Occupy Kiwi Biker Movement [Archive]

mashman

30th July 2013, 17:47

If some green splurge is your more information, I see your case is as strong as usual :bleh:

The issue I have is the 99% are just another minority claiming to represent the masses, but where the (currently in charge) affluent minority has usually done something of substance to become part of that group, the minority claiming to be the 99% more often just come off as having done a few too many substances...

It's not green. So I see your usual counter-argument and understanding are as bereft of "faith" as they are of fact :D

They are a group of minority's... and they put in just as much time, in many many cases, as the affluent few, but the market (bwaaaaa ha ha ha ha haaaaa), but those who control the market refuse to recognise that effort as being as valid as theirs and pay themselves so much money that the entire financial system buckles under their weight. The 1% have put us where we are with their delusional self congratulatory remuneration, not the 99%. Facts that are hard to escape irrespective of how they wriggle.

Hitcher

30th July 2013, 17:53

The only problem with fascism is when a majority of an electorate support it. If other forms of political endeavour keep it suppressed, then we have nothing to worry about, surely to goodness?

bogan

30th July 2013, 17:54

It's not green. So I see your usual counter-argument and understanding are as bereft of "faith" as they are of fact :D

They are a group of minority's... and they put in just as much time, in many many cases, as the affluent few, but the market (bwaaaaa ha ha ha ha haaaaa), but those who control the market refuse to recognise that effort as being as valid as theirs and pay themselves so much money that the entire financial system buckles under their weight. The 1% have put us where we are with their delusional self congratulatory remuneration, not the 99%. Facts that are hard to escape irrespective of how they wriggle.

Just offering some opinions on the behavior of the so called 99%. Seriously, how do you not find the name of the movement immensely pretentious, it would be like naming my morning movement lord smoothington the third.

I'd say a lot of us maybe the majority even, think where we currently are is pretty good all things considered. So if its the 1%'rs that got us here, bravo; if its the so called 99%'rs that want it changed, fuck those guys.

Robert Taylor

30th July 2013, 17:54

Some cloning of Margaret Thatcher and Enoch Powell wouldnt go amiss..............

Akzle

30th July 2013, 18:00

Holy shit. It must be the waning moon causing delusionality.

the (currently in charge) affluent minority has usually done something of substance to become part of that group,

whoa now space cadet! Maybe turn that 02 valve down a bit.
I dont consider 'mass enslavement and stealing off everyone' to be 'of substance'.

Well, it is, but the same type of substance as lord smoothington.
It certainly hasnt benefitted anything but their own egos.

bogan

30th July 2013, 18:07

Holy shit. It must be the waning moon causing delusionality.

whoa now space cadet! Maybe turn that 02 valve down a bit.
I dont consider 'mass enslavement and stealing off everyone' to be 'of substance'.

Well, it is, but the same type of substance as lord smoothington.
It certainly hasnt benefitted anything but their own egos.

Looks like all the usuals are turning up and posting many compelling arguments to bring people to their cause... :rolleyes:

Top tip, if you want people to take your ideas seriously, dial down on the 'its all the 1%rs fault and they've done nothing good' and maybe instead play the 'here's an idea which might work a little better' card.

Virago

30th July 2013, 18:10

...Still.... we are the 99%!

So you keep saying. But on whose authority do you claim to represent 99% of the population?

scumdog

30th July 2013, 18:10

Berries

30th July 2013, 18:11

Some cloning of Margaret Thatcher and Enoch Powell wouldnt go amiss..............
They'd need spades.

Matt Bleck

30th July 2013, 18:15

With all these boot licking fascists breeding like flies and taking over, I hereby ask all decent and good NZers to occupy Kiwibiker Rant or Rave... to make a 24hr vigil... correcting fascist commentaries and teach light socialist policy to the system programmed masses... we are the 99%!!!

Occupy movement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement‎
The Occupy movement is an international protest movement against social and economic inequality, its primary goal being to make the economic and political ...

Viva la revolution my brothers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWKfXxwmYpQ

:facepalm: I bet the so called fascist are shitting their pants! :shutup:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/6S0HznBnrCE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Akzle

30th July 2013, 18:30

Top tip, if you want people to take your ideas seriously, dial down on the 'its all the 1%rs fault and they've done nothing good' and maybe instead play the 'here's an idea which might work a little better' card.

im not selling anything.

How much you absorb of what i say will come down entirely to your ability to think.
But im right i tells ya.

The main thing is for you to decide which way youll be shooting. With .99% behind you, or 98.99%

Big Dave

30th July 2013, 18:32

Fuck off hippy!

Are you still at work?

scumdog

30th July 2013, 18:34

Are you still at work?

Rick told me to say that...or was it Vivian??

bogan

30th July 2013, 18:36

im not selling anything.

How much you absorb of what i say will come down entirely to your ability to think.
But im right i tells ya.

The main thing is for you to decide which way youll be shooting. With .99% behind you, or 98.99%

Many tell me they are right (it probably around 99% of them), but few will show it (probably around 1%).

Maybe I'll be in the 0.02% who controls the robot armies...

mashman

30th July 2013, 18:38

Just offering some opinions on the behavior of the so called 99%. Seriously, how do you not find the name of the movement immensely pretentious, it would be like naming my morning movement lord smoothington the third.

I'd say a lot of us maybe the majority even, think where we currently are is pretty good all things considered. So if its the 1%'rs that got us here, bravo; if its the so called 99%'rs that want it changed, fuck those guys.

Yeah I know... opinions is like arseholes blah blah blah, a greater leveler as you pointed out before. You cannot be serious? As the man says, names is for tombstones baby. If I took notice of the names only, I'd be a voter.

That's certainly a positive way to look at it and to a degree I agree... but it's the, it could be a fuckload better with minimal effort, bit that doesn't have me hanging out the flags and celebrating what we have as civilisation. Certainly not with the state of some of the country's on the planet, let alone the reasons given for fucking the planet up. It's the graft of the 99% that actually gets us to where we want to go and to a large extent that's where the ideas come from... however the glory seekers like their glory and boy do they pay themselves for it. The 99% do want change, the 1% are no longer listening, unless there's a profit in it of course. Things could be far far far better than they are.

mashman

30th July 2013, 18:39

:facepalm: I bet the so called fascist are shitting their pants! :shutup:

I assume that's a large part of why they're ramming the Bill through ;)

Erelyes

30th July 2013, 18:40

This Fascism business gets people in such a state.

bogan

30th July 2013, 18:42

Yeah I know... opinions is like arseholes blah blah blah, a greater leveler as you pointed out before. You cannot be serious? As the man says, names is for tombstones baby. If I took notice of the names only, I'd be a voter.

That's certainly a positive way to look at it and to a degree I agree... but it's the, it could be a fuckload better with minimal effort, bit that doesn't have me hanging out the flags and celebrating what we have as civilisation. Certainly not with the state of some of the country's on the planet, let alone the reasons given for fucking the planet up. It's the graft of the 99% that actually gets us to where we want to go and to a large extent that's where the ideas come from... however the glory seekers like their glory and boy do they pay themselves for it. The 99% do want change, the 1% are no longer listening, unless there's a profit in it of course. Things could be far far far better than they are.

Sorry I just can't take you seriously when you keep calling a minority the 99%. A name is only a name up till the point where the name conveys a meaning opposite the truth, at which point it's just insulting.

mashman

30th July 2013, 18:43

The only problem with fascism is when a majority of an electorate support it. If other forms of political endeavour keep it suppressed, then we have nothing to worry about, surely to goodness?

But do they? Have they been asked? Sorry, yes, forgot we're in the land, actually, on the planet of apathia... where people just want to live out their lives without the complications of having to take a stand.

awa355

30th July 2013, 18:43

Keep going you lot, :Police: I've got 14 names to pass on already. :laugh:

Akzle

30th July 2013, 18:49

Keep going you lot, :Police: I've got 14 names to pass on already. :laugh:

ha fuken ha. Im public enemy numero uno.
Youre now on the list by association...

Whatever you do, dont anrwer your phone saying 'the silent black helicopters will fly at dawn'...

mashman

30th July 2013, 18:52

Sorry I just can't take you seriously when you keep calling a minority the 99%. A name is only a name up till the point where the name conveys a meaning opposite the truth, at which point it's just insulting.

Take poverty for instance. If the majority of us are the happy with the way things are, as you claim, then the majority are happy for poverty to continue, which means that the minority aren't. Yet asking an individual will likely paint a different picture. Take it to pet hate level. As part of that majority that are happy with things the way they are, could there possibly be a pet cause where they will be viewed as the minority? By all means continue to take a single factor and define it as an unequivocal majority, but some of us might be looking at things in slightly more detail than the labels you seem to be unhappy/incapable with letting go of. Praps the Hurricanes will apoligise to you for their name.

bogan

30th July 2013, 19:04

Take poverty for instance. If the majority of us are the happy with the way things are, as you claim, then the majority are happy for poverty to continue, which means that the minority aren't. Yet asking an individual will likely paint a different picture. Take it to pet hate level. As part of that majority that are happy with things the way they are, could there possibly be a pet cause where they will be viewed as the minority? By all means continue to take a single factor and define it as an unequivocal majority, but some of us might be looking at things in slightly more detail than the labels you seem to be unhappy/incapable with letting go of. Praps the Hurricanes will apoligise to you for their name.

See, there's more of the insulting arguments. Because we are happy this works in a way as good as possible or close to it, does not mean we think it ideal, or would not like to change things for the better if we could. Those last three words are something the so called 99% have been completely incapable of demonstrating as a realistic possibility.
I have no idea what the %ages actually are, but the fact you don't know either again suggests the 99% claims are a misrepresentation.
Its a lot worse than the hurricanes or other similar name, as those can be filtered out by context. Actual hurricanes are rarely seen playing footy, but when somebody says 99% in this sort of context, it's quite easy to confuse the meaning as a claim of representing the interests of 99% of the population; and I can't see why you would name it thus unless its a deliberate plan is to do that. Hence why I think it is pretentious.

Hinny

30th July 2013, 19:29

The only problem with fascism is when a majority of an electorate support it. If other forms of political endeavour keep it suppressed, then we have nothing to worry about, surely to goodness?

How is it a problem?

Could this govt. be called fascist?
Fascism as in the integration of Business and Govt.
It is certainly easy to argue that this govt. is not working for the majority of New Zealanders to make their lives better.

By your assertion therefore it is clear the majority needs to support other parties than the one holding the treasury benches at present.

mashman

30th July 2013, 19:31

See, there's more of the insulting arguments. Because we are happy this works in a way as good as possible or close to it, does not mean we think it ideal, or would not like to change things for the better if we could. Those last three words are something the so called 99% have been completely incapable of demonstrating as a realistic possibility.
I have no idea what the %ages actually are, but the fact you don't know either again suggests the 99% claims are a misrepresentation.
Its a lot worse than the hurricanes or other similar name, as those can be filtered out by context. Actual hurricanes are rarely seen playing footy, but when somebody says 99% in this sort of context, it's quite easy to confuse the meaning as a claim of representing the interests of 99% of the population; and I can't see why you would name it thus unless its a deliberate plan is to do that. Hence why I think it is pretentious.

WTF! Who says anything about ideal. Just because we can do by far better doesn't mean that it's going to be ideal, it only means that it's going to be better for more people... and in my eyes that will be the majority. We'll never know until every single person has been offered a set of alternatives to consider and then they can have their say (something that is yet to happen due to the ideology of the 1% of self-made we know better folk) So claiming to be a member of A 99% is just the same as saying that Hurricanes don't play football. You are the one referring to it as a statistic, for me it is a representational feeling towards a number of issues that all have one thing in common... the 1%. You have your context, I have mine and mine has nothing to do with me being in the 1% financially.

So you, or anyone else for that matter, thinking it a pretentious naming convention is entirely of your own doing and highlights a need to put their finger on something that they can't/don't want to grasp because they are either a majority or believe that things are as good as they can be. I'm fully aware that that is my interpretation, but it seems to be an interpretation that is likely closer aligned to the reasoning behind calling themselves the 99%.

Hinny

30th July 2013, 19:33

...Because we are happy this works in a way as good as possible or close to it...

Who is this 'we' you refer to?

The collective 'we',

the Royal 'we'

or you and your bloody tapeworm?

unstuck

30th July 2013, 19:35

:crybaby::crybaby::violin:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/kBqzCAWxJUY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>:shifty:

Big Dave

30th July 2013, 19:39

mashman

30th July 2013, 19:41

:bleh:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwUGSYDKUxU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1__6ft9y5c

Akzle

30th July 2013, 19:45

or you and your bloody tapeworm?

src="//www.youtube.com/embed/kBqzCAWxJUY"

no i think more:

But I cannot grow
Till you eat the last of me
Oh when will I be free
And you a parasite
Just find another host
Just another fool to roast
'Cause you

My tapeworm tells me what to do, you
My tapeworm tells me where to go
Pull the tapeworm out of your ass
(Hey)
Pull the tapeworm out of your ass
(Hey)
Pull the tapeworm out of your ass
(Hey)
Pull the tapeworm out of your ass
(Hey)

I cannot deny
All the evil traits
And the fillin' of the crates
When you, do come out
(You)
(Out)
And you slither up to me
In your pimpin' majesty
But I cannot grow
Till you eat the last of me
Oh when will I be free
And you, a parasite

I'm sittin' in my room
With a needle in my hand
Just waitin' for the tomb
Of some old dyin' man
Sittin' in my room
With a needle in my hand
Just waitin' for the tomb
Of some old dyin' man

Pull the tapeworm out of your ass
(Hey)
Hey, hey, hey, hey
Fuck me

unstuck

30th July 2013, 19:46

bogan

30th July 2013, 19:46

WTF! Who says anything about ideal. Just because we can do by far better doesn't mean that it's going to be ideal, it only means that it's going to be better for more people... and in my eyes that will be the majority. We'll never know until every single person has been offered a set of alternatives to consider and then they can have their say (something that is yet to happen due to the ideology of the 1% of self-made we know better folk) So claiming to be a member of A 99% is just the same as saying that Hurricanes don't play football. You are the one referring to it as a statistic, for me it is a representational feeling towards a number of issues that all have one thing in common... the 1%. You have your context, I have mine and mine has nothing to do with me being in the 1% financially.

So you, or anyone else for that matter, thinking it a pretentious naming convention is entirely of your own doing and highlights a need to put their finger on something that they can't/don't want to grasp because they are either a majority or believe that things are as good as they can be. I'm fully aware that that is my interpretation, but it seems to be an interpretation that is likely closer aligned to the reasoning behind calling themselves the 99%.

You said that we were happy with those in poverty, as evidenced by the fact we hadn't joined the so called 99%, which implies we think the current situation ideal or at least would not want to change it for the better. That is why it's an insulting argument. You've offered no realistic alternatives to make things better, that's why nothing is taking off for the so called 99%. Stop with all the hate 1% bullshit, and actually try something constructive if you want to make a difference.

One thing in a good name, is it should be a good name as judged by your target audience, 'the 99%' is a shit name going by the people's reactions (of whom I can only assume are you target audience), you've every right to use it, just as I have every right to keep calling it out as the pretentious misleading bollocks that it is.

Who is this 'we' you refer to?

The collective 'we',

the Royal 'we'

or you and your bloody tapeworm?

We as in myself and other like minded individuals.

Oscar

30th July 2013, 20:08

Are the trains running on time?

Hinny

30th July 2013, 20:09

We as in myself and other like minded individuals.

Is it pretentious of you to speak on behalf of other individuals?

I think it is.

mashman

30th July 2013, 20:09

You said that we were happy with those in poverty, as evidenced by the fact we hadn't joined the so called 99%, which implies we think the current situation ideal or at least would not want to change it for the better. That is why it's an insulting argument. You've offered no realistic alternatives to make things better, that's why nothing is taking off for the so called 99%. Stop with all the hate 1% bullshit, and actually try something constructive if you want to make a difference.

One thing in a good name, is it should be a good name as judged by your target audience, 'the 99%' is a shit name going by the people's reactions (of whom I can only assume are you target audience), you've every right to use it, just as I have every right to keep calling it out as the pretentious misleading bollocks that it is.

No I didn't, that's the context in which you took it. Perhaps you missed the IF at the start of the sentence. :killingme @ no realistic alternative. What, because you can't grasp it it's not a realistic alternative? Nothing is taking off because it hasn't been launched yet and to get what is required off the ground is gonna take more than posting on the internet for an hour a day or a little bit of media attention... it's gonna take door knocking/seminars, education essentially. I don't have answers for everything, but then again, neither do your leaders. However the answers I do have make more sense than the answers they have if you decide to go the holistic route. Spying and keeping the people down is not among mine, quite the opposite.

Ignore the name, focus on the content.

Virago

30th July 2013, 20:14

http://jamesjmueller.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/430993_327129000659193_100000862880492_1021697_200 3346952_n.jpeg

bogan

30th July 2013, 20:22

Is it pretentious of you to speak on behalf of other individuals?

I think it is.

Fine, take it as the solo we if you like, or think of me as pretentious, neither really affects the point I was making now does it? Or is it you guys will take any excuse to avoid the points being made?

No I didn't, that's the context in which you took it. Perhaps you missed the IF at the start of the sentence. :killingme @ no realistic alternative. What, because you can't grasp it it's not a realistic alternative? Nothing is taking off because it hasn't been launched yet and to get what is required off the ground is gonna take more than posting on the internet for an hour a day or a little bit of media attention... it's gonna take door knocking/seminars, education essentially. I don't have answers for everything, but then again, neither do your leaders. However the answers I do have make more sense than the answers they have if you decide to go the holistic route. Spying and keeping the people down is not among mine, quite the opposite.

Ignore the name, focus on the content.

The if was in reference to the majority's happiness, the insult is where you said the same group are happy with poverty.

If the majority of us are the happy with the way things are, as you claim, then the majority are happy for poverty to continue, which means that the minority aren't.

Like I said, no realistic alternative has been presented to me, you may think you've found one, but last time we discussed it there were some large holes that needed addressing before I'd give it a second thought; and yes, judging by the lack of traction your cause has, that opinion seems to be shared by the majority.

Get a better name, more will take the content seriously.

mashman

30th July 2013, 20:22

http://jamesjmueller.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/430993_327129000659193_100000862880492_1021697_200 3346952_n.jpeg

Yet another bitch with no fuckin clue. So bitch, you're more than happy with people dying of starvation so that oil company's can make profits? More than happy with company's poisoning the oceans and the land that gives us our food so long as they can make their profits? You're ok with letting people go bankrupt, die or be maimed for life because your healthcare system is more than most can afford so that company's can make their profits? You got the fuckin point yet bitch, or do you want more examples of how blindly ignorant you argument is as well as your warped perception of what the 99% stand for? The 1% take it for granted, seems you ain't a member of the 53% after all, bitch.

Big Dave

30th July 2013, 20:26

perception of what the 99% stand for?.

Bad maths.

bogan

30th July 2013, 20:27

Yet another bitch with no fuckin clue. So bitch, you're more than happy with people dying of starvation so that oil company's can make profits? More than happy with company's poisoning the oceans and the land that gives us our food so long as they can make their profits? You're ok with letting people go bankrupt, die or be maimed for life because your healthcare system is more than most can afford so that company's can make their profits? You got the fuckin point yet bitch, or do you want more examples of how blindly ignorant you argument is as well as your warped perception of what the 99% stand for? The 1% take it for granted, seems you ain't a member of the 53% after all, bitch.

Sent from a bundle of hay, 3 goats, and a fresh pinecone then?

Also, it's a picture mashman, no matter how many insults you can throw out there she won't hear you; course the rest of us do an it makes the so called 99% look like a lunatic fringe movement.

Hinny

30th July 2013, 20:30

Fine, take it as the solo we if you like, or think of me as pretentious,.

The solo 'we' is the Royal 'we'.
I guess that would make you pretentious - and in the 1% bracket.

What you appear to disregard is that you are undoubtedly in the 99% bracket.
The 1% bracket are those who own as much as the other 99% of society.
You are trying to argue from the point of pretentious right-wing plonkers who identify with the 1%.
Classic 5 monkey mentality.

mashman

30th July 2013, 20:31

The if was in reference to the majority's happiness, the insult is where you said the same group are happy with poverty.

If the majority of us are the happy with the way things are, as you claim, then the majority are happy for poverty to continue, which means that the minority aren't.

Like I said, no realistic alternative has been presented to me, you may think you've found one, but last time we discussed it there were some large holes that needed addressing before I'd give it a second thought; and yes, judging by the lack of traction your cause has, that opinion seems to be shared by the majority.

Get a better name, more will take the content seriously.

Just putting a context around your claim that the majority are happy. So you were the one doing the insulting.

I haven't started yet and as I said, it'll be door knocking etc... when it does. Thought you might have figured that one out by NOW... guess not. Anyhoo, your assumption is a possibility. I accept that it may well turn out that the majority don't accept what I propose, however given more input from other sources (shirley you don't think it's gonna be my way or the highway?) and with the answer to your, "but what about me and my needs, wants and desires" issues, I reckon we're going to end up with a different result. And until every PERSON and human being has been asked, neither of us can successfully claim the majority position.

Why? because that's how you roll?

Big Dave

30th July 2013, 20:33

'I got 99 problems and misogyny is one of 'em.' - Jay Zed.

mashman

30th July 2013, 20:38

Bad maths.

Yeah, I bet they wish they could be more like the financial maths geniuses of Wall street et al... coz they're just rocket scientists.

Sent from a bundle of hay, 3 goats, and a fresh pinecone then?

Also, it's a picture mashman, no matter how many insults you can throw out there she won't hear you; course the rest of us do an it makes the so called 99% look like a lunatic fringe movement.

Yet another bitch that misses the point. It ain't what's being pulled out that's the issue, it's why it's being pulled out and what it's being used for that's the problem.

Oh she heard me alright. :rofl: you and your labels and perceptions eh... What was the problem this time? Delivery? :killingme...

Virago

30th July 2013, 20:39

Yet another bitch with no fuckin clue. So bitch, you're more than happy with people dying of starvation so that oil company's can make profits? More than happy with company's poisoning the oceans and the land that gives us our food so long as they can make their profits? You're ok with letting people go bankrupt, die or be maimed for life because your healthcare system is more than most can afford so that company's can make their profits? You got the fuckin point yet bitch, or do you want more examples of how blindly ignorant you argument is as well as your warped perception of what the 99% stand for? The 1% take it for granted, seems you ain't a member of the 53% after all, bitch.

Our hearts bleed for those who live a comfortable lifestyle based on the products and corporations they despise. The hypocrisy must burn...

bogan

30th July 2013, 20:42

The solo 'we' is the Royal 'we'.
I guess that would make you pretentious - and in the 1% bracket.

What you appear to disregard is that you are undoubtedly in the 99% bracket.
The 1% bracket are those who own as much as the other 99% of society.
You are trying to argue from the point of pretentious right-wing plonkers who identify with the 1%.
Classic 5 monkey mentality.

In terms of income I most certainly am in the lower 99%, it's probably the lower 30% tbh. What I'm not in, is the so called 99% who most certainly do not represent my interests, regardless of whether we share incomes levels, property ownerships levels, or levels of pretentiousness.

Just putting a context around your claim that the majority are happy. So you were the one doing the insulting.

I haven't started yet and as I said, it'll be door knocking etc... when it does. Thought you might have figured that one out by NOW... guess not. Anyhoo, your assumption is a possibility. I accept that it may well turn out that the majority don't accept what I propose, however given more input from other sources (shirley you don't think it's gonna be my way or the highway?) and with the answer to your, "but what about me and my needs, wants and desires" issues, I reckon we're going to end up with a different result. And until every PERSON and human being has been asked, neither of us can successfully claim the majority position.

Why? because that's how you roll?

Not at all, but if you still can't see why implying those who don't agree with you are happy for others to suffer unnecessarily, then good fucking luck winning their hearts and minds buddy!

Good, that is actually a constructive approach.

Me and many others (even in this thread others have questioned your representation), you obviously want to win hearts and minds so I'm not sure why you like a name that sets you off on the back foot with some people.

Yet another bitch that misses the point. It ain't what's being pulled out that's the issue, it's why it's being pulled out and what it's being used for that's the problem.

Oh she heard me alright. :rofl: you and your labels and perceptions eh... What was the problem this time? Delivery? :killingme...

Err, that's the point, its being used to make things like your computer, what, you think they would just pull it out and burn it if consumers didn't buy it?

Yeh, directly insulting people is not such good delivery, you know, at the winning hearts and minds thing...

Robert Taylor

30th July 2013, 20:53

They'd need spades.

In respect of Enoch Powell, dont knock the man. He certainly was very accurate in his predictions, more is the pity he wasnt taken seriously at the time. We seriously need people of his intellect and integrity.

Hinny

30th July 2013, 20:54

In terms of income I most certainly am in the lower 99%, it's probably the lower 30% tbh. What I'm not in, is the so called 99% who most certainly do not represent my interests, regardless of whether we share incomes levels, property ownerships levels, or levels of pretentiousness.
.

I doubt you are in the lower 30%
Half the worlds population earn $2 a day or less. Half of them earn $1 a day or less.
Many of those are in good capitalist countries where income disparity is at an extreme level. India for instance - Highest number of Billionaires.
This is the road the present govt. seems to be heading us down.
Keep propping them up like a monkey and you or your descendents could well end up in the 30% bracket.
Time to start thinking.

mashman

30th July 2013, 20:54

Our hearts bleed for those who live a comfortable lifestyle based on the products and corporations they despise. The hypocrisy must burn...

There is no hypocrisy.

Robert Taylor

30th July 2013, 20:57

avgas

30th July 2013, 21:01

Occupy a segment, of a chat forum. On the internet.

I did my 20 seconds. Now back to the porn

avgas

30th July 2013, 21:03

Hang on, it just occurred to me. What percentage of the world posts in the Rant or Rave section.

Must be less than 1%

Hinny

30th July 2013, 21:10

Our hearts bleed for those who live a comfortable lifestyle based on the products and corporations they despise. The hypocrisy must burn...

My heart bleeds for those whose lives are taken or destroyed by Corporations and the govts. that do their bidding.
My heart bleeds for the death of justice and the rule of law.
John Key giving away our tax dollars to support terrorists -
If the leader of the Black Power / Mongrel Mob or any other gang in NZ gave moral support, encouragement and finance to a group of thugs to commit mayhem and murder I feel sure the public would want to see them locked up and removed from society at the least. Many would want even harsher measures.
Should Key suffer the same justice?

mashman

30th July 2013, 21:14

Not at all, but if you still can't see why implying those who don't agree with you are happy for others to suffer unnecessarily, then good fucking luck winning their hearts and minds buddy!

Good, that is actually a constructive approach.

Me and many others (even in this thread others have questioned your representation), you obviously want to win hearts and minds so I'm not sure why you like a name that sets you off on the back foot with some people.

I was merely extrapolating your argument. Or are you so special you're allowed to have your cake and eat it too? Thanks for the luck, I might need it. So far 1% of those I have interacted personally with have sided with your majority view and they're from all walks of life.

As I've said before, I understand what needs to be done, it's the knowing what I don't know that KB offers. Hopefully another approach you'll approve of.

Preconceptions are the hardest things to overcome and I'm under no illusion that it is me that overcomes them for the person... they have to do it for themselves. After that point in time the name doesn't matter. Brand mentality is strong with you and as a marketing acquaintance of mine found out, it's by no means about the marketing when it comes to things that are personal to people, because it is about them.

Err, that's the point, its being used to make things like your computer, what, you think they would just pull it out and burn it if consumers didn't buy it?

Yeh, directly insulting people is not such good delivery, you know, at the winning hearts and minds thing...

Computers are useful, but there are too many parts that are disposable and wasted. It costs money to reduce, reuse, recycle. Design the thing right in the first place and we'll use less of the resource... but as business is all about making things obsolete and the return wouldn't be as high if you sold the components, then damned right people should wiggle their finger at the fuckers perpetuating such wastage. Got it yet?

I can play the emotive victim if you'd prefer... or perhaps the unyielding extremist... or perhaps the scatty eccentric... or perhaps the uber altruist... or perhaps the troll... either way, the message remains the same. Different folk respond to different delivery's in different ways. Different folk have different priorities to other folk. People are different and I will not be targeting a demographic... that and it's impossible to be everything to all people, especially when they have heir own minds and especially when they refuse to use them. Shame there's a small percentage of people who would prefer to trust those who would sell them in a heart beat than those who would hold out a helping hand and want change for the better. Shame that small percentage realise that they are so vastly outnumbered and that there are indeed more and more people thinking along "similar" lines to myself that they need to spy on them in order to defend themselves... and all because they know that they're so full of shit that if it came down to a straight choice they would likely lose, or at the very least would realise just how many are against how they go about things.

The hearts and minds are easy to win so long as the idea is acceptable in regards to what they have to undertake to make it a possibility. It's not apathy if all you're required to do is work and live a happy life.

Robert Taylor

30th July 2013, 21:19

Fascism is of course a term that is used very loosely, and often to intend as an insult. But those further to the left than those who post on here with left leaning sympathies are known as communists. Now dont get me wrong, if a left leaning voter has the courage of his or her convictions and consistently votes left then I have way more respect for them than swing voters. And respect for a number of their arguments. Indeed people on here such as Hinny and Mashman often have plausible and well considered arguments, whether you choose to agree with them or not.
When I lived in England I was of course a Maggie fan through and through, but always had respect and interest of Michael Foot and his own powerful intellect ( which he didnt articulate so well )
Many communist regimes have been in practice the same as fascist regimes. Exercising total control, hell bent on territorial conquest and killing people that didnt agree with them or were of ''incorrect'' ethnicity etc. I believe for example that around 29 million Russians lost their lives during World War 2. 9 million by Hitler and 20 million by Stalin.
So to loosely use the word Fascist and not be so conversant of history is a little bit disingenuous

mashman

30th July 2013, 21:19

Our mainly deceased fathers and granfathers fought against fascism. Its fair to say they would have a much better understanding of what the true meaning of fascism is, rather than its rather loose and emotive employment as a term of derision in this thread.

We're only just finding out the reasons that wars are fought and as more and more details are reported, the more we find out that it's never for the reasons stated when seeking acceptance. What you reckon that all wars have been started for reasons other than stated?

bogan

30th July 2013, 21:19

I doubt you are in the lower 30%
Half the worlds population earn $2 a day or less. Half of them earn $1 a day or less.
Many of those are in good capitalist countries where income disparity is at an extreme level. India for instance - Highest number of Billionaires.
This is the road the present govt. seems to be heading us down.
Keep propping them up like a monkey and you or your descendents could well end up in the 30% bracket.
Time to start thinking.

I was thinking nationally, where we can actually make a change to the way things a run, but whatevs.

That's not informative in the least... All these doom and gloom predictions, what are they about? If we think about them, well you lot have shown no significant degree of aptitude in assessing the way things are going. So the logical conclusion to thinking about it, is to go 'yeh, it may not be ideal but it's the best we've got' then stop thinking about it. So why exactly is it time to start thinking? Or are you one of the many who just assume anyone who disagrees with you is not thinking hard enough?
If you want change, you need to earn it, avoid the insults and work constructively to educate people. Mashman and the like have really set things back on this issue for me, through their ineptitude at constructive discussion; the 99% protest interviews have had a similar result... I'm now less likely to want change than if you guys had not brought it up at all; it's like you are to the financial system what Ed is to atheism; its the same self righteousness, lack of constructive and open discussion, coupled with a really shit delivery :facepalm: only imo of course :innocent:

Hinny

30th July 2013, 21:20

Our mainly deceased fathers and granfathers fought against fascism. Its fair to say they would have a much better understanding of what the true meaning of fascism is, rather than its rather loose and emotive employment as a term of derision in this thread.

It apparently has a new meaning now.
Like Maori, English is a living language and is constantly changing.
The true meaning of words becomes, like the correct pronunciation of words, whatever the vernacular is. The common useage.
The new norm becomes the new truth.
Like pronouncing WH as F in Maori. Like saying 'Free' for the number 3.
W T Wh.

mashman

30th July 2013, 21:28

All these doom and gloom predictions, what are they about?

I once had "my" discussions with people ootside of a pub over a few drinkies one evenink, probably over the space of an hour or two. Questions were asked by all, even tough ones with no concrete answer, and then it started to rain. One person got up (he who asked most of the questions) and whilst smiling and polite exclaimed that it matched the doom and gloom mood of the conversation. 3 others at the table, in unison I might add, exclaimed that it was an exceptionally positive discussion and not doomish or gloomish in the slightest.

You see what you choose to see big fulla. (Oh yeah, these guys were all strangers)

unstuck

30th July 2013, 21:40

You see what you choose to see big fulla.

:killingme:killingme:killingme Oh the irony.:bleh::bleh:

Ocean1

30th July 2013, 21:55

Our hearts bleed for those who live a comfortable lifestyle based on the products and corporations they despise.

And currency, no less...

mashman

30th July 2013, 22:01

:killingme:killingme:killingme Oh the irony.:bleh::bleh:

Did I ever say that I disagreed with your philosophy? :bleh:

unstuck

30th July 2013, 22:05

Did I ever say that I disagreed with your philosophy? :bleh:

You might of done when I was stoned, and I cant remember it.:bleh:

unstuck

30th July 2013, 22:10

http://www.briantracy.com/blog/financial-success/financial-independence-why-money-is-good-financial-problems-money-problems/ :2thumbsup:whistle:

Robert Taylor

30th July 2013, 22:28

We're only just finding out the reasons that wars are fought and as more and more details are reported, the more we find out that it's never for the reasons stated when seeking acceptance. What you reckon that all wars have been started for reasons other than stated?

I hear you! Companies like Krupps did very well out of wars

mashman

30th July 2013, 22:28

You might of done when I was stoned, and I cant remember it.:bleh:

ha ha ha ha haaaaaaa... s'ok, I wasn't stoned so I'll remember for the both of us.

mashman

30th July 2013, 22:39

http://www.briantracy.com/blog/financial-success/financial-independence-why-money-is-good-financial-problems-money-problems/ :2thumbsup:whistle:

:rofl: hardly surprising the financial system keeps failing. Money is bad, demonstrably so in every day life. As there is a finite amount of money, not everyone can have the average salary. Something he completely ignores, which is impressive. I wonder how he'd classify my situation then. I've had enough money for 20 years and only have 1 debt.

I hear you! Companies like Krupps did very well out of wars

Now we've got Halliburton, Blackwater, the Military-Industrial Complex and many more we'll likely never hear of... what a fuckin mess and not something I think my Grandad would have fought for.

ducatilover

30th July 2013, 23:42

How does one occupy some internet?

I'd rather occupy Narnia.

scissorhands

30th July 2013, 23:50

Fuck having to read through all that arguement again... took me hours!

What I mainly wanted to highlight, was the futility of some political activism. How some political actions serve both sides and end up growing the opposition forces [shot in the foot]....How time could be better spent to achieve a desired result

Bleating on a forum read by a handful of people....
A much more productive action would be a $1 bumper sticker that reads:

'JK genes to be bred with a monkey'

Even just 1x 20min commute to work with said sticker on back window will produce better results than all this 'trying to convert each other argueing on KB'

At least it fans the flames of discontent, and polarisers [duality of opposites]the community and weakens any real revolt:yawn:

bogan

31st July 2013, 00:06

:rofl: hardly surprising the financial system keeps failing. Money is bad, demonstrably so in every day life. As there is a finite amount of money, not everyone can have the average salary. Something he completely ignores, which is impressive. I wonder how he'd classify my situation then. I've had enough money for 20 years and only have 1 debt.

Nah it's not that bad, to which I think most would agree, I guess you just see what you want to see :whistle:

bogan

31st July 2013, 00:10

'JK genes to be bred with a monkey'

Considering that's just slanderous bollocks with no discernible point, I'd tell any organisation using such tripe to go fuck themselves regardless of the message or what they are selling. Maybe having a good circle jerk putting down the 'opposition' with other people who share you views is fine in private, but I think it unlikely to get shit-all done in public...

scissorhands

31st July 2013, 00:26

'I Like':yes:

Robert Taylor

31st July 2013, 07:53

mashman

31st July 2013, 10:58

Nah it's not that bad, to which I think most would agree, I guess you just see what you want to see :whistle:

Poverty exists, but it's not that bad? Educational insituations have limited places, but it's not that bad? There aren't enough well paying job for everyone, but it's not that bad? The top 10% of the world has let's say 50% of the "wealth", but it's not that bad? Money is actually infinite yet we can't implement that which we know will help, but it's not that bad?

It's pretty fuckin bad in a lot of places, so no, money is bad because it is a limiter, not the enabler that gets touted and it damages and hinders the lives of billions on a daily basis. Thems is facts baby, not fictions... and I choose to see those facts because those people deserve the lifestyle that I have (and I'm not talking about stuff), but there isn't enough money from the infinite pot to allow them that "luxury", even though there are enough resources to accomplish it.

I'll go all Ocean and Oscar on you and start putting words into your mouth here... so what you should take from that is equity does not exist, therefore billions of people are marginalised and treated like dogs and not people to support the lifestyle of the 1%. Anything else just make you a (add ad hominem wankshot a la Ocean and Oscar here).

unstuck

31st July 2013, 11:08

Money in and of itself has no power, until stupid humans get hold of it. Ban humans.:headbang::headbang:

mashman

31st July 2013, 11:09

Quite simply, no man is an island. We are all brought up at the expense of the wider community. From education to healthcare to water "purification" to waste management to, well, the list is endless.

The farmer who produced food relies on a huge number of industry's to provide food, water, machinery, internet, transport, administration etc... before the food gets to us. Before many of those who the farmer relies upon can do their jobs minerals have to be dug out of the ground, processed, fashioned, transported etc... but first they need to be fed. It's a simple cycle that every individual in this country relies upon, even those off grid. Why any person should be entitled to anything above any other is beyond me.

It's simply a moronic way of saying that you are better than someone else and that those who control the market have laid the foundations for you to excuse yourself on the basis that you should be valued more than anyone else, because you made more of a perceived effort. You're fuckwits of the highest order and such a view should be met with the blunt end of a hammer to the forehead on first communicating such fucked up ideology. You do more damage than good to people and the planet. That is an undeniable truth, now go hide-out behind your excuses like the chicken shit mutha fuckas that you are, there's good children.

bogan

31st July 2013, 11:10

Poverty exists, but it's not that bad? Educational insituations have limited places, but it's not that bad? There aren't enough well paying job for everyone, but it's not that bad? The top 10% of the world has let's say 50% of the "wealth", but it's not that bad? Money is actually infinite yet we can't implement that which we know will help, but it's not that bad?

It's pretty fuckin bad in a lot of places, so no, money is bad because it is a limiter, not the enabler that gets touted and it damages and hinders the lives of billions on a daily basis. Thems is facts baby, not fictions... and I choose to see those facts because those people deserve the lifestyle that I have (and I'm not talking about stuff), but there isn't enough money from the infinite pot to allow them that "luxury", even though there are enough resources to accomplish it.

I'll go all Ocean and Oscar on you and start putting words into your mouth here... so what you should take from that is equity does not exist, therefore billions of people are marginalised and treated like dogs and not people to support the lifestyle of the 1%. Anything else just make you a (add ad hominem wankshot a la Ocean and Oscar here).

Exactly, you're seeing what you want to see, try looking at the good side of the same coin (so to speak), look on the bright side of life buddy :sunny:

unstuck

31st July 2013, 11:11

mashman

31st July 2013, 11:11

Money in and of itself has no power, until stupid humans get hold of it. Ban humans.:headbang::headbang:

Yes it does. It has the power to stop things from being done. That is not humans not putting in the effort or being stupid, it's an economic fact that a finite pot of money is available to undertake a particular task.

OOOH......Someones got their period.:devil2::spanking:

Nahhhh, just cutting through the bullshit that people hide behind, but using emotivity and the language of my home town as the method of conveying truth this time :D

unstuck

31st July 2013, 11:12

Yes it does. It has the power to stop things from being done. That is not humans not putting in the effort or being stupid, it's an economic fact that a finite pot of money is available to undertake a particular task.

How?:innocent:

mashman

31st July 2013, 11:14

Exactly, you're seeing what you want to see, try looking at the good side of the same coin (so to speak), look on the bright side of life buddy :sunny:

:rofl:... I saw no negativity in that statement, only cold hard facts that need to be addressed.

mashman

31st July 2013, 11:17

How?:innocent:

ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaa... we can't put money into alternative energy, because it is required for updating the payroll system for schools, or for irrigation projects for food production, or for roading, or for healthcare etc... the resources, materials, man power, know how, the will are there, the only thing that isn't is the money.

unstuck

31st July 2013, 11:19

So theres a big pile of money sitting in a big room, how is that money bad? Not the people who are holding it there, the money itself?:Police:

bogan

31st July 2013, 11:20

:rofl:... I saw no negativity in that statement, only cold hard facts that need to be addressed.

Cold hard facts eh? Shit you are just like Ed!

The point is, fact or not, it's the negative aspects you decide to focus on. Establishing a global resource economy which harnesses productivity from around the world for our common good is no small feat.

unstuck

31st July 2013, 11:24

The point is, fact or not, it's the negative aspects you decide to focus on. Establishing a global resource economy which harnesses productivity from around the world for our common good is no small feat.

This dude gets it.:Punk::Punk:

Big Dave

31st July 2013, 11:28

>>Why any person should be entitled to anything above any other is beyond me. <<

I hope you don't have a dog. Another dog will eat it.

mashman

31st July 2013, 11:43

So theres a big pile of money sitting in a big room, how is that money bad? Not the people who are holding it there, the money itself?:Police:

Because if the money didn't exist in the first place, neither the money nor the people could be considered bad. Is it because the money exists that we see the behaviours.

Cold hard facts eh? Shit you are just like Ed!

The point is, fact or not, it's the negative aspects you decide to focus on. Establishing a global resource economy which harnesses productivity from around the world for our common good is no small feat.

No. I'm focussing on recognised issues. WTF! seriously? You're saying that we currently don't have a global resource based economy? Come on, apply at least a little thought to that statement.

>>Why any person should be entitled to anything above any other is beyond me. <<

I hope you don't have a dog. Another dog will eat it.

Or it will die trying.

bogan

31st July 2013, 11:51

No. I'm focussing on recognised issues. WTF! seriously? You're saying that we currently don't have a global resource based economy? Come on, apply at least a little thought to that statement.

"It's pretty fuckin bad in a lot of places, so no, money is bad because it is a limiter, not the enabler that gets touted and it damages and hinders the lives of billions on a daily basis. Thems is facts baby, not fictions..."

Those are not facts. For you to put the fault on money, you would have to demonstate it was the financial system that did those things, not other factors like human douchebaggery, resource scarcity, etc...

I'm saying that money created the one we have, and it is no small feat. It was to point out that if you focused on more positive stuff you might see just what money has given us, has enabled us to do :sunny:

mashman

31st July 2013, 12:09

"It's pretty fuckin bad in a lot of places, so no, money is bad because it is a limiter, not the enabler that gets touted and it damages and hinders the lives of billions on a daily basis. Thems is facts baby, not fictions..."

Those are not facts. For you to put the fault on money, you would have to demonstate it was the financial system that did those things, not other factors like human douchebaggery, resource scarcity, etc...

I'm saying that money created the one we have, and it is no small feat. It was to point out that if you focused on more positive stuff you might see just what money has given us, has enabled us to do :sunny:

The only way to truly do that is to remove the financial system and see. What product/good/service is free of financial constraint?

I'm not denying what the financial system has achieved, what I am saying is that without the financial system we would have achieved more as we would not have had financial constraints to limit research or hold back technology. The reason that we have smart bombs is because someone wanted to make a smart bomb. The only reason a smart bomb came in to being was because finance was used to turn that idea into a reality. If a lack of "investment" is held up as the reason for not doing anything, which it usually is, then money/the financial system has stopped that anything from being achieved irrespective of the benefits it will yield. It impedes true progress and to a large extent limits cooperation. Yes money has taken us a long way, but there has been a very real human cost too, and that cost needn't have been paid had we have put in place that which is consistently reported that we cannot afford.

MisterD

31st July 2013, 12:10

Why any person should be entitled to anything above any other is beyond me.

So you're saying that everyone's time and skill is equal? I should pay the same to someone to weed my garden, as I should to fix my car as I should to perform surgery on my knee?

Question about money: What does a car mechanic do, in a moneyless world, if he needs bread but none of the bakers need their car fixed?

mashman

31st July 2013, 12:15

So you're saying that everyone's time and skill is equal? I should pay the same to someone to weed my garden, as I should to fix my car as I should to perform surgery on my knee?

Question about money: What does a car mechanic do, in a moneyless world, if he needs bread but none of the bakers need their car fixed?

I'm saying that we shouldn't have to pay at all, as all of those jobs are requirements for society to tick. Start removing those jobs and see how far ya get. My face example being binmen. Remove the binmen, watch disease rise, see waiting lists extend, watch more people die, see more docrots and nurses become disease ridden etc... It's all required, so why put a price on which is more important. Similarly with clean air, clean water and clean land. Start fucking with those and nobody lives.

He goes to the shop and picks up a loaf of bread. A dead mechanic is of no use (Soylent Green), neither is a stockpile of stale bread.

Edbear

31st July 2013, 12:16

That ad on TV? Money is neither good or bad, it's what you do with it that counts.

bogan

31st July 2013, 12:16

The only way to truly do that is to remove the financial system and see. What product/good/service is free of financial constraint?

I'm not denying what the financial system has achieved, what I am saying is that without the financial system we would have achieved more as we would not have had financial constraints to limit research or hold back technology. The reason that we have smart bombs is because someone wanted to make a smart bomb. The only reason a smart bomb came in to being was because finance was used to turn that idea into a reality. If a lack of "investment" is held up as the reason for not doing anything, which it usually is, then money/the financial system has stopped that anything from being achieved irrespective of the benefits it will yield. It impedes true progress and to a large extent limits cooperation. Yes money has taken us a long way, but there has been a very real human cost too, and that cost needn't have been paid had we have put in place that which is consistently reported that we cannot afford.

Exactly, that's why calling it a cold hard fact makes you look uninformed or deliberately misleading...

You perhaps need to look at it with a little less bias, the financial system is in its simplest form a resource allocation system. Yes projects get held up or green lit by financial investment, but there just isn't enough resources around to green light every project. So the financial system is a valuable tool for maxising advancement by ensuring the right projects get the resources.

puddytat

31st July 2013, 12:28

"Moms going to fix it all soon, Moms going to put it all back the way outta be....."

The future is a Socialist state period. Wether its a Fascist one is still on the cards.....

We only need a biggy on the Alpine Fault & our countries societal splits will dissapear....my left nut said to me this morning (over the protestations of my Knob) that it is going to happen sooner than we'd like.
By the way,its just over the hill from me:eek5:

mashman

31st July 2013, 12:31

That ad on TV? Money is neither good or bad, it's what you do with it that counts.

And when there isn't enough to do that which is necessary? Take for instance an oil spill. Would you rather argue over how much it costs to fly every boom in the world to that location to mop it up and end up only sending 1/4 of the booms, or would you rather just fly everything there because it is needed at that place at that time (no cost makes that a possibility)?

Exactly, that's why calling it a cold hard fact makes you look uninformed or deliberately misleading...

You perhaps need to look at it with a little less bias, the financial system is in its simplest form a resource allocation system. Yes projects get held up or green lit by financial investment, but there just isn't enough resources around to green light every project. So the financial system is a valuable tool for maxising advancement by ensuring the right projects get the resources.

But it still is a cold hard fact. We have poverty because there isn't enough money. Poverty is measured in financial terms. If you don;t have the money, you can't buy the stuff... however as witnessed by several documentary's, you can always dumpster dive for food.

Mate, I haven't always felt this way about the financial system. This only started about 5 or 6 years ago. I'm 42 man. The bias has flown and I'm looking at this holistically and logically. I know what the financial system is in its simplest form, but it isn't used in just its simplest form is it? When weighing up the pros and cons of a thing, do you just approach it with the pros in mind or do you evaluate the cons? I've evaluated an awful lot of the pros and cons in the last 5 years, so my bias is underpinned by the fact that for every issue/road block the financial system hits/throws up, that very same issue could have been avoided if the financial system hadn't have been in place to begin with. All done using logic and all driving me to the same conclusion.

Of course there are enough resources, just ask any neo-classical economist :innocent:... you're right though, there may well not be enough resources, which is all the more reason to make the ones we currently have count, no?

Who decides what the right projects are? Is a spy satellite at the cost of billions of dollars a good use of resources? Is a stock pile of human ending weapons a good use of resources (or money for that matter)?

mashman

31st July 2013, 12:34

MisterD

31st July 2013, 12:39

I'm saying that we shouldn't have to pay at all, as all of those jobs are requirements for society to tick. Start removing those jobs and see how far ya get. My face example being binmen. Remove the binmen, watch disease rise, see waiting lists extend, watch more people die, see more docrots and nurses become disease ridden etc... It's all required, so why put a price on which is more important. Similarly with clean air, clean water and clean land. Start fucking with those and nobody lives.

He goes to the shop and picks up a loaf of bread. A dead mechanic is of no use (Soylent Green), neither is a stockpile of stale bread.

Riiight. So the incentive for someone to spend years training to be a doctor is what, when they can just stroll down to the bakers for their bread, or get the mechanic to fix their car? Why not just spend a couple of hours emptying rubbish bins?

Like it or not, everything has it's own value at any point in time and a free market is the only fair and efficient way to let those values find their level. The problem we have is that we don't have a free market, we have a politically distorted and skewed market. Bankers making $millon bonuses is not a problem, bankers who make shit decisions getting bailed out and not losing their shirts is.

Scuba_Steve

31st July 2013, 12:39

So the financial system is a valuable tool for maxising advancement by ensuring the right projects get the resources.

:facepalm:
Most of the biggest advancements were made without big moneys, but hey maybee spending millions on finding the "perfect cup of tea" was good use of money for maximum advancement?

bogan

31st July 2013, 12:43

But it still is a cold hard fact. We have poverty because there isn't enough money. Poverty is measured in financial terms. If you don;t have the money, you can't buy the stuff... however as witnessed by several documentary's, you can always dumpster dive for food.

Mate, I haven't always felt this way about the financial system. This only started about 5 or 6 years ago. I'm 42 man. The bias has flown and I'm looking at this holistically and logically. I know what the financial system is in its simplest form, but it isn't used in just its simplest form is it? When weighing up the pros and cons of a thing, do you just approach it with the pros in mind or do you evaluate the cons? I've evaluated an awful lot of the pros and cons in the last 5 years, so my bias is underpinned by the fact that for every issue/road block the financial system hits/throws up, that very same issue could have been avoided if the financial system hadn't have been in place to begin with. All done using logic and all driving me to the same conclusion.

Of course there are enough resources, just ask any neo-classical economist :innocent:... you're right though, there may well not be enough resources, which is all the more reason to make the ones we currently have count, no?

Who decides what the right projects are? Is a spy satellite at the cost of billions of dollars a good use of resources? Is a stock pile of human ending weapons a good use of resources (or money for that matter)?

Actually the definition of poverty is not tied to the financial system at all "The quality or state of being poor or indigent; want or scarcity of means of subsistence; indigence; need." so no, it is not a cold hard fact.

Still comes off as obviously biased with a dash of naivety.
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxk88alD0l1r7w8cbo1_500.gif

Mostly it is the market, the consumers, the people! sure you can point to some wasteful ones if that is what you want to see, but who else should decide if not the people?

mashman

31st July 2013, 12:46

Riiight. So the incentive for someone to spend years training to be a doctor is what, when they can just stroll down to the bakers for their bread, or get the mechanic to fix their car? Why not just spend a couple of hours emptying rubbish bins?

Like it or not, everything has it's own value at any point in time and a free market is the only fair and efficient way to let those values find their level. The problem we have is that we don't have a free market, we have a politically distorted and skewed market. Bankers making $millon bonuses is not a problem, bankers who make shit decisions getting bailed out and not losing their shirts is.

Why did they decide to become a doctor in the first place? And who has "carried" them all through their years of training from baby to man, or woman?

Riiiiiiiight, so if you had a free market nothing would be politically distorted or skewed? You think the market would be self regulating and outwith the manipulation of those chasing the $? My primary objections to the free market are that unnecessary shit will be made, resources will be wasted, competition will skew the market etc... Even if you paid every single person the same amount of money, those who sell for a higher value will skew that market eventually. Markets just don't work the way you expect them to, so why bother wasting any more time, I think 2000+ years is enough, proving that? Time for something new and improved.

bogan

31st July 2013, 12:48

:facepalm:
Most of the biggest advancements were made without big moneys, but hey maybee spending millions on finding the "perfect cup of tea" was good use of money for maximum advancement?

Really, which ones? Seem to me that arguably the biggest one (computers) now has a massive industry and accompanying massive r&d budget...

mashman

31st July 2013, 12:58

Actually the definition of poverty is not tied to the financial system at all "The quality or state of being poor or indigent; want or scarcity of means of subsistence; indigence; need." so no, it is not a cold hard fact.

Still comes off as obviously biased with a dash of naivety.

Mostly it is the market, the consumers, the people! sure you can point to some wasteful ones if that is what you want to see, but who else should decide if not the people?

Poverty is said measured, not defined.

You don't like your system (and associated beliefs) being challenged, so how could you see my attempt at offering an alternative as anything other than biased or naive... irrespective of the fact that I used to think similarly to yourself, yet took the extraordinary step of paying attention, questioning my own thinking and then changing my mind. Which bias should I choose......... I know, the one that actually makes sense.

A resource committee for starters. We should be deciding what is made to fulfil everyone's needs first and foremost. Food, water, power supply, housing and all to a high standard, not something with a 50 or 100 years life expectancy, but for thousands of years. We should be deciding how to build things before they are produced for maximum re-usage and on and on and on and on... all of those best practices that we would love to use, but can't afford the drop in customer base to produce blah blah blah.

MisterD

31st July 2013, 13:01

Why did they decide to become a doctor in the first place? And who has "carried" them all through their years of training from baby to man, or woman?

Generally because of a combination of three things (in no particular order) it's very well paid, the role carries a lot of mana in society and they enjoy helping people.

Riiiiiiiight, so if you had a free market nothing would be politically distorted or skewed? You think the market would be self regulating and outwith the manipulation of those chasing the $? My primary objections to the free market are that unnecessary shit will be made, resources will be wasted, competition will skew the market etc... Even if you paid every single person the same amount of money, those who sell for a higher value will skew that market eventually. Markets just don't work the way you expect them to, so why bother wasting any more time, I think 2000+ years is enough, proving that? Time for something new and improved.

I think you fundamentally misunderstand the "free" bit of "free market". It's political skewing that causes unnecessary shit to be made and resources to be wasted. In a free market, as resources diminish their value rises and the cost of using them increase making alternatives more attractive.

There is no deliberate human-intervention system that will respond as quickly and accurately as a truly free market. Capitalism has lifted more people out of real poverty than anything else ever invented by man.

puddytat

31st July 2013, 13:07

Capitalism has lifted more people out of real poverty than anything else ever invented by man.

And the climate chaos its causing will drop him back into even deeper shit than before.

bogan

31st July 2013, 13:09

Poverty is said measured, not defined.

You don't like your system (and associated beliefs) being challenged, so how could you see my attempt at offering an alternative as anything other than biased or naive... irrespective of the fact that I used to think similarly to yourself, yet took the extraordinary step of paying attention, questioning my own thinking and then changing my mind. Which bias should I choose......... I know, the one that actually makes sense.

A resource committee for starters. We should be deciding what is made to fulfil everyone's needs first and foremost. Food, water, power supply, housing and all to a high standard, not something with a 50 or 100 years life expectancy, but for thousands of years. We should be deciding how to build things before they are produced for maximum re-usage and on and on and on and on... all of those best practices that we would love to use, but can't afford the drop in customer base to produce blah blah blah.

In a financial context it is measured, as a concept it is defined, when you say the financial system causes poverty I assume you mean as the concept is defined. I mean it's blatantly obvious you can no longer measure it financially without a financial system and of absolutely no relevance to your argument unless you want to use it to mislead...

It's biased an naive because you have nothing better to offer.

A resource committee? so you want the average joes to have even less say than we do now? Isn't that just giving the 1% (albeit a different 1%) more power than what they have now?

Ocean1

31st July 2013, 13:12

I think you fundamentally misunderstand the "free" bit of "free market". It's political skewing that causes unnecessary shit to be made and resources to be wasted. In a free market, as resources diminish their value rises and the cost of using them increase making alternatives more attractive.

There is no deliberate human-intervention system that will respond as quickly and accurately as a truly free market. Capitalism has lifted more people out of real poverty than anything else ever invented by man.

Carefull there, dude, you'll end up having to sit in the corner here with Oscar an' me.

Where the real freedom is.

Scuba_Steve

31st July 2013, 13:14

Really, which ones? Seem to me that arguably the biggest one (computers) now has a massive industry and accompanying massive r&d budget...

"computers" is a pretty vague topic & if we look at personal side most of the big players now started out with no moneys then; So yes now they have big budgets, but are they really "game changing" anymore with their big budgets like they did back in the days with their pittance?
Most of their best stuff came without the large moneys, nowadays they just use their large moneys to buy up innovative companies actually advancing the industry with no moneys

bogan

31st July 2013, 13:19

"computers" is a pretty vague topic & if we look at personal side most of the big players now started out with no moneys then; So yes now they have big budgets, but are they really "game changing" anymore with their big budgets like they did back in the days with their pittance?
Most of their best stuff came without the large moneys, nowadays they just use their large moneys to buy up innovative companies actually advancing the industry with no moneys

They only became game changing once people started using them, and people only started using them once they could mass produce em, and they could only mass produce them with decent investment for production gear. Right way back at the start you have a lot of uncertainty, as the uncertainty dwindles through proof of concept you get more money coming in. Are you really suggesting society should start pouring money into the most uncertain projects based on nothing but a 'I hope it works'? Time travel, zero point energy etc?

Scuba_Steve

31st July 2013, 13:26

They only became game changing once people started using them, and people only started using them once they could mass produce em, and they could only mass produce them with decent investment for production gear. Right way back at the start you have a lot of uncertainty, as the uncertainty dwindles through proof of concept you get more money coming in. Are you really suggesting society should start pouring money into the most uncertain projects based on nothing but a 'I hope it works'? Time travel, zero point energy etc?

No I'm just simply stating that the biggest advancements didn't come about due to big moneys, but more through necessity or desire.
In-fact alot of what we see today was created 20yrs ago but moneys made it a financial suicide should they have released it when created, so in that respect moneys actually retards our advancement

MisterD

31st July 2013, 13:29

Are you really suggesting society should start pouring money into the most uncertain projects based on nothing but a 'I hope it works'?

Case in point - every "Green job" created by government intervention in the UK costs $200,000 plus 3.7 other real jobs.

mashman

31st July 2013, 13:29

Generally because of a combination of three things (in no particular order) it's very well paid, the role carries a lot of mana in society and they enjoy helping people.

I suggest you go an ask a kid why they want to become a doctor. I reckon you'll get 1 out of those 3 answers and it won't be the money or the mana.

I think you fundamentally misunderstand the "free" bit of "free market". It's political skewing that causes unnecessary shit to be made and resources to be wasted. In a free market, as resources diminish their value rises and the cost of using them increase making alternatives more attractive.

There is no deliberate human-intervention system that will respond as quickly and accurately as a truly free market. Capitalism has lifted more people out of real poverty than anything else ever invented by man.

It's not political skewing at all. I'm not saying that political interference doesn't have anything to do with the price of shit, but to say that they're causing unnecessary shit to be made is really rather quite outlandish. Can you qualify your statement?

Yes there is. It's called good will and the need to do something because it needs to be done. The truly free market will weigh up how much to spend before they will respond. As for capitalism lifting more people out of poverty etc... "my" system will eradicate poverty within 10 years. Technically the moment it is implemented poverty will be eradicated, so I'm giving a wide margin for error there... but it will be eradicated, not mitigated.

In a financial context it is measured, as a concept it is defined, when you say the financial system causes poverty I assume you mean as the concept is defined. I mean it's blatantly obvious you can no longer measure it financially without a financial system and of absolutely no relevance to your argument unless you want to use it to mislead...

It's biased an naive because you have nothing better to offer.

A resource committee? so you want the average joes to have even less say than we do now? Isn't that just giving the 1% (albeit a different 1%) more power than what they have now?

Ok, using the definition then: "The quality or state of being poor or indigent; want or scarcity of means of subsistence; indigence; need.".

Lack of resources. The resources are available, yet they don't have the funds to purchase them or the funds to import the resources. Plenty of places around the globe with that problem... and not for want of resource scarcity, but for a lack of sharing the abundant resources with all to allow them the ability to provide for their community's. It ALL requires money... yet not all can afford it, so the financial system plays a pivotal role in poverty.

It's better than what we currently have... doubly so as you're offering absolutely no alternative in return.

Sorry if I mislead you to believe that there would only be 1 resource committee. More power? How is that giving them more power to that which they already own? Who will ask the resource committee for resources? Go ahead, use yer brain thingymajig and extrapolate that a little further. At some point a line will have to be drawn as to the frequency we get "stuff". I'm more than happy for that to happen given the positives that will also come about with that sort of "controlled development".

bogan

31st July 2013, 13:30

No I'm just simply stating that the biggest advancements didn't come about due to big moneys, but more through necessity or desire.
In-fact alot of what we see today was created 20yrs ago but moneys made it a financial suicide should they have released it when created, so in that respect moneys actually retards our advancement

Ahh, so when money helps people create things or promote its advancement, it's actually the person who does the work. But if the people decide not to put money into creating or advancing something, it is money's fault it failed. Right... that doesn't sound biased at all :rolleyes:

mashman

31st July 2013, 13:34

Are you really suggesting society should start pouring money into the most uncertain projects based on nothing but a 'I hope it works'? Time travel, zero point energy etc?

Case in point - every "Green job" created by government intervention in the UK costs $200,000 plus 3.7 other real jobs.

bwaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaa... time travel and zero point energy can be explored if there is no cost because it removes nothing from other projects.

Ergo Green jobs cannot be afforded.

Fuckin geniuses support a system that limits human endeavor and then you moan and bitch about the costs. PRICELESS bwaaaaaaa ha ha ha ah ha ha haaaaaa. Your system does not allow you to have your cake and eat it, mine does :bleh:

Scuba_Steve

31st July 2013, 13:36

Ahh, so when money helps people create things or promote its advancement, it's actually the person who does the work. But if the people decide not to put money into creating or advancing something, it is money's fault it failed. Right... that doesn't sound biased at all :rolleyes:

Not my thoughts, but carry on...

MisterD

31st July 2013, 13:36

I'm not saying that political interference doesn't have anything to do with the price of shit, but to say that they're causing unnecessary shit to be made is really rather quite outlandish. Can you qualify your statement?

Can I qualify? Have you heard of the Common Agricultural Policy? The system which basically subsidises French farmers and gave us the famous Wine Lake and Butter Mountain.

bogan

31st July 2013, 13:38

Ok, using the definition then: "The quality or state of being poor or indigent; want or scarcity of means of subsistence; indigence; need.".

Lack of resources. The resources are available, yet they don't have the funds to purchase them or the funds to import the resources. Plenty of places around the globe with that problem... and not for want of resource scarcity, but for a lack of sharing the abundant resources with all to allow them the ability to provide for their community's. It ALL requires money... yet not all can afford it, so the financial system plays a pivotal role in poverty.

It's better than what we currently have... doubly so as you're offering absolutely no alternative in return.

Sorry if I mislead you to believe that there would only be 1 resource committee. More power? How is that giving them more power to that which they already own? Who will ask the resource committee for resources? Go ahead, use yer brain thingymajig and extrapolate that a little further. At some point a line will have to be drawn as to the frequency we get "stuff". I'm more than happy for that to happen given the positives that will also come about with that sort of "controlled development".

So back to the start then, how can you prove it's the financial system preventing those people's access to the resources? and not human douchebaggery or resource scarcity? It's not a fact unless you can prove it.

I've heard nothing that even comes close to what we have, I'd like to offer something better, but in absence of that I think what we have is the best. This is the point you keep struggling with, the so called 99% have no useful alternative to offer, and will not be taken seriously (even by opposition) until you do.

Currently the free market (despite it no being a perfect free market) is a huge driving force allowing all consumers to have their say in what gets produced, what companies get access to the resources. By shifting that power into a committee you are taking it away from the rest of the people, it doesn't mater who has to ask, it matters who has to decide.

It just seems like you want a dictatorship, but where the dictator is a committee of as many people as you can find who agree with your way of doing things. :crazy:

MisterD

31st July 2013, 13:39

Fuckin geniuses support a system that limits human endeavor and then you moan and bitch about the costs. PRICELESS bwaaaaaaa ha ha ha ah ha ha haaaaaa. Your system does not allow you to have your cake and eat it, mine does :bleh:

I really think you need to ponder on this: If something seems too good to be true, it probably is.

Cake and eat it? Hash cake and eaten it, I reckon.

Hint: Costs exist whether you ascribe a monetary value to them or not.

MisterD

31st July 2013, 13:42

a committee of as many people as you can find who agree with your way of doing things. :crazy:

Finally you've explained my feeling of deja vu

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/JvKIWjnEPNY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

bogan

31st July 2013, 13:43

bwaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaa... time travel and zero point energy can be explored if there is no cost because it removes nothing from other projects.

Removes nothing? How do you expect to get those things done without allocating technical expertise and research resources from other projects?

Are there a lot of wizards in the so called 99% or something?

Not my thoughts, but carry on...

Is that not an accurate summary of what you said then? At what point does the financial system start to be a reflection of people's decisions?

mashman

31st July 2013, 14:11

So back to the start then, how can you prove it's the financial system preventing those people's access to the resources? and not human douchebaggery or resource scarcity? It's not a fact unless you can prove it.

I've heard nothing that even comes close to what we have, I'd like to offer something better, but in absence of that I think what we have is the best. This is the point you keep struggling with, the so called 99% have no useful alternative to offer, and will not be taken seriously (even by opposition) until you do.

Currently the free market (despite it no being a perfect free market) is a huge driving force allowing all consumers to have their say in what gets produced, what companies get access to the resources. By shifting that power into a committee you are taking it away from the rest of the people, it doesn't mater who has to ask, it matters who has to decide.

It just seems like you want a dictatorship, but where the dictator is a committee of as many people as you can find who agree with your way of doing things. :crazy:

Because they haven't got the resources they need. Why don't they have the resources. Because they don't have the money, that the financial system produces, to buy them. Do the resources exist, yes. Is it logistically possible to get the resources from A to B, yes. Then the hold up is the lack of money produced by the financial system. Now perhaps you'll be able to answer this question properly: What product/good/service is free of financial constraint?

Hang on, you're telling me and "my" idea are representative of any solutions being proposed by the 99%. That's a bit silly really isn't it... but yes I agree, they don't seem to be proposing much these days, well, apart from starting a bank that is. Now that is ironic. Pay attention, I will say this only once more: THERE WILL BE NEXT TO NO DIFFERENCES IN THE SHORT TERM EXCEPT THERE WILL BE NO MONEY IN CIRCULATION. EVERYTHING ELSE WILL GO ON AS IT CURRENTLY DOES... and that means everything. Once you've grasped that concept, we can move forwards, until then, you're looking in the wrong places for your answers.

Consumers get a say in what stays on the market yes, but as they are susceptible to advertising and marketing strategy's (like yourself, brand loyalty etc...) then they have proven that they shouldn't have a say. Does that fit better with your perception? Yes. Some shit just does not need to be produced. Some shit just does not need to be produced so frequently. Some shit should be put together much better than it currently is. Those issues need to be addressed and if the only way to do that is to remove certain things from the marketplace, then so be it, the robots will get over it in a remarkably short space of time and everyone will be the better off for it.

Bwaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaa... oh so lervely wrong it's almost poetic.

I really think you need to ponder on this: If something seems too good to be true, it probably is.

Cake and eat it? Hash cake and eaten it, I reckon.

Hint: Costs exist whether you ascribe a monetary value to them or not.

I have done, 5/6 years. Are you saying that I read this stuff in a book? or off of the internet? Please see the following statement.

I can help you find your imagination if you like.

I know... hence the reason I say to use them properly and do the things that need to be done.

Removes nothing? How do you expect to get those things done without allocating technical expertise and research resources from other projects?

Are there a lot of wizards in the so called 99% or something?

Errrrr, because they haven't been removed?

Could be.

bogan

31st July 2013, 14:25

Because they haven't got the resources they need. Why don't they have the resources. Because they don't have the money, that the financial system produces, to buy them. Do the resources exist, yes. Is it logistically possible to get the resources from A to B, yes. Then the hold up is the lack of money produced by the financial system. Now perhaps you'll be able to answer this question properly: What product/good/service is free of financial constraint?

Hang on, you're telling me and "my" idea are representative of any solutions being proposed by the 99%. That's a bit silly really isn't it... but yes I agree, they don't seem to be proposing much these days, well, apart from starting a bank that is. Now that is ironic. Pay attention, I will say this only once more: THERE WILL BE NEXT TO NO DIFFERENCES IN THE SHORT TERM EXCEPT THERE WILL BE NO MONEY IN CIRCULATION. EVERYTHING ELSE WILL GO ON AS IT CURRENTLY DOES... and that means everything. Once you've grasped that concept, we can move forwards, until then, you're looking in the wrong places for your answers.

Consumers get a say in what stays on the market yes, but as they are susceptible to advertising and marketing strategy's (like yourself, brand loyalty etc...) then they have proven that they shouldn't have a say. Does that fit better with your perception? Yes. Some shit just does not need to be produced. Some shit just does not need to be produced so frequently. Some shit should be put together much better than it currently is. Those issues need to be addressed and if the only way to do that is to remove certain things from the marketplace, then so be it, the robots will get over it in a remarkably short space of time and everyone will be the better off for it.

Bwaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaa... oh so lervely wrong it's almost poetic.

Errrrr, because they haven't been removed?

Could be.

You of course have proof that such resource would make their way to them if money was not a thing? And that it wouldn't just be douchebaggery or nationalism or hoarding that would continue to prevent them getting there if money was not a thing...

I figured you as part of the so called 99% so assumed your idea were indicative of their own, in either case I've seen nothing good from any source to replace or surpass our current system. Shouting a concept is worthless since you have no basis to back up that statement; it's either shit now there is no money I can't buy anything, or, sweet, no money so I can buy everything! Or some other factor you've yet to explain... like the wizards suddenly imbuing everyone with a sense of altruism.

Regardless, removing the people from the driving force in favor of your dictator committee who decides for our common good that we don't need those things anymore, is still removing one of the driving forces all people have a say in.

Are they wizard researchers who can do two things at once? Or do you just have visions of all the top minds sitting around idly going, well if only I had money I could do something with my life. Surely you can see those people and equipment are occupied with existing projects?

MisterD

31st July 2013, 14:26

I know... hence the reason I say to use them properly and do the things that need to be done.

You're peddling a financial perpetual motion machine. It just won't work.

ducatilover

31st July 2013, 14:35

Why don't you all put your incredible collective intelligence together and build me a swing arm? And because it's a free market, I won't pay any of you. Or something.

Thanks, you can contact me via PM

unstuck

31st July 2013, 14:35

Because if the money didn't exist in the first place, neither the money nor the people could be considered bad. Is it because the money exists that we see the behaviours.

So before the monetary system was invented, everybody was living in perfect harmony. There were no tribal wars of greed, people didnt die of starvation, fuck......that must of been cool.:whistle:

mashman

31st July 2013, 14:42

You of course have proof that such resource would make their way to them if money was not a thing? And that it wouldn't just be douchebaggery or nationalism or hoarding that would continue to prevent them getting there if money was not a thing...

I figured you as part of the so called 99% so assumed your idea were indicative of their own, in either case I've seen nothing good from any source to replace or surpass our current system. Shouting a concept is worthless since you have no basis to back up that statement; it's either shit now there is no money I can't buy anything, or, sweet, no money so I can buy everything! Or some other factor you've yet to explain... like the wizards suddenly imbuing everyone with a sense of altruism.

Regardless, removing the people from the driving force in favor of your dictator committee who decides for our common good that we don't need those things anymore, is still removing one of the driving forces all people have a say in.

Are they wizard researchers who can do two things at once? Or do you just have visions of all the top minds sitting around idly going, well if only I had money I could do something with my life. Surely you can see those people and equipment are occupied with existing projects?

Do you have proof to say otherwise? That douchebaggery or nationalism or hoarding already exists, the main difference being that those in poverty, hungry, wanting further education, wanting healthcare etc... would have it available to them. That's several plus's in my book.

And as I pointed out at the start of the thread, there is no indicative, just people with concerns that they decide to concern themselves with. In my case, I've gone for concerning myself with trying a solution that affects everything. Most of it will be for the better, the rest, well we'd have to wait and see ad deal with that. As I have said, I'm not looking for nirvana/utopia, just something better and that is achievable. NOTHING WILL CHANGE IN THE SHORT-TERM. We're already altruistic, we just need the environment to show it.

Not all people have a say at the moment. So no difference there.

What percentage of bankers, accountants, and financially related people would be capable of turning their hand to something else? Because there's an awful lot of people in those jobs that are qualified to be mathematicians, rocket scientists, biochemist etc... and as there weren't any jobs in those fields, they've thrown themselves into something different. So no need to remove anyone from any existing projects, unless of course the project is finding the best cup of tea or designing weapons of destruction or highly inefficient hydrogen engines to take into disaster zones etc...

You're peddling a financial perpetual motion machine. It just won't work.

In what way? and why won't it work?

Scuba_Steve

31st July 2013, 14:42

So before the monetary system was invented, everybody was living in perfect harmony. There were no tribal wars of greed, people didnt die of starvation, fuck......that must of been cool.:whistle:

No but there was 1 less thing to beat da shit outta each other over/for

mashman

31st July 2013, 14:43

unstuck

31st July 2013, 14:47

That was then.

So people only started to be BAD when money was invented?:scratch:

mashman

31st July 2013, 14:51

So people only started to be BAD when money was invented?:scratch:

As Scuba_Steve says, it was just 1 more thing added to the list and one that has come back to bite a awful lot of people with a vengeance. I, fortunately, am not one of those that were bitten, but I know what that feels like and see it as an unnecessary and avoidable part of living.

bogan

31st July 2013, 14:52

Do you have proof to say otherwise? That douchebaggery or nationalism or hoarding already exists, the main difference being that those in poverty, hungry, wanting further education, wanting healthcare etc... would have it available to them. That's several plus's in my book.

And as I pointed out at the start of the thread, there is no indicative, just people with concerns that they decide to concern themselves with. In my case, I've gone for concerning myself with trying a solution that affects everything. Most of it will be for the better, the rest, well we'd have to wait and see ad deal with that. As I have said, I'm not looking for nirvana/utopia, just something better and that is achievable. NOTHING WILL CHANGE IN THE SHORT-TERM. We're already altruistic, we just need the environment to show it.

Not all people have a say at the moment. So no difference there.

What percentage of bankers, accountants, and financially related people would be capable of turning their hand to something else? Because there's an awful lot of people in those jobs that are qualified to be mathematicians, rocket scientists, biochemist etc... and as there weren't any jobs in those fields, they've thrown themselves into something different. So no need to remove anyone from any existing projects, unless of course the project is finding the best cup of tea or designing weapons of destruction or highly inefficient hydrogen engines to take into disaster zones etc...

I never claimed it as fact, so why do I need proof?

"We're already altruistic, we just need the environment to show it." Fuck I wish, now there is that nativity I was talking about earlier, those wizards will be busy casting their altruism spells.

Not all but a hell of a lot more than a dictator committee size do, so definitely a difference there.

I'd assume a lot of those would go straight into the resource management area, which if anything is going to need more people to do a proper job without market driven forces at work, or at least more wizards. What is it you have against Tea? this seems a good example of the dictator commitee, why should you decide we should all drink run of the mill tea? and you'd sell our future down the river by disarming us again aliens or meteors? hamper us disaster recovery efforts? I don't like this dictator committee, can I get a different one?

mashman

31st July 2013, 15:03

So people only started to be BAD when money was invented?:scratch:

My turn. Has your financial system stopped war?

ducatilover

31st July 2013, 15:04

No but there was 1 less thing to beat da shit outta each other over/for

Humans are selfish by nature, it's part of being an animal and having survival instincts. So they probably beat each other up for not bartering/giving gobbies for their new stone mallet

ducatilover

31st July 2013, 15:04

My turn. Has your financial system stopped war?

Fuck me, Unstuck made the financial system?

MisterD

31st July 2013, 15:12

In what way? and why won't it work?

Who decides how resources are allocated? Mr Farmer produces a limited amount of grain and maybe a limited amount of milk, who decides what proportion of land to use for the production of each? What happens if there isn't enough grain, or there is too much?

What's to stop me setting up as a baker, even though there's not enough grain to use, or there's too much bread made already? I can still take my car to the mechanic and expect it to be fixed?

Please explain how, in the absence of a market and variable values of resources and production, we can replace the price signals that take care of this stuff for us at the moment.

mashman

31st July 2013, 15:12

I never claimed it as fact, so why do I need proof?

"We're already altruistic, we just need the environment to show it." Fuck I wish, now there is that nativity I was talking about earlier, those wizards will be busy casting their altruism spells.

Not all but a hell of a lot more than a dictator committee size do, so definitely a difference there.

I'd assume a lot of those would go straight into the resource management area, which if anything is going to need more people to do a proper job without market driven forces at work, or at least more wizards. What is it you have against Tea? this seems a good example of the dictator commitee, why should you decide we should all drink run of the mill tea? and you'd sell our future down the river by disarming us again aliens or meteors? hamper us disaster recovery efforts? I don't like this dictator committee, can I get a different one?

Yet you deny it on the same basis. How very unscientific of you.

Funny, I thought Chch proved the exact opposite. As do many random acts of kindness that we perform on any given day.

Again, proof please?

You can assume all you like, but given that they are individuals, they'll likely make their own minds up where their time would be best served. Perhaps they'll augment the current body of researchers in the fields in which they were trained, ya know, the ones they couldn't find jobs in. I only mentioned Tea once and it was pout forwards by someone else regarding millions of $ being, ahem, poured in to research, and for what? It's indicative of the resource and financial waste society produces. In a system that relies on money to feed and cloth people, I think there are more important things than tea... but then poverty isn't on your radar, neither is the housing shortage (which "my" system could provide quite easily), neither is healthcare, or education or any of those other things that actually make a societea. You're too focussed on there being a committee and not what it can achieve. I said "designing weapons of destruction", not protection. Man them blinkers are well and truly glued on there ;)

Voltaire

31st July 2013, 15:22

Hitler could not have been too impressed with Mussolini as he could play the violin and speak English, French and German too, very Tory
Mind you Hitler was a Vegetarian who could not drive......makes him more a greeny.:rolleyes:

bogan

31st July 2013, 15:22

Yet you deny it on the same basis. How very unscientific of you.

Funny, I thought Chch proved the exact opposite. As do many random acts of kindness that we perform on any given day.

Again, proof please?

You can assume all you like, but given that they are individuals, they'll likely make their own minds up where their time would be best served. Perhaps they'll augment the current body of researchers in the fields in which they were trained, ya know, the ones they couldn't find jobs in. I only mentioned Tea once and it was pout forwards by someone else regarding millions of $ being, ahem, poured in to research, and for what? It's indicative of the resource and financial waste society produces. In a system that relies on money to feed and cloth people, I think there are more important things than tea... but then poverty isn't on your radar, neither is the housing shortage (which "my" system could provide quite easily), neither is healthcare, or education or any of those other things that actually make a societea. You're too focussed on there being a committee and not what it can achieve. I said "designing weapons of destruction", not protection. Man them blinkers are well and truly glued on there ;)

Well, I don't claim it as a proven fact, so it actually is scientific of me to call into question unproven facts with alternate theories.

Short (though not as short as we would all like) lived tragedies often bring out the best in people, doesn't mean it would become permanent if your tragedy of a wbe (Wizard Based Economy) was put into place.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_forces this explains how the market drives the production through market forces. A committee deciding the same within the boundaries of a financial system is called a monopoly, and actually outlawed in most places I think, so there is some food for thought.

Of course they will, but unless the wizards magic up some increased efficiency across the board, it's all just some rearranging of existing resources, lose some here, gain some there, it comes at a cost. It's also indicative of the wbe's dictator ways, we clearly enjoy our tea enough to warrant vast research budgets, but the dictator committee is not such a fan of tea, so fuck all you tea drinkers, there will be no more innovation for you.

mashman

31st July 2013, 15:23

Fuck me, Unstuck made the financial system?

He certainly did... him and his quantum mechanics buddies :siftry:

Who decides how resources are allocated? Mr Farmer produces a limited amount of grain and maybe a limited amount of milk, who decides what proportion of land to use for the production of each? What happens if there isn't enough grain, or there is too much?

What's to stop me setting up as a baker, even though there's not enough grain to use, or there's too much bread made already? I can still take my car to the mechanic and expect it to be fixed?

Please explain how, in the absence of a market and variable values of resources and production, we can replace the price signals that take care of this stuff for us at the moment.

Lo recommendations shall be made by those who do the job to those who make the decisions, about 3 of them... Then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then they will make a decision on what is best course of action. All of those involved will make up that committee. The members of which will be recommended by those who do the job. Too much is a great situation, coz it can be sent somewhere where they are short of grain.

You can be a lazy cunt that sits on the couch all day and still get your bread and your car fixed.

If stuff needs doing, then do it where the resources are available.

Ocean1

31st July 2013, 15:23

or highly inefficient hydrogen engines to take into disaster zones etc...

I'm sure we've already discussed your complete lack of understanding regarding the physics, indeed the whole panopoly of related concepts associated with that idea. As I recall the conclusion reached after an unpleasantly protracted series of silly conjectures on your part was that your idea was utter crap. With which you eventually agreed.

And yet here you are trotting it out again like some talisman of the glory of the moneyless utopia. I suppose it has to be said that it's symbolic of your collection of "ideas" insomuch as that it bears a remarkably similar feature. It was ill considered nonsensical crap, thinly disguised with a light veneer of circular logic and mind-dulling repetition.

You haven’t spent your time since then wisely I find.

MisterD

31st July 2013, 15:27

Lo recommendations shall be made by those who do the job to those who make the decisions, about 3 of them...

And it's a holiday in Cambodia
Where you'll do what you're told
A holiday in Cambodia
Where the slums got so much soul

bogan

31st July 2013, 15:27

unstuck

31st July 2013, 15:27

My turn. Has your financial system stopped war?

How is it MY financial system? Tis the one I accept and use but I never made it. Wars wont stop until everyone is at peace with THEMSELVES. But theres the catch, you have to get yourself in a place of peace and contentment before you can be an affective change for anything. Personal responsibility is where the answers lie in my opinion, stop worrying about what everyone else is doing, and how everyone else is fucking up the world and start getting your own shit together. Then you may start to see the change that is afoot within the world today.:Punk::Punk:

unstuck

31st July 2013, 15:29

He certainly did... him and his quantum mechanics buddies :siftry:

Damn, ya got me there ya prick.:laugh::laugh:

mashman

31st July 2013, 15:35

Well, I don't claim it as a proven fact, so it actually is scientific of me to call into question unproven facts with alternate theories.

Short (though not as short as we would all like) lived tragedies often bring out the best in people, doesn't mean it would become permanent if your tragedy of a wbe (Wizard Based Economy) was put into place.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_forces this explains how the market drives the production through market forces. A committee deciding the same within the boundaries of a financial system is called a monopoly, and actually outlawed in most places I think, so there is some food for thought.

Of course they will, but unless the wizards magic up some increased efficiency across the board, it's all just some rearranging of existing resources, lose some here, gain some there, it comes at a cost. It's also indicative of the wbe's dictator ways, we clearly enjoy our tea enough to warrant vast research budgets, but the dictator committee is not such a fan of tea, so fuck all you tea drinkers, there will be no more innovation for you.

Yet you claim that the current system is the best it can be despite me proving otherwise? If there is no money, there is no concern in regards to poverty because everyone has access to everything they need. Pretty undeniable given that the very same needs are provided at the moment, but they are only provided on a how much money you have basis.

:rofl: Love the name... it would be magic (scouse vernacular). Doesn't mean that it wouldn't happen either... however the environment would be there to find out for sure.

The whole system is a monopoly. I'm not going to qualify that statement, other than it is human beings who decide whether or not to raise/lower inflation/interest rates, how much money to produce etc... (will read it after though)

Robbing Peter to pay Paul is how our system currently works... Exactly, you would rather waste money of flavoured water than on helping the disadvantaged of society, or set up spy infrastructure, or make weapons for killing humans etc... At least under "my" system, you could do all of them and given that the tea industry only rely's on leaves that they grow themselves, I fail to see why they would have their activities curtailed... butcha neva know, coz I don't like tea :shifty:

ducatilover

31st July 2013, 15:36

mashman

31st July 2013, 15:42

I'm sure we've already discussed your complete lack of understanding regarding the physics, indeed the whole panopoly of related concepts associated with that idea. As I recall the conclusion reached after an unpleasantly protracted series of silly conjectures on your part was that your idea was utter crap. With which you eventually agreed.

And yet here you are trotting it out again like some talisman of the glory of the moneyless utopia. I suppose it has to be said that it's symbolic of your collection of "ideas" insomuch as that it bears a remarkably similar feature. It was ill considered nonsensical crap, thinly disguised with a light veneer of circular logic and mind-dulling repetition.

You haven’t spent your time since then wisely I find.

What are you doing out of your corner? (p.s. I've already said it won't be utopia)

as for the rest :yawn:

And it's a holiday in Cambodia
Where you'll do what you're told
A holiday in Cambodia
Where the slums got so much soul

Twanslation required please.

How is it MY financial system? Tis the one I accept and use but I never made it. Wars wont stop until everyone is at peace with THEMSELVES. But theres the catch, you have to get yourself in a place of peace and contentment before you can be an affective change for anything. Personal responsibility is where the answers lie in my opinion, stop worrying about what everyone else is doing, and how everyone else is fucking up the world and start getting your own shit together. Then you may start to see the change that is afoot within the world today.:Punk::Punk:

Wars will stop when we share shit. Nothing to do with being at peace with oneself (as pleasant as that sounds). What you are dismissing is that my path to complete peace (I am closer now than I have ever been) is to create an environment where the concerns aren't the every day struggle. Til then we'll be led around by the nose by the minority who see war as a profitable venture. I, ahem, aim to remove the the ability to profit. It might actually help.

Damn, ya got me there ya prick.:laugh::laugh:

:D

:lol: I remember that now.

Brain like a sieve screaming trust me trust me... you fit in well with your brethren.

bogan

31st July 2013, 15:43

Yet you claim that the current system is the best it can be despite me proving otherwise? If there is no money, there is no concern in regards to poverty because everyone has access to everything they need. Pretty undeniable given that the very same needs are provided at the moment, but they are only provided on a how much money you have basis.

:rofl: Love the name... it would be magic (scouse vernacular). Doesn't mean that it wouldn't happen either... however the environment would be there to find out for sure.

The whole system is a monopoly. I'm not going to qualify that statement, other than it is human beings who decide whether or not to raise/lower inflation/interest rates, how much money to produce etc... (will read it after though)

Robbing Peter to pay Paul is how our system currently works... Exactly, you would rather waste money of flavoured water than on helping the disadvantaged of society, or set up spy infrastructure, or make weapons for killing humans etc... At least under "my" system, you could do all of them and given that the tea industry only rely's on leaves that they grow themselves, I fail to see why they would have their activities curtailed... butcha neva know, coz I don't like tea :shifty:

Do I claim it as fact though? And no, you've tried to prove otherwise and failed. This is the problem with a few people around here, claims of facts and things proven when they just clearly have not been set off my bullshit allergies.

Course not, if you beleive in wizards anything is possible, go you!

I think you should start by reading up on the definition of a monopoly... if you can strecth the current system to fit in there, I'm sure the dictator committees will fit in too.

Handouts and charity only go so far, production and industry should be encouraged, as well as population control but that is a whole other issue entirely.

mashman

31st July 2013, 15:44

How is the ownership of land decided? I'm a little late in to this, but it looks fun!

I'm highly disappointed in Unstuck for creating this money system, he never mentioned it to me. I think he just wants me for teh sex.

Currently no one owns land, you have title. Although there is supposedly one piece of land in London that is owned by the Templars or some such. Anyhoo, whatever your using, you "own". Look after it, or you'll see what it looks like from underneath.

That's all anyone wants you for according to the KB gents gloryhole toilet third from the left.

Big Dave

31st July 2013, 15:46

I blame Big Brother......and the X factor.

ducatilover

31st July 2013, 15:47

Currently no one owns land, you have title. Although there is supposedly one piece of land in London that is owned by the Templars or some such. Anyhoo, whatever your using, you "own". Look after it, or you'll see what it looks like from underneath.

That's all anyone wants you for according to the KB gents gloryhole toilet third from the left.

So, how do you get your title?
I wish I was a templar, then I could stand up to you sexual bullies.

mashman

31st July 2013, 15:52

Do I claim it as fact though? And no, you've tried to prove otherwise and failed. This is the problem with a few people around here, claims of facts and things proven when they just clearly have not been set off my bullshit allergies.

Course not, if you beleive in wizards anything is possible, go you!

I think you should start by reading up on the definition of a monopoly... if you can strecth the current system to fit in there, I'm sure the dictator committees will fit in too.

Handouts and charity only go so far, production and industry should be encouraged, as well as population control but that is a whole other issue entirely.

Well that's what you've repeatedly stated, it's the best it can be, it's the best it can be... I'm sure unstuck will have some words to say about such an attitude :shifty:. So you claim that poverty will still exist in "my" society?

Bring pom poms next time and work it.

I have no doubt that all of the local body committees, as well as the higherup committees will share 99% of the characteristics of a monopoly... one of the differences will be the people making up the committee and their motivations. Profit being MUCH harder to eek out of the system where everything is already free and you do not oversee everything yourself. Yup, all sounds familiar.

There will be no need for handouts and charity. Yup, Industry and production will be driven by need and not want and it will be taught in school alongside personal responsibility and population control... and drugs usage and John Cleese style sex Ed.

mashman

31st July 2013, 15:54

So, how do you get your title?
I wish I was a templar, then I could stand up to you sexual bullies.

You won't need one. You are there, look after it please.
Nah, we'll hog tie you and rape you if you tried to believe that you had any real options.

ducatilover

31st July 2013, 15:56

You won't need one. You are there, look after it please.
Nah, we'll hog tie you and rape you if you tried to believe that you had any real options.

Sounds pretty mint to me :niceone:

bogan

31st July 2013, 15:58

Well that's what you've repeatedly stated, it's the best it can be, it's the best it can be... I'm sure unstuck will have some words to say about such an attitude :shifty:. So you claim that poverty will still exist in "my" society?

Bring pom poms next time and work it.

I have no doubt that all of the local body committees, as well as the higherup committees will share 99% of the characteristics of a monopoly... one of the differences will be the people making up the committee and their motivations. Profit being MUCH harder to eek out of the system where everything is already free and you do not oversee everything yourself. Yup, all sounds familiar.

There will be no need for handouts and charity. Yup, Industry and production will be driven by need and not want and it will be taught in school alongside personal responsibility and population control... and drugs usage and John Cleese style sex Ed.

Which is what I think it is, I've not claimed it is a fact, or that it has been proven to be the best. I think the wbe will never get of the ground due to a distinct lack of wizards.

So the systems are similar, but the people are different? Why don't you get the wizards to just fix the people in our system instead of fixing the people and bringing in a new system?

No handouts, so that means everyone has to work? There will be no welfare system?

unstuck

31st July 2013, 16:19

[QUOTE=mashman;1130589212)

Wars will stop when we share shit. Nothing to do with being at peace with oneself (as pleasant as that sounds). What you are dismissing is that my path to complete peace (I am closer now than I have ever been) is to create an environment where the concerns aren't the every day struggle. Til then we'll be led around by the nose by the minority who see war as a profitable venture. I, ahem, aim to remove the the ability to profit. It might actually help.[/QUOTE]

People who are completely at peace share stuff with everyone, because they realize the nature of life is sharing. When you are at peace, there is no struggle. Poverty is a state of mind, for the person at peace with themselves, there is no poverty in their life.:Punk::Punk:

mashman

31st July 2013, 16:19

Which is what I think it is, I've not claimed it is a fact, or that it has been proven to be the best. I think the wbe will never get of the ground due to a distinct lack of wizards.

So the systems are similar, but the people are different? Why don't you get the wizards to just fix the people in our system instead of fixing the people and bringing in a new system?

No handouts, so that means everyone has to work? There will be no welfare system?

You think it is and my think it is are exactly the same, but different :D. The wizards exist... although are there enough of them........ yeah, I reckon the, giving the right environment thing would bring out the best in those who have always wanted to do better.

As above, a lot of them will be one in the same. Changing the people where the environment doesn't exist to support that change doesn't work, hence we have more people doing more bad things with every increasing sums of money being required to get into ever more exclusive running things clubs. It ain't always the right people for the right job where it really should be... or as best as at that time. In fact of someone better comes along, I see no reason why the better person can't help the already holding the position person or indeed to share the position. Something a financial system can't afford. The system is broken and has been for hundreds of years and it'll be easier to install one built for purpose instead of patching the current system. I say that because the patching hasn't worked despite 2000+ years of trying.

There will be no welfare system. There will be a job there for everyone. Some will work longer and harder than others. Some won't work at all (disability or laziness). Why support the lazy's. Well why are they supported at the moment? Why let them have access to the same things the workers would have access to? To stop them from taking what others have. Why would anyone work? Why would anyone not work? Would you rather have a system that promotes war, poverty, ok standard healthcare, ok standard education etc... ad all because of a minority that don't work, or would you rather have the best of everything and put in the effort required to have that system? Pretty straight forwards questions and I'd rather have the best of everything and suffer the lazy's than not.

unstuck

31st July 2013, 16:21

I'm highly disappointed in Unstuck for creating this money system, he never mentioned it to me. I think he just wants me for teh sex.

No, thats not true. You can fix stuff for me when the sex is done.:bleh::bleh:

mashman

31st July 2013, 16:25

People who are completely at peace share stuff with everyone, because they realize the nature of life is sharing. When you are at peace, there is no struggle. Poverty is a state of mind, for the person at peace with themselves, there is no poverty in their life.:Punk::Punk:

I agree... however that state of mind is more often than not driven by the environment that surrounds them. How can the peace come if the surroundings define a persons level of peace? Perhaps the peaceful will number enough to make that environment available for all? However there will still be people that give a fuck not and they will have kids that will either follow their example or follow the example of society. If they are the choices (not discounting yours, but just highlighting the immediate interactions/examples that kids see/have) then who has more of an affect on the kid? One is potentially violent and oppressive, the other is welcoming and friendly.

bogan

31st July 2013, 16:27

You think it is and my think it is are exactly the same, but different :D. The wizards exist... although are there enough of them........ yeah, I reckon the, giving the right environment thing would bring out the best in those who have always wanted to do better.

As above, a lot of them will be one in the same. Changing the people where the environment doesn't exist to support that change doesn't work, hence we have more people doing more bad things with every increasing sums of money being required to get into ever more exclusive running things clubs. It ain't always the right people for the right job where it really should be... or as best as at that time. In fact of someone better comes along, I see no reason why the better person can't help the already holding the position person or indeed to share the position. Something a financial system can't afford. The system is broken and has been for hundreds of years and it'll be easier to install one built for purpose instead of patching the current system. I say that because the patching hasn't worked despite 2000+ years of trying.

There will be no welfare system. There will be a job there for everyone. Some will work longer and harder than others. Some won't work at all (disability or laziness). Why support the lazy's. Well why are they supported at the moment? Why let them have access to the same things the workers would have access to? To stop them from taking what others have. Why would anyone work? Why would anyone not work? Would you rather have a system that promotes war, poverty, ok standard healthcare, ok standard education etc... ad all because of a minority that don't work, or would you rather have the best of everything and put in the effort required to have that system? Pretty straight forwards questions and I'd rather have the best of everything and suffer the lazy's than not.

Neither of which are fact or proven, but one of us asserts they are regardless, so no, not exactly the same.

:yawn: same old conjecture, look, if you can find wizards, just magic the shit out of those in positions of power in the current system, job done.

Some don't work at all, yet are given the same access to resources etc as others who do a lot of work? Isn't that the definition of a handout or welfare system? Except the wizards right, we can't let them lay of the antilaziness spells that are the only thing between your societies decay into worldwide poverty; seriously, if there are too many lazy people your system will crash harder than any stock market or food famine ever seen.

unstuck

31st July 2013, 16:30

I agree... however that state of mind is more often than not driven by the environment that surrounds them. How can the peace come if the surroundings define a persons level of peace?

Then I would suggest said person needs to redefine their definition of peace. If you need an environment that is conducive to obtaining peace, then your peace will be short lived. Be happy and peaceful under ANY and ALL circumstances for a day or two, and you will know where I am coming from.:msn-wink:

mashman

31st July 2013, 16:35

Neither of which are fact or proven, but one of us asserts they are regardless, so no, not exactly the same.

:yawn: same old conjecture, look, if you can find wizards, just magic the shit out of those in positions of power in the current system, job done.

Some don't work at all, yet are given the same access to resources etc as others who do a lot of work? Isn't that the definition of a handout or welfare system? Except the wizards right, we can't let them lay of the antilaziness spells that are the only thing between your societies decay into worldwide poverty; seriously, if there are too many lazy people your system will crash harder than any stock market or food famine ever seen.

So you claim that poverty will still exist in "my" society? irrespective of everything being made available to everyone free of charge? Doesn't sound much like logic to me.

Cool. You won't mind the taxpayer forking out billions in severance packages then?

If that is the definition of a handout and welfare, then everyone having access to the same things would mean that they're all taking handouts and welfare. You think I haven't considered that? The rollback plan is a financial system and if people have voted for "my" system, then I would have thought it pointless to suddenly stop working in order to return to that which they removed? And of course you will accept that a real financial crash will have the same things happen?

mashman

31st July 2013, 16:38

Then I would suggest said person needs to redefine their definition of peace. If you need an environment that is conducive to obtaining peace, then your peace will be short lived. Be happy and peaceful under ANY and ALL circumstances for a day or two, and you will know where I am coming from.:msn-wink:

I've been doing that for the last year or so. Several days of ommmmm, to days of holy fuck how can people be treated this way by other people. I can't, maybe refuse to, find that peace whilst others are getting butt fucked by those who choose that as their world.

unstuck

31st July 2013, 16:41

I've been doing that for the last year or so. Several days of ommmmm, to days of holy fuck how can people be treated this way by other people. I can't, maybe refuse to, find that peace whilst others are getting butt fucked by those who choose that as their world.

But the ones who are getting butt fucked by others as you put it, have choices too. Nobody has to stay oppressed or victimized, it is a choice, maybe an unconscious choice, but a choice non the less. :2thumbsup

scumdog

31st July 2013, 16:50

So you claim that poverty will still exist in "my" society? irrespective of everything being made available to everyone free of charge? Doesn't sound much like logic to me.

Of course 'poverty' will still exist - some will be greedy and grab all they can (and hold onto it until there's a shortage) and the meek'n'weak will miss out - hell, even chimps are greedy and will take more than they need.

(I don't know why I even bother with this thread - being on it is like pissing in the snow - it feels good signing your name in yellow snow but it shortly disappears and nothing's been achieved and nobody else will notice)

bogan

31st July 2013, 16:56

So you claim that poverty will still exist in "my" society? irrespective of everything being made available to everyone free of charge? Doesn't sound much like logic to me.

Cool. You won't mind the taxpayer forking out billions in severance packages then?

If that is the definition of a handout and welfare, then everyone having access to the same things would mean that they're all taking handouts and welfare. You think I haven't considered that? The rollback plan is a financial system and if people have voted for "my" system, then I would have thought it pointless to suddenly stop working in order to return to that which they removed? And of course you will accept that a real financial crash will have the same things happen?

It's all or nothing poverty, either nobody is poor or everyone is, and since you're yet to produce a wizard I very much think it would fall in the latter category.

Nah, wizards can cover that shit too I'm sure.

Nope, only those contributing less than they take would be effectively taking handouts and wellfare, the rest would be providing them.

It's good to have a rollback plan. On the voting thing, the way I see it going down, everyone votes, the bludgers form the majority core of your votes but other join in to give enough to pass it. The higher earners and those of high productivity (but not all of course) then say fuck this lark, I'm taking my money overseas and leave. Now you have a less productive population trying to produce more with only national incentives (ie, on a personal level people can just say, nah, let someone else do it). Of course the more likely outcome will simply be china who by that times owns about 47% of NZ just goes 'the fuck you doing with our property?' and drops troops then annexes the whole country, yay! now we are communists right? China has fuck all poverty so we'll be fine :rolleyes:

ducatilover

31st July 2013, 16:59

No, thats not true. You can fix stuff for me when the sex is done.:bleh::bleh:

Fuck you. Your system has meant cake isn't free.

mashman

31st July 2013, 17:09

But the ones who are getting butt fucked by others as you put it, have choices too. Nobody has to stay oppressed or victimized, it is a choice, maybe an unconscious choice, but a choice non the less. :2thumbsup

Being butt fucked and knowing you're being butt fucked are two entirely different things. Meanwhile all the hours people spend not focussing on "self-healing" are being spent keeping the wolf from the door. Doing it with a smile of their faces will only see them being butt fucked even more. Yup they could do it, but then what? they're happy about being butt fucked?

Of course 'poverty' will still exist - some will be greedy and grab all they can (and hold onto it until there's a shortage) and the meek'n'weak will miss out - hell, even chimps are greedy and will take more than they need.

(I don't know why I even bother with this thread - being on it is like pissing in the snow - it feels good signing your name in yellow snow but it shortly disappears and nothing's been achieved and nobody else will notice)

And this would happen because this is what you would do? They'll look like right dickheads when the expiry dates pass and there's still more to hoard.

Meh... it broadens the mind :D

It's all or nothing poverty, either nobody is poor or everyone is, and since you're yet to produce a wizard I very much think it would fall in the latter category.

Nah, wizards can cover that shit too I'm sure.

Nope, only those contributing less than they take would be effectively taking handouts and wellfare, the rest would be providing them.

It's good to have a rollback plan. On the voting thing, the way I see it going down, everyone votes, the bludgers form the majority core of your votes but other join in to give enough to pass it. The higher earners and those of high productivity (but not all of course) then say fuck this lark, I'm taking my money overseas and leave. Now you have a less productive population trying to produce more with only national incentives (ie, on a personal level people can just say, nah, let someone else do it). Of course the more likely outcome will simply be china who by that times owns about 47% of NZ just goes 'the fuck you doing with our property?' and drops troops then annexes the whole country, yay! now we are communists right? China has fuck all poverty so we'll be fine :rolleyes:

Even with every resource that a person needs at their finger tips free of charge no strings attached?

:rofl: current evidence would highlight the opposite.

WHAT? Don't bring your value system into something where it isn't required. Food is produced to be eaten irrespective of effort.

Yup, those who believe they have something to lose might leave... but who's going to buy their shit? Perhaps those coming in who see the value in living that way? Perhaps those who can't get their ideas off the ground because of financial constraint or get grants for their research? Why so negative on the fucktards leaving as they were never here to make NZ/ better in the first place, no loss in my eyes. Why would the Chinese utter "the fuck you doing with out property?"? It'll still be there's to look after.

bogan

31st July 2013, 17:26

Even with every resource that a person needs at their finger tips free of charge no strings attached?

:rofl: current evidence would highlight the opposite.

WHAT? Don't bring your value system into something where it isn't required. Food is produced to be eaten irrespective of effort.

Yup, those who believe they have something to lose might leave... but who's going to buy their shit? Perhaps those coming in who see the value in living that way? Perhaps those who can't get their ideas off the ground because of financial constraint or get grants for their research? Why so negative on the fucktards leaving as they were never here to make NZ/ better in the first place, no loss in my eyes. Why would the Chinese utter "the fuck you doing with out property?"? It'll still be there's to look after.

Exactly, how long would the resources last in such a system? longer than one with strings attached? how about if productivity took a massive dive in your system?

Well I'm yet to see an actual wizard intervene so the current evidence is irrelevant.

Yeh, silly me, that pig flying passed my window just dropped me off some bacon with no human effort involved at all :rolleyes: fucks sake mashman, do try and make sense will you.

The rest of the world, hell unless your society wants to give up a lot of consumer devices, it'll still have to trade with such people. Because the chinese have invested in that property, they would probably like to see some returns...

scumdog

31st July 2013, 17:35

And this would happen because this is what you would do? They'll look like right dickheads when the expiry dates pass and there's still more to hoard.

Meh... it broadens the mind :D.

No, I just deal with different people to the ones you seem to have had experience with, not all people are as nice and altruistic as you think (or would like).:no:

And not EVERYTHING has an expiry date eh, - but you know that too eh...:bleh:

mashman

31st July 2013, 18:03

Exactly, how long would the resources last in such a system? longer than one with strings attached? how about if productivity took a massive dive in your system?

Well I'm yet to see an actual wizard intervene so the current evidence is irrelevant.

Yeh, silly me, that pig flying passed my window just dropped me off some bacon with no human effort involved at all :rolleyes: fucks sake mashman, do try and make sense will you.

The rest of the world, hell unless your society wants to give up a lot of consumer devices, it'll still have to trade with such people. Because the chinese have invested in that property, they would probably like to see some returns...

The resources will last just as long, maybe even longer. Why wouldn't they? Why would productivity take a massive nose dive? And how would that be any different in the system that you favour?

In which case see my definition of wizard, coz you're using the wrong one.

Where did I say that no human effort would be involved?

Just because the internal economy runs without a financial system, doesn't mean that goods produced and imported into NZ won't have a financial value outwith its borders. But as you're struggling with the notion of how it'll work internally, I'd rather not boggle your mind any further with the interaction between NZ and the financial economy that the rest of the world will be using... until they follow NZ's example that is :D. Having said that, here's one I prepared earlier (http://www.now-nz.com/Home/Examples)or indeed the forerunner with slightly more and less detail. (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/entry.php/2397-Anti-Insanity)

No, I just deal with different people to the ones you seem to have had experience with, not all people are as nice and altruistic as you think (or would like).:no:

And not EVERYTHING has an expiry date eh, - but you know that too eh...:bleh:

I lived in amongst them in Glasgow for 6 years. Perhaps that's not enough experience for ya... and as it turns out they're just regular folk that help each other out on a regular basis. So whilst your external view looks all messy like, the view from inside is somewhat different.

Aye... but hey, we were talking about poverty so I was thinking more along the lines of necessities... which there will be plenty of, because there currently is. Why go and hoard when you know that there is, as there has always been, more than enough.

unstuck

31st July 2013, 18:13

Being butt fucked and knowing you're being butt fucked are two entirely different things. Meanwhile all the hours people spend not focussing on "self-healing" are being spent keeping the wolf from the door. Doing it with a smile of their faces will only see them being butt fucked even more. Yup they could do it, but then what? they're happy about being butt fucked?.

Im pretty sure I would know if I was getting buttfucked, even a little bit. But then thats why self awareness is such a wonderful thing, so maybe teaching self awareness would be the way to go. Then they would realize there is no wolf at the door. Some people seem to be happy getting buttfucked, more power to them in that case, to each his own and all that.:2thumbsup

unstuck

31st July 2013, 18:24

No, I just deal with different people to the ones you seem to have had experience with, not all people are as nice and altruistic as you think (or would like).:no:

And not EVERYTHING has an expiry date eh, - but you know that too eh...:bleh:

Shouldn't you be out arresting pot smoking punk rockers and the like.:bleh::bleh:

mashman

31st July 2013, 18:31

Im pretty sure I would know if I was getting buttfucked, even a little bit. But then thats why self awareness is such a wonderful thing, so maybe teaching self awareness would be the way to go. Then they would realize there is no wolf at the door. Some people seem to be happy getting buttfucked, more power to them in that case, to each his own and all that.:2thumbsup

Can you live of nothing more than a gingko leaf and universe juice? or do you need food and water like the rest of us? Perhaps those with kids, who actually care about them that is, have more of a concern for them than to sit thinking happy happy thoughts, surviving on love and not so healthy food. Sometimes it's harder than it needs to be and everyone should be catered for.

unstuck

31st July 2013, 18:39

Can you live of nothing more than a gingko leaf and universe juice? or do you need food and water like the rest of us? Perhaps those with kids, who actually care about them that is, have more of a concern for them than to sit thinking happy happy thoughts, surviving on love and not so healthy food. Sometimes it's harder than it needs to be and everyone should be catered for.

My life style is such now that I can pretty much live off fuck all, I only have to earn $240 a week to pay the bills, and I can do that in a day easy peasy.:niceone:
My kids have turned out pretty fucken awesome too, somehow.
Happy happy thoughts will get you more abundance than working like a slave in a job that makes you unhappy. Poverty is a state of mind, so is abundance.:devil2:

bogan

31st July 2013, 18:43

The resources will last just as long, maybe even longer. Why wouldn't they? Why would productivity take a massive nose dive? And how would that be any different in the system that you favour?

In which case see my definition of wizard, coz you're using the wrong one.

Where did I say that no human effort would be involved?

Just because the internal economy runs without a financial system, doesn't mean that goods produced and imported into NZ won't have a financial value outwith its borders. But as you're struggling with the notion of how it'll work internally, I'd rather not boggle your mind any further with the interaction between NZ and the financial economy that the rest of the world will be using... until they follow NZ's example that is :D. Having said that, here's one I prepared earlier (http://www.now-nz.com/Home/Examples)or indeed the forerunner with slightly more and less detail. (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/entry.php/2397-Anti-Insanity)

Greed, with no checks to how fast people consume them, faster consumption is an option. With no direct relationship between an individual's productivity and an individuals entitlement, there becomes less motivation for an individual to work. Sure you can wave it away as wizards will make sure people are now altruistic, but that justification is not good enough for me. In the current system both are addressed.

Who was it that first brought up the term wizard? What I mean is you need actual magic to make this shit work.

"Food is produced to be eaten irrespective of effort." Which to me sounds like food production gets done without effort...

You asked who would buy their shit (I assumed the shit they would produce in other parts of the world), so... the rest of the world will! Or do you mean that you'll kick off the whole society with a market crash 'fuck you' to those opting out by not letting them sell their current shit?

Ocean1

31st July 2013, 18:49

So you claim that poverty will still exist in "my" society? irrespective of everything being made available to everyone free of charge?

There will always be poor. Always has been, no matter the economic paradigms in place.

At no time in history have the poor had access to the resources they do now, evidence that the current system you rant about has it righter than any other in history. Yet you say they're suffering, they need more and it's all our fault.

Poor isn't caused by inequity of earnings, it's just a symptom of low performance, and the more you reward it the lower it gets. You need to fix the cause, not the symptom.

Smifffy

31st July 2013, 18:49

The free market actually worked very well, and the drongos that speculated wildly and bought and sold non-existent assets were in for a well-deserved shellacking. The big problem arose when the world's govt's and their cronies decided to abandon free market ideals and intervene by way of a bailout, then bailed out the self-same drongos that market darwinism had determined should go the way of the dinosaur. The drongos continue merrily along.

It's likely that if the market was left to its devices, the bank manager would have come to me looking for a loan. Admittedly my house would be worth a lot less if that happened, so would most of the ones in Auckland, and there'd be no outcry about housing affordability.

unstuck

31st July 2013, 18:54

You need to fix the cause, not the symptom.

:niceone::headbang::headbang:

unstuck

31st July 2013, 19:05

scumdog

31st July 2013, 19:08

There will always be poor. Always has been, no matter the economic paradigms in place.
Poor isn't caused by inequity of earnings, it's just a symptom of low performance, and the more you reward it the lower it gets. You need to fix the cause, not the symptom.

A certain amount of poverty is caused by lazy-arse not wanting to get off their butt and contribute/do anything.

Any society is going to have those.

Holding their hand out constantly expecting 'somebody' to give them what they need. (want?)

mashman

31st July 2013, 19:10

My life style is such now that I can pretty much live off fuck all, I only have to earn $240 a week to pay the bills, and I can do that in a day easy peasy.:niceone:
My kids have turned out pretty fucken awesome too, somehow.
Happy happy thoughts will get you more abundance than working like a slave in a job that makes you unhappy. Poverty is a state of mind, so is abundance.:devil2:

So when did you find your faith?

Greed, with no checks to how fast people consume them, faster consumption is an option. With no direct relationship between an individual's productivity and an individuals entitlement, there becomes less motivation for an individual to work. Sure you can wave it away as wizards will make sure people are now altruistic, but that justification is not good enough for me. In the current system both are addressed.

Who was it that first brought up the term wizard? What I mean is you need actual magic to make this shit work.

"Food is produced to be eaten irrespective of effort." Which to me sounds like food production gets done without effort...

You asked who would buy their shit (I assumed the shit they would produce in other parts of the world), so... the rest of the world will! Or do you mean that you'll kick off the whole society with a market crash 'fuck you' to those opting out by not letting them sell their current shit?

Waddaya mean no checks? Who said anything about no checks? Ohhhhhhh I see, you're correlating the motivational factor for going to work is money and deciding that without it no one would work. People's motivations change and it would seem a little false to write off what they are capable of because you don't see how they could ever do anything that wasn't for themselves. You have been taught well. In the current system it also drives people to murder and commit violent crimes... but I guess that's ok huh?

You asked me if there were wizards, I said yes and defined what a wizard was.

I can see why it would look that way, but it was meant as effort that they put in outwith food production. My bad.

You didn't read the links did you, coz at least one of those questions is answered. if you're above to bail from NZ, who is going to buy your shit so that you can leave with money and start afresh in a brave old world?

There will always be poor. Always has been, no matter the economic paradigms in place.

At no time in history have the poor had access to the resources they do now, evidence that the current system you rant about has it righter than any other in history. Yet you say they're suffering, they need more and it's all our fault.

Poor isn't caused by inequity of earnings, it's just a symptom of low performance, and the more you reward it the lower it gets. You need to fix the cause, not the symptom.

You've had your 2000+ years. You've failed billions of people who are in poverty. There simply aren't enough jobs, let alone well paying ones. Yet you call performance related pay. :yawn:

unstuck

31st July 2013, 19:12

A certain amount of poverty is caused by lazy-arse not wanting to get off their butt and contribute/do anything.

Any society is going to have those.

Holding their hand out constantly expecting 'somebody' to give them what they need. (want?)

Thats why I personally believe a system that is based around educating people about life and the way to get the best out of it, would be more beneficial than making a war on the people in the financial sector.:msn-wink:

unstuck

31st July 2013, 19:14

So when did you find your faith?

Faith in what?:devil2:

bogan

31st July 2013, 19:20

Waddaya mean no checks? Who said anything about no checks? Ohhhhhhh I see, you're correlating the motivational factor for going to work is money and deciding that without it no one would work. People's motivations change and it would seem a little false to write off what they are capable of because you don't see how they could ever do anything that wasn't for themselves. You have been taught well. In the current system it also drives people to murder and commit violent crimes... but I guess that's ok huh?

You asked me if there were wizards, I said yes and defined what a wizard was.

I can see why it would look that way, but it was meant as effort that they put in outwith food production. My bad.

You didn't read the links did you, coz at least one of those questions is answered. if you're above to bail from NZ, who is going to buy your shit so that you can leave with money and start afresh in a brave old world?

I mean who decides who is entitled to what? As I understand it its the consumer only. I'm not saying nobody would work, but that if those on the over-entitled or lazy arse side of the scales start to outweigh things, there is nothing in place but your faith in wizards to prent that.

I don't recall that, I'm pretty sure I just started calling your system a wbe because it needs wizard magic to ensure all the gaping holes in the plan don't tear it apart.

'effort that they put in outwith food production' yeh, you're going to have to try again with that sentence...

I tried to read that drivel in your links, but I just couldn't, my bullshit allergies flared up too much.

mashman

31st July 2013, 19:35

Faith in what?:devil2:

Sorry... when did you finally come to understand the power of quantum mechanics and the benefits it yields?

I mean who decides who is entitled to what? As I understand it its the consumer only. I'm not saying nobody would work, but that if those on the over-entitled or lazy arse side of the scales start to outweigh things, there is nothing in place but your faith in wizards to prent that.

and the :yawn:fest

It's all there to be used. People will have to exercise personal responsibility else we end up back with a financial system.

unstuck

31st July 2013, 19:38

Sorry... when did you finally come to understand the power of quantum mechanics and the benefits it yields?.

Heard about it about 12yrs ago, started to understand it and apply it, maybe 5 yrs ago.:msn-wink:

mashman

31st July 2013, 19:40

Heard about it about 12yrs ago, started to understand it and apply it, maybe 5 yrs ago.:msn-wink:

So you were 59 when you first started and yet you still get busted :sweatdrop

bogan

31st July 2013, 19:41

It's all there to be used. People will have to exercise personal responsibility else we end up back with a financial system.

So if the wizards fail you, you shall go back to the financial system. Since wizards don't exist, the financial system is the only logical conclusion. And with that masterful chain of logic, I may have just saved you years of drivel spouting, you're welcome :D

unstuck

31st July 2013, 19:47

So you were 59 when you first started and yet you still get busted :sweatdrop

Dont know where the 59 comes from? :msn-wink:
I think I secretly wanted to get busted in a way, I have learnt a lot in the last few months, mainly to do with who my mates are. But there has been a lot of good happening for me too with all that, so thats where most of my focus has been. So I am choosing to see it as a learning curve, and reset my priorities. Thats the wonderful thing about contrast, you have to know what you dont want, in order to know what you do want.:niceone:

mashman

31st July 2013, 19:47

So if the wizards fail you, you shall go back to the financial system. Since wizards don't exist, the financial system is the only logical conclusion. And with that masterful chain of logic, I may have just saved you years of drivel spouting, you're welcome :D

ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaa... in ways I wish it were that easy to go back, but that ain't gonna happen. My wizards are just people who have the knowledge to make society function like magic... in fact a lot of them will be the very same people who have kicked the shit out of the financial system. Whether they'd take up the challenge or not is another matter.

unstuck

31st July 2013, 19:50

Since wizards don't exist,

A friend of mine is a wizard, well thats what he calls himself. He is a Reiki teacher and healer. But they call themselves wizards.:shifty:

bogan

31st July 2013, 19:50

ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaa... in ways I wish it were that easy to go back, but that ain't gonna happen. My wizards are just people who have the knowledge to make society function like magic... in fact a lot of them will be the very same people who have kicked the shit out of the financial system. Whether they'd take up the challenge or not is another matter.

:lol: your society depends on the changing of the mindset of the masses, aint nothing but a real wizard going to achieve that ;)

mashman

31st July 2013, 19:51

Dont know where the 59 comes from? :msn-wink:
I think I secretly wanted to get busted in a way, I have learnt a lot in the last few months, mainly to do with who my mates are. But there has been a lot of good happening for me too with all that, so thats where most of my focus has been. So I am choosing to see it as a learning curve, and reset my priorities. Thats the wonderful thing about contrast, you have to know what you dont want, in order to know what you do want.:niceone:

Asshat figure I think they call it.
heh... sounds vaguely familiar. I lived with what I didn't know I didn't want until I figured out what I did want. I guess it's selfish of me to want a system where no one is hindered and where as much of everything is done for everyone instead of a small boys club.

mashman

31st July 2013, 19:52

:lol: your society depends on the changing of the mindset of the masses, aint nothing but a real wizard going to achieve that ;)

It depends on people making a decision, they don't have to change their mindset.

Ocean1

31st July 2013, 19:53

You've had your 2000+ years. You've failed billions of people who are in poverty.

Yeah? The facts don't agree. As usual with you. Start with the fact that almost every single quality of life indicator, starting with infant mortality and ending with expected lifespan is massively better than at any previous time in that 2000 years. None of the facts agree with you're spectacularly distorted bullshit.

There simply aren't enough jobs, let alone well paying ones. Yet you call performance related pay. :yawn:

Drivel. The very first requisite for mutual understanding is coherency. You don't have it. Speak fucking England.

unstuck

31st July 2013, 19:54

Asshat figure I think they call it.
heh... sounds vaguely familiar. I lived with what I didn't know I didn't want until I figured out what I did want. I guess it's selfish of me to want a system where no one is hindered and where as much of everything is done for everyone instead of a small boys club.

I think it is good to be selfish, as in making sure you are the priority in your life. Because if you are not right within yourself, your not going to be any good to anyone else.:Punk::Punk:

bogan

31st July 2013, 19:57

It depends on people making a decision, they don't have to change their mindset.

Unless of course their current mind set is lazy, selfish, greedy.... etc etc, them's going to be some busy wizards bro!

http://rlv.zcache.com/crazy_wizard_holding_a_green_magic_potion_puzzle-rc89e8190ae53453fbbf49adee4b065b8_ambtl_8byvr_324. jpg

mashman

31st July 2013, 20:05

Yeah? The facts don't agree. As usual with you. Start with the fact that almost every single quality of life indicator, starting with infant mortality and ending with expected lifespan is massively better than at any previous time in that 2000 years. None of the facts agree with you're spectacularly distorted bullshit.

Drivel. The very first requisite for mutual understanding is coherency. You don't have it. Speak fucking England.

Was I denying any of that? start with your story straight.

:yawn:

I think it is good to be selfish, as in making sure you are the priority in your life. Because if you are not right within yourself, your not going to be any good to anyone else.:Punk::Punk:

And of that selfishness is at the expense of others?

Unless of course their current mind set is lazy, selfish, greedy.... etc etc, them's going to be some busy wizards bro!

http://rlv.zcache.com/crazy_wizard_holding_a_green_magic_potion_puzzle-rc89e8190ae53453fbbf49adee4b065b8_ambtl_8byvr_324. jpg

Could well end up being the case... maybe the next generation will view things slightly differently.

He's cute. What could possibly go wrong in a society where looks are everything :D

mashman

31st July 2013, 20:10

Right... that's 24 hours up and at least one of us is moving forwards ;)

ducatilover

31st July 2013, 20:11

I think I'm winning in this thread.

Because I haz GN250

bogan

31st July 2013, 20:14

I think I'm winning in this thread.

Because I haz GN250

:yes: Which is actually a rather accurate evaluation of the rest of the material in this thread :innocent:

scumdog

31st July 2013, 20:16

:yes: Which is actually a rather accurate evaluation of the rest of the material in this thread :innocent:

And that's praising it...:shifty:

ducatilover

31st July 2013, 20:19

:yes: Which is actually a rather accurate evaluation of the rest of the material in this thread :innocent:

And that's praising it...:shifty:

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2010/1/20/1264014822789/Fred-Cawood-outside-his-p-001.jpg

unstuck

31st July 2013, 20:37

And of that selfishness is at the expense of others?

What mean you?:scratch:

Big Dave

31st July 2013, 20:38

What mean you?:scratch:

He means 'are you normal'.

I think we all know the answer to that.

unstuck

31st July 2013, 20:42

He means 'are you normal'.

I think we all know the answer to that.

Normal, I would hope not.:devil2:

ducatilover

31st July 2013, 20:58

He means 'are you normal'.

I think we all know the answer to that.

Everybody has their own normal.

Ocean1

31st July 2013, 21:19

Was I denying any of that? start with your story straight.

Yes, you were. You said "you've failed billions of people who are in poverty". (And I must admit by "you've" I assume you mean the usual generic "someone else" that you usually blame, because even you can't be stupid enough to think I personally have failed anywhere near that many people.)

Whereas the most basic perusal of almost all of the facts available shows that the current system is far superior in minimising the effects of poverty on the poor.

Sorta fucks up your whole rationale for change, dunnit?

If you ever had one to start with...

mashman

31st July 2013, 22:11

What mean you?:scratch:

What I meant was, if your selfishness has an adverse affect on the lives of others, is it ok to be selfish in that case?

Yes, you were. You said "you've failed billions of people who are in poverty". (And I must admit by "you've" I assume you mean the usual generic "someone else" that you usually blame, because even you can't be stupid enough to think I personally have failed anywhere near that many people.)

Whereas the most basic perusal of almost all of the facts available shows that the current system is far superior in minimising the effects of poverty on the poor.

Sorta fucks up your whole rationale for change, dunnit?

If you ever had one to start with...

No I wasn't. There are still billions of people who are in poverty irrespective of the inroads that have reportedly been made. It's only taken 2000+ years.

Minimising? No Money = Eradication.

Obviously not.

:yawn:

avgas

31st July 2013, 23:02

What do we want?

scissorhands

31st July 2013, 23:06

What do we want?

Happiness and motorbikes

ducatilover

31st July 2013, 23:24

What I meant was, if your selfishness has an adverse affect on the lives of others, is it ok to be selfish in that case?

That depends, we need to set what "okay" is. Then we can have a definitive answer.
Shall we start out own culture with this set version of okay? Or would that be too Victorian?

scissorhands

1st August 2013, 00:21

What I meant was, if your selfishness has an adverse affect on the lives of others, is it ok to be selfish in that case?

By soliciting support for you selfishness
Buying others off
Sucking dick
OK=things will happen while they can

unstuck

1st August 2013, 05:32

What I meant was, if your selfishness has an adverse affect on the lives of others, is it ok to be selfish in that case?

If you can handle the lack of peace of mind and all the things associated with that lack of peace of mind, then I guess so. Thats not for me though. Why anyone would choose to put themselves through that kind of a life is beyond me. But then I am getting good at only thinking about how I feel in relation to anything, because the I is the only one I can change. You attitude determines your altitude remember .:motu:

Yeah, I know I said I would still love and respect you in the the morning, but I lied.:devil2::Punk::Punk:

unstuck

1st August 2013, 05:46

https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/q71/s720x720/970014_494525060626052_954920254_n.jpg

Ocean1

1st August 2013, 07:50

No I wasn't. There are still billions of people who are in poverty irrespective of the inroads that have reportedly been made. It's only taken 2000+ years.

Then your use of the language is obviously totally fukt. As for 2000 years, those improvements have almost all been in the last couple of hundred, y'know concurrent with the latest economic system. So this:

Minimising? No Money = Eradication.

Is obviously extravagantly wishful thinking. In fact going by your current storybook No Money = 100% of the population poor.

Which is pretty close. In fact a lot of them would be dead.

So your criteria for:

Obviously not.

Is found substantially wanting.

Again.

Robert Taylor

1st August 2013, 08:07

But the ones who are getting butt fucked by others as you put it, have choices too. Nobody has to stay oppressed or victimized, it is a choice, maybe an unconscious choice, but a choice non the less. :2thumbsup

While your choice of phrasing is less than eloquent it really does sum it all up, and I immediately think of bankers and under regulated institutions that run riot and prey off ordinary everyday people. Although Im personally of a largely Tory persuasion that doesnt mean you cannot also have social conscience.
Politicians are also of course very much in the mix and one of the most atrocious examples of their attitudes is happening in Australia right now. Kevin Rudd ( aka Kevin Ruddiculous aka The milky bar kid ) is gallavanting around announcing this and that (announcements are easy, following through less easy ) Of course both he and then Gillard have made a right royal mess of the penal colony. Rudd is so clearly a complete and utter fraud and it is to be hoped that he will be totally annihilated in the forthcoming elections.

Swoop

1st August 2013, 12:24

A certain amount of poverty is caused by lazy-arse not wanting to get off their butt and contribute/do anything.

Any society is going to have those.

Holding their hand out constantly expecting 'somebody' to give them what they need. (want?)
Somebody had to mention our politicians...:rolleyes:

I see Godwin's law has already been enacted in this thread, but has BEER been mentioned yet?

Big Dave

1st August 2013, 13:12

Politicians are also of course very much in the mix and one of the most atrocious examples of their attitudes is happening in Australia right now. Kevin Rudd ( aka Kevin Ruddiculous aka The milky bar kid ) is gallavanting around announcing this and that (announcements are easy, following through less easy ) Of course both he and then Gillard have made a right royal mess of the penal colony. Rudd is so clearly a complete and utter fraud and it is to be hoped that he will be totally annihilated in the forthcoming elections.

According to the alternative media the country has just achieved the highest living standards in the world.
http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/04/its-official-australia-is-the-no-1-place-to-be
(Wiki only says second however).
What a shemozzle.

I don't like Rudd either, but the angry weird budgie smuggler is just as unappealing.
It will come down to who the populace dislikes least - and could be quite close.

MisterD

1st August 2013, 14:03

It will come down to who the populace dislikes least - and could be quite close.

That might be true, if it weren't for the daily parade of Labor party and Union types being hauled up on corruption charges...the Labor party will cease to exist in some places I think, and it looks like our lot are on the verge of splitting into several pieces too.

(scouse accent)Happy Days. (/scouse accent)

Big Dave

1st August 2013, 14:16

That might be true, if it weren't for the daily parade of Labor party and Union types being hauled up on corruption charges...the Labor party will cease to exist in some places I think, and it looks like our lot are on the verge of splitting into several pieces too.

(scouse accent)Happy Days. (/scouse accent)

Every day is a happy day in Dave world.

I'm voting Jedi.

Smifffy

1st August 2013, 14:32

Every day is a happy day in Dave world.

I'm voting Jedi.

Fuck you, and your Jedi mind tricks. You keep posting the things I'm thinking and I gotta spread more rep b4 reppin you again.

Big Dave

1st August 2013, 15:05

The sauce is strong in this one.

mashman

1st August 2013, 16:04

That depends, we need to set what "okay" is. Then we can have a definitive answer.
Shall we start out own culture with this set version of okay? Or would that be too Victorian?

Verily true. Best ask those folks that sets the lawz bru.

By soliciting support for you selfishness
Buying others off
Sucking dick
OK=things will happen while they can

Nice start to the listen... although you could have led with attending Eton and I woulda got yer drift.

If you can handle the lack of peace of mind and all the things associated with that lack of peace of mind, then I guess so. Thats not for me though. Why anyone would choose to put themselves through that kind of a life is beyond me. But then I am getting good at only thinking about how I feel in relation to anything, because the I is the only one I can change. You attitude determines your altitude remember .:motu:

Yeah, I know I said I would still love and respect you in the the morning, but I lied.:devil2::Punk::Punk:

I guess if it pays well people are willing to go that extra mile.

I lied too, it didn't fill me.

Then your use of the language is obviously totally fukt. As for 2000 years, those improvements have almost all been in the last couple of hundred, y'know concurrent with the latest economic system. So this:

Is obviously extravagantly wishful thinking. In fact going by your current storybook No Money = 100% of the population poor.

Which is pretty close. In fact a lot of them would be dead.

So your criteria for:

Is found substantially wanting.

Again.

Still billions in poverty. "My" system can solve that little issue within a decade and without tanking the economy. If you have nothing better, please return to your corner.