Poverty measure ... doesn't make sense to me

[Oakie]

Watching TV news this morning and some guy was talking about poverty. He said the measure was defined in New Zealand as the households that make less than 60 per cent of the median disposable income. Fine. I did fail school cert maths but one thing I was good at was statistics.. I started thinking.

The median is the middle point in a series. The point that separates the top half from the bottom half.

Now I can understand making a dollar value the 'poverty line' but I don't understand making it a percentage of the median. If the goal is to eradicate 'poverty', then saying 60% less than the median is useless because no matter what you do, there will always be people 60% less than the median. If you increase the dollars those people at the bottom get, then yes, they get more dollars but then the median goes up so there are still the same number of people 60% below the median.

Am I wrong? I did say I failed school cert maths (41 years ago).

[johcar]

Watching TV news this morning and some guy was talking about poverty. He said the measure was defined in New Zealand as the households that make less than 60 per cent of the median disposable income. Fine. I did fail school cert maths but one thing I was good at was statistics.. I started thinking.

The median is the middle point in a series. The point that separates the top half from the bottom half.

Now I can understand making a dollar value the 'poverty line' but I don't understand making it a percentage of the median. If the goal is to eradicate 'poverty', then saying 60% less than the median is useless because no matter what you do, there will always be people 60% less than the median. If you increase the dollars those people at the bottom get, then yes, they get more dollars but then the median goes up so there are still the same number of people 60% below the median.

Am I wrong? I did say I failed school cert maths (41 years ago).I think your 41 year old fail of School C maths is better than an achieved in NCEA maths and kapa haka put together.

You are spot on. The measurement of poverty by bleeding heart liberals using this formula means we will always be on a hiding to nothing.

There is no poverty in NZ - anyone who is been to Asia, Africa, South America or the middle east knows what poverty looks like.

What we have here is a failure of parenting: wrong choices made for their priorities...

Throwing money at these people will never achieve anything

[Graystone]

Watching TV news this morning and some guy was talking about poverty. He said the measure was defined in New Zealand as the households that make less than 60 per cent of the median disposable income. Fine. I did fail school cert maths but one thing I was good at was statistics.. I started thinking.

The median is the middle point in a series. The point that separates the top half from the bottom half.

Now I can understand making a dollar value the 'poverty line' but I don't understand making it a percentage of the median. If the goal is to eradicate 'poverty', then saying 60% less than the median is useless because no matter what you do, there will always be people 60% less than the median. If you increase the dollars those people at the bottom get, then yes, they get more dollars but then the median goes up so there are still the same number of people 60% below the median.

Am I wrong? I did say I failed school cert maths (41 years ago).

Yes your mathematical interpretation is flawed, that measure of poverty is a measure of inequity, were we all earning the exact same amount, nobody would be earning less than 99% of the median.

Your conclusion that it is a shit measure is spot on, any poverty measure based on income or spend is going to be flawed because it takes into account wants, rather than just the needs. Trickle down capitalism with a dollop of basic democratic social policy seems to result in a pretty solid downwards trend for absolute poverty. Perhaps that is why socialist parties feel the need to use relative measures to define it.

[HEsch]

Amount needed to live on is also relative to what you need to spend it on - what I "need" (or want) to spend on my lonesome single self with no dependants, is going to differ from someone with a spouse and various offspring.

I don't question that there are many people who are not well off, and do not have money floating around. Just that the amount needed to live comfortably, and not worry about where the next meal or rent cheque is coming from, does often correspond with one's choices in life.

[FJRider]

The median is the middle point in a series. The point that separates the top half from the bottom half.

The median is Average. Average is not (necessarily) the middle


Am I wrong? I did say I failed school cert maths (41 years ago).

Yep ... when I sat school cert maths ... the average mark in my class was 38%. 38 is not the "middle" between the highest and lowest possible score.

The point that separates the top half, from the bottom half of the earners ... is that the top half have the ability, inclination and/or position ... (and desire) to be in the top earners.

Many of those "in poverty" might think it beneath them to sweep streets ... or ANY other shit paying unskilled work.

[Jeeper]

The problem with a relative poverty (or rather inequality) ratio is that as the disposable income of the population shrinks, it would improve. In words, if all became poorer there would be less people in poverty!

Another problem with a measure like this is that it ignores assets or any savings/wealth such a person may have acquired. Its possible, for argument sake, that a frugle person who has limited income yet manages to save substantial amount over the years would still be considered in poverty if below the 60% threshold.

This measure is actually what OECD uses, and so do most European countries for comparative purposes.

[HEsch]

Another problem with a measure like this is that it ignores assets or any savings/wealth such a person may have acquired. Its possible, for argument sake, that a frugle person who has limited income yet manages to save substantial amount over the years would still be considered in poverty if below the 60% threshold.


Earning power vs savings ability - crucial.

[JimO]

while i feel that there is genuine poverty in NZ i also feel 99.9% is bad parenting

[Jeeper]

Earning power vs savings ability - crucial.Agree, in economics its classed as marginal propensity to save. Or the flip of marginal propensity to consume, which explains the increase in personal consumer spending (consumption) occuring with increase in disposable income. In simple terms, some people tend to save or spend more than others but generally as our incomes increase, so does oir spending. Often luxury goods become necessities.


PS: I studied economics. Hence, this is closer to my heart.

[Jeeper]

I thought anyone living in poverty were those seen in photos as skinny as a stick living in Africa and begging (as an example). With WINZ in NZ we have the best fed beggars in the world I feel.I don't think its very civilized or cultured to call people in need beggars. Not everyone at WINZ is there to abuse the system. Sure there are some examples of bad parenting, abuse of system, or even deceitful behavior. But generalizing like you have shows lack of intellect. There are definitely people who need our support (but often they are too humble to ask for it).

[Luckylegs]

while i feel that there is genuine poverty in NZ i also feel 99.9% is bad parenting

And growing up with bad parenting can we expect people to be better parents or is it more likely they might continue the cycle.

My point being can we simply dismiss the issues with throw away lines like yours or does some thing need to change?

[Jeeper]

The median is Average.

Mathematically, median and average are not the same and not necessarily always equal, particularly where the data has outliers.

[Jeeper]

And growing up with bad parenting can we expect people to be better parents or is it more likely they might continue the cycle.

My point being can we simply dismiss the issues with throw away lines like yours or does some thing need to change?Neither throw away lines, nor throwing money at it will fix the problem. It has to be a behavioral shift across-the-board. Fix the root cause to fix the problem. There have to be incentives for someone to change their behavior. Education, self-esteem and removal of stigma attached to failures in ventures willo a long way to start.

[FJRider]

I thought anyone living in poverty were those seen in photos as skinny as a stick living in Africa and begging (as an example). With WINZ in NZ we have the best fed beggars in the world I feel.

You obviously lead a sheltered life. Those on a benefit are luckier than some. Only those on a benefit think they are in poverty.

Most in poverty are those that chose to live as such. Their (poor) life choices led them to be as they are.

To get a job ... first you must WANT to work. The fact that most wont do work they don't like to do ... can present difficulties for them in finding work.

Easier to breed a dozen kids (don't get excited Akzle) with the taxpayers picking up the tab for their welfare ... than actually getting a job.



Get your head out of your ass and look around.

[Luckylegs]

I dont mean all WINZ clients are beggars but the existance of WINZ does mean those that beg on top of their WINZ payments are very well fed compared to countries where there is no WINZ.

Well duh! - i think that is your point, but curiously im still left wondering what is your point.

Are you suggesting they should be greatful for their lot in life

[Jeeper]

FJRider, I agree to some of your arguments. I definitely believe in wanting to work is not on everyone's moral compass. I have tried to instill in my kids to be self-reliant and work towards getting things 'cause that's what my parents drilled into me.

[FJRider]

I dont mean all WINZ clients are beggars but the existance of WINZ does mean those that beg on top of their WINZ payments are very well fed compared to countries where there is no WINZ.

Some could be ... http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/88264521/west-auckland-beggar-makes-up-to-150-a-day

[Luckylegs]

You obviously lead a sheltered life.

Most in poverty are those that chose to live as such. Their (poor) life choices led them to be as they are.


Get your head out of your ass and look around.

Pot, kettle, noir.

[FJRider]

FJRider, I agree to some of your arguments. I definitely believe in wanting to work is not on everyone's moral compass. I have tried to instill in my kids to be self-reliant and work towards getting things 'cause that's what my parents drilled into me.

I learnt work ethics at an early age. Simply because the dole didn't pay as well as it does now.

Also ... because I like to eat. Many of the employment sectors I worked in were contract rate based. The more you did ... the better you were paid. I ate well. Never rich ... but I ate well.

[Berries]

Also ... because I like to eat. Many of the employment sectors I worked in were contract rate based. The more you did ... the better you were paid. I ate well. Never rich ... but I ate well.
Just get a job in a kitchen. Was on shit wages for shit hours for several years but I was never hungry.

[FJRider]

Just get a job in a kitchen. Was on shit wages for shit hours for several years but I was never hungry.

I did that for six months too ... and I did :laugh:

[Oakie]

The median is Average. Average is not (necessarily) the middle

Mean, median and mode. The mean is the average, the median is the value in the middle and the mode is the value that occurs most often in the series. (The median can be assessed by averaging the two numbers in the middle when there is an even number of values in the series so no one middle number right in the middle of the series). See Mr Colquhoun ... I did learn something in your maths class. Still gutted that you caned me for throwing Vaughan Stringer's pencil out the window too!

[FJRider]

Here you are folks ... the latest figures to find out if YOU are in poverty.

http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/snapshots-of-nz/nz-social-indicators/Home/Standard%20of%20living/disp-income-pp.aspx

[Jeeper]

The biggest problem I see with unconditional continued funding is that it provides no rational reason for recipients' behavior to change. Support the genuine people who are in genuine need, temporarily and with a view to get them back to being a productive part of the economy.

Obviously, people who are genuinely unable to work due to a disability are special cases and do indeed need society's support (we do live in a civilized country).

Poverty is a complex social problem. Last time someone tried to fix it with attempting to make everyone equal was under Socialist and Communist regimes, and popularised by political ideology originating from Karl Marx and his works.

I have no problems with capitalism. Hard work being rewarded accordingly.

[ellipsis]

... <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/oSEOzimKnEY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> ...but it wont...

[TheDemonLord]

Poverty is a complex social problem. Last time someone tried to fix it with attempting to make everyone equal was under Socialist and Communist regimes, and popularised by political ideology originating from Karl Marx and his works.

Well, to be fair - they did make some 200 million odd people completely equal....

[Voltaire]

According to the news there are 700 000 people on the minimum wage. They work hard and often have to work multiple jobs.
The cleaning firm we engage pays over the minimum wage ( just) and we got talking one day about " the living wage" of $18 per hour and he said he's been asked to quote both before and no one has taken up the living wage option.
For large companies with large floor space cleaning can be one of the largest costs and gets the most focus by customers.

I was working in the UK in the 91/92 recession and ranks closed there to 'foreigners" ( as you'd expect) and I was going jobs like labouring, cash electrical, car jobs and working in my landlords Joinery shop. For someone who had never been out of work in 10 years it was a bit sobering.

Employers are understandably concerned as they now need to find more money for the staff. Is this the opportunity that will see lots of Flippies appear on the scene.

Hang on tight going to be an interesting 3 years.

[Jeeper]

Raising minimum wage is a false boost to economy. Someone always pays the additional cost of production. Most likely would be the small businesses and customers. Its like printing more money to pay your debt. What are the downstream impacts of that?

[Woodman]

Them on $18 to $20 will now start bemoaning the fact that they are on minimum wage and that they are now being paid the same as the junior/slack fuck and will want more.

Those on about $21-$23 per hour will want a pay rise because they are too close to minimum wage.

And so it goes on.....................

I do support it with reservations but its going to cause some problems. The old pommy union fuckwits are going to be waking up and whinging up a storm.

[jasonu]

Are you suggesting they should be greatful for their lot in life

They should at least be grateful for the free money they receive courtesy of the hard working tax payer.

[FJRider]

Are you suggesting they should be greatful for their lot in life

Who do they blame for "their lot in life" ... ??? The Government .. ??? Obviously it was nothing THEY did (or didn't) do to put themselves in the position they are in ... <_<

[FJRider]

The country was better off in the days of pommy union fuckwits as you put it as major news of poverty and homelessness in NZ were non existent back then.

Back when the minimum wage was around $7-8 per hour you mean ... <_<

[jasonu]

The country was better off in the days of pommy union fuckwits as you put it as major news of poverty and homelessness in NZ were non existent back then.

You mean the days of no internet, twitter, FB, cell phones and only 2 TV channels. News (especially bad news) travels a shit load faster these days sista.

[TheDemonLord]

But there were skill based
"award" pay rates above it but today the minimum wage has become the award pay rate for many low tier jobs.

It's almost like unskilled jobs that anybody can do aren't paid well... It's almost like when you've got a large supply and low demand, the price goes down... It's almost like skilled jobs that very few people can do pay more...



Today
when you go for an interview they ask you how much money do you want rather than say we pay award rates or an amount above. I remember years ago in job ads some employers would state we pay above award rates.

I give them my upper and my lower limits and have walked out of at least one interview where their upper limit for the role was $10k short of my lower limit.

[TheDemonLord]

The days of affordable housing and no poverty.

No Poverty?

By what standard?

The poor today are INFINITELY better off than the poor of 50 years ago.

Hell - do you remember when owning a Colour TV or being able to travel overseas by Air was the sole domain of the super rich?

This line of argument I am seeing more and more often, to the point where I'm beginning to think it isn't just rose-tinted wishful thinking, but actual deliberate deception.

[TheDemonLord]

What annoys me about the interviews today is that the interview can actually go quite well and they only ask you about money at the end wasting both their and your time if they dont like what you say you want. At one interview I asked if they had a salary band so I could give them a ball park figure but they would not even tell me the salary band and I ended up guessing wrong anyway. Industrial law reform is needed so the employer is forced to name an amount first and not the jobseeker.

What you have written makes zero sense.

The potential Employer is under no obligation to give you a Salary estimate.

If they refuse to disclose, then you are under no obligation to take the job.

And you do know that you can ask upfront what the Salary expectations are? Especially if the job advert was vague and didn't specify.

"Excuse me, just before we continue too much further - My Salary expectations are in the $95-120k range, your advert popped up in my search filters but it was a little vague in this regard. Is this in line with what you are expecting for this oppertunity?"

And even before then, where I've applied for jobs that had vague wording as to the nature of the role, I've had employers come back to me and ask what my expectations are in regards to Salary - before the interview stage (in one instance it was because they were actually wanting a more entry level position, which I was waaaaay over qualified for)

[Voltaire]

Pommy Union Leaders and Award Wages....that brings back memories, can't say I miss those days.

" out the gate for 48" ( in a Belfast accent...yeah I know not really Pommy:innocent:)

I ask the salary range on the first phone call, saves a lot of time.

[Jeeper]

You mean the days of no internet, twitter, FB, cell phones and only 2 TV channels. News (especially bad news) travels a shit load faster these days sista.Back then there were no smashed avacado sandwiches either. Back then expectations were basic, and consumption reflected that. My first cellphone was a work tool for work use only. Now a 6 year old child has to have a smartphone, otherwise they are considered below the poverty line.

I didn't need a car of my own, I was happy to share family car. Now every 16 year old expects wheels of some sort from the parents or the State. Whats wrong with walking or taking the bus.

[FJRider]

But there were skill based "award" pay rates above it

Yep ... some people made as much as $10.49 per hour ...


but today the minimum wage has become the award pay rate for many low tier jobs.

Simply because ... they're not fucking allowed to pay less to useless lazy pricks that don't want to work ...


Today when you go for an interview they ask you how much money do you want rather than say we pay award rates or an amount above.

It gives those employers a giggle ... with the ridiculous sums asked for. But those qualified ... and with experience to match ... usually get what they ask for. If not more ...


I remember years ago in job ads some employers would state we pay above award rates.

Yep ... 49 cents above minimum wage ...

[Maha]

You mean the days of no internet, twitter, FB, cell phones and only 2 TV channels. News (especially bad news) travels a shit load faster these days sista.

Two channels? I remember when it was only one. TV2 (known as South Pacific Television) didn't start broadcasting until 1975.

[jasonu]

What annoys me about the interviews today is that the interview can actually go quite well and they only ask you about money at the end wasting both their and your time if they dont like what you say you want. At one interview I asked if they had a salary band so I could give them a ball park figure but they would not even tell me the salary band and I ended up guessing wrong anyway. Industrial law reform is needed so the employer is forced to name an amount first and not the jobseeker.

it's a game and you need the nerve to stick to your guns.

[jasonu]

Two channels? I remember when it was only one. TV2 (known as South Pacific Television) didn't start broadcasting until 1975.

Me too grand dad. One black and white channel with Philip Sherry doing the news.
We were the first family in Bulls to get a 26" color TV. Philips K9 it was. lasted for nearly 30 years, actually became a bit of a family heirloom.

[caseye]

it's a game and you need the nerve to stick to your guns.

She ain't got any! Guns or the nerve to stick to her knitting!@#$%

[mashman]

There are people going hungry and living in exceptionally shite conditions and you dumb fuckers think they deserve it? If the poor didn't exist, the value of the $ would be absolute pants. Maybees you should learn how things work, externalities n all, coz ya'll are about as far from the truth as possible as is evidenced by your ignorant diatribe. There's plenty of food and resources to go around, the poor simply don't have the money. The average household spends 17% of its budget on food. 17% of $1000 is ever so slightly less than 17% of $100. End of story. Anything other than that is some form of false moral narrative that's been poured down your throat by your parents who also swallowed the same shit from their parents etc... "Insanity: Doing the same things over and over again and expecting different results." - Einstein. You dumb fucks don't learn anything, because your mum told you. Then again, at least we know that your parents were twats too and really shouldn't be surprised by the bullshit you spout as knowledge. Dumb fucks.

[sidecar bob]

There are people going hungry and living in exceptionally shite conditions and you dumb fuckers think they deserve it? If the poor didn't exist, the value of the $ would be absolute pants. Maybees you should learn how things work, externalities n all, coz ya'll are about as far from the truth as possible as is evidenced by your ignorant diatribe. There's plenty of food and resources to go around, the poor simply don't have the money. The average household spends 17% of its budget on food. 17% of $1000 is ever so slightly less than 17% of $100. End of story. Anything other than that is some form of false moral narrative that's been poured down your throat by your parents who also swallowed the same shit from their parents etc... "Insanity: Doing the same things over and over again and expecting different results." - Einstein. You dumb fucks don't learn anything, because your mum told you. Then again, at least we know that your parents were twats too and really shouldn't be surprised by the bullshit you spout as knowledge. Dumb fucks.

I could be poor too, I felt the inconvenience of that far outweighed the inconvenience of working most days for the last 35 years.
Although nobody goes in to bat for old tired pricks that worked too hard.

[Woodman]

The country was better off in the days of pommy union fuckwits as you put it as major news of poverty and homelessness in NZ were non existent back then.

Really? Ever talked to someone who grew up in a "union" household and how they went hungry while Dad was on strike for some dumbfuck reason.

[Jeeper]

There are people going hungry and living in exceptionally shite conditions and you dumb fuckers think they deserve it? If the poor didn't exist, the value of the $ would be absolute pants. Maybees you should learn how things work, externalities n all, coz ya'll are about as far from the truth as possible as is evidenced by your ignorant diatribe. There's plenty of food and resources to go around, the poor simply don't have the money. The average household spends 17% of its budget on food. 17% of $1000 is ever so slightly less than 17% of $100. End of story. Anything other than that is some form of false moral narrative that's been poured down your throat by your parents who also swallowed the same shit from their parents etc... "Insanity: Doing the same things over and over again and expecting different results." - Einstein. You dumb fucks don't learn anything, because your mum told you. Then again, at least we know that your parents were twats too and really shouldn't be surprised by the bullshit you spout as knowledge. Dumb fucks.Without questioning the absurdity of some of the economic logic displayed in your comments, would you care to elaborate how would you define poverty? How would you measure it? And how do you purpose to alleviate suffering of humankind who are supposedly living on $100 a week in NZ.

[Maha]

Me too grand dad. One black and white channel with Philip Sherry doing the news.
We were the first family in Bulls to get a 26" color TV. Philips K9 it was. lasted for nearly 30 years, actually became a bit of a family heirloom.

1974 just in time for the CH-CH Commonwealth Games....do you remember when the Bulls bridge collapsed?

[Jeeper]

Me too grand dad. One black and white channel with Philip Sherry doing the news.
We were the first family in Bulls to get a 26" color TV. Philips K9 it was. lasted for nearly 30 years, actually became a bit of a family heirloom.I remember that TV very well, it was our first colour one. And it lasted a long time too.

Found an image on Google. Brought back a lot of memories of good times.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171025/7468ceef32292939d5c01b97059977cd.jpg

[JATZ]

You mean the days of no internet, twitter, FB, cell phones and only 2 TV channels.
And you had to get out of your seat to switch between them.

[Voltaire]

Prior to the internet I would waste less time reading shit like I have just typed, Used to do boring stuff like go and see mates, drive around, work on fixing old things.

I wish it could be the 80's every dayyyyyy....

[oldrider]

Prior to the internet I would waste less time reading shit like I have just typed, Used to do boring stuff like go and see mates, drive around, work on fixing old things.

I wish it could be the 80's every dayyyyyy....

"It is at our house" (more like 60's) - downsized - we have no room for the old TV so it stays in the shed waiting to be given away or dumped!

Lovin the return to the real world! :wings:

[TheDemonLord]

Lovin the return to the real world!

I played that game once - the graphics were alright, but the plot was terrible, the NPCs were all badly coded, the Character progression was clunky and the Grind was absurd. The boss fights were next to impossible and the 'respawn' option appears to be missing.

2/10 would not play again

[Graystone]

I played that game once - the graphics were alright, but the plot was terrible, the NPCs were all badly coded, the Character progression was clunky and the Grind was absurd. The boss fights were next to impossible and the 'respawn' option appears to be missing.

2/10 would not play again

Great immersion, but atrocious support from the devs.

[Ocean1]

There are people going hungry and living in exceptionally shite conditions and you dumb fuckers think they deserve it?

They deserve what others consider their work's worth.

The end.

[Woodman]

Have you ever thought how the 8hr day,annual leave,sick leave, bereavement leave and meal and smoko breaks came about? They did certainly not come about as a result of all the employers getting together and offering those conditions out of the goodness of their hearts. The strikes that those union members went on were responsibe for all the conditions I mentioned above which you will be enjoying today but as you think they are all dumbfuck ideas I am sure your employer would love you to give up all those "dumbfuck" entitlements to increase their profit margin.

Don't disagree with you but they became out of control bullies.

[Graystone]

If the poor didn't exist

There's probably better reasons not to kill all the poor, like morals...


https://youtu.be/owI7DOeO_yg

[Ocean1]

I could be poor too, I felt the inconvenience of that far outweighed the inconvenience of working most days for the last 35 years.
Although nobody goes in to bat for old tired pricks that worked too hard.

Listen, there's only room for so many poor, and all the taxes you've been paying has made the few remaining positions fucking scarce:

http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/snapshots-of-nz/nz-social-indicators/Home/Standard%20of%20living/pop-low-incomes.aspx

...So I reckon you're shit outa luck.

[Swoop]

I remember that TV very well, it was our first colour one. And it lasted a long time too.

Found an image on Google. Brought back a lot of memories of good times.

That looks like the one we had.
It had the pop-out drawer at the bottom with the tuning wheels for each of the six (yes SIX!) channels possible, even though there were only two being broadcast...

[pete376403]

I remember when there was no TV. We listened to the wireless and read books.

[Jeeper]

I remember when there was no TV. We listened to the wireless and read books.BBC started transmission in 1935 in London, how vintage are you?

[Ocean1]

I remember when there was no TV. We listened to the wireless and read books.

One of the old man's mates made a TV from a 10" round green oscilloscope screen. First few days he had it we'd sit there watching the news broadcast from Aussie, couple of years before TV came here.

Can't remember if it was 1 hr or 2, but that was, news and some very BBC style current affairs thing.

[ellipsis]

...I remember the first TV coming to our town...it created some wondrous conversation...it was at a house not far from ours which was 'exciting'...we had one a couple or three years later, rented from ?...it looked a lot older than the one pictured here...fucked if I know why but us kids were not allowed near it...I remember lots of cuffed ears for watching the cartoons after school, if I was caught...

[Ocean1]

...I remember the first TV coming to our town...it created some wondrous conversation...it was at a house not far from ours which was 'exciting'...we had one a couple or three years later, rented from ?...it looked a lot older than the one pictured here...fucked if I know why but us kids were not allowed near it...I remember lots of cuffed ears for watching the cartoons after school, if I was caught...

There was a scheme where someone was modifying British second hand TVs to work here. I remember getting dragged down to the post office to buy UK bonds, (limit per person/week, then) so we could pay for ours.

That was maybe a year after broadcasting began here. Was always a rigmarole around tuning the fucking thing, look at it sideways and it gave up. I remember some nights any time someone stood up reception turned to shit.

[mashman]

I could be poor too, I felt the inconvenience of that far outweighed the inconvenience of working most days for the last 35 years.
Although nobody goes in to bat for old tired pricks that worked too hard.

I Am doing that very thing dearheart... that and trying to prevent anyone from having to work that hard for so long without the inconvenience factor. Enjoy it. Stop moaning about it ya grumpy fucka ;)

[mashman]

They deserve what others consider their work's worth.

The end.

Meanwhile, that behavioural construct is systematically poisoning our environments (social, mental, trees n resources n shit etc...).

No. It isn't. :)

[ellipsis]

There was a scheme where someone was modifying British second hand TVs to work here. I remember getting dragged down to the post office to buy UK bonds, (limit per person/week, then) so we could pay for ours.

That was maybe a year after broadcasting began here. Was always a rigmarole around tuning the fucking thing, look at it sideways and it gave up. I remember some nights any time someone stood up reception turned to shit.

...yeah...the, 'who's going up on the roof ?', question was probably asked every time the fucken thing was turned on...

[mashman]

Without questioning the absurdity of some of the economic logic displayed in your comments, would you care to elaborate how would you define poverty? How would you measure it? And how do you purpose to alleviate suffering of humankind who are supposedly living on $100 a week in NZ.

The absurdity is is that I've just described your absurd system and you've agreed that it's absurd. Although the absurdity could be your need to reframe the $100 to live on where it was quite clearly in the context of food budget. Then again, the absurdity of questioning economic logic that exists does somewhat take the biscuit.

I define poverty as the lack of social cohesion that gives credence to phenomena, like Structural Violence. It is measured in Educational terms. It is measured in living standards and conditions terms. It is measured by the access to goods and services like houses, transport, amenities, food quality etc... Absolute poverty for the vast majority of the population. Yeah, pretty close. I'll give that as a part of an answer as to how I would define poverty.

As for alleviation. Moving towards a Resource Based Economy would do the trick. Failing that, putting things in place to fund those who currently redistribute free food to those who need it. Building vertical hydroponic farms on the doorsteps of those very people and calling them community gardens. I'd look at slightly different ways of mixing current logistics to save on transport costs, sprays etc... Either way, should anyone struggling financially choose to turn down good fresh free food, and therefore not have another 17% in their pocket by default, then that's their problem. Where they do get 17%... well, they now have 17% more money without anyone really having to spend much outwith the investment required to build the farms. Even at that we could find the final year students who kick ass and offer them the contract to build them. Again, it's be cheap, potentially free, as these guys are already paid for given that they're still in education. What they would receive in return is a short-cut in terms of their industry standing. There are a few other, more maybe, important things I'd address too... but hey, let's start with the alleviation of poverty and maybe some knock on health effects.

So please, point out the absurdity of not being able to get any of the abundance of food that currently exists to those who could do with it. Coz iffen ye don't have the money, then ye don't have access to that resource... and so on and so forth. the current system is clinically insane given its outcomes. I'll take your perceived absurdity over that any day.

[roogazza]

One of the old man's mates made a TV from a 10" round green oscilloscope screen. First few days he had it we'd sit there watching the news broadcast from Aussie, couple of years before TV came here.


Shit yes, my uncle made a TV from the same sort of thing but it would have been smaller maybe 6 to 8 inch diameter max. We'd sit round and watch really old stuff ,Hyram Holiday (spelling) or some such.

[Jeeper]

Mashman, are we now talking about absolute poverty or still talking about relative poverty? The measure used by NZ and referred to in the original post is for relative poverty, which we are unlikely to ever eliminate (unless we all live on a big Commune and grow some funky stuff together). If you are talking about absolute poverty, like the measure used in US, then that is actually much easier to calculate and mark progress against.

All your ideas are just big statements with relatively no connection to any economic theory or policies that can actually be implemented and progress monitored against.

Healthy debate is a sign of a healthy society. But it has to be grounded in logic. Propose a single alternative measure for absolute poverty in NZ. And then we can see what works. Heck, we can measure both absolute and relative poverty and decide which one makes the society feel better.

[FJRider]

Really? Ever talked to someone who grew up in a "union" household and how they went hungry while Dad was on strike for some dumbfuck reason.

"Winning" a 10 week strike ... and getting an extra 59 cents per hour and 5 extra minutes for morning and afternoon smoko ... :blank:

[mashman]

Mashman, are we now talking about absolute poverty or still talking about relative poverty? The measure used by NZ and referred to in the original post is for relative poverty, which we are unlikely to ever eliminate (unless we all live on a big Commune and grow some funky stuff together). If you are talking about absolute poverty, like the measure used in US, then that is actually much easier to calculate and mark progress against.

All your ideas are just big statements with relatively no connection to any economic theory or policies that can actually be implemented and progress monitored against.

Healthy debate is a sign of a healthy society. But it has to be grounded in logic. Propose a single alternative measure for absolute poverty in NZ. And then we can see what works. Heck, we can measure both absolute and relative poverty and decide which one makes the society feel better.

I gave you my definition and measure of poverty. Not sure why you're so confused. If your goal s to accept a level of poverty, then poverty you shall have. Given that there's more than enough food to go around, there are still empty stomachs. Anything else is trifling over those lives.

Correct. They are different thinking. It's kind of what we need. Yet absolutely everything I put forwards there is achievable today using the very same tools and monitoring that we have today. All that has changed is the logistics. That such a thing confuses you really doesn't surprise me, because instead of putting forwards an economic argument, you dismiss that which was offered as nothing more than big statements. I can't help you being a sad sack of shit, but I sure as hell don't have to accept that that's the best you can do. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if you and TDL are related. Blood sisters or summink.

Measure measure measure. Always with the measuring. Just do what needs to be done and there'll be no need to measure anything. But that's what Resource Based Economy is about i.e. making sure everyone has access to everything so that you don't have to waste time and effort on systems that are used to do nothing other than monitor that everyone is getting access to what they require. Your bullshit system uses averages and medians and all sorts of measures to quantify that which exists in sufficient enough numbers that we're currently trying to find policy to fix it.

So I'm sure you'll excuse me when I tell you to fuck off back under the 1150's rock from which you crawled. Coz, Son, you've got nothing... but at least you're in good company.

[Woodman]

Mashman, are we now talking about absolute poverty or still talking about relative poverty? The measure used by NZ and referred to in the original post is for relative poverty, which we are unlikely to ever eliminate (unless we all live on a big Commune and grow some funky stuff together). If you are talking about absolute poverty, like the measure used in US, then that is actually much easier to calculate and mark progress against.

All your ideas are just big statements with relatively no connection to any economic theory or policies that can actually be implemented and progress monitored against.

Healthy debate is a sign of a healthy society. But it has to be grounded in logic. Propose a single alternative measure for absolute poverty in NZ. And then we can see what works. Heck, we can measure both absolute and relative poverty and decide which one makes the society feel better.

You are new here aren't you?

[Jeeper]

You are new here aren't you?Does that mean I am not allowed to have an opinion that differs from someone who's best argument is to name call and throw personal insults? Thank you for reminding me. I will keep that in mind for future.

[Jeeper]

I gave you my definition and measure of poverty. Not sure why you're so confused. If your goal s to accept a level of poverty, then poverty you shall have. Given that there's more than enough food to go around, there are still empty stomachs. Anything else is trifling over those lives.

Correct. They are different thinking. It's kind of what we need. Yet absolutely everything I put forwards there is achievable today using the very same tools and monitoring that we have today. All that has changed is the logistics. That such a thing confuses you really doesn't surprise me, because instead of putting forwards an economic argument, you dismiss that which was offered as nothing more than big statements. I can't help you being a sad sack of shit, but I sure as hell don't have to accept that that's the best you can do. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if you and TDL are related. Blood sisters or summink.

Measure measure measure. Always with the measuring. Just do what needs to be done and there'll be no need to measure anything. But that's what Resource Based Economy is about i.e. making sure everyone has access to everything so that you don't have to waste time and effort on systems that are used to do nothing other than monitor that everyone is getting access to what they require. Your bullshit system uses averages and medians and all sorts of measures to quantify that which exists in sufficient enough numbers that we're currently trying to find policy to fix it.

So I'm sure you'll excuse me when I tell you to fuck off back under the 1150's rock from which you crawled. Coz, Son, you've got nothing... but at least you're in good company.Ah, the age old cliches with no logic but name calling and personal attacks. Im not your son, dont ever call me that again, my father was infinitely more intelligent than you ever could dream to be.

Poverty in NZ is a relative construct. You want to see absolute poverty, visit some of the developing countries and see how they live. Poverty in NZ is created following an attitude of entitlement and that attitude being positively reinforced with universal and unconditional funding.

[Voltaire]

Does that mean I am not allowed to have an opinion that differs from someone who's best argument is to name call and throw personal insults? Thank you for reminding me. I will keep that in mind for future.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest he was implying your statement was too thoughtful for around these here parts ( sadly).

Rant and Rave is like one of those old pubs where if your not careful you end up getting your ear chewed off by " Mr Interesting"

Anyhows....back to Manfeild bike prep...:msn-wink: ( not the creepy Simon Cowell one):laugh:

[jasonu]

1974 just in time for the CH-CH Commonwealth Games....do you remember when the Bulls bridge collapsed?

Yes mate. It was a Thursday. I know that because it was late night opening for Dad in his bookshop on High St. He was wondering why it was so quiet until someone told him the bridge had collapsed. He actually got interviewed on TV (not by Philip Sherry) as a town spokesman.

[jasonu]

I remember that TV very well, it was our first colour one. And it lasted a long time too.

Found an image on Google. Brought back a lot of memories of good times.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171025/7468ceef32292939d5c01b97059977cd.jpg

Ours was a console top o the line model with a little pop out drawer at the bottom for tuning the 2 stations we had at the time.

[Jeeper]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest he was implying your statement was too thoughtful for around these here parts ( sadly).

Rant and Rave is like one of those old pubs where if your not careful you end up getting your ear chewed off by " Mr Interesting"

Anyhows....back to Manfeild bike prep...:msn-wink: ( not the creepy Simon Cowell one)[emoji23]Appreciate your input in deciphering some of the information for my future benefit.

[Woodman]

Does that mean I am not allowed to have an opinion that differs from someone who's best argument is to name call and throw personal insults? Thank you for reminding me. I will keep that in mind for future.

I was referring to Mashmans views on how the world should be.

[mashman]

Ah, the age old cliches with no logic but name calling and personal attacks. Im not your son, dont ever call me that again, my father was infinitely more intelligent than you ever could dream to be.

Poverty in NZ is a relative construct. You want to see absolute poverty, visit some of the developing countries and see how they live. Poverty in NZ is created following an attitude of entitlement and that attitude being positively reinforced with universal and unconditional funding.

Ahhhh, the age old inability to look past the language and deal with what's being said. I meant Son in a completely derogatory manner. You claimed a failing in economic knowledge and then folded like a tonne of bricks. Pretty fuckin pathetic, even for around these parts. It's all you deserve in terms of an explanation as you have come equipped with absolutely nothing. You were given more than achievable mitigations and you spat the dummy due to your incapacity to understand, well, anything by the looks of it. That's not a personal attack, just an observation given the evidence you've put forwards so far.

bwaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaa... and there it is. Actually, you're more like bogan than TDL. Your ASSumptions are the worst form of defensive tripe that I've read in a while. Fuck off, there's a good lad. If you knew anything you'd have done something with the knowledge to put me in my place by now. You haven't, because you actually have nothing but pomp and bluster. You qualify and quantify nothing and run away like a poor little lamb because someone used some language that offends your delicate sensibility of entitlement. Hardly surprising you project your entitlement onto others. Poverty is created by a lack of money. Full stop. The rest of your bullshit is merely logical externality of that money scarcity.

Now run along Son, mummy needs her other tit drained.

[mashman]

I was referring to Mashmans views on how the world should be.

Are you saying that that which I have written is outwith the realms of the current reality? That's a quaint way of viewing the evidence.

[Ocean1]

Meanwhile, that behavioural construct is systematically poisoning our environments (social, mental, trees n resources n shit etc...).

No. It isn't. :)

Behavioural construct. :laugh:

Here's an idea: you pay whatever you want to anyone for whatever they provide, $100 for bottle of milk? Go for it, your money, you earned it: you decide.

And the rest of us will do exactly the same.

And it really really is, the only people that have any right to decide what anything's worth id the guy selling it and the guy buying it. You can fuck off and mind your own business along with the rest of your bone idle mates.

[Ocean1]

Does that mean I am not allowed to have an opinion that differs from someone who's best argument is to name call and throw personal insults? Thank you for reminding me. I will keep that in mind for future.

Means you haven't learned the futility of using fact and logic in arguing with mushmate.

He's immune.

[Maha]

Yes mate. It was a Thursday. I know that because it was late night opening for Dad in his bookshop on High St. He was wondering why it was so quiet until someone told him the bridge had collapsed. He actually got interviewed on TV (not by Philip Sherry) as a town spokesman.

I was living in Palmmy at the time and Dad took me out to see it the day after.

[Voltaire]

Appreciate your input in deciphering some of the information for my future benefit.

Witness first hand how a thread on Poverty in NZ ends up being the old dears fond memories of an old tele.

Wait until they start on the day the VCR arrived.....

[jasonu]

I was living in Palmmy at the time and Dad took me out to see it the day after.

Small world mate. Maybe we looked at each other from opposite sides of the river.

[Ocean1]

Witness first hand how a thread on Poverty in NZ ends up being the old dears fond memories of an old tele.

Wait until they start on the day the VCR arrived.....

Aye, dems was the days, no indoor plumbing, third world housing, healthcare was an aspirin, dirt simiches for lunch, walked 15 miles to school, (uphill both ways).

But you tell the younguns today and will they believe you?

[Jeeper]

Witness first hand how a thread on Poverty in NZ ends up being the old dears fond memories of an old tele.

Wait until they start on the day the VCR arrived.....I remember that day. It was Betamax with 60 minutes maximum tape... Connected to the Philips TV as above! There were no remotes.

[mada]

New Zealand does not have an official poverty measure. However, low-income thresholds or poverty lines can be used. The ‘fixed line’ measure anchors the poverty line in a reference year, then adjusts it each survey with the Consumer Price Index. The ‘moving line’ or ‘relative’ measure sets the poverty line as a proportion of the median income.

The fixed line measure (60 percent of median income) adjusted for housing costs indicated 15 percent of the total population lived in poverty in 2010, the same as in 2009. This ended a decline in poverty started in 1994. Child poverty rates were 22 percent from 2007 to 2010, following major falls from 2001. According to the MSD this was due to improving employment, income-related rents and WFF. Poverty rates for older New Zealanders (7 percent) were lower in 2010 than for any other age group (13 percent for 25 to 64 year olds and 22 percent for dependent children).

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/research-papers/document/00PlibCIP181/household-incomes-inequality-and-poverty

[Woodman]

Are you saying that that which I have written is outwith the realms of the current reality? That's a quaint way of viewing the evidence.

But you never said anything. Just a whole bunch of jibberish.

[eldog]

Would making the pension equal to the benefit help?
with the same accommodation, hardship, furniture, meal extras

I am sure there are a few pensioners who suffer hardship....

Can't say I know anything about Benefits or Pension

[Woodman]

Would making the pension equal to the benefit help?
with the same accommodation, hardship, furniture, meal extras

I am sure there are a few pensioners who suffer hardship....

Can't say I know anything about Benefits or Pension

I reckon that the pension and benefit should be a percentage of the base politicians salary.

[Graystone]

You are new here aren't you?

I'm new here as well, perhaps you could explain what Mashman's measure of poverty is? (be it absolute or relative) I am having some trouble understanding his posts, perhaps due to lacking past context? They seem similar to Trumps speeches and tweets now I think about it, rather focused on telling us how good the results will be while being utterly bereft of any detail or logic about the implementation.

[Woodman]

I'm new here as well, perhaps you could explain what Mashman's measure of poverty is? (be it absolute or relative) I am having some trouble understanding his posts, perhaps due to lacking past context? They seem similar to Trumps speeches and tweets now I think about it, rather focused on telling us how good the results will be while being utterly bereft of any detail or logic about the implementation.

To be honest Mashman used to be quite engaging and articulate in his debates whether he opposed your view or not, but the last few on here have been quite unintelligable and he has come across quite angry. Not sure why, hope he is okay.

As for his theories. In a nutshell as far as I can understand is that he wants to have no financial system at all. Everyone who wants to just works and gets everything for free. It is not policed in any way, rather just rely on the community spirit. Make of that what you will.

[pete376403]

BBC started transmission in 1935 in London, how vintage are you?

I was referring to NZ pre-TV, but yeah, I'm getting old

[Swoop]

I reckon that the pension and benefit should be a percentage of the base politicians salary.
The other way around.
MP's salaries should be the same as the average wage. That would give them incentive for raising it.
Also it would wean out those professional unemployable's who have no useful skills yet get into politics to suckle off of the taxpayer's teat.

[mashman]

Behavioural construct. :laugh:

Here's an idea: you pay whatever you want to anyone for whatever they provide, $100 for bottle of milk? Go for it, your money, you earned it: you decide.

And the rest of us will do exactly the same.

And it really really is, the only people that have any right to decide what anything's worth id the guy selling it and the guy buying it. You can fuck off and mind your own business along with the rest of your bone idle mates.

I wee'd a little when I wrote it too. It is all of our business should that behaviour lead to conditions that could threaten the environments under which humans develop. Shame you think otherwise... then again, progress has always been made at the expense of the myopic entitled.


Means you haven't learned the futility of using fact and logic in arguing with mushmate.

He's immune.

He'd have had to have used some in order to gauge that for his or herself.


Not sure why, hope he is okay.

Chur love. I'm absolutely splendid thanks. No anger, just using language to make a point and in order to shortcut the discussion to its more than likely obvious conclusion. Ya'll will read the post how you choose to read it. As such, the post worked flawlessly.

Many thanks Jeeper for proving the point and saving me huge amounts of time explaining things to you that you already have strong enough preconceptions about to completely ignore that which would have been explained.

[pritch]

Im not your son, dont ever call me that again,

This is the new enlightened KB, he is allowed to call you an egg, or maybe even son? These though are an improvement on some of the invective that passed for discourse hereabout. :whistle:

[Graystone]

To be honest Mashman used to be quite engaging and articulate in his debates whether he opposed your view or not, but the last few on here have been quite unintelligable and he has come across quite angry. Not sure why, hope he is okay.

As for his theories. In a nutshell as far as I can understand is that he wants to have no financial system at all. Everyone who wants to just works and gets everything for free. It is not policed in any way, rather just rely on the community spirit. Make of that what you will.

Ah yes, I know the type, thanks for the clarification.

[FJRider]

This is the new enlightened KB, he is allowed to call you an egg, or maybe even son? These though are an improvement on some of the invective that passed for discourse hereabout. :whistle:

Some lucky ones have had an invitation by one member ... to suck his cock.

So ... being referred to as "an egg" ... might seem ... um ... almost polite ... :2thumbsup

[Jeeper]

Its rather unfortunate that the society has come down to throwing insults rather than ideas for fixing real or imaginary problems. I do enjoy a healthy debate. But won't stoop to swearing or name calling. Not the way I was brought up.

Twyford's solution to help with poverty is to introduce 10c per liter tax on petrol! Such a good guy. Suck'em dry, they'll stop bleeding. This is tax 1. Let's see what comes next.

[Woodman]

Unless you work for the govt the only way wages will rise is through bargaining with your employer. For some silly reason today and it must be due to something dumb being taught in schools or uni everyone including those employed by private businesses seem to think its the govt's job to give them pay rises.

Everyone?? I don't. Am I not part of everyone?

[Jeeper]

Unless you work for the govt the only way wages will rise is through bargaining with your employer. For some silly reason today and it must be due to something dumb being taught in schools or uni everyone including those employed by private businesses seem to think its the govt's job to give them pay rises.I don't expect the government to interfere in my pay negotiation. In fact, I don't want the government to interfere at all in the job market or any other market. Let the buyer and seller work out whats best for them. Free market all the way.

[ellipsis]

I do enjoy a healthy debate.




...you are definitely on the wrong forum if you want that kind of shit...

[TheDemonLord]

To be honest Mashman used to be quite engaging and articulate in his debates whether he opposed your view or not, but the last few on here have been quite unintelligable and he has come across quite angry. Not sure why, hope he is okay.

Yeah - I miss that Mashman...

I think it's ever since he realised that regardless of how nice it would be and how much he wishes it were true - he's utopian vision will never come true.


As for his theories. In a nutshell as far as I can understand is that he wants to have no financial system at all. Everyone who wants to just works and gets everything for free. It is not policed in any way, rather just rely on the community spirit. Make of that what you will.

It's basically an updated form of Communism, for the Electronic age, repackaged with some extra technological woo in a desperate attempt to hide the connections to those happy fun Dictators of the 20th century.

[TheDemonLord]

I'm new here as well, perhaps you could explain what Mashman's measure of poverty is? (be it absolute or relative) I am having some trouble understanding his posts, perhaps due to lacking past context? They seem similar to Trumps speeches and tweets now I think about it, rather focused on telling us how good the results will be while being utterly bereft of any detail or logic about the implementation.

Paraphrased - they are this:

Some people have more than others and that is WRONG!!!111!oneoneone

It's the radical left wing/communist position.

Wonderful idea, completely unworkable in reality.

[Jeeper]

I think this govt is more keen to stop global warming/climate change than reduce poverty as increased emissions taxes will do nothing but increase it.I seriously doubt they are that cunning. They are just happy they have job security for the next three years, particularly the ones in the Green Party.

[Woodman]

Lots of people commenting on the Stuff FB page when the topic of pay rises come up expect the Govt to be able get them one.

So you have downgraded "everyone" to "lots of people on Stuff FB page".

Lol........

[FJRider]

To have that attitude you must have a highly sort after skill to have the ability to negotiate your own pay rises?

Since the introduction of the employment contract act ... all you need to succeed is a sound work record, good ex employer references, easily demonstrated work skills and a positive work ethic. Such people can name their salary ... and get it.


Most people are not as highly skilled as you and I bet you would want govt assistance in some way eg raising the min wage and associated employment law if you were not as highly skilled as you are.

When minimum wage is raised further ... many will find their company "Restructuring" and will need to reapply for the job they have.

And their application will be rejected.

For a girl that is highly skilled ... you need to sell yourself more. I could suggest a few streets you could try selling yourself ...

[FJRider]

So you have downgraded "everyone" to "lots of people on Stuff FB page".

Lol........

Government raising the minimum wage is a great plan. easy money for the Government ... a bigger wage means a bigger tax sum paid into Inland Revenue with each pay (without increasing the tax rate) ... with NO financial outlay by the Government ... just a simple change in legislation.

A brilliant plan ... other Governments should have done it too ... Oh wait .. !!!

[gsxr]

Government raising the minimum wage is a great plan. easy money for the Government ... a bigger wage means a bigger tax sum paid into Inland Revenue with each pay (without increasing the tax rate) ... with NO financial outlay by the Government ... just a simple change in legislation.

A brilliant plan ... other Governments should have done it too ... Oh wait .. !!!

One could argue that the wage freeze between 1982 and 1984 put all workers behind the 8 ball of inflation for all subsequent years since compounding.
One could argue that the introduction of the individual employment contract act has reduced wages in line with inflation.
One could argue that cheap immigrant labour has reduced wages in NZ
One could argue that non residents greatly inflating house prices is a problem
But I am not one to argue ,
It is what it is

[FJRider]

One could argue that the wage freeze between 1982 and 1984 put all workers behind the 8 ball of inflation for all subsequent years since compounding.

Half the members on site now ... weren't even born then ... :laugh:


One could argue that the introduction of the individual employment contract act has reduced wages in line with inflation.

I'd argue ... I got a pay increase. I might suggest however ... that some were then paid their net worth ... :sunny:



One could argue that cheap immigrant labour has reduced wages in NZ

It wasn't high to start with ... and they do the work that Kiwi's wont lower themselves to do ... :doh:


One could argue that non residents greatly inflating house prices is a problem

There were plenty of wealthy Kiwi's that could have bought the houses. But they thought the prices (and their returns) would not be worth the risk ... :msn-wink:


But I am not one to argue ,

I noticed ... :blank:


It is what it is

Flipping burgers at McDonald's could pay $20 an hour soon ... :laugh:

[mashman]

I don't expect the government to interfere in my pay negotiation. In fact, I don't want the government to interfere at all in the job market or any other market. Let the buyer and seller work out whats best for them. Free market all the way.

And who is in control of the money supply? How is money issued under your free market? Because by the sounds of things, you're expecting everything to run without constraint, including the control of creation of money. That doesn't end well.

[Swoop]

Some lucky ones have had an invitation by one member ... to suck his cock.

So ... being referred to as "an egg" ... might seem ... um ... almost polite ... :2thumbsup
We can only hope that his psychiatric treatment provider has discussed his underlying repressed homosexual inclinations.


So you have downgraded "everyone" to "lots of people on Stuff FB page".
That sounds as bad as BeTradeMe's community discussion board lunatics. Now THERE is a group of fuckwits.
Anyway, which fool reads Stuff? Hideously inaccurate drivel, written for the lowest morons to comprehend.

[Jeeper]

And who is in control of the money supply? How is money issued under your free market? Because by the sounds of things, you're expecting everything to run without constraint, including the control of creation of money. That doesn't end well.Unconstrained money supply is indeed a disaster waiting to happen, hyperinflation is normally the outcome when free money is printed in an attempt to solve all social problems. One of the Greens idea a few years ago was to print money to pay off national debt - yeah sure, lets kill the economy at the same time.

My view of money supply or stock of money (currency in circulation and deposits in banks), is that its no different than any other commodity. Supply and demand has to match, but through market forces not government intervention (i.e. flooding or starving supply through whatever mechanism). Interest rate is the price of the money borrowed and lent, not something government created arbitrary target rate which is socially palatable.

Notion of uncontraint money supply would be the same as a manufactrer flooding the market with their goods, whether the market wants it or not (demand side ignorance). Free market doesn't work that way. Remember, with money also comes the multiplier effect. I deposit $100 in bank (issued by government). MS at $100. Same bank tgen lends $80 to someone else, who deposits it in their account. Money supply is now $180! And so on. In reality its still only $100 issued by government, but economy feels it multiple times. Minor government intervention can have massive headaches. I don't like headaches.

[T.W.R]

Unconstrained money supply is indeed a disaster waiting to happen, hyperinflation is normally the outcome when free money is printed in an attempt to solve all social problems. One of the Greens idea a few years ago was to print money to pay off national debt - yeah sure, lets kill the economy at the same time.

My view of money supply or stock of money (currency in circulation and deposits in banks), is that its no different than any other commodity. Supply and demand has to match, but through market forces not government intervention (i.e. flooding or starving supply through whatever mechanism). Interest rate is the price of the money borrowed and lent, not something government created arbitrary target rate which is socially palatable.

Notion of uncontraint money supply would be the same as a manufactrer flooding the market with their goods, whether the market wants it or not (demand side ignorance). Free market doesn't work that way. Remember, with money also comes the multiplier effect. I deposit $100 in bank (issued by government). MS at $100. Same bank tgen lends $80 to someone else, who deposits it in their account. Money supply is now $180! And so on. In reality its still only $100 issued by government, but economy feels it multiple times. Minor government intervention can have massive headaches. I don't like headaches.

Zimbabwe is a prime example :yes:

Though the thought of being able to swan around with trillions of dollars in your pocket or wipe your arse with billion dollar notes would be amusing :lol:

[Jeeper]

Zimbabwe is a prime example :yes:

Though the thought of being able to swan around with trillions of dollars in your pocket or wipe your arse with billion dollar notes would be amusing [emoji38]Well, Zimbabwe has no immigration problems..... [emoji3] No migrants coming in and cheapening the local labour market.

[Jeeper]

Actually Zimbabwe has no problems with foreign ownership of housing stock either.

Low relative poverty as well, because median income is so low.

Be careful what we wish for.

[T.W.R]

Well, Zimbabwe has no immigration problems..... [emoji3] No migrants coming in and cheapening the local labour market.


Actually Zimbabwe has no problems with foreign ownership of housing stock either.

Low relative poverty as well, because median income is so low.

Be careful what we wish for.

Really :scratch:
I think you should have a GOOD look at their history if you think that :msn-wink:
Apart from being raped by England for years then being so in debt to the US that caused their hyperinflation, plus Mugabe's regime and what that caused too.
Massive illegal markets & slums and a huge number homeless people; poverty is rife there, not the we're hard done by poverty but real world poverty :msn-wink:

[Jeeper]

Really :scratch:
I think you should have a GOOD look at their history if you think that :msn-wink:
Apart from being raped by England for years then being so in debt to the US that caused their hyperinflation, plus Mugabe's regime and what that caused too.
Massive illegal markets & slums and a huge number homeless people; poverty is rife there, not the we're hard done by poverty but real world poverty :msn-wink:And that is exactly what I was saying that what we have in NZ is relative poverty. Some people are worse off than the neighbours, sure. But as a overall country we are much better than most others. Absolute poverty is what a lot of the less developed nations face. No infrastructure, no universal healthcare, no education. Nothing.

[pritch]

Obama inherited an economy that was dead in the water. He pumped trillions into the economy by way of a jump start. While that worked, it did massively increase the internal debt and that upset the Hell out of the Republicans who don't give a shit about anything - as long as they don't have to pay more tax.

Some economists were predicting that the Federal Reserve would manage things so as to create a period of high inflation with the intention of lowering the relative value of said trillions. When I read that they were printing money I was somewhat concerned. More so because they were being just a bit sneaky, they didn't announce they were printing money, they anounced a "quantitative easing".

So far so good though, fingers crossed.

[FJRider]

and it was not present in NZ due to the compulsary unionism/award pay rate/collective bargaining system of industrial relations as well as welfare.

NOPE ... it was due to (relatively) high employment. Belonging to a union was not compulsory ... but often you weren't hired in some firms if you were not a member of the required union for that occupation.


There was no big homelessness stories in the media back then confirming the lower paid were better off.

Almost right ... and confirmed nothing ... it wasn't reported as nobody wanted to know or hear about it. (Many still don't)

[Woodman]

[QUOTE=FJRider;1131068994]Since the introduction of the employment contract act ... all you need to succeed is a sound work record, good ex employer references, easily demonstrated work skills and a positive work ethic. Such people can name their salary ... and get it.


You are dreaming as if there are many others looking for work with exactly the same skills and references etc the employer will hire the person who is prepared to work for the least money. What you think would happen would only work for anyone with a rare highly sort after skill.

Bollocks. There are many reasons not to choose someone who has the same skills as other candidates.

[FJRider]

Actually Zimbabwe has no problems with foreign ownership of housing stock either.

All the white and foreign land owners were literally kicked out of the country and their properties stolen. Usually the buildings ransacked and demolished. Livestock taken and killed or just left to die.


Low relative poverty as well, because median income is so low.

With all the wealthy kicked out of the country ... there was nobody that had money to pay staff ... or know how to run the farms and industries.


Be careful what we wish for.

Those that decried the lot of the wealthy ... still want to be (well) paid for any work they do ...

[FJRider]

... Bollocks. There are many reasons not to choose someone who has the same skills as other candidates.

Yep ... people that are prepared to work cheaper ... you get what you pay for.

[Maha]

Yep ... people that are prepared to work cheaper ... you get what you pay for.

Our staff are on minimum wage and do an outstanding job, they are forever wanting more hours and terribly keen to work, that old adage 'you get what you pay for' apply's mainly to selected purchases.... any Warehouse product to name but one.

[Woodman]

Yep ... people that are prepared to work cheaper ... you get what you pay for.

No, I would pay more for a non smoker than a smoker with the same skill set for example.

[FJRider]

No, I would pay more for a non smoker than a smoker with the same skill set for example.

Funny that ... I don't (never did) smoke.

And with all four jobs I have applied four in the last 15 years ... more attention was paid to my references than my qualifications. Go figure eh ... !!!

[FJRider]

Our staff are on minimum wage and do an outstanding job ...

Then pay what they're worth then ... and they wont need the extra hours ... <_<

If they did an average job ... I could understand why you don't want to pay them more. Give them some good references ... so they can go looking for better paid work.

[Maha]

Then pay what they're worth then ... and they wont need the extra hours ... <_<

If they did an average job ... I could understand why you don't want to pay them more. Give them some good references ... so they can go looking for better paid work.

They're also on benefits so paying more is out of the question. They can only earn X amount more than their bene.

[FJRider]

They're also on benefits so paying more is out of the question. They can only earn X amount more than their bene.

Then so is them working more hours then. And as such ... pointless them asking for more hours. I think $80 is the maximum they are allowed ... and they must declare it too.

[eldog]

Really :scratch:
I think you should have a GOOD look at their history if you think that :msn-wink:
Apart from being raped by England for years then being so in debt to the US that caused their hyperinflation, plus Mugabe's regime and what that caused too.
Massive illegal markets & slums and a huge number homeless people; poverty is rife there, not the we're hard done by poverty but real world poverty :msn-wink:

not to mention, extortion, blackmail (:laugh:), back handers, detention, confiscation, bribes etc

[Ocean1]

So thats what I got wrong about saying NZ had the best fed beggars in the world in that I should have said we have no "Absolute Poverty" in NZ. When I grew up the only poverty ever highlighted by the media was what you call "Absolute Poverty" and it was not present in NZ due to the compulsary unionism/award pay rate/collective bargaining system of industrial relations as well as welfare. There was no big homelessness stories in the media back then confirming the lower paid were better off.

Bullshit. There has always been poverty in NZ, even poverty as defined by having less than enough income to buy enough food and shelter to remain healthy.

The only difference is that then nobody blamed anyone else for it, and as there wasn't a welfare state providing an alternative to minimal employment it was usually the family of the poor that fed and housed them.

And all unionism ever did, has ever done is drag the more productive down to the level of the least productive.

[Jeeper]

They're also on benefits so paying more is out of the question. They can only earn X amount more than their bene.So they are capable of working more, and with an employer who is willing to give them more work. Yet they chose to not work more because benefit will be impacted? To me that is the issue. Benefit should not be the priority if they are able to work.

[eldog]

They're also on benefits so paying more is out of the question. They can only earn X amount more than their bene.

so is X going to get bigger when the minimum wage increases (Y) or are you going to employ more people working less hours?

[eldog]

Funny that ... I don't (never did) smoke.

And with all four jobs I have applied four in the last 15 years ... more attention was paid to my references than my qualifications. Go figure eh ... !!!

its a small town after all.....

could always move to Gore :sweatdrop

[eldog]

Yep ... people that are prepared to work cheaper ... you get what you pay for.

and if i pay with peanuts?

could I pay with goods or services or some other payment - like paying off debt?

[eldog]

There were plenty of Kiwi's that could have bought the houses. But they thought the prices (and their returns) would not be worth the risk ... :msn-wink: :laugh:

I put off buying a house when I was growing (still growing up) up, lots of people asked why I didn't buy a house, even to rent out. I thought I was on the right path.

I took the plunge after getting burgled, the landlord was very sad I moved out - perfect tenant

Yes it was very hard at first - so many extra costs, now its become no worries apart from mortgage as long as I have a job.
and looking back now, it isn't that hard, you just need to cut your cloth to suit your income.

If I run out of money, I can always sell the house and move on.

As long as the house price doesn't fall below what I can afford for another house then I haven't lost much.

[FJRider]

... could always move to Gore :sweatdrop

My references aren't that bad ... <_<

[Maha]

Then so is them working more hours then. And as such ... pointless them asking for more hours. I think $80 is the maximum they are allowed ... and they must declare it too.

My original statement was to counter your assumption that 'you get what you pay for'.. not an accurate point to conclude unless you buy a BBQ that last one season.


So they are capable of working more, and with an employer who is willing to give them more work. Yet they chose to not work more because benefit will be impacted? To me that is the issue. Benefit should not be the priority if they are able to work.

There are thousands nation wide in that position, neither (nor anyone else) have a clue what benefit our employees are on and for what reason. Yet they are will to get off their asre and earn extra, unlike many in the same position.

so is X going to get bigger when the minimum wage increases (Y) or are you going to employ more people working less hours?

It appears that yes indeed X will get bigger in time, the work here still has to be done and we will still pay to have it done. Increase the room rate by $1 and............sorted.

[Woodman]

Funny that ... I don't (never did) smoke.

And with all four jobs I have applied four in the last 15 years ... more attention was paid to my references than my qualifications. Go figure eh ... !!!

Thats refreshing about the references which would have highlighted your experience. The issue now is that someone quite young who has done lots of bullshit polytech courses will appear more qualified to a lot of corporate HR types.

[eldog]

It appears that yes indeed X will get bigger in time, the work here still has to be done and we will still pay to have it done. Increase the room rate by $1 and............sorted.

I understand the increase in room rate.
wondered if benefit stayed the same and minimum wage was increased wouldn’t that put it above the amount the beneficiary could earn. Wondered I found you could have 1 more beneficiary helping every one would benefit except the occupier.

we had an argument at work today, about the minimum wage increase.
if joe has say 20 current wage and bill was on the minimum, then bill gets an increase via govt legislation. What does joe think, should I also ask for an increase?
yada yada yada the increases would go on?
it will affect a few at work so I am asking

[eldog]

My references aren't that bad ... <_<
You haven’t run out of jobs?:shutup:

[eldog]

Thats refreshing about the references which would have highlighted your experience. The issue now is that someone quite young who has done lots of bullshit polytech courses will appear more qualified to a lot of corporate HR types.

Always pick the one with practical knowhow. Who is willing to get hands dirty.
even if job doesn’t require it.
not the suits.....

[FJRider]

Thats refreshing about the references which would have highlighted your experience. The issue now is that someone quite young who has done lots of bullshit polytech courses will appear more qualified to a lot of corporate HR types.

I was hired one time because I had experience ... with fewer qualifications than some that applied.

[Jeeper]

Always pick the one with practical knowhow. Who is willing to get hands dirty.
even if job doesn’t require it.
not the suits.....What's wrong with the suits? If the job is corporate, thats what it requires.

[eldog]

What's wrong with the suits? If the job is corporate, thats what it requires.
If they can wear a suit, no worries.
i just prefer working with people who call a spade a spade, and can use it.
If I get hit with the back of the spade, I would have deserved it

wearing of a suit doesn’t nesscessarily mean the job gets done

this is my own opinion.

where I work we have employed, crims, alcoholics, mentally challenged, all sorts.
almost all would have quit smoking in their time with me. And sorted the bing drinking problem.

they usually sort themselves out and get themselves on the straight and narrow.
the suits usually don’t last.

[FJRider]

You haven’t run out of jobs?:shutup:

Nope ... most of my references are nothing to do with my qualifications.

[eldog]

Nope ... most of my references are nothing to do with my qualifications.
Must be a good worker then.:2thumbsup

i was going to write good bugger but it might be misread:whistle:
it is KB after all

[FJRider]

Must be a good worker then.:2thumbsup

i was going to write good bugger but it might be misread:whistle:
it is KB after all

Not that good ... I just bury my mistakes ... :innocent:

[Maha]

Then so is them working more hours then. And as such ... pointless them asking for more hours. I think $80 is the maximum they are allowed ... and they must declare it too.

The Rolling Stones said it best with....

You can't always get what you want
But if try...
Sometimes, you get what you need.

That apply's for both employer and employee. See you at smoko Trev.

[mashman]

Unconstrained money supply is indeed a disaster waiting to happen, hyperinflation is normally the outcome when free money is printed in an attempt to solve all social problems. One of the Greens idea a few years ago was to print money to pay off national debt - yeah sure, lets kill the economy at the same time.

My view of money supply or stock of money (currency in circulation and deposits in banks), is that its no different than any other commodity. Supply and demand has to match, but through market forces not government intervention (i.e. flooding or starving supply through whatever mechanism). Interest rate is the price of the money borrowed and lent, not something government created arbitrary target rate which is socially palatable.

Notion of uncontraint money supply would be the same as a manufactrer flooding the market with their goods, whether the market wants it or not (demand side ignorance). Free market doesn't work that way. Remember, with money also comes the multiplier effect. I deposit $100 in bank (issued by government). MS at $100. Same bank tgen lends $80 to someone else, who deposits it in their account. Money supply is now $180! And so on. In reality its still only $100 issued by government, but economy feels it multiple times. Minor government intervention can have massive headaches. I don't like headaches.

Hyperinflation is one of the reasons why the poor are required. Unemployment, more so low wages these days, is used as a mechanism for controlling the amount of money in the economy. The Phillips Curve was created to show that relationship. Yes, that was a few years ago, right before monetary mechanisms grew in number and complexity and all but hid the obvious "quick sack some people coz there's too much currency about". It was also stated outright in a document published by RBNZ a few years ago.

Whilst the Greens were being kick in the testicles for suggesting the printing of money, the U.S., U.K., Germany etc... were all printing money without so much as a blip in terms of inflation. Likely the primary reason for that was because all of that $ went into the stock market. That, accompanied with the likes of Bill Mitchell and MMT are highlighting that in this day and age printing money doesn't cause the hiccups that it used to cause. Again though, that's because they have new fiscal policy toys.

The IMF released a paper a few years ago that clearly stated that 97% of the money that is created today is created by private banks. As such, governments haven't printed money to cause an inflationary blip in quite some time. Tis the private debt that shafts everyone. The governments merely set rules agreed on by industry and think tanks so that they can provide an income for various purposes (unemployed, health, education, infrastructure etc...). As such, the government are not responsible for todays version free market.

The free market already manufactures demand, to the point where we use up a years worth of resources in just over 7 months. The free market priduces crap after crap after crap simply to sell so that people can earn money, have a job and generally feel good about themselves for contributing. That they're contributing to pollution doesn't cross their mind, because they need more money and create things like fidget spinners and various other utilityless rubbish to achieve that goal. If you don't use money, there's no need to produce things without utility.

I can't wait for Tech Unemployment to kick in hard, because the economic externalities are going to see the issue of unconstrained money most likely become a reality given the lack of tax base to fund much in the way of benefits for people to live on. NO capitalistic system can handle that. Tis why we have had so much in the way of policy change over the decades/centuries. Essentially money is a really really bad tool if it can't achieve its goal after so many thousands of years of existence. So whilst I understand what you're talking about, you seem to be blaming the government for somethings they have not done... and that's my job ;)

[Jeeper]

That is what I appreciate, a well thought-out and civil argument. Well done.

The only thing I am blaming government for is to try and interfere in the market with a moral code that there must be equality in people's living standards. Government intervention rarely works, if at all. Market adjusts to negate it largely. How much money RBNZ used to influence FX a few years ago? Did that change the rate? No.

This notion of the current politicians that somehow increasing supply of housing stock through banning alleged foreign buyers and bigger deposit incentives will not suppress the pricing of existing stock or even crash it for some areas is absurd. When house price downshift ends up creating negative equity situations and stress on the banking system, don't blame anyone other than the government intervention. Remember that is how financial crisis started for some economies during GFC.

Leave the market alone. People who want to move up will acquire new skills if they really really want to improve their situation.

[Jeeper]

Its not as simple as just aquiring new skills as employers are wanting experience over a qualification today and if no one wants to train anyone people end up being stuck forever in a low tier job or on a benefit.Don't brush all employers with the same nonsense. There are plenty of ways to become employed, even self employed. If there is a will, there is a way. There are many organisations who hire graduates with no prior experience all the time or else all university graduates would be unemployed because they have no actual experience of the industry.

[Ocean1]

Don't brush all employers with the same nonsense. There are plenty of ways to become employed, even self employed. If there is a will, there is a way. There are many organisations who hire graduates with no prior experience all the time or else all university graduates would be unemployed because they have no actual experience of the industry.

Correct. NZ is a nation of family businesses, sole traders and SMEs mostly because union driven distortion of the labour market made normal employment simply unworkable for many industries.

Among all the bleating from the NZCTU's political wing about how poorly today's employees are paid there's a recent report about modern work habits that I found somewhat relevant: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11929543

I found myself imagining my first boss's reaction to a three hrs per day level of commitment to the collective cause. :laugh:

[TheDemonLord]

The free market already manufactures demand, to the point where we use up a years worth of resources in just over 7 months. The free market priduces crap after crap after crap simply to sell so that people can earn money, have a job and generally feel good about themselves for contributing. That they're contributing to pollution doesn't cross their mind, because they need more money and create things like fidget spinners and various other utilityless rubbish to achieve that goal. If you don't use money, there's no need to produce things without utility.

Yes... Under the Politburo, only one type of thing will be authorised to be produced, Tovarisch.


Essentially money is a really really bad tool if it can't achieve its goal after so many thousands of years of existence.

It achieved it's goal thousands of years ago....

[mashman]

That is what I appreciate, a well thought-out and civil argument. Well done.

The only thing I am blaming government for is to try and interfere in the market with a moral code that there must be equality in people's living standards. Government intervention rarely works, if at all. Market adjusts to negate it largely. How much money RBNZ used to influence FX a few years ago? Did that change the rate? No.

This notion of the current politicians that somehow increasing supply of housing stock through banning alleged foreign buyers and bigger deposit incentives will not suppress the pricing of existing stock or even crash it for some areas is absurd. When house price downshift ends up creating negative equity situations and stress on the banking system, don't blame anyone other than the government intervention. Remember that is how financial crisis started for some economies during GFC.

Leave the market alone. People who want to move up will acquire new skills if they really really want to improve their situation.


I keep forgetting that I have to compensate for people's lack of will to ignore emotive language. You might want to work on that. Son ;)

Without government there would be more monopoly than there currently is. The financial power and already acquired wealth is more than enough to crush every single business it chooses without financial risk. There's a service in there somewhere. A corporatocracy will do more than consolidate a monopoly on money. Government also tends to fund stuff that's non-profitable, but hazardous to the economy to such an extent that no private industry would blossom where the government isn't paying for some of those services. As an institution, it's serves many useful purposes in terms of preventing even more of a disaster without it.

Politicians are there to get voted in. They're show ponies with advisors... or trainers depending on your viewpoint. I had the pleasure of sitting through a few things and listening at close quaters. Meh.

The market is setup to facilitate the ECP. If you're planning for nothing, coz it's against your religion, then you're ignoring the fact that we've depleated the tree stock by 50% (CO2 up 50%, erm...), we're poisoning our rivers, doing many weird things to land and creature etc... then maybe you shouldn't be doing things that way, coz eventually, the economy will eat itself. Its first challenge is technological unemployment and the undermployment of technology. This means ditching life by ECP. It scares the pants off people to think that someone could get something for nothing. Yet if you don't go that route, then house prices are only the beginning. I saw something today that projected up to 10% in 3 years. Fun times ahead.

Bottom line. Production of almost everything that is non-essentiall has to stop (ASAP, but as quick as is possible so as not to cause the economy to nosedive). No financial economy can handle that. A Resource Based Economy can.

[Graystone]

Yes... Under the Politburo, only one type of thing will be authorised to be produced, Tovarisch.

While worded with a lot of bias, this does get to the heart of the matter. Consumers decide what is consumed, which in turn decides what is produced. Apple products are a great example for this, because the product itself is great, and would easily last 3-8 years (claims of planned obsolescence notwithstanding). Yet we probably all know at least one person who updates at least one of their apple products on a yearly basis. This sort of rampant, wasteful, consumerism is a product of people, not capitalism. Capitalism is the check that balances out this human nature of always wanting more; and considering just how far poverty has dropped (by any absolute measure) under capitalism it is working fantastically. Communism and other money-free theories do not balance it, instead removing the freedom of the people to decide through one method or another

Resource consumption an environmental pollution is a symptom of overpopulation, which is in turn a symptom of the reduced poverty and greater quality of life we now have (in addition to just being simple human nature).

[Jeeper]

Under your resource based model, what do you propose will happen to excess human resource on the planet? Given that in your dreams the current ecosystem is unable to sustain onslaught of human decision-making?

[TheDemonLord]

Bottom line. Production of almost everything that is non-essentiall has to stop (ASAP, but as quick as is possible so as not to cause the economy to nosedive). No financial economy can handle that. A Resource Based Economy can.

I'm so glad you've finally admitted this - Afterall - I remember a lovely conversation (before you got all butthurt that I was calling your Beloved RBE Communism - which it still is FYI) where I was telling you that under an RBE personal choice would be removed and you were proselytizing that under an RBE we would have complete freedom (cause yah know - no money and all that)

And yet now you have admitted that actually, it will be just like I said it would be - under an RBE, Personal choice WILL be removed, just like it was in every other Communist State.
From about here onwards (https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/122031-My-first-poll-for-the-NZ-public?p=1130976545#post1130976545)

[Graystone]

Does the term Resource Based Economy mean something different now? It used to be an reasonably environmentally unfreindly capitalist system where a countries resources were sold off with very little value added to the raw product.

[Graystone]

Under your resource based model, what do you propose will happen to excess human resource on the planet? Given that in your dreams the current ecosystem is unable to sustain onslaught of human decision-making?

I haven't got a model for it, but the excess human resource will lead to scarcity for everyone. I wouldn't say the current ecosystem cannot sustain the onslaught of human decision making, almost the opposite, it can't sustain the lack of decision making; we need to do something to avoid our finite resources becoming scarce for everyone. Just look at clean, green, NZ's waterways, if you can stand the sight of them; easily prevented if someone had some foresight and made environmentally friendly decisions.

[Jeeper]

I haven't got a model for it, but the excess human resource will lead to scarcity for everyone. I wouldn't say the current ecosystem cannot sustain the onslaught of human decision making, almost the opposite, it can't sustain the lack of decision making; we need to do something to avoid our finite resources becoming scarce for everyone. Just look at clean, green, NZ's waterways, if you can stand the sight of them; easily prevented if someone had some foresight and made environmentally friendly decisions.My comment was more targeted to Commrade Mashman. His RBE has more holes than a fishing net. If everyone is free to do what like and everything is provided for. Nobody would do anything remotely difficult or hazardous.

[Graystone]

My comment was more targeted to Commrade Mashman. His RBE has more holes than a fishing net. If everyone is free to do what like and everything is provided for. Nobody would do anything remotely difficult or hazardous.

Ok, it was immediately after mine and had no quoted post in it so I thought it was in reply to my post.

I am still confused why such a communist system is refereed to as an RBE? What resource can it be is it based on when everything within it is touted as being free?

[Akzle]

Its not as simple as just aquiring new skills as employers are wanting experience over a qualification today and if no one wants to train anyone people end up being stuck forever in a low tier job or on a benefit.

or it could just be that you come across as a raving fuckwit in real life, too.

[caseye]

or it could just be that you come across as a raving fuckwit in real life, too.

Arsekill, I thought you'd know better! Stop feeding the fucking bitch!
It lives and breathes because you talk to it.
Don't.

[mashman]

Under your resource based model, what do you propose will happen to excess human resource on the planet? Given that in your dreams the current ecosystem is unable to sustain onslaught of human decision-making?

Excess human resource? You mean the extra resources that humans won't be able to consume? Or those who are doing next to nothing, coz robots, but are getting access to stuff that others don't believe they should have given their "input" to acquire it? You know. Those with entitlement issues that would rather see the place burn coz someone is getting something that the entitlemented believe they don't deserve. Children.

[mashman]

My comment was more targeted to Commrade Mashman. His RBE has more holes than a fishing net. If everyone is free to do what like and everything is provided for. Nobody would do anything remotely difficult or hazardous.

And here we end up back at fuck off you got nothin' territory. If you understood it, you would have blown it to pieces already... moreover you end by projecting that nobody would contribute. Some of us are willing to plant the seed of something that they'll never feel the shade of. Some think that that gets in the way of a reasonable financial return based on input that sees rivers polluted, children starving etc...

Comrade indeed.


Its rather unfortunate that the society has come down to throwing insults rather than ideas for fixing real or imaginary problems. I do enjoy a healthy debate. But won't stoop to swearing or name calling. Not the way I was brought up.

You lose. Who's Next? Fuck, I hope that isn't a KB trademark of sommink.

[Graystone]

And here we end up back at fuck off you got nothin' territory. If you understood it, you would have blown it to pieces already... moreover you end by projecting that nobody would contribute. Some of us are willing to plant the seed of something that they'll never feel the shade of. Some think that that gets in the way of a reasonable financial return based on input that sees rivers polluted, children starving etc...

Comrade indeed.

You lose. Who's Next? Fuck, I hope that isn't a KB trademark of sommink.


I keep forgetting that I have to compensate for people's lack of will to ignore emotive language.

You are getting quite emotive in response to when the term communism is used? Perhaps you can tell me what the Resource in your Resource Based Economy is? are we to dig up the oil, cut down the trees etc, as long as no price tag is added?

[Woodman]

Excess human resource? You mean the extra resources that humans won't be able to consume? Or those who are doing next to nothing, coz robots, but are getting access to stuff that others don't believe they should have given their "input" to acquire it? You know. Those with entitlement issues that would rather see the place burn coz someone is getting something that the entitlemented believe they don't deserve. Children.

Robots? that reminds me.

What are we humans going to do to stop getting bored out of our tiny minds once robots do all the work?

Who wins and who loses once robots do all the work? Surely the companies that are pushing to use robots can see that if robot workers catch on then they will have no market for their products because humans won't be earning money because robots do all the work.

Actually Mashman I think your society will be a sort of robotic/hippy commune hybrid. Unless they ban robots then I see no other way. Money will be pointless.

[eldog]

Robots? that reminds me.

What are we humans going to do to stop getting bored out of our tiny minds once robots do all the work?

Who wins and who loses once robots do all the work? Surely the companies that are pushing to use robots can see that if robot workers catch on then they will have no market for their products because humans won't be earning money because robots do all the work.

Actually Mashman I think your society will be a sort of robotic/hippy commune hybrid. Unless they ban robots then I see no other way. Money will be pointless.

there will still be KB :headbang:

although one or 2 appear to be robotic (same shit different thread)

[Akzle]

It lives and breathes because you talk to it.
Don't.

unfortunately not. if it were that fucken simple i'd kill it tomorrow.

[Akzle]

. Money will be pointless.

WILL be. hah.
ironing.

technological redundancy's a comin'

[mashman]

You are getting quite emotive in response ... dribble. You sounds like husaberg

Well I wasn't. You're entirely free to choose to believe that you know better than myself how I wrote the post.

[mashman]

Robots? that reminds me.

What are we humans going to do to stop getting bored out of our tiny minds once robots do all the work?

Who wins and who loses once robots do all the work? Surely the companies that are pushing to use robots can see that if robot workers catch on then they will have no market for their products because humans won't be earning money because robots do all the work.

Actually Mashman I think your society will be a sort of robotic/hippy commune hybrid. Unless they ban robots then I see no other way. Money will be pointless.

Automation in general. Robots sounds cooler.

Whatever they decide to do. With any luck flying bikes will be an option. Although we have houses to build, people to feed, land and river systems to "rescue", aging infrastructure to replace and lashings and lashings of technology to help etc... Some stuff needs doing irrespective of Economy. It just so happens that Resource Based Economy can throw more people at any given issue and yield far better results. Like earthquake recovery and the knock on business and personal stress that goes with it and so on and so forth.

You reckon the companies think that far ahead or indeed that they aware that their employees are someone else's customer and that a loss of discretionary income, a la replaced by robots, has those very same companies not considering the externalities of such a movement in money? Pulease. You get what you can, pay what you choose and everyone else should mind their own business. No, I don't think some employers concern themselves with the lives and economic reprisals of how they "use" their employees. They're too busy securing market position and fighting to grow. No one wins of we ignore those little things.

lol... I can live with that. Yeah, some things probably shouldn't be automated, but hey.

[Graystone]

Well I wasn't. You're entirely free to choose to believe that you know better than myself how I wrote the post.

Sure seems like it though. I'd appreciate it if instead of changing my post when you quote it, you would answer the simple questions in it.

[Jeeper]

Commrade Mashman, interesting Freudian slip in your words "If you understood it, you would have blown it to pieces already..."

Looks to me you already know your theory is fatally flawed but you still insist on pushing it. I don't need to resort to swearing and insults to get a reaction from you. You are easily provoked. Human mind is largely incapable of logic and anger at the same time.

Long live free markets. Government has only one job, govern. Government has no place interfering in free exchange of goods and services at a price agreeable between buyers and sellers. Nor should the government own and run commercial ventures (known as SOEs in NZ).

[mashman]

Sure seems like it though. I'd appreciate it if instead of changing my post when you quote it, you would answer the simple question in it.

I choose not to. However I shall refrain from changing your posts should I ever quote them.

[mashman]

Commrade Mashman, interesting Freudian slip in your words "If you understood it, you would have blown it to pieces already..."

Looks to me you already know your theory is fatally flawed but you still insist on pushing it. I don't need to resort to swearing and insults to get a reaction from you. You are easily provoked. Human mind is largely incapable of logic and anger at the same time.

Long live free markets. Government has only one job, govern. Government has no place interfering in free exchange of goods and services at a price agreeable between buyers and sellers. Nor should the government own and run commercial ventures (known as SOEs in NZ).

Well you called the economics absurd without providing anything in regards to a rebuttal then, or since. You know your stuff or your're just rubbing yourself a little too much at the thought fo something I dare not even consider considering any further.

The theory is fine, because it is exactly what we have today, but done on purpose. Anyhoo... what's with the negative personal waves Moriarty?

Snigger.

[Graystone]

I choose not to. However I shall refrain from changing your posts should I ever quote them.

How unfortunate, I guess while your approach is the same as Trump's we can only hope your position never gets anywhere near what his has.

[Woodman]

WILL be. hah.
ironing.

technological redundancy's a comin'

Agree, but what are we going to do? Bored humans will raise merry hell I reckon. Mashman thinks we will be happy frollicking in the woods which is a nice ideal, but far from reality.

[Akzle]

Agree, but what are we going to do? Bored humans will raise merry hell I reckon. Mashman thinks we will be happy frollicking in the woods which is a nice ideal, but far from reality.

yeah y'all better stay the fuck up outa my woods. dees where I frolick


(it does present social challenges as well as economic jewry, however most aboriginal / subsistence societies "work" only 2 hours a day.)

[mashman]

Agree, but what are we going to do? Bored humans will raise merry hell I reckon. Mashman thinks we will be happy frollicking in the woods which is a nice ideal, but far from reality.

We'll learn not to be bored. You know, maybe have a beer in a mates garage. Find some project that you always wanted done. Learn different skills. Ride motorbikes etc... So long as you're fed, housed, provided with what you currently have, then why are you complaining? Are you saying that you need work to not be bored when there'll be plenty of fuckups to unfuckup? You'd just say fuck it and throw in the towel at the thought of working or sommink similar on something that actually serves a purpose? I really don't think you understand why I think people will be happy. Agreed though, the current reality isn't lots of happy people. That will change, because everyone will have the chance to be happy without money getting in their way. Like I said, learn to be bored... or do something else.

[Ocean1]

We'll learn not to be bored. You know, maybe have a beer in a mates garage. Find some project that you always wanted done. Learn different skills. Ride motorbikes etc... So long as you're fed, housed, provided with what you currently have, then why are you complaining? Are you saying that you need work to not be bored when there'll be plenty of fuckups to unfuckup? You'd just say fuck it and throw in the towel at the thought of working or sommink similar on something that actually serves a purpose? I really don't think you understand why I think people will be happy. Agreed though, the current reality isn't lots of happy people. That will change, because everyone will have the chance to be happy without money getting in their way. Like I said, learn to be bored... or do something else.

Everybody already has a chance to be happy. They just have to produce something someone else considers worthwhile.

All the whining is from idiots that a: cant be fucked, b: can't bear the fact that really really does make them actual failures and c: figure everyone else owes them shit anyway.

See also: Fuck off you lazy bastard.

[Akzle]

"If I really know what it is to live in the great Dao, then it is, above all, busy-ness that i fear"

[Akzle]

"the wise man hears the tao and follows it.
the average man hears the tao and searches for it
the fool hears the tao and laughs at it"


thanks for being so fucken stupid, puddle. laughter really is the remedy.

[Graystone]

Everybody already has a chance to be happy. They just have to produce something someone else considers worthwhile.

Disagree, they can be happy without producing anything at all as we have a welfare system to cater for their needs; they can be happy by losing the entitlement complex that makes them think they have any right to more than their needs.

[Woodman]

We'll learn not to be bored. You know, maybe have a beer in a mates garage. Find some project that you always wanted done. Learn different skills. Ride motorbikes etc... So long as you're fed, housed, provided with what you currently have, then why are you complaining? Are you saying that you need work to not be bored when there'll be plenty of fuckups to unfuckup? You'd just say fuck it and throw in the towel at the thought of working or sommink similar on something that actually serves a purpose? I really don't think you understand why I think people will be happy. Agreed though, the current reality isn't lots of happy people. That will change, because everyone will have the chance to be happy without money getting in their way. Like I said, learn to be bored... or do something else.

A purpose would be nice.

[Akzle]

think they have any right to more than their needs.

your right. that shit should be tightly controlled by the IMF jews by artificially limiting (by jewdollars) so only the bestest slaves get to play.

[Akzle]

A purpose would be nice.

it's sad that you define yourself by your employment.

[TheDemonLord]

it's sad that you define yourself by your employment.

Who said Employment?

My personal greatest satisfaction in life (apart from Arguing on KB of course) is wrestling with a problem and seeing a solution come to fruition.

I happen to be lucky that my job is 80% that

[Akzle]

Who said Employment?


me. right there in that post you quoted. <_<

[Woodman]

Who said Employment?

My personal greatest satisfaction in life (apart from Arguing on KB of course) is wrestling with a problem and seeing a solution come to fruition.

I happen to be lucky that my job is 80% that


Yes, this is what I mean. A bored human population will be so restless. Its not in our nature to do sweet fuck all each and every day of our lives.

[Ocean1]

Disagree, they can be happy without producing anything at all as we have a welfare system to cater for their needs; they can be happy by losing the entitlement complex that makes them think they have any right to more than their needs.

I stand corrected.

And in fact I don't give a flying fuck how happy the parasitic element are, and I don't really give a fuck how hard they think shit is, I'd just rather they stopped whining about it.

[Akzle]

Yes, this is what I mean. A bored human population will be so restless. Its not in our nature to do sweet fuck all each and every day of our lives.

according to whom?
there's some brown robed types chilling out up mountains that might disagree.
the pursuit of love and happiness might also get more brain-cpu-time, rather than being (artificially) limited to weekends and holidays

[R650R]

Haven't time to read whole thread, sorry if already been said....

We were talking about this is at work, is poverty real given the handouts available or just poor choices by badly educated/raised people???

JFC!!! on telly news other night, an obese woman and her obese daughter who in background is texting/using cellphone. Since when did any poverty stricken mofo be able to afford a cellphone?
Yes they were living in a caravan but by the huge pile of washed dishes and pots you could say they had food and shelter. They were poor but not in poverty.

Hell we haven't heard the famous underclass word used again... guess both parties realise that was mission impossible.....

As for child poverty, if real shouldnt that be an automatic intervention by CYFS (as mucha s I despise them)???? there by making the term child poverty redundant????

[Laava]

Its not in our nature to do sweet fuck all each and every day of our lives.

I'm sure there will be a few "enlightened people" on here that will disagree with you!:laugh:

[Akzle]

Haven't time to read whole thread, sorry if already been said....

We were talking about this is at work, is poverty real given the handouts available or just poor choices by badly educated/raised people???

JFC!!! on telly news other night, an obese woman and her obese daughter who in background is texting/using cellphone. Since when did any poverty stricken mofo be able to afford a cellphone?
Yes they were living in a caravan but by the huge pile of washed dishes and pots you could say they had food and shelter. They were poor but not in poverty.

Hell we haven't heard the famous underclass word used again... guess both parties realise that was mission impossible.....

As for child poverty, if real shouldnt that be an automatic intervention by CYFS (as mucha s I despise them)???? there by making the term child poverty redundant????

yeah. there's no such thing as fat AND poor people.
vote akzle.

as for state care of children... because that never has any negative outcomes for the clients(sarcasm)... (read, appalling suicide rates, criminality, mental health issues, drug use... blahblahblah)

[Akzle]

and living in a caravan = fokken winning <_<

[Woodman]

according to whom?
there's some brown robed types chilling out up mountains that might disagree.
the pursuit of love and happiness might also get more brain-cpu-time, rather than being (artificially) limited to weekends and holidays

Some = very very few brown robed types living a very disciplined life. The entire population ain't going to want to live like that.

[mashman]

Everybody already has a chance to be happy. They just have to produce something someone else considers worthwhile.

All the whining is from idiots that a: cant be fucked, b: can't bear the fact that really really does make them actual failures and c: figure everyone else owes them shit anyway.

See also: Fuck off you lazy bastard.

Stupid rule that's leads the planet to war, endures poverty coz financial economy and generally degrades whatever isn;t nailed down and barely paid for in order to consider themselves more worthwhile than someone else.

d: actually give a shit enough to want to do something about it and not leave it to market conditions that have proven themselves to fail over millennia.

e: entitled fuckwits, you know, your type.

See also: You were educated in the 1850's weren't you.


A purpose would be nice.

Then you'll get to pick one of many. Children have little purpose and get bored. Adults know better and find a purpose all by themselves.

[mashman]

I'm sure there will be a few "enlightened people" on here that will disagree with you!:laugh:

Enlightenment.

Stating that people will get bored coz one says so, on behalf of everyone.

Stating that people will sort it out themselves when given the environment to do it.

Not that it's a contest. I'm enlightened that way :rofl:

[Woodman]

Stupid rule that's leads the planet to war, endures poverty coz financial economy and generally degrades whatever isn;t nailed down and barely paid for in order to consider themselves more worthwhile than someone else.

d: actually give a shit enough to want to do something about it and not leave it to market conditions that have proven themselves to fail over millennia.

e: entitled fuckwits, you know, your type.

See also: You were educated in the 1850's weren't you.



Then you'll get to pick one of many. Children have little purpose and get bored. Adults know better and find a purpose all by themselves.


No, you are overlooking (for want of a better term) human nature. Seriously billions of people at a loose end will be chaos.

[Akzle]

life. The entire population ain't going to want to live like that.

and wont be forced to, what with that unlimited natural choice and shit.

[Graystone]

Enlightenment.

Stating that people will get bored coz one says so, on behalf of everyone.

Stating that people will sort it out themselves when given the environment to do it.

Not that it's a contest. I'm enlightened that way :rofl:

What's the difference between faith and enlightenment?

[Laava]

Enlightenment.

Stating that people will get bored coz one says so, on behalf of everyone.

Stating that people will sort it out themselves when given the environment to do it.

Not that it's a contest. I'm enlightened that way :rofl:

Yeah well, that's all well and good but just changing a values system isn't going to radically alter ones personal approach to life is it? I mean, lazy people aren't lazy just because they hate the financial system are they? More likely they are just fucken lazy fullstop.
This is not a dig at you by the way...

[TheDemonLord]

No, you are overlooking (for want of a better term) human nature. Seriously billions of people at a loose end will be chaos.

He doesn't believe in Human Nature - he's stated so many times.

Which interestingly enough is yet another hallmark of Communist/Marxist thinking - afterall, if there is no Human Nature, then the State can simply mold the perfect Human and therefore a perfect Society.

And it worked oh so well...

Personally, I think Mashman should own a set of Huskies, cause he is partly right - if left alone, people will create a purpose for themselves - however, whether or not it is a purpose that you want...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gcw6tV7fhjQ

[mashman]

No, you are overlooking (for want of a better term) human nature. Seriously billions of people at a loose end will be chaos.

There's no such thing as human nature. Only monkey see monkey do. Or maybe monkey think of something else to do when they realise that they don;t have a nature :bleh:. There is only ever learned behaviour. Oh, and the limitations of any economic system in place at the time.

[mashman]

Yeah well, that's all well and good but just changing a values system isn't going to radically alter ones personal approach to life is it? I mean, lazy people aren't lazy just because they hate the financial system are they? More likely they are just fucken lazy fullstop.
This is not a dig at you by the way...

Agreed. Yet the current system takes financial capital away from the economy to cover the lazy... who likely live on weed, beer, pizza and computer games. That capital could go into education, healthcare, infrastructure etc... If they're going to be lazy and supported irrespective of how you spin the economy, then all you need to do is give them what they need to keep their life going as it is and then maybe we can get on with more important things. We have a choice. Let the financial economy provide it for them by accident/crime, or purposefully give them that shit to continue what they were going to be doing anyway and negate the need for any potential negative outcome i.e. crime to pay for what they need.

No offense taken. I'm enlightened :killingme

[Woodman]

There's no such thing as human nature. Only monkey see monkey do. Or maybe monkey think of something else to do when they realise that they don;t have a nature :bleh:. There is only ever learned behaviour. Oh, and the limitations of any economic system in place at the time.

Disagree on the human nature. your theory of society really should not ignore this.

Monkey see monkey do? Thats why it will be chaos.

Learned behaviour? Again, thats why there will be chaos unless you can somehow teach them to tow the line.

[TheDemonLord]

There's no such thing as human nature. Only monkey see monkey do. Or maybe monkey think of something else to do when they realise that they don;t have a nature :bleh:. There is only ever learned behaviour. Oh, and the limitations of any economic system in place at the time.


He doesn't believe in Human Nature - he's stated so many times.

Which interestingly enough is yet another hallmark of Communist/Marxist thinking - afterall, if there is no Human Nature, then the State can simply mold the perfect Human and therefore a perfect Society.


https://youtu.be/HXBjVau1w7Y?t=128

Take heed my friends - how many times has Mashie told us that only He (and not us mere mortals) truly understand how an RBE works - so long as he is in charge. It's the same old Lie.

To quote someone else I'm fond of:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5jvUXij7nU

"You take a mortal man
And put him in control
Watch him become a god
Watch people's heads a'roll"

[Laava]

Agreed. Yet the current system takes financial capital away from the economy to cover the lazy... who likely live on weed, beer, pizza and computer games. That capital could go into education, healthcare, infrastructure etc... If they're going to be lazy and supported irrespective of how you spin the economy, then all you need to do is give them what they need to keep their life going as it is and then maybe we can get on with more important things. We have a choice. Let the financial economy provide it for them by accident/crime, or purposefully give them that shit to continue what they were going to be doing anyway and negate the need for any potential negative outcome i.e. crime to pay for what they need.

No offense taken. I'm enlightened :killingme

Ok then here is a serious question, in a theoretical RBE, how are the terminally unemployable and sickness benes etc going to be supported by the population? At the moment, apart from medication and counselling, we just donate them cash so they can buy drugs, smokes and alcohol as they see fit. How is an RBE going to support them in an equivalent way?

[TheDemonLord]

Something else I think that is relevant - suppose for a moment that Mashie's Utopia did work, exactly as he said it would:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Calhoun#Mouse_experiments

One could even Argue that in the west - with our relatively carefree lives - we are seeing some of the symptoms of his Experiment:

"expulsion of young before weaning was complete, wounding of young, increase in homosexual behavior, inability of dominant males to maintain the defense of their territory and females, aggressive behavior of females, passivity of non-dominant males with increased attacks on each other which were not defended against."

[Ocean1]

Stupid rule that's leads the planet to war, endures poverty coz financial economy and generally degrades whatever isn;t nailed down and barely paid for in order to consider themselves more worthwhile than someone else.

d: actually give a shit enough to want to do something about it and not leave it to market conditions that have proven themselves to fail over millennia.

e: entitled fuckwits, you know, your type.

See also: You were educated in the 1850's weren't you.

Who said it was a rule? It's simply a fact: the results of production belong to those that produce them.

And those what give a shit have the same option as anyone else: produce your own shit or do without.

Which is, as observed above the only real entitlement: you make it: you own it.

So again: fuck off you lazy bastard.

[mashman]

Disagree on the human nature. your theory of society really should not ignore this.

Monkey see monkey do? Thats why it will be chaos.

Learned behaviour? Again, thats why there will be chaos unless you can somehow teach them to tow the line.

It doesn't. And it doesn't. Fresco goes into great depths when talking about human behaviour v's human nature. And to add further fuel to the nature v's nurture "battle", The Ukranian Dog Girl. Found acting like a dog, you know, walking on all fours, eating without using hands etc... "Malaya was eventually transferred to the foster home for mentally-disabled children in Barabol (rural Ovidiopol Raion of Odessa Oblast). She underwent years of specialized therapy and education to address her behavioural, social and educational issues. Upon adulthood, Oxana has been taught to subdue her dog-like behaviour, she learned to speak fluently and intelligently,[4] she works at the farm milking cows,[5][4] but remains somewhat intellectually impaired.". I disagree with your disagreement lol.

They already tow the line. The vast majority of people go to work after all. Some for exceptionally shit wages. I fail to see where the chaos will come from when people are given some form of freedom, but in the realisation that they'll have to dig in at some point in order to maintain that lifestyle. I don't see chaos in that at all. I see lots of free time and some work thrown in to keep things working that way.

[mashman]

Ok then here is a serious question, in a theoretical RBE, how are the terminally unemployable and sickness benes etc going to be supported by the population? At the moment, apart from medication and counselling, we just donate them cash so they can buy drugs, smokes and alcohol as they see fit. How is an RBE going to support them in an equivalent way?

An RBE will be able to support that because the current system kind of supports that already. In theory you could probably have 50% of the population doing nothing important at any given point in time, apart from being the village that raises the child that is. That all depends on what needs doing and how prepared people are to build an environment that lowers stress to the point that drugs/cigs/booze are no longer produced. Cigs not produced I hear you say? If so, then yeah. If there's no profit in producing drugs/ciggies/a wee snifter, then why would you want them produced given their health outcomes? If you want tobacco, then hit the net, grow your own plants and good luck to ya. Someone may actually enjoy making a good tobacco that you can acquire freely locally. Who knows, the tobacco fields may well be used for something a little more useful, like dairy. If you want booze, again, do your own, see if someone's makin' a batch and will produce for locals, maybe current producers will carry on etc... As such, RBE can support almost anything because it doesn't rely on money getting the job done, just the people... and given that people are already undertaking those roles in todays society, the service already exists with people willing to do the job.

[mashman]

Who said it was a rule? It's simply a fact: the results of production belong to those that produce them.

And those what give a shit have the same option as anyone else: produce your own shit or do without.

Which is, as observed above the only real entitlement: you make it: you own it.

So again: fuck off you lazy bastard.

That's not what I meant, but I agree with what you said. I merely want things that are being produced and that are currently costing us the sustainability battle for the environment not produced. Pretty straight forwards really. The more you use resources without care for the environment that they come from and the more you technologically advance, the more you screw the financial economy. Production for money is simply fuckin stupid and you morons have made it a rule because it is enshrined in law.

Again: Go back to the 1850's and tell them that the planet is finite... and for bonus points, whilst you're there, find a distant female relative of yours and test the ultimate paradox by shooting her to see if you disappear along with your way.

[Ocean1]

That's not what I meant, but I agree with what you said. I merely want things that are being produced and that are currently costing us the sustainability battle for the environment not produced.

There's all sorts of fuckwits with strage ideas about sustainability, but if you can prove a link between a product and a problem then regulating the market is probably a good move.


T The more you use resources without care for the environment that they come from and the more you technologically advance, the more you screw the financial economy.

Drivel.


Again: Go back to the 1850's and tell them that the planet is finite... and for bonus points, whilst you're there, find a distant female relative of yours and test the ultimate paradox by shooting her to see if you disappear along with your way.

I'm pickin' your fantasising from personal experience, there, someone go back and cause some inheritable mental damage to your gran?

[TheDemonLord]

It doesn't. And it doesn't. Fresco goes into great depths when talking about human behaviour v's human nature. And to add further fuel to the nature v's nurture "battle", The Ukranian Dog Girl. Found acting like a dog, you know, walking on all fours, eating without using hands etc... "Malaya was eventually transferred to the foster home for mentally-disabled children in Barabol (rural Ovidiopol Raion of Odessa Oblast). She underwent years of specialized therapy and education to address her behavioural, social and educational issues. Upon adulthood, Oxana has been taught to subdue her dog-like behaviour, she learned to speak fluently and intelligently,[4] she works at the farm milking cows,[5][4] but remains somewhat intellectually impaired.". I disagree with your disagreement lol.

What's hilarious - is that the Glorious RBE Messiah says so (with no Psychological, Biological, Anthropological or other related -ology training) therefore it must be true.

Despite people who are actually qualified in those fields pointing to the blank-slate theory (which is what Mashie is espousing) is a hangover from various dogmatic viewpoints.

What's even more Hilarious is that supposedly 1 case - vs the entire of Human Evolution proves his case...

Except it doesn't - because Humans and Dogs (as highly social, intelligent, predatory Mammals) have a lot of the same basic traits - It's kinda like why we get on so well - Cause we have those same basic traits. We speak a common evolutionary language of sorts.

What's really hilarious is that in the supposed rebuttal - did you spot the sleight of hand? substituting natures for behaviours - Discrediting one, and then substituting that discredited statement back into the argument.

The old bait-and-switch.

[Luckylegs]

https://youtu.be/HXBjVau1w7Y?t=128

Take heed my friends - how many times has Mashie told us that only He (and not us mere mortals) truly understand how an RBE works - so long as he is in charge. It's the same old Lie.

To quote someone else I'm fond of:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5jvUXij7nU

"You take a mortal man
And put him in control
Watch him become a god
Watch people's heads a'roll"

:headbang::headbang::headbang::headbang::headbang:

Long may this thread remain off topic

The number of threads these days that look like text books is far too disturbing

[mashman]

There's all sorts of fuckwits with strage ideas about sustainability, but if you can prove a link between a product and a problem then regulating the market is probably a good move.

Drivel.

I'm pickin' your fantasising from personal experience, there, someone go back and cause some inheritable mental damage to your gran?

Typical response from the ignorant. I guess the articles being written by the subject matter experts and various other recognised minds of the era who are highlighting these issues aren't to your liking. Perhaps you don't like the author or the words they use to describe what is and has been happening over the last 50 (minimum) years in terms of environment and technology etc...

I'll give my regards to my gran as she's tries to dumb me down even further so that I accept the shit that you and your cohort consider a better way :killingme. So stay as the ignorant hypocritical fuck that you are. That is your choice after all.

Love n hugs.

Gordon.

[Ocean1]

Typical response from the ignorant. I guess the articles being written by the subject matter experts and various other recognised minds of the era who are highlighting these issues aren't to your liking. Perhaps you don't like the author or the words they use to describe what is and has been happening over the last 50 (minimum) years in terms of environment and technology etc...

I'll give my regards to my gran as she's tries to dumb me down even further so that I accept the shit that you and your cohort consider a better way :killingme. So stay as the ignorant hypocritical fuck that you are. That is your choice after all.

Love n hugs.

Gordon.

Dude, your history of wishful interpretation and outright comprehension failures re "expert" opinion isn't something an intelligent observer can avoid lolling at, you continue to mash absolutely everything you find into a shape that fits your retarded insistence that evel bogymen are using money to persecute everyone that cbf working for a living.

Get a haircut.

[mashman]

Dude, your history of wishful interpretation and outright comprehension failures re "expert" opinion isn't something an intelligent observer can avoid lolling at, you continue to mash absolutely everything you find into a shape that fits your retarded insistence that evel bogymen are using money to persecute everyone that cbf working for a living.

Get a haircut.

Wrong. Oh so very wrong. Fortunately I Am not living or considering living your perception of what you think should be, coz it sounds like a right manky state to live in. that's all in your own tiny mind, Son. Grow the fuck up and take a share of that responsibility you claim that you don;t have to the rest of society. Maybe you'll find out what it takes to actually become a man.

[Graystone]

They already tow the line. The vast majority of people go to work after all. Some for exceptionally shit wages. I fail to see where the chaos will come from when people are given some form of freedom, but in the realisation that they'll have to dig in at some point in order to maintain that lifestyle. I don't see chaos in that at all. I see lots of free time and some work thrown in to keep things working that way.

Collective or individual? Will it be the chinese individual we all blame when shit goes wrong, that ends up having to do all the digging?

You still haven't got round to answering the difference between faith and enlightenment btw; an inability to do so obviously indicates the former condition.

[Graystone]

To quote someone else I'm fond of:

"You take a mortal man
And put him in control
Watch him become a god
Watch people's heads a'roll"

Make love, not war!

"It can make you better
It can change you slowly
Give you everything you want, ask for nothing in return
In the blink of an eye, the hint of a smile
In the way you say goodbye, in every time you find me"


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHvGpxOMN6U

[mashman]

Collective or individual? Will it be the chinese individual we all blame when shit goes wrong, that ends up having to do all the digging?

You still haven't got round to answering the difference between faith and enlightenment btw; an inability to do so obviously indicates the former condition.

I'll say it once so that we're clear. I don't respond to your questions on purpose.

[Graystone]

I'll say it once so that we're clear. I don't respond to your questions on purpose.

I'd have preferred if you (and the original trump too) focused more on your cause than on yourself. But you do you, I guess.

[mashman]

I'd have preferred if you (and the original trump too) focused more on your cause than on yourself. But you do you, I guess.

:killingme... You would have preferred if I focused on something other than me :killingme... fuckin priceless. But hey, some projections are near impossible to hide when you're an arsehole. Kudos for coming out of the closet in such spectacularly hypocritical fashion.

[Graystone]

:killingme... You would have preferred if I focused on something other than me :killingme... fuckin priceless. But hey, some projections are near impossible to hide when you're an arsehole. Kudos for coming out of the closet in such spectacularly hypocritical fashion.

It is simple, I've asked a number of times what an RBE is, and other questions to specific to your version of communism; yet you only engage people by calling them and their ideas wrong and ignorant, while promoting your own as enlightened.

I'm not sure why you have responded to my posts in such a combative fashion, interactions like this are why I did not bother getting login or posting on this site for so long.

[mashman]

It is simple, I've asked a number of times what an RBE is, and other questions to specific to your version of communism; yet you only engage people by calling them and their ideas wrong and ignorant, while promoting your own as enlightened.

I'm not sure why you have responded to my posts in such a combative fashion, interactions like this are why I did not bother getting login or posting on this site for so long.

:killingme@promoting my own as enlightened.

I haven't responded to any of your posts in a combative fashion in the slightest. Your projection is merely 1 reason why I choose not to engage with you. There's also your hypocrisy. Your assumptions. And don't forget the petted lip. Awwwwwwww pet lamb, is no one answering your questions. I have no need to hold your hand. Welcome to KB. Get used to it.

[Graystone]

:killingme@promoting my own as enlightened.

I haven't responded to any of your posts in a combative fashion in the slightest. Your projection is merely 1 reason why I choose not to engage with you. There's also your hypocrisy. Your assumptions. And don't forget the petted lip. Awwwwwwww pet lamb, is no one answering your questions. I have no need to hold your hand. Welcome to KB. Get used to it.

Best of luck gaining followers for your cause with those attitudes! FYI, if you do not want someone to 'project' a combative tone to your posts, not calling them an arsehole and hypocrite is a pretty good start.

As an aside (since you still insist on making this about you), when I posted about you earlier in the thread I hoped to be proven wrong about knowing your type. It is clear you are one of the dreamers who has decided to choose between reality and his dream, rather than making the two meet. For this you have nothing but my sympathies and pity.

[Woodman]

:killingme@promoting my own as enlightened.

I haven't responded to any of your posts in a combative fashion in the slightest. Your projection is merely 1 reason why I choose not to engage with you. There's also your hypocrisy. Your assumptions. And don't forget the petted lip. Awwwwwwww pet lamb, is no one answering your questions. I have no need to hold your hand. Welcome to KB. Get used to it.

Speaking of assumptions. What about yours about human nature? I know this RBE isn't actually a thing, but jeez you need to be a bit more open minded about any objections.

[mashman]

Best of luck gaining followers for your cause with those attitudes! FYI, if you do not want someone to 'project' a combative tone to your posts, not calling them an arsehole and hypocrite is a pretty good start.

As an aside (since you still insist on making this about you), when I posted about you earlier in the thread I hoped to be proven wrong about knowing your type. It is clear you are one of the dreamers who has decided to choose between reality and his dream, rather than making the two meet. For this you have nothing but my sympathies and pity.

:killingme@trying to gain followers. You're funny. You read posts how you read them. I've told you there was no combative intent my post, yet you choose to believe otherwise. See the problem there? If you do, then yeah, we might actually be able to have a discussion should you genuinely wish more information. If you don't, then why the fuck would I bother with you?

Thanks. I appreciate your ill-founded sentiment.


Speaking of assumptions. What about yours about human nature? I know this RBE isn't actually a thing, but jeez you need to be a bit more open minded about any objections.

Nature v's Nurture... The Dunedin Experiment had some interesting things to say about that. As do many psychologists, anthropologists etc... i.e. there is no such thing as human nature, because everything is learned and behaviour is triggered by the environment under which a human being is nurtured. It's not my opinion, it's documented fact. We have no nature. We live, we die, every country in the world has different cultures/religions/rules that make us different to someone in another country. That's not nature, that's monkey see monkey do.

As such, I'm more than open minded about such things, but when one comes across someone such as yourself that is so deeply entrenched (dramatic phrase, don't spill your coffee) in an opposing view, things get icky. Icky to the point where I'll be told that I'm meaning this or saying that when I mean something different, or indeed that I'm being closed minded or combative and living in a fantasy land that has no bearing on reality whatsoever despite the mounting evidence to the contrary. It ain't my fault that you guys choose not to explore the things I state and would rather simply state that I'm being this or that and ignoring this and that because you guys think so, as that is what your preferred position at that given point in time is. Calling me closed does you no favours. However, I actually enjoy many of your posts as you seem to be able to ask a question and accept the answer given as an actual answer. That you deny that answer as invalid is entirely up to you. I cannot and will never try to convince you otherwise. I shall put forwards logical, reasonable and common sense points and then guess what? You get to make your own mind up. If a post sounds angry, then go, make a cup or tea, and come back and read it again once you've calmed down... coz you someone may be trolling you using language specifically posted to highlight just how stupid readers who don't actually want to learn anything coz the person might seem angry etc... The last person who apologised to me for their emotive rant was met with the response "It's ok, I listened to what you said not how you said it.". Some people need to do some serious growing up if they think that they're open minded and fold when confronted with what looks like conflict or a combative post... but no, they'd rather spin in the spin because that's what they came here to do. All entirely your choice and absolutely nothing to do with me other than the environment my words create. Le sigh.

[TheDemonLord]

:killingme@trying to gain followers. You're funny. You read posts how you read them. I've told you there was no combative intent my post, yet you choose to believe otherwise. See the problem there? If you do, then yeah, we might actually be able to have a discussion should you genuinely wish more information. If you don't, then why the fuck would I bother with you?

Thanks. I appreciate your ill-founded sentiment.

Once you call his Beloved RBE for the Communism it really is (fun Fact - Fresco, whom Mashie already brought up earlier in the Thread and the creator of the RBE concept attended Communist League - although he was ejected for critiquing Marx...) the insults, refusals to engage and general grandstanding happens.

I actually think Mashie deep down knows that it's in the same philosophical tree as Marxism, Communism etc. I also think that deep down he knows it's doomed to the same failure - and that's why when you touch that exposed nerve he goes from the rational Mashman that used to be up for Debate to the pious asshat that we currently have.


Nature v's Nurture... The Dunedin Experiment had some interesting things to say about that. As do many psychologists, anthropologists etc... i.e. there is no such thing as human nature, because everything is learned and behaviour is triggered by the environment under which a human being is nurtured. It's not my opinion, it's documented fact. We have no nature. We live, we die, every country in the world has different cultures/religions/rules that make us different to someone in another country. That's not nature, that's monkey see monkey do.

Ask him which Psychologists and Anthropologist...

And I bet he'll cite multiple ones whose major body of work was all before circa 1970 or fringe researchers post 1970. The current consensus is that there is such a thing as Human Nature (refer to the work of Steven Pinker for example)

And for bonus points - he says that ever country has a different culture, religion and rules - which in one sense is correct - however what he fails to note (whether through ignorance or deliberate omission) is that there are some universal common concepts that can be found across all of them (that would be Human Nature):

- A Prohibition against killing someone belonging to your tribe/family/city/group
- A Prohibition against lies
- A validation of the right to self-defense.
- A Protection of breeding age Females (although this one sometimes goes a bit wonky)

[Ocean1]

And for bonus points - he says that ever country has a different culture, religion and rules - which in one sense is correct - however what he fails to note (whether through ignorance or deliberate omission) is that there are some universal common concepts that can be found across all of them (that would be Human Nature):

- A Prohibition against killing someone belonging to your tribe/family/city/group
- A Prohibition against lies
- A validation of the right to self-defense.
- A Protection of breeding age Females (although this one sometimes goes a bit wonky)

Not to mention the propensity to occasionally pretend that all pigs should be equally rewarded. A fantasy that sometimes persists for as long as a couple of decades before reality asserts itself, usually killing a significant portion of the population in the process.

Is it any wonder he's desperate to distance his communist ideology from it's historical utter failure?

[Akzle]

):

- A Prohibition against killing someone belonging to your tribe/family/city/group
- A Prohibition against lies
- A validation of the right to self-defense.
- A Protection of breeding age Females (although this one sometimes goes a bit wonky)

never been to india or asia huh?

[TheDemonLord]

never been to india or asia huh?

I think you misunderstood what I meant...

[Akzle]

I think you misunderstood what I meant...

i think you misunderstand the meanings of the words you used, then.

[TheDemonLord]

i think you misunderstand the meanings of the words you used, then.

No, I really don't.

I suspect you are taking umbrage with the last one - However - some of the rules that on the surface would seem to directly contradict that - generally have conformity to other things that are pretty much universal (namely to do sexual fidelity which itself seems to stem from concerns around parentage and inheritance).

I did say that it sometimes goes a bit wonky

[Swoop]

What's the difference between faith and enlightenment?
Simple.
"Faith" = going to a building on Sunday morning to hand over cash that you can't afford, to a white collar criminal who does not pay any tax, for a lie that you will be allowed to live forever with all those nice relatives who lived boring lives and whom you avoided throughout your own life.
"Enlightenment" = Knowing that doing good and not being a cunt to others, is a "good thing".

[Graystone]

Once you call his Beloved RBE for the Communism it really is (fun Fact - Fresco, whom Mashie already brought up earlier in the Thread and the creator of the RBE concept attended Communist League - although he was ejected for critiquing Marx...) the insults, refusals to engage and general grandstanding happens.

I actually think Mashie deep down knows that it's in the same philosophical tree as Marxism, Communism etc. I also think that deep down he knows it's doomed to the same failure - and that's why when you touch that exposed nerve he goes from the rational Mashman that used to be up for Debate to the pious asshat that we currently have.

So why did this Fresco call it an RBE? what's his resource?

I'm not so sure, there's clearly a retreat from reality, and passing on the blame to others (ie, calling someone an arsehole then blaming them for seeing it as a combative tone) so he can sit in a nice little box of his own reality where his RBE dream can be a sure thing. It's self-delusional behavior so I don't think we can rationalise exactly what he knows deep down.

[Woodman]

:killingme@trying to gain followers. You're funny. You read posts how you read them. I've told you there was no combative intent my post, yet you choose to believe otherwise. See the problem there? If you do, then yeah, we might actually be able to have a discussion should you genuinely wish more information. If you don't, then why the fuck would I bother with you?

Thanks. I appreciate your ill-founded sentiment.



Nature v's Nurture... The Dunedin Experiment had some interesting things to say about that. As do many psychologists, anthropologists etc... i.e. there is no such thing as human nature, because everything is learned and behaviour is triggered by the environment under which a human being is nurtured. It's not my opinion, it's documented fact. We have no nature. We live, we die, every country in the world has different cultures/religions/rules that make us different to someone in another country. That's not nature, that's monkey see monkey do.

As such, I'm more than open minded about such things, but when one comes across someone such as yourself that is so deeply entrenched (dramatic phrase, don't spill your coffee) in an opposing view, things get icky. Icky to the point where I'll be told that I'm meaning this or saying that when I mean something different, or indeed that I'm being closed minded or combative and living in a fantasy land that has no bearing on reality whatsoever despite the mounting evidence to the contrary. It ain't my fault that you guys choose not to explore the things I state and would rather simply state that I'm being this or that and ignoring this and that because you guys think so, as that is what your preferred position at that given point in time is. Calling me closed does you no favours. However, I actually enjoy many of your posts as you seem to be able to ask a question and accept the answer given as an actual answer. That you deny that answer as invalid is entirely up to you. I cannot and will never try to convince you otherwise. I shall put forwards logical, reasonable and common sense points and then guess what? You get to make your own mind up. If a post sounds angry, then go, make a cup or tea, and come back and read it again once you've calmed down... coz you someone may be trolling you using language specifically posted to highlight just how stupid readers who don't actually want to learn anything coz the person might seem angry etc... The last person who apologised to me for their emotive rant was met with the response "It's ok, I listened to what you said not how you said it.". Some people need to do some serious growing up if they think that they're open minded and fold when confronted with what looks like conflict or a combative post... but no, they'd rather spin in the spin because that's what they came here to do. All entirely your choice and absolutely nothing to do with me other than the environment my words create. Le sigh.

Cool, but your rbe is just an unproven theory.

[Graystone]

Simple.
"Faith" = going to a building on Sunday morning to hand over cash that you can't afford, to a white collar criminal who does not pay any tax, for a lie that you will be allowed to live forever with all those nice relatives who lived boring lives and whom you avoided throughout your own life.
"Enlightenment" = Knowing that doing good and not being a cunt to others, is a "good thing".

Nah I don't agree with that at all. Edge cases, and only in a religious sense for both of those examples.

[Akzle]

No, I really don't.

I suspect you are taking umbrage with the last one - However - some of the rules that on the surface would seem to directly contradict that - generally have conformity to other things that are pretty much universal (namely to do sexual fidelity which itself seems to stem from concerns around parentage and inheritance).

I did say that it sometimes goes a bit wonky

there's no umbrage motherfucker.

you presented that list as definitive of "human nature"
i'm telling ya, that people i'd identify as azn or injun, don't fit your definition. so by your 2ft stick, they're either "not human" or...

[mashman]

Cool, but your rbe is just an unproven theory.

Correct. It is... although plenty of cultures have lived that "way" (i.e. sustainably). Damned shame they used colonisation as a tool.

[TheDemonLord]

there's no umbrage motherfucker.

you presented that list as definitive of "human nature"
i'm telling ya, that people i'd identify as azn or injun, don't fit your definition. so by your 2ft stick, they're either "not human" or...

I'm glad you say I've got a 2ft stick :msn-wink:

However - none of those Cultures made their Women folk do dangerous work (apart from Child Birth) - All of them considered Women as incapable of looking after themselves - so developed very strict rules as to how they should act - these rules, although made under the intent of protection, ended up as oppressive.

Concepts such as Dowries (the original idea being it was a portion of the Bride's family wealth, transferred to her, so that in the event of her Husbands death, she could look after herself) had a rooting in an idea of protection of Women - but as I'm sure you are aware, have become rigid tools that do the opposite.

Hence why I said they went a bit Wonky.

[Akzle]

I'm glad you say I've got a 2ft stick :msn-wink:

However - none of those Cultures made their Women folk do dangerous work (apart from Child Birth) - All of them considered Women as incapable of looking after themselves - so developed very strict rules as to how they should act - these rules, although made under the intent of protection, ended up as oppressive.

Concepts such as Dowries (the original idea being it was a portion of the Bride's family wealth, transferred to her, so that in the event of her Husbands death, she could look after herself) had a rooting in an idea of protection of Women - but as I'm sure you are aware, have become rigid tools that do the opposite.

Hence why I said they went a bit Wonky.

that's a foot short of a yard. if you're happy with that measure then power to you. i guess.
just don't lick my windows cos i've had them cleaned.

whoopdeedoo basil. intent's pretty meaningless when the outcomes known but doesn't change anything. one could almost say there were ulterior motives in play. are they part of human nature?

and (off topic) dowry was pretty much fathers with cunt daughters paying some poor sod to take the whore. and also usualy reciprocal with the groom swapping farm animals with the bride's parents, presumably because he was sick of shagging them and wanting to upgrade.

and that was but one of 4 traits.

[TheDemonLord]

that's a foot short of a yard. if you're happy with that measure then power to you. i guess.
just don't lick my windows cos i've had them cleaned.

I was making a Penis joke...


whoopdeedoo basil. intent's pretty meaningless when the outcomes known but doesn't change anything. one could almost say there were ulterior motives in play. are they part of human nature?

Well - Intent is pretty key - if you look at a lot of tribal/ancient cultures - they have some pretty bizarre rules, often with steep/brutal punishments and are enforced with tyrannical enthusiasm - It's easy to look at it and critique it on the outcome, without any appreciation for the intent.

Perhaps my favourite example is the Biblical prohibition against eating shellfish, and it being a crime punishable by Death - on the Surface it seems very arbitrary and an unnecessarily steep punishment...

Until you remember that the people who created the rule lived in the desert some 3000 odd years ago - and that Shellfish can have some very nasty bacteria, especially if they are carted across the Desert and aren't fresh.

Then you remember that the people of the time lived in very close proximity, often in extended familial groups, with limited access to Fresh Water.

Almost everyone here will have some memory of a gathering of people where someone had a tummy bug and a couple days later, almost everyone is squirting at both ends. For us, it's not that bad - sit on the Toilet, with a bucket, drink lots of fluid, eat only bread etc. But if you remove that ready access to clean water and you remove modern sanitation and you add in desert heat - it suddenly becomes much more serious - potentially killing the youngest members of the tribe (infants) and the eldest members of the tribe (the Elders) and leaving the tribe undefended.

At that point, you realise that a supposedly silly rule - when given the correct context and intend - isn't as silly as it first sounds.

Now in regards to Ulterior Motives and are they Part of Human Nature? I'm not 100% sure, certainly across cultures there has been prohibitions of kinds in place to ensure that Parentage of children is beyond dispute - there are also similar behaviours observable in the Animal kingdom.

I suspect that there is a strong human nature component (Mainly from the Male side) but with time it has moved to a much more cultural behaviour.


and (off topic) dowry was pretty much fathers with cunt daughters paying some poor sod to take the whore. and also usualy reciprocal with the groom swapping farm animals with the bride's parents, presumably because he was sick of shagging them and wanting to upgrade.

and that was but one of 4 traits.

As I said - it goes a bit Wonky...

[TheDemonLord]

Correct. It is... although plenty of cultures have lived that "way" (i.e. sustainably). Damned shame they used colonisation as a tool.

Yes....

That's because the complexity of living in mudhuts and grass skirts means that everyone is capable of doing every job in the tribe - once society gets a bit more complex, it doesn't work.