Stupid World

[bogan]

Oh well, plenty more rebirths before you reach enlightenment then ..

That doesn't sound like you have any self doubts? tsk tsk, perhaps the same goes for you

Also, have you stopped being a racist yet?

[Banditbandit]

Do you ever discuss things of substance?



Path B; remove money, retain ownership? decrease production in some areas? resource allocation based on 'need' (as decided by whom?)
Change level: society wide, and some extra society changes
Cost of change level: high for some individuals, low for others, massive for society as whole.
Examples: None

Now, can you maintain a logical discussion to concisely fill in the question marks left in Path B?

Maybe I can .. but then I need to ask you some questions about Path B

Retain ownership? - maybe not .. what you seem to describe is very close to an anarchist model ... and no, ownership would not be retain. It is not necessary. Ownership is linked to wants and needs and all of those would be fulfilled.

Decrease production in some areas? Why? Do you see this as a necessity? If so, why? Production is only reliant on machines, not human beings in your scenario. I don't see why production would be reduced.

Resource allocation based on need?? But al our needs will be fulfilled. There's a bit of a gap here I don't see. Can you explain why resource allocation is important if all our wants and needs are fulfilled.

Yes, there will be massive change, at a societal level and an individual level, but I can't build you the argument unless you can fill in the gaps and answer the questions I have posed for Path B.

[Banditbandit]

That doesn't sound like you have any self doubts? tsk tsk, perhaps the same goes for you

Also, have you stopped being a racist yet?

I don't know about self doubts - but as a Buddhist I am pretty certain that this life I have will spark at least one more rebirth .. after that, who can say?

PS. I don't believe I am a racist ... but I choose not to engage with you any more on inter-cultural issues.

[bogan]

Maybe I can .. but then I need to ask you some questions about Path B

Retain ownership? - maybe not .. what you seem to describe is very close to an anarchist model ... and no, ownership would not be retain. It is not necessary. Ownership is linked to wants and needs and all of those would be fulfilled.

Decrease production in some areas? Why? Do you see this as a necessity? If so, why? Production is only reliant on machines, not human beings in your scenario. I don't see why production would be reduced.

Resource allocation based on need?? But al our needs will be fulfilled. There's a bit of a gap here I don't see. Can you explain why resource allocation is important if all our wants and needs are fulfilled.

Yes, there will be massive change, at a societal level and an individual level, but I can't build you the argument unless you can fill in the gaps and answer the questions I have posed for Path B.

Plan B is not my plan, we shall have to wait for mashy to fill in those things if he can. The ? I left were because I think on different days we get different answers for that same plan...

I will take it as a compliment that no further questions were need about Path A though

[bogan]

I don't know about self doubts - but as a Buddhist I am pretty certain that this life I have will spark at least one more rebirth .. after that, who can say?

PS. I don't believe I am a racist ... but I choose not to engage with you any more on inter-cultural issues.

Indeed.

They rarely do, a wise choice considering your views on 'pakeha' culture Though perhaps shying away from your own shortcomings is not an enlightened choice...

[mashman]

Do you ever discuss things of substance?

Lets review:
Path to utopia A; human productivity and production automation reaches levels in which we have no unfulfilled needs and few unfulfilled wants, ownership of property (including intellectual) becomes far less of an issue at this tipping point, and the subsequent sharing assures utopian like existence with regard to resource management.
Change Level: individual.
Cost of change level: high for some individuals, low for others.
Examples: TVP, charitable individuals, etc

Path B; remove money, retain ownership? decrease production in some areas? resource allocation based on 'need' (as decided by whom?)
Change level: society wide, and some extra society changes
Cost of change level: high for some individuals, low for others, massive for society as whole.
Examples: None

Now, can you maintain a logical discussion to concisely fill in the question marks left in Path B?

Not with you, no... because your cup is already full.

[Banditbandit]

Though perhaps shying away from your own shortcomings is not an enlightened choice...

Maybe I can follow you lead and throw that one right back atchya ...

[bogan]

Maybe I can follow you lead and throw that one right back atchya ...

Perhaps it would stick better if you attached a shortcoming to it before throwing it back? I know I have them, but unless there is one you think I'm shying away from, the main point is missed...

[Brian d marge]

Let the open source revolution begin

Ar15 anyone?



Stephen

[oldrider]

I don't believe I am a racist ...

Think again seriously about that.

Everybody is a racist by degree ... it is mainly our decision not to engage in the negatives of it for the sake of societal harmony and to remain inoffensive!

But dig even just a little bit in the right circumstances and whallah ... there it is! ... simply add a little venom and it will be just as bad as the baddest there is!

If I choose to allow myself to lose control ... RACIST? ... absolutely! ... On one very "provoked" occasion I even astounded myself!

When in a conflict we reach for any god damned weapon we can find and lash out with it and it feels good ... until we we regain self control and then!

TOO fricking LATE! Move on and try to pick up the pieces as you go!

[mashman]

The shit that kiwi's will do for money eh

[Banditbandit]

Think again seriously about that.

Everybody is a racist by degree ... it is mainly our decision not to engage in the negatives of it for the sake of societal harmony and to remain inoffensive!

But dig even just a little bit in the right circumstances and whallah ... there it is! ... simply add a little venom and it will be just as bad as the baddest there is!

If I choose to allow myself to lose control ... RACIST? ... absolutely! ... On one very "provoked" occasion I even astounded myself!

When in a conflict we reach for any god damned weapon we can find and lash out with it and it feels good ... until we we regain self control and then!

TOO fricking LATE! Move on and try to pick up the pieces as you go!

Yeah - I agree. I was thinking about responding to Bogan along those lines, but I have chosen not to engage with him on inter-cultural issues.

One thing I really hate, which drives me batshit, is Chinese voices .. but like you I choose to control it and not ACT racist ...

[oldrider]

The shit that kiwi's will do for money eh

What the hell is this Justice guy all about FFS?

[Quote] He already has one strike under the three strikes law and Justice Graham Lang didn't enter a conviction due to the sentencing ramifications of Turner having a second strike against his name.[Quote]

[Akzle]

It was impossible to completely cut myself off ...

Yeah - it's a nice dream but in contemporary world, it's impossible. And I don't believe you're even trying ... have YOU thought about cutting off your power supply?? How about cutting off your IPC???

uhh. i am solar powered... off grid.
i don't know what IPC stands for?

Everybody is a racist by degree ... it is mainly our decision not to engage in the negatives of it for the sake of societal harmony and to remain inoffensive!

i don't believe that for a minute.
i'm only racist against the human race.

[Brian d marge]

I would pur me dick anywhere near a white woman . . .that would make me racist and sexist