Occupy Dunedin?

[mashman]

isn't my definition - it's what the Occupy mob are demanding we provide....

as someone else said on another site:

Since you can't force the "average" to be "superior", or the "inferior" to be "average", the only way to rectify inequality is to make everyone "inferior".

There are only two ways to eliminate "class warfare" - eliminate classes or eliminate the warfare. Eliminating classes is far easier politically.

This is "fairness" - it's inefficient, unproductive, pessimistic and self-defeating, but it's "fair", and it sometimes gets votes.

Personally, I'll take efficiency, productivity, optimism and success, and worry later about "fairness".

Is that what they're demanding? Seems our ideas of what they're demanding are different... heh, go figure.

You can't for the "superior" to be superior either. Seems like a silly way to look at it, but each to their own.

I'll add a 3rd way to eliminate class warfare. Take money out of the equation. After all, that's what splits the classes?

That's not "fairness" in my book, but I guess we all have our own ideas about what's fair. Although I'd argue that "fairness" in those terms being inefficient, unproductive, pessimistic and self-defeating is exactly what we have at the moment.

I'd argue that 8 hours a day is 8 hours a day and if you work those 8 hours to the best of your ability you should receive exactly the same amount of reparation as anyone else working 8 hours a day to the best of their ability. Those who believe different are up themselves and have chips on their shoulders that could break they toes should they fall off. All I hear is, but but but they've earned it... where the morons haven't. Piss poor in my book and inefficient, unproductive, pessimistic and self-defeating given what we are. Seems like such a waste that everyone with what it takes can't get to a position where they can prove that they've got what it takes, because those positions are already filled.

Did communism use money?

[RDJ]

I'd argue that 8 hours a day is 8 hours a day and if you work those 8 hours to the best of your ability you should receive exactly the same amount of reparation as anyone else working 8 hours a day to the best of their ability. <-> Did communism use money?

Senior Communist Party Members are certainly Richer Than All Their Tribe (hat tip to Mr Monsarrat) - the evidence is easy to find.

If everyone gets paid the same for 8 hours of the best of their ability, then their best will regress to a low norm - the evidence is all around to see.

We'll agree to disagree!

[mashman]

Senior Communist Party Members are certainly Richer Than All Their Tribe (hat tip to Mr Monsarrat) - the evidence is easy to find.

If everyone gets paid the same for 8 hours of the best of their ability, then their best will regress to a low norm - the evidence is all around to see.

We'll agree to disagree!

I'm not surprised communism failed then.

Why will their best regress? And where is the evidence?

We're probably going to have to.

[Oscar]

Is that what they're demanding? Seems our ideas of what they're demanding are different... heh, go figure.

You can't for the "superior" to be superior either. Seems like a silly way to look at it, but each to their own.

I'll add a 3rd way to eliminate class warfare. Take money out of the equation. After all, that's what splits the classes?

That's not "fairness" in my book, but I guess we all have our own ideas about what's fair. Although I'd argue that "fairness" in those terms being inefficient, unproductive, pessimistic and self-defeating is exactly what we have at the moment.

I'd argue that 8 hours a day is 8 hours a day and if you work those 8 hours to the best of your ability you should receive exactly the same amount of reparation as anyone else working 8 hours a day to the best of their ability. Those who believe different are up themselves and have chips on their shoulders that could break they toes should they fall off. All I hear is, but but but they've earned it... where the morons haven't. Piss poor in my book and inefficient, unproductive, pessimistic and self-defeating given what we are. Seems like such a waste that everyone with what it takes can't get to a position where they can prove that they've got what it takes, because those positions are already filled.

Did communism use money?

So tell me Comrade, if everyone is rewarded the same, where is the motivation to become better trained?
To work in dangerous or unpleasant jobs?

[Winston001]

You say as long as "most people get a fair suck of the sav", so who are those that you don't think should?

LOL guess I asked for that.

Who shouldn't? Clearly "young Polynesian, young Maori men in South Auckland, on the dole sitting in front of TV, smoking marijuana, watching pornography and planning more drug offending, more burglaries..." in the opinion of one politician.


Ok, I simply used the word "most" because no society is completely fair no matter how hard we try. There will always be a few who do not fit in or reject help when offered. I don't have any sociological data at hand so will take a punt that at any one time 5% will be in the outliers. Mental illness, personality disorders, criminal intentions, anti-social pathologies.

[mashman]

So tell me Comrade, if everyone is rewarded the same, where is the motivation to become better trained?
To work in dangerous or unpleasant jobs?

Plenty of jobs don't require training, yet plenty of people do them. I self train because those I've worked for refuse to see the value in training. Good job one of us did.

People work in dangerous and unpleasant jobs already with next to no reward in comparison to "lesser" jobs. Perhaps you malign human beings too much.

[Oscar]

Plenty of jobs don't require training, yet plenty of people do them. I self train because those I've worked for refuse to see the value in training. Good job one of us did.

People work in dangerous and unpleasant jobs already with next to no reward in comparison to "lesser" jobs. Perhaps you malign human beings too much.

I don't recall maligning anyone but you lately.
And I note that yet again you haven't actually answered the question.
Why aren't people who have trained or work in unpleasant jobs entitled to be paid more?

[RDJ]

I'm not surprised communism failed then.

Why will their best regress? And where is the evidence? *

We're probably going to have to.

* disclosure: I lived and worked in Russia for 4 years. Common Russian wry saying: "they pretended to pay us, so we pretended to work".

For a more philosophical exposition of the corollary that follows when everybody gets the same reward for an arbitrarily defined the same amount of work, may I refer you to the online document entitled "The Tragedy Of The Commons"...

[mashman]

I don't recall maligning anyone but you lately.
And I note that yet again you haven't actually answered the question.
Why aren't people who have trained or work in unpleasant jobs entitled to be paid more?

You believe that people need financial motivation and are incapable of training or bothering to "improve" their skill set unless money is involved.

That wasn't the question you asked... and I did answer it.

[mashman]

* disclosure: I lived and worked in Russia for 4 years. Common Russian wry saying: "they pretended to pay us, so we pretended to work".

For a more philosophical exposition of the corollary that follows when everybody gets the same reward for an arbitrarily defined the same amount of work, may I refer you to the online document entitled "The Tragedy Of The Commons"...

in regards to the Russian saying though... the same attitude exists across the globe and is generally just a bitch and moan about the amount of $$$ they get paid... tis nothing new.

I gotta go out... will read about The Tragedy when I get home later

[Scuba_Steve]

it should be noted too that with money not being the motivating factor, people will tend to do work they enjoy rather than doing work that brings the $$$ & because of this, tend to obviously not only have a better/happier life but also tend to do a better job, as it's something they enjoy/are passionate about not just "something to pay the bills" or to keep a "lifestyle".

[Winston001]

Here is a site which describes in graphs the core issues underlying the Occupy movement.

http://visual.ly/vizbox/inequality-i...aphcontainer-3

The CEO of Capital One Financial earned above US$244,431,600.00 .

I've said previously that the complete disconnect between senior managers wages and average workers wages is irrational. Frankly I'm surprised it has taken so long for protest to arise....and what's worse, many average people think the Occupy people are pinko commies when in fact they are trying to help the average wage earner.

[mashman]

In case you haven't heard, President Obama wants the wealthiest to pay more in taxes.

[mashman]

* disclosure: I lived and worked in Russia for 4 years. Common Russian wry saying: "they pretended to pay us, so we pretended to work".

For a more philosophical exposition of the corollary that follows when everybody gets the same reward for an arbitrarily defined the same amount of work, may I refer you to the online document entitled "The Tragedy Of The Commons"...

Would taking the $$$ out of the situation go anyway to addressing the grievances of the workforce? as Scube_Steve mentioned above. I think it would too.

What about for the good of the country and not the individual? which is really where I'm coming from. Having said that, does private industry look after the land/The Commons? Do the issues being raised across the globe not prescribe to the Tragedy of The Commons philosophy? for 1, Climate Change, Kyoto and the big boys refusing to cut emissions as it would adversely affect their economies... irrespective of the knock on effects to the rest of the world. We need to do things smarter, as an example recently discussed with a friend, we have had 5 iphones in the last 4 years... other than a complete waste of resources what has that given to society? A phone that does 1 thing better than the last one. Perhaps if we had been doing things with resource wastage in mind (and without budget constraint), we'd have gone from the iphone 1 to the equivalent of the iphone 10 in the same 4 years. That goes for just about every product and as not everyone can make an iphone, or build a lawnmower or a laptop or a TV or a car or or or etc... wouldn't we be making better use of our collective resources than the private sector? and as we can't all make these items, the chance that The Tragedy of The Commons would happen in our very near future would be drastically reduced by more prudent use of the resources (buying us more time)? Perhaps we would have designed the phone to be upgradable too etc... all things that aren't explored because someone is out to make a $, irrespective of 1 more cow tipping the balance.

there are better ways of doing things. Most of the shit, sorry, I mean stuff, heh, we have these days is unnecessary, but because it makes money (there is no other reason), it's a valid use of resource. We've moved on since The Tragedy of The Commons was penned and whilst I agree that there is the potential for danger with people having equal access to everything, the resources in the hands of a few, seems to be doing a worse job of managing them imho. Anyhoo, perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned reparation, not reward, as there should be neither.

[BoristheBiter]

Would taking the $$$ out of the situation go anyway to addressing the grievances of the workforce? as Scube_Steve mentioned above. I think it would too.

What about for the good of the country and not the individual? which is really where I'm coming from. Having said that, does private industry look after the land/The Commons? Do the issues being raised across the globe not prescribe to the Tragedy of The Commons philosophy? for 1, Climate Change, Kyoto and the big boys refusing to cut emissions as it would adversely affect their economies... irrespective of the knock on effects to the rest of the world. We need to do things smarter, as an example recently discussed with a friend, we have had 5 iphones in the last 4 years... other than a complete waste of resources what has that given to society? A phone that does 1 thing better than the last one. Perhaps if we had been doing things with resource wastage in mind (and without budget constraint), we'd have gone from the iphone 1 to the equivalent of the iphone 10 in the same 4 years. That goes for just about every product and as not everyone can make an iphone, or build a lawnmower or a laptop or a TV or a car or or or etc... wouldn't we be making better use of our collective resources than the private sector? and as we can't all make these items, the chance that The Tragedy of The Commons would happen in our very near future would be drastically reduced by more prudent use of the resources (buying us more time)? Perhaps we would have designed the phone to be upgradable too etc... all things that aren't explored because someone is out to make a $, irrespective of 1 more cow tipping the balance.

there are better ways of doing things. Most of the shit, sorry, I mean stuff, heh, we have these days is unnecessary, but because it makes money (there is no other reason), it's a valid use of resource. We've moved on since The Tragedy of The Commons was penned and whilst I agree that there is the potential for danger with people having equal access to everything, the resources in the hands of a few, seems to be doing a worse job of managing them imho. Anyhoo, perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned reparation, not reward, as there should be neither.

Like I said you know nothing of human nature.