My first poll for the NZ public

[Woodman]

Why would a woman become a hooker on Mashmans planet but for the sex ? Certainly not money. Actually, why would someone put themselves through years of study and long hours to become a heart surgeon when everyone gets the same whether they choose to go to work or not. Extra credit? no, that would be a form of currency.

Personally, I would just spend my days doing sweet fa and riding round on a dirt bike. Obviously not a road bike because the roads would never get maintained.

Idealistic twaddle that ignores human nature.

[blue rider]

Even with their "big gun" incentive schemes, "all" of the communist states have diminished, collapsed, disintegrated or kept their name while they practice Capitalism!

Pity as much energy and effort hadn't gone into correcting the "few" vital faults of the world monitory system as has gone into the worlds failed communist experiments!

Correct the flaws of world finance and capitalism would blossom the way it should have and most of the worlds social problems would benefit from it accordingly!

Nothing succeeds like success and the most charitable heart is a successful heart!

World monitory problems are "NOT" an accident!

and yet here is the largest communist economy buying up, financing and supporting the capitalistic rest of the world, and many thrid world countries thrown in the mix

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/02/op...pire.html?_r=0


the question really is not Mashmans Utopia, which is just as a Utopia as is unfettered Capitalism. The question is what society do we want to live in, and how do we finance it, and how much do we want to pay for it.

1. some want to pay nothing....their money their decision....etc. Ok, so Toll Roads, all puplic toilets to be pay for use, schools are pay for use, hospitals are pay for use...etc. you get my drift.

2. some want everything to be free to use....free roads, free health care, free schools for all, free puplic toilets...

3. others want the free stuff for use, after they financed it. I.e Taxes collected to pay for schools, roads, hosipitals and puplic toilets. Maybe a co payment to pay for upkeep and future investment.


in scenario 1. No Taxes....well what is one going to do when one is to sick/old to work? When one can't find work....(because they are lazy, unproductive, drug abusing scoundrels, or just shit out of luck).....well society could just round them up and cull them....after all they are unproductive so why waste resources one them?

in scenario 2. all is free....well this does not work yet, only in Mashmans scenario, cause we all just work for puplic use and consumptions to keep us in a state of comfort without excess. (sadly still utopia...mankind will need to evolve a bit more)

scenario 3. this is what we are having now, and the only question that really needs to be raised and answered is....are all users contributing and accordlingly? i.e. should a transport company pay a user fee for roads?, should parents have co payments for schools, students co pay for their education.


and one last question.....would ocean1 work for ocean1 and would ocean1 consider ocean1 a productive employer that is earning money or is just a worthless looser who needs to be unemployed pronto. also would the worker ocean1 consider the boss ocean1 a major prick the size of a pinhead.

[Ocean1]

and yet here is the largest communist economy buying up, financing and supporting the capitalistic rest of the world, and many thrid world countries thrown in the mix.

Have you dealt with China? Been there?

The piece of China the rest of the world deals with is hard core capitalist. The bit that's communist is the peasantry, and you really don't want to be making an example of how prosperous communism is based on them, take my word for it.

and one last question.....would ocean1 work for ocean1 and would ocean1 consider ocean1 a productive employer that is earning money or is just a worthless looser who needs to be unemployed pronto. also would the worker ocean1 consider the boss ocean1 a major prick the size of a pinhead.

He does. He is. And he's as big a prick as current company requires.

[mashman]

So, what happened to this social responsibility and empathy you were talking about? Now it's all about what the me-me-me needs?

Oh, and you'd better bloody value the Engie before you need that replacement, advanced robotics takes time to develop.

There was no me in there, just plenty of you... those who need to be valued to enable themselves to feel self-esteem and self-worth because the only way they can get those fuzzy feelings is to measure themselves against someone else... preferably a large large group of someone else, coz they don't want to feel mediocre.

And the Engie better value the farmer and the electricity guy and the bin man and the doctor and the water treatment folk and the road workers etc... as they fulfill the needs allowing him to be a geek.

[bogan]

There was no me in there, just plenty of you... those who need to be valued to enable themselves to feel self-esteem and self-worth because the only way they can get those fuzzy feelings is to measure themselves against someone else... preferably a large large group of someone else, coz they don't want to feel mediocre.

And the Engie better value the farmer and the electricity guy and the bin man and the doctor and the water treatment folk and the road workers etc... as they fulfill the needs allowing him to be a geek.

Dodging the question I see. When talking about the collective, a 'you' is really just a 'me' in third person (btw, your you is my me), neither are reflective of the whole. It's not about self esteem and self worth, its about ensuring the jobs that need to be done are done. Does your system need Engies more than hookers? more than artists? more than surgeons? How about ratios, does your system need at least one Engies to every 1000 farmers? to every 20 lingerie salesmen? A mechanic to at least every 50 bus drivers?

[mashman]

Why would a woman become a hooker on Mashmans planet but for the sex ? Certainly not money. Actually, why would someone put themselves through years of study and long hours to become a heart surgeon when everyone gets the same whether they choose to go to work or not. Extra credit? no, that would be a form of currency.

Personally, I would just spend my days doing sweet fa and riding round on a dirt bike. Obviously not a road bike because the roads would never get maintained.

Idealistic twaddle that ignores human nature.

Absolutely, they wouldn't have to unless they wanted to. Imagine not having to be forced into having sex with numerous strangers because someone doesn't have financial power over you anymore. I know, I'm sorry, we should continue with such slavery. My god , you mean heart surgeons only become heart surgeons because a heart surgeon gets paid lots of money. And here was me thinking that they might actually enjoy that job.

yeah, coz that's how it would be

... human nature is bullshit. You make the decision tat you could live in that sort of society or you wouldn't. Human nature is unquantifiable as it states that we must all have the same range of emotions and feelings and will all perform an act the same given the exact same set of circumstances where that is patently not true.

All I hear is, wahh wahh someone might get more than me and I think I deserve more than them because that's how the market values human beings. Wahh wahh, I know that all of the people out there are unable to deny their human nature, because a book and some experts told me so. Well, you're wrong. I know plenty of people who have changed their minds in regards to living in a financially free society. Human nature denies that that can happen. So yeah, the human nature argument is bullshit that's regurgitated because that's all people know. Fuckin hilarious that they claim to have thoughts of their own given they prescribe to human nature as the overriding factor in decision making etc... It's laughable.

[mashman]

Dodging the question I see. When talking about the collective, a 'you' is really just a 'me' in third person (btw, your you is my me), neither are reflective of the whole. It's not about self esteem and self worth, its about ensuring the jobs that need to be done are done. Does your system need Engies more than hookers? more than artists? more than surgeons? How about ratios, does your system need at least one Engies to every 1000 farmers? to every 20 lingerie salesmen? A mechanic to at least every 50 bus drivers?

oh, you were serious. If a you is a me, then a you referring to anyone is every me on the planet. Still well within the bounds of being a "collective". Funny, coz all I hear these days is that a job gives you self-esteem and self-worth. They're gonna be real upset to hear you talking like that. If you don't need either, then they're as valuable as each other and you can only hope that you get to see the latter more than the former. As for the artists etc... are they full-time or part-time and are they African or European? Actually none of that matters, but if the ratio to mechanics v's breakdowns/maintenance is such that mechanics end up working 2 hours per day, then they end up working 2 hours per day, there is no golden rule or ratio.

[mashman]

and yet here is the largest communist economy buying up, financing and supporting the capitalistic rest of the world, and many thrid world countries thrown in the mix

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/02/op...pire.html?_r=0


the question really is not Mashmans Utopia, which is just as a Utopia as is unfettered Capitalism. The question is what society do we want to live in, and how do we finance it, and how much do we want to pay for it.

1. some want to pay nothing....their money their decision....etc. Ok, so Toll Roads, all puplic toilets to be pay for use, schools are pay for use, hospitals are pay for use...etc. you get my drift.

2. some want everything to be free to use....free roads, free health care, free schools for all, free puplic toilets...

3. others want the free stuff for use, after they financed it. I.e Taxes collected to pay for schools, roads, hosipitals and puplic toilets. Maybe a co payment to pay for upkeep and future investment.


in scenario 1. No Taxes....well what is one going to do when one is to sick/old to work? When one can't find work....(because they are lazy, unproductive, drug abusing scoundrels, or just shit out of luck).....well society could just round them up and cull them....after all they are unproductive so why waste resources one them?

in scenario 2. all is free....well this does not work yet, only in Mashmans scenario, cause we all just work for puplic use and consumptions to keep us in a state of comfort without excess. (sadly still utopia...mankind will need to evolve a bit more)

scenario 3. this is what we are having now, and the only question that really needs to be raised and answered is....are all users contributing and accordlingly? i.e. should a transport company pay a user fee for roads?, should parents have co payments for schools, students co pay for their education.


and one last question.....would ocean1 work for ocean1 and would ocean1 consider ocean1 a productive employer that is earning money or is just a worthless looser who needs to be unemployed pronto. also would the worker ocean1 consider the boss ocean1 a major prick the size of a pinhead.

My "utopia" does not require perfection... and will allow pretty much any form of governance structure to be overlaid in order to respond to the wishes of the majority.

[bogan]

oh, you were serious. If a you is a me, then a you referring to anyone is every me on the planet. Still well within the bounds of being a "collective". Funny, coz all I hear these days is that a job gives you self-esteem and self-worth. They're gonna be real upset to hear you talking like that. If you don't need either, then they're as valuable as each other and you can only hope that you get to see the latter more than the former. As for the artists etc... are they full-time or part-time and are they African or European? Actually none of that matters, but if the ratio to mechanics v's breakdowns/maintenance is such that mechanics end up working 2 hours per day, then they end up working 2 hours per day, there is no golden rule or ratio.

It's that you or me refers to a singular part of the collective, not the whole collective. As evidenced by your next bit of question dodging, I don't need either at the moment, but that doesn't mean your society doesn't need either now does it.

Hang on, you're telling me that if I choose a popular profession, I have to work even less? So the poor bastard who decides to take one for the team and do the crutching has to work more than the guy who decides selling lingerie is right for him, and the 3076 other guys he works with.

[Woodman]

... human nature is bullshit.

Interesting..................

[mashman]

It's that you or me refers to a singular part of the collective, not the whole collective. As evidenced by your next bit of question dodging, I don't need either at the moment, but that doesn't mean your society doesn't need either now does it.

Hang on, you're telling me that if I choose a popular profession, I have to work even less? So the poor bastard who decides to take one for the team and do the crutching has to work more than the guy who decides selling lingerie is right for him, and the 3076 other guys he works with.

It's not my fault the answer you're getting isn't the answer you translate my answer to be. Did I say that "my" society didn't need either? Coz I don't remember having said that at all. There was no dodging, I answered your question.

There is a possibility that your chosen profession could mean that you end up working less, yes. I mentioned this several posts ago when describing what my potential day could be. In theory you could work for 1 hour per day and it may well be enough to allow society to function. I thought we had decided that the crutching was a task for a robot. No one will be selling lingerie. there may well be someone in the shop to help you should you require assistance and their day may well end up being longer than that of the robot. But your scenario is a possibility. The more daggas there are, the quicker the job gets done, the more people helping choose knickers et al, the quicker the job gets done.

[mashman]

Interesting..................

So how do you define human nature?

[Woodman]

So how do you define human nature?

Its pretty complex, and I am no rocket scientist, but that doesn't matter because if it doesn't suit your world then as you say its "bullshit".

Will you try to persuade your potential followers by telling them how they feel is bullshit?

Good luck with that .

Where are the pink fairies when ya need them?

[bogan]

It's not my fault the answer you're getting isn't the answer you translate my answer to be. Did I say that "my" society didn't need either? Coz I don't remember having said that at all. There was no dodging, I answered your question.

There is a possibility that your chosen profession could mean that you end up working less, yes. I mentioned this several posts ago when describing what my potential day could be. In theory you could work for 1 hour per day and it may well be enough to allow society to function. I thought we had decided that the crutching was a task for a robot. No one will be selling lingerie. there may well be someone in the shop to help you should you require assistance and their day may well end up being longer than that of the robot. But your scenario is a possibility. The more daggas there are, the quicker the job gets done, the more people helping choose knickers et al, the quicker the job gets done.

Short memory? And no, you still haven't answered my question as to which jobs are more valuable to the society's ability to function.

We don't need either... the potential downside for some is that hookers may well stop hooking under "my" system.

I think the problem you have, is that somehow you're equating less work hours in a money free system to greater productivity than that found in a money based system, by a very large margin. Which is just illogical. The more of one job you have, and thus less work hours for that job, is also less people left for other jobs your society would need. I don't think I can put it any more simply than that.

[mashman]

Its pretty complex, and I am no rocket scientist, but that doesn't matter because if it doesn't suit your world then as you say its "bullshit".

Will you try to persuade your potential followers by telling them how they feel is bullshit?

Good luck with that .

Where are the pink fairies when ya need them?

So you need to be a rocket scientist to be able to explain human nature, and you're not one, but you are qualified to enough to state that human nature exists.

Interesting.........

Surely you mean my leaders?

Short memory? And no, you still haven't answered my question as to which jobs are more valuable to the society's ability to function.

I think the problem you have, is that somehow you're equating less work hours in a money free system to greater productivity than that found in a money based system, by a very large margin. Which is just illogical. The more of one job you have, and thus less work hours for that job, is also less people left for other jobs your society would need. I don't think I can put it any more simply than that.

Not needing them won't mean that they don't exist... but they are not essential. Every job is as important as any other job.

Which does more work. 1 man doing 8 hours of 10 men doing 1 hour? You're forgetting all of the jobs that are going to become redundant.