Conner Habib, on Progressives Disconnect From Spirituality |401|

#21
Why does the title feel the need to take a slap at progressives? That was hardly the main focus of the discussion. Try being inclusive rather than exclusive. I know the conservative way is to band together around hating the same things, but give me a break. Liberals may be easily mislead and their compassion co-opted, but so is everybody these days - at least what liberal hearts want ultimately is fairness for all (including for conservatives) and a system that doesn't appeal and promote the worst in our natures. What monstrous villains! Buuuurrrrrrn them!

Ask yourself, is it having money that you like or is it that you have money when everyone else does not? That you are somewhat elite? What if you had the same spending/decision-making power you have now, but so does everyone else. Would that bother you? People who drive a lambo don't just want the car, they want the exclusivity of that car - it would have far less value if everyone else got one too. So truly a rich person's motive is to keep others down so they retain their exclusivity. And this is spiritual?

Ugh, I'm a long-time Skeptiko promoter often pushing these interviews and sharing links, but I've been on and off lately and I feel like I need to retract some of my endorsement. You want to add more data into the conversation and promote larger thoughts? Great, I'm in. You want to use your platform to tear things down? Eh, I'm not into that. Especially when you've shown yourself how you got Trump wrong; don't you think it's entirely possible that in the monopoly game of life we can't all be rich dad? They only let so many rich dads into the game and you're certainly speaking from a place of privilege having gotten there. Yes you worked at it, but your life circumstances allowed you to get there, your level of diction, your upbringing, your connections, your religion, your drive, your family, your inheritance, your color, your neighborhood -- so much is at play there that you can't possibly think we all had the same starting hand and you just happened to play your cards real good? Even if that was the case, there's not enough to go around when we allow inequality to run rampant the way it is. We can't all be rich dads and not all of us want that anyway. Most of us just want to get rid of unnecessary suffering, instability, and fear and our system keeps serving all of those in big heaping tablespoons. You really think God likes the American system? You think all these homeless people, all these shootings, the Flint water crisis, the environmental destruction to the relentless selfish maw of capitalism -- you think this might be a clue from the universe that something is wrong?

https://planetsave.com/2013/12/23/a...eling-wealthy-changes-our-behavior-ted-video/

http://planetsave.com/2013/10/12/ho...unctioning-and-promotes-risky-decison-making/

Neo-liberals are no more liberals than Nazi Socialist Party members are socialists. Please don't lump us together. The word liberal has been co-opted just like Trump co-opted the conservative party. Just like calling a bill a clean air act when it increases pollution. Or yes, co-opting feminism to promote Israel. You think liberals are the only ones who have been tricked through narrative? It's happening everywhere to everyone as we weaponize politics and opinion.

I've met progressive atheists that are FAR more spiritual than the most godly conservative - how can I say that? Because the conservative is selfishly motivated, "god loves ME, MY relationship with god, *I* am special... f*** everyone else, you just need to manifest harder" whereas even the atheist progressive is supporting God's creation, which is mankind. If god was subjective which do you think he'd find more godly? The guy basically worshipping himself using god as his lens or the guy who has no spiritual angle at all, but is dedicated to helping other people and making their lives better?

Our system is risky, wasteful, distributes wealth unfairly, promotes lying, deception, and exploitation, isn't comforting and supportive like a decent family is, it allows for entirely too much instability (like a roulette table we're always knocking all the chips off the table and starting over), and it has gotten us to the same inequality point where most major civilizations in the past have fallen apart at this stage. Capitalism is reckless, it is short-sighted, it subverts democracy (because corporations are hierarchical/fascist, not democratic), it promotes fear and desperation, and it is blind as hell because you never know what's coming down the pike (which also makes it easier to manipulate.)

You think all this child trafficking pedo stuff could happen in a society where women made their own money and weren't forced to sell themselves to survive or raise a child? I swear sometimes capitalism was invented so ugly rich a-holes can still get laid.

There are other ways to be. More spiritual ways to be. If you turn a blind ear to the song of progressives/socialists you're doing exactly what progressives have done when they throw the spiritual baby out with the religion bath water and don't hear what's actually useful there. God doesn't play dice with the universe and I very seriously doubt he/she would be encouraging us to play dice with our lives and economic futures. It's ridiculous. You really shouldn't be telling other people to grow up.
Kindagamey,
Lot of prejudice and generalizing there. I am a fiscal conservative because I think that it works best in real world application and I've seen what fiscal liberalism leads to. The incentives are all screwed up. It has nothing to do with lording power over others. I work hard, as I have my entire life, and I make good money. When people I knew were slacking, partying, what have you in our young adult days, I was applying myself, sacrificing for the future, etc. I don't see a rigged game. I see opportunity everywhere and I see a system that generally takes care of its most vulnerable. I see even relatively poor people living much better than most of the population of the world and way better than even the wealthiest did a few hundred years ago, I see progress everywhere.

Definitions are problem here. As are causes. Does a moral society make people dependent and reward slacking? Does it punish those who work hard? Or does it give people the skills and opportunity to make something of themselves?

I know Christian conservatives that are as you say and I know many that donate most generously to worthy charities like children's hospitals, orphanages, scholarship programs, etc and who are really fine people. I know liberals that are also nice enough and I know some who are degenerate slackers and whiners.
 
#23
Talking of social engineering, Steven Novella and his SGU team were invited to discuss skeptical issues with the CIA towards the back end of last year.
The hypocrazy of this pretend skeptic group never ceases to amaze me. These fake skeptics will not learn a single thing from the CIA - and the CIA will learn a great deal about self-deception, ego and useful idiots, and how they can be manipulated inside a mission cult.

They foist this statement by author Neil Gaiman upon that same page:

'I hope that in this year to come, you make mistakes. Because if you are making mistakes, then you are making new things, trying new things, learning, living, pushing yourself, changing yourself, changing your world. You’re doing things you’ve never done before, and more importantly, you’re doing something.'

...and ironically then you look at what these fake skeptics actually do -

1. Eviscerate anyone who makes the mistake of researching a subject they don't like​
2. Highlight and scream about analytical or method mistakes, far and wide - to act as final condemnation​
3. Accuse people of the modern from of witchcraft, the mistake of 'woo' credulousness​
4. Appoint themselves curators and Nazi patrols of science​
The CIA analysts probably walked out of the meeting grinning at each other with a slight roll of the eyes. Real professional bullshit winnowers, can easily detect fake ones.
 
#24
nice. but, don't we have to acknowledge the practical reality politics? for example, I love James Corbett On Anarchy And Voluntarism but it's totally unrealistic. somebody's got to coord the picking up the trash bins me and my neighbors roll out to the curb every week without having the Huns ride over the hill.
Thanks for responding Alex. This is a point I hear often (one on my conservative friends has mentioned the trash collection bit to me a few times over the years) but I would counter that trash collection is only necessary in a society that has decided to organize itself in a post-industrial fashion.

In the Southwest there are American Indians that have always heaped their trash near their living structures. It was never a problem until they started using plastics and non-biodegradable materials. Just saying. :)

The issue for me is the inherent intellectual dishonesty in just about all modern political discourse. Any group that holds a position of power can justify any measure to keep that power, and spin it to the public any way they wish, thanks to a now toothless and bankrupt fourth estate.

We live and participate in a collective fiction about what politics is. This is the part I have a real issue with. It may be necessary, but to pretend it's virtuous is the part I can't stomach.

What can I say, I have convict blood going back generations and perhaps a cell memory level of mistrust for power structures. My great grandfather many times removed was an Irishman charged with sedition against the king and sent to the colonies with hard labour.
 
#25
ok, but I still don't like recycling... are you ok with that? is that fair? never mind,
If you're serious about not wanting to recycle we could make it easier on the consumer and sort at the receiving facility (much of which is done anyway because ppl are stupid and put the wrong things in the bins... sometimes it all goes in the trash anyway), but that's more expensive as far as labor and time because our system prefers to socialize costs and privatize profits.

I have a friend in the politburo he can get them to come by and pick up my trash whenever I want.
hehe! commie cracks. good one! luckily, every mischaracterization is an opportunity to educate. enjoy!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkd_DDQ63gI&t=0s&list=PLL-Kpfpulvgx2yFZiqaO17gWKUR0eN-nc&index=5
 
#28
The issue for me is the inherent intellectual dishonesty in just about all modern political discourse. Any group that holds a position of power can justify any measure to keep that power, and spin it to the public any way they wish, thanks to a now toothless and bankrupt fourth estate.
I hear you. And as you know often rail similarly, but as our chief criminal-in-waiting Hillary Clinton was caught saying off the Record recently " it's good that the public doesn't know how the political sausage is made" ( paraphrasing only slightly)
 
#29
haha... yeah, I can almost visualize the scene :)
Having worked with Langley CIA and Greenbelt NSA for many years, I can visualize it keenly. There is a quick learning curve in a functional analyst role, enough to make a person wary of 'skeptics'. But this only brings a journeyman specialty analyst so far. Once you begin a multi-discipline, counter-intelligence training track, and hold more than four or five compartments of access, suddenly the lights begin to turn on, and you recognize the Steven Novella form of skepticism for what it is.

Their tactics and methods are congruent with what is employed inside third world nations, by our worst enemies. Perhaps it is unfair, but one begins to attach the methods - with the disposition. One begins to detect not bias, rather agency.
 
#30
Kindagamey, Lot of prejudice and generalizing there. I am a fiscal conservative because I think that it works best in real world application and I've seen what fiscal liberalism leads to.
If you're a cattle rancher you don't starve your own cattle, that's ridiculously wasteful. Investment in people leads to better people and an engagement in society, as well as the reward when those people are able to give back in the form of new ideas and being productive. If we don't support people then they become a drain on society and they give back in the form of crime, disease, disorder, and the dumbing down of society. You think you're being fiscally conservative by not supporting some of humanity, but guess what, you'll pay either way. Surprisingly, paying for people to be healthy and supported is actually cheaper in the long run. Pinch of prevention, pound of cure, and all that.

The incentives are all screwed up. It has nothing to do with lording power over others. I work hard, as I have my entire life, and I make good money. When people I knew were slacking, partying, what have you in our young adult days, I was applying myself, sacrificing for the future, etc.
But that's the type of person you are. Some are morning people, some are night people, some are artists. Ebenezer wasn't a better man than Bob Cratchit. Big deal, you worked hard, you sacrificed, you are a workhorse-type. You need to understand that a) because you are who you are does not mean you are better than anyone else or b) we would not have a better society if everyone was like you. We need all types of people.

Not only that, but it also turns out that most of the jobs today are absolute time-wasters just so we can pretend this is a meritocracy (when it absolutely is NOT... the banks pay people who already have money, real estate pays someone just for "owning" something, millionaire and billionaire inheritances are barely taxed, internships can only be done by people who already have their cost of living covered, loans and small businesses are easier for people who are risking pocket money rather than their life savings - it all favors people who already have money, not who works the hardest.)

If we put the amount of tasks needed to keep humanity housed, fed, clothed, and with little devices, etc, in a little pile (especially with 1 man being able to do the work of 10 due to technological advances) there wouldn't be all that much work to do! We could probably all get away with 3 days a week of labor, if even that, and all live like kings. OR, as Conner was saying, we could spend that time doing creative projects or scientific works or inventing new technology or creating entertainment. We could unleash the power of human creativity instead of keeping humans enslaved and leashed to dumb labor so guy x can earn a crust of bread and guy y can starve because society deems he didn't earn his. It's barbaric and we will look back at capitalism as the dark ages.

I don't see a rigged game. I see opportunity everywhere and I see a system that generally takes care of its most vulnerable. I see even relatively poor people living much better than most of the population of the world and way better than even the wealthiest did a few hundred years ago, I see progress everywhere.
Of course you don't, it's rigged for you. Why do we have people starving and going into bankruptcy for their medical bills? Is this how we make better human beings do you think? You think the challenges are making a tougher breed or are we just torturing some while others buy their third yacht and still feel unfulfilled?

Definitions are problem here. As are causes. Does a moral society make people dependent and reward slacking? Does it punish those who work hard? Or does it give people the skills and opportunity to make something of themselves?
Let's find out. If we create a perfect society and give everyone everything (a la The Time Machine) and people end up like rich kids stereotypically do (useless, selfish, entitled...), then we will need to reformat society so that working hard no longer means 8 hours a day at a useless job in order to earn more for a rich boss; working hard could be working on one's self, making one's self a better person, educating one's self for a lifetime. Spiritually, emotionally, through knowledge and skills... a lifetime of self-improvement. Or, we can all can punch a timecard and can beans for a living while barely being able to keep the lights on and feed our families as the stress and fear erode our brains and keep us on the fight or flight train.

I know Christian conservatives that are as you say and I know many that donate most generously to worthy charities like children's hospitals, orphanages, scholarship programs, etc and who are really fine people. I know liberals that are also nice enough and I know some who are degenerate slackers and whiners.
Yes they do. And they get rewarded for that - not just on their taxes, but they get that little warm fuzzy knowing they did something "good". What if instead of school lunches we just let Christians go into schools and bring kids meals every day? Win win until the day that you forget to go or you deem the kids not worthy for not paying you enough thanks/respect the last time you brought them a meal. Now paying .01 cent in taxes doesn't give you the warm feeling, but the kids will get lunches whether you show up or not. That's a real safety net. Charity-based systems really benefit the chariteers more than the benefitted, they aren't a guaranteed support system.

There are degenerates, whiners, and slackers on both sides. As we all know.
 
Last edited:
#31
Kindagamey,
I don't even know where to start with your reply. I'll try to stick with the morality that is the topic under discussion.

1. In my morality people are free beings- not "cattle" - looking at my brothers and sisters as cattle seems very Nazi-esque. Do you see people as cattle? Or perhaps you are trying to mind read successful/wealthy people, who you seem to hold in low regard, as somehow managing others and thus responsible for them (like a rancher for his cattle). I fundamentally disagree that that is the state of affairs. There is no set finite amount of money. It isn't as if some people have a lot of money and, therefore, there is less for others. If others create value then more money is created. It's how economies grow. I think not understanding is another fundamental misconception on your part.
2. It is funny that you consider me a "work horse". More of that humans as dumb animals outlook from you. I work and work hard because I'm a man and not a whiney coward will to exist by milking off others. I would happily sit on the porch and drink beer, pick guitar and think about things if I could or if I was immoral enough to have others pay my way, mooching off society. In your scheme of things I am either cattle to the bosses or a workhorse for people who have better things to do than work. Thanks a lot. Do see why I might be offended by your outlook? I'm having difficulty understanding your morality.
3. When we do have a bunch of mooches, they don't do anything productive. So your theory is observably incorrect. The inner cities are full of porch sitters that can't even be bothered to pick up the trash in their own neighborhoods, let alone grow productive vegetable gardens, become better educated, create art, etc. They seem to prefer using their govt supported free time to abuse drugs and commit crime and gripe about how unfair life is. I think you are greatly underestimating the amount of public assistance that is available and readily doled out for people to advance themselves. You are making excuses for losers and leaches, IMO. By far the largest chunks of the federal budget are mandated for taking care of the most vulnerable, the elderly, the truly disabled. Your scheme most definitely is about taking from the successful and giving it to those who won't even try.
4.No one is starving because they couldn't afford healthcare. The ACA (aka Obamacare) and Medicaid handle care for the poor and low income quite well. I think that spouting provably incorrect propaganda is immoral.
5. You falsely attribute crime to income level. This is another proven falsehood. You're not gonna like this, but poor people in rural areas (usually white) don't commit violent crime at anything like the rate of low income urban dwellers (usually black or Hispanic). Many studies have debunked the alleged connection between poverty and crime. In fact blacks, being 13% of the population, commit more than 50% of violent crime (from FBI stats). Crime seems to be more associated with failure to accept the values and characteristics of the dominant society. I already know what you're going to say in response and my preemptive response - another you won't like - is that if you can't accept American values and feel you're perpetually discriminated against - contrary to the evidence of people of your own race who have become successful - you should probably seriously consider moving to a country where you feel you fit in better.
6. People work hard so they can more than a basic roof over their head, basic food, public transportation and basic healthcare. A lot of people want more than basic. They work for it. That is their chosen path in life. You want to dictate that their morality is wrong. They should have the minimal, yet continue to work hard so that the fruits of their labor can go to those who prefer to not work. In other words, you want to enslave those you don't like to provide for those that you have deemed worthy. I think slavery is immoral.
7. I just got done paying my taxes. I will wager I paid more than you make in a year. Not a good time to discuss your communist theories with me. I just gave to the dependents. probably enough to support a couple families of them. And all for what? So they - and you - can call me a dumb racist greedy animal? Personally, I'd like to her a "thank you" once in while from some of these recipients as opposed to continued hate directed my way. Your oppressed heroes can't have any more from me. Or I'll quit working and they'll get nothing from me.
 
Last edited:
#32
I hear you. And as you know often rail similarly, but as our chief criminal-in-waiting Hillary Clinton was caught saying off the Record recently " it's good that the public doesn't know how the political sausage is made" ( paraphrasing only slightly)
Is there any chance of a link to that? Hopefully, though Killary (that was actually a typo, but I will leave it) is out of the running to ever be president, but you never can be sure.

David
 
#33
Firstly, thank you for bringing the ego/condescension and racism to the surface so I didn't have to dig in and extract them from your implications.

1. In my morality people are free beings- not "cattle" - looking at my brothers and sisters as cattle seems very Nazi-esque. Do you see people as cattle? Or perhaps you are trying to mind read successful/wealthy people, who you seem to hold in low regard, as somehow managing others and thus responsible for them (like a rancher for his cattle). I fundamentally disagree that that is the state of affairs. There is no set finite amount of money. It isn't as if some people have a lot of money and, therefore, there is less for others. If others create value then more money is created. It's how economies grow. I think not understanding is another fundamental misconception on your part.
I don't think of people like cattle, but I knew not to present you with an appeal to emotion/empathy because you'd toss it aside like a used Kleenex so I tried to appeal to your practicality. Yes, there is no finite amount of money, there is, however, a finite amount of resources. There's also a finite amount of human hope and dignity.

2. It is funny that you consider me a "work horse". More of that humans as dumb animals outlook from you. I work and work hard because I'm a man and not a whiney coward milking off others. I would happily sit on the porch and drink beer, pick guitar and think about things if I could or if I was immoral enough to have others pay my way, mooching off society. In your scheme of things I am either cattle to the bosses or a workhorse for people who have better things to do than work. Thanks a lot. Do see why I might be offended by your outlook? I'm having difficulty understanding your morality.
Please don't be offended. I'm just saying you're a worker bee. I don't want you to be my hair dresser, or the front man for my favorite band, or a furniture designer. Worker bees are necessary, but so is everyone else.

If all of society's needs were taken care of by all of us chipping in a few days a week then I could care less if you sat on the porch drinking beer and picking guitar. Frankly I think the world would be better for it. The 'being a man' because of how much work shtick is a social construct that you're carrying on from your father most likely. If the way we dug holes for a living was for me to dig one and throw dirt in your hole to slow you down and you would dig and throw dirt into my hole - we could both work hard as hell and brag about what big strong men we were, but the labor itself is completely inefficient and wasteful. If that's the way we'd always done things we might not even question it, but what if we dug a hole together and then the rest of the time we would have wasted competing we could drink beer and play guitar together? There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. I also don't think my parents who worked and paid taxes their entire lives are "mooches," but they can barely survive on the retirement they're getting. I don't think they deserve to starve because my mother has rheumatoid arthritis and my father has bladder cancer. Why can't we feed everyone and take care of their medical issues?

If you look in your heart you will see how punitive your model is. You want to punish anyone who didn't work as hard and made as many sacrifices as you did. You sat inside doing your homework and you want all the kids who played outside to pay for it. It doesn't mean you're a better person. In fact, many of the people who work really, really hard are working at things that are a detriment to their fellow human beings only to line their own pockets. Is that a triumph to be celebrated? What Hitler did was bad and all, but boy, you gotta admire how hard he worked.

3. When we do have a bunch of mooches, they don't do anything productive. So your theory is observable incorrect. The inner cities are full of porch sitters that can't even be bothered to pick up the trash in their own neighborhoods, let alone grow productive vegetable gardens, become better educated, create art, etc. They seem to prefer using their govt supported free time to abuse drugs and commit crime and gripe about how unfair life is.
Uh oh. Here it comes! ("And we'll see your true colors shining through..." - Cyndi Lauper)

Matthew:20: Jesus owns a vineyard and pays a bunch of guys to work and says he'll pay em all a shekel on Sunday. On Saturday some guys are passing through and ask if they can work too. "Sure," says Jesus, "I'm paying a shekel on Sunday." The first group of workers get pissed. "Hey, you're paying THEM a shekel?!? We worked all week!" Jesus says, "You were happy with your shekel before, so what's your fucking problem?"

The moral is, worry about your own sh**, not what anyone else is getting. For instance, it costs way less to set up a buffet style dinner for an entire neighborhood and let them eat what they want. A conservative might say, "Hey! These fat pigs can eat however much they want! No way, let's hire monitors to watch the buffet line and weigh how much their trays are holding and make sure to drug test them to be sure that they aren't druggies mooching free food." Well now the costs have gone up astronomically. It was cheaper to give food away than it is to piecemeal it out in whatever way you deem is equitable to someone's food worth.

4. You falsely attribute crime to income level. This is another proven falsehood.
You're absolutely right, actually. White collar crime hurts this country WAY more than blue collar crime. And there's far more of it.

You're not gonna like this, but poor people in rural areas (usually white) don't commit violent crime at anything like the rate of low income urban dwellers (usually black or Hispanic). Many studies have debunked the alleged connection between poverty and crime. In fact blacks, being 13% of the population, commit more than 50% of violent crime (from FBI stats). Crime seems to be more associated with failure to accept the values and characteristics of the dominant society. I already know what you're going to say in response and my preemptive response - another you won't like - is that if you can't accept American values and feel you're perpetually discriminated against - contrary to the evidence of people of your own race who have become successful - you should probably seriously consider moving to a country where you feel you fit in better.
Ahh... good ol racism. Every time. There there, let it out... Let the dark side flow through you.

If every time you came to the playground we played musical chairs, but when you came I would purposefully stop the music when you weren't near a chair. Or you would sit down in a chair and I'd kick you out and give it to someone else. Or if I just reduced the total number of chairs to a number where you never got one. You wouldn't want to play my game anymore would you? You certainly wouldn't have faith in sticking to my rules because you'd think them arbitrary and unfair. When we make the system work for everyone they will play the rules, they will pull the lever to get the food pellet. You guys keep wanting to ignore segments of the population and then point at them and say how they deserved it. The societally abandoned are monsters of your own creation.


5. People work hard so they can more than a basic roof over their head, basic food, public transportation and basic healthcare. A lot of people want more than basic. They work for it. That is their chosen path in life. You want to dictate that their morality is wrong. They should have the minimal, yet continue to work hard so that the fruits of their labor can go to those who prefer to not work. In other words, you want to enslave those you don't like to provide for those that you have deemed worthy. I think slavery is immoral.
Capitalism is slavery. People have no democracy inside of corporations and people have no autonomy over their own futures and the profit that results from their labor.

6. I just got done paying my taxes. I will wager I paid more than you make in a year. Not a good time to discuss your communist theories with me. I just gave to the dependents. probably enough to support a couple families of them. Your heroes can't have any more from. Or I'll quit working and they'll get nothing from me.
Wonderful. You've shown who you are far more descriptively than I could do. May the meek inherit the earth.
 
#34
Matthew:20: Jesus owns a vineyard and pays a bunch of guys to work and says he'll pay em all a shekel on Sunday. On Saturday some guys are passing through and ask if they can work too. "Sure," says Jesus, "I'm paying a shekel on Sunday." The first group of workers get pissed. "Hey, you're paying THEM a shekel?!? We worked all week!" Jesus says, "You were happy with your shekel before, so what's your fucking problem?"

The moral is, worry about your own sh**, not what anyone else is getting. For instance, it costs way less to set up a buffet style dinner for an entire neighborhood and let them eat what they want. A conservative might say, "Hey! These fat pigs can eat however much they want! No way, let's hire monitors to watch the buffet line and weigh how much their trays are holding and make sure to drug test them to be sure that they aren't druggies mooching free food." Well now the costs have gone up astronomically. It was cheaper to give food away than it is to piecemeal it out in whatever way you deem is equitable to someone's food worth.
Sadly, Jesus was wrong here - if this is the basis for an economic policy. I think, if indeed it was he who said this, he was speaking of spiritual earnings. This makes the 'economy' context he was addressing much larger than monetary wage policy. Our 'value' in the context Jesus outlined here, is who we become by the end of our life. Not how long we took to get there... Such may indeed constitute a wise statement.

But global economies are different...

In my strategy work with nations, one thing is clear - ignore value to the peril of your people, your well being and your lives. Such approaches sound good to a neophyte, but are disastrous in application - after a good 50 attempts at experimenting. The only time one can pull this off is when oil, gold, coal or natural gas, come out of the ground at low cost ($4 per barrel equivalent) and your population is low... then everyone can live this theoretical life. I have developed policy for nations like this - and have modeled their economics. But in the 96% of the rest of the world, Value = Margin is a law.

Value flows and margin flows must equal each other and move in opposite directions - or economic sickness ensues. This was the basis of our trade strategy re-negotiation with China.

So, from an economic standpoint, the workers were correct.
 
#35
Firstly, thank you for bringing the ego/condescension and racism to the surface so I didn't have to dig in and extract them from your implications.



I don't think of people like cattle, but I knew not to present you with an appeal to emotion/empathy because you'd toss it aside like a used Kleenex so I tried to appeal to your practicality. Yes, there is no finite amount of money, there is, however, a finite amount of resources. There's also a finite amount of human hope and dignity.



Please don't be offended. I'm just saying you're a worker bee. I don't want you to be my hair dresser, or the front man for my favorite band, or a furniture designer. Worker bees are necessary, but so is everyone else.

If all of society's needs were taken care of by all of us chipping in a few days a week then I could care less if you sat on the porch drinking beer and picking guitar. Frankly I think the world would be better for it. The 'being a man' because of how much work shtick is a social construct that you're carrying on from your father most likely. If the way we dug holes for a living was for me to dig one and throw dirt in your hole to slow you down and you would dig and throw dirt into my hole - we could both work hard as hell and brag about what big strong men we were, but the labor itself is completely inefficient and wasteful. If that's the way we'd always done things we might not even question it, but what if we dug a hole together and then the rest of the time we would have wasted competing we could drink beer and play guitar together? There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. I also don't think my parents who worked and paid taxes their entire lives are "mooches," but they can barely survive on the retirement they're getting. I don't think they deserve to starve because my mother has rheumatoid arthritis and my father has bladder cancer. Why can't we feed everyone and take care of their medical issues?

If you look in your heart you will see how punitive your model is. You want to punish anyone who didn't work as hard and made as many sacrifices as you did. You sat inside doing your homework and you want all the kids who played outside to pay for it. It doesn't mean you're a better person. In fact, many of the people who work really, really hard are working at things that are a detriment to their fellow human beings only to line their own pockets. Is that a triumph to be celebrated? What Hitler did was bad and all, but boy, you gotta admire how hard he worked.



Uh oh. Here it comes! ("And we'll see your true colors shining through..." - Cyndi Lauper)

Matthew:20: Jesus owns a vineyard and pays a bunch of guys to work and says he'll pay em all a shekel on Sunday. On Saturday some guys are passing through and ask if they can work too. "Sure," says Jesus, "I'm paying a shekel on Sunday." The first group of workers get pissed. "Hey, you're paying THEM a shekel?!? We worked all week!" Jesus says, "You were happy with your shekel before, so what's your fucking problem?"

The moral is, worry about your own sh**, not what anyone else is getting. For instance, it costs way less to set up a buffet style dinner for an entire neighborhood and let them eat what they want. A conservative might say, "Hey! These fat pigs can eat however much they want! No way, let's hire monitors to watch the buffet line and weigh how much their trays are holding and make sure to drug test them to be sure that they aren't druggies mooching free food." Well now the costs have gone up astronomically. It was cheaper to give food away than it is to piecemeal it out in whatever way you deem is equitable to someone's food worth.



You're absolutely right, actually. White collar crime hurts this country WAY more than blue collar crime. And there's far more of it. Again, IMO, it is immoral to NOT face realities so that progress can be made. If there's a problem, call it out and get busy fixing it, whatever the solution might be.



Ahh... good ol racism. Every time. There there, let it out... Let the dark side flow through you.

If every time you came to the playground we played musical chairs, but when you came I would purposefully stop the music when you weren't near a chair. Or you would sit down in a chair and I'd kick you out and give it to someone else. Or if I just reduced the total number of chairs to a number where you never got one. You wouldn't want to play my game anymore would you? You certainly wouldn't have faith in sticking to my rules because you'd think them arbitrary and unfair. When we make the system work for everyone they will play the rules, they will pull the lever to get the food pellet. You guys keep wanting to ignore segments of the population and then point at them and say how they deserved it. The societally abandoned are monsters of your own creation.




Capitalism is slavery. People have no democracy inside of corporations and people have no autonomy over their own futures and the profit that results from their labor.



Wonderful. You've shown who you are far more descriptively than I could do. May the meek inherit the earth.
Serious question, Gamey - Have you ever, you know, actually worked? Have you ever worked for a corporation? You seem to know so much about it, you must have, right (sarcasm)? How old are you? You speak the language of a 19 year old who's just been turned onto to Marxism by his/her wild haired college prof (or maybe you are that college prof).

Excuse making isn't healthy; nor is it moral in an interdependent society. No one is pulling the chair out from anyone; other than people pulling the chair out from under themselves. If you come into a job interview with me and your pants are sagging, you're bebopping around, can't speak English well; you're not getting a job; not even in the copy room. If you don't have the requisite education, you're not getting the job. If you can't demonstrate a history of responsibility; you're not getting the job. I don't care where your from or what color you are. Otherwise, if you're a minority and apply, I'm likely going to hire you because we have quotas that need to be filled. The minorities have privilege over Caucasians and Asians in both college admissions and hiring. Which, IMO, is immoral (I believe in the words of MLK - who was a great American).

The question people who don't get the job should ask is, "What was I doing wrong? What do I need to do better?". But alas, some people are just too quick to declare that the world is rigged against them and then conclude that it is just fine to give up and mooch off others. You're there to encourage that. You're hurting these people by helping them be losers who lack self-respect. That is, IMO, immoral. Where is the hope and dignity in that attitude?

So statistics are racist? You can't handle the truth so I'm a racist? Another display of immorality on your part. Make excuses and blame others instead of identifying and calling our real problems. That victimizes the innocent and makes undeveloped monsters out of the beneficiaries of your approach.
 
Last edited:
#36
Sadly, Jesus was wrong here - if this is the basis for an economic policy. I think, if indeed it was he who said this, he was speaking of spiritual earnings. This makes the 'economy' context he was addressing much larger than monetary wage policy. Our 'value' in the context Jesus outlined here, is who we become by the end of our life. Not how long we took to get there... Such may indeed constitute a wise statement.

But global economies are different...
It's really funny that you called me out on that because that's exactly what that passage means. Dead on. He's talking about the spiritual economy; basically saying anyone who repents and accepts Jesus gets to go to Jesus-Land even if at the last minute. BUT, I absolutely love using it as an economic metaphor because I truly think one of our major problems is people looking over other people's shoulders and griping about what they're getting. It's ugly and not spiritual at all. So yes, I pulled a fast one, but I think it's clever anyway.

As for the rest of your statement, let's say instead of economics being treated like laws of physics as if we are beholden to them and not the creators of them, what if we made it work for us? How do we want things distributed... and who do we want them distributed to? As a board game player and occasional designer these kind of systems seem perfectly manageable. We have now a digital revolution where we can distribute information for almost ZERO cost, and this is a totally different type of economy where everyone could benefit. And instead we still play at the game of scarcity... womp womp. We have the resources to benefit everyone and we are choosing not to. That sickens me personally.

If you haven't noticed we have economic sickness right now. An inequality and instability that will eat us alive if we don't manage it. And an environmental damage that we may not be able to return from. The cost of capitalism is too damn high and really all it does is pay off rich people, enslave the poor to strike fear in the middle class, and funnel wealth upwards, so... as a dutiful thrifty capitalist I'd like to buy a better system please.
 
#37
Sadly, Jesus was wrong here - if this is the basis for an economic policy. I think, if indeed it was he who said this, he was speaking of spiritual earnings. This makes the 'economy' context he was addressing much larger than monetary wage policy. Our 'value' in the context Jesus outlined here, is who we become by the end of our life. Not how long we took to get there... Such may indeed constitute a wise statement.

But global economies are different...

In my strategy work with nations, one thing is clear - ignore value to the peril of your people, your well being and your lives. Such approaches sound good to a neophyte, but are disastrous in application - after a good 50 attempts at experimenting. The only time one can pull this off is when oil, gold, coal or natural gas, come out of the ground at low cost ($4 per barrel equivalent) and your population is low... then everyone can live this theoretical life. I have developed policy for nations like this - and have modeled their economics. But in the 96% of the rest of the world, Value = Margin is a law.

Value flows and margin flows must equal each other and move in opposite directions - or economic sickness ensues. This was the basis of our trade strategy re-negotiation with China.

So, from an economic standpoint, the workers were correct.
Yes, the problem with communism is that it seeks to force people to accept that things are worth what they really aren't. It's state controlled value setting.

I would say that Gamey is somewhat subtly threatening a kind of terrorism. Give us what we want and as much of it as we want, or we will cause you to spend even more because we re not going to play your game and we're here and you can't get rid of us. The Democrat party in the US is increasingly buying into this tactic via identity politics and Marxist rhetoric. I'm sure you know, as I do, where this leads - and it's not pretty. Les chiens vont manger bien.
 
#38
Serious question, Gamey - Have you ever, you know, actually worked? Have you ever worked for a corporation? You seem to know so much about it, you must have, right (sarcasm)? How old are you? You speak the language of a 19 year old who's just been turned onto to Marxism by his/her wild haired college prof (or maybe you are that college prof).
Worked my whole life in cubicles. Worked in my father's small business for 14 years, just the two of us sailing the entrepreneurial seas. Been poor and well off and now I guess I'm somewhere in the middle.

That kid with his pants sagging had a much harder life than you did I'd wager. Emotionally at the very least. You have no idea what he's been through. I'm not saying let him work in your mailroom. I'm saying allow society to feed him, clothe him, educate him, and give him a fighting chance otherwise you're just perpetuating what you're turning your nose up at.

I wouldn't want to live in an ivory tower if I had to look out over death, poverty, and destruction. We need to support all people. You can't just throw some of them away and hope they die off. We're in this together. Judge lest ye be judged. I truly don't see how one can be 'spiritual' and yet consider part of society to be disposable. So ugly.
 
#39
Worked my whole life in cubicles. Worked in my father's small business for 14 years, just the two of us sailing the entrepreneurial seas. Been poor and well off and now I guess I'm somewhere in the middle.

That kid with his pants sagging had a much harder life than you did I'd wager. Emotionally at the very least. You have no idea what he's been through. I'm not saying let him work in your mailroom. I'm saying allow society to feed him, clothe him, educate him, and give him a fighting chance otherwise you're just perpetuating what you're turning your nose up at.

I wouldn't want to live in an ivory tower if I had to look out over death, poverty, and destruction. We need to support all people. You can't just throw some of them away and hope they die off. We're in this together. Judge lest ye be judged. I truly don't see how one can be 'spiritual' and yet consider part of society to be disposable. So ugly.
Gamey,
I've had serious emotional challenges in my life. Screw Saggy Pants' hard luck tales.

But I agree that Saggy Pants should be afforded the opportunity to develop. How is he not? Are there not free schools for him to attend? Are there not food stamps and section 8 housing and free healthcare (See Medicaid, CHIPS, etc)? Are there not higher educational slots set aside for him even if he's not up to normal standards? I happen to know that all these things are readily available and there are even social workers to help Saggy's mother get connected if she's too stupid to do it on her own.

I am rejecting your excuse making and demand for freebees because you're stating a problem that doesn't exist. Furthermore, you're all over the place. On the one hand you want Saggy to have equal opportunity. On the other, you think that the opportunity would only lead to slavery in "the capitalist system" and a generally hideous unfulfilling existence. Seems to me you're working at cross purposes.

And for chrissakes, if he's trying at all, why are his pants still sagging?
 
Last edited:
#40
Beat a dog his whole life and you end up with a pretty unfriendly dog. This isn't hard to understand.

If I put your soul in that young man's shoes you'd be begging me to put you back in your own. You're soft. They'd eat you alive. Your corporate skills do not translate to the street.

As for the "freebies" we have enough resources to make sure everyone has a good living and it would be way cheaper than it is now. It would be irresponsible to lift everyone to the level of the 1% as the Earth couldn't even sustain it, but we could all have what we need and then some.

Let me put this in sociopathic conservative terms for you: let's say you were bothered by seeing all these homeless people around and I said I could get rid of them for you for $0.05 a piece. I'd have to chainsaw them up and dip them in a bath of acid, but it might be worth the cost to you just to give you a better view from your balcony.

Now what if everyone paid $0.05 a piece and instead we educated them and helped them become better people? If we treated their mental health problems and gave them a place to live and made them into productive citizens. Now they might even be one of your employees, or they might invent the cure for cancer, or who knows what? You all suffer from a failure of imagination and your ideas will be left in history where they belong.

The people you denigrate are going to be here whether you like it or not; the question is, is the head so stupid that it thinks it can ignore the gangrene in the feet? Ignore it at your own peril.
 
Top