Heh okay I can see you didn't get my point. I only mention the C word (Communisim) as an example of my words privious to uttering it.
On Sep 19, 4:39 pm, James Lynch <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 4:37 AM, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: > > Heh James it is not hard to imagine what you see as unreasonable to be > > the reality of the situation. As I said in my last post, let us look > > at how Communisim has worked or not for us over the last 70 years or > > so. > > Political ideology may be convenient for discourse on political theory > but when it comes to solving social challenges I think it is ill > equipped compared to, say, child psychology. Sure, communism sounds > great on paper, but I think it is especially prone to corruption- who > can be trusted with such power, it might be workable under a strong > anarcho-syndicalistic population to keep it in check but then it > wouldn't be Communism and lacking a large scale defense > command&control infrastructure would be vulnerable to corruption and > conquest from within and out. Sounds kinda pie-in-the-sky for today's > world. > > > The problem is that we are all differant, what may seem sensable to > > some will not seem so to others. > > Granted, this does not establish whichever negative effects are the > result of social systems that encourage the 'sponging' behavior. What > I am trying to identify is the context of humanity, the variables that > encourage beneficial and desirable behaviors and also under what > circumstances the negatives emerge so that they can be minimized. > > > What is you stance on the dealth penalty, as a view to an example of > > how differantly we all think? > > Hm, too expensive to pursue proper justice, ineffective deterrent, > provides little gain to society at large. Bout sums it up for me. > > For example one could argue beating kids and following the Bible > examples is the only way to produce 'properly' behaved children, that > doesn't fit with scientific knowledge on the subject of child rearing. > I think there is helpful scientific knowledge on all these subjects > you bring up and would like to see more of that in public discourse. > As it stands progress is held to the beck and call of reaction-terms > tossed at the public to produce reliable results (for the same people > that aren't fixing things) rather than encouraging people to develop > productive and intelligent discourse. > > Considering the level of ignorance promulgated in our political > debates I find it amazing our (US) democracy works to the degree it > has. > > > > > On Sep 16, 11:37 pm, James Lynch <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Well the more I think about this the less it sounds reasonable to > >> assume that given the viable choice and reason to believe it wasn't a > >> catch 22 that anyone capable of doing anything would choose a life of > >> scraps over anything productive. In that case chronic welfare should > >> come hitched with therapy, mandatory, to identify those who could > >> really use some more psychological attention and keep people from > >> falling between the cracks. Some may, and that is one's right, but a > >> goal of societal health should be to facilitate productive lives my > >> any means possible. The costs to society are too great otherwise and > >> there is a huge amount of work to be done. > > >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > I do not belive all people would work for these things make sacrifices > >> > and be likely to be happy at all. > > >> > We can see that so far Communism has not really worked. > > >> > I agree that we must as a society look after those less abelt o look > >> > after themselves, but we need to be very carefull indeed that we do > >> > not create a sociaty of spongers. > > >> > On Sep 16, 3:39 pm, James Lynch <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> I believe in cradle to the grave social securities, and that is > >> >> something that should be on offer. People will work for these things, > >> >> make sacrifices, and likely be happy about it if they have a sense of > >> >> it helping to strengthen society. I think many people would work > >> >> harder and even be willing to work smarter if there were tangible > >> >> results, if that work pays into the social securities and societal > >> >> infrastructure and benefits the individual at the same time- what more > >> >> could one ask for? Of course one could ask for more, and that is why I > >> >> think we should have a dual economy- we obviously cannot trust the > >> >> politicians, lobbyists, and corporate interests to factor human beings > >> >> and the well being of society into their bottom line we need something > >> >> to compensate for this. We need a progressive social plan that > >> >> tenaciously pursues social stability, security, sustainability, and > >> >> excellence from the bottom to the top and across the board for near > >> >> and long term objectives. It should be an option. > > >> >> I am playing out hundreds of scenarios trying to solve the hard > >> >> questions like the one you have raised Rigsy and there is no easy way > >> >> out. I'm not omniscient either, actually battling with mental tumult > >> >> and exhaustion in the process. It brings up the inconvenient truths > >> >> such as who makes the decisions, who benefits and who is at a loss- it > >> >> boils down to representation- should it? Even by pursuing a principled > >> >> hierarchial weighting system to benefit the maximum number to the > >> >> maximum degree over a temporal timeline some will be disadvantaged > >> >> (lest we throw everything we have at each person in line)- it is > >> >> obvious any workable system would account for need and availability, > >> >> after identifying those ends part of the second task would be > >> >> identifying where the current system lies in those terms and creating > >> >> a context shift. It may turn out that everyone could live a longer and > >> >> more fulfilling life consuming half of the current resources (or less) > >> >> but it will take some intelligence to identify how to make it a > >> >> reality and the systems required to secure this future and eliminate > >> >> the implicit wastes that siphon off our collective human potential. > >> >> Though everything isn't clear to me, I've developed a strong belief > >> >> that we can achieve these ends and that we must if we wish to survive > >> >> the challenges in our indefinite future. > > >> >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 6:51 AM, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > So- are you for "death panels"? Some day you will wake up and not be > >> >> > so "new" anymore. > > >> >> > On Sep 16, 1:40 am, James Lynch <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> My mother in law went to school with Mike, said he was a jerk or > >> >> >> something like that. I thought it was a riot the way he showed our > >> >> >> hometown, a highschooler then. > > >> >> >> Elsewhere, Archytas mentions this being the only game in town and I > >> >> >> wonder facing the situational characterizations Moore lists what > >> >> >> options does one have? I mean we either play their game or lose, > >> >> >> period. Sure regions can begin to resist by conserving resources > >> >> >> through internal trade and services but in the end everybody has to > >> >> >> pay the tax man, tuition, fuel, etc. It makes me think we are all > >> >> >> under the spell of a mass narcotic. I would like to see the rise of a > >> >> >> dual economy come out of this disaster, one independent (the current > >> >> >> model) and one social (remove gov't assistance from the old and apply > >> >> >> to the new). The purpose of the social will be to fuel the > >> >> >> improvement > >> >> >> of society as a whole through massive public works projects like > >> >> >> education, mentorship, health and care of those in need, removal of > >> >> >> poverty and mitigation of its effects through quality individualized > >> >> >> social reeducation programs beginning with relocation, therapeutic > >> >> >> exercise (learning/gaining skills) and exposure to positive > >> >> >> reinforcement. Sounds scary? > > >> >> >> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:19 AM, ornamentalmind > > >> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> > Yes rigsy, the short lived US middle class is all but gone...and > >> >> >> > it is > >> >> >> > no accident. > > >> >> >> >http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/08/06 > > >> >> >> > Hyperbole, perhaps. Directly applicable?... absolutely! > > >> >> >> > On Aug 27, 6:29 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> The middle class is shrinking- the class that drives an economy. > > >> >> >> >> Greece is not a good example. Libya is a wealthy country- sweet > >> >> >> >> crude, > >> >> >> >> investments around the world=cash. Now the clean up crew will > >> >> >> >> clean up > >> >> >> >> with new oil contracts and rebuilding a ruined infrastructure all > >> >> >> >> in > >> >> >> >> the name of liberty and freedom as per the examples of Iraq and > >> >> >> >> Afghanistan plus we have "miles"/countries to go, as Frost put it. > > >> >> >> >> On Aug 27, 2:12 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> >> >> > Banks are lying about money laundering - > >> >> >> >> > seehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/03/us-bank-mexico-drug-gangs > >> >> >> >> > - as an example. They are also hiding losses illegally through > >> >> >> >> > massive false accounting that has been 'made legal'. The basic > >> >> >> >> > scam > >> >> >> >> > is similar to the alleged 'rogue trading' that brought down > >> >> >> >> > Barings - > >> >> >> >> > losses are being moved around through subsidiaries and the > >> >> >> >> > ability to > >> >> >> >> > 'mark to model' (instead of market) on assets - hence Bank of > >> >> >> >> > America > >> >> >> >> > is claiming to be worth $325 billion but is only trading at £65 > >> >> >> >> > billion on the exchanges. > >> >> >> >> > What we probably have is the near certainty of bank collapses. > >> >> >> >> > We are > >> >> >> >> > currently funding these bent operations instead of going to full > >> >> >> >> > employment and wealth redistribution to prevent recession. > >> >> >> >> > Banks have sprung up all around the European drug routes for no > >> >> >> >> > other > >> >> >> >> > explicable reason (just like Miami in the past). > > >> >> >> >> > There is no reason for a global recession, but that's different > >> >> >> >> > from > >> >> >> >> > whether one is being engineered. The Greeks are currently being > >> >> >> >> > pilloried as having > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
