How to Save America

[The Anti-Wisemon]

Correlation does not equal causation. Enough said on that.

There's nothing else to suggest the sudden rise. These things just don't happen. The Fair Standards Of Labour Act (it's callecd something of that nature) correlates perfectly with sudden drastic turn. These things just don't go for nothing.

Look, your whole system of crap doesn't work, even IN a market economy. The simple truth is that markets are not even things of their own. People in them tend towards greed and tend towards taking advantage of one another. That must end, we must have a system that encourages cooperation and giving for the sake of the greater good.

"A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away" - Sen. Barry Goldwater

Greed and power hunger are part of natural condition. Capitalism didn't encourage this. How long has capitalism existed? A few hundred years, with some historical exceptions (like Rome)? Greed and power hunger has existed before then, much longer, into fuedalism, traditionalist semi-communal society. Any hierarchy will naturally lead to power hunger, and any deviation in luxury will lead to greed. And no government has yet gotten to the point where both of those are wiped out. You could even say one creates the other. Here's another quote, and this time, it's from the horse's mouth.

"In order for the social contract may not be a mere empty forumla, everyone must nderstand that any individual who refuses to obey the general will must be forced by his fellows to do so. This is a way of saying that it may be necassary to force a man to be free; freedom in this case being obedience to the will of all" -Rousseau, The Social Contract

That system is one in which everyone is supplied with their basic needs by nonprofit organizations, and are free to manufacture extra goods as they like as long as the people who make the goods own the goods they make and the means of making them.

So they'll have less stuff, and with shittier workmanship? Why cant they just sell, say chairs, which they specialize in (therefore they have better workmanship), and buy say beds, who are also specialized, and have better workmanship?

[Anonmon]

Who said everyone would have to make everything for themselves? No, I meant that anyone could make anything they wanted for themself, but everyone would be guaranteed the basics by nonprofits.

Rousseau was full of shit when he said that.

Greed and power hunger are not part of the natural condition, they are part of there not being enough for everyone and people bickering over who gets what. With modern industrial technology comes a great gift: At last, if we keep our numbers from rising too high, we can supply plenty for everyone. The problems are that 1. We refuse for some reason to keep our numbers down and 2. That we still run by pre-industrial pre-having-enough social systems like capitalism.

Once again I iterate, correlation does NOT equal causation. Just because the Fair Labor Standards Act was passed during an economic recession (a natural thing since reform is usually only called for in times of hardship) doesn't mean it caused the recession. There were a million other conditions that could have done it. I'm just a bit too lazy to find an American History website to look it up on.

[The Anti-Wisemon]

Who said everyone would have to make everything for themselves? No, I meant that anyone could make anything they wanted for themself, but everyone would be guaranteed the basics by nonprofits.

My point still stands. Non-essential items (food, water, shelter) would be of low low supply, and low workmanship.

Greed and power hunger are not part of the natural condition, they are part of there not being enough for everyone and people bickering over who gets what. With modern industrial technology comes a great gift: At last, if we keep our numbers from rising too high, we can supply plenty for everyone. The problems are that 1. We refuse for some reason to keep our numbers down and 2. That we still run by pre-industrial pre-having-enough social systems like capitalism.

Are you kidding me? The Industrial Revolution couldn't of happened without capitalism driving it to do so! Capitalism keeps companies innovating, making better quaity products, cheaper products ete.

And greed and power hunger certainly are. It's simply the want to better yourself, and the want to upgrade your standard of living, as is always dreamed of. Every society ever had elements of greed and power hunger.

Once again I iterate, correlation does NOT equal causation. Just because the Fair Labor Standards Act was passed during an economic recession (a natural thing since reform is usually only called for in times of hardship) doesn't mean it caused the recession. There were a million other conditions that could have done it. I'm just a bit too lazy to find an American History website to look it up on.

It caused the doubling of the Depression. Can you actually name any other causes for this?

[Anonmon]

Your point does not stand. WHY would those things be of low supply and quality?

The Industrial Revolution in the SOCIAL CONDITIONS under which it happened, those of inequity and radical gaps between the power and wealth of one man and another, required capitalism to urge it on. That does not mean, however, that capitalism is required under the completely different social conditions where concentrated political power and concentrated wealth are completely unnecessary due to having enough of both for all if they are properly distributed. Your proposing an old solution to a new issue. If this is all you can do, I advise you to shut up.

Wanting to achieve a satisfactory standard of living is natural, and possible for almost all people. However, greed, the constant wanting to be somehow better than your fellowman, is a product of competitive societies in which one man going up means kicking another man on the head.

[The Anti-Wisemon]

The Industrial Revolution in the SOCIAL CONDITIONS under which it happened, those of inequity and radical gaps between the power and wealth of one man and another, required capitalism to urge it on. That does not mean, however, that capitalism is required under the completely different social conditions where concentrated political power and concentrated wealth are completely unnecessary due to having enough of both for all if they are properly distributed. Your proposing an old solution to a new issue. If this is all you can do, I advise you to shut up.

First of all, is there any need for Industrialization, for advancement in general in the socialist state? The Industrial revolution was about producing goods cheaper, faster ete. It was about getting an edge over another company. What's the use for imporvement if there is no urgent need to do so?

Also, inequality in wealth is not necassarily even a side-effect of capitalism, an evil inevitability. It is a way for the smarter, the wiser ete. to get ahead. Inequality in capitalism is meritocratic. Socialism, what you propose, does not reward those who work hard, those who could get ahead in the capitalist society. They can never get ahead, so there's no incentive to become smart to be better than others (and yes, some poeple are better than others). It discourages technological evolution, increased efficieny ete.

Your point does not stand. WHY would those things be of low supply and quality?

Because there would be no specialization. Could you build a computer, right now? Even iof you could, in theory, it would be of poor workmanship. Building skills, like all others, take practice. To get enough practice to be of higher quality, you have to do it a lot. Of course, there's no incentive to build a lot, since you can only use so many. Trade is forbidden as well, so there is no way of say building only computers and trading them for other goods, like chairs. Not to mention, it would be a major drain in time. Agricultural work would probably be the main task of any socialist family, food has to come from somehwere, right? And even if there is a proletariate, it would be confined to building things for themselves, and wasting resources. You could even have proletariate with certain luxuries not available to, say, a peasant.

Wanting to achieve a satisfactory standard of living is natural, and possible for almost all people. However, greed, the constant wanting to be somehow better than your fellowman, is a product of competitive societies in which one man going up means kicking another man on the head.

So you wouldn't take a steak over a hamburger?

[JamesBond007]

One thing that I've seen is that the goverment keeps trying to bandaid everything. They should go back and rewright most of the laws

[The Anti-Wisemon]

And choke up the legislative system?

[Gnostic Metatron Prime]

We refuse for some reason to keep our numbers down

"Some reason"? It's called Catholicism. Just how the hell do you propose that we stop a 2000-year-old religion whose base lies outside of American jurisdiction?

[Wisemon]

"Some reason"? It's called Catholicism. Just how the hell do you propose that we stop a 2000-year-old religion whose base lies outside of American jurisdiction?

The same way America does everything...let's nuke Vatican City.

[The Anti-Wisemon]

"Some reason"? It's called Catholicism. Just how the hell do you propose that we stop a 2000-year-old religion whose base lies outside of American jurisdiction?

I thought primordial lust had more to do with it? MAny Catholics use contraception, and if you want to blame anyone, blam China.