| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Comments:
<0> Healthcare and education of the m***es does not matter of course, a few billionaires do! :)
<1> any college student will tell you that MOST of the education he receives is useless and never applied.
<2> farhan: when is it going to set in that for every billionaire that exists there must be people who suffer
<2> hang on i have a good quote
<1> niv_ : so, why is education the measure of success?
<1> niv_ : sure :-)
<3> horse**** farhan, don't try to generalize something like that
<4> farhan: Do you have a better measure?
<0> You can't be rich without stealing from society, from my point of view
<1> Sartak : yes, GDP (or GNP, whichever you prefer)
<4> Oh. Of course.
<4> Capitalist scum! ;)
<2> The amount of poverty and suffering required for the emergence of a Rockefeller, and the amount of depravity that the accumulation of a fortune of such magnitude entails, are left out of the picture and it is not always possible to make the people in
<0> Hence I definitely don't aim at acquiring wealth, I don't live with the illusion that it will make me happier anyway
<2> general see this.
<2> - Ernesto Guevara
<1> yeah, btw im anti Geuvara now :-)
<2> hmm.. thats actually only half of the quote
<1> he improvrished south america
<5> all by himself?
<2> farhan: You're obviously capable of abandoning an ideology and adopting it's polar opposite.. in a rather short period of time, I'm guessing, since you're in school and probably young
<4> farhan: Isn't that enough to make you think "maybe capitalism isn't so perfect after all"?
<2> that's pretty telling
<1> niv_ : took about two years
<1> Sartak : no, i have arguments against it
<4> farhan: Such as?
<0> I think farhan is just highly egocentrical, he said it himself during religious debates
<6> farhan: hi! did you come back to the 21st century yet? ;)
<6> hehe
<0> He hardly cares about others, but fortunately there's a "god" to keep him in check
<1> if you want to hear them, lets make a private channel or msgs because we'll be more serioust here
<1> Maloeran : nah, private charities :-)
<1> im all for private charities
<6> farhan: sir, the other day you were mentioning that religion kept people in "check"
<1> they work better than public ones
<2> faith based?
<6> farhan: i was thinking of that over the weekend
<2> haha
<1> whichever you preer
<1> prefer
<6> farhan: faith has arguably helped humanity form its laws and moral codes.
<1> INFACT
<6> farhan: HOWEVER
<4> farhan: Well, could you mention just one here? Or PM it to me and I'll repeat it for you. I'm just curious is all, you seem to be highly pro-capitalism and, well, I'm not.
<6> farhan: the fact that religion "helps" is not the issue we were actually discussing
<1> www.helpmadeeha.com That's a private charity where government fails :-)
<1> case and point
<6> farhan: the fact we were discussing is...whether or not god exists
<1> www.helpmadeeha.com raised half the money needed for operation in two weeks. HALF! Its private, not public
<6> farhan: which has nothing to do with the whether religion is or has been a boon to society
<2> farhan: You know what's funny.. capitalism has been pretty good to me, financially. But I still feel alienated from my labour, as Marx would describe it.
<0> farhan, here the government pays any amount required for operations. Amazing, no?
<1> niv_ : hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah
<1> Maloeran : read her case
<2> farhan: Although, I'm still a worker, because I don't own property or a business to make money from.
<2> damn, this ssh session is pretty lagged
<4> farhan: Um, according to the little box on that page, they're just under a quarter the way through..
<0> Ah. I recently refused a 6 digits amount for sale of intelectual property, to release that in the public domain instead... As programmers, let's not give these companies any more software patents I say :)
<2> farhan: I asked you a question earlier to which I don't think you responded.. you said in your economics cl*** you are learning to argue against the regulation of the economy?
<2> farhan: is that right?
<1> Maloeran : that's great, and if you wish to do so, that's your choice. Free-Market in action!
<4> farhan: Why are you saying they raised half the money needed when they don't even have a quarter of it?
<0> No farhan, that's common good and non-property of knowledge in action. The free market would have taken a route much less beneficial to humanity
<1> Maloeran : then the benefit of your software (lets say $1 billion) would be transferred from the company to everyone in society. It still existst hough
<2> farhan: actually the free-market would have had him sold it
<1> niv_ : no, its his choice
<1> niv_ : free-markets are about freedom, not coercion
<2> farhan: because capitalism always pushes profit
<1> niv_ : government regulations are just that...regulations. and regulations = control of rreedom
<4> Okay, so apparently farhan isn't going to answer my question. I'm done talking to him.
<0> No farhan, the benefits of the software would have stayed in the pockets of a few individuals
<1> Maloeran : yep :-)
<1> and that's good
<2> farhan: his decision basically kept the software out of the market
<2> the market would have done the opposite
<1> niv_ : who's "the market"
<0> It's good for a few individuals to gather large amounts, approvishing the whole society, farhan?
<1> its neither good nor bad
<2> anyone in the market, would want to make a profit
<0> It is bad, it is very harmful!
<2> the market is about maximizing profits
<1> Maloeran : you are quantifying happiness
<0> Money related to happiness below a certain amount, amount which a lot of humans on this earth don't have. It really makes no difference once basic needs are covered
<1> Maloeran : below a certain amount?
<0> Below the amount required to satisfy essential needs such as eating properly and having a roof
<1> Maloeran : that's false. i bet your computer + food makes you more happy than food + no computer
<0> If you believe you are happier with more money, that's because the system hammered this notion in your head, but you just can't be ; it's biochemical
<1> lol "the system"
<1> the government is against us!
<1> run from "the system!"
<0> I meant the socio-economical system, not any government
<1> lol
<2> depends on how you cl***ify basic needs
<2> once a person no longer has to worry about his/her basic needs they are free to pursue their own interests.. this is the highest form of the human condition
<0> Psychological and social needs come afterwards, ***uming most can satisfy them equally in the society
<1> i think socialists and communists are the most decent, respectable people on earth, i really do. I just think their they realize the mechanics behind why their systems have always failed and why they will fail again. Their hearts are in the wrong places
<2> hmm.. I think it has failed because of centralization and vanguard parties attempting to lead a m*** revolution "for the people".. these vanguards simple become the new ruling cl***, and unfortunately that is the leninist/maoist model that has been
<2> copied and tried over and over
<0> Good point, farhan, the socio-economical model must be built to smoothly deal with most humans who will tempt to act only for their own interests, while giving them incentives for their contributions
<2> s/simple/simply/g
<1> Maloeran : now you're talkin!
<1> lol, the Vanguard party! niv, are you a marxist?
<2> I told you, yes.
<1> you know that marx didn't call for a vanguard party...he wanted a gradual movement
<2> farhan: Please re-read what I just wrote.
<1> i know, you're against it
<2> farhan: It was against the idea of a vanguard party.
<2> farhan: OK
<1> but, marx didn't wanted a gradual movement which first started in Europe, NOT Russia
<2> And?
<2> That's irrelevant
<1> when the PPP (People's Party of Pakistan) took control int he 70s or so, the economy was hit bad....when Soniya Ghandi's congress party took control recently in India, investors fled the market, and the stock market tumbled :-)
<2> Actually, Marx said that capitalism would sow the seeds of it's own destruction eventually.
<1> yah, he did
<1> and it hasn't :-)
<4> Hence the "eventually" :P
<2> He based that on the fact that capitalism is unsustainable, it requires more and more resources to keep itself afloat
<0> Of course "investors" flee socialism, the whole concept of socialism is against the mere existence of "investors"
<1> Maloeran : yep, when they you take away capital from a place, it suffers
<0> People who gain more money just because they already have money, without contributing anything to the socety
<0> society*
<2> imperialism shows this necessary growth of capitalism, because it is unsustainable in one location and must move to another and acquire those resources
<2> farhan: what's your definition of capital?
<1> Maloeran : they deserve money for all the hard work they did in finding the investmen topportunity
<1> niv_ : i forgot the one by economics, but its Human's ability to do stuff, physical material and money, i think
<2> farhan: do you know marx's definition of capital? he called it "dead labour".. as in, capital has absolutely no value without the labour of workers
<0> What? They deserve millions and billions, so that they can gain even more, and their actual contribution to society is mostly based on wasting resources just to satisfy a wasteful existence?
<2> farhan: What about people who have the resources to simply purchase the means of production, and exploit others? And what if these people did nothing to earn that wealth in the first place
<0> Wealth is mostly inherited, over many generations
<1> Maloeran : why don't you donate all of your money beyond your "basic needs" to charity?
<2> farhan: Obviously the owner of a company does "work" if he is also a manager of his company, but his wealth primarily comes from his position as owner, not manager.
<0> I actually share everything I don't need, farhan. I even travel by bicycle ;)
<0> I won't force anyone to live by the ethical standards I believe in, but I can at least do so myself
<1> Maloeran : free market in action! its your CHOICE to give away stuff
<1> Maloeran : Free-markets are about Freedom
<0> This has nothing to do with free market
<1> Maloeran : not the government stealing your money
<0> The government is not "stealing", it's redistributing money in a proper way
<2> farhan: Once a person, through whatever means (inheritance or other), acquires enough wealth to purchase a component of the MoP, they begin creating more and more wealth from the exploitation of workers, and they themselves no longer have to everwork
<1> Maloeran : okay, let me go break into my neighbors house and redistribute :-)
<1> Maloeran : what's the difference between theft and redistribution?
<0> Redistribution is supported by the laws the society was built on, theft is not
<2> One is just
<1> lol, so just by defination, they're different? in terms of what actually happens, they're the same
<1> if we defined theft as legal, your argument woudl collapse
<2> so, taxes are all stealing as well then?
<0> Sure, but redistribution of wealth is controlled by the government to be done properly and fairly
<2> oh wait, you actually think that
<1> niv_ : yes
<1> niv_ : i do think that
Return to
#c
or
Go to some related
logs:
#gentoo
ztod password
penis extions
#microsoft
#beginner
#photoshop
Somerset Hills WT
trojan +baptist +phoenix -horse -usc
#cisco
i hate the oilers page
|
|