Switch Theme:

Dakka's Authoritarian/Libertarian Political Alignment  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
How would you define your Authoritarian/Libertarian Political Alignment
Totalitarianism 2% [ 2 ]
Very Authoritarian 5% [ 6 ]
Somewhat Authoritarian 10% [ 13 ]
Authoritarian-leaning Centrist 8% [ 11 ]
Centrist 17% [ 23 ]
Libertarian-leaning Centrist 18% [ 24 ]
Somewhat Libertarian 23% [ 31 ]
Very Libertarian 11% [ 15 ]
Anarchism 5% [ 7 ]
Total Votes : 132
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in es
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




Vigo. Spain.

I don't know how people can have such vitriol agains't goverment but at the same time ideolize so much private runned business or multinational.
(And to be honest it happens at the inverse too)
Yeah, you can vote with your wallet agains't business that you don't like, and in democratic countries you can vote with... your vote, agaisn't a goverment that you don't like. One can say that a Goverment has much more influence in our lives, and thats true. Unless you live in a country where basic and vital services are literally only provided by one giant monopolic business like gas, or electricity.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/07/22 03:18:09


 Crimson Devil wrote:

Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

ERJAK wrote:
Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

 
   
Made in gb
The Last Chancer Who Survived




United Kingdom

 Peregrine wrote:
Why should I have to pay for your kids to go to school?
Because you and your family, and all of humanity, will see the benefits of an educated population. Uneducated people are fairly useless at building hospitals, fixing people's livers, designing the next technological revolution, etc. And because it is a "pay it forward" system, to which you owe a social debt of gratitude for having reaped these benefits already - due to the system being older than you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Galas wrote:
agains't
There is no apostrophe in "against"

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/22 09:25:05


 
   
Made in us
Kid_Kyoto






Probably work

I'm trying to slowly kill, cripple, and bankrupt all of you and everyone you hold dear because that improves my chances to flourish in this modern world. Slavery is nothing. Real life tyranny the likes of which the world has never before seen is tax dollars going toward anything other than rat poison for your children.

Assume all my mathhammer comes from here: https://github.com/daed/mathhammer 
   
Made in gb
The Last Chancer Who Survived




United Kingdom

 daedalus wrote:
I'm trying to slowly kill, cripple, and bankrupt all of you and everyone you hold dear because that improves my chances to flourish in this modern world. Slavery is nothing. Real life tyranny the likes of which the world has never before seen is tax dollars going toward anything other than rat poison for your children.
Can't tell if serious. But if serious, do you really se *no* benefit to people pooling their resources and working together for something other than an arbitrarily larger bank account?
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






 Selym wrote:
Because you and your family, and all of humanity, will see the benefits of an educated population. Uneducated people are fairly useless at building hospitals, fixing people's livers, designing the next technological revolution, etc. And because it is a "pay it forward" system, to which you owe a social debt of gratitude for having reaped these benefits already - due to the system being older than you.


The same is true of the things that the person I was responding to wants to end. I understand exactly why government-funded schools are good, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of supporting and accepting certain payments from the government for things that you can't do yourself while complaining that you have to pay for other people.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/22 10:02:13


There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Supertony51 wrote:
 skyth wrote:
 Supertony51 wrote:
 sebster wrote:
 Galas wrote:
I think thats the biggest problem. I'm sure that, with a more efficient goverment, people is more willing to pay higger taxes, because you see how they are used and the actual improvement in your life. Even if it doesn't affect directly to you.


Even with efficient government people still resent paying taxes, and don't realise the scope of services and facilities government provides. I mean, how would a person even know if their government was efficient? Do you know what the road you drove to work on cost to build? Do you know what the road should have cost, if it was handled with absolute efficiency?

I'm not saying the roads were done efficiently, I don't know. The problem is no-one else does either. People just take services and infrastructure for granted, but remain resentful about the taxes they pay.


Well, I believe the key here is transparency. People should be able to find out, in a easy manner, how much money is being spent and on what.

Hell, I'm not resentful about the taxes that are spent on common services like Defense, police, roads, even schools, although I feel like property taxes are bs.

What many people seem to be upset about, myself included are taxes being spent frivolously, or redistributed as handouts with no accountability.

Here's an example. My wife and I make over 150k a year. We both work hard, waiting to have kids, don't use drugs or abuse alcohol, and make sound financial decisions. At tax time, we are ineligible for the EITC (earned income tax credit) for our two young children.


Nice dig, implying that people who are receiving assistance are lazy drug users. Not any where close to true, but hey...the myth perpetuates. And guess what, the people that make a lot less work a lot harder than you do. Only reason you got so far ahead is you got lucky.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 skyth wrote:
Employers do not pay based on the value of the work you produce. That's really a load of bull. That 'might' have been true in the past, but is not true now.

Right now, companies give huge raises to the executives and then 'don't have money' to give raises to the workers.
It has nothing to do with your performance. Getting more money is more of a matter of luck than skill.

Also, by default, government is more efficient than private enterprise as government doesn't need to have the waste that is profit.


no government isn't more efficient, ever.

I can't think of one government program that runs in budget and effectively.


Medicare does a lot better and more efficient than private insurance companies.


Additionally, Profit isn't "waste" it is used by a company to expand, which provides new jobs. It is used to develop new methods and technologies that enhance productivity or enrich quality of life..




Profit is 100% waste. It is the extra money that the company charges for its product after all expenses are paid. And btw, expenses include all those things that you mention. The company charges more for stuff than it costs to make it plus R&D, plus inflated executive salaries.


OH boy where to start.

1. I never said anyone was on drugs.


I never said you said it. What I said you did is imply it. Or else what was the point of you bringing it up in the first place?



2. You don't know what I do for a living, I'll just say I work in the finance industry.

Not all "work" has to be hard manual labor. Work includes completing jobs that require education, or expertise. I could say a DR. works harder than a construction worker, their occupation requires far higher amounts of education and training. Those CEO's you seem to be jealous of, many of them spent a decade or more In school, they make decisions which effect the lives of thousands of employees. That "work" is harder than what you do im sure.


It's different from what I do. They do not work 200 times as hard as I do though definitely. And btw, you have to be lucky to have that education and training.


3. I got where I am through good decisions.

Graduating highschool

Not having kids before I was able to support them

Joining the military to gain job experience, and GI BILL

Going to college and getting 3 degrees

Finding and holding a job. When I exited the military I got a job in my industry making 12$ an hour, through my own pursuit of continued education and ambition I've moved up and make much more.

Luck has nothing to do with it.


Luck had a lot more to do with it than you are willing to admit.

You have no control over when and where you are born. Let's see your finance ability do you a lot of good if you were born a female black slave in the 1600's.

You have no control over who your parents are and your upbringing.

You have no control over how much (and what sort of) intelligence you have. Some things come a lot easier than other things to people. My wife would never be able to handle the numbers required for finances. She's smart in other ways, but she wasn't lucky enough to have a gift with numbers that society has deemed to be valuable.

You have very little control over your own health. If you had asthma, you wouldn't have been able to join the military. There goes your GI bill.

Speaking of GI Bill, you had no control over that being in existence in the first place.

You have no control over your physical appearance. Attractive people tend to be more successful and given more opportunities.

You have no control over whether what you went to school for changes.

You have no control over if someone is even more gifted that comes along and keeps you out of your job.

It's a myth that hard work equals success. Not working hard can keep you from achieving success, but the overriding difference between those who are successful and those who are not is just luck.

You know the kind of people who say luck has more to do with success than hard work or education? People who don't have the intestinal fortitude necessary to identify their own failures and improve themselves. They blame everyone else for their problems and bitch and moan about how hard they have it.


You know the people who say luck has nothing to do with success? The people who live in a fantasy land and have no realization or appreciation for what they've been given.


4. Medicare is garbage and is bankrupting the government, it is wasteful and provides gak care.


Nope.


5. No...profit is what's used to expand, improve, or grow a company. expenses are things like electric bills, taxes, and payroll.

As far as CEO salaries, at the end of the day, it really isn't your business how much someone makes. Once again, if you feel that a company isn't being socially responsible, refuse to do business with them.


As a member of society, yes it is my business that wealth isn't being distributed properly. And it's hard to refuse to do business with everyone. That isn't practical. Especially when they are the only providers in the area. There is a serious power discrepancy and that is an issue.
   
Made in us
Virulent Space Marine dedicated to Nurgle





USA

 Peregrine wrote:
 Supertony51 wrote:
Here's an example. My wife and I make over 150k a year. We both work hard, waiting to have kids, don't use drugs or abuse alcohol, and make sound financial decisions. At tax time, we are ineligible for the EITC (earned income tax credit) for our two young children.

Fine whatever, I make enough.

Now take my sister in law.....5 Kids, no job, brother in law can barely hold a job, maybe had a combined income of 10k last year.

They got damn near 7k in EITC, ON TOP OF Medicaid, SNAP, and a plethora of other benefits. So literally money went from my pocket to their hand because they can't get their life straight.

I get it, the kids need to eat, but can anyone explain to me why or how they earned that 7k? Could we at least subtract the monetary amount that they get from their other benefits from that number (4k worth of food stamps over a year gets taken from that 7k).


Here's an example. I have no kids. I am responsible, and don't require any educational expenses for my nonexistent children. As a result I have money left to pay for other things.

Now take Supertony51. Two kids, a job that doesn't pay all that much, and getting the benefit of government-funded schools. So literally money went from my pocket to his hand because he can't get his life straight enough to pay for his own schools/roads/etc.

Why should the concept of "I should only have to pay taxes for people that I approve of" stop at providing certain welfare benefits? Why should I have to pay for your kids to go to school?

Additionally, Profit isn't "waste" it is used by a company to expand, which provides new jobs. It is used to develop new methods and technologies that enhance productivity or enrich quality of life.


No, that's not what profit is. Money spent on expansion, R&D, etc, is classified as expenses. Profit is the money left over after expenses, including growth expenses, have been paid. It goes out to the shareholders or is saved for the future, or is given as bonus payments to the CEO, but it certainly is not improving the lives of anyone who isn't a shareholder or in upper management.



Awww, look at the weak attempt at a personal attack, how cute.

Pretty sure I specifically said that I'm perfectly fine with taxes paying for common services....like schools.

I'm not okay with direct redistribution of "my" money to other people, especially when their situation is primarily of their own making.

If your cool with that fine, create a non-profit that can collect donations from like minded folks and can hand money over to people through your own free will.

1500pt
2500pt 
   
Made in us
Virulent Space Marine dedicated to Nurgle





USA

 skyth wrote:
 Supertony51 wrote:
 skyth wrote:
 Supertony51 wrote:
 sebster wrote:
 Galas wrote:
I think thats the biggest problem. I'm sure that, with a more efficient goverment, people is more willing to pay higger taxes, because you see how they are used and the actual improvement in your life. Even if it doesn't affect directly to you.


Even with efficient government people still resent paying taxes, and don't realise the scope of services and facilities government provides. I mean, how would a person even know if their government was efficient? Do you know what the road you drove to work on cost to build? Do you know what the road should have cost, if it was handled with absolute efficiency?

I'm not saying the roads were done efficiently, I don't know. The problem is no-one else does either. People just take services and infrastructure for granted, but remain resentful about the taxes they pay.


Well, I believe the key here is transparency. People should be able to find out, in a easy manner, how much money is being spent and on what.

Hell, I'm not resentful about the taxes that are spent on common services like Defense, police, roads, even schools, although I feel like property taxes are bs.

What many people seem to be upset about, myself included are taxes being spent frivolously, or redistributed as handouts with no accountability.

Here's an example. My wife and I make over 150k a year. We both work hard, waiting to have kids, don't use drugs or abuse alcohol, and make sound financial decisions. At tax time, we are ineligible for the EITC (earned income tax credit) for our two young children.


Nice dig, implying that people who are receiving assistance are lazy drug users. Not any where close to true, but hey...the myth perpetuates. And guess what, the people that make a lot less work a lot harder than you do. Only reason you got so far ahead is you got lucky.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 skyth wrote:
Employers do not pay based on the value of the work you produce. That's really a load of bull. That 'might' have been true in the past, but is not true now.

Right now, companies give huge raises to the executives and then 'don't have money' to give raises to the workers.
It has nothing to do with your performance. Getting more money is more of a matter of luck than skill.

Also, by default, government is more efficient than private enterprise as government doesn't need to have the waste that is profit.


no government isn't more efficient, ever.

I can't think of one government program that runs in budget and effectively.


Medicare does a lot better and more efficient than private insurance companies.


Additionally, Profit isn't "waste" it is used by a company to expand, which provides new jobs. It is used to develop new methods and technologies that enhance productivity or enrich quality of life..




Profit is 100% waste. It is the extra money that the company charges for its product after all expenses are paid. And btw, expenses include all those things that you mention. The company charges more for stuff than it costs to make it plus R&D, plus inflated executive salaries.


OH boy where to start.

1. I never said anyone was on drugs.


I never said you said it. What I said you did is imply it. Or else what was the point of you bringing it up in the first place?



2. You don't know what I do for a living, I'll just say I work in the finance industry.

Not all "work" has to be hard manual labor. Work includes completing jobs that require education, or expertise. I could say a DR. works harder than a construction worker, their occupation requires far higher amounts of education and training. Those CEO's you seem to be jealous of, many of them spent a decade or more In school, they make decisions which effect the lives of thousands of employees. That "work" is harder than what you do im sure.


It's different from what I do. They do not work 200 times as hard as I do though definitely. And btw, you have to be lucky to have that education and training.


3. I got where I am through good decisions.

Graduating highschool

Not having kids before I was able to support them

Joining the military to gain job experience, and GI BILL

Going to college and getting 3 degrees

Finding and holding a job. When I exited the military I got a job in my industry making 12$ an hour, through my own pursuit of continued education and ambition I've moved up and make much more.

Luck has nothing to do with it.


Luck had a lot more to do with it than you are willing to admit.

You have no control over when and where you are born. Let's see your finance ability do you a lot of good if you were born a female black slave in the 1600's.

You have no control over who your parents are and your upbringing.

You have no control over how much (and what sort of) intelligence you have. Some things come a lot easier than other things to people. My wife would never be able to handle the numbers required for finances. She's smart in other ways, but she wasn't lucky enough to have a gift with numbers that society has deemed to be valuable.

You have very little control over your own health. If you had asthma, you wouldn't have been able to join the military. There goes your GI bill.

Speaking of GI Bill, you had no control over that being in existence in the first place.

You have no control over your physical appearance. Attractive people tend to be more successful and given more opportunities.

You have no control over whether what you went to school for changes.

You have no control over if someone is even more gifted that comes along and keeps you out of your job.

It's a myth that hard work equals success. Not working hard can keep you from achieving success, but the overriding difference between those who are successful and those who are not is just luck.

You know the kind of people who say luck has more to do with success than hard work or education? People who don't have the intestinal fortitude necessary to identify their own failures and improve themselves. They blame everyone else for their problems and bitch and moan about how hard they have it.


You know the people who say luck has nothing to do with success? The people who live in a fantasy land and have no realization or appreciation for what they've been given.


4. Medicare is garbage and is bankrupting the government, it is wasteful and provides gak care.


Nope.


5. No...profit is what's used to expand, improve, or grow a company. expenses are things like electric bills, taxes, and payroll.

As far as CEO salaries, at the end of the day, it really isn't your business how much someone makes. Once again, if you feel that a company isn't being socially responsible, refuse to do business with them.


As a member of society, yes it is my business that wealth isn't being distributed properly. And it's hard to refuse to do business with everyone. That isn't practical. Especially when they are the only providers in the area. There is a serious power discrepancy and that is an issue.


1. What does being born as a black slave in the 1600's have to do with anything. We are talking about people born in America in the modern age. We can talk about economic privilege, I can understand that, but it still doesn't dispute the fact that peoples situations, in their adult life, are largely due to their own decisions.

You can be raised by substandard parents and still end up successful if you want. Unlikely, but it can happen. Even in those situations where someone has gakky parents, it's no fault of mine and they aren't entitled to my labor just because they have a gakky mom or dad. the world isn't fair.

since im pressed for time i'll skip addressing everything you listed. Long story short, is their luck, sure, but it plays a far less a part than making good or bad decisions as an adult.

Lastly, no it's still not your business on how much someone does or does not make. You aren't entitled to someone elses labor, no matter how you try to justify it. If I start a business, build it from the ground up and am successful, that's my money im earning and you aren't entitled to it. That's slavery.


1500pt
2500pt 
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

You've posited and refuted your argument between one sentence and the next.

...peoples situations, in their adult life, are largely due to their own decisions.

You can be raised by substandard parents and still end up successful if you want. Unlikely, but it can happen.

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in us
Virulent Space Marine dedicated to Nurgle





USA

 Kilkrazy wrote:
You've posited and refuted your argument between one sentence and the next.

...peoples situations, in their adult life, are largely due to their own decisions.

You can be raised by substandard parents and still end up successful if you want. Unlikely, but it can happen.


I'm conceding that some people are born into better situations than others. I still make the point that a persons success is largely based on their personal decisions.

I guess I should have worded that better. I'm working a early shift on a Saturday and my brain hasn't absorbed coffee yet.

1500pt
2500pt 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Plus good or bad decisions play little role in success.

Luck (in the form of genetics(intelligence, health, and appearance), upbringing(values imparted, network, support, and location), circumstances, and other people(Someone better wasn't around, you randomly run into the right people)) play a much much larger role.

But continue living in your fantasy land where if everyone made the same decisions you did, they would be just as well off as you are...
   
Made in us
Virulent Space Marine dedicated to Nurgle





USA

 skyth wrote:
Plus good or bad decisions play little role in success.

Luck (in the form of genetics(intelligence, health, and appearance), upbringing(values imparted, network, support, and location), circumstances, and other people(Someone better wasn't around, you randomly run into the right people)) play a much much larger role.

But continue living in your fantasy land where if everyone made the same decisions you did, they would be just as well off as you are...


LOL

Experiences may very, you seem to live in a world where if one man walks into a room with 5 dollars and another walks in with 1, that somehow the man with 5 didn't earn it and they exploited the man with 1.

1500pt
2500pt 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Strawman much?
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

Harvard Business Review did an interesting article on executives in large businesses.

Their finding was that the correlation between ability/skills and success was fairly weak. It was more important to be lucky. This brought you to the attention of the top execs, and they preferentially selected you for further promotion.

https://hbr.org/2015/11/are-successful-ceos-just-lucky

HBR makes the point that promotion clearly is not on the basis of merit alone, or higher management would not be dominated by white men.

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





And really what I'm trying to do is stop the perpuation of the myth that people are only poor because they are bad people.

Since they are painted as bad people, it is fine to dehumanize them and paint them as not deserving of anything.
   
Made in gb
The Last Chancer Who Survived




United Kingdom

Speaking from personal experience, there are limits to what each person can do.

- Some people are just not very capable. They might only be able to work in a warehouse, or are barely intelligent enough to be someone's cleaner. These jobs do not pay well, and will often have you not earn enough money to feed yourself or your kids.

- No matter how capable a population is, there have to be people at the bottom. It is not logically possible for everyone to "pull themselves up by the bootstraps", because every economy needs people to stay at the bottom rung. It is a fact of economies. No matter how hard everyone works, somebody's going to get gakked on by the system.

- Some success does rely on the downfall of others. Companies go bust, people get laid off, skillsets get made redundant. All can contribute to someone spending most of their life in need of support measures.

As a result, it is far from just laziness and poor decisions that keep people down.
   
Made in us
Wise Ethereal with Bodyguard




Catskills in NYS

 Selym wrote:
- No matter how capable a population is, there have to be people at the bottom. It is not logically possible for everyone to "pull themselves up by the bootstraps", because every economy needs people to stay at the bottom rung. It is a fact of economies. No matter how hard everyone works, somebody's going to get gakked on by the system.

a. This does not mean their lives have to be horrible. You can still do the menial jobs of society without undue suffer, which is the point of a lot of leftist policies.

b. it's also not true because of one important thing. *automation* Before we "needed" people to me poor to do the things like mining, construction, farming, ect. But with the growth of automation that is no longer true. And this leaves us two options. With everything getting cheaper and cheaper to make, do we take care of those who cannot do anything, or leave them to fail. I know what side I'm on.

And, eventually, we will reach a point (more specifically, post-scarcity) where we'll either have to transition into a socialist or pseudo-communism state, or just become a capitalist distopia, where only those who control the production can survive.

Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
 kronk wrote:
Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
 sebster wrote:
Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
 BaronIveagh wrote:
Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
 
   
Made in gb
The Last Chancer Who Survived




United Kingdom

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
 Selym wrote:
- No matter how capable a population is, there have to be people at the bottom. It is not logically possible for everyone to "pull themselves up by the bootstraps", because every economy needs people to stay at the bottom rung. It is a fact of economies. No matter how hard everyone works, somebody's going to get gakked on by the system.

a. This does not mean their lives have to be horrible. You can still do the menial jobs of society without undue suffer, which is the point of a lot of leftist policies.

b. it's also not true because of one important thing. *automation* Before we "needed" people to me poor to do the things like mining, construction, farming, ect. But with the growth of automation that is no longer true. And this leaves us two options. With everything getting cheaper and cheaper to make, do we take care of those who cannot do anything, or leave them to fail. I know what side I'm on.

And, eventually, we will reach a point (more specifically, post-scarcity) where we'll either have to transition into a socialist or pseudo-communism state, or just become a capitalist distopia, where only those who control the production can survive.
I see nothing disputable here, except for one thing. We have not reached sufficient levels of automation yet to resolve the issue of "the working class poor".

While governments *should* ensure that even the lowest-wage workers are making a living wage that sad fact is they are reluctant to do it. The UK government claims to have guaranteed a Living Wage, but what they actually did was redefine "Living Wage" to mean whatever they want it to mean.
   
Made in us
Kid_Kyoto






Probably work

 Selym wrote:
 daedalus wrote:
I'm trying to slowly kill, cripple, and bankrupt all of you and everyone you hold dear because that improves my chances to flourish in this modern world. Slavery is nothing. Real life tyranny the likes of which the world has never before seen is tax dollars going toward anything other than rat poison for your children.
Can't tell if serious. But if serious, do you really se *no* benefit to people pooling their resources and working together for something other than an arbitrarily larger bank account?


It was not serious at all. The fact that it's impossible to tell if that kind of stuff IS serious says something about the world we live in though.

Assume all my mathhammer comes from here: https://github.com/daed/mathhammer 
   
Made in gb
The Last Chancer Who Survived




United Kingdom

 daedalus wrote:
 Selym wrote:
 daedalus wrote:
I'm trying to slowly kill, cripple, and bankrupt all of you and everyone you hold dear because that improves my chances to flourish in this modern world. Slavery is nothing. Real life tyranny the likes of which the world has never before seen is tax dollars going toward anything other than rat poison for your children.
Can't tell if serious. But if serious, do you really se *no* benefit to people pooling their resources and working together for something other than an arbitrarily larger bank account?


It was not serious at all. The fact that it's impossible to tell if that kind of stuff IS serious says something about the world we live in though.
Who needs Grimdark, amirite?

(Goes off into a corner to pretend we don't live in a universe where some people make it so that we need 40k to remind us that it *could* be worse)
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






 Supertony51 wrote:
Pretty sure I specifically said that I'm perfectly fine with taxes paying for common services....like schools.


And my point is that you're defining "common services" in an arbitrary way that just happens to exclude the things you don't want to pay for, but leaves the things that you personally benefit from.

I'm not okay with direct redistribution of "my" money to other people, especially when their situation is primarily of their own making.


But you sure seem to be ok with direct redistribution of my money to yourself, even though your situation is primarily of your own making.

If your cool with that fine, create a non-profit that can collect donations from like minded folks and can hand money over to people through your own free will.


The same could be said of all of the government services that you benefit from and want to keep.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in gb
The Last Chancer Who Survived




United Kingdom

In terms of where a person's money is going, how does nobody just imagine that their tax is just going into one thing? Each government funded project will cost millions to billions of tax dollars/pounds. Your lifetime tax contributions will most likely make only a fraction of one project. Why not just imagine that all your money is going to roadworks, or schools, or something else that fits the criterion of selfish gain, while everyone else is paying for the chaff?
   
Made in us
Kid_Kyoto






Probably work

 Selym wrote:
In terms of where a person's money is going, how does nobody just imagine that their tax is just going into one thing? Each government funded project will cost millions to billions of tax dollars/pounds. Your lifetime tax contributions will most likely make only a fraction of one project. Why not just imagine that all your money is going to roadworks, or schools, or something else that fits the criterion of selfish gain, while everyone else is paying for the chaff?


I actually like thinking about them as a membership fee to belong to society. I don't mind the majority of the ones that I currently pay, but new or additional taxes are things I'm not necessarily excited about the idea of. Not always though. I think during this last election, I voted to increase taxes to provide additional revenue specifically for upkeep on the Missouri national parks. That gak's basically my backyard.

Assume all my mathhammer comes from here: https://github.com/daed/mathhammer 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




Co'tor Shas wrote:And, eventually, we will reach a point (more specifically, post-scarcity) where we'll either have to transition into a socialist or pseudo-communism state
Yup, higher taxes that pay for social services and support of the poor are essentially a type of guillotine insurance for the rich, that is: if they want to avoid a revolution.
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

Respect existence or expect resistance.

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in gb
The Last Chancer Who Survived




United Kingdom

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Respect existence or expect resistance.
Resistance is futile.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut



Glasgow

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

And, eventually, we will reach a point (more specifically, post-scarcity) where we'll either have to transition into a socialist or pseudo-communism state, or just become a capitalist distopia, where only those who control the production can survive.


I think the likelihood of humanity achieving a post-scarcity economy in the next thousand years is pretty close to nil. Your talking about a society that can build dyson spheres and we can currently only harness a fraction of a single planet's energy output. I don't think we can risk waiting on that to push for a socio-anarchist society. We need to get a shift on before 90% of people lose their jobs to robots and AIs in the next thirty years or so. Unfortunatley, almost no governments are even thinking about the oncoming disaster because A) it's almost incomprehensible and B) talking about how everyone will be losing their jobs and we're going to have to deal with it rather than just stop it from happening isn't really a vote-winner.
   
Made in gb
The Last Chancer Who Survived




United Kingdom

It's wonderful how we could solve these sorts of problems, if humanity as a whole could actually be bothered to face up to them. The sad reality is that politicians cannot discuss serious issues with human organisation as a whole, because it implicates the voter as well as the politician as being at fault. I've had a few of these discussions before, and it almost always results in people mentally running away and hiding from it.

To get to this ideal of post-scarcity, we would need a massive boost to science funding, international cooperation on the conservation and efficient use of Earth's resources, and an everyone-is-in-on-it push to get into space. We'd need new industries, we would have to basically scrap the current education system (as it is both incredibly inefficient and out of date in the UK and US), and we would have to realign our social values from "protect ourselves from other humans" to "do what is necessary to stop our faults from getting us killed".

Not an easy task.

Not to mention that we have no experts on how to actually reach post-scarcity, never mind experts on how such a system would work.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/23 13:48:19


 
   
Made in us
Terrifying Rhinox Rider




That does seem like a formidable challenge. It is really begging the question to refer to post-scarcity however because it assumes scarcity. I think giving extensive attention to the concept is solutionist. There are many suggestions, very much in the popular media even, that enough food and housing is produced to feed and house the entire population.
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

As I understand it, we already live in a post-scarcity age in terms of food production, but there are people dying of starvation because their countries are involved in civil war which disrupts distribution channels (e.g. The Yemen, South Sudan, etc.)

A different example is the scarcity of housing in the UK, which isn't caused by a scarcity of space or capacity to build housing, but by a system of perverse incentives that prevent local councils from building social housing while leading house building companies to use their land banks to produce retirement homes because there is a lower tax regime making such projects more profitable.


I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: