|
Your continuous donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » General Forums » Politics, Religion & other Controversies » The Wall Street Occupation

Default The Wall Street Occupation

December 14th, 2011, 21:28
Not likely. May as well post a link to a Limbaugh taping…
Thrasher is offline

Thrasher

Thrasher's Avatar
Wheeee!
RPGWatch Donor

#301

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Studio City, CA
Posts: 10,108

Default 

December 14th, 2011, 22:43
Originally Posted by dteowner View Post
An interesting response to the whole OWS thing, me thinks. While Thrasher won't like the website, the article does a fairly good job of expressing the opinion without too much partisan foaming.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/14/du…lled-your-job/
Retort!

Übereil

For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.

H. L. Mencken

The Chaos Cascade
Ubereil is offline

Ubereil

Ubereil's Avatar
Keeper of the Watch

#302

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,263

Default 

December 14th, 2011, 23:43
Ah, a return of the Ayn Rand nonsense. *yawn*

The fallacy of your retort is that there is no demand from people with no money. Jobs must be created or else there is no demand for new products.

In fact, couldn't pass up this little gem:
In fact, paying taxes means you are already making money
This is so completely false that it completely destroys any credibility of your source. Paying taxes on profits means there's a profit, but corporate income tax is only a small portion of total corporate taxation.

Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
Dallas Cowboys: Still afraid to hope / / Detroit Red Wings: Another rollercoaster season?
dteowner is offline

dteowner

dteowner's Avatar
Shoegazer

#303

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 11,340

Default 

December 15th, 2011, 11:03
He gets one fact wrong and everything he says is BS?

Originally Posted by dteowner View Post
The fallacy of your retort is that there is no demand from people with no money. Jobs must be created or else there is no demand for new products.
The fallacy in that is that it's based on the idea that the only way to get money is to have a job.

Übereil

For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.

H. L. Mencken

The Chaos Cascade
Ubereil is offline

Ubereil

Ubereil's Avatar
Keeper of the Watch

#304

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,263

Default 

December 15th, 2011, 14:20
That's a pretty fundamental and basic fact, Ubereil. That's not some trivial detail. It's not like someone not being able to identify chartreuse—that's someone proudly claiming the color of the sky is plaid.

The only sustainable way to get money is to have a job. Sure, you can go on the government tit, but that's not practical for quantities beyond a sliver of society.

Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
Dallas Cowboys: Still afraid to hope / / Detroit Red Wings: Another rollercoaster season?
dteowner is offline

dteowner

dteowner's Avatar
Shoegazer

#305

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 11,340

Default 

December 15th, 2011, 16:14
Right, so what taxes are you talking about that matters in the hiring equation?

And we're talking about demand on a collective level. We've designed it so that the only way for an individual to have money is to have a job. But, if we were to (for instance) remove money alltogether, demand would skyrocket (on the other hand, production would probably plummel).

Übereil

For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.

H. L. Mencken

The Chaos Cascade
Ubereil is offline

Ubereil

Ubereil's Avatar
Keeper of the Watch

#306

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,263

Default 

December 15th, 2011, 16:34
Originally Posted by Ubereil View Post
Right, so what taxes are you talking about that matters in the hiring equation?
FICA (company match for social security and medicare), workforce development (state unemployment), to start with. There are also various taxes and fees that usually change based on headcount, but those two are 100% directly related.
Originally Posted by Ubereil View Post
And we're talking about demand on a collective level. We've designed it so that the only way for an individual to have money is to have a job. But, if we were to (for instance) remove money alltogether, demand would skyrocket (on the other hand, production would probably plummel)
Jeezuz! If (for instance) people shit gold, we'd have no problems at all. Try to keep at least a toe in reality or the conversation is pointless.

Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
Dallas Cowboys: Still afraid to hope / / Detroit Red Wings: Another rollercoaster season?
dteowner is offline

dteowner

dteowner's Avatar
Shoegazer

#307

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 11,340

Default 

December 15th, 2011, 16:36
Universal gold shitting isn't obviously possible, but eliminating the monetary system is.

Also, I have a way to make production levels all but meaningless.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#308

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,809

Default 

December 15th, 2011, 17:20
You might replace fiat value (money) with tangible value (some sort of barter system, perhaps?) but I don't see that you'd ever eliminate some method of tallying value. Each monkey wants more bananas than the monkeys around him, and while you might substitute oranges for bananas, there's still some sort of counter so that "more" can be defined and demonstrated. Even if there's no value to the counter, there will still be one created, just ask the star-bellied sneeches.

Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
Dallas Cowboys: Still afraid to hope / / Detroit Red Wings: Another rollercoaster season?
dteowner is offline

dteowner

dteowner's Avatar
Shoegazer

#309

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 11,340

Default 

December 15th, 2011, 17:24
Originally Posted by dteowner View Post
You might replace fiat value (money) with tangible value (some sort of barter system, perhaps?) but I don't see that you'd ever eliminate some method of tallying value. Each monkey wants more bananas than the monkeys around him, and while you might substitute oranges for bananas, there's still some sort of counter so that "more" can be defined and demonstrated. Even if there's no value to the counter, there will still be one created, just ask the star-bellied sneeches.
The only reason we want more than others, is because the fear of not having enough is instilled in us. That fear is also the reason having more than you need is seen as a quality.

Obviously, that fear is what we need to deal with.

Conveniently, that's very much part of my solution
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#310

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,809

Default 

December 15th, 2011, 17:39
I know where you're heading, but it still doesn't work. There's more than mere fear going on, and one of the favorite leftie soapboxes is actually good proof: rich people generally wanting more money. Once you hit a certain level of wealth, there is no practical limit to what you can have, nor how much of it you can get. All without touching the principal, and there's no way to lose that core outside of gross incompetence. Basically, there is no fear nor unfulfilled want at that point. And yet, they try to acquire more money. Why? Because somewhere there's another monkey with MORE. Bigger bank account, bigger house, more cars, bigger yacht, more ski trips in the Alps, better (man)whores, whatever the measure of choice happens to be. It's an instinctive drive that goes beyond a simple fear of "not enough".

Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
Dallas Cowboys: Still afraid to hope / / Detroit Red Wings: Another rollercoaster season?
dteowner is offline

dteowner

dteowner's Avatar
Shoegazer

#311

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 11,340

Default 

December 15th, 2011, 21:51
@Dart C'mon. Fear of being poor is not the cause for everyone. For such a self-heralded study of the human condition, you'd think you'd be familiar with the concept of greed.
Last edited by Thrasher; December 15th, 2011 at 23:47.
Thrasher is offline

Thrasher

Thrasher's Avatar
Wheeee!
RPGWatch Donor

#312

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Studio City, CA
Posts: 10,108

Default 

December 15th, 2011, 21:52
Thrasher, having read what DTE said, I think it's pretty clear he was actually talking about greed, such as when he said ". Basically, there is no fear nor unfulfilled want at that point. And yet, they try to acquire more money. Why? Because somewhere there's another monkey with MORE. Bigger bank account, bigger house, more cars, bigger yacht, more ski trips in the Alps, better (man)whores, whatever the measure of choice happens to be. It's an instinctive drive that goes beyond a simple fear of "not enough"."

Edit: Thrasher was referring to Dart. Disregard this post!
Last edited by Rithrandil; December 16th, 2011 at 02:30.
Rithrandil is offline

Rithrandil

I bent my wookie

#313

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: VA
Posts: 2,299

Default 

December 15th, 2011, 23:40
It's really just like playing an RPG!! We want more stuff, more gold, more XP, etc; it's how we keep score. Competition is part of our makeup!!

If God said it, then that settles it!!

Editor@RPGWatch
Corwin is offline

Corwin

Corwin's Avatar
On The Razorblade of Life
RPGWatch Team

#314

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 10,551
Send a message via Skype™ to Corwin

Default 

December 15th, 2011, 23:47
R, I was referring to Dart's post.

FIXED.
Thrasher is offline

Thrasher

Thrasher's Avatar
Wheeee!
RPGWatch Donor

#315

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Studio City, CA
Posts: 10,108

Default 

December 16th, 2011, 02:30
Oops. I'll edit mine to reflect that.
Rithrandil is offline

Rithrandil

I bent my wookie

#316

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: VA
Posts: 2,299

Default 

December 16th, 2011, 09:54
Originally Posted by dteowner View Post
I know where you're heading, but it still doesn't work. There's more than mere fear going on, and one of the favorite leftie soapboxes is actually good proof: rich people generally wanting more money. Once you hit a certain level of wealth, there is no practical limit to what you can have, nor how much of it you can get. All without touching the principal, and there's no way to lose that core outside of gross incompetence. Basically, there is no fear nor unfulfilled want at that point. And yet, they try to acquire more money. Why? Because somewhere there's another monkey with MORE. Bigger bank account, bigger house, more cars, bigger yacht, more ski trips in the Alps, better (man)whores, whatever the measure of choice happens to be. It's an instinctive drive that goes beyond a simple fear of "not enough".
Now you're talking about two different things, though. You're talking about the natural competition instilled in us AND the drive for material wealth. Competition isn't just about material wealth or value. Setting yourself apart can be done in a myriad of ways.

If we reduce or remove the value of material things by making them universally available in whatever quantity is required for a practical purpose - beyond basic needs met - then people will find something else to be competitive about. This does depend on the assumption that we have enough natural resources available to not only meet basic needs for everyone, but also for practical purposes beyond that.

But the drive for material things really does begin at the basic stage of the fear of not having enough - the survival instinct. That's why the opposite sex finds it attractive as well, which we all know. What the opposite sex finds attractive is a pretty strong motivator. But it's a long-term process - and not something we can magically remove over the course of a few years. It will likely take generations to fully eliminate the ambition to have more than you need.

It's about security, really. You fear not having what you need mostly on an instinctual level. It's very much about something primal. Unfortunately, the human brain doesn't quite overrule the sensation of security we feel by having MORE than we need, so that we don't run out. So, essentially, we feel ever more secure the further we go beyond what we actually need.

But that's very far from the only reason people strive to get rich - but it's the origin and the primary cause. Remove that, and the rest will eventually follow.

But I don't believe we can eliminate the competitive drive, or the need for attention or love. That's something entirely dffferent. But by eliminating the pursuit of material wealth - we help ensure the even distribution of it to everyone in the world. Which is the ultimate goal.

Because many of the biggest problems in our world has to do with the differences between us (perceived or real), especially in terms of material wealth and the perception of being less because you have less.

The problem with the monetary system is that human beings are too stupid to handle a symbol of value. They can't separate value from the symbol, so they just accumulate more and more - in case something of value should become attractive, and then you need enough wealth to purchase it. The capitalistic system combined with human weakness and stupidity is a very bad cocktail. Because we're not trading things of tangible value - we're trading things of perceived value. That's why you can get people to pay 1000$ for a meal that costs 10$ to make.

There are other equally large issues to deal with, but they tend to blend together. I'd say the biggest one is general ignorance - based on denial - which is again based on the inability to ignore the instinctual and emotional drive and behave rationally. Rational behavior being, more or less exactly, that which results in the most beneficial long-term outcome for everyone.
Last edited by DArtagnan; December 16th, 2011 at 10:13.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#317

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,809

Default 

December 16th, 2011, 10:21
Originally Posted by Thrasher View Post
@Dart C'mon. Fear of being poor is not the cause for everyone. For such a self-heralded study of the human condition, you'd think you'd be familiar with the concept of greed.
Greed applies universally to everything that's perceived as desirable - not just material wealth. It applies to love, sex, food, passion, and so on.

I can't remove greed - but I have an idea of how to remove one of the biggest problems with greed = that which prevents others from surviving or living comfortably.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#318

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,809

Default 

December 16th, 2011, 10:26
Originally Posted by dteowner View Post
FICA (company match for social security and medicare), workforce development (state unemployment), to start with. There are also various taxes and fees that usually change based on headcount, but those two are 100% directly related.
I'll grant you that taxes that raises the cost for hiring hurts job creation. However, I think the problem is that you mean different things by "tax". He's talking about how taxing the rich won't destroy jobs. And when talking about taxing the rich you don't refer to payroll taxes. In fact, I'm pretty sure OWS isn't pissed about the payroll tax not being high enough.

So, I think our two links talk about different things, really. I think some (not all, but some) of the disagreement between leftists and righties is that we don't realize this.

Another point is that the right is bad because it doesn't realize redistribution doesn't hurt the economy and the left is bad because it doesn't realize payroll taxes (and the likes) isn't redistribution. Both sides have things to learn from the other side.

Originally Posted by dteowner View Post
Jeezuz! If (for instance) people shit gold, we'd have no problems at all. Try to keep at least a toe in reality or the conversation is pointless.
Apart from the fact that gold would become valueless if it existed in abundance…

The problem is, though, that pepole don't feel like they can afford to buy stuff. Paul Krugman's written a pretty explanatory example where some friends started a baby sitting economy, using coupons. One coupon represented one baby sitting. The problem was that everyone felt they had too few coupons (what if they needed babysitting several days in a row?), so they felt like they had to save up more coupons before they could do things like go out dancing one night. The result was that no one would pay for babysitting until someone else did, which meant the entire baby sitting economy stood still. The solution ended up being introducing more coupons into the system.

…which IIRC lead to inflation. Economy is a complicated field.

(Basic income guarantee might work to ensure the base economy was always up and running, by the way.)

Übereil

For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.

H. L. Mencken

The Chaos Cascade
Ubereil is offline

Ubereil

Ubereil's Avatar
Keeper of the Watch

#319

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,263

Default 

December 19th, 2011, 16:36
http://news.yahoo.com/more-50-occupy…005726648.html

The day the idealism died? Seems like the OWS clowns are getting a little desperate and frustrated.

Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
Dallas Cowboys: Still afraid to hope / / Detroit Red Wings: Another rollercoaster season?
dteowner is offline

dteowner

dteowner's Avatar
Shoegazer

#320

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 11,340
RPGWatch Forums » General Forums » Politics, Religion & other Controversies » The Wall Street Occupation
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 11:12.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch