I have just read that 110 people cause £34 million pounds worth of damage etc a year, in my home town of Bristol (England).

Now then, Why should the majority suffer because of the minority. There are nearly 600,000 people living in Bristol.

Why can we not lock these thugs in prison for the rest of their lives? And not one of these modern prisons with TV's and nice beds, more like the ones that I described here (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=11011) , or for those lazy people a qoute...

Put a hangmans noose in each prison cell with instructions on how to use it. (most arn't very intelligent)
Also I do not think that prisons should be that cosy... i.e. dont let them out of thier cells, (not even to see a doctor), only feed them the basics.(i.e. bread and water), dont let them communicate in anyway with anyone. Instead of a toilet give them a bucket which is only emptied once a month... Wake them up every hour with a load speaker.

“Babies who are in a nurturing environment where they can learn and grow will be physically and emotionally healthier in later life than children who live in stifled environments. I really wonder if that theory does not only apply to babies, but people of all ages. We are all nothing but babies who will not be healthy unless our environment is nurturing us. Is your environment nurturing you?”


most of the damage caused to this planet is the result of antiquated government systems and capitalism.

it is amazingly legal for companies to use earth's resources and human resources to create useless products. furthermore, most of these products r not only completely useless, they r harmful to the people that use them and to the earth as well.

not only that, the companies that make these products use more of human/earth resources to promote and sell these products. furthermore, they must increase their promotions and marketing in order to survive against competition. then there is the research and development departments using more time and resources to make these useless products more palatable 2 the consumers.

instead of dedicating our efforts to helping hungry people,

we as a species put obscene amounts of energy, resources, and efforts into creating useless products,

then, creating packaging and sales forces, and commercials, and paperwork, and more sales forces in the noble effort to sell these useless products

who really causes the most damage?

all of a sudden we as common people r lashing out in anger, and hurting ourselves and others around us.

no wonder we become criminals.
why would we not become criminals?

in a society where our leaders r completly ignorant and indifferent of the damage they cause, should we sit back and follow their laws? y shouldnt we retaliate?

y wouldnt the people at the bottom become angry, and act out in impulse, and commit crimes against one another?


1) leaders create government
2) government sets the rules and enforces the rules
3) these rules completely ignore and r indifferent 2 the repercussions and effects that they have on the planet and it's inhabitants
4) only a tiny handful of people actually live in nurturing environments (do you?). the vast remaining majority live in stifled environments.
5) the common people become depressed, angry, frustrated.
6) many of them act out in violence, hurting themselves and these around them
7) leaders lock them up, and wonder why they r committing crimes

I guess they forget the studies proving that positive nurturing people and environments decrease and even eliminate violent patterns and aggression in children and adults alike.

Cool skill:
all of a sudden we as common people r lashing out in anger, and hurting ourselves and others around us.

Crime has existed since the dawn of humanity, before humans were human. Of course, this is obvious to anyone with an IQ above lukewarm.....

in a society where our leaders r completly ignorant and indifferent of the damage they cause, should we sit back and follow their laws? y shouldnt we retaliate?

What, by posting inane arguments with poor spelling? Seems you are retaliating.

I guess they forget the studies proving that positive nurturing people and environments decrease and even eliminate violent patterns and aggression in children and adults alike.

Or maybe they simply can't be bothered with the revolt of the lower against the higher.

Originally posted by Xev
Crime has existed since the dawn of humanity, before humans were human. Of course, this is obvious to anyone with an IQ above lukewarm.....
[/B]
y?

What, by posting inane arguments with poor spelling?

how is it inane??
Seems you are retaliating.
oh yes! i shall conquer evil with the might of my grammatical errors.

Or maybe they simply can't be bothered with the revolt of the lower against the higher.
wow!
its amazing!
ur absolutly right!

Cool Skill - >

You make a good argument. As I understand it though, you are passing on the blame. Basically you are saying that its ok to commit crime because I am not as well off as other people?

So does this mean that I can go up to Bill Gate's, punch him in the face and nick his mobile phone, just because he is richer than I? Just because he created something that has saved the whole world billions of billions of pounds, by creating a product?

Ok, so that is a silly example, but you see the extremes. It is the individual who commits the crime, and the individual who should be punished regardless of the motives.

I don't go around acting like an idiot (well thats what i think anyway:D ) commiting crimes, costing my city £34 million a year. Why should I pay my taxes to repair damage that some johnny nobrane has done? I would rather pay my taxes to keep them in jail.

edit -> Just did a calculation, and it turns out that if I over simplify the situation and assume that every one in Bristol pays taxes (bugger off illegal immigrants) I personally pay 51 pence a year to repair damage caused by ONE of them. That is £56 for all 110 people, a year! This should be going to schools not to repair damage caused, by these thugs.

Originally posted by Xev
Cool skill:


Crime has existed since the dawn of humanity, before humans were human. Of course, this is obvious to anyone with an IQ above lukewarm.....


Not exactly true. For crimes to be commited there must be laws to be broken. Laws did not exist till man was socially and morally able to make them.

Originally posted by sjmarsha
you are saying that its ok to commit crime because I am not as well off as other people?

no
that would not be a good idea


So does this mean that I can go up to Bill Gate's, punch him in the face and nick his mobile phone, just because he is richer than I?
i dont think that would benifit anybody either
then again
we could all use a good laugh
seriously -> no. i would not recomend punching anybody. or eating their mobile phone.


Ok, so that is a silly example, but you see the extremes. It is the individual who commits the crime
y?


I would rather pay my taxes to keep them in jail
i would rather pay no taxes at all
the concept of taxing your own people is outdated, and should be abolished


This should be going to schools not to repair damage caused, by these thugs.
u would prbably get laughed at by "these thugs"

i would rather pay no taxes at all

Well, how else would you pay for public services?

u would prbably get laughed at by "these thugs"

I do not care. I would chuck them into my prison, and then we would see who is laughing, wouldn't we.

Originally posted by DeSeRt RaT UK
Not exactly true. For crimes to be commited there must be laws to be broken. Laws did not exist till man was socially and morally able to make them.
xev?
is this true?



Originally posted by sjmarsha
Well, how else would you pay for public services?

i think ur smart enough 2 figure out an answer 2 that question.
(just think in terms of diverting the time and energy we use to pay for useless products, the promotion of useless products, and the administration of it all by the government)

(it might also be helpful if we got rid of our set ways of understanding the world in terms of a system of competition and capitalization between one another as being NORMAL.
instead we could think of the possibility that our structure based on competition may actually be HARMFUL. u might then think of a better structure. then u might ask:
what services are needed?
how can these services be provided?
what forms of compensation would be best?)


I do not care. I would chuck them into my prison, and then we would see who is laughing, wouldn't we.
good luck!

I have just read that 110 people cause £34 million pounds worth of damage etc a year, in my home town of Bristol (England).

Would it not be a lot less difficult and more economical to pay them 15 million POUNDS to not cause damage? Then they could drive nice cars and eat at nice restaurants. Then they too would be eager to jail the NEXT 110 bastards.

Let me get this straight... you're going to pay me a share of 15 million quid to help trash bristol?

o-kaaay.... i'm in.

or rather, my mistake... i'll promise not to trash bristol for a share in 15 million pounds. yeah. thats it.

that what you mean macheon?

Would it not be a lot less difficult and more economical to pay them 15 million POUNDS to not cause damage? Then they could drive nice cars and eat at nice restaurants. Then they too would be eager to jail the NEXT 110 bastards.

Umm, you are an idiot.

it might also be helpful if we got rid of our set ways of understanding the world in terms of a system of competition and capitalization between one another as being NORMAL.

Do you not think that we might stagnate? No competition means that there is a lot less desire to improve, and expand our knowledge base.

For general crimes of thievery and 'mild' violence.

First offence: Fine 3 months wages or equivalent in goods. Put them in the stocks for a week in the middle of the mall + 2 weeks solitary with intense counselling.

Second offence: Fine 6 months wages or equivalent. 2 months in solitary + psychological counselling.

Third offence: Fine 12 months wages or equiv. Minimum 3 months or longer solitary + psychological REprogramming , until 'cured'.

Fourth offence: Fine 5 years wages. 5 years in work prison, ie producing goods for sale by govt but unpaid. Intense reprogramming.

For Rape, Murder and treason:

Fine them their entire assets and offer them a choice of death or a lifetime in work prison--no parole and no outside contact except lawyer for appeals.

In an intelligent system, only those who can't abide by the system are criminals.

The correct thing to do with criminals is to reserve an area for them where they must find their own way of surviving.

I think that area is currently called "America."

To the leftisting whining about capitalism: yes, it sucks, but only because money is the goal. Competition is essential to human progress.

To the leftisting whining about capitalism: yes, it sucks, but only because money is the goal. Competition is essential to human progress.

Saying the world could be a better place through a more even distrubution of the essentials is not whining. But saying that the world would be a better place through the more even distrubution of $100 nikes and striped toothpaste is. Even I will admit that the blinding swarm of life can only be made so pretty by the soothing illusion of altruism. But cooperation can breed strength as well as competition. It is the goals of either system that tend to worry me. Or rather who is responsible for naming those goals....

Originally posted by machaon
It is the goals of either system that tend to worry me. Or rather who is responsible for naming those goals....
but u r responsible. arnt we all?

Originally posted by sjmarsha
Do you not think that we might stagnate? No competition means that there is a lot less desire to improve, and expand our knowledge base.
i kno u don’t need me 2 answer this.
u really shouldn’t underestimate ur own creativity.
can anybody think of other methods of motivation to improve our society?

is a system based on competing and capitalization of one another the best way to motivate society to improve?
or could it be possible that competition actually plays a large role in hindering us from progressing as well as we should be.

1) all competition does is promote commercialization.
instead of focusing our time and resources creating better and better products, we create halfway decent products, and focus our time and resources trying to get people to buy these products.

when you look at companies, and check the difference in sizes between the marketing department and research/development department, you find that the marketing departments are much much larger than the research/development.

will making better products mean more money for your company?
no because it’s all in marketing.
companies with excellent marketing strategies step all over companies with excellent products.


examples on how capitalization and competition does not increase our desire to improve, but instead promotes deceptive marketing strategies that push better products to the side (which in turn does not cause progress to stagnate, but it definitely slows it down in more ways that i can mention here):

everybody knows that windows is far from the best operating system. why do we all use it? because of the one thing microsoft is good at . . . marketing.
apple has the best processors, and overall computer systems in the world. so y arnt they the best selling computers?
because as we all know, their marketing strategies are horrible. take any marketing class, and they will show you how apple constantly proves to the world how not to market a product.
nintendo used 2 reign at the top of the video game industry. their gamecube (by far the best sytem out there for video game potential) can outrun anything. what happened to them? first they let sony obtain rights to publish games for the best develiopers. then they create the n64 wich game developers had a much more difficult time writing for. eventually these game developers decided that it would be much more profitable to devote their efforts to sony. then they release gamecube wich does not even play dvds, had the most painstaking form of distribution (overseas), and they let microsofts advertising campains tear their ad campaigns to smitherines. (microsoft’s ads did a great job convincing people that the xbox was a better system for playing games. following sony’s example by adding a dvd player was excellent. so was learning from sony’s distribution mistake, and manufacturing the xbox as close to the usa as possible.)



2) putting an end 2 all this competition will not cause anybody to stagnate.
in fact, there r many ways to promote growth. because there is no more competition, energy and resources spent on competing for sales and markets can be diverted elsewhere.
what makes me think that the energy will be diverted to better research and development, and progress instead of another form of waste?
it all depends on other factors.

a)it is definitely possible that if we don’t set ourselves up correctly we can come across more problems that prevent our progress. the energy we used for competition could end up being used for destruction.

b)it is also possible that humans are prone to progress, and that no matter what, we will continue to accomplish other things. the elimination of a competitive system is looked at as simply one accomplishment. afterwards, we will automatically divert our energies into making further progress.

c)another possibility is for us to create a system that will promote progress. a system where everybody’s needs are taken care of, people are living in a positive clean nurturing encouraging environment (and therefore become less aggressive beings), the earth is well nourished, people are well educated, society is well organized yet it does not hinder freedom, people r encouraged to care for eachother, care for their environment, and use their creative energies to better understand the world and the people around them so that we can develop better laws, better products, better everything.

my main answers to all of your questions is be creative. when solving problems, u hav the ability 2 cum up with solutions that do not hurt anybody. solutions wher everybody wins.



3)
i look around and see doctors and scientists. but then i wake up and realize im only seeing pontentials.
in reality im looking at crackheads, dope dealers, prostitutes, and little baby wanna be thugs.
wat happend that these humans that r all born with so much potential 2 do so much good but never access it, or even worse, use it to hurt others?
y do some refuse to work, and instead sit around all day playing cards or doing drugs, or doing nothing, or sleeping all day?
y do we commit these crimes and hurt others and hurt ourselves?
y do people who follow the law refuse 2 put themselves in our shoes?
y do they criticize us 4 commiting violent acts.
if they lived the same lives, wore the same shoes, and went through the same experiences and frustrations, they would probably b just as violent. they would probably commit just as many crimes, hurt just as many people, and escape in the same drugs and alcohol.
drugs and violence is all around us. we grow up in it, that is all we see, and that is what we become.

we r the thugs of the future
our parents are violent so we learn violence
our parents do drugs and alcohol so we do drugs and alcohol
our parents don’t kno how 2 read so they don’t teach us how 2 read
our schools r crowded
our teachers r teachers r too overburdened 2 giv us any form of care and attention
everyone around us glorifies guns so we glorify guns
everyone around us sells dope so we sell dope
that is all we know
that is all we ever think 2 want 2 kno
we never learned 2 seek knowledge
we never ask 4 a better life because-
we never learned that ther is a better life 2 ask 4
we r the children of today
we r the county’s prisoners of the future

some say that the first 6 months of our life determines our personality
weather that’s tru or not, what is tru is that
the less attention and affection u giv 2 a child or baby, the more aggressive and impulsive that child will become.
aggressive impulsive children grow up 2 become aggressive impulsive adults.
aggressive impulsive adults r depcted as violent natured people
no matter what u consciously do to this adult, no matter how much that adult consciously tries 2 be peaceful, the aggressive impulsive behavior will remain etched into that person’s subconscious.
no matter what, the right set of stimuli will ALWAYS cause the violent response (destruction, vandalism, battery, rape, aka violent crimes).

our goal is 2 eliminate the crime. how can we do it without hurting anybody?
hatred for this violent person will get us nowhere fast.
locking a person away only temporarily alleviates the problem.
the only way is 2 understand the source, 2 eliminate the source of it all.



4)the source is the our outdated political/economic system.
we eliminate it, and everything about it.
our current laws, our current system structure, our city layouts, everything.
just dump it all like the garbage that it is.

the next step is 2 create brand new system using our understanding of humans and the world. (see #2c above)
this new system that is not based on competition would leave room for us 2 create a basis for proper child care.
this new system would eliminate the crime by eliminating the source
the source being an environment that attaches a violent nature 2 the child.
in its place is a new environment that nurtures and provides the child with attention and affection that will automatically attach a more peaceful nature 2 the child.

again, u can find answers 2 any of ur questions using ur own creativity.
there is always a peaceful solution where everybody wins. its up 2 u 2 b creative enough 2 find it.
if ur solutions involve hurting or someone, i suggest u rethink them and don’t b shy about using ur imagination. u hav it 4 a reason.

contact except lawyer for appeals.

You must be joking!! The appeal court would be disbanded if it was my choice.

Cool Skill - > Can I ask you a question? (No objections so...)

Are you a criminal/illegal Drug user?

Let me ask another question...

Why did America decide to go into space? Was it curiosity (spelling) or was it competition from the Russians?

When are the biggest improvements in human knowledge made? During WARS or times of competition against other countries...

Why have some people started to privately launch a space craft? For a competition...

Get my point?

I have just read that 110 people cause £34 million pounds worth of damage etc a year, in my home town of Bristol (England).
that doesnt mean they cause all of the damage.

coolskill, you the man. :D

Originally posted by sjmarsha
Are you a criminal/illegal Drug user?
not that i kno of

Get my point?
do humans need wars or competition 2 motivate us 2 progress?
would putting an end 2 war(destruction, killing, and fighting) with one another and capitalizing(using and taking advantage) off of one another hinder us from improving our lives?

r u trying 2 convince people that destruction, killing, fighting, taking advantage of eachother, and the time, energy, and resources to do all of these things will give everybody involved a better quality of life?

Your right capt'n (i've always wanted to say that!) They didn't cause all the damage in Bristol... But £34 million is a hell of a lot of money.

I am not saying that we need wars, my point was that wars are a kind of competition... and that is what speeds up the development of new technology and other ideas, However in my opinion I would rather have internal competition rather than wars where people would die.

Its a choice.

competition wasnt around when man invented the wheel, he invented the wheel because it would make life easier. The princable being; humans by nature will do anything to make life easier for themselfs. We dont need competition for technological advances. Also, you mentioned man went to the moon because of competition (??), the first man that was put in space was by a communist/socialist country. If russia had went with this theory that in a competition free country nothing new happens, would he have been put there? Yes, you may say he was put there because of competition with America, then, that means, there can be compitition in a communist/socialist country. There is nothing to say that there can not be a free market in a communist country. I have no idea how this thread got onto a political theme tho. :confused: Anyway, back to the topic, there will always be crime, unless you wipe out the cause for/people that cause the crime in the first place. abit drastic yes, but the only way that i can see crime being stopped.
Also, it doesnt say that 34million pounds is comming out of tax payer's money, therefore, it doesnt mean that the majority is being afffected.

just think about how many people we could be putting on the moon and how advanced we would be if we stopped wasting time competing, going to war, trying 2 get ppol 2 buy useless products, and spending all of our time and energy selling, trading, and consuming useless products.

Cool Skill -> If you want to live in a cave again, then go ahead I wont stop you. We will always have big companies and therefore massive competition.

capt'n -> I fear that the money came from the insurance companies, which means that my premium will go up (and so will everybody elses) therefore affecting everyone.

capt'n -> I fear that the money came from the insurance companies, which means that my premium will go up (and so will everybody elses) therefore affecting everyone.
ah, i understand. but that moves us onto another topic of insurance companies. In my opinion, insurance companies. I created a thread called Car insurance in free thoughts. I have my views there on car insurance. Please, take i few minutes to read it through.

What's wrong with competition?

It seems to me that what is wrong is that competition is disallowed or mediated through favoritisms according to political flavor.

i dont think that there is anything wrong with competition, all i am saying is we dont need it anymore in this day and age.

Originally posted by Captain_Crunch
i dont think that there is anything wrong with competition, all i am saying is we dont need it anymore in this day and age.

If we don't need it, there's something wrong with it in the current context, correct? :)

I think we need more of it. Too little competition results in the inability to distinguish between something done well and something done poorly.

And despite all of our wordplay, that difference is real.

thats your opinion buddy

Originally posted by Captain_Crunch
thats your opinion buddy

Wow, he copped out with a social excuse. What an idiot.

im an idiot for avoiding a long and tiresome argument?

Two letters and a number for you:

WW2

Originally posted by Captain_Crunch
im an idiot for avoiding a long and tiresome argument?

You're an idiot for starting to argue, and then bailing out.

Laughing @ you

You're an idiot for starting to argue, and then bailing out.

Laughing @ you

Yeah, I'm laughing too. You're the first person on my ignore list :D

i see we have a little childish flamer here people.
if u were actually to read this thread, you would realise that i hadnt started any argument. If you reply to this post, i will ignore anything you post. you are not worth the waste of time. oh and by the way:
he who laughs last, thinks the slowest.

stop bickering

Originally posted by prozak
Too little competition results in the inability to distinguish between something done well and something done poorly.
Competition results in the inability to distinguish between something done well and something done poorly.


QUOTES:

6th century BC Babylon:
“Babylon’s massive walls will always stand strong and therefore Babylon will always prosper.”

1st century BC Greece”
“Women will always serve men at home and therefore will never hold political office.”

7th century AD India
“The caste system will always remain in place and therefore social stratification. The muslins will never take over our land.”

15th century Rome:
“Slavery will always be a popular commodity in all the land throughout the empire and therefore we might as will live with it.”

17th century France:
“Power will always reside in the king as God's representative and therefore his word will always be law. It will never change”

18th century America:
“Competition between the 13 colonies is too strong and therefore they will always be under British regulation. They will never in their dreams be able to defeat Britain as a United group of States.”
Originally posted by sjmarsha 21st century Internet:
We will always have big companies and therefore massive competition.
Cool Skill -> If you want to live in a cave again, then go ahead
im the one living in a cave?
get real istic.
im not the one saying we will ALWAYS have big companies and competition.

Ok Ok I see your point. 'Never' is a hell of a long time...

I just think that for the time being we will have big companies and competition. I don't think that this will change until we recieve an outside threat. Such as Sun exploding...Aliens...Big asteroid on a collision course.

Compitition drives prices down. Consider this, in todays age we have the choice to shop around which is all very well. Do you think in the future, these big corporations will buy each other out and end up with a few massive corporations that control different corners of the market? for example: microsoft controls software market, coca-cola controls soft drinks market etc. If this happened they would be able to put prices up to whatever they want and you would have no option to buy from them.

Originally posted by Captain_Crunch
Compitition drives prices down.

If u consider the 3 stooges that r constantly trying 2 one up the other. (mcdonalds, burger king, wendys) ull notice that each of them was eventually forced by competition 2 price items (that would normally cost more) at $1.
they operate on little or no profit for these items knowing that they attract customers that may come in 2 buy other items.

It seems like both parties (seler and consumer) r benefiting because competition has driven the prices down.
That may be fine if u look at costs in a short sighted sense.

Should we think of costs as
u as the buyer paying me as the seller?
Or me as the seller charging u as the buyer?
dos monetary price really have anything 2 do with costs?

What if u look at costs as
the total synergy needed 2 create a product compared 2 the product’s overall benefit 2 the individual (and society)?
(synergy meaning – the energy, human power, resources, time etc. used)

if we as a group combine our efforts, we could feed and house each other, clean up the environment, nurture each others minds and well beings, educate one another, reduce sickness and disease,
create more efficient technologies
that apply less stress to people and the environment,
make the creation of these technologies easier, smoother, enjoyable, etc.

:mad: Im sorry I wasnt going to respond to this because it just doesnt sound interesting. I mean no offence, or some by what Im about to type out on my ratty little keyboard.

Cool Skill,
Can you please take the time to put the "yo" in the "u" and "ur". Please do not say "UR" that is annoying. Please do not say "Y" to ask a question. Do not say "U". IL repeat this again, do not say "U".

You have good points but reading through your crappy typing or "UR" and "U" is idiotic. It makes me feel like I need to go get dental surgeory because it erks me so bad. Please just take the time on your post, I know I make my share of grammer errors but yours are horrible and annoying.

Sorry. Now do you think that you can do that?:confused:

Originally posted by CounslerCoffee
erks me so bad.
y dos it irk u so bad?
what irks you enough to write a post about it?
i ddnt do it 2 irk u.
why are the people that get irked the most by grammar, the worst spellers?
“erk”
“grammer”
do u rely neeed me 2 change the way i write?
can’t you just make life easy for me, and stop letting it bother you?
ty!

Cool Skill I said in my last post that I made my share of grammer mistakes. But your are on purpose and are stupid. I hate people who use "UR'" and "U" it kills me, its just annoying thats all. I can deal with it but Im telling you here at sciforums people like Xev and others that I wont mention dont like that at all, and you probably wont get any respect from them, if at all.

Originally posted by CounslerCoffee
you probably wont get any respect
i respect people

You can respect them but they might not respect you.

thanx!

Okay cool skill....:bugeye: Lets stop this madness before it turns into a flame war, thats the last thing I need.

Originally posted by CounslerCoffee
Okay cool skill....:bugeye: Lets stop this madness before it turns into a flame war, thats the last thing I need.
wat madness?
what flame war?
xplain.
lets stop what??
wat must b stopped?
wat the hell r u talkin about?