Could we create the perfect world?

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Holly-May Leslie, Nov 27, 2021.

  1. billvon Valued Senior Member

    I hope you get a chance to broaden your horizons at some point.
    If you combine that with a requirement to back all debt with hard currency, that would work, but it would also cripple our economy and result in a lot of deflation. That's a pretty heavy price to pay.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    That's not exactly a novel concept. It doesn't work for long because politicians spend more money than they take in with taxes so they can't stay on the gold standard (which the U.S. was on until the 1970's).

    Today Bitcoin would be the better choice but that's unlikely to replace the dollar but it is likely to be a good choice for individuals to replace their dollars as a long-term store of value. It will still likely be converted back into dollars when large purchases are required.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Bells Staff Member

    I want you to do me a huge favour. I want you to look up the word "analysis" and then look up "rational analysis".

    Then you might understand why you appear to be confused.
    And it's bad, because you are making factual statements. Your manner of learning is essentially daring people to prove you wrong.
    Okay. Thank you for the definition.

    You can't change people or force change without basically turning into a dictator. You see, the manner in which you commented about changing things, would make you what you keep accusing others of being. Unless you want to make being bossy, needy, vulgar, stupid, naysaying (given your previous comments about vaccines!), etc, illegal.. You can't really force change in how you are putting that out there...
    Handmaid's Tale was about utopia for a group of people. See, what is utopia for you, may end up being hell for others.
    What do you mean by relevant truth? The saying is actually 'tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth' and it's used when being sworn in. Usually before presenting testimony of some sort, that's where most would encounter it. But when you amend it to the "relevant truth", then it immediately assumes that you are withholding things back because you do not deem them to be relevant. The "whole truth" about a particular issue should be the point here. Not what you may consider to be relevant or not.
    The problem is with style of delivery. You have yet to master that level of sarcasm or wit with the written language. It's quite tricky sometimes and it takes experience to do so. In other words, we can't tell when you are joking or not.
    I said that your approach is lazy. You expect others to correct you, instead of making an effort to learn about things yourself. You expect others to do the work for you. That is lazy.
    Your performance here says otherwise.

    And that's the thing. You are coming across like a performance. It is so stereotypical that I feel as if I'm cringing my way through a teen movie. Not because of a thought of 'oh dear lord, I sounded like that once?'.. But more along the lines of 'oh dear lord, no one speaks like this'.
    It's a matter of speech for one. Essentially it's more along the lines that people are going to hesitate telling a child off on the internet.

    And you should remind yourself of that "hierarchal construct" when you set about changing people because you think they are bossy, needy, etc..
    I would suggest less InfoWars...
    A libertarian who wants to change people because she thinks they are bossy, needy, etc...?
    Okay? I did not for one second suggest that you do?
    Let me tell you something Holly-May. The government does not care whether you live or die, in a crash or otherwise. The government does care if you have a crash, you aren't wearing a seatbelt and you cost the government millions in medical bills and rehabilitation for yourself and/or others.

    The opposite of "should happen" is "does not happen" or "should not happen". When you say the contrary applies, you are essentially saying the opposite applies.

    Please look up the meaning of "totalitarianism".

    And if something is not good, you vote them out the next election.

    But you seem to be approaching this from a standpoint of ignorance. Your vaccination comments are examples of that. Same with your lack of understanding of forms of government and what things like totalitarian actually means. You let yourself be told instead of doing your own research. You seem to be listening to people who aren't telling you anything factual, but essentially telling you what you want to hear. You will never make good decisions if you do that.
    As I said. You are lazy. You expect others to do your work for you.
    Make of your life what you will. But please don't troll internet forums as a means of self education. Because that is literally what you are doing. You make ridiculous statements to rile people. That's trolling and flaming. As a 17 year old, you should learn how to research things and be able to argue your point. And you may not mind. But it's also about self respect. Particularly if you've used your real name and photo on this site (I truly hope you have not, by the way!). Because what you say online will stay there forever and could follow you forever.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    I get it.
    You're deluded. Or dishonest. Or possibly both.
  8. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Could we create the perfect world?

    As per the title of this thread I am certain we could do better than the one we have at the moment. But I suspect the title is misleading

    Could we create the perfect society? would be more to the point

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  9. Holly-May Leslie Registered Member

    I'm neither, except for maybe the deluded part. I try to make good guesses about things, but by virtue of being guesses, they're bound to be wrong some of the time.
    Why are you being mean? It's not working. Maybe try easier prey. Have you considered kindergartners? I've heard that they're pretty sensitive.
  10. Holly-May Leslie Registered Member

    It's not a dare. I frankly don't care enough about what other people think to dare them to challenge me. Besides, this way of learning works, at least for me. I think that more people should try it.
  11. Holly-May Leslie Registered Member

    What do you mean by what I keep accusing others of being?
    I don't plan on forcing change on anyone. I'm a libertarian for god's sake! I just plan on gently persuading them to be nice to
    I just decided not to be sarcastic anymore, but you're right that sarcasm takes experience to develop I guess. As for my wit, it is one of the sharpest out there. I just don't use it often. As for not being able to tell when I am joking, I kind of always am. Perhaps that is why. Sarcasm is rarely useful you know.
    How does my performance here say otherwise? How am I being stereotypical? saying that I am being stereotypical because I speak differently is almost a contradiction.

    Okay. Would you care to tell me what you think my place is now?

    Well, perhaps nobody should be obliged to give anything to anyone else.
    Well, I guess it is a bit lazy.
    Great. Although, democracy is rife for exploitation by those who want to start a dictatorship because it would be pretty easy so just pretend there were different parties when everyone was working together. If there were new parties popping up all of the time and quickly gaining popularity, this might fix that.

    Okay. I'm not trying to rile anyone, though I may have accidentally. I should know how to research, and I do. I would say that this applies to most people.
    Also, I have used my real name and photo, and do you know what? I am proud of everything I say and I do not need to hide behind fake names or images.
    I did that.
    If I appear confused then it is because you are confused.
    The definition of what I very irrelevantly consider wrong? You're welcome.
  12. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    My aim was to defend you from cynical comments.
  13. Holly-May Leslie Registered Member

    Well thanks. I don't need it but it gives me a lovely warm fuzzy feeling. I figured that this was your aim when you were all like: Why don't you crawl back into whatever hole you came out of! to dywyddyr.
  14. Holly-May Leslie Registered Member

    Don't politicians have other ways to get money to spend? What do they have to spend it on anyway?
  15. billvon Valued Senior Member

    The military. Social Security. Police and fire. The CDC. The FAA. Our justice system. Medicare. Veteran's programs. Things like that.
  16. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    They have to get it all from you, one way or the other. They can tax you directly or debase the currency which taxes you indirectly though reduced purchasing power.

    It's not that there is nothing for a government to spend money on but there needs to be a limit otherwise it is like sending a kid into a candy store with a blank check.

    In the U.S. we spend more on our military than the next 10 largest militaries added together. There is no sense of proportion when there is no limit on what can be spent (if you are willing to "print" money). We put a larger percentage of our citizens in prisons than most other countries by far (and treat them like crap while they are in there).

    Our national debt is more than 100% of our yearly GDP and we are still looking for ways to add new programs such as paying for everyone's pre-kindergarten, paid time off up to 4 weeks/year to look after someone. Don't be surprised to find that most everyone will find someone that needs to be looked after and it will generally occur during the warm summer months.
  17. Holly-May Leslie Registered Member

    Jesus. Maybe governments should be more careful with their spending then.
    I honestly don't think that it is necessary for people to be taxed. I mean, if they really need something they will just buy it of their own volition instead, off of whoever is offering to provide it. That should probably be how this thing works.
  18. Holly-May Leslie Registered Member

    Well, I would say that it is worth it. If it is done slowly then perhaps the economy could handle it. What do you mean by hard currency? Do you mean, not fiat currency?
  19. Holly-May Leslie Registered Member

    I have plenty of interests. Despite your implication here, the reason that I have most of what I want is not because I am easily satisfied. I am quite the contrary. It is because I take what I want.
  20. Holly-May Leslie Registered Member

    I think that it is a bad idea to have digital currency. I mean, people could easily create more or less of it out of nothing and eff up the economy that way, and for another thing if it is digital, it is probably hack able, which in the case of money is just dangerous.
  21. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    not to be mean but perhaps you need to pay more attention in history and economics class. normal people cant or won't buy public goods in the amount needed for society to function.
  22. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    I see that there is a lot that you are not knowledgeable about. Go figure...
  23. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Yes indeed.
    I must disagree with that. Apart from Individual and State controlled Socio-economic programs, there are National needs that benefit all who reside within the National borders and which would be impossible to maintain by Individual or State funding.

    The one major difference is that Governments are always not-for-profit and all taxes raised must be used for the general welfare as identified and voted on by the legislature.

    Example; the Constitution stipulates two essential services that cannot be administered by individuals or states,
    to wit:
    Did the Constitution establish a national military?

    Army Clause
    Does the national government regulate interstate commerce?

    Interstate highways are Federally funded, but now awarded to private contractors by competitive bids. The result is that building highways have become prohibitively expensive to build and no one likes to pay Tolls to private ownership of public highways. So everybody has to pitch in. This is what Biden is attempting to do by his "Build Back" plan.
    Biden Details $2 Trillion Plan to Rebuild Infrastructure and Reshape the Economy
    And everybody enjoys equal benefit.

    What are examples of federal assistance programs?

    Examples of federal assistance programs
    How many federal programs are there?

    The All-in-One Guide to All Federal Assistance Programs
    This is a consequence of the concept that "all persons are created equal". It would be unfair to help a few selected individuals and deny the same privileges to others.

    There has been a slow change from Nationally administered programs in outsourcing to individual companies and the result has been disastrous.
    For-profit companies always want to make maximum profit and with these enormous projects there is always a lot of "graft".

    What is the crime of graft?
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2021

Share This Page