Your value.

Yes said:
Well, they have to support your lifestyle, because the capitalist lifestyle is what this society is based on and in order to survive within it one has to support it, if one doesn't then it's the "highway".

I don't know what country you live in, but America sure as hell isn't capitalist.

Anyway, you haven't done anything to demonstrate how some unemployed, unwashed hippie is subsidizing my life.

Yes said:
I'm not going to define greedy to you, if you're not familiar with the word, look it up in a dictionary.

Let me rephrase...

Give me a practical example of what you consider greedy and why.

Yes said:
Who said anything about forcing you to pay my rent?

You did, albeit indirectly.

Yes (First Post In This Thread) said:
So how can we make life better for those who have chosen a lifestyle that doesn't generate money? If a person wants to devote a life to art for example, or philosophy, or any other area that is not immediately commercial but brings that person a meaning to life and spiritual satisfaction and brings the same to other people, but doesn't make enough money to pay the rent, should that person then bow down to the harsh reality of capitalism and get a money paying job and waste a lifetime on concentrating on paying bills instead of what that person really wants to do?
I definitely don't think so.
How can we change this system so that everybody can do what they want and still live a comfortable life? Or do you like it the way it is?

If I misinterpreted your statements, please clarify.

Yes said:
Why should people pay rent in the first place?

Because property owners have a right to be compensated for the use of their property.

Yes said:
That's what's so strange. We have built this hightech society on peoples fear of what would happen to them if they don't comply and work for money.

We would never have built this or any other advanced society had everyone been sitting on their asses painting pictures and playing frisbee. You seem to be taking civilization for granted; assuming that we would have all the neato stuff we have today without the incentive for hard work.

Yes said:
Money has become a goal in itself, that's the problem.

Why is that a problem? Why should everyone be expected to live by your values and strive to achieve your goals?

Yes said:
Peoples lives should be worth more than money.

They are. Who said otherwise?

Yes said:
Society should be construced around what people, all people, want to do with their lives, not what they must do to feed the machine.

I've addressed this before and you didn't even attempt to counter my argument.

Most people would rather do something other than work. If everyone who wants to do something other than work does something other than work, there won't be anyone to grow our food, save babies from burning buildings, fix our toilets when they break, build the computers we use, etc. There wouldn't even be enough taxpayers to support all the lazy hippies. Society would fall apart.

Is this what you want?

Yes said:
If society can't meet peoples needs, then it must be reconstructed to do that.

And who are you to determine what everyone else needs? What if these alleged needs violate the rights of and/or put an unfair burden on others?

Yes said:
If the majority of the people suffer, are not happy with their lives, feel worthless then a change must be done, or it will come by itself in a more agressive manner.

And what if that which would give "meaning" to the lives of these lazy hippies is totally unreasonable; depending entirely on violating the rights of others and essentially destroying this great civilization that was built by people who weren't lazy hippies?
 
You know, I havnt met any hippies who werent paying for themselves by selling services or suchlike. I've met a few crooks and likely benefits cheats, but everybody else has been working away to stay alive. So why the downer on hippies, acid cowboy?

(which with a name like that, makes me think of lsd, seems odd.)

And the USA is certainly capitalist, if your talking about accumulation of capital etc. Of course, some of it gets siphoned off to pay for common goods like roads and education, but it is essentially a mixed free market capitalist economy with enough socialism to make sure the proles dont turn on the owners.
 
guthrie said:
You know, I havnt met any hippies who werent paying for themselves by selling services or suchlike.

I know.

On the other hand, I haven't seen any evidence of these hippies subsidizing my life, as Yes has claimed.

guthrie said:
I've met a few crooks and likely benefits cheats, but everybody else has been working away to stay alive. So why the downer on hippies, acid cowboy?

My comments are more about the hypothetical hippies in Yes' fantasy land where everyone lays around painting and playing the tambourine while the few producers of society foot the bill for this attempted utopia.

Personally, I couldn't care less if somebody wants to lay around all day and not work. I just don't want to pay for it.

guthrie said:
And the USA is certainly capitalist, if your talking about accumulation of capital etc.

Accumulation of capital (AKA money, property, stuff that has value, etc.) occurs in every society that habitually produces anything, which is why it really isn't an accurate criteria for determining the economic system of a society.

My preferred method is to took a look at who owns/controls the means of producing and distributing (selling and buying) goods and services within the context of individual rights. The means of production and distribution are highly regulated, even in areas having nothing to do with preserving individual liberties.
 
Hey, your galt arent you?

OK, as for capitalist, we have a different definition.

"My preferred method is to took a look at who owns/controls the means of producing and distributing (selling and buying) goods and services"

Within this bit, this is similar to the standard definition, and applies to private companies etc. Hence, by the traditional standard, the USA is capitalist.

"within the context of individual rights. The means of production and distribution are highly regulated, even in areas having nothing to do with preserving individual liberties."

Ok, well if you want to use the words differently, thats your choice. But the private sector is still the largest capital section of the USA.
 
Sorry for not "taking care" of the thread that I started. I must sleep now, but tomorrow...is a new day.
 
Hey, Yes, very good question. I believe that the use of money is actually a sign of our lack of civilization, it is still basically barter based on trade of tokens. I suspect we will figure out a different way to share on this planet which will bring a great deal more liberty as well as efficiency in satisfying basic needs or we will destroy ourselves due to the lack of sufficient means to address the accumulating dangers of the information explosion. You have heard of money being a medium of exchange well one sage of the later half of last century said "Money doesn't talk, it swears." Money is just too arbitrary. It allows and facilitates people with little or no or even counter social responsibility to gain power and control and influence. It just plain old doesn't work. We are in the process of developing the communication tools to eventually do without all of this token representation. The loss of things of real value, life, liberty, health, security, freedom and other such things will motivate us to figure out how to share this space colony. Seems a far way off as for now few even realize we live on/in a space colony where all is shared and dependent. I'm afraid we are in for some rude awakenings.
 
guthrie said:
Hey, your galt arent you?

Yup. I changed my name a couple of weeks ago. I wasn't sure how to handle it, though. Starting a thread announcing my new identity would have made me feel arrogant, like I was assuming that the whole SciForums community really gave a crap about me or my name. Not formally announcing the name change may lead to confusion. I chose the latter as the lesser of two evils.

Sorry if I caused any confusion or anything.

guthrie said:
Within this bit, this is similar to the standard definition, and applies to private companies etc. Hence, by the traditional standard, the USA is capitalist.

By this standard, the United States certainly isn't capitalist. We [Americans] have a mixed-economy; part capitalist, part socialist.

The capitalist element would be a sizeable private sector.

The socialist element is the huge level of government interference (AKA regulation) for reasons other than individual rights; government enforced monopolies; and confiscation of our money - the most important part of producing/distributing (selling) goods - which is then redistributed to third parties for reasons other than individual rights.
 
It took me disgustingly too long to work it out, but i havnt seen you around for a while.
Then as for the USA being capitalist, I suppose the majority of it is, and that is roughly what counts, at least for now. Ive brought up the mixed economy thing before somewhere, cant remember where or why.
And just remember, the money isnt yours, its the banks.
 
I value the beauty of things that don't have [what I qualify as] as personality. I.E. Art, nature, books, etc. :D
 
Hello. I am civilized man. I don't talk directly to others. I don't share. I let my pocket book do my talking. Where did I get my money? Even I don't know about all those back room deals, the CIA's drug running to bolster the world banks, the wars to keep a few in control of the resources for the many, the sequestered knowledge and murdered inventors, I don't know a thing about any of those things and the other shady garbage that is where my money comes from and I don't care. As long as I have enough to keep my backyard and my own castle and family happy and well stocked to the best of my ignorance of my needs, I am happy and money works. If I don't have money then I lose my voice in saying that money doesn't work, so this is the story you will hear predominantly. Ah, no rhyme or reason, no logical or rational connection to the world or the universe. Yes, I am civilized man, plowing my entropic wake of wasted life as I speed my boat through the lake of careless existentialism.
 
Back
Top