Donald Trump and US politics

"
diablofdb wrote:
"
Raycheetah wrote:
Socialism with Bill Whittle (don't bother to comment if you don't watch it):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z286CvEwdFY

Pretty much sums up its soci-economic drivers. ='[.]'=



This is a very good metaphore that represent why socialism always fail in the end. It remind me of an old story that is very similar you may have heard of it. It's about a college teacher who is teaching economy. His students disagreed with him when he told them socialism always fail. So in the end he decided to make an experience to prove them how and why it fail. Next exam everyone would share the same result, the average score.


First exam most people were happy because a few scored 90% and + the average score was around 75% so everyone passed the exam with a pretty decent note.

But on the second exam, people who failed the first exam and still passed for free because they were given the average score... they worked even less. And those who scored 90% but were given 75% they didn't spent those extras hours studying late. The average score was much much lower. So everyone was angry. Some people blamed the Nerd kids for not studying as much as they did for the first exam, the other were blaming the ones who just never studied. And so the blame game started.

At the 3rd exam, the average score was bellow 60% and everyone failed.


That's not socialism. it's more like, I don't know, hive mind or something.

A socialist system take more from the rich to distribute to the poor in the form of utilities (mostly) and the likes. It also doesn't take EVERYTHING to redistribute, otherwise, just like your example, it would fail catastrophically.
Build of the week #9 - Breaking your face with style http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_EcQDOUN9Y
IGN: Poltun
"
Raycheetah wrote:
Pretty much sums up its soci-economic drivers. ='[.]'=

It presumes that we have perfect equality of opportunity and compares it to full blown communism where every penny earned goes to the state for redistribution. Complete strawman.

---

We don't have perfectly equal opportunity, but we have some amount. The sons and daughters of the wealthy are hard-pressed to not end up wealthy, and the poor have to put in tremendous effort and get extremely lucky to rise up. That being said, there still is mobility.

We don't take 100% of everyone's earnings, but we take some amount. It's closer to 20% -- 80% of the remainder is still a lot of earnings, and is certainly not so oppressive that people would rather not improve or innovate.

---

I agree with the sentiment above: both extremes don't work out.

Fully socialist countries die from a combination of bad central planning (like deciding to only export Venezuelan oil) and lack of innovation, and fully capitalist countries die from bad central planning (in the forms of mad kings) and nepotism.

There's a sweet spot in between where central planning is minimized. The enemy is too much power in too few hands, by whatever route you end up there. You should want lots of people involved, even if it slows things down, because it provides a natural resistance to singularly bad ideas.
"
pneuma wrote:
"
Raycheetah wrote:
Pretty much sums up its soci-economic drivers. ='[.]'=

It presumes that we have perfect equality of opportunity and compares it to full blown communism where every penny earned goes to the state for redistribution. Complete strawman.

---

We don't have perfectly equal opportunity, but we have some amount. The sons and daughters of the wealthy are hard-pressed to not end up wealthy, and the poor have to put in tremendous effort and get extremely lucky to rise up. That being said, there still is mobility.

We don't take 100% of everyone's earnings, but we take some amount. It's closer to 20% -- 80% of the remainder is still a lot of earnings, and is certainly not so oppressive that people would rather not improve or innovate.

---

I agree with the sentiment above: both extremes don't work out.

Fully socialist countries die from a combination of bad central planning (like deciding to only export Venezuelan oil) and lack of innovation, and fully capitalist countries die from bad central planning (in the forms of mad kings) and nepotism.

There's a sweet spot in between where central planning is minimized. The enemy is too much power in too few hands, by whatever route you end up there. You should want lots of people involved, even if it slows things down, because it provides a natural resistance to singularly bad ideas.


There are far too few people whom see things as clearly as you on this topic. Dont expect a blow job or anything, but props.
For years i searched for deep truths. A thousand revelations. At the very edge...the ability to think itself dissolves away.Thinking in human language is the problem. Any separation from 'the whole truth' is incomplete.My incomplete concepts may add to your 'whole truth', accept it or think about it
Last edited by SkyCore#2413 on Apr 19, 2017, 2:44:04 AM
"
soneka101 wrote:
(It's so hard to tell what the hell is going on right now)

So, NK backed off from their nuclear test, just by placebo effect? The US armada wasn't even in the vicinity? I'd say that's a good thing, no?

"
Raycheetah wrote:
Speaking of Leftist self-destruction, here's some information on that "skinny girl" who got herself smacked in the face on her quest to collect "100 Nazi scalps":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYJFCY-pIu0

Being a porn star is the dream of every strong independent woman. Nothing stands up to "conformism" & patriarchy, like being a whore.
When night falls
She cloaks the world
In impenetrable darkness
Last edited by morbo#1824 on Apr 19, 2017, 2:55:10 AM
"
morbo wrote:
"
soneka101 wrote:
(It's so hard to tell what the hell is going on right now)

So, NK backed off from their nuclear test, just by placebo effect? The US armada wasn't even in the vicinity? I'd say that's a good thing, no?

I guess it is. Although I would be less worried if things were done in purpose... I don't think that "If it is still working then it doesn't need no fixing" applies to this situation, so maybe there will be some "tinkering" in the way people are communicating in this administration, after all, if false alarms start ringing all the time we probably won't last much longer due to the stress.
"
pneuma wrote:


Fully socialist countries die from a combination of bad central planning (like deciding to only export Venezuelan oil) and lack of innovation, and fully capitalist countries die from bad central planning (in the forms of mad kings) and nepotism.



So, that would make the Norks... Capitalists? =0[.]o=
=^[.]^= basic (happy/amused) cheetahmoticon: Whiskers/eye/tear-streak/nose/tear-streak/eye/
whiskers =@[.]@= boggled / =>[.]<= annoyed or angry / ='[.]'= concerned / =0[.]o= confuzzled /
=-[.]-= sad or sleepy / =*[.]*= dazzled / =^[.]~= wink / =~[.]^= naughty wink / =9[.]9= rolleyes #FourYearLie
Mike 'Deus Volt' Pence staring down a very fake news reporter for her rambling. 1 minute video.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=-l0GSbvqvqo
GGG banning all political discussion shortly after getting acquired by China is a weird coincidence.
"
鬼殺し wrote:

http://www.snopes.com/college/exam/socialism.asp

You can always tell who's actually been to university and gives a shit about little things like verisimilitude and critical engagement and who just thinks a university is some mythical spawning ground of radical liberal socialist bums. You'd have to be pretty ignorant to think such a story as the one cited is even vaguely possible or realistic. Seriously ignorant to use it as anything but an example of thoughtless mimicry conveniently compatible with one's worldview.


He is basicly a Genius for comparing apple´s to potatos. The student´s didnt have to care about the test.

Pick 10 student´s and give them 6 shovel´s and put them on a ground which they ""collectivly own"", evrything that growes out has to be shared to there liking. See i made a study that is closer to topic than this college teacher, just in 1min.

And that Bill whittle guy is a joke, act´s like he talk´s to child´s. If most of the world is already owned by someone, there is not much of equal opportunity left. Well, of course you can try to open a resteraunt close to a McDonald´s, but that won´t turn out that well.
"
Pwnzors87 wrote:
Well, of course you can try to open a resteraunt close to a McDonald´s, but that won´t turn out that well.

There are many restaurants close nearby to fast food joints, because they satisfy two different consumer groups. I personally wouldn't feed whatever is produced in Mcdonalds to a dog and I'd rather go to a restaurant once, than eat McDonalds food 5 times for the same money.

Just saying. Competition is still alive and kicking, not everything is "owned" yet ;)
When night falls
She cloaks the world
In impenetrable darkness

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info