Socialism

Page 7 of 27 [ 424 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 27 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

31 Jan 2007, 11:15 pm

dexkaden wrote:

Plus, then you have the tragedy of the commons, wherein everyone thinks everyone else will take care of it---as there is no incentive to take care of it individually.

I think he actually entailed a government managed form of a propertied system. "People get their own share, to a certain limit, which they buy with credits.", however, my criticism is one of governmental control now and the possibilities of flawed incentives, as if the intra-corporate incentives are messed up work gets done pretty fast due to the strong incentive to fix problems, governments don't have this same strong incentive.

dexkaden
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,967
Location: CTU, Los Angeles

31 Jan 2007, 11:21 pm

Alright. But the government is made up of individuals, just like businesses are. If business is the problem now, what is to say that government will not be the problem in this scenario? Absolute power corrupts absolutely, after all.

_________________
Superman wears Jack Bauer pajamas.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

31 Jan 2007, 11:41 pm

dexkaden wrote:

Well, I pointed out that flawed incentive structures are likely to occur in governments as they have very little incentive to streamline or appease. This ultimately points to greater inefficiencies in the future. I didn't bust out the totalitarian angle as such a development is more likely going to be the result when government planning fails and I have started the line of thinking to suggest to that but not drawn them out to the full conclusion.

Anubis
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Sep 2006
Age: 137
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,911
Location: Mount Herculaneum/England

01 Feb 2007, 12:20 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

Anubis wrote:

The nation owns resources at first. People get their own share, to a certain limit, which they buy with credits. Independence of what you buy for yourself. The government is an all-enveloping entity, the nation itself.

Part of this is that the nation did deal with an aspect of resource ownership at first as the nation granted titles and still does own some resources, but people bought those resources with money and then traded in order to deal with optimal usage of those resources. The issue I have with the government being an all-enveloping entity is that governmental authorities show little incentive to stream-line processes and strive for efficiency in an effective manner while corporate entities focus continually on such processes.

People are obliged to take action. They have their own responsibilities within the government. This system, of course requires strong and dedicated leadership on not just the top levels, but on every level, as you might have already guessed. So it would be essential to train people to head companies before putting them in charge, whether they are promoted to that level, or they simply apply for the position. Not only that, but people's responsibilities would be enshrined in law. You don't do your job and get lazy, and you get fired. That's the way it has to be. There is an unending requirement for manpower in all aspects, so there is no employment problem.

There is always a method to sort out a problem.

_________________
Lalalalai.... I'll cut you up!

dexkaden
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,967
Location: CTU, Los Angeles

01 Feb 2007, 12:26 pm

Anubis wrote:

Alright, so what if people don't do their job and get lazy and are fired. What happens to them? Are they free to go off and do whatever they wish elsewhere, in a different country? Are they societal outcasts? What will you do if there are a lot of these people who get lazy and get fired? What will you do about social unrest?

And who will be in charge? Who determines that? And who would train the heads of companies? What if the people wanted a service/good that wasn't in existence yet and required a start-up company. Who would train them?

_________________
Superman wears Jack Bauer pajamas.

Corvus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,674
Location: Calgary

01 Feb 2007, 12:34 pm

Quote:

I love this! What do we do NOW? I have a friend who hasnt done ONE thing in a year except sleep 14 hour days and live in his parents basement. What do we do about them? Oh, thats what! We provide them larger tax returns, tax them less, and give them welfare. God Bless Society!

These issues exist NOW so don't think they won't exist later. If you were to cut them off from services, such as police, etc. then maybe they'd get their asses in gear but then again, I speak from a responsible, biased side of this argument.

Anubis
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Sep 2006
Age: 137
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,911
Location: Mount Herculaneum/England

01 Feb 2007, 3:55 pm

Corvus wrote:

Quote:

No. you scrounge for too long, without proof of sickness, disability or incapacity, you get a very low share of resources, just enough to buy some food every week. In fact, it would be a good idea to provide food tokens, which can only be used with your identity card and fingerprints, and are none transferrable. It makes the person look cheap, which is portrayed as bad.
I considered cutting people off from services, but only to a certain extent. People should not be denied healthcare or security.

As I said before, you hate the system, you leave the country with your belongings and qualifications, shut up, or go to prison.

And, before you ask, yes identity cards and very secure computer systems are essential.

_________________
Lalalalai.... I'll cut you up!

dexkaden
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,967
Location: CTU, Los Angeles

01 Feb 2007, 4:04 pm

This is sounding very controlled and fascist.

_________________
Superman wears Jack Bauer pajamas.

Corvus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,674
Location: Calgary

01 Feb 2007, 4:27 pm

dexkaden wrote:

This is sounding very controlled and fascist.

I agree, although, I disagree. Reason being is I totally understand it and it has a HUGE backing of things like 'responsibility' and 'no ego' and etc.

For those who rely on greed, ego, etc. then yes, it will seem totally fascist. Though, if you start analyzing what "responsibility" is, you understand how much crap in THIS society can be removed.

But yes, it does sound Fascist but only because its remarkably a hard concept to grasp. People draw too many conclusions on too little information

Last edited by Corvus on 01 Feb 2007, 4:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Corvus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,674
Location: Calgary

01 Feb 2007, 4:28 pm

Anubis wrote:

Corvus wrote:

Quote:

How can you prove that? How can you prove they havent done anything? And iuf you're talking ID cards to monitor that, NO WAY!! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! Invasion of Privacy

dexkaden
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,967
Location: CTU, Los Angeles

01 Feb 2007, 4:34 pm

It is not a very hard concept to grasp at all. It is utilizing the monoply of force to coerce citizens into behaving how you want them to behave. It has nothing to do with responsibility and egos, but it has everything to do with coercion and subjugation of the will to the Omnipotent State.

But whatever. It is entirely impractical, and IF the citizens of this Great Society were truly free to leave if they wanted, whenever they wanted, I guarantee you would have no one working in your Utopia.

_________________
Superman wears Jack Bauer pajamas.

Corvus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,674
Location: Calgary

01 Feb 2007, 5:08 pm

dexkaden wrote:

Do you know what you, as an individual, must give up in order to live in a "Utopia?"

dexkaden
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,967
Location: CTU, Los Angeles

01 Feb 2007, 5:17 pm

Corvus wrote:

dexkaden wrote:

Do you know what you, as an individual, must give up in order to live in a "Utopia?"

Hmm...is this a trick question? Because I would be getting out of THAT country as fast as I could.

But anyway, can we get back to discussing the pros/cons of socialism so that maybe we could come to some kind of idea as to what the best route to aleviating society's ills? We could go on forever discussing this Fantasy Economic System, but we wouldn't be any closer to fixing the one we have now.

I mean, why do people feel the need for a socialist government? Or why do some people feel so strongly in government as the panacea for everything? How about instead of working out HOW we would fix something, we look at WHY we think it is broken in the first place.

_________________
Superman wears Jack Bauer pajamas.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

01 Feb 2007, 5:19 pm

Anubis wrote:

The only thing is that people don't always show themselves to be strong, and we have always had corruption. If our institutions end up becoming corrupt though, we end up in a worse spot as the replacement and purging of such problems becomes an issue. There is an unending need for manpower, however, that does deal with the problem with unemployment. As I stated earlier, a lot of the unemployed are temporarily between jobs, and ultimately the entire unemployment process, being a job search ends up being on some level working to promote the system within the context of personal choice.

Quote:

There is always a method to sort out a problem.

Some problems go deeper than others and some solutions are not as good as others. An issue ends up being that we both are trying to solve the same problem, the nature of a working economy, and what I see in your system is a system that is more likely to end up having certain problems.

Quote:

I don't think that the whole cheapness thing really is necessarily that big of a disincentive to a person of the type Corvus referred to.

Quote:

As I said before, you hate the system, you leave the country with your belongings and qualifications, shut up, or go to prison.

I think that a problem that could arise is flight of human capital and physical possessions, the possibility of corruption seems like it could be rather high and I don't think that top performers are likely to get the same rewards as they would elsewhere.

Quote:

And, before you ask, yes identity cards and very secure computer systems are essential.

Which leads to other problems involving privacy, breaking in to computer systems, and etc.

Corvus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,674
Location: Calgary

01 Feb 2007, 5:25 pm

dexkaden wrote:

Corvus wrote:

dexkaden wrote:

Do you know what you, as an individual, must give up in order to live in a "Utopia?"

Trick question? No, but it shows how much people truely care about changing society for the better or just "managing" what we have now.

Society's ills are the people, themselves. It isnt the system, its the people in the system. You cannot fix the system and expect people to see benefits while they remain the same. You have to fix the people IN the system in order to see a change. This is why I asked you what you'd need to give up to live in a Utopia. If you're willing to give up nothing, then expect NOTHING to change.

dexkaden
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,967
Location: CTU, Los Angeles

01 Feb 2007, 5:36 pm

Corvus wrote:

First, your question shows nothing.

Second, I agree that it isn't system that is the problem, that is, in fact, the people who are the problem. But see, changing people's behavior is an internal affair, one the requires education. I can't FIX a person; people are not machines. I am not willing to give up anything to live in a Utopia, at least not the Utopia wherein my individual freedom is severely curtailed and controlled by a group of elite leaders.

I recognize that there are serious problems in the world today, and that every single one of those problems is the result of decisions made by people, sometimes out of "greed," sometimes out a misguided attempt to "help."

I think it was Adams who said that if all men were angels, government would not be necessary.

Men aren't angels, and government is necessary, and the question is what FORM of government do you believe in? If you think the problem is with the idividual, then why use a system to fix the problem? It is like treating symptoms of a disease without fixing the cause of the disease in the first place.

_________________
Superman wears Jack Bauer pajamas.

Page 7 of 27 [ 424 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 27 Next

Jump to:

Socialism Post Reply New Topic

Socialism