The Zeitgeist Movement - Give me your best shot.

Post Reply New Topic

I can see you still can't keep your cool. I appreciate you whittled it down.

Oh I'm sorry, shall I include a dictionary definition of each logical fallacy everytime I call you out on them? lol I would have thought you would know what an ad hom is, and what a strawman is.

And calling me a liar, is yet another ad hom. I can understand your compulsion to use these rhetorical devices though. Coz its much, much easier to call someone a liar, than go through the effort of explaining how and why they are. That's the difference.

Adam, I say this as someone with no dog in this fight, who couldn't care less about this subject, and who hasn't posted in this topic before: you are an as*hole. Tone your posts the hell down.

Oh my, this is awesome. You are worthy of your own meme at this point.

You accused me of threatening you. And once again, simply stating "this is a fallacy" is not proving anything other than your extremely high regard for your own "expertise" and your low opinion of anyone who interacts with you. You are completely dishonest, you have nothing and you know it, that is why you refuse to provide a quote of where I "threatened you".

You are describing yourself to the letter. You really are completely unaware of your own actions aren't you?

You are a liar, you have repeatedly accused me of different things including threatening you and whenever asked to show where you give some typical douche non-reply

Adam, I say this as someone with no dog in this fight, who couldn't care less about this subject, and who hasn't posted in this topic before: you are an as*hole. Tone your posts the hell down.

Not only an ad hom, but an aggressive ad hom. And why should I "tone my posts the hell down"? You sond like you are taking this mighty personally.

Three inches from breaking Godwin's law is a threat? there are some nutty people out there

Exactly. Especially since "Godwin's law" is completely irrelevant to this thread.

No, he is just pointing out the obvious. To everyone but you, that is.

Again, completely irrelevant Just coz something is "obvious" doesn't stop it from being a personal attack and thus a violation of the forum rules.

Well, at least you can admit he is correct. And you bringing up violations of forum rules is absolutely hilarious. You attack basically every single person who interacts with you. It is kind of amazing in its own right

Hunh, the post doesn't make you seem insane. The issue is that demand is used in an unusual way. The demand curve in microecon is always a function of price, and that's because when something is just priced at 0, people often don't even care about wasting it or not. So, we don't care about wasting air, so we use it to whatever extreme we'd like. But, things involving actual resources, like cotton, metal, silicon, time, etc, sound terrible to waste.

I think I follow. I think I basically agree. I mean, the RBE idea tends to rely on the idea that demand can be controlled, but.... demand probably cannot be controlled so easily without a totalitarian solution. I mean, some people will just hoard shoes. I don't know why, but they will. Some people will just lose tons of socks. It's not that they don't like socks, but they don't care because there is no cost to losing socks. So, if price is zero, a large amt of waste will occur. Unless supply is massively overbuilt, to the point where even if people just started burning clothes for the hell of it(and some might as some form of social gesture) that nothing will be impacted, we'll have an issue. The RBE crowd will talk about human goodness, but I don't think waste means you're a bad person anyway. I've wasted lots of things simply because they were free and because I could request as much as I wanted. I don't think anything but totalitarianism is likely to prevent this from happening.

The issue with the RBE is that population control will probably have to be used. As long as population growth is positive, the steady-state economy can't work because the resources required will change. So, there will be policies controlling how many children every person can have. There have to be. There will probably even have to be mandatory abortions, just like China, otherwise people will just screw and not care. (AAU may dispute this, but let's be serious on the actual consequences) I don't think most people would be willing to accept this unless grossly necessary. Christianity is definitely opposed to these population control policies(given Christian opposition to abortion, Catholic opposition to birth control, and perhaps even the reading of some fundamentalists of the verse "Be fruitful and multiply"), and that may cause political strife.

You're absolutely correct. The RBE community just seems to be pitching communism without that whole Soviet smell being as apparent. I suppose we could call them "technocrat collectivists".

I don't concede to comments made purely to insult. Notice that I put obvious in inverted commas? Like I have said before, just coz you say it, doesn't make it so.

Now, I feel this has got to its end. You can either ask relevant questions, or notice me not giving you any more credence.

Can you show me where in TZM's or TVP's material that it says anything that gives this validity?

I've noticed that people try and actually make up terms to define what an RBE is coz they want to create a prima facie label. Sometimes as an appeal to fear fallacy.

What exactly in our materials gives your definition validity?