Topic: VOCALON: allow me to explain it this way.
Anonymous A started this discussion 12 years ago #37,832
Forget "Capitalism" and all other modern labels. Let's envision a primitive society in the wild. Let's say there is a village of 100 people. Now, all of those people must eat and drink and have shelter and clothing, or else they will probably die. Now, in order to provide the most basic -- food -- one or more of them must go out and either kill animals or harvest plants to eat. While those are working, the others can either sit around doing nothing, or do things in the village to improve life. Let's say that they, like you, sit around and do nothing. They return with meat and plants, and everyone eats.
Day after day, they are the only ones who go out, risk their lives, work hard, and provide food. You just sit around in the village doing nothing. Now, regardless of any idea of "fairness" or "equality," the fact is that *someone* in that village has to go out and work. If no one does, then you all die. So, even if you believe that "foraging is slavery", you are still eating and living because someone foraged. Understand?
Day after day, they are the only ones who go out, risk their lives, work hard, and provide food. You just sit around in the village doing nothing. Now, regardless of any idea of "fairness" or "equality," the fact is that *someone* in that village has to go out and work. If no one does, then you all die. So, even if you believe that "foraging is slavery", you are still eating and living because someone foraged. Understand?
vocalon !74TdoRkjCc joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 1 minute later[^] [v] #507,442
You say that like it's relevant. Yes, in fuckin' archaic-ass times it was necessary to work to live, but it's not now.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 12 years ago, 46 seconds later, 2 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,443
@previous (vocalon !74TdoRkjCc)
My point is not that. My point is this: if you do not work, but still eat, then SOMEONE is working FOR you. In other words, you are not actually living without Capitalism: you are simply living off of the Capitalism of others.
My point is not that. My point is this: if you do not work, but still eat, then SOMEONE is working FOR you. In other words, you are not actually living without Capitalism: you are simply living off of the Capitalism of others.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 7 seconds later, 2 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,444
So a modest change in economic policy is unrealistic because of some tribal people hunting for food. Understand Vocalon? Can't you see the error of your ways?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 12 years ago, 23 seconds later, 2 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,445
Anonymous C replied with this 12 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,446
vocalon !74TdoRkjCc replied with this 12 years ago, 31 seconds later, 4 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,447
@507,443 (A)
Explain how this is an issue. Explain how people supported by other people is an issue.
@507,444 (C)
lolbud
Explain how this is an issue. Explain how people supported by other people is an issue.
@507,444 (C)
lolbud
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 12 years ago, 50 seconds later, 4 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,448
@previous (vocalon !74TdoRkjCc)
My issue is that you criticize "Capitalism," which to you seems to mean "working," yet you live because your parents "work". You are a massive hypocrite.
My issue is that you criticize "Capitalism," which to you seems to mean "working," yet you live because your parents "work". You are a massive hypocrite.
vocalon !74TdoRkjCc replied with this 12 years ago, 3 minutes later, 8 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,452
@previous (A)
Explain how it's hypocritical to advocate a change in economic policy when my parents use the policy I'm working against.
Hey, guys. Did you know if you use a system which is inherently unavoidable, but advocate against it, that's hypocritical? Even though there's literally no way out of it without massive reform? That's hypocritical... smh
Explain how it's hypocritical to advocate a change in economic policy when my parents use the policy I'm working against.
Hey, guys. Did you know if you use a system which is inherently unavoidable, but advocate against it, that's hypocritical? Even though there's literally no way out of it without massive reform? That's hypocritical... smh
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 12 years ago, 1 minute later, 9 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,458
@previous (vocalon !74TdoRkjCc)
Fair enough, but you must tell us: which economic policy do you therefore advocate?
Fair enough, but you must tell us: which economic policy do you therefore advocate?
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 1 minute later, 11 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,459
@previous (A)
The one that threw your father in prison and made you move back in with your mother at 37.
The one that threw your father in prison and made you move back in with your mother at 37.
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 2 minutes later, 13 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,460
@OP
But it's "cool" and "edgy" to be anti-Capitalist!
But it's "cool" and "edgy" to be anti-Capitalist!
vocalon !74TdoRkjCc replied with this 12 years ago, 9 minutes later, 22 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,468
@507,459 (D)
> The one that threw your father in prison and made you move back in with your mother at 37.
DAMN #rekt
@507,458 (A)
I've been thinking about this and while there's still holes and shit in it, this is what I've got so far. The government supplies human needs such as food, water, vehicles, and all that shit, while the people do their own things without the constraints of needing-money bogging them down. The concept of money is still around - it's so deeply ingrained that it's difficult to get rid of, it's just not nearly as prevalent. Think about how many times people have put out shoddy products because they needed money. Imagine the ways people could innovate without the constraints of needing money. The lack of emphasis on the concept of money will also avoid the pitfalls of money-driven societies, such as Rome's (and contemporary United States') failure to mediate the gap between the rich and the poor. (See: The minimum wage in comparison to the average income of a CEO.)
Overall, there are still some kinks to work out, such as how to transition into this softly, but it's still drastically better than the system as it is now.
> The one that threw your father in prison and made you move back in with your mother at 37.
DAMN #rekt
@507,458 (A)
I've been thinking about this and while there's still holes and shit in it, this is what I've got so far. The government supplies human needs such as food, water, vehicles, and all that shit, while the people do their own things without the constraints of needing-money bogging them down. The concept of money is still around - it's so deeply ingrained that it's difficult to get rid of, it's just not nearly as prevalent. Think about how many times people have put out shoddy products because they needed money. Imagine the ways people could innovate without the constraints of needing money. The lack of emphasis on the concept of money will also avoid the pitfalls of money-driven societies, such as Rome's (and contemporary United States') failure to mediate the gap between the rich and the poor. (See: The minimum wage in comparison to the average income of a CEO.)
Overall, there are still some kinks to work out, such as how to transition into this softly, but it's still drastically better than the system as it is now.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 12 years ago, 1 minute later, 24 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,470
@previous (vocalon !74TdoRkjCc)
I appreciate your thoughts, but I See one major flaw. You say that "the government" supplies the necessities of life. But, where and how does the government get those resources? Who is actually getting them?
I appreciate your thoughts, but I See one major flaw. You say that "the government" supplies the necessities of life. But, where and how does the government get those resources? Who is actually getting them?
vocalon !74TdoRkjCc replied with this 12 years ago, 1 minute later, 25 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,471
@previous (A)
Computer-driven farming already exists here in Illinois, it would hardly be a pain to introduce it elsewhere. And given the nature of innovation without monetary limits, there's no reason for it not to improve.
Computer-driven farming already exists here in Illinois, it would hardly be a pain to introduce it elsewhere. And given the nature of innovation without monetary limits, there's no reason for it not to improve.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 9 seconds later, 25 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,472
@507,470 (A)They get them from the money your father pays for restitution, and from the interest you're paying through your tax liens and student loans.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 12 years ago, 9 minutes later, 35 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,482
vocalon !74TdoRkjCc replied with this 12 years ago, 2 minutes later, 37 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,485
@previous (A)
> funds the research
> implying
The computers are designed by people who take interest in that subject. Ask just about any scientist who works in their field - it's not about making money. It's for the science itself.
> funds the research
> implying
The computers are designed by people who take interest in that subject. Ask just about any scientist who works in their field - it's not about making money. It's for the science itself.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 12 years ago, 26 seconds later, 38 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,486
@previous (vocalon !74TdoRkjCc)
And while they design those computers, who is paying for their food?
And while they design those computers, who is paying for their food?
vocalon !74TdoRkjCc replied with this 12 years ago, 3 minutes later, 41 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,490
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 2 minutes later, 44 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,491
@previous (vocalon !74TdoRkjCc)
Answer the question: who is providing food for them, while they design?
Answer the question: who is providing food for them, while they design?
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 3 minutes later, 47 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,494
vocalon !74TdoRkjCc replied with this 12 years ago, 31 seconds later, 48 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,496
Anonymous G replied with this 12 years ago, 3 minutes later, 51 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #507,502
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #507,550
VOCALON: hi. I wasn't expecting to see you back here.
vocalon !74TdoRkjCc replied with this 12 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #507,553
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 12 years ago, 9 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #507,554
@previous (vocalon !74TdoRkjCc)
Not well. The reptilians are closing in.
Vocalon, when N'grrenk declares supremacy, you need to go underground. Trust me.
Not well. The reptilians are closing in.
Vocalon, when N'grrenk declares supremacy, you need to go underground. Trust me.
vocalon !74TdoRkjCc replied with this 12 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #507,556
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I'm already fluent in R'ylehian.
The lizard people have no shit on me anyways.
I'm already fluent in R'ylehian.
The lizard people have no shit on me anyways.
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 1 hour later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #507,584
@507,554 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
> Not well. The reptilians are closing in.
>
> Vocalon, when N'grrenk declares supremacy, you need to go underground. Trust me.
He needs to go underground now. Why wait?
> Not well. The reptilians are closing in.
>
> Vocalon, when N'grrenk declares supremacy, you need to go underground. Trust me.
He needs to go underground now. Why wait?
Triptych !!/xkPL9myM joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 11 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #507,588
@507,470 (A)
mincome has worked in the past. i don't see why it wouldn't work now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome
mincome has worked in the past. i don't see why it wouldn't work now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 12 hours later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #507,710
@507,471 (vocalon !74TdoRkjCc)
Where the fuck are you living? The problem isn't that your concept is fundamentally flawed, but it won't work in this day and age. We're atleast 100 years away from a society that can be run almost completely by technology, but you want it now. People don't just need food. They're not animals which just eat, shit and sleep. They want to do lots of things, they want products and services.
Computer controlled farming isn't all of the job. There's production, transport, storage, there's quality checks, there's maintainence. If you were to go through all the fucking shit you wouldn't finish typing until tomorrow. That's just for food production and handling.
Why can't you accept it simply will not work in your lifetime? It's inevitable in the future, but that's fucking obvious. And that's the distant future need I say.
Where the fuck are you living? The problem isn't that your concept is fundamentally flawed, but it won't work in this day and age. We're atleast 100 years away from a society that can be run almost completely by technology, but you want it now. People don't just need food. They're not animals which just eat, shit and sleep. They want to do lots of things, they want products and services.
Computer controlled farming isn't all of the job. There's production, transport, storage, there's quality checks, there's maintainence. If you were to go through all the fucking shit you wouldn't finish typing until tomorrow. That's just for food production and handling.
Why can't you accept it simply will not work in your lifetime? It's inevitable in the future, but that's fucking obvious. And that's the distant future need I say.
vocalon !74TdoRkjCc replied with this 12 years ago, 6 hours later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #507,758
@previous (L)
"wah wah it wont happen in my life time so i clearly cannot put thought and effort into progressing it despite it being a clear improvment from the current system"
"wah wah it wont happen in my life time so i clearly cannot put thought and effort into progressing it despite it being a clear improvment from the current system"
kook !!32zdfdzi+ joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #507,782
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #507,784
@previous (kook !!32zdfdzi+)
He is writing posts on the internet telling people how bad it is while sitting in his mother's basement, which is how all great philosophers got started.
He is writing posts on the internet telling people how bad it is while sitting in his mother's basement, which is how all great philosophers got started.
kook !!32zdfdzi+ replied with this 12 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #507,787
Anonymous O joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #507,788
Anonymous P joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 39 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #507,795
@507,758 (vocalon !74TdoRkjCc)
Going towards the goal isn't what you want, you want near instant results.
Going towards the goal isn't what you want, you want near instant results.