Daz: in what way do you want this country to be a great nation again?
Daz: in what way do you want this country to be a great nation again?
I do agree with CL that politics will move towards the extremes soon - this is because the vested interests will try to cling to power at all costs.
Well you're not wrongOriginally Posted by Grouse
Lots of CL's views are hard to refute, and it is hard to argue with someone who seems so unwilling to acknowledge that there might be validity in opposing points of view. He obviously has read a bit of political theory, and there seems to be some cohesion in his vision. It may be 'natural' to live in the way he prescribes and it is easy to see how this vision fits in with 'the laws of the jungle' . I think that capitalism developed out of feudalism and gave rise, via technology/mass media etc. to consumerism, and it is this which threatens our existence. I am not a political theorist and I know I am about to be shot down by CL but I believe capitalism is an inherently BAD IDEA and free market economics are bad environmentally, morally and socially. I think that Marx was basically right when he predicted that capitalism would eventually collapse, he said it would be dismantled when the workers took control of the means of production - government has prevented that from happening, and we are all too entranced by material comfort and cheap shit to start the revolution, but if there is to be hope for us, capitalism will be replaced by 'green' political thinking which works at a local level and is antithetical to globalisation and the vested interests of corporations and their puppets. This might all be complete cobblers, but I find CL's views utterly depressing and even if he is right, I choose another way.
Ommmmmmmmm......
.
I also think Christpher Leigh should get a life rather than wasting so much time complaining or being synical about.... well everything.
Shame on you Grouse! All Chris's arguments are ridiculously easy to refute. It's like talking to someone who's just found out about philosophy and keeps repeating "You can't prove you're not a figment of my imagination." He hasn't yet demonstrated how being selfish can result in any "virtuous" outcomes except for him and the people he likes. He seems to flip from ranting pessimism to hippy faith in people's inherent goodness in the same paragraph.Lots of CL's views are hard to refute,
Ayn Rand was a lovely, lovely womanThis bit's interesting. Am I right in thinking that you approve of kindness and generosity? I wonder if Ayn Rand is just massively misunderstood (like the Archbishop of Canterbury, a wise fool if ever there was one!) and is in fact a lovely, lovely man.
(Are the gloves boxing gloves in case you have to knock somebody off the pavement if they get in your way?)
with an unlovely philosophy. But what was she like to know? Was she kind to her family and ruthlessly uncaring with regard to everyone else. Probably not. Did she punch people off the pavement or did she say "Excuse me" out of enlightened self interest. Does it matter why people are good? to paraphrase Guru Nanak: It is our actions that make us good or bad.
There may be some congruence in our philosophies CL if when Objectivism takes hold of the public imagination
Maybe it's just a Darwinian urge to ensure the survival of the species, I don't know, but in my philosophy people sacrifice themselves and their money for the greater good out of caritas. And they don't need to wait till Red Nose Day to start doing it.
God bless.
do you really want me to answer that after all ive gone on about
why do you think i started the thread
if you want me to i will but id have thought you would have got my pointby now
Blimey - you lot have been busy! I've spent half an hour catching up on this thread, and I've got a few points. They'll be a bit out of synch with the rest of it though - sorry!
For what it's worth, I'm not a raving leftie either. I run a little company. My responses to the points are prefixed with arrows: >>
If people waited patiently, their standard of living would have gradually increased, at a rate much faster than welfare.But the people wanted it now, and they paid with their futures.
>> Nonsense - the standard of living for those with the means would have increased exponentially at the expense of those without the means - in a competitive position the starting point is all-important. The rich get richer and the poor go to the work house and die young.
I believe that given freedom (Freedom in a political context means-freedom from the initiation of physical force) Humans will pursue the right course.They will make mistakes on the way, but in the long term they'll succeed.This is because the capitalist system, punishes irrationality and evil.
>> No - the capitalist system doesn't have anything to say about irrationality or evil. Its sole objective is to sustain itself. Who can honestly say that they need a Ferrari, when a Fiesta does the same job? Rationality has nothing to do with consumerism and the capitalist aim of market generation, building and management. Neither does the capitalist system punish evil: anyone can manipulate a market to their own benefit. Not everyone chooses to.
Once the constitution is in place, all property will be private.If you want medical care or education for your children, go onto the open market and compete for them, just as the doctors and teachers will compete for your business.
>> And enter a world of misinfomration, dodgy marketing and biased advice. Look at the cosmetic surgery industry - it's worth billions, yet surgeons are continually advising size 10 women to have liposuction. Capitalism in action.
As I consider the initiation of physical force immoral, all taxes would be voluntary and only paid for proper government services.These services are the Police(selfdefence from criminals), the military(selfdefence from foreign threats) and the law courts(so people who disagree can settle their disputes peacefully). People would be willing to finance these institutions voluntarily, because they would affect their interests directly.
>>No they wouldn't - the rich would employ private armies of security guards and medics, and the rest would be spread so thinly as to be irrelevant. This is what happens in Colombia.
There would be some in society that wouldn't pay voluntary taxes.The wealthiest people would pay the most, why?Because they have the most to lose, by not having adequate legal protection.Just look at the looting that goes on when a country turns to anarchy.
>>No they wouldn't - they'd emigrate to Switzerland or Monaco. These are tax-limited safe havens.
Originally Posted by Grouse
Which bit of the 19th century was America almost free in - the bit when they were killing each other or the bit when they were killing the indigenous population?
The bit where people could create and produce without repression!
>>Where huge ranches of prime farmland could be bought for a dollar an acre! It's a bit different now.
Capitalism is incompatible with slavery, just read the bill of rights.
>>Whose Bill of Rights? America's? Where a significant amount of the country's GDP is based on production by armies of illegial immigrants or is offshored to sweatshops in the Phillipines? None of these workers have any rights whatsoever. These are modern-day slaves employed by Levi's or Gap.
Abuse and Altruism are corollaries.One cannot exist without the other.The term Altruism was originated by the philosopher Auguste Comte, and it means,OTHER.
Don't mistaken Altruism with kindness and generosity.Altruism states that a Man has no right to exist for his own sake, that service to others is his only moral justification.
Selfishness means 'concerned with ones own interests.' Most people equate Selfishness with hedonism.But, just because you want something doesn't mean it's in your interests.A Man has to discover what values are actually to his interests.
I admire your zest,but your totally ignorant of the history of Altruism.You clearly don't understand it's meaning.
>>Stop getting hung up on definitions - it doesn't help your argument. A word means what its user wants it to mean.
I find it amazing that people get so wound up about real or perceived unfairness in society, especially in the UK where internationally we are probably fairer than most. I’ve lost previous jobs to what I’d consider outrageous unfairness but you can’t just sit on your arse grumbling about it or trying to change the now unchangeable; just bash on and do something positive about the situation you find yourself in. Outlook in life I think is everything and quoting Yossarian from Catch 22 it pays to ‘live forever or die in the attempt’.
Success in business can also be over rated. Most often its down to tunnel vision, obsession, hard graft, imagination, timing and unbelievable luck – a bit like running then – and even when you gained your success it might well be at an unaffordable cost (to your health, family, friends, employees etc). I know quite a lot of overweight, smoking, depressed, stressed (to bulgey eyed proportions) and divorced alcoholics that are ‘successful’.
As for Shell’s huge profits, well their share price is still not doing terribly well. Also remember they will pay a huge, huge figure in corporation tax on the back of those profits (whereas if they were chose to be based in another country and taxed there, the UK tax system would get nothing) and will probably have to reinvest the rest into exploration and alternative types of fuel. And they make bugger all profit on selling petrol at the pump.
So there
[QUOTE=Stolly;105039] Outlook in life I think is everything and quoting Yossarian from Catch 22 it pays to ‘live forever or die in the attempt’.
I agree! I plan on living forever too. All according to plan so far
Just caught up on this thread.I've been laughing for ages.It's not that I find your(formites) comments funny(I don't), it's because of the zeal with which you fight!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote