Non-threaded

Forums » The Lounge » Read Thread

A place to sit back, hang out, and make monkey noises about anything you'd like.

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Uniting earth is a great idea but everyone is like ONE WORLD GOVERMENT BAD and ILLUMINATI

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago
the Christian Bible is against a one world government which is the only reason it hasn't happened yet. The UN is as close as we've come. For some reason the Christian Bible loves to preach about division and then wrap it up in a nice cuddly we are one type blanket. I'm all for uniting the planet.

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

....... Yes, lets unite the world under a single, easily corruptible government. Please. That would be just dandy. 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago
Well first we have to get rid of currency. Which I am also all for. that levels the playing field drastically.

Th

10 years ago

Oh yes. Lets remove currency. So now.... We have returned to the trade and barter system that we used a couple hundred years ago.... 

There was a reason we stopped using trade and barter system and moved to currency. It's simpler, we don't need to go to person 'a' to get his food to go purchase at person 'b' to purchase computers. It's a hassle. 

---

Now, world government. Sounds wonderful at first, but then we actually look at the world.  How many parties are there in the world? How do you expect anything to be done. 

America, is a very, very very, different country then Canada or Mexico. Each state in America is very very very different from another state. We are in deadlock over nearly every issue. You expect a world government to NOT be in deadlock? It would be even worse then what we have now. 

Government with more power. Sounds like a great idea, no? No, it isn't. Government should be kept small. (IMO). Make it bigger, it'll cost more, do less, and we'd have more of a chance for a dictator to come into power and we couldn't fight it since every military in the world would be under his command. 

Th

10 years ago

See this: http://www.thevenusproject.com/en/the-venus-project

This is the world I want to live in a venus project one.

Th

10 years ago

lol Guys, guys. I was just saying that what I would consider the *future is a successfully united and working Earth with a fully terraformed and colonized mars. 

If we need to do anything with the currency system we just need to make it a single-world currency. (obviously that wouldn't work in some places.)

Th

10 years ago

 

Alright. Firstly, I don't believe such a situation is possible, since 
 
A) Humans are flawed
 
B) Work without reward is never done. (Explanation: If everyone gets the same, why would anyone work? Why should the smart work, when the dumb are getting everything for free? My dad had a professor who did that with a class. The smart students stopped working, the b students stopped working, the c students gave up, and the D and F students didn't care. Humans aren't kind like that)
 
C) There will always be lazy people
 
---
 
but, lets say we could have a civilization like that. Ever read The Giver, Brave New World, or Anthem? They discuss different problems, so I suggest you read all of them if you haven't, but the basic premise is, that if everyone was perfect, we would stop progressing, culture would stop (it's a worthless, and individualistic Endeavour), and we'd lose feelings. Since, perfect humans are perfect. No flaws makes the world boring. 
 
Also, in Anthem, it discusses how we'd also end up making everyone equal. Height, intelligence, thoughts, sex life, etc. anyone who was smart would be forced to behave as if they were dumb, the tall would be attacked for being unequal, you weren't allowed to say I (only we, since I is individualistic) and the mating system was, you'd go to a house, you'd be randomly selected a partner, and you'd go at it, and never talk again. 
 
Id hate that world. I'm an individual. I have passions, I have loves, I have flaws, and I have goals. To create a world where those stuff harm the worlds equality, I don't want to live in such a world.

Th

10 years ago

No one aaid anything about being equal. The reason i want a one world goverement is to stop wars. If there is no nations to fight againist, you can't fight. Also another reason this kind of goverment is good, is because resource distribution. Look at it, people in the US are dying from obesity related dieases and people in third world countries are dying from starvation.

Th

10 years ago

The Venus project wants everyone to be equal. 

Really? So, the civil wars in nearly every country in history never occurred, huh? :p I'd even say that we could have more wars, since we would be forcefully melding different opinions into a single government. 

Resource distribution would cost the same (to move food to Africa. No tariffs i believe) The reason we have problems with obesity are far different from us just having extra food. It's culture+bad choices. 

Th

10 years ago

Only the giver.

Th

10 years ago

Read Anthem and Brave New World. Great books that discuss this topic. Anthem is a post-apocalyptic setting (sort of) brave new world is hardcore sci fi.

Th

10 years ago

Well, why do you think just because we remove human flaws there is no "I"?

Th

10 years ago

Since of every human is perfect, then what's the difference between Person A and Person B? They are perfect, serve the world creatures. 

You want a world where everyone is equal, everyone works to serve the greater good, and everyone has no flaws. No individuality if everyone is the same, has the same goal, and has no personal flaws. 

Th

10 years ago

Person A likes to paint while Person B likes to play music. Person A is more short tempered. Person A has diffrent beliefs about god.

Th

10 years ago

Those are flaws. Liking to paint/play music is wasting time for the common good, he shouldn't be allowed to paint/play music. It's a waste of resources. It's individualistic and selfish. 

Want to own a brown chair? Everyone has to be equal. Everyone has to have the same chairs, the same clothes, the same skills, the same hair color, the same height, since otherwise, it wouldn't be fair. 

Perfect humans have no feelings. Feelings are flaws. Emotions are flaws. 

Th

10 years ago

Why do people play music? For themselves. Thats greed. Or, they play to show off, which is arrogance. A flaw. 

Why do people paint? For themselves. That's greed. Or, to show to others. That's arrogance. 

Th

10 years ago

People play music for their own enjoyment. And what is wrong with showing off?

Th

10 years ago

That's arrogance. (A flaw)

Thats greed. They are playing for themselves and not the community. A flaw. 

Th

10 years ago

What they want to do is remove flaws that cause suffering. War. According to you, any enjoyment is greed, but that is not their goal. Why would they strive to create a world where enjoyment is banned??

Th

10 years ago

Since the only way to remove greed is to remove it completely. Lets remove greed. Well, the only way to do that is to make cyber em from doctor who. Well, we are all equal, live perfect lives, etc. but we aren't I. 

I'm not arguing for your system, you are. Don't ask me to defend it. 

Th

10 years ago

Those are not flaws. The goal of the project is too make everybody's needs done by technology so that they can do their pursuits.

Th

10 years ago

Yes they are. Look above.

Th

10 years ago

You don't have to become a "Serve the world creature." Using technology, the goal of the project is to make everything done using technology and then we can do our pursuit, hobbies etc.

Th

10 years ago

The whole goal is to remove flaws. That's what they want to do. And that removes the human spirit. 

Th

10 years ago

They want to remove flaws that cause misery for some humans. Greed which causes other poor people to starve because the greedy person is stealing resources underneath their feet. Does being "greedy" by spending time painting cause others to suffer? Not get something?

Th

10 years ago

If the greedy painter could be spending time making advances in technology, yes, that's greedy.

What your system makes, is a worker class (scientists, doctors, builders, etc) and layabout class (non-workers) which get the same benefits as the worker class. Why should the workers work? 

Th

10 years ago

Why are workers needed? They want to use technology to make there no need for work.

Th

10 years ago

Yes, because technology is always going to work. You want robots? What happens when the robots break down? You want reusable energy? What happens when the machines funneling it stop working? You want new technology? You'll need inventors.

Th

10 years ago

If everything is perfect, then yes, it would work. But nothing is perfect. We will be constantly trying to update our technology, since it is impossible to reach the pinnacle of technological advances. 

Th

10 years ago

What about teachers? (Human teachers, since computers don't teach as well as humans in most cases) What about emergency response teams? (Since computers aren't perfect)

Th

10 years ago

And that are some of the problems to fix. And solutions are being worked out.

Th

10 years ago

Yes, since AI is such a great idea. Lets give computers, that run everything, sentience! Woot! And totally possible and not at all liable to need upgrades every couple of years with the changing world. 

Th

10 years ago

How changing world? And for learning you could just have knowledge inserted into your brain. 

Th

10 years ago

.... Again, so you want Cybermen. If we could implant stuff into the brain, why not take out flaws? Why not make everyone perfect beings, without malice and hatred? It's perfectly logical action to take. We want a perfect world. Humans will always have flaws. Lets remove them. 

And yes, greed is greed, no matter what it amounts to. Arrogance allowed some of the greatest leaders in the world to exist. Lust creates babies, and creates happiness (for some). Laziness invented trains, and cars. Etc. 

flaws are part of human nature. If we remove them, we lose ourselves. That can not be disputed. Emotions are all from flaws in character. 

As for changing world, again, we will countinue to advance in technology. 

Th

10 years ago

Well then you could make a person not do greed that causes harm but greed that is enjoyment ok.

Th

10 years ago

It's the same gene. 

The wish for power in a humans mind allowed our greatest leaders to rise. But it also made the most evil people rise as well. (I believe Fireplay linked that to a page on cracked.com that explained that)

Th

10 years ago

Other robots will fix that robot and the machines. Why would you want new technology? Once a proper system is made, is there any reason why it has to be upgraded with a new technology?

Th

10 years ago

And when those robots break? You're expecting perfection out of something that we know is glitchy. Computers require survailence. Everything breaks down, and since everything is based off power source, if we lose electricity, everything dies. 

Why would we want technology? Well, I'd like to explore the universe, figure out teleportation, maybe create life, perhaps figure out a way to escape the world that in a couple billion years will be destroyed.

What about products. Books? Paintings? Music? Why should hard work be granted with nothing? 

Th

10 years ago

People would still paint and write, as they like too. Why do you think BZ spent so much time in creating Dead Man Walking?

Th

10 years ago

Since he's a glory hog? Since he has greed? (No offense to BZ meant of course. I consider greed and arrogance (at some level) virtues)

Most people wrote to make money. JK Rowling wouldn't have written Harry Potter if she had all she ever wanted.

Th

10 years ago

So people for the same reasons you listed would write. Would glory stop being there from writing something good?

Th

10 years ago

You want to remove flaws. They wouldn't write if they don't have flaws. 

Th

10 years ago

Your statement makes no sense.

Th

10 years ago

Greed is a flaw. Glory hounds is both arrogance and greed. You want to remove flaws. Therefore, if you remove flaws, no one would write books. 

Th

10 years ago

Read what I have been saying. All they want to do is remove flaws that cause suffering.

Th

10 years ago

Greed causes suffering, arrogance causes suffering, lust causes suffering, laziness (eh, not really but it could) cause suffering. If you remove these flaws from humans, (and they are all genetic traits, meaning you'd have to go full on Gataca on humanity, which is horrible), then the flaws are gone. 

Remove greed+arrogance=no more authors=no more painters

Remove all flaws=no more individuals. 

Th

10 years ago

They want to remove the greed etc that causes suffering.

Th

10 years ago

You just ignored what I've been saying. The greed that causes suffering is genetically, the same greed that causes music. You can't take one without the other. 

Th

10 years ago

Genetically? Really? And how do you know? Any evidence too say that one cannot be removed without the other? One causes suffering, the other doesnn't.

Th

10 years ago

 

 
Aman
Reply
The future is at hand.
 
6 hours ago
http://genetics.thetech.org/ask/ask81
 
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2009/03/is_greed_in_the.html
 
----
They are the same thing. There is a greed gene. You remove the gene, it's gone. One is greed, the other is greed. 

Th

10 years ago

http://stupidhumans.info/Docs/greedgene.html

Th

10 years ago

http://www.m-bettencourt.com/shorts/greedgene.pdf

Th

10 years ago

(Note that this isn't actually a scientific research, just awake discussion about genes)

Th

10 years ago

Then greed doesn't have to be removed. Instead you ensure that everyone doesn't want others to suffer, thus only removing the bad side of greed.

Th

10 years ago

http://www.rinr.fsu.edu/spring96/features/evil.html

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/102439.php

How do you do that? Go Gataca on us? Manipulate everyone's emotions so that the world is all flowers and happiness? Sounds like you don't want humans, you want cybermen. Everyone has hates. Everyone has dislikes. If we start removing parts of people's genetics, they aren't human anymore. They are cybermen. And if we don't do that, we are stuck with everyone having likes and dislikes. Your future is disgusting to me, since I'm an individualist, but for those who want everyone to be the same person, I suppose it's great. 

Th

10 years ago

Of you manipulate us, we don't have life, we have no choices, we don't love the life we want to live, we live the life you want us to live. 

(And remember that all technology will be used against us. Manipulate everyone to love each other? Someone will end up manipulating it in the opposite direction.)

Th

10 years ago

Let'sstay two people want X as a wife. Who gets her? 

Let's say two people want the house that is near the ocean, but in such and such location. Who gets it?

Th

10 years ago

The one that can Woo her.

Turns of six months.

Th

10 years ago

Wouldn't that fester hatred? And Anger? (and as such, destroy your happy flower world?) And if it does (which is does), how does your world handle it? Do we terminate those with a disposition to anger? Do we terminate him, lest he reacts violently? And, considering how you've removed violence from people's vocabulary, no doubt the two will be killed. Knives, stones, fists, Electricty. You've created a society that an aged person will experience anger for the first time in his life, and he won't be able to control it. Way To go. 

And you ignored my house question. 

Th

10 years ago

The top one is for the women, the bottom one for the house.

Th

10 years ago

Alright, (respond to my discussion about anger and hatred if you will?)

As for turns of six month, wouldn't that fester annoyance, and displeasure, and greed? Good job, you've erased greed from a persons life, so, he's an aged person when he first encounters greed, can't control it, and attack his fellow. Great going. 

Th

10 years ago

Councilling sessions would be done before.

Lets back up again--this is my stance:

My idea of a perfect world is a one where life can be enjoyed to its fullest. Thus work is a waste of time. After all, we are only given 80 years of life.

Venus project seems to fullfill that, thus I support it. I do not know whether my dream world is implementable or not, though.

Th

10 years ago

Done before what? If they never experienced anger, they wouldn't be able to have counseling sessions. If afterwards, that's after the guy gets enraged and slaughters his fellow. 

Alright. So, we have a world where no one experiences anger, hatred, jealousy, etc. now, this sounds wonderful. It isn't. 

 
Firstly, we need to look at how we stop people from experiencing anger, hatred, and jealousy. 
 
Remove genetics: This works, but we become emotionless. 
Kill those predisposed to 'bad' emotions; Great going hitler II. Now you've able to decide whos good and who's bad. Next step, is, logically, removing anything bad, and having a world where everyone is genetically the same. Now THAT'S equality. 
Teach children at youth to not act on these emotions: Now, this doesn't actually explain how you did it with adults, but let's say you managed to do so. Now, these children are growing up without pain, suffering. Everything they want is given to them A) That sounds horrible. Just imagine if everything you ever wanted was given to you for nothing. Life would be boredom B) once they experience pain, and suffering, or jealousy, or greed, or anger, or any 'bad' emotion, they wouldn't be able to handle it. 

Th

10 years ago

How? They would have hobbies to do, play games etc.

Th

10 years ago

How many hours do you think most kids watch T.V. or maybe sleep in? They do it because they can't think of anything else to do and are bored. If people had everything (and possibly no emotions, which would rule out bordom.) they would be extremly useless.

Th

10 years ago

There is more than tv. Books, games, rping, making a storygame..

Th

10 years ago

But all knowledge would be implanted into your mind, making books worthless. RPing is enjoyable because we have our characters face danger. Let's say no one experienced danger. How would roleplaying be fun? :P 

Th

10 years ago

Fiction Books. And not all knowledge will be implanted, only how to speak language and other basic maths science etc. But the roleplaying characters could experience dangers.

Th

10 years ago

Why not all knowledge? Wouldn't that be better? (logic speaking, of course. If we can implant all knowledge, why not implant all knowledge?)

Yeah, if you've never experienced danger, you wouldn't know what danger is, thus, they would not experience danger. 

Th

10 years ago

1. So that enjoyment in learning what we want would be there. So the fun of books would be there.

2. Have I experianced a monster chasing after me? Yet I can imagine what it would be like.

Th

10 years ago

2. You've experienced fear. If you've never experienced fear you can't imagine fear. And not all people enjoy roleplaying. 

1. Why though? You'd end up with the problem of teachers being needed. 

Th

10 years ago

1. Even if we implant all knowledge, fiction would still be enjoyable to read.

2. Fear will still be experienced. What about the crushing fear that people will discover you have crush on x .cheeky

Th

10 years ago

1. Not everyone enjoys reading. 

2. Not really. We have fear of revealing those stuff since we fear rejection. But if we don't fear anything, everything we ever wanted was given to us, we wouldnt care. Also, lust is a flaw. Not allowed. Festers jealousy. Should be removed like bad hatred, bad greed, bad laziness. 

Th

10 years ago

1. Then there are many other things to do, as I have listed earlier.

2. I think you took the "remove all flaws" to literally.

Th

10 years ago

1. Boredom arises when everything is given to you. I'm bored right now, so I'm arguing about this topic. If all of life was like this, I'd commit suicide. (and I've considered suicide at some points in life.) 

2. Not at all. In a perfect world, all flaws should be gone. That's what you want. I'm taking it as they said. We don't want any flaws, so we removed all flaws. Can't take that too literally, it has one possible meaning. 

Th

10 years ago

1. Even I have considered Suicide.

2. A perfect world with no flaws would be boring. Thus only some would be removed.

Th

10 years ago

1. So.... You agree that of your perfect world existed a great deal of people would kill themselves out of boredom? 

2. ......... And which flaws should you remove? All flaws can harm others. A perfect world would suck, that's what I've been trying to tell you for this whole debate. Perfect world can not exist with flaws, otherwise it's not perfect. 

Th

10 years ago

1. I don't know. My brain is too fried to think.

2. ^

Th

10 years ago

Yep. Questions without answers can't be answered. 

Ill point out that I've complained to my rabbis about how in heaven, we get everything we want. (and that I consider that bad). I'm not someone who would consider having everything you ever wanted for free is good. 

Th

10 years ago

I don't like the concept of heaven. I mean really, forever?

Day 99999999999999999999999999999999 of being in heaven: 

I wish I could end this.

I wish I could end this.

...

I wish I could end this.

Th

10 years ago

Not actually what heaven is, according to Judaism at least, but I get bored of discussing religion with most people. Only a couple of people I enjoy talking to about religion. 

Th

10 years ago

At least this is how it is in Christianity. I hate all "forever" things. No matter what, you'll get bored.

Th

10 years ago

Not exactly..... I mean, by definition, God could just instill everlasting joy, for eternity, and youd live euphorically and without a mind forever. I'd assume Ugilick could answer what you are saying better then I can, since Judaism has 'forever' in it, but a very different heaven. 

Th

10 years ago

That wouldn't be nice, still. Having no mind is not a nice prospect.

Th

10 years ago

Of course. That's why I had trouble understanding why I'd want heaven. Though, it's an apt description of the perfect world (Your view of heaven). Everything is given to you. No war, no plague, no harm. Would be utter boredom. Love the hypocrisy there, :P

I don't know Christianity, you'd need to talk to Ugilick about it if you wanted to debate that (assuming he would even discuss it with you). Judaism has a different type of heaven, one where people like you would hate it, and people like me would enjoy it. (as in, I like working for benefits, I'd hate free stuff. You want free stuff for no work.)

Th

10 years ago

Its ok for a human lifespan, not for all eternity.

Th

10 years ago

Not really. What's the difference between eternity and 80+-20 years? We don't know. To us, 80 years is an eternity.

Th

10 years ago

After so much time(which is greater then 80 years) all ideas are run out, thus boredom ensues.

Th

10 years ago

I'll give an analogy:

You want a -insert really cool object-. Once you get -really cool object- you'll play with it, and use it up as much as you can. You will be in euphoric joy. Then, you get bored of it. It doesn't take long. Happiness without anything to stop it is boring. 

A book exemplifies this perfectly. don't remember it's name, where people would strap themselves up with a machine that would give them bliss. (it was a drug) In the end, after a week, the person in bliss would try and kill themselves, since they've experienced everything life had to offer. Now, that's a very short period of time, but it is a fiction story. 80 years is too long to experience nothing but joy. 10 years is too long. 

Th

10 years ago

Aman is correct every countries government has incredibly corrupt politicians and deep divisions between the political parties. Could you imagine if that was the entire world under one system it would be awful.

Th

10 years ago

I don't see anyone stopping happiness in CYS cheeky

Th

10 years ago

Have you seen Madglee? XD He's been here for 10 years, he's gone nuts! 

*Claws reach out from the thread to devour Aman. Aman scatters. 

Th

10 years ago

The thing is, the Venus project sucks. In ordr for a world to feel perfect, it needs to be flawed, in order for a world to be perfect, it can't have any. Really, the fun in our world is all the many risks we take, big and small. If that were taken away, so would be the interesting flaws our minds rely on for happiness and entertainment.

I guess as long as the world doesn't go too far one way or the other, I'd be fine.

One Way: Anarchy, the wonderful Land of Do-As-You-Please, but only after a probable few years of death, destruction, and chaos, that probably nobody but the governmentalist conspiracy cranks would survive, utterly defeating the purpose. Not to mention I would have no greater power there either, I'd still be a skinny, untrained kid, people could push me around just like they could in and under government.

The Other: The Venus Project, because Aman and the Giver proved that it sucks, Facism, because V proved that it sucks,  Communism, because Stalin, the Chinese Government, 8-million-kill-Mau (Tse-Tsunge/Zedong), and especially Liberty Prime, proved that it sucks, Totalitarianism, because Hitler, and pretty much evryone else who's ever been in total power proved that it sucks.

Another thing: Have you noticed how virtually no government in the history of the world, even Anarchy, actually lived up to the ideals on which they were based?

Th

10 years ago

I don't know if you are right about anarchy. While, no I don't support abolishing all government, I have no doubt many communities will survive. (The community I live in is somewhat self reliant. We have our doctors, our cleaners, our food, a gun club, we have our own EMT service. And this is in a normal, none paranoid community.) So, while Anarchy will cause lots of death, it wouldn't be the end of the world. 

Th

10 years ago

Eh Stalin wasn't a communist, he was just a dictator using communism as a front. Marxist communism has never been instilled in a goverment

Th

10 years ago

Marxist Communism has it's own flaws and that's why it was always easier to change and fit to a more favorable government.

Communism is good for tiny isolated self-sustaining places but doesn't really work with anything bigger than Ireland. (In my opinion at least.)

Th

10 years ago

Maybe it's unrelated, but I found that the examples with the russian inventors very nicely showed off how shitty comunism is:

http://www.cracked.com/article/207_6-inventors-who-got-jack-shit-changing-modern-world/

Th

10 years ago

Still, Liberty Prime is the prime example of how many ways communism sucks, and he doesn't even support a real democracy!

Government Interference

10 years ago

This is such a great thought-provoking thread and the base issue seems to be 'how much should the government interfere?'

On one end of the spectrum we have Minimal Interference.  No food stamps or welfare.  Each person maintains roads around their property.  Schools and hospitals are privatized, maybe even law enforcement.

On the other end we have Ideal Communism*.  When you go to your job, you don't get a paycheck at the end of the day, the government gets it.  In return, you have no personal expenses.  You live in a house with no rent.  If you don't feel well you go to the hospital for free.  When new media (movies, games, music) is available, it is freely distributed among the population.

There are clearly problems with both extremes. 

Let's say we have a family of four: Man, wife, son, and daughter.  Mom and dad each make 30,000USD a year and live in a medium sized city for a total income of 60k a year.  Not rich, but they survive.  Now let's say mom dies.  Dad has to take care of 3 people on 30,000 a year, but it's not possible.  Not alone.  So what happens to our fictional family with a minimal government?  No welfare, the family loses their house.  There would be no orphanages because we don't have government assistance.  The kids probably have to beg, maybe live with family if they have any.  Dad would be fine alone in a one bedroom apartment.

Sound familiar?  Maybe a little like a book called "The Jungle"?  If you haven't read it and are interested in sociological issues, it's a great story.

On the other extreme, the Ideal Communism*, why go to work?  A doctor gets the same house and food and care as someone who doesn't work.  I think many people would work because they like what they do, but not nearly enough of the population.

I'm not a sociologist or an economist.  I don't know enough macroeconomics to fully understand the health care and welfare issues facing the USA right now.  I know it is good for us to discuss and be aware of.  My opinion from what I've read (from fiction like The Jungle and Brave New World to news articles and published reports on government spending) that there is no perfect solution.  Some people suggest drug testing or other ways to make sure people on welfare don't abuse it.  So far, every test proposed would cost more than it would save.  I definitely wouldn't want it cut completely.  I know many people who needed welfare due to no fault of their own and wouldn't have gotten by otherwise.  I'm 24 and if not for Obamacare I wouldn't have health insurance.  Not that I don't work: every job I've had has cut its benefits so much that what you pay in premiums doesn't cover what they charge in deductibles and copays.  On the other hand, I do hate to think of people who have child after child, knowing that they get more and more assistance, sometimes enough that they barely have to work, while we (the normal working tax payers) have to support them.  I don't have a solution, so I don't criticize any of the current systems.  I think they're doing the best they can.

*Ideal Communism:  all resources equally shared by all citizens.  No rich or poor, all middle class.  There has never been a real life example of Ideal Communism.

Government Interference

10 years ago

An easy solution to the fault you listed with ideal communism would be to kick out people who didn't work from the country. It's not the only problem with the view, but it's a fairly easily solvable one.

Government Interference

10 years ago

Is the US where you Canadians kick out people who try to cash in on your excellent health care system who haven't put enough into it? ;)

 

*Edit:

*reads more about health care in Canada* this sounds pretty awesome but the issue with wait times is crazy.  Is that because people just go to the hospital whenever they feel icky, instead of 30 seconds before death like many Americans have to due to fear of crushing debt? Also, do the doctors in Canada 'try' as much as their US counterparts?  It seems to me that that if the government is only going to pay them x amount for their care either way it wouldn't have the same incentive as a doctor here (in the US) who can basically charge what they want. Seriously.  If you look at the bill print out, and manage not to become suicidally depressed, you can find hospitals charging 10$ for a dose of Tylenol or 5$ for a bandaid. Also, is it an issue for those who try and take really good care of themselves, like eating well and exercising, that never go to the hospital to pay the same amount of taxes as someone who is obese and diabetic due to their life choices and must go to the hospital frequently?  

Government Interference

10 years ago

It's not an issue for them, I, for one, work out regularly, play in two sports teams (can't say anything about the healthiness of the food I eat though). I still go to the hospital when I have broken bones, i'm bleeding internally, etc...

But yeah, it's usually just because of a bunch of annoying hypochondriacs, the wait times are ridiculous.

The doctors work very well actually, and they get payed about the same that normal doctors get payed (I think). And i'm pretty sure that the doctors charge our goverment just as much as they charge you in the US (they swipe our medicare cards for EVERYTHING)

I know that I had no complaints about my last doctor, at least. He hated most of his patients, but apparently he has a soft spot for me or something, he did an excellent job, surgery went splendidly, and he was extremely friendly.

Government Interference

10 years ago

While I agree that the anarchist(Ish) creation isn't going to work, I think you are forgetting a very big part of human behavior. Charity. While Ayn Rand thought charity was evil, she didn't want to ban it, she just wanted the government to not force people to do so. Many communities in the nation have families that they themselves are supporting, without the use of welfare (I'll point to my community again), by giving charity. 

Now, the family would have to lessen the apartment to something smaller (if there is such a thing), and it would be rougher, charity orginization due a lot more then we credit them. (and of course, orphanages with charity work)

Honestly though? I think we should have some sort of welfare system, that allows people to get back on their feet rather then live in luxury (I'd point to my thread about a surfer who dines on luxury foods paid by the tax payer). (and doesn't allow for the rich to bypass it. I know a family who own a restaurant, live in an extravagant house, but manage to hide it all and get welfare)

I remember that Milton Freedman said something along the lines that big buisness would finance schools, since if they don't they'd lose good employees. 

As for the communist theory, I feel you may be a little optimistic (thankfully. Having 100% pessimists on this site would be really bad :P). I know people who love their work. If they didn't get paid for it? They wouldn't do it, since it's a lot of hard work. They may work, but far less hours. 

Government Interference

10 years ago

How about if such person does not go to work, he is denied services? But this could be abused and corrupted...

Government Interference

10 years ago

This would result in a lot of dead old/sick/young people.

Government Interference

10 years ago

There is a sick day period and retirement? 

Government Interference

10 years ago

An epidemic could screw the system over.

Government Interference

10 years ago

The young people would be the exceptions, they are unable to support themselves, but once they reach a certain age they would no longer have a choice.

The old and the sick die. They are not useful, they are not good enough to work in the system, they will either be culled or ignored.

Efficiency is not a fan of compassion.

Government Interference

10 years ago

Then some idiot decides that they should get "rights" and marches... *gasp* peacefully for them! Disgusting thoughts. :P

Government Interference

10 years ago

Burn the filth and then sweep the remains into the ash tray?

Government Interference

10 years ago

This reminds me of nazi germany

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

For all who say 'let's just kill off those who don't work!" you gotta remember something. Why should a doctor work 12 hours a day, and get paid equally to a garbage man? Why should he get paid like a piano player (assuming such a job is considered acceptable even)? Why shouldhe get paid the same as a job that's far easier? 

Lets say the smart were paid the same as the dumb who work? Why would anyone work hard/take hard jobs? It's stupid to work harder for the same pay. 

If the CEO was paid the same as the others, why should he be working so hard?the reason people work hard is to get paid better. If your job doesn't matter, I can say with certanty that most doctors would stop practicing. 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

This: For all who say 'let's just kill off those who don't work!" 

And this: you gotta remember something. Why should a doctor work 12 hours a day, and get paid equally to a garbage man? Why should he get paid like a piano player (assuming such a job is considered acceptable even)? Why shouldhe get paid the same as a job that's far easier? 

Lets say the smart were paid the same as the dumb who work? Why would anyone work hard/take hard jobs? It's stupid to work harder for the same pay. 

If the CEO was paid the same as the others, why should he be working so hard? The reason people work hard is to get paid better. If your job doesn't matter, I can say with certanty that most doctors would stop practicing. 

Are not related in the slightest. Seriously, absolutely no relation whatsoever between the two.

 

I would imagine that most doctors go into the profession because they care about saving the lives of others, so, pretty bad example. The CEO one also isn't the best example. The position of a CEO gives you power over others, people like power. While money wouldn't be the big game changer, the control a CEO would have over the lives of his workers would be very powerful indeed, if you consider that people deemed too useless for work would be left without any sustenance whatsoever, that's basically a death sentence unless they can find another job. Also, I would imagine that there would be a limited amount of job slots for everything, just as there is in real life, meaning that people would have no choice but to take the jobs that they didn't want because the jobs they DO want are taken. Also, extra incentive for doctors that will never go away: Chicks dig doctors. (Female doctors will have to be happy with the good feeling that comes with saving a life)

 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

I would still work as hard as a pastry chef, no matter what the pay, because I love making food and feeding people.  But there would be no customer service.  Everyone hates those jobs.

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

And what if people didn't have a choice? What id the option was between that job or no job? (as it often is today)

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Ha ha, you don't know the doctors I know then. XD I can tell you with certanty, most doctors I know, would jump at the chance to not work. (this includes my Dad, a gastroenterologist (not my dad) my uncle, the doctors in my old medical center, every dentist I've ever known, a private practice doctor, another private practice doctor etc, practicing is a PAIN. It's not a fun job, it's torturous (quoted directly from my dad). They work all day, and, for some, they don't save lives like a surgeon or an EMT, they take care of drug addicts. And they (not all, but all I've met personally) hate doing that. The reason they are doctors is to make money, part of the reason the most liberal man I know hates Obamacare is because it makes his job lose money. (another doctor.) 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Also, what you're saying is that you'd force people to be docors.... Smart. After all, it's not like you need an education for being a doctor. Forcing people to save lives is stupid. 

Forceing people to work is stupid period, simply because you'd have a massive revolt. 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

It's not that you're forcing them to work, it's that if they don't work, they will not receive anything. it would be their choice, they would just die of starvation due to their inneficiency. It's technically the same in our current society, except the difference would be that no one could afford to support anyone else. So you either work for the society, or the society does not help you. It's an even trade.

Also, in a society where everyone earned the same amount of money, it would be near impossible for anyone to get away with selling drugs, as almost all money would have to be spent on food or other necessities, so drug addicts probably wouldn't be treated as often. The goverment is keeping charge of the money right? They're making sure that everyone is equal correct? So they'll know exactly what someone is using their money for, if they notice that someone is richer than another, they'll investigate him. If they notice someone doesn't have enough money for food, they'll investigate it. Having everything regulated would be a huge slap to the face to any illegal-industry that relies on selling stuff for money (most of them).

Of course, perhaps the dealers could arrange for trades instead (like sexual favors, or certain items) but that's another topic.

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Okay, let's say I wanted to learn piano. Would that be allowed by the government? If not, then you wouldn't be allowing painters or authors to exist either, I'd assume. 

Then we'd get into the problem with Brave New World, where all pleasure is banned, since it's a waste. 

And, again, you're forcing people to do a job they don't want to do. Remember that America revolted for taxation, what you're doing here is forcing people to do everything you want them to do. Not going to last long before someone gets pissed off, and a revolt begins. 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Aman, you understand that i;m not recommending this system right? I'm not that heartless, i'm just saying that communism could successfully work in a society if done correctly, which it never will be.

Okay, let's say I wanted to learn piano. Would that be allowed by the government? If not, then you wouldn't be allowing painters or authors to exist either, I'd assume. 

Au contraire, I doubt people would not have any free-time. The system I propose is efficient, but it does not have to be unecessarily cruel or stupid.  In that free-time, people could do things that would provide them pleasure (work-time could be highly regulated in order to make the lives of people easier, for example, doctors, who get ridiculously over-worked. By the way, in the system I proposed, only people who work receive any benefits from society, so that would likely cut down on the number of patients that doctors would have to work on).
They could do in this time whatever they wished. In this case, authors, singers, and composers would prove themselves useful. Of course, they would have to prove themselves actually capable of being good writers and artists beforehand, and they would have to do their work because they enjoyed it, not for pay (as their pay would be the same) but it could still very well be a valid profession. This would also weed out all of the un-talented fools who believe that going into a career in the music or film industry is a valid option for them. Would probably actually increase the quality of pleasurable works.
 
Then we'd get into the problem with Brave New World, where all pleasure is banned, since it's a waste. 
 
Because apparently whoever designed the system to be used in the Brave New World was a complete and total dumbass. He likely picked an efficient system, but forgot to sacrifice a very minimal amount of efficiency in order to keep his people moderately happy, which likely fucked him over in the long run (almost all dystopian novels end with the society's crumble, so I just assume)
 
And, again, you're forcing people to do a job they don't want to do. Remember that America revolted for taxation, what you're doing here is forcing people to do everything you want them to do. Not going to last long before someone gets pissed off, and a revolt begins. 
 
If people are so fucking stupid that they expect society to care for them despite the fact that they do nothing for it, I would personally whole-heartedly support their executions (Over-exxageration, but overly-dependent whiny little fucks like that piss me off). The choice is simple, you can accept the society, and work for it, and in turn the society will provide for you, or you can reject the society, and it will leave you completely alone. Once you realize that you cannot live without the society, then maybe you should stop being a little bitch who feels that he's entitled to living without doing anything to earn it. (Pretty much exactly what that guy you mentionned was doing with the food stamps) and either accept the society or go off to live in the wild.
 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

 

 
"Because apparently whoever designed the system to be used in the Brave New World was a complete and total dumbass. He likely picked an efficient system, but forgot to sacrifice a very minimal amount of efficiency in order to keep his people moderately happy, which likely fucked him over in the long run (almost all dystopian novels end with the society's crumble, so I just assume)
"
Nope, main character hanged himself. All distorting novels I've read end with the main character either becoming a hermit or dying, so I suppose we've had different experiences.
---
"If people are so fucking stupid that they expect society to care for them despite the fact that they do nothing for it, I would personally whole-heartedly support their executions (Over-exxageration, but overly-dependent whiny little fucks like that piss me off). The choice is simple, you can accept the society, and work for it, and in turn the society will provide for you, or you can reject the society, and it will leave you completely alone. Once you realize that you cannot live without the society, then maybe you should stop being a little bitch who feels that he's entitled to living without doing anything to earn it. (Pretty much exactly what that guy you mentionned was doing with the food stamps) and either accept the society or go off to live in the wild."
 
They would revolt. Which would suck. If everyone hated doing what they are forced to do, they'd revolt. (unless you make Cybermen)
---
You know that most great authors were considered shit back in their time, right? If we followed your idea of dropping garbage authors, we wouldn't have Poes, Lovecrafts or Tolkiens. 
 Also, who decides which book is quality or not? Twilight is considered masterful writing, while writers like Joel Rosenberg (read his books if you haven't. Some are more 'Jewish' (as in, the main character is a Jew, but not observant (nor is the author observan)) but his Guardian of the Flame series was fantastic) or Joann Burton, both authors with very small supportors, but amaizing authors. 
Or Justin Beiber, compared to Indie Rockers (while I don't listen to any of those, I listen to small times Jewish singers, but they'd be dropped as well). Tastes can't be measured by a rule. And if they are doing these kinds of stuff, they are wasting time, and resororces. 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Hey, Aman, do you listen to mewithoutYou?

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Never heard of it, 

the music I listen to is (if not Jewish/Hebrew) Elvis and Cash (along with, of I get the radio working, country music. :P) My taste in music is hated by most of my friends. XD 

But the Israeli music I listen to is either old popular music (music from my mom's childhood) or independent musicians like Amir Ben-Ayun (all Hebrew music, so can't really recommend it to anyone who doesn't speak Hebrew, Unfortunatly.) 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Hmm, that would be hard to decide (What novels would be accepted)

I suppose that perhaps sample copies could be distributed to volunteers, who would read the books and determine it's quality. Should the books be determined good enough (likely with a pre-requesite of a certain number of people liking it) then they would be considered good enough to be made  official works, and the people who produced the works would be considered full-time authors/artists. (After all, their efforts contribute to the level of happiness in the society, it would make little to no sense to cut them out if you're trying to run a prosperous, efficient world. Happiness contributes to prosperity, I should hope, I know I do better work when i'm happy.)

Perhaps some authors would be dropped, and it would be unfortunate, but an efficient system makes the most people happy with the least amount of work. Making niche groups happy would not be in it's interests. Those author's lack of popularity would be their downfall in that society, just as it is in our own.

As for the society crumbling, I've read only a few dystopian novels (such as the giver, or farenheit 451), and i've seen a few movies (like equilibrium, which I MUST recommend), and in almost all of them the crumbling of society was either evident or heavily implied.

Though I don't much like dystopean novels, I find them all to basically be the same story, so I get tired of them after a while.

As for the people revolting, I doubt it. The system would make the majority of all people happy, the revolters would be singled out as idiots, people who are too lazy to contribute to the system, people do not want to work, so instead they attack everyone else (You might recognize these people as thieves in our own society).

They would likely be quickly killed/incarcerated/banished.

As for everyone hating what they're doing, you forget that a huge amount of someone's unsatisfaction with their jobs comes from them either having too much work time, or them not being able to score their dream job. In this case, work times would (hopefully) be "fixed", so that people like doctors wouldn't have to work ridiculous 12-hour shifts (this likely wouldn't be a problem anyways, since the patient numbers would likely fall drastically due to previously mentionned things) In the case of Hypochondriacs, they could simply be refused medical attention if they wasted too much time (it may seem strict to you, but if you waste everyone's time and do nothing, then you are an unnecessary drain). In the case of you having an unsatisfying job due to you losing out on your dream job, too fucking bad, that happens to most of the human population now, suck it up and do what you need to do, and try to enjoy your job.

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

The giver didn't have that occur. (I think). The character just becomes a hermit.

---

Not from my perspective. Of its the doctors, scientists, etc, they wouldn't be considered idiots. Ever read 'The moon is a Harsh Mistress'? Great novel, but the peopl who made the revolt were headed by intellectuals, and ignoring the super computer they had, they did it using a strategy that didint even need the computer (it was used since it was uncuruptable), which was basically cause Disension. If the leaders of the community (doctors, buisness men, etc) quit, they'd screw up everything the system was based on. 

---

You also need to realize those long hours are neccasary. Now, you could pull a Gataca, and this problem would be fixed, but thats as bad as the Venus Project. (and I'm not going to argue that such a cibilization couldn't exist, it could, you just wouldn't have emotions). Doctors don't work long hours just because they want to, they are constantly needed. 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

*They are constantly under-staffed and stuck with too many patients, most of whom don't really need doctors. 

More doctors+ Less patients= no problem.

-------

In the Giver, the memories apparently all return to the population upon a Giver's death (It's implied in the book, as the giver mentions that when his last apprentice died, her memories were given to the other around her, and he had to take them all back), so when the kid died (and yes, I believe that he died of cold, the ending was not a real family, it was either a happy memory the giver shared with him which he now remembered in his last moments or a hallucination) then his memories would be thrown to the rest of the society, which, with the sudden influx of memories, would likely collapse.

-------

Not from my perspective. Of its the doctors, scientists, etc, they wouldn't be considered idiots. Ever read 'The moon is a Harsh Mistress'? Great novel, but the people who made the revolt were headed by intellectuals, and ignoring the super computer they had, they did it using a strategy that didint even need the computer (it was used since it was uncorruptable), which was basically cause Disension. If the leaders of the community (doctors, buisness men, etc) quit, they'd screw up everything the system was based on. 

Why? Why would doctors and scientists lead a revolution? The society proposed is near-perfect in theory, though cruel to those who are unable to provide for the society. It lets people enjoy the pleasures in life, it stops unemployment, it keeps everyone equal (though this will likely not be a desire. Equality is desired only by those who have not experienced power or money, yet have been subject to it's uses. But for this purpose, let's assume that what all those idealistic fools think they want is actually what they want). It would not stop advancement, literature, art, musical entertainment, and it would be efficient, making sure that everything worked in an organized manner. It would be cruel, but cruelty is necessary, cruelty is a good thing in the right circumstances. The problems with dystopian novels is that they automatically assume that you must cut out all human emotion to make something work well, but sometimes human emotion can be your friend, it can earn you co-operation, it can be used. 

Of course, my system would never work. It will forever remain nothing but a theoretical system, because people don't want equality, people don't want efficiency, people don't want to work for the good of the whole group. People want power, money, they want more and more and more. People are selfish, distrusting, hateful, greedy bastards. (also, I have no plans to conquer the world)

The ideal world would support equality, making it so that no one person had an advantage over another in material things, it would work like clockwork, with everyone doing their part, and everything unnecessary or unhelpful would be removed. It would support individuality, by giving people a certain amount of free time in order to let them explore their own interests and desires. Except people do not want an ideal world, people like our world, they just don't know it yet. People like that greed triumphs over all, they enjoy using power to abuse or injure others. They wish for equality without fully knowing what that means, and so they wish for something they don't want. 

 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

More doctors=Less of another field. We don't have an infinite pool of smart people. 

---

Difference of opinions about the guy. I always imagined it was that he actually had those memories (but then again, I read that in 5th grade, when I was an optimist). 

----

See, I don't think it would support individuality. The whole system is based in everyone being the same, and as such, not individuals. Of course it could never work since people are flawed (only way for it to work would be to make Cyber Men), but even if it could, we wouldn't have individuals. The goal is to make everyone want to work for a single goal, the betterment of the world, which removes personal wishes and wants. 

----

Why would people revolt?  Since some people have feelings? XD If you killed off the old and the sick, people would care. Unless you want a society like the giver, brave new world,Anthem, etc, it's unstable since revolt is likely to occur. 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

More doctors=Less of another field. We don't have an infinite pool of smart people. 

 

I believe lawyers would become less necessary under the new political society, as would certain other fields, which would free up workers for other fields (like the medicine field)
 
-------

Difference of opinions about the guy. I always imagined it was that he actually had those memories (but then again, I read that in 5th grade, when I was an optimist). 

Also, (and this part might be completely off, since it's been about 6 years since I read it (also read it in 5th grade)), didn't the old man say he was going to kill himself in order to release his memories and destroy the society? (which he clearly did not support)
-------
See, I don't think it would support individuality. The whole system is based in everyone being the same, and as such, not individuals. Of course it could never work since people are flawed (only way for it to work would be to make Cyber Men), but even if it could, we wouldn't have individuals. The goal is to make everyone want to work for a single goal, the betterment of the world, which removes personal wishes and wants. 

Not really, while the theoretical communism is based off of everyone having the same amount of money and house space, small, inconsequential material things like that, it still allows for one to pursue his own interests, be his own person, think his own thoughts, it doesn't require you to get rid of emotions, in fact, if anything, it requires you to be even more selfish (letting old and sick people die in order to live through the system requires selfishness, and I personally see selfishness as perhaps the ultimate form of individuality)
It would work while accomodating for flaws. I don't see anywhere in the system where human flaws would break it (except for maybe compassion and greed. But here we're assuming people want equality, which they so clearly don't)
-------
Some people have feelings. Most don't. We're not the most forgiving of peoples, us humans. We can push and push and push, we can torture, cause pain, take away from other's lives without blinking an eye. Most people wouldn't care that others were suffering and dying in order for them to live their lives. Yeah, maybe some indignation would sweep through the people, and maybe a new thing would appear on facebook tht says "Like this if you think that so and so is bad" but it wouldn't actually help anyone, as most people would not care enough to do anything more than that- like a facebook picture. They feel as if that inane activity somehow is enough, that it makes up for all the wrong they do. It's a little bit of useless gratification that people use to make themselves feel better. Maybe a few people would rise up to protest, but they would be few in number, very few, They would be drowned out by the sea of people who just straight up don't give a shit.

 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

I think a reason we don't have more doctors now is that it's very daunting for a college freshman to consider.  8 years of college plus 4 years of internship before you can really make any money is not something many 18 year olds find appealing, especially if they are going to have to take loans to pay for it.  In our hypothetical communism, they wouldn't be worried about going through their 20's with no money, and I think there would be a higher percentage of educated people in general, including the medical field.  Education would be free, not just no tuition, but also counting loss of wages from not being able to work a full time job.

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Lawyers aren't capable of the same field. Lawyering is not a science field. 

---

Dont think so, though we know of other camps that would have that occur. 

---

Not at all. Your goal is for everyone to want everyone else to be equal. Selfishness is the counter to that (as well as greed). Personalities would conflict to that. One person wants X, it's unequal if he doesn't get it. Bng selfish would mean you'd want yourself to be above others, and that includes your family. 

---

I agree that most dont give a shit, it's true. However, that's because no one is acting. If you suddenly hear of a revolt in X, you'd feel more interested in this. (and information spreads, no matter what you do to stop it). Action causes more action. People don't act because no one else is. All revolts started with a few people complaining. *few is not meant to be taken 100% literally. 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Lawyers tend to be intelligent. You said the problem was a lack of intelligent people. 

---

Well, nothing more to add here

---

If no one wants to be equal, then the entire system is not worth considering in the first place. The entire system is based on people not placing that much value on material things. I know that this is not the case in real life, but for this conversation to make even a modicrum of sense, we need to assume that people wish for equality, which is how i've been thinking about this whole thing. Obviously, a system that is based on equality would never work in a society that does not want it, so we're pretending we've found an equality-loving society (let' say the Amerindians, who highly supported this) that is as advanced as the US or Canada in terms of technology and everything (just ignore the amerindien poverty and horrible living conditions and lack of advanced technology, we've entered the world of theory). Now, putting yourself above the lives of others is still a remarkable show of selfishness, despite the society's equality, that equality only comes for people who join the society, so while it equalizes them, it also still puts them above anyone who isn't in the society, making them more important, giving them a sense of both safety and power. It should also reinforce the fact that the society is the only real way to survive, as knowing that being left behind by the society would pretty much mean death would likely also unintentionally reinforce the thought that the society was a good thing, that being in it guaranteed safety, the freedom to choose, and the ability to live a life more or less free from danger (unless of course you choose to actively seek it)

---

No intelligent government would try to stop the flow of indignant information. That gives people something to latch on to. "they're trying to stop, they're going to silence us because they're scared!" If they just let the information spread, but they keep things peaceful (relatively) then most people would just dismiss the revolutionners, either out of sheer laziness or disinterest, seeing that no one, not even the government that they were opposing, cared enough to go against it. 

And consider this: People protesting the society would basically be declaring that they no longer wanted to live in it and contribute, so they would naturally be removed. It's not that they are being killed, or silenced, it's that they are not contributing, and they do not want to be part of the regime, so the society simply complies with their desires and kicks them out, leaving them completely alone, not bothering to deal with them at all. The protesters would quickly realize their mistakes, chances are that only a very select few people would continue sticking to the revolutionnary philosophy.

Those people would either die, or branch off and start their own community. Either one is fine for the society, it matters not to them that people leave them, they would not mind losing people, as long as there were enough people to support the system.

(Ugh, these posts take so long to write -_-')

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Yeah, but some people are fit for X job, and not for Y job. 

---

if we are pretending this system is perfect, of course it's perfect. :P You're basically saying, well, this system would work, if everything was perfect. Can't argue that it would t work if you are creating a world where everyone is actively seeking the betterment of the world. Again, that's not a normal civilization, to have that. You'd need to create Cyber Men. You can't say communism could work if everyone was perfect, since no one is perfect. Anything could work. 

Capitalism would work, if everyone was hard working, we had infinite resources, and no one was stupid. This is pretty much your statement put on another title. Arguing that if everything everything was perfect it would work doesn't make sense.

---

If revolutionaries aren't silenced, they draw out everything. If you ignore them, they'd control everything. Revolutions have occurred, and the main reason they did was because people managed to send messages of dissent. The system would collapse from revolt. 

If they took one city, they'd take another city, and another. And another. If ignored, they beat you, if not ignored they cause turmoil in your society. 

If X society allowed you to love the way you wanted to, most would go there. It's basically taking it straight from Atlas Shrugged. A society where the good workers are well treated would end up attracting the good workers, leaving the bad in your society. 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Meh

---

I'm not pretending the people are perfect, i'm pretending that they desire equality. Societies like this DO exist, and I am merely discussing a society where the one thing that is a definite pre-requesite (A desire for equality) is a given. Otherwise, there is no point in any discussion at all, as that is literally the one thing who's removal would make the entire system collapse.

---

And what would they draw out? The people would know what is happening to the older and sick people, that hardly means they would care. And since in this case, being ignored= death, probably via starvation, ignoring's a pretty good strategy.

And they will not "take" a city, that belongs to the society, them taking it would be equivalent to them stealing it. They would leave. If they did not go willingly, then they would go forcefully. People who do not contribute to the system are removed.

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Meh? 

http://www.american.com/archive/2010/february/the-genetics-of-job-choice

http://whartonmagazine.com/issues/spring-2010/genetics-in-the-workplace/

----

The only civilizations that have that are ones that are not advance (I believe). There is a reason for that. Read Anthem. Explains it perfectly. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthem_(novella)

Then there isn't. Since its a huge deal. It requires us to return to such a lifestyle. Because, modern day? most would not want to live life like that. 

----

Since the smart get to be paid better? Since the smart live better? 

Im talking about a revolt. If a revolt occurs, and they take a city.... (Return to my last paragraph) 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

If people take military action against a society who's worst crime is ignoring people, these guys are a bunch of dicks. also, the rest of the society will slaughter them, in order to protect what is their own.

And Aman, you continue to ignore this:

If someone refuses to follow the society, they are removed. If someone is out of the society, they die. If you do not agree with them, you are kicked out, into the wild. If you want to come back, you have to accept the society, if you want to continue protesting, you die in the wild. The society does not want people who do not contribute, as i've repeated many, many times. They would be removed as they appeared, and organized revolt would be impossible.

As for the links, i'll read them tomorrow.

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

I barely trust doctors now.  I really wouldn't be cool with going to a doctor who was forced to be one. 

And I always assumed people became doctors because they wanted to help people.  Aman has shattered my last bit of trust in hospitals.

Maybe the trade-off would be how many hours a week you have to work.  Like higher skill/stress jobs would get to work less hours than easy slack-off jobs.  Also zero-skill jobs, like cashiers at Walmart or whatever, maybe be mandatory for certain age groups, like under 21, so they get experience before getting a meaningful job? 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Ha, sorry about that. But honestly? I'd actually be happier if doctors are aiming to get money then to help people. Since, screwing up and getting sued is a huge take on money. I know a doctor who did a experimental surgery on a woman I know (friend of my mom), and did it to help the woman? No, it Fucked up her life forever. (as in, she cut most of the woman's stomach, making it smaller, and now has the acid in the stomach fill it up and spill out into her body). 

I trust people who are in it for money, since getting sued is anti-getting money, they'll be more careful. 

I'd stay away from making cashiers forced teens. I'm a teen, and I hate dealing with teenagers. Think of the torture. :P

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Hey, most of the people doing those jobs are high schoolers anyway.  And if you don't want to be a cashier, you could do other entry level work, like janitor, unloading trucks, fast food, barista at Starbucks, etc.  And we all must learn humility somewhere, a crappy job is as good a place as any.  It would only be til you turn 21, or until you finish college and get your real job.. in our hypothetical communism that would probably last 3 weeks..

(mewithoutYou is an indie band from PA that uses a lot of Jewish imagery and themes in their music.  You should check them out, they're one of my favorite bands)

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Ha, Unfortunatly that's true, us (talking about myself, not you, since I assume (and am 99% sure) you aren't a teen anymore) teens need to learn to shut up when talking to authority. :P 

(I'll check it out, sounds interesting.) 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

I would rather be a doctor or CEO rather than a garbage man. And this is the encouragement for the CEO: Bad perfomance means he'll be made to do a less appealing job.

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

If I got paid the same? Hell no. A couple hours of work driving a car around and then throwing garbage away, is far more appealing then working 12 hours a day, constantly stressed. 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Turns, then. A person will have one "real" profession and everybody will take turns being a garbage man.

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Garbage man is a real profession. Also, what you're suggesting is ridiculously inneficient, it wouldn't work.

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Wow, so, how are you going to alternate doctors? Genius! 

Here, garbage man, take care of these patients for me.

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Person one learns how to be a doctor.

Person two learns how to be a doctor.

Person one is doctor for 3-4 days of the week and garbage man the other days.

Person two is doctor for 3-4 days of the week and garbage man the other days.

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Person one is a skilled doctor

Person two is a shit doctor/retard. 

---

Now, while not everyone will be an idiot, not everyone will be fit to be a doctor. Won't work. 

Venus Project and uniting earth

10 years ago

Bleaugh, I don't we're ready as a species to do that yet, if ever.

Human nature to be greedy, emotional bastards who on several occasions be selfish enough to harm others for wants.  Try to suppress it a little is fine and dandy, but trying to reach for "maximum efficiency" at our current state is impossible without inciting rebellions that would break the system all too easily.  Throwing all pleasures away is like weaning a human who has been supplemented on human milk for 70 years.  Yes, you can live without pleasures, but it'd make you go crazy without them.  After all, not everyone is born and raised in such a manner that communism is a good idea, and then you'd have to factor in epidemics and natural disasters that would slow down the work for some people.