User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 9 of 14 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 134

Thread: Fiscal Cliff will we solve it in time? Yes or No...

  1. #81
    Points: 10,706, Level: 24
    Level completed: 82%, Points required for next Level: 144
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran10000 Experience Points
    GrumpyDog's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    1044
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Civil Rights HQ
    Posts
    949
    Points
    10,706
    Level
    24
    Thanks Given
    70
    Thanked 210x in 170 Posts
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    Why would you want to measure anything against a Utilitarian axiom? If capitalism is so bad then why is it social democracy's goal to manage it? Social democracy is the worst form of socialism, far worse than communism, fascism, nazism. It's undermining the invisible hand.
    Would it not be more beneficial, for small market capitalism, if the food/clothing/basic requirments of every individual were not the anxiety causing issue it is now?

    So then, the individual, relieved of this burden,is much more inclined to have a positive attitude, and will then seek more readily to explore his own potential, discover a hidden talent, or learn,at a more comfortable pace, a new skill, or set of skills. In effect, the theory here is, to make entrepreneurial enterprise easier, rather than a struggle against a corporate dominated aristocracy.

    Certainly, there will always be some % of population, who will be content with the minimum standard of living, since it would take care of their basic psychological needs. But I doubt that the majority of people would lose their desire to improve upon that condition, so there should not be reason for the system to deter motivation. The difference will be, that poverty will not be such an issue as it currently is. In fact, the lowest standard, will make it nearly impossible for an individual to live in deprivation, unless that individual just refuses even the basic provided allotments. In that case, then, the individual that lives in poverty, will be entirely a personal choice made, not one which was forced upon them by a failed system.
    Last edited by GrumpyDog; 11-23-2012 at 08:25 PM.

  2. #82
    Points: 24,520, Level: 38
    Level completed: 14%, Points required for next Level: 1,130
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Social10000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awryly's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    976
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    12,000 merciful miles from the US
    Posts
    3,031
    Points
    24,520
    Level
    38
    Thanks Given
    74
    Thanked 146x in 132 Posts
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by GrumpyDog View Post
    Would it not be more beneficial, for small market capitalism, if the food/clothing/basic requirments of every individual were not the anxiety causing issue it is now?

    So then, the individual, relieved of this burden,is much more inclined to have a positive attitude, and will then seek more readily to explore his own potential, discover a hidden talent, or learn,at a more comfortable pace, a new skill, or set of skills. In effect, the theory here is, to make entrepreneurial enterprise easier, rather than a struggle against a corporate dominated aristocracy.

    Certainly, there will always be some % of population, who will be content with the minimum standard of living, since it would take care of their basic psychological needs. But I doubt that the majority of people would lose their desire to improve upon that condition, so there should not be reason for the system to deter motivation. The difference will be, that poverty will not be such an issue as it currently is. In fact, the lowest standard, will make it nearly impossible for an individual to live in deprivation, unless that individual just refuses even the basic provided allotments. In that case, then, the individual that lives in poverty, will be entirely a personal choice made, not one which was forced upon them by a failed system.

    You can't have millions of down-trodden people getting a fair crack of the whip or a fair suck of the sav.

    That's "undemocratic". It would lead to anarchy. And lesser profits for the few in a position to make any.
    Last edited by Awryly; 11-23-2012 at 08:57 PM.
    Come sit down beside me I said to myself
    And although it doesn't make sense
    I held my own hand as a small sign of trust
    And together I sat on the fence


    Anon. Very anon.

  3. #83
    Points: 665,270, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 88.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433316
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,552
    Points
    665,270
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,984
    Thanked 80,905x in 54,720 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by GrumpyDog View Post
    Would it not be more beneficial, for small market capitalism, if the food/clothing/basic requirments of every individual were not the anxiety causing issue it is now?

    So then, the individual, relieved of this burden,is much more inclined to have a positive attitude, and will then seek more readily to explore his own potential, discover a hidden talent, or learn,at a more comfortable pace, a new skill, or set of skills. In effect, the theory here is, to make entrepreneurial enterprise easier, rather than a struggle against a corporate dominated aristocracy.

    Certainly, there will always be some % of population, who will be content with the minimum standard of living, since it would take care of their basic psychological needs. But I doubt that the majority of people would lose their desire to improve upon that condition, so there should not be reason for the system to deter motivation. The difference will be, that poverty will not be such an issue as it currently is. In fact, the lowest standard, will make it nearly impossible for an individual to live in deprivation, unless that individual just refuses even the basic provided allotments. In that case, then, the individual that lives in poverty, will be entirely a personal choice made, not one which was forced upon them by a failed system.
    Would it not be more beneficial, for small market capitalism, if the food/clothing/basic requirments of every individual were not the anxiety causing issue it is now?
    No. Such "anxieties" are incentives to work to achieve them. Pursuit of happiness.

    So then, the individual, relieved of this burden,is much more inclined to have a positive attitude, and will then seek more readily to explore his own potential, discover a hidden talent, or learn,at a more comfortable pace, a new skill, or set of skills. In effect, the theory here is, to make entrepreneurial enterprise easier, rather than a struggle against a corporate dominated aristocracy.
    No. Taking the easier way being the nature of man, such individuals will then continue to see political means to satisfy their desires rather than economic means.

    But I doubt that the majority of people would lose their desire to improve upon that condition, so there should not be reason for the system to deter motivation.
    Yes. But now you've contradicted yourself, you've gone from arguing for a free lunch to against one.

  4. #84
    Points: 665,270, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 88.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433316
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,552
    Points
    665,270
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,984
    Thanked 80,905x in 54,720 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Awryly View Post
    You can't have millions of down-trodden people getting a fair crack of the whip or a fair suck of the sav.

    That's "undemocratic". It would lead to anarchy. And lesser profits for the few in a position to make any.
    So according to you, and grump, it's better to keep people oppressed, downtrodden and dependent with your social democratic "solutions".

  5. #85
    Points: 10,706, Level: 24
    Level completed: 82%, Points required for next Level: 144
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran10000 Experience Points
    GrumpyDog's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    1044
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Civil Rights HQ
    Posts
    949
    Points
    10,706
    Level
    24
    Thanks Given
    70
    Thanked 210x in 170 Posts
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    So according to you, and grump, it's better to keep people oppressed, downtrodden and dependent with your social democratic "solutions".

    Wow, Chris, you interpret the meaning of words quite the opposite as I do. It must be extremely difficult for you to interpret Awryly as well.

    You interpret "anxiety" as an "incentive"?

    So if I beat the slave, causing him anxiety, then that should be called "incentive" for the slave to work harder?

    People make better decisions, and can think of more solutions, when they are not burdened with anxiety caused by lack of food,clothing and shelter. This is why we have schools that help impoverished children.

    I get the impression, that if water, and air, could be controlled by conservatives, that those elements, also, would no longer be a basic necessity, according to the logic that one must be anxious as part of pursuing happiness.

    Difficult to pursue happiness, when life and liberty have been stripped by lack of basic necessities for sustaining the life, and access to those, limited by a failed system that does not acknowledge all people have worth, regardless of their ability, or productivity.

    What I fail to understand, is why anyone would be concerned, that it would be detrimental, if all the neighbors, the community, and the nation, were not worried about the potential of poverty anymore.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to GrumpyDog For This Useful Post:

    Awryly (11-23-2012)

  7. #86
    Points: 24,520, Level: 38
    Level completed: 14%, Points required for next Level: 1,130
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Social10000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awryly's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    976
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    12,000 merciful miles from the US
    Posts
    3,031
    Points
    24,520
    Level
    38
    Thanks Given
    74
    Thanked 146x in 132 Posts
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    So according to you, and grump, it's better to keep people oppressed, downtrodden and dependent with your social democratic "solutions".
    Tell me. sunshine, do you earn the average wage? What tax do you pay (if any)? What government tax exemptions, rebates, subsidies do you get?

    Or do you just get Social Security, Medicaid and free health insurance?

    Seeking to establish a base line here to enable a test of my wonderment.
    Last edited by Awryly; 11-23-2012 at 10:07 PM.
    Come sit down beside me I said to myself
    And although it doesn't make sense
    I held my own hand as a small sign of trust
    And together I sat on the fence


    Anon. Very anon.

  8. #87
    Points: 665,270, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 88.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433316
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,552
    Points
    665,270
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,984
    Thanked 80,905x in 54,720 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by GrumpyDog View Post
    Wow, Chris, you interpret the meaning of words quite the opposite as I do. It must be extremely difficult for you to interpret Awryly as well.

    You interpret "anxiety" as an "incentive"?

    So if I beat the slave, causing him anxiety, then that should be called "incentive" for the slave to work harder?

    People make better decisions, and can think of more solutions, when they are not burdened with anxiety caused by lack of food,clothing and shelter. This is why we have schools that help impoverished children.

    I get the impression, that if water, and air, could be controlled by conservatives, that those elements, also, would no longer be a basic necessity, according to the logic that one must be anxious as part of pursuing happiness.

    Difficult to pursue happiness, when life and liberty have been stripped by lack of basic necessities for sustaining the life, and access to those, limited by a failed system that does not acknowledge all people have worth, regardless of their ability, or productivity.

    What I fail to understand, is why anyone would be concerned, that it would be detrimental, if all the neighbors, the community, and the nation, were not worried about the potential of poverty anymore.
    Wow, Chris, you interpret the meaning of words quite the opposite as I do. It must be extremely difficult for you to interpret Awryly as well.
    I try to apply meanings to the real world, not you all's fantasy worlds.

    You interpret "anxiety" as an "incentive"?
    Yes, one feels uneasy lacking food, clothing, shelter, etc, so one does something to ease the anxiety. People learn this as kids.

    So if I beat the slave, causing him anxiety, then that should be called "incentive" for the slave to work harder?
    Why are you beating your slave? Why are you causing harm to another human being? And what has this to do with your earlier remarks about the need for food, clothing, shelter? If you could just try to stick to the same topic form more than a sentence we might actually have a discussion. Why do you flit about from one assertion to another, never standing your ground long enough to defend any?

    People make better decisions, and can think of more solutions, when they are not burdened with anxiety caused by lack of food,clothing and shelter.
    How difficult is it to decide to work? Again, little kids know this.

    This is why we have schools that help impoverished children.
    When did this happen? Where I live every kid must go to school.

    Do you have a rational argument for whatever it is you're arguing about instead these constant emotional please?

    I get the impression, that if water, and air, could be controlled by conservatives, that those elements, also, would no longer be a basic necessity, according to the logic that one must be anxious as part of pursuing happiness.
    Are you the one arguing for controlling all these basics through government? I think you got the impression from yourself.

    Difficult to pursue happiness, when life and liberty have been stripped by lack of basic necessities for sustaining the life, and access to those, limited by a failed system that does not acknowledge all people have worth, regardless of their ability, or productivity.
    What fantasy world are you talking about?

    What I fail to understand, is why anyone would be concerned, that it would be detrimental, if all the neighbors, the community, and the nation, were not worried about the potential of poverty anymore.
    Liberals have waged war on poverty since LBJ and it's only gotten worse. Time to try a different approach?

  9. #88
    Points: 665,270, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 88.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433316
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,552
    Points
    665,270
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,984
    Thanked 80,905x in 54,720 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Awryly View Post
    Tell me. sunshine, do you earn the average wage? What tax do you pay (if any)? What government tax exemptions, rebates, subsidies do you get?

    Or do you just get Social Security, Medicaid and free health insurance?

    Seeking to establish a base line here to enable a test of my wonderment.
    Specify your test along with your null hypothesis.

  10. #89
    Points: 24,520, Level: 38
    Level completed: 14%, Points required for next Level: 1,130
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Social10000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awryly's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    976
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    12,000 merciful miles from the US
    Posts
    3,031
    Points
    24,520
    Level
    38
    Thanks Given
    74
    Thanked 146x in 132 Posts
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    Specify your test along with your null hypothesis.

    Simple question. Are you down-trodden?

    And who treads gaily upon your corpse?
    Come sit down beside me I said to myself
    And although it doesn't make sense
    I held my own hand as a small sign of trust
    And together I sat on the fence


    Anon. Very anon.

  11. #90
    Points: 24,520, Level: 38
    Level completed: 14%, Points required for next Level: 1,130
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Social10000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awryly's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    976
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    12,000 merciful miles from the US
    Posts
    3,031
    Points
    24,520
    Level
    38
    Thanks Given
    74
    Thanked 146x in 132 Posts
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Awryly View Post
    Simple question. Are you down-trodden?

    And who treads gaily upon your corpse?
    Yeah, I know. The gummint that keeps you alive?

    So why do you vote for a party that wants you more down-trodden? You like mud?
    Come sit down beside me I said to myself
    And although it doesn't make sense
    I held my own hand as a small sign of trust
    And together I sat on the fence


    Anon. Very anon.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts