Politics

[FiahOwl]

This message is only viewable with Universe Sandbox Galaxy Edition. Access it and much more with promo-code '110189'.

[atomic7732]

There is no point in saying "oh we will automate things and no one will have jobs", because as technology advances the more jobs that are available. Burgeoning new fields like nanotech or space or whatever, we have no idea when they will take off and represent huge segments of our economies, but they will. With them will be millions of jobs to replace the ones we are automating.

Sounds like people will be forced into high skill jobs they aren't interested in, as opposed to low skill.

I honestly don't think you can say "some jobs are created and some are destroyed" as if there's some conservation of job quantity. The skills required will change and the amount of jobs needed will more than likely decrease, and you can't trust that the "job creators" will be there to create jobs willy-nilly for people who need them to live. Society needs to change it's view on that jobs aren't actually mandatory to keep you alive and just deal with it.

[Yqt1001]

Sounds like people will be forced into high skill jobs they aren't interested in, as opposed to low skill.

I honestly don't think you can say "some jobs are created and some are destroyed" as if there's some conservation of job quantity. The skills required will change and the amount of jobs needed will more than likely decrease, and you can't trust that the "job creators" will be there to create jobs willy-nilly for people who need them to live. Society needs to change it's view on that jobs aren't actually mandatory to keep you alive and just deal with it.

You'll still need the grunt labourers, even if it is as simple as the space industries version of ramp workers and TSA members. However, it's true that there can be a concern about automation replacing everyone's jobs, but at the same time it would be a very gradual process to automate every position of massive job positions (service industry ones, remaining manufacturing ones etc) and I think we would be able to evolve over time. It won't be a switch "oh we have no jobs for everyone, whoops", I think we'll have the time to react and evolve before we hit that point.


Side point, any opinions on Syrian intervention? Personally I hate it and it makes no sense and will simply send another country into a century of civil war and poverty. No one in governments seem to care though, whatever.

[Bla]

Instead of looking at whether technologies creates/replaces jobs, look at the human functions they replace. Technology may be creating as many new jobs as it is making obsolete, but there's no reason why this should continue to happen forever. Because at the same time, technology is replacing more and more human functions, machines can lift things better than humans etc. If this progress continues, one day all human productive functions will become obsolete because of more efficient robots, AIs and computers.

I don't see any reason to think we would then simply be granted eternal spare time at that point under capitalism though, jobs in capitalism are not rationally planned, but are created by chaotic market forces which have little connection to what improves our lives the most. Actually I think the opposite is likely to happen: If technology becomes able to replace every human function, humans will be forced to compete with the machines in all jobs, and in the end the only factor they can compete in will be "wages". If human labor is too expensive, people will lose their jobs, the price on human labor will then fall, until they become cheaper than the alternative machines again. And if machines become more and more efficient and cheaper all the time, human labor will have to do the same.

But as wages fall, demand on the goods people buy fall as well, which would make production fall, resulting in even less workers being needed, and thus even more losing their jobs, continuing the bad circle. So if this is how the future would be, it most likely result in an economic crisis, if Earth is still capitalist by then.

[Darvince]

which would result in revolutions and voilĂ  no more dirty money grubbing rich assholes

[TheMooCows]

Instead of looking at whether technologies creates/replaces jobs, look at the human functions they replace. Technology may be creating as many new jobs as it is making obsolete, but there's no reason why this should continue to happen forever. Because at the same time, technology is replacing more and more human functions, machines can lift things better than humans etc. If this progress continues, one day all human productive functions will become obsolete because of more efficient robots, AIs and computers.

I don't see any reason to think we would then simply be granted eternal spare time at that point under capitalism though, jobs in capitalism are not rationally planned, but are created by chaotic market forces which have little connection to what improves our lives the most. Actually I think the opposite is likely to happen: If technology becomes able to replace every human function, humans will be forced to compete with the machines in all jobs, and in the end the only factor they can compete in will be "wages". If human labor is too expensive, people will lose their jobs, the price on human labor will then fall, until they become cheaper than the alternative machines again. And if machines become more and more efficient and cheaper all the time, human labor will have to do the same.

But as wages fall, demand on the goods people buy fall as well, which would make production fall, resulting in even less workers being needed, and thus even more losing their jobs, continuing the bad circle. So if this is how the future would be, it most likely result in an economic crisis, if Earth is still capitalist by then.

By the time that happens I think most of the common economic systems will be as outdated as feudalism is today. Honestly I think that people will look back and say "ha silly people...capitalism and communism are so stupid and ________ is a lot better for everyone." I don't see only technology getting better, I see all areas of life and politics improving as well.

[tuto99]

Side point, any opinions on Syrian intervention? Personally I hate it and it makes no sense and will simply send another country into a century of civil war and poverty. No one in governments seem to care though, whatever.

 I rarely jump into discussions of any sort, so I am going to actually try to be interested in sharing my opinions. (I hate the bad things that go on around the world; too much to fucking worry about. I am sorry but I don't have any interest in any news involving people.)
 If the U.S. is in Syria to stop the fucking chemical warfare that is going on, by all means stop them. Though, a part of me says "This is a conflict between the people of Syria and their leader. Let THEM deal with it. So, at this point, I have mixed feelings. I just feel that no one should intervene in their conflicts unless if someone requests any help. That is how I feel.

[FiahOwl]

This message is only viewable with Universe Sandbox Galaxy Edition. Access it and much more with promo-code '110212'.

[tuto99]

I feel that we should conquer Syria and then let Israel annex it in order to form the new holy Christian order

wtf no

[Darvince]

You have spent a year on a highly sarcastic forum; how are you unable to detect it yet?!

[atomic7732]

this is the politics thread

[tuto99]

this is the politics thread

Yeah, it was a bit confusing.

[Bla]

By the time that happens I think most of the common economic systems will be as outdated as feudalism is today. Honestly I think that people will look back and say "ha silly people...capitalism and communism are so stupid and ________ is a lot better for everyone." I don't see only technology getting better, I see all areas of life and politics improving as well.

I don't see how that would make communism outdated. Communism is exactly a future vision of the perfect society. If all areas of life are going to improve, I think that would exactly involve a society where distribution is based on need.

[blotz]

You know after all this I dont know what communism is
Don't tell me I'm on Wikipedia

[blotz]

Scratch that give me a totally understandably explanation Wikipedia to complicated

[Yqt1001]

By the time that happens I think most of the common economic systems will be as outdated as feudalism is today. Honestly I think that people will look back and say "ha silly people...capitalism and communism are so stupid and ________ is a lot better for everyone." I don't see only technology getting better, I see all areas of life and politics improving as well.

I don't see how that would make communism outdated. Communism is exactly a future vision of the perfect society. If all areas of life are going to improve, I think that would exactly involve a society where distribution is based on need.

TMC has a pretty good point about how our economies could change to some pretty crazy ways as time goes on and all the current economic systems just fading away and becoming part of the crazy path of human history.

[tuto99]

By the time that happens I think most of the common economic systems will be as outdated as feudalism is today. Honestly I think that people will look back and say "ha silly people...capitalism and communism are so stupid and ________ is a lot better for everyone." I don't see only technology getting better, I see all areas of life and politics improving as well.

I don't see how that would make communism outdated. Communism is exactly a future vision of the perfect society. If all areas of life are going to improve, I think that would exactly involve a society where distribution is based on need.

You're communist I get it, but not every country will probably want to become communist now, and in the future. Look at Murica for example.

[TheMooCows]

By the time that happens I think most of the common economic systems will be as outdated as feudalism is today. Honestly I think that people will look back and say "ha silly people...capitalism and communism are so stupid and ________ is a lot better for everyone." I don't see only technology getting better, I see all areas of life and politics improving as well.

I don't see how that would make communism outdated. Communism is exactly a future vision of the perfect society. If all areas of life are going to improve, I think that would exactly involve a society where distribution is based on need.

To be quite honest there is a flaw with everything. I'm not saying that the new economic system would be completely different. Communism ain't perfect-it is a hell of a lot better than a lot of people give it credit for- but it isn't perfect by a long shot. There are always areas that can be improved.

[atomic7732]

You're communist I get it, but not every country will probably want to become communist now, and in the future. Look at Murica for example.

does any country honestly

There should be some international group that regulates the ideologies of countries and sections off nationless plots of land rather than letting everyone decide this crap themselves (or lack thereof)

[unl0cker]

I've promised myself I would not post in this topic again, as apparently it leads to no substancial evolution of one being.

But... I;m gonna break that...

Communism ain't perfect-it is a hell of a lot better than a lot of people give it credit for- but it isn't perfect by a long shot.

Are you mad? A lot better? hahahahaha

Communism under:

Mao: 70+ million dead

The 3 devils (trotsky stalin lenin) 50+ million dead, mostly under the victorious stalin.

Cuba same...

Romania same..

Bulgaria the same...

Czech Republic guess? same!

Hungary same...

Poland same..

Romania that was fun... same

Slovakia even funnier, same...

Albania looks mild but was not, same...

Bosnia and Herzegovina wow here was a party... same

Bulgaria, Croatia, Rep. of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia, Angola, Benin, Dem Rep. of Congo, Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, and Mozambique same same same ... SAME!


Yeah, communism is GREAT to depopulate the planet. Oh and to aggregate power and riches  under one or maybe two heads.


!!!People Do Not Read!!!

And that was it for it. Bailing out.

[FiahOwl]

This message is only viewable with Universe Sandbox Galaxy Edition. Access it and much more with promo-code '110246'.

[unl0cker]

Ohhh, sorry then!!!  I just read that one quote. So he's talking about utopia?

Well we discussed that, I mean, me and Bla.

Marx and Engels as in Adam's garden... all nice cozy and warm.

There is no utopia   -> .

If I have to render myself useless politically, I rather do that to Plato's philosopher king.

[blotz]

In utopia, communism is the BEST
Like even wih the dents there's at leat 500 amries per urn

[TheMooCows]

I've promised myself I would not post in this topic again, as apparently it leads to no substancial evolution of one being.

But... I;m gonna break that...

Communism ain't perfect-it is a hell of a lot better than a lot of people give it credit for- but it isn't perfect by a long shot.

Are you mad? A lot better? hahahahaha

Communism under:

Mao: 70+ million dead

The 3 devils (trotsky stalin lenin) 50+ million dead, mostly under the victorious stalin.

Cuba same...

Romania same..

Bulgaria the same...

Czech Republic guess? same!

Hungary same...

Poland same..

Romania that was fun... same

Slovakia even funnier, same...

Albania looks mild but was not, same...

Bosnia and Herzegovina wow here was a party... same

Bulgaria, Croatia, Rep. of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia, Angola, Benin, Dem Rep. of Congo, Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, and Mozambique same same same ... SAME!


Yeah, communism is GREAT to depopulate the planet. Oh and to aggregate power and riches  under one or maybe two heads.


!!!People Do Not Read!!!

And that was it for it. Bailing out.

That's hardly fair. You can point fingers at any system in anytime and be like "hey a crapload of people died." Most if not all of those deaths was not the fault of communism but rather the fault of the people in charge. Many wouldn't even consider those to be true communistic examples-they were not executed as they should have been. Communism seems to be this thing that everyone is so sure is worse than the devil while in reality it is not.

[atomic7732]

Ohhh, sorry then!!!  I just read that one quote. So he's talking about utopia?

Well we discussed that, I mean, me and Bla.

Marx and Engels as in Adam's garden... all nice cozy and warm.

There is no utopia   -> .

The only "communism" that has ever been instituted was dictatorial or oligarchic, most were the former and just an excuse to rally the masses and get into power. Communism is a stateless ideology, there is no government, so rather we shall phrase and understand the next sentence differently. Socialism has as of yet to be tried in a democratic or a republican forum, and both would fit so much better with the whole premise anyway.

[unl0cker]

I understand that. Perfectly in fact as I've read the manifesto a few times over the years.

Nevertheless is a dream, an utopia, that will never flourish as long as human beings are human beings.

So, we are back at it. Socialism, Communism, are nothing but masked excuse for Fascism, which is the union of the Plutocratic "masses" with the government, and ALWAYS leads to the suffering of all, but a few chosen ones.

Which is in fact the (very old) trend of telling one exactly the oposite of what one purpose is. Like:

- United Nations focus on ending Nations... not uniting them,
- Dept. of Defense aims at making ostensive war, not defending one'S nation,
- Federal Reserve aims at removing all reserves from the federal government, and therefore from the masses.
- Dept of Homeland Security aims not at security, but at controlling and oppressing those that are suposed to be secure.
- Charities aims not at giving, but at "receiving".
- Augustus loved, in fact WANTED to be called princeps (first citizen), when in fact he was a tyrant.

These are a few of many many more "insane" examples.

History - Repeats - Itself

Why? Because people's deepest nature do not change, what does change are the toys we use.

Karl Marx was at best a dreamer, the owner of an impossible idea. And people hijacked his (good) idea and are using to oppress and control nations all over. Don't get me wrong, if you presented me with a magic button where it reads "Press to Socialize the World as it was meant to be" I would press it like 50 times, just to be sure. It is a wonderful idea, but a impossible one. That's for SURE!

[Bla]

You're communist I get it, but not every country will probably want to become communist now, and in the future. Look at Murica for example.

A country could want to send 80% of its population to jail and torture them, and gather 90% of the wealth among 1% of the people. But it would not make no difference to whether communism would become an outdated vision in the future or not.

Anyway I think it was wrong of me to say communism is a vision of a perfect society. I think it is the best vision of a future society we have and that the "perfect" society would certainly be similar to communism, in that it would be classless and moneyless, and certainly nothing like capitalism.

I've promised myself I would not post in this topic again, as apparently it leads to no substancial evolution of one being.

You told me 11 days ago you expected to reply to my argument in an email the same day, I still haven't received any reply. Anyway if you want to start another argument, let's go.

Communism ain't perfect-it is a hell of a lot better than a lot of people give it credit for- but it isn't perfect by a long shot.

Are you mad? A lot better? hahahahaha

Communism under:

Mao: 70+ million dead

The 3 devils (trotsky stalin lenin) 50+ million dead, mostly under the victorious stalin.

Cuba same...

Romania same..

Bulgaria the same...

Czech Republic guess? same!

Hungary same...

Poland same..

Romania that was fun... same

Slovakia even funnier, same...

Albania looks mild but was not, same...

Bosnia and Herzegovina wow here was a party... same

Bulgaria, Croatia, Rep. of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia, Angola, Benin, Dem Rep. of Congo, Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, and Mozambique same same same ... SAME!

Yeah, communism is GREAT to depopulate the planet. Oh and to aggregate power and riches  under one or maybe two heads.

None of those countries ever achieved communism, most of them were socialist, ruled by a communist party.

So if anything the death count would be related to the economic system of socialism and not communism.
But it turns out that the millions of people killed in most of those cases have been victims of political repression and targeted for other reasons which are not a result of the economic system. Some have also died from famine, which you could consider whether are socialism's fault. But all the countries were in a poor state to begin with - most of them devastated by World War 2 for example, their history explains many of the troubles they've had, and some socialist economies managed to thrive and grow at times despite the constant arms race and sometimes armed interventions from capitalist countries which have always been much richer.

And speaking of depopulating the planet, you might want to take a look at the millions of people who have starved to death after the counterrevolution in USSR.


At last, you should really include sources for the things you claim. I'm not saying all your figures are incorrect, but you make a lot of claims that you do not back up with any evidence.

but that was arguably stalin's strange corrupt version of communism, the communism bla is talking about has not ever been tried I think

See above. It is not the issue here whether he was a communist or not, or whether I think his ideas were corrupted - what matters is the society he was in charge of and that wasn't communist.

Ohhh, sorry then!!!  I just read that one quote. So he's talking about utopia?

Well we discussed that, I mean, me and Bla.

Marx and Engels as in Adam's garden... all nice cozy and warm.

There is no utopia   -> .

Communism is a utopia in the sense that it has very desirable qualities, yes - I can agree with that.
So your argument is essentially that an utopia, such as the vision of communism, does not exist. I can agree.
...But that doesn't mean it can't exist - such as in the future, which was what we were discussing, when technology gives us new possibilities. I can understand why many people do not think communism is possible on a large scale today.

[unl0cker]

You told me 11 days ago you expected to reply to my argument in an email the same day, I still haven't received any reply. Anyway if you want to start another argument, let's go.

Our discussion was getting nowhere, as you failed to recognize you were wrong when you were wrong! Sorry but there is no point in discussing with a "wall". If you find a loophole in my "expressions" like I did with yours, I'll accept and try to argument over that. But to say an elephant is a dog, when I just prove that it's weight is outside of the dogs weight boundaries, is a no no, it's what is called useless discussion. So I lost my apetite for the topic and kinda gave up...

The "problem" with gay people and their hate for God and religion is in my opinion based on the fact these stupid religions prosecuted their layer of society to the maximum possible extent. Therefore "if the pope, mohammed, and God hate me, I'll hate them back." That's what's going on. Is the same with "African Americas". African Americans? GTFOH stupid dumb f%$#. Do you see caucasian people calling themselves European Americans? Or Italians calling themselves Greek Italians? Idiotic! Divide and conquer! YOU ARE ALL AMERICANS!

Same division of waters with the gay fellas. And the media hypes that. And ppl buy.

And when you people talk about 1%... wtf can't you guys do math? It is WAY less than that. 1% of 6Bi is 60 Millions. No... 90% of the wealth is held by at **most** 50k ppl. That makes 90% of the wealth on the hand of 0,00001%. And that is the reality... and people fight over what? Who's the enemy? Wake the hell up guys!

None of those countries ever achieved communism, most of them were socialist, ruled by a communist party.

None will ever... it is an UTOPIA. By the time we get to the state of mind/being/elevation required to archive what the manifesto states, I rather go with another utopian system. One in which bright intelligent for practical matters minds lead, and the rest follows, which is what Plato suggested as perfect system (also an utopia).

So if anything the death count would be related to the economic system of socialism and not communism.

ERRRRR Wrong. Bullets to the back of the head, gulag atrocities, ethical cleansing ARE not economical problems. These are the product of totalitarian systems.

Charts are, as Al Gore knows, as precise as the data AND the presentation they have. Showing me  population grown charts doesn't wipe anything from my head other than shrinking of population numbers.

You GOTTA understand that, ALL socialist communist fascist regims were backed financially by  western nations, including the US. Hell, England practically MADE russia. What does this tell you? No need to be the sharpest knife in the drawer to see what's going on here.

About the evidence, showing me a chart is not evidence. I won't back anything up for you! No you won't get that easy. Go research and you'll find it. Just like I did. IT IS IMPERATIVE YOU DO!

If you ask for evidence, having the means of getting it yourself, then it is just like TV: This or that?! Now if you go find for yourself, you'll end up wondering about this, that, those, here, up, down, big, small, that too, and this too, and maybe that one too. Makes the synapse in your brain go wild, the way it should be!

Or, you might choose between this or that and start to jumping so that 0,00001% can sleep.

[tuto99]

I get lost in your long replies.

[unl0cker]

Hey Tut's,

Considering is not sarcasm, where exactly did you got lost?