Total posts: 3,383
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I can see why people are attracted to socialism. There is a need for some social type programs. There are many "necessary evils"
If you are asking if I would dismiss or dislike something because it's labeled socialism, I would not. I try to examine ideas based on what they are, what merrit I think the do or do not have. Does that answer the question?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I'm not so ridged that my mind couldn't be changed or that I couldn't be persuaded. It's typically not easy to do but it does and has happened.
The public school system was created by a few in government AFAIK which was before socialism was a theory. It was not created by democracy or the "workers" best I can tell.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
School districts are drawn to maintain a level of students which is necessary to maintain the services needed. School size, support staff etc is all based on that. I could see a constant fluxuation of the numbers would be disruptive and problematic.
Consider the parents who blame the teachers, schools etc, everything except their child. I see scenarios where they constantly change schools.
Would they provide their own transportation?
I mean I really like the idea of minimizing government but from a practical perspective I think it would fail many
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Didn't take you long to resort to insults and name calling, typical of you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
does socialism require government ownership and control of an industry? this is a main part of most definitions isn't it? Do taxes and programs ran with taxes treat everyone the same and equal in benefit? isn't that a requirement of socialism to an extent?
"Socialism, on the other hand, is the movement for the liberation of the working class from the oppression and exploitation of the capitalist regime. So ultimately the aim is for the workers — not the state — to take over the management of all the industries, including public services." Tom Wetzel, PhD Philosophy, University of California, Los Angeles (1978)
the state would be dismantled and replaced by a more democratic kind of popular governance, rooted in delegates elected from workplace and neighborhood assemblies. Socialism means worker power, not bureaucratic state power."
public education existed before the word socialism
the control of schools varies greatly by state, county and city.
so is it the system itself or the actual use of taxes, therefore taxes,taxation that is socialism to you?
school taxes are only levied against land owners I believe, if you choose not to pay you can rent, live in an r.v. probably some other ways as well.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
A Boson particle was thought to exist and 50 years later they proved that it did. One of many examples proving much after the thought.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
is there a difference between a social policy and a socialist policy?
I think there's a difference between social and socialism
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
do you honestly believe that "political distribution is owned or regulated by the community as a whole" via government? is the government "the community"?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
#3 was your first comment to me "Guess you like socialist policies." Then I asked you how you defined it and you didn't/won't or can't answer it, instead you try to put that on me.
I'll wait for YOUR definition since there is not just one.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Paul
we can talk about, ponder it, perhaps as technology advances, actually find it. I don't believe either side has proven the other side wrong.
You have to go to the very beginning, the big bang, and just decide which is more likely the cause, a random occurrence, luck, whatever and that created the multiverse or it was intelligently designed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
if there are private and public schools or school choice then there is no "control over production" also it's not controlled by the workers so....
my link said it best
"The argument that all government action is socialism really does either a disservice to those arguing for socialism or reveals the great dangers of government power: If you’re claiming that everything that government does is socialism, then you don’t get to cherry-pick the “good” while ignoring the bad."
"The socialists are clear about their definition of socialism and it involves controlling businesses and property through democratic action. Just because there is government, doesn’t make it socialism."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
I don't believe schools, k-12 is socialism, if you think it is please show us
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
letting people group together to hire a teacher etc is a socialist policy? it's their choice, the individuals choice, I don't believe that is socialism, but please, tell me what else I like oh knowledgeable one.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Paul
why ask me? I never said it proved anything. what I said in post #14 was "that is the best argument for creation I have heard yet."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I don't really have any critique because I generally agree. Long ago I recall seeing a new clip or something similar where some well-to-do families with similar aged children got together, rented a space and hired a teacher for their children. They controlled the class room size and interviewed for the teaching position. Imo this is the best way to do it if and when possible. The teacher was actually paid better than the public sector and had a manageable class size.
Here's the problem though. There would be too much disruption of people constantly changing or wanting to be in control etc. The personal responsibility and accountability for a suggestion like you posted wouldn't work for many people for those reasons imo. I mean it should work but I don't have faith in the general public because people are what they are.
Created:
Posted in:
Though I'm not from NYC I am from NY, there's a certain sarcastic sense of humor so many don't get or understand. If people could remove themselves and examine things more objectively they'd see these things for what they really are, not serious.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Paul
we just think about it more, perhaps technology will develop enough to explore that further, rather than just theory, that has been true for many things if you think about it. We think we know far more than we actually do. So many times have we been wrong.
Created:
Posted in:
Pinky and the Brain best ever, can't think of any others atm....
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
in that case, from what I know via theories etc, imo there is more reason to believe there IS intelligent design vs not/random occurrence or whatever people want to call it.
something must have caused the big bang anyway as he put it, physics is about how things interact but not where they come from.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
would you consider an intelligent designer "God"? Reason I ask is I just listen to some Stephen C. Meyer and he has some powerful arguments for, but not specifically saying there is a "God".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
do you include those who "believe" in intelligent design? Since right now, for me, that is the best argument for creation I have heard yet.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
personally, I got a much, much larger tax return last year. more over for the most part gun sales have been down because there's no threat to take them, unlike the Obama reign, record sales, ammo shortages and high prices those 8 years.
But yeah more physical barriers are being built, better than some silly fence.
Make no mistake, most of the other Republicans that ran against him, I preferred, but he was a better choice than Hillary Clinton. I try to give him credit where it's deserved, he has actually done some very good things that you will not hear about because of the biased fake main stream "news" A lot of the criticism he brings onto himself and it's his fault, I wish he'd stop doing that.
The democratic party does not care about people like me. they have turned into some kind of pandering, controlling, enabling mob. Trump cares more than they do. remember one of the things he ran on was border security and the citizens have spoken.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
consider this, there are a multitude of videos by Democrats wanting and advocating for border barriers. Even St. Obama. These simpletons used the terms like fences. Either their proposals were just b.s. or they are actually that dumb. Trump on the other hand is serious about the solution and what he wants in the way of a barriers proves that. So to bash Trump for doing what Democrats had been wanting to do is hypocritical at best. His ideas are more effective than anything the Democrats could come up with and that has hurt their egos, it's made them look bad, as it should.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
those could work imo, add solar panels and wind turbines so they can be electrified ftw.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
I very much believe he would be too soft on China and they know it. He'd let all the jobs go. Remember what Obama said about manufacturing jobs never coming back etc. The employment numbers would be so bad that more and more people would be forced to accept government entitlements. This is the goal, to make people dependent on the government and that's how you do it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dylancatlow
it would be far more effective than the fences etc that were built by previous administrations, obviously the believed barriers helped and worked to a certain degree. We protect buildings and areas with physical barriers all the time, because they help and do work. Obama had a wall built around their new home, Pelosi etc they all have walls. Now mind you they have walls within the U.S. Consider for a moment if you will, someone who is already a citizen has more access and money to acquire ladders and other means to defeat these barriers if they really wanted to. And yet they still put up those walls.
The border walls will be far bigger, more difficult to overcome and the people poorer with less ability to acquire the means needed to defeat them.
In short the wealthy build walls within the interior of the country to keep people out. They believe walls around their homes work well enough to incur the expense and time to have them built. Using their own logic, walls work.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
naw the animal rights people like green peace have died, what I'm saying is that this motive people think the dolphins are showing, human like traits, I just don't buy it for the reasons I've said.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bmdrocks21
wages and benefits are probably the highest cost for a business which directly affects what they have to charge for their goods and services, why that's so difficult for people to understand I'll never know.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bmdrocks21
if there wasn't a federal minimum, states could and would compete for workers more than they do by offering higher pay etc, we wouldn't want that to happen now would we.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
How would we know if a hyena died for another hyena? They don't have media or storytelling apparatus. His point about dolphins is that similar behavior is in fact observed in the wild.
many animals have been observed in the wild for many years, it's been observed animals will save their own lives and or avoid injury even when their offspring are in peril, heck some eat their own young.
do dolphins protect other species or are they just attacking a known predator/enemy? If you can show me that they don't attack sharks for example, if no other creature is around then perhaps that's plausible but it can't be shown that they wouldn't have attacked anyway in the absence of creatures they are supposedly protecting.
My point is neither are humans if you start to scale back the modernity of our current life, our ability to control our surroundings.
here's the problem I see, there seems to be a conflation of the individual with the group. Humans seem to do things for the greater good, society, human kind, I have seen no evidence or plausible explanation that animals also exhibit this behavior. Actually on the contrary in that animals are individual self serving creatures which survive and thrive, but kept in balance by a variety of factors. This can not be said of humans generally.
I would accept that at some point caveman or whatever was like any other animal with a drive to pass on their personal genetics. But when and why did that change because it seems what we know, observe and what we are now is much different than that for the reasons stated. Yes there is a drive or desire to procreate but it's much more than that, and I have yet to see it observed or proven that it's similar in any other creature.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
people die for other people, even strangers, what other animals do that?Dolphins are known to protect not just strangers, but strangers of other species....
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
Can you give me an example of this sacrifice you're referring to?
sure, firemen, policemen anyone who dies in the duty or defense of someone else for example.
The species DID matter: this specific specimen preferred that HIS genetic material be passed along over the competitor's.
not to the lion, only thing that matters is his genes, which is true of every animal I can think of, they are unaware of anything outside their own travels/range. He preferred nothing, they don't make conscious decisions, they are driven by some unseen instinct. They all are, it's just a matter of who is bigger and stronger to impose their will over the others.
the individual is safe in a herd, but they herd for their own individual safety not some desire to save their own kind.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
Why do antelopes move is such massive herds? They're not all genetically linked, at least not directly, but they all have an interest in making sure the maximum number of antelopes survive.
I disagree that they have an interest beyond their own individual survival. I believe this because as I've stated earlier only humans sacrifice themselves for strangers.
(yes I meant apex)
long time ago I recall seeing a documentary or something where an alpha lion either died or for whatever reason wasn't around. Another alpha came along, killed the cubs the original one had sired and immediately breed with the willing female. This is one example where the species doesn't matter but rather passing along the individuals genetics.
There is safety in numbers, hence herds, but that, I believe is an individual survival technique rather than a species one. Some animals with stay in close proximity to things like hippos because they receive some protections by being in proximity with them, again it's an individual trait imo.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
some choose not to have children or are celibate so I wonder how we arrived to this point. Once a species is dominant what or why would there be a drive to be more than? if you what you say is true, we've far exceeded our purpose. Our advancements seem to have no real or practical purpose and is far beyond any need to procreate and yet here we are.
Some birds use tools. But that's an individual survival mechanism. Humans teach strangers, non genetic linked others to survive and thrive. I can't think of any other animal that does that as well.
Consider a wild animal who is put in captivity. They lose the edge to hunt and live wild. Being fed, protected etc is all they need and desire, so when it's given to them they seek nothing more.
An alpha predator isn't looking to be more alpha because the only competition they have is with each other generally speaking. There's no external influences to make them change much at all imo.
Humans do not seem to follow these laws of nature that I can tell.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
that's true, the will to live, reproduce etc, I don't believe we can explain that. When technology advances enough that we can create life, can we also give it the will to live and reproduce? A virus is very basic. We know a lot about DNA/RNA sequencing etc. At some point it will be just a matter writing the genetic code and putting it into a protein shell (we maybe able to do that know, I don't know) Though we can do many things and know many things but not everything. Often we know the how but not always the why, fully.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
I only use the term "unnatural" because of those who would compare and draw links between humans and other life forms. They would say all life has a single purpose which is to procreate.
Humans have far surpassed the purpose to procreate and even ensure the survival of the species. If those are the actual meaning of life then the progression should have stopped there, but it didn't.
A single male lion isn't aware or concerned that he could be the only one of his kind left, only humans can think like that. This goes far and beyond any need to procreate, but why, how? The simplistic answer that it "furthers the species" just doesn't make sense and I don't find it to be a logical explanation.
Humans are the only species without an opposing force to keep them within balance, seems unnatural to me, or perhaps anti-nature as so many describe the earth and nature being in balance.
Created:
Posted in:
I'm not sure if I really have any religious or spiritual beliefs. However I think a lot on the subject and listen to what others say etc. For example some claim morality and cooperation came about because it furthered the species. I'm not sure that's true. Are there any other creatures other than humans which would sacrifice themselves for a stranger? All other creatures, their main focus and purpose is to pass on their genes (and it works and their species carries on) rather than to ensure the survival of the species.
when I considered predators and prey, there is a balance, there must be a balance for both to survive. there doesn't need to be evolution or anything of the sort since the species can carry on within that balance. Humans are not bound that way. We have far exceeded any need to maintain or thrive as a species. If anything we are "unnatural" in what we are and what we do imo.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Imabench
good points, however there's several, for all their tough talk when push comes to shove they would fold like a house of cards imo. China's human rights is horrible, but has been and no one ever seems to be able or want to do much about it. I have no reason to believe that will change in my life time. Trade is the only leverage that can be used against them short of actual military force. So free trade as some of talked would give up any advantage the U.S. may have. Biden is a former shadow of who he once was. If I were running China I think he'd be my preference. The gaffs, lack of energy and mental focus would make him very easy to manipulate imo.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
any talk of rights infringement, I hate it, thus hate speech.
Created:
-->
@dylancatlow
it's a slippery slope as they say, profanity could be considered hate speech, heck any kind of insult as well, I mean why not? There's a reason why rights shouldn't be messed with.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
if I understand what you wrote correctly, we are born a "clean slate" or a "black slate" would you agree with that?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
sorry my post was a big confusing, who does China want to be the U.S. president in 2020
Created:
Posted in:
who would you want to be president in 2020? They are slowing the process, dragging their feet in hopes Trump won't be president in 2020 imo. Which means at some point Trump will have to push harder and be more aggressive, unless he's really that confident he will win in 2020.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Harikrish
have you ever seen The Search for Adam I think this is the right one anyway, there's one where they traced recessive genes in males and they end up on some island off of Africa, something like that anyway.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
sure I understand what you are saying, that assumes a soul and existing before we existed on earth etc. If I existed before I existed on earth I don't remember or know of it, therefore I am the sum of my experiences, if and when my experience involves recovering pre earth memories etc then I will still be the sum of my experiences. Afaik whatever knowledge and experience I had pre earth has no effect or bearing on my earth life right? So it still stands I am the sum of my experiences I think.
Created:
Posted in:
no, you are right I like my privacy, I actually have a protonmail email account it's free but I think better privacy wise than google, have you heard of it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
right, so one could say we die and are reborn all the time wouldn't you say?
Created: