Global Revolution!

[ralis]

Overconsumption in the land of free economic opportunity!

 

 

 

Edited November 22, 2011 by ralis

[Encephalon]

[Aaron]

Hello folks,

 

Joeblast, as always you miss the point because you fail to see anything but your own point. I am done trying to convince you of anything, because your perceptions of reality are already set in stone and no amount of convincing will change it. Perhaps you'll be fortunate enough to become destitute and homeless, then your eyes may be opened and you will see that I'm not saying that doing well or being successful are evil, but rather that it should be the duty of every man to look out for the well being of their fellow man. In my opinion this isn't available for everyone in the current climate of consumerism (and yes capitalism). Capitalism, in the sense that people perform duties and others pay them for those duties is perfectly fine, but it does not mean that one can lay claim to something they do not possess. The land you build your house on isn't your land, it isn't mine either. Early man knew this as did many tribal cultures, they viewed the land as their home, but they did not possess it, rather they were blessed in the sense that they could gain sustenance from it. They valued moderation and bountiful harvests, but they did not attempt to ring every ounce of wealth they could from it, for they knew something we seem to miss, that the world is not inexhaustible. So they hunted for a time, then moved on. They planted in one field, then moved and planted in another. The problems that we share are a result of greed. Greed is not good, it is product of fear, and many times those things born of fear do more harm than good, because in the grips of fear we cannot think rationally.

 

Vortex, the same goes for you. You miss the overwhelming message that I am sharing, that it is in the best interest of all to help everyone, for so long as you have an enemy or someone that wants what you have, then you can never safely keep that which you have. The sage values nothing and thus has nothing to lose.

 

Encephalon, thank you for the Pope John quote. I think on this topic we are both in agreement, which is certainly a refreshing change. I hope that we can find more things to agree upon.

 

Aaron

Edited November 23, 2011 by Twinner

[joeblast]

Economic freedom for all? That is a fallacy based on right wing propaganda! The U.S. remains a divided country based on socioeconomic status. All people are different in some capacity i.e, intelligence, learning disabilities, severe birth defects, very low IQ etc. Further, poor nutrition has a disastrous effect on development and learning.

 

Upward mobility with the illusion of economic freedom for all is bullshit i.e, belief systems BS. That meme is currently being foisted on a gullible public by Newt Gingrich et al.

 

The U.S. economy is largely based on WAR and has been so for the most part of the last 100 years. Even now politicians are posturing against Iran as if that country is a threat! The U.S. military industrial complex needs more war to stay in business. Eisenhower warned about the threat of the military industrial complex and the incessant demand to feed the machine! I was in the military during Viet Nam and I know what the machine is.

 

Encephalon is correct in that discussing economics is missing the point of this discussion. The study and subsequent application of economic theory is not based on a physical science. Moreover, economists obtain data based largely on human behavior and the data obtained are modeled mathematically. Not empirical but highly subjective. If economics were an objective science, I could be a billionaire in a very short time. :lol:

*crows* aw there you go, bringing class into it again!

/MPtHG

 

That's the spirit! Keep up on them policies that keep the high outliers down, that'll...make...it...more...ffaaaiiiyeahhhh I dont type to convince you, but to provide space for you to make an example of your accepted line of thinking. Its really the only thing that tempts me to reply, now I'm starting to feel like Rush hahahaha...

 

There's a phenomenon called listening fatigue - that's what liberal policies do to socioeconomic potential in the analogous forum. It happens when you compress the hell out of audio, small sounds are loud, loud sounds a little more loud, quiet is simply less loud - you can only listen to such hackery for so long before you yearn for a recording to listen to that gives breathing room for the entire compliment of the music to come through. Hopefully I dont need to explain that one any further

 

 

 

Enc, I dont disagree on consumerism - I havent had a tv in...I dont know, at least ten, twelve years. I'm not sure how my defending a good business market gets extrapolated exponentially into global consumerism. My main point is, a locality must do things to attract businesses, just like people, to its area. Of course some places have huge geographical benefit and what not, but fact of the matter is, localities that are streamlined in their governance and expenditures are able to confiscate less from the businesses and people who reside there to provide whatever it is that they provide. When governance gets shaky, governments confiscate more to cover their lack of clairvoyance on the results of too much in whatever fashion. Pretty easy to look and see which states have their fiscal houses in order...

[gendao]

Vortex, the same goes for you. You miss the overwhelming message that I am sharing

No, you've missed the whole message of your personal poverty experience. Why do you think your soul chose it this life?? Why are you so irrationally emotionally-vested in social/financial inequality, stubbornly defying all logic? Why does it hurt you so much to be poorer than someone else - even if they fairly attained their wealth?

 

 

 

 

*** SPOILER ALERT ***

 

 

 

BECAUSE YOU HAVE LOW SELF-WORTH. YOU DON'T VALUE YOURSELF HIGHLY.

As a result, you project this inferiority complex onto others back at yourself. Which also manifests as low financial worth. You literally feel like you are "worth nothing." And that's what is really bothering you here.

 

This feeling then gets amplified by further basing your self-worth upon financial status and other societal benchmarks - thus further reinforcing your own complex in a feedback loop. So now everytime you feel financially worthless, you feel even more personally worthless. Ouch..

 

The answer then is to find your own inherent self-worth - which is not based upon anything, actually. It's inherent. Only people who base their self-worth on financial worth view financial inequals as truly inequals. But once you discover your own innate worth, you'll feel worthy independent of any worldly materials.

 

Do you think a 1000-yo majestic Redwood or a blue whale give a rat's ass about the rat race??? Do you think they give a sh*t that they're 100% broke and only humans make money? No, because money has no value to them and hence they don't judge themselves or others by their bank accounts.

 

Now, I'm not saying money is bad, by all means. It's great! But just a great bonus, to what you already are.

[Aaron]

No, you've missed the whole message of your personal poverty experience. Why do you think your soul chose it this life?? Why are you so irrationally emotionally-vested in social/financial inequality, stubbornly defying all logic? Why does it hurt you so much to be poorer than someone else - even if they fairly attained their wealth?

 

 

 

 

*** SPOILER ALERT ***

 

 

 

BECAUSE YOU HAVE LOW SELF-WORTH. YOU DON'T VALUE YOURSELF HIGHLY.

As a result, you project this inferiority complex onto others back at yourself. Which also manifests as low financial worth. You literally feel like you are "worth nothing." And that's what is really bothering you here.

 

This feeling then gets amplified by further basing your self-worth upon financial status and other societal benchmarks - thus further reinforcing your own complex in a feedback loop. So now everytime you feel financially worthless, you feel even more personally worthless. Ouch..

 

The answer then is to find your own inherent self-worth - which is not based upon anything, actually. It's inherent. Only people who base their self-worth on financial worth view financial inequals as truly inequals. But once you discover your own innate worth, you'll feel worthy independent of any worldly materials.

 

Do you think a 1000-yo majestic Redwood or a blue whale give a rat's ass about the rat race??? Do you think they give a sh*t that they're 100% broke and only humans make money? No, because money has no value to them and hence they don't judge themselves or others by their bank accounts.

 

Now, I'm not saying money is bad, by all means. It's great! But just a great bonus, to what you already are.

 

Wow, you're more screwed up than I first thought. You really think you know me by my past experiences? I've actually been very successful in life, having had jobs that paid more than you could ever imagine, but with that "hard work" came very long hours and a slow whittling away of my desire to enjoy life. I don't care about money, so maybe that's one of the problems? I see the experience of life being infinitely more important than gathering up goods. Goods do nothing in the end, but understanding the depths of one's soul does wonders for one's perceptions of the universe.

 

In short, I'd rather be homeless than go to work for a major corporation being a mindless drone that hates his job and life and wants nothing more than to escape, but can't. I've chosen to live a modest life on purpose, not because I don't value my self, but because I do. Again something you obviously cannot understand.

 

Also I'm not broke, in fact I'm surviving modestly. I've been designing webpages for people starting online businesses, as well as helping people start up ebay stores. Ironic? Yes, but I'm getting paid for it and I would much rather help an individual earn money than a corporation. Don't presume to know someone. I plan on giving this up though to do some charity work in the near future. I'll either be going to India to work with some charities teaching children or joining the Peace Corps. Both seem infinitely more satisfying than going out and working to simply better my own situation.

 

Again, you obviously don't know me. Your assumptions are baseless as are most of your opinions, so please refrain from trying to analyze me with your pop-psychology BS.

 

It's dealing with people as ignorant as you that gets me in trouble with the insult policy.

 

Aaron

[lazy cloud]

"A wise man does not accumulate for himself. The more he uses for others, the more he has himself. The more he gives to others, the more he possesses of his own. The way of heaven is to benefit others and not to injure."

-Lao-Tzu (c. B.C. 550)

 

Thought this deserved repeating.

[joeblast]

I've actually been very successful in life, having had jobs that paid more than you could ever imagine,

"I dont know, I can imagine a lot" -Han Solo

 

Wow, it sounds like you've done pretty well for yourself - why the belief that noone from poverty can really make it, its but only those statistical outliers from the poor that actually are able to make a decent wage, then? That post basically proved one of the points Vortex and I have been making - you have income mobility in a place that has relative economic freedom.

 

Sounds like American capitalism has done you pretty well, taught you lessons you wanted to learn - and from the sounds of it you've largely given it up. Which is fine, that is your choice. So why deny others the same benefits and opportunities? You at least sounded consistent up until that post.

 

I understand that money is a tool and nothing more. One doesnt always need certain tools on certain travels, but on the other hand, certain tools are absolutely indispensable in certain travels.

[Informer]

Interview with a Yogic Monk Activist

 

Recorded live 2 days ago on occupynyc

 

 

Dada Pranakrsnananda is a yogic monk of Ananda Marga and a social activist. He is a member of the #Occupy Wall Street movement and was one of the first arrested on the Brooklyn Bridge on October 1st. In this exclusive video, Dada shares his unique experience of being arrested and his concern that the focus has shifted to the conflict between the movement and NYPD, when it should it should remain on the injustice of corporate greed and inequity of wealth in society.

 

http://www.livestream.com/occupynyc/video?clipId=flv_6c1072ee-4221-4fcb-9c45-50f3e032fa5c&utm_source=lslibrary&utm_medium=ui-thumb

[Birch]

OWS is just a sign for people who don't know how to read signs.

---opinion alert---

 

I've been reading through this one again and it seems that the game will be won on premises.

In other words, if one can make "business" equal with "capitalism" and show that business-value-creation can't be had in the absence of capitalism then capitalism becomes just another necessary evil in the process of creating value. But what if value-creation and capitalism can be shown, not only not to be linked, but antitheitical (sp?) to each other?

 

If it can be shown (and not just opined) then wouldn't that change something? No forceful revolutions or whatnots required. And I don't think threatening folks with the Communism and no dessert is up to scratch.

[ralis]

OWS is just a sign for people who don't know how to read signs.

---opinion alert---

 

I've been reading through this one again and it seems that the game will be won on premises.

In other words, if one can make "business" equal with "capitalism" and show that business-value-creation can't be had in the absence of capitalism then capitalism becomes just another necessary evil in the process of creating value. But what if value-creation and capitalism can be shown, not only not to be linked, but antitheitical (sp?) to each other?

 

If it can be shown (and not just opined) then wouldn't that change something? No forceful revolutions or whatnots required. And I don't think threatening folks with the Communism and no dessert is up to scratch.

 

The main problem is that the U.S. is no longer a manufacturing country. Therefor, very little wealth and value are being created.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

The main problem is that the U.S. is no longer a manufacturing country. Therefor, very little wealth and value are being created.

 

 

The (legitmate) solution is arbitrarily wrapped up in so much red tape, that there is no "legitmate" solution.

 

 

What now?

[ralis]

The (legitmate) solution is arbitrarily wrapped up in so much red tape, that there is no "legitmate" solution.

 

 

What now?

 

What is the legitimate solution?

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

What is the legitimate solution?

 

 

Staying within bounds of law and peaceful protest, petitions, and lobbying.

But as far as my eyes can see, this accomplishes nothing when up against big dollars and/or red tape.

 

 

Revolutionary solutions are too easily corruptible and susecptible to violence and/or (civil)war.

 

A sit-out wouldnt work well, unless a vast majority of indivioduals participated willingly. and anything other than willingly would effectively fail. not many people are willing to abandon the epic constructs of the corporations to accomplish a sit-out.

 

Thus violence would sooner, rather than later, follow.

 

{edit:}

 

The overall answer, which i forgot to mention, is essentially self sufficency and interdependent community. Only in a society which does not require trade to acquire necessary goods and resources can prosperity flourish, thrive, or even stagnate. Without self sufficency, prosperity declines and/or dies.

 

In an interdependent society, everyone who is self sufficent will inevitably gain surpluses which they cannot consume by themselves, thus are able to share at inexpensive rates. Everyone who is not self sufficent can work for those who are and eventually become prosperous even without self sufficency.

 

 

In a nation who cannot keep it's resources to itself and further must trade for resources, it/they/we belong to our benifactors. (America: Made in China)

{/edit:}

Edited November 23, 2011 by Hot Nirvana Judo Trend

[ralis]

Americans are feasting not only on turkey tomorrow but turkey with an antibiotic cocktail. These industries need to regulated more closely.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/23/turkey-antibiotics-drug-resistant-infections-thanksgiving_n_1110745.html

 

Tomorrow begins consumption to the max which will last till Jan.2. Plenty of food and cheap Chinese made junk for all!

[joeblast]

The main problem is that the U.S. is no longer a manufacturing country. Therefor, very little wealth and value are being created.

So you're saying that since our manufacturing base has shifted and there's not nearly as many small ticket items, we dont mfg anymore? Typical efficiency gains...while there is a lot of mfd' things that could be made here, our laws have made it such that a lot can be made more cheaply elsewhere - yet there are percentagewise far more high dollar items and the general overall value is roughly the same, though the employment difference is significant.

 

That's part of the problem when you make generalized comments that are only applicable in a small context - you wind up being largely wrong, partially correct.

[strawdog65]

Hello folks,

 

Joeblast, as always you miss the point because you fail to see anything but your own point. I am done trying to convince you of anything, because your perceptions of reality are already set in stone and no amount of convincing will change it. Perhaps you'll be fortunate enough to become destitute and homeless, then your eyes may be opened and you will see that I'm not saying that doing well or being successful are evil, but rather that it should be the duty of every man to look out for the well being of their fellow man. In my opinion this isn't available for everyone in the current climate of consumerism (and yes capitalism). Capitalism, in the sense that people perform duties and others pay them for those duties is perfectly fine, but it does not mean that one can lay claim to something they do not possess. The land you build your house on isn't your land, it isn't mine either. Early man knew this as did many tribal cultures, they viewed the land as their home, but they did not possess it, rather they were blessed in the sense that they could gain sustenance from it. They valued moderation and bountiful harvests, but they did not attempt to ring every ounce of wealth they could from it, for they knew something we seem to miss, that the world is not inexhaustible. So they hunted for a time, then moved on. They planted in one field, then moved and planted in another. The problems that we share are a result of greed. Greed is not good, it is product of fear, and many times those things born of fear do more harm than good, because in the grips of fear we cannot think rationally.

 

Vortex, the same goes for you. You miss the overwhelming message that I am sharing, that it is in the best interest of all to help everyone, for so long as you have an enemy or someone that wants what you have, then you can never safely keep that which you have. The sage values nothing and thus has nothing to lose.

 

Encephalon, thank you for the Pope John quote. I think on this topic we are both in agreement, which is certainly a refreshing change. I hope that we can find more things to agree upon.

 

Aaron

 

 

Hi Aaron,

Thanks for posting this.

It is entirely ironic that a reminder of this sort

would even need to be posted on a forum like TTB.

 

The obviousness of what you are saying hits home.

I agree that when a person has lost their home/job and can

see the world with new eyes, it opens them to what the

reality of the world really is.

 

Many people on this thread have argued that the economic freedom

of the USA is the reason for our success and that all people have

the equal opportunity to become rich and successful.

 

This is a LIE. It is a fairy tale told to prove

to the weakest minded individuals, that because

we call ourselves free,we are the best nation in the world. Poppycock.

 

I know that the reality of the world is vastly different from what

we would want the world to be in a Humanistic sense.

That being that all people have equal and protected rights without

question, to Live, Learn, and be the very best person they are able to.

It is the fact that basic needs like, Food, Shelter, and Education

are not available to so many people of this world, based entirely on

the principle that these things must be "paid" for, that holds us back

from a world community that works together rather than at odds with one another.

 

I believe that Nationalism, and too much pride in "your" country,

rather than pride in the family of Humanity as the world is seen from

space, is a lot to blame. It is an easy prospect to put other people

down when you push your own "type" of people up.

 

I am constantly saddened to read so many replies on TTB that are so

concentrated with a materialistic world viewpoint. I believe we all,

deep down know better than this.

 

I have presented the Idea that is the "Venus Project" many times here

at TTB, and I continue to believe that this Idea holds much promise for

some future time when man/womankind finally gets over the hurdle of looking

beyond their own self and can focus on the concerns of Humanity itself.

[strawdog65]

With all of these protests...

 

Do people "know" what they want?

They say they want change, they want

to remove corporate greed from the system.

 

Do they even have an inkling of a plan?

 

The movement is good.

 

But having a goal, a plan is even better.

The following is from the "Venus Project" website.

 

http://www.thevenusproject.com/

 

 

--------------------------------------------

 

The Venus Project is an organization that proposes a feasible plan of action for social change, one that works towards a peaceful and sustainable global civilization. It outlines an alternative to strive toward where human rights are no longer paper proclamations but a way of life.

 

We operate out of a 21.5-acre Research Center located in Venus, Florida.

 

When one considers the enormity of the challenges facing society today, we can safely conclude that the time is long overdue for us to re-examine our values and to reflect upon and evaluate some of the underlying issues and assumptions we have as a society. This self-analysis calls into question the very nature of what it means to be human, what it means to be a member of a "civilization," and what choices we can make today to ensure a prosperous future for all the world's people.

 

At present we are left with very few alternatives. The answers of yesterday are no longer relevant. Either we continue as we have been with our outmoded social customs and habits of thought, in which case our future will be threatened, or we can apply a more appropriate set of values that are relevant to an emergent society.

 

Experience tells us that human behavior can be modified, either toward constructive or destructive activity. This is what The Venus Project is all about - directing our technology and resources toward the positive, for the maximum benefit of people and planet, and seeking out new ways of thinking and living that emphasize and celebrate the vast potential of the human spirit. We have the tools at hand to design and build a future that is worthy of the human potential. The Venus Project presents a bold, new direction for humanity that entails nothing less than the total redesign of our culture. What follows is not an attempt to predict what will be done, only what could be done. The responsibility for our future is in our hands, and depends on the decisions that we make today. The greatest resource that is available today is our own ingenuity.

 

While social reformers and think tanks formulate strategies that treat only superficial symptoms, without touching the basic social operation, The Venus Project approaches these problems somewhat differently. We feel we cannot eliminate these problems within the framework of the present political and monetary establishment. It would take too many years to accomplish any significant change. Most likely they would be watered down and thinned out to such an extent that the changes would be indistinguishable.

 

The Venus Project advocates an alternative vision for a sustainable new world civilization unlike any social system that has gone before. Although this description is highly condensed, it is based upon years of study and experimental research by many, many people from many scientific disciplines.

[joeblast]

Hello folks,

 

Joeblast, as always you miss the point because you fail to see anything but your own point. I am done trying to convince you of anything, because your perceptions of reality are already set in stone and no amount of convincing will change it. Perhaps you'll be fortunate enough to become destitute and homeless, then your eyes may be opened and you will see that I'm not saying that doing well or being successful are evil, but rather that it should be the duty of every man to look out for the well being of their fellow man. In my opinion this isn't available for everyone in the current climate of consumerism (and yes capitalism). Capitalism, in the sense that people perform duties and others pay them for those duties is perfectly fine, but it does not mean that one can lay claim to something they do not possess. The land you build your house on isn't your land, it isn't mine either. Early man knew this as did many tribal cultures, they viewed the land as their home, but they did not possess it, rather they were blessed in the sense that they could gain sustenance from it. They valued moderation and bountiful harvests, but they did not attempt to ring every ounce of wealth they could from it, for they knew something we seem to miss, that the world is not inexhaustible. So they hunted for a time, then moved on. They planted in one field, then moved and planted in another. The problems that we share are a result of greed. Greed is not good, it is product of fear, and many times those things born of fear do more harm than good, because in the grips of fear we cannot think rationally.

 

Vortex, the same goes for you. You miss the overwhelming message that I am sharing, that it is in the best interest of all to help everyone, for so long as you have an enemy or someone that wants what you have, then you can never safely keep that which you have. The sage values nothing and thus has nothing to lose.

 

Encephalon, thank you for the Pope John quote. I think on this topic we are both in agreement, which is certainly a refreshing change. I hope that we can find more things to agree upon.

 

Aaron

-"Look out for" and "fully provide for" are two entirely different things. I'll help damn near anyone out. Will I fully support as in monetarily give everything away? Hell no, not at this point in my life. What would that molecule in the bucket accomplish? I might as well slash my throat and give my body away to bacteria and worms. I can do more good by keeping the majority of my wealth and help where I may, in more ways than just monetarily.

 

-Isnt available...well, the more people rely on government for charity, the more people wind up thinking "the government's taking care of it." What do you think is going to happen to charitable donations if they remove the tax exemption for it?

 

-Society moved away from hunter/gatherer a LONG time ago. Think its about time people accept the notion? Even the Yellow Emperor's classic of medicine speaks of the ancients living in harmony, valuing moderation - wakey wakey, this problem has been going on for quite a long time, its not a creation of capitalism, america, or modern society even.

 

You seem to think Vortex and I "miss your point" because we still disagree with you, even after reading it Your replies do not convey any understanding of what he and I are portraying in the least - which is, a compassionate path that will do more good and uplift a far higher percentage of the population than stamping down the rich simply because they have too much - by letting go of tight control over too many things. Our examples are rooted in empirical reality, yours are rooted in a fictitious state of contrived piety - having the best of intentions doesnt mean a whole heck of a lot when the outcomes produce suffering, stagnation, joblessness, homelessness, and people tethered to government assistance. Such are the outcomes of socialist oligarchies. I dont care how much of a heart one has, if you have no mind to direct it you're little better off than having all mind and no heart, they both have the potential to easily veer off course.

 

Like I said, when the weight of government is small enough to allow for businesses to operate at very small profit margin, you wind up with a lot more businesses. More businesses, more jobs. Is it anny wonder that a business with a 2-5% profit margin completely ceases expansion in the face of potential 2-5% increases in costs? That almost kills the entire business right there, for if they cant operate at a profit then that necessarily means they are going out of business before too long.

 

What does that have to do with consumerism and mega corporations? I dislike both, but I am not so shortsighted so as to want to shoot the goose. Companies (just like unions, in this regard) can get too big, and the bigger they get the more the law of oligarchs creeps in and creates a culture that cares mostly about keeping itself in power. This is not an outcome of capitalism, this is an outcome of human nature - therefore I state yet again that all of you railing on capitalism simply have misdirected anger or frustration.

[Aaron]

-"Look out for" and "fully provide for" are two entirely different things. I'll help damn near anyone out. Will I fully support as in monetarily give everything away? Hell no, not at this point in my life. What would that molecule in the bucket accomplish? I might as well slash my throat and give my body away to bacteria and worms. I can do more good by keeping the majority of my wealth and help where I may, in more ways than just monetarily.

 

-Isnt available...well, the more people rely on government for charity, the more people wind up thinking "the government's taking care of it." What do you think is going to happen to charitable donations if they remove the tax exemption for it?

 

-Society moved away from hunter/gatherer a LONG time ago. Think its about time people accept the notion? Even the Yellow Emperor's classic of medicine speaks of the ancients living in harmony, valuing moderation - wakey wakey, this problem has been going on for quite a long time, its not a creation of capitalism, america, or modern society even.

 

You seem to think Vortex and I "miss your point" because we still disagree with you, even after reading it Your replies do not convey any understanding of what he and I are portraying in the least - which is, a compassionate path that will do more good and uplift a far higher percentage of the population than stamping down the rich simply because they have too much - by letting go of tight control over too many things. Our examples are rooted in empirical reality, yours are rooted in a fictitious state of contrived piety - having the best of intentions doesnt mean a whole heck of a lot when the outcomes produce suffering, stagnation, joblessness, homelessness, and people tethered to government assistance. Such are the outcomes of socialist oligarchies. I dont care how much of a heart one has, if you have no mind to direct it you're little better off than having all mind and no heart, they both have the potential to easily veer off course.

 

Like I said, when the weight of government is small enough to allow for businesses to operate at very small profit margin, you wind up with a lot more businesses. More businesses, more jobs. Is it anny wonder that a business with a 2-5% profit margin completely ceases expansion in the face of potential 2-5% increases in costs? That almost kills the entire business right there, for if they cant operate at a profit then that necessarily means they are going out of business before too long.

 

What does that have to do with consumerism and mega corporations? I dislike both, but I am not so shortsighted so as to want to shoot the goose. Companies (just like unions, in this regard) can get too big, and the bigger they get the more the law of oligarchs creeps in and creates a culture that cares mostly about keeping itself in power. This is not an outcome of capitalism, this is an outcome of human nature - therefore I state yet again that all of you railing on capitalism simply have misdirected anger or frustration.

 

First I'm willing to bet the only one that liked this comment was you. I do understand what you're talking about, I can even understand the rationale of it, but I do not, for even the slightest second agree with it. It's a greed and fear motivated philosophy, and as I said, it does more harm than good. You are far to intelligent for your own good, and what I mean by that, isn't that you're actually smart, but that you think you're so smart no one can teach you anything new. Look at my experiences in the last few years exploring the internet... I came here a strict "Taoist" believing in only Taoism, but I opened my mind to the new, sometimes even stubbornly, and came away understanding there was so much more to everything than merely Taoism, that within Buddhism there were gems, and within Vedanta there were gems, that to deny them, was denying a wisdom simply because it was contrary to what I had believed.

 

Why do I not agree with what you advocate? Because there is no compassion in it, even though you try very hard to say there is. There is no concern for others, rather it is the idea that one looks out for themselves first and others second. That isn't necessarily an evil way to think, but you take it one step further (IMO- anyone besides Vortex and Joe that think differently feel free to enlighten me) in that it is perfectly okay for one to satisfy all of their own desires at the expense of someone else.

 

Tell me, when did the earth give you the land you claim as your own? How do you own that land other than within the constructs of the intellectual theocracy of Capitalism... after all Capitalism is a religion, it just happens to worship wealth. You don't own that land, nor do any of us, we simply lay claim to it. This is done out of greed, a need to take something that we want and not let others partake in it.

 

Anyways, you can't be blamed, the problem with most people is that they've stopped thinking for themselves and let the media and authorities think for them. Hopefully one day something will shake that impression from you.

 

Aaron

Edited November 24, 2011 by Twinner

[Aaron]

Hi Aaron,

Thanks for posting this.

It is entirely ironic that a reminder of this sort

would even need to be posted on a forum like TTB.

 

The obviousness of what you are saying hits home.

I agree that when a person has lost their home/job and can

see the world with new eyes, it opens them to what the

reality of the world really is.

 

Many people on this thread have argued that the economic freedom

of the USA is the reason for our success and that all people have

the equal opportunity to become rich and successful.

 

This is a LIE. It is a fairy tale told to prove

to the weakest minded individuals, that because

we call ourselves free,we are the best nation in the world. Poppycock.

 

I know that the reality of the world is vastly different from what

we would want the world to be in a Humanistic sense.

That being that all people have equal and protected rights without

question, to Live, Learn, and be the very best person they are able to.

It is the fact that basic needs like, Food, Shelter, and Education

are not available to so many people of this world, based entirely on

the principle that these things must be "paid" for, that holds us back

from a world community that works together rather than at odds with one another.

 

I believe that Nationalism, and too much pride in "your" country,

rather than pride in the family of Humanity as the world is seen from

space, is a lot to blame. It is an easy prospect to put other people

down when you push your own "type" of people up.

 

I am constantly saddened to read so many replies on TTB that are so

concentrated with a materialistic world viewpoint. I believe we all,

deep down know better than this.

 

I have presented the Idea that is the "Venus Project" many times here

at TTB, and I continue to believe that this Idea holds much promise for

some future time when man/womankind finally gets over the hurdle of looking

beyond their own self and can focus on the concerns of Humanity itself.

 

Thank you Straw. I hope you're doing well.

 

Aaron

 

 

[Enishi]

First I'm willing to bet the only one that liked this comment was you. I do understand what you're talking about, I can even understand the rationale of it, but I do not, for even the slightest second agree with it.

 

Actually I was the one that liked his comment, particularily this part:

 

'Like I said, when the weight of government is small enough to allow for businesses to operate at very small profit margin, you wind up with a lot more businesses. More businesses, more jobs. Is it anny wonder that a business with a 2-5% profit margin completely ceases expansion in the face of potential 2-5% increases in costs? That almost kills the entire business right there, for if they cant operate at a profit then that necessarily means they are going out of business before too long.'

 

Even if you don't agree with someone's overall philosophy, that doesn't mean one can't acknowledge when they've made a good point.

Edited November 24, 2011 by Enishi

[joeblast]

First I'm willing to bet the only one that liked this comment was you. I do understand what you're talking about, I can even understand the rationale of it, but I do not, for even the slightest second agree with it. It's a greed and fear motivated philosophy, and as I said, it does more harm than good. You are far to intelligent for your own good, and what I mean by that, isn't that you're actually smart, but that you think you're so smart no one can teach you anything new. Look at my experiences in the last few years exploring the internet... I came here a strict "Taoist" believing in only Taoism, but I opened my mind to the new, sometimes even stubbornly, and came away understanding there was so much more to everything than merely Taoism, that within Buddhism there were gems, and within Vedanta there were gems, that to deny them, was denying a wisdom simply because it was contrary to what I had believed.

 

Why do I not agree with what you advocate? Because there is no compassion in it, even though you try very hard to say there is. There is no concern for others, rather it is the idea that one looks out for themselves first and others second. That isn't necessarily an evil way to think, but you take it one step further (IMO- anyone besides Vortex and Joe that think differently feel free to enlighten me) in that it is perfectly okay for one to satisfy all of their own desires at the expense of someone else.

 

Tell me, when did the earth give you the land you claim as your own? How do you own that land other than within the constructs of the intellectual theocracy of Capitalism... after all Capitalism is a religion, it just happens to worship wealth. You don't own that land, nor do any of us, we simply lay claim to it. This is done out of greed, a need to take something that we want and not let others partake in it.

 

Anyways, you can't be blamed, the problem with most people is that they've stopped thinking for themselves and let the media and authorities think for them. Hopefully one day something will shake that impression from you.

 

Aaron

What sort of insecure individual feels the need to click the plus sign on his own argument? Shall I go plus it so that you can believe me?

 

Greed and fear indeed! Since when is providing for oneself and his family greed? Fear? Perhaps if one fears being destitute. Hollow mischaracterizations.

 

At the expense of someone else...there's the crux of your argument, the root fallacy. You seem to believe that anybody making money is doing so at the expense of someone else - it would be silly to deny it happens because there are certain contexts in which it goes, but in extrapolating the small percentage of such onto the entire thing, you miss the entire base upon which capitalism is built - quid pro quo - I have something you want, you have something I want, we come to an agreement and we each walk away satisfied having gotten that which we wanted or needed. If I create a business and sell things, is this money someone "at someone else's expense?" I am forcibly taking money from people? ( What do I look like a government? Anybody else that does that is committing theft.) No, I am providing something that somebody has use for and I charge a moderate percentage for my efforts - for if I charge too much for my efforts, there will be somebody else that comes along and charges less. Markets generally work in such a manner. In creating my business, I give people things of value, they give me an equivalent sum, I employ some people, provide a means of living for them while also providing a means of living for myself. The profits I make allow me to do other things, even create other streams of revenue, employ more people - that is why I used the example of Apple - was SJ somehow stealing from people? That's somehow discompassionate, the jobs created, the livelihoods enriched, the spawned industry items having created more jobs and wealth?

 

You still treat it as a zero sum pie, one person having more necessarily means that another has less. That is a complete fallacy.

 

Anyways, you can't be blamed, the problem with most people is that they've stopped thinking for themselves and let the media and authorities think for them. Hopefully one day something will shake that impression from you. Perhaps if you ran a business and expended great effort for even a small margin of gain, you'd understand the benefit you are giving to other people, not just employees but your customers. It is why certain very good businesses around here I will tell the owners "thank you for being here, for being in business. You provide a good service here and there's lots of people that benefit by your presence." Because it is true.

[thelerner]

What sort of insecure individual feels the need to click the plus sign on his own argument? Shall I go plus it so that you can believe me?

 

 

Anyways, you can't be blamed, the problem with most people is that they've stopped thinking for themselves and let the media and authorities think for them. Hopefully one day something will shake that impression from you. Perhaps if you ran a business and expended great effort for even a small margin of gain, you'd understand the benefit you are giving to other people, not just employees but your customers. It is why certain very good businesses around here I will tell the owners "thank you for being here, for being in business. You provide a good service here and there's lots of people that benefit by your presence." Because it is true.

 

Speaking of Plus'ing. I often plus you on this thread. Technically I'm in the middle, but I admire you for standing up for the conservative position. Otherwise the board would be a love fest for loving, compassionate, dead end, less well thought out positions. Verse your seemingly harsh, practical, real world posts.

[Aaron]

Actually I was the one that liked his comment, particularily this part:

 

'Like I said, when the weight of government is small enough to allow for businesses to operate at very small profit margin, you wind up with a lot more businesses. More businesses, more jobs. Is it anny wonder that a business with a 2-5% profit margin completely ceases expansion in the face of potential 2-5% increases in costs? That almost kills the entire business right there, for if they cant operate at a profit then that necessarily means they are going out of business before too long.'

 

Even if you don't agree with someone's overall philosophy, that doesn't mean one can't acknowledge when they've made a good point.

 

Yes, but it's not true, just theoretical republican tea party BS. If we want to discuss how we can make a fair market economy I think we also need to look at other factors involved, in particular regarding loans and incentives to start businesses, the ability to compete against large corporations and succeed. If you think that there doesn't need to be some sort of regulations remember that there was a time when every convenience store out there was a mom and pop store, now less than a quarter of them are, you can't really make a living unless you accept the patronage of a major corporation and agree to give them a portion of your profits in exchange for their goods (i.e. you can't just purchase their goods, you actually have to accept them as your sole provider and give them a percentage of the overall profits, if fact you don't even actually own the fuel or pumps, at least not in many cases.) Also lets look at bank fees and the costs of doing business, where they are charged exorbitant fees for processing credit card transactions and debit transactions. This is just one type of industry, there are numerous others that are having just as many problems.

 

(Guess who was opposed to reducing or capping fees on debit and credit card transactions that banks and credit card companies charge businesses? Give up? Here's a clue it starts with republic--.)

 

I get the strong feeling that Joe's a Tea Party-Repubican-Rush Limbaugh-adoring-wannabe libertarian. I say wannabe because most people that call themselves libertarians today don't even know what one actually is (or was before it was bastardized by conservative republican's disillusioned with their own party.)

 

Anyways, I'm glad you got something nice from his speech, but keep in mind the whole 2-5% profit margin is one of the reasons small businesses are failing... large companies like walmart and BP can afford to operate at such a low margin, small businesses in most cases can't. Hence the republican model is better suited to ensuring the success of the large company owned by the 1% than the small business owned by the 99%.

 

Aaron

Edited November 24, 2011 by Twinner