Do or Die
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-10-2016, 10:53 PM
RE: Do or Die
(03-10-2016 02:09 PM)Stevil Wrote:  If you aspire to be a toilet cleaner then sure, don't bother applying yourself in school. But also don't complain later in life that the system is rigged for the rich. It's your own choice, whether to apply yourself or not.

And what if the family cannot afford better schooling?

In America, schools are most often funded locally, to property taxes, meaning that the children of poor folk -- who live in shitholes -- go to schools funded by property-taxes based on shithole valuations. The schools cannot afford extra teachers or classrooms or supplies.

You can apply yourself all you want. You can line up at the trough. But if nothing is left because the resources are out of date, if nothing is left because the school cannot afford a good library -- if nothing is left because you live in a ghetto with schools funded by your favored low taxation rates -- what's going to happen?

You seem to be assuming that everyone's starting at the same baseline, and has equal opportunity. But they don't -- not in my country, and not in yours, either, where Maoris face hurdles equivalent to blacks here in in America.

I'm thinking you live in a bookish world, sundered from the realities of day-to-day living.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
03-10-2016, 11:18 PM
RE: Do or Die
(03-10-2016 05:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(03-10-2016 02:13 PM)Stevil Wrote:  It would make sense for the local council to recognise that there may be some long term negative affects on mining and hence put some restrictions on the mining company before allowing them to mine.

That is the responsibility of the local council who gives the mining permit.

That is not at all the way it works in the U.S. or Canada. Federal law governs most aspects of mining.
OK, then for you, replace "local council" with "Federal law"

(03-10-2016 05:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  
Quote:The company is expected to try and make a profit. It makes no sense to assume the company will voluntarily incur costs just to be nice. The belief in some unwritten do gooder moral code is naive to say the least. Company's aren't evil, they are there to make a profit. Governments and councils are there to represent society and are the ones responsible for setting the parameters under which companies must operate.

That is why laws are needed to prevent despoilation and pollution that the company wouldn't otherwise give a shit about since they aren't do-gooders.
Sure.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2016, 11:26 PM
RE: Do or Die
(03-10-2016 10:53 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(03-10-2016 02:09 PM)Stevil Wrote:  If you aspire to be a toilet cleaner then sure, don't bother applying yourself in school. But also don't complain later in life that the system is rigged for the rich. It's your own choice, whether to apply yourself or not.

And what if the family cannot afford better schooling?

In America, schools are most often funded locally, to property taxes, meaning that the children of poor folk -- who live in shitholes -- go to schools funded by property-taxes based on shithole valuations. The schools cannot afford extra teachers or classrooms or supplies.
OK, well, that seems to be a problem America has created for itself.

If your country provides quality free schools then people (even poor people) have the opportunity to get qualifications and a decent job.

I'd be voting for someone that campaigns on providing better schools rather than worrying about gun laws, abortion laws, building walls, or taxing the rich more in order to support bigger social benefit payouts. But then again, I don't really know what goes on in USA, all I know is that free schooling and free health (especially for young and for those in desperate need for medical treatment) is pretty essential.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-10-2016, 12:06 AM
RE: Do or Die
(03-10-2016 02:09 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(03-10-2016 12:26 AM)morondog Wrote:  There will always be low wage jobs though, unless you think a degree is necessary to clean toilets? Is everyone supposed to be aiming to be an investment banker?
Everyone should be aiming at education yes. Especially if they want to earn enough money to get by.

If you aspire to be a toilet cleaner then sure, don't bother applying yourself in school. But also don't complain later in life that the system is rigged for the rich. It's your own choice, whether to apply yourself or not.

...

Spoken like a true privileged kid. For fuck's sake man. There are not enough high wage jobs that everyone can have one. You can't have an entire nation of banking executives. Even if everyone got exactly the same opportunities in life some people would be poor. And it wouldn't be for lack of effort, it would be because once someone is a little bit rich it becomes easier to get a little bit more rich. The system is inherently unstable. There are X resources to go round and Y people, and the way we do things X is not simply divided by Y so that everyone gets an equal share. You seem to think that the best way to do things is to have a free for all resources grab and everyone must be happy with whatever resources they get, and if they happen to get less it's because they didn't grab hard enough.

You have this ridiculous infatuation with holy profits but why the fuck should profits matter? Why are you so hell bent on giving corporations money with no rules?

And the fact of the matter is that the system *is* rigged for the rich. They're the ones with power and they sure as fuck aren't giving it away. Now you're saying to those who're unfortunate enough not to have as much "it's your fault you're poor anyway, don't complain that the system is rigged".

Dodgy I have zero hope that you'll understand any of this.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
04-10-2016, 12:15 AM
RE: Do or Die
(03-10-2016 01:53 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(30-09-2016 01:14 PM)Stevil Wrote:  If you encourage businesses they you have a sustainable source of income. Income for investors and income for workers.

If you don't encourage businesses then where do the jobs come from? Do we instead just sit back and milk the rich? How does that work in the long run?

With regards to the "no allegiance to society" I really don't know what you are getting at. Society has many, many facets. Business supplies income and jobs, skills, goods and services, what more do you want from them?

At the cost of providing jobs?
Why shouldn't they?

I don't know what you mean when you say "ignore everyone else"? What do you expect businesses to do over and above, turning a profit?

I'm going to perform a thought experiment. Let's say that there's a big old deposit of diamonds under the desert in Botswana. Let's further say that the De Beers company geologists identify it and De Beers buys the mining rights from the government of the day. They set up two huge mines and begin extracting diamonds of incredible quality and quantity. The diamonds are sold for vast sums. Some of the money comes back to Botswana and is used to improve the mines, and the local economy does grow because there's a knock on effect of mining jobs - local tribesmen are hired as unskilled labour, there's food markets etc.

Now the profits from this mine are stratospheric. There's an incredibly rich deposit down there. De Beers executives rub their hands in glee. It's gravy train all the way.

Tell me something: is this completely fair? De Beers developed the mine, sure, but the diamonds were just *there*. They bought the mining rights, sure, but actually the government of the day didn't realise the value that would be extracted, nor were they in fact a legitimate government since they were a colonial occupying power. The local economy improved, sure, but relative to the profits from the mine, it was just pig swill. The only people who really profit from the mine are De Beers investors who apart from putting up the money to set up the mine initially don't life a finger in the day to day generation of profits. They just sit while the entire country of Botswana pumps their bank accounts full of diamond profits, and a tiny trickle of money is allowed back to keep the pump running.

This is a bit of a fairy story. It did actually happen in Botswana but perhaps not quite as I described. The mines exist but I didn't fact check the history. But the purpose of the fairy story is to illustrate that there's a lack of fairness in the system. I can't see how the diamonds should be the exclusive property of De Beers even though to all intents and purposes they bought the mining rights and everything fair and square.

Anyway, to me that's a microcosm of the relationship of the rich and poor today. In Botswana the democratic government actually decided that this was not a right thing and they forced De Beers into a profit sharing agreement which has benefitted the entire country so that it is now one of the shining lights in Southern Africa, possibly the sole place in the region where genuine good governance is practiced. Something that would not be possible without the diamond profits which otherwise would just be making a fat businessman fatter.

Stevil did you see this post and the two subsequent? 'Cos I'm sorta semi-proud of it.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-10-2016, 01:41 AM (This post was last modified: 04-10-2016 11:23 AM by Thumpalumpacus.)
RE: Do or Die
(03-10-2016 11:26 PM)Stevil Wrote:  OK, well, that seems to be a problem America has created for itself.

If your country provides quality free schools then people (even poor people) have the opportunity to get qualifications and a decent job.

I'd be voting for someone that campaigns on providing better schools rather than worrying about gun laws, abortion laws, building walls, or taxing the rich more in order to support bigger social benefit payouts. But then again, I don't really know what goes on in USA, all I know is that free schooling and free health (especially for young and for those in desperate need for medical treatment) is pretty essential.

Well, yeah, we have this election thing going on, thanks for the advice.

But insofar as "taxing the rich more" (which point you tried to sneak in after several red herrings, don't think that wasn't noticed), I'd rather put it as removing loopholes available to the rich which the poor cannot access. Things like treating investment income on a different taxation scale, y'know?

I bet if we removed that loophole, and the loopholes that allowed large corporations to pay little or no tax at all, we could probably fund the free health point you've made.

We already have free education even if it's hamstrung by financial realities like the ones I pointed out above. What's really funny is that 140 years ago, the drive for free public education was pushed by business, not out of altruism, but because the Industrial Revolution required workers who could read, be it instructions or equations.

The businesses writing off all their taxes for a number of years seem to be complaining about the system they themselves built for education ... yet they are the ones benefitting from the school's output.

And -- another thing, you keep repeating strawman arguments. Several of us here have acknowledged the importance of having affordable health care. Oddly enough, it's the big insurance companies which seem to make it unaffordable.

There's a contradiction in your position that I don't think you yourself see.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thumpalumpacus's post
04-10-2016, 01:53 AM
RE: Do or Die
The other thing that hacks me off is that the elite are so goddamn short-sighted. I don't know about elsewhere but definitely over here there is a small elite class, a small middle class and a vast gaping void of poor. Especially in Zim, there's not a lot of money to go around and all of it goes to keeping the rich happy. Zim is an extreme case, but the point is, the country could easily support a much larger class of rich people. No one there *needs* to go hungry, but they do. The rich who are there aren't super rich by global standards and if they let the economy grow without playing silly buggers there'd be enough for everyone and more left over, and they'd still be at least *as* rich as they are now. They just wouldn't be *more* rich than 99% of the population. It seems to me that they prefer to be rich in a nation of poor people than wealthy in a nation of people with nearly equal weath, despite that they'd probably be even better off then. I see it in Zim but I don't hold out any hope that rich people are different elsewhere.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
04-10-2016, 02:48 AM
RE: Do or Die
(04-10-2016 01:53 AM)morondog Wrote:  The other thing that hacks me off is that the elite are so goddamn short-sighted.

Why does the dog lick his balls? Big Grin

As long as they can afford this....and as long as they have supporters from the very classes they are exploiting...why not?

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Deesse23's post
04-10-2016, 03:40 AM
RE: Do or Die
(04-10-2016 12:06 AM)morondog Wrote:  Spoken like a true privileged kid.
I paid my own way through university.
I took up a job doing seasonal work while I was at school and saved up money.
When I got to university I qualified for the maximum govt assistance because my parents didn't make enough money.
Is that privileged to you?

I applied myself at school (a rural public school), I worked and my achievements are due to my application and my work, where is the privilege?


(04-10-2016 12:06 AM)morondog Wrote:  For fuck's sake man. There are not enough high wage jobs that everyone can have one.
Not everyone applies themselves at school. Those that do, get decent enough grades to be ahead of the pack. Doesn't matter about your socio-economic background. At least that is my experience.

(04-10-2016 12:06 AM)morondog Wrote:  Even if everyone got exactly the same opportunities in life some people would be poor.
Not everyone takes up those opportunities, not everyone applies themselves. Some people dream of being pop stars, dream of being sport stars, some people just want to get quick money without having to put in much effort, Some people want to do a trade rather than a corporate job, or perhaps run a business or a farm or orchard, for whatever reason there are many people not applying themselves in school and not getting the grades. That doesn't have to be you. You can apply yourself and get the grades and get the corporate job. The opportunity is there. It is upto you to take it.

(04-10-2016 12:06 AM)morondog Wrote:  And it wouldn't be for lack of effort, it would be because once someone is a little bit rich it becomes easier to get a little bit more rich.
This kind of thinking means a person assumes they are underprivileged and then they give up. What I am saying is that you can apply yourself, get the grades and see where that takes you. Don't just give up.

(04-10-2016 12:06 AM)morondog Wrote:  You seem to think that the best way to do things is to have a free for all resources grab and everyone must be happy with whatever resources they get, and if they happen to get less it's because they didn't grab hard enough.
There are limited resources and we must compete for them. That is a fact of life. It makes no sense to assume we are all entitled to the same amount regardless of the effort that we put in. Reality doesn't work like that and it never will.

(04-10-2016 12:06 AM)morondog Wrote:  You have this ridiculous infatuation with holy profits but why the fuck should profits matter? Why are you so hell bent on giving corporations money with no rules?
Where have I ever said that there should be no rules on corporations?

(04-10-2016 12:06 AM)morondog Wrote:  And the fact of the matter is that the system *is* rigged for the rich. They're the ones with power and they sure as fuck aren't giving it away. Now you're saying to those who're unfortunate enough not to have as much "it's your fault you're poor anyway, don't complain that the system is rigged".
I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying, if you are fortunate to live in a country that provides free quality education then make the most of it, create opportunities for yourself.

This all started because I was saying that encouraging businesses creates jobs, rather than supporting a system reliant on taxing the rich and giving to the poor, or artificially raising wages.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-10-2016, 03:48 AM
RE: Do or Die
(04-10-2016 01:41 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  And -- another thing, you keep repeating strawman arguments. Several of us here have acknowledged the importance of having affordable health care. Oddly enough, it's the big insurance companies which seem to make it unaffordable.

There's a contradiction in your position that I don't think you yourself see.
In NZ we don't really need health insurance. If you need to go to hospital then it is all free. Doctor appointments for kids is free. So I don't really know how your system in US works.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: