Spew All About Politics Here

[nemafakei]

Again, more miscomprehension of my system on your part, Emprworm.

Yes, I accept that I need to do a lot of work on how work will be monitored.

"GO GET A SHOVEL YOU LAZY WIMP AND MAYBE WE WILL PAY YOU NEXT WEEK"

More like...

"Well, we know you are capable of writing two programs a week, so we'll pay you half of what we pay the poor devils who are working far more."

To the diggers...

"Digging this muck isn't really the best way to help society. We will pay you more to be educated; once educated, you will be more useful to us all. You don't really want to be digging muck with a shovel, do you, when you could be operating a tractor?"

[emprworm]

GO GET A SHOVEL YOU LAZY WIMP AND MAYBE WE WILL PAY YOU NEXT WEEK"

More like...

"Well, we know you are capable of writing two programs a week, so we'll pay you half of what we pay the poor devils who are working far more."

and this is the part that is offensive. if you think people are going to be happy with this kind of bigotry, you are in for a wake up call. your goal to eliminate poverty, Nema, is a noble one indeed. But your citizens will be utterly discontent and thus, your system will collapse. A discontent populus will not tolerate their government and will naturally resist it, hence it will be a failure.

If John Doe writes one program while sipping tea on his yacht, and that program does a great deal for humanity, it is a massive accomplishment. That you would find a way to penalize him for such a program instead of reward him, i can GUARANTEE YOU he will not be motivated to ever write a program for your bigoted government again. You think motivation comes from a vaccuum, but you have another thing coming. WHen people make an accomplishment INDEPENDENT of how much calories they burned, they expect recognition. You equate work with calories, this will lead to miserable people. Every now and then someone makes an accomplishment that has vast positive effects for people. These accomplishments must be rewarded with vast rewards. A society that pays its workers by work effort alone is not good enough. It will fail. You must ALSO pay workers by their accomplishments. Lets take a man who invents a new circuit system that uses light wavelength instead of "binary on/off". Because there are 4 primary colors in the spectrum: red, green, yellow, blue- every circuit on the motherboard has 4 possible states instead of 2 possible states. A tiny chip that has 4 switches for ON/OFF has 16 possibible states. Now it would have 256 possible states. A 128MB RAM chip that has millions of capacitors would instead need only thousands. Computer speeds would increase by factors of thousands of times. Such an accomplishment would literally take humanity from one technological age into another. I honestly believe someday someone will invent that. And here is your bigoted councils judging him and punishing him becaue he was working on his yacht while bathing in the warm sun drinking strawberry martinis. That is repugnant. He should be rewarded with 10 more yachts. When your society does not recognize its geniouses- it WILL crumble. And people who makes a major contribution to your society that deserve great reward may instead get punishment. Well, I can promise you this- yes I promise you this: they will never be motivated to serve your bigoted society again.

[BRAVO]

i agree*

[nemafakei]

"That you would find a way to penalize him for such a program instead of reward him"

I do not penalise him for writing one program.

But, if he can within reason, produce two in a working day, he will be encouraged to do so.

"And here is your bigoted councils judging him and punishing him "

Where?

How?

You're taking extreme examples, and, in all honesty, I would guess that the councils councils would have more common sense than blindly follow literal rules (that is the whole point of the councils) and give the man more.

For it is the councils' job to judge extreme cases where there may be loopholes in to close a literal text.

"And people who makes a major contribution to your society that deserve great reward may instead get punishment"

While they're developing this system, they will almost certainly be at the top of their payscale, if they are committed to it. If not, I doubt they will get anything done.

"And what will that be? OTHER PEOPLE OF COURSE"

Nope. Compared to their own capability.

I have also another idea about payment. Retirement. We can base the retirement age for each person on acheivements and effort. How does this sound? Would you care to suggest part of a system that would suggest how this would work to solve some of the problems in the general system you've been agonising about?

[emprworm]

yes, Bravo. The US is proof of that. The reason why the US is the technological leader of the world is because geniouses here are appreciated and rewarded. When they make a massive accomplishment, they see massive reward. Those who are envious and jealous of those rewards- well that is their own moral greed and shameful envy. The day a society stops rewarding its geniouses is the day that those genioses say "#$#$ YOU" to their society.

[emprworm]

well you see, Nema, your councils have too much freedom. What happens if a man disagrees with a council's decision? What recourse would he have? If there is no "letter of the law" then your system woul be grossly unfair because one council may judge one man differently than another over the same thing. This is not fair. I dont know if you've ever worked in a large company, but I can tell you the worst demoralizing thing that can happen in your work environment is seeing preferential treatment of one person over everyone else. This is why you have LETTERS OF LAW- it prevents the "spirit of the law" from making partial decisions that are not unilateral for all people. Your system is not a system of equality.

Regarding retirement:; perhaps, so long as accomplishments are rewarded independed of effort.

[BRAVO]

i agree but dont be so agressive lol its politics not anarchy

[nemafakei]

"The reason why the US is the technological leader"

Japan?

But anyway, The point about the basic governance in place is that the councils are free to make exceptions in exceptional circumstances (eg 'geniuses'). These really should be taken on a case-by-case basis (you can't relly generalise about such as geniuses) - for which councils are ideally suited.

As to the councils having too much freedom (Who was it complaining about freedom... never mind), I did outline processes of appeal in my first post, I think...

"So decisions should only be made once - this considerably reduces red tape, but appears to leave no route for appeal. This is not true, however. If the situation (or evidence) has changed considerably since the initial decision was made, then that decision will not be made again if an appeal is mounted - the decision could well be a different one, since it will be made concerning different circumstances, even if the topic and question are the same."

Moreover, each decision can be divided into things like research, criteria setting, fulfilment of criteria, etc, which will make for a totally logical (and therefore repeatable) decision.

[emprworm]

the US is actually. Japan does have a history of innovation. They are brilliant at taking what the US thinks up and mass producing it. However Japan saw great advancement when the Demming system of business (US based) was implemented over there. Most of Japan's great technological achievement is the result of US based influence in their economy post WWII. Japan's economy also rewards accomplishment. You just dont see advancement where accomplishment is not rewarded.

[emprworm]

hey look, Nema. I do not think the US capitalist system is the ideal one. I think its the best one in the world today, but by no means is it the best POSSIBLE. In fact, our government seems to be getting worse. I see the US government on a decline.

About your system: NO poverty- I like this.

but that is about all I like.

1. Your councils operate too freely without a letter of the law. Inequality will result. Unless you have a letter of the law, there will be no recource for a citicezn who disagrees with the council. All citicenz MUST have an absolute law with which to appeal to that has full authority over any subjective whim of a council. Spirit of the Law is good, but it is unacceptable unless there is a letter of the law that keeps the spirit of the law accountable.

2. Your reward system breeds discontentment. You reward work and effort, yet you have no system in place to reward accomplishment. Work and effort are meaningless. Fred and Bob each have a task: Move an 300 KG rock 10 feet. Fred works 8 hours pushing as hard as he can. HE PUSHES AND PUSHES AND PUSHES- of course the rock goes no where. Bob thinks about his task, and he finds a sturdy branch and makes a lever using a smaller rock. Using leverage, he moves the rock in 20 minutes. You can work and work and work and work all day and get nothing done. This is BAD for society. WOrk that ACCOMPLISHES is what matters. UNless you reward ACCOMPLISHMENT your society will fall.

3. Greed will always be around with everyone. As long as no one is impoverished, there is nothing wrong with a man wanting a nice house, a yacht, a skiing vacation, blueberry pancakes, etc. Luxury items should exist, yet I have no idea in your system how they would.

4. People naturally resent having their "effort" judged by another person. This breeds agony in people and I do not suspect citicenz will tolerate that very well.

5. You say people's efforts will be judged against themselves. This is impossible since you really have no idea what anyone can natively do.

6. Unless competition exists and is fostered, accomplishment will go no where. I do not see competitive elements in your society.

7. I have yet to see any moral basis for your government. YOu have not told me if the rights of the people are granted by government or are inherent. You have not explained moral law, whether it is subjective or objective.

[nemafakei]

Remember that the no poverty thing stretches quite far. It is, effectively a huge insurance policy (think how subject you could be to bad fortune, even in the US), and eliminating poverty now is far more important than anything capitalism offers. Plus there's the advantage of objective decisions, rather than greedy ones. There's the fact that armies will no longer really be needed (antagonistic/MAD needed now - think of the huge defence budget etc). And no war would be a definite plus for the world. Like any of this, yet?

There'll be fairness in the system, finally giving EVERYONE an equal chance in life. And there'll be total flexibility in law, allowing for it to change with circumstances, rather than end up contorting community that individuals work around law.

"without a letter of the law"

There will be a letter of the law. But it's just meant to be taken in spirit (something which must be explained very clearly in the law). This is to allow councils to correct the law. The law is there for the people, not the other way around. It MUST be flexible, else we will either stagnate, or the law will get left behind.

"Your reward system breeds discontentment"

No-one has a better way of getting half the world out of poverty. The system may be initially uncomfortable, but once worn in, smoothened out (flexibility again), it will become more suitable.

"You can work and work and work and work all day and get nothing done"

Then you are not doing good to society - so you are not doing things in a way which will be rewarded. Remember, the basis is the idea that you are paid for how much useful work you do toward society compared to the amount you are reckoned to be able to do.

"Luxury items should exist, yet I have no idea in your system how they would."

On your demand, I explained exactly how a restaurant would be created, providing luxuries.

You, howeever, have failed to prove how luxury items cannot exist in my system: You have asserted this blindly, with no logical thread.

"People naturally resent having their "effort" judged by another person"

I'm going to have to work on that... but remember, that's what happens indirectly with capitalism now. (Perople judge your product unworthy, and they don't pay you)

"Unless competition exists and is fostered, accomplishment will go no where"

Again, little more than analagies which have been solved and bling assertion.

If someone is the first to have an idea in a capitalist system, there is no competition; yet it gets done. Why not here?

"You say people's efforts will be judged against themselves. This is impossible since you really have no idea what anyone can natively do"

There are ways of testing... I think a heavily altered on Morrisby Report should do the trick. I agree, I need to fill out more detail.

"You have not explained moral law, whether it is subjective or objective."

Law is about making the right decisions, not upholding vague concepts of "rights" I've made this clear from the start. It should be totally objective - when someone is clearly in the wrong, it is the job of the law to account for this, not to ignore it for existing litigation.

[Anathema]

Exactly where was the restaurant part? Seems to be burried rather deep.

First of all, if a person were a developing scientist and were paid no more then a farmer.

Emprworm, you wouldn't even try to develop something new because there is nothing in it.

I would still put effort into research because I want to achieve something and be remembered as more then a trivial scientist.

Nemas system wouldn't work in most western countries, especially the US, or at least not at this point. We raise our kids to be greedy.

Let's see- why would you want to own a yaught? Is it because you want to enjoy something 90 % of the people will never enjoy? It's possible to be happy without excessive luxury items. (your Orange Julius is not an excessive luxury)

About the greed thing- people work solely to achieve material wealth, or at least according to you. But they will never achieve that wich they want. Most people will never own a yaught. Capitalism divides the people in two. The donkey rider and the donkey. The rider sits on the donkey holding a stick with a carrot in front of the donkey. The donkey will walk (the thing the rider wants to achieve) but the donkey will never achieve what he wants- the carrot. The worst thing is, the donkey genuinely believes he will sometime reach the carrot and has no idea he is exploited by the rider.

[emprworm]

Is it because you want to enjoy something 90 % of the people will never enjoy? It's possible to be happy without excessive luxury items.

excessive only according to your opinion. When guy like Earthnuker lord over all humanity and say "This is excessive....this isnt" then we have a major problem. Thankfully, this isn't the case. I know that I dont need the likes of any socialist telling me what I can and cannot have in life. If I want a yacht, I dont need you telling me its too "excessive". If it is excessive for YOU than just dont get one. Plain and simple. But leave me alone.

[Anathema]

You want a yaught- yet 90 % of the people will never be able to buy a yaught. I think I can call that an excessive luxury, unless you consider the average lifestyle to be poor. Go ahead and try to get your yaugh, I wish you all the luck you need, because you will need it.

[emprworm]

You want a yaught- yet 90 % of the people will never be able to buy a yaught.

big deal. If me and my buddies build ourselves a yacht, and take it out and have parties on the sea, and if people are jealous of it....THEN SCREW THOSE GREEDY JEALOUS LOSERS. Jealous, envious greed breeds hatred. But that isn't my fault...its THEIRS. They can build there own yacht.

Socialist greed is incurable.

Hhere is the socialist Motto: (say this outloud)

"Whats yours is mine!"

[Anathema]

"Whats yours is mine!"

Sounds more like anarchism.

Yeah right, go build a yaught with some other peeps. But even assuming you can build one that doesn't sink like a brick after putting 10 metres distance between you and the shore, it isn't yours- only partially. If I'd let George Lucas make a movie solely for me, it would be an excessive luxury. If you let millions of others share in that joy it isn't. See the difference?

[emprworm]

i'd gladly share a yacht with 10 people. they will all be my buddies, and yes building it is entirely feasible given we all combine our skills. and YES people will be envious....but TOO BAD

[Edric O]

Yes, how DARE those poverty-stricken hungry children be jealous of your yacht! How DARE they ask you to give them a piece of bread! Let them die in misery! You need a yacht! ::)

You do not understand socialism, Emprworm. And you do not understand my system, or Nema's.

Go ahead, have your yacht and ignore the cries of agony and hunger all around you. May the Lord have mercy on your soul.

[pointybum]

Yes, how DARE those poverty-stricken hungry children be jealous of your yacht! How DARE they ask you to give them a piece of bread! Let them die in misery! You need a yacht! ::)

You do not understand socialism, Emprworm. And you do not understand my system, or Nema's.

Go ahead, have your yacht and ignore the cries of agony and hunger all around you. May the Lord have mercy on your soul.

Quite frankly, if the guy knew anything he wouldnt be here droning away on a daily basis, he'd be living the fruits of his so-called theory of life, the universe, and the toilet paper he wipes his arse with. yawn

[emprworm]

Yes, how DARE those poverty-stricken hungry children be jealous of your yacht! How DARE they ask you to give them a piece of bread! Let them die in misery! You need a yacht!

You do not understand socialism, Emprworm. And you do not understand my system, or Nema's.

Go ahead, have your yacht and ignore the cries of agony and hunger all around you. May the Lord have mercy on your soul.

lol! hahaha.

Edric if you would have read the conversation, I obtained my yacht in NEMAS system.

lol. :D

[Edric O]

If you obtained your yacht in Nema's system, that means your argument about "his system not allowing luxuries" is wrong. Thank you for proving Nema's point. :)

[nemafakei]

"We raise our kids to be greedy"

Half the point of my system is that greediness can no longer really harm others, indeed, you will only get more material wealth by doing services to the community.

This means we can start to accept that we all should be helping each other out, not knocking each other down.

[The_Sadukar]

(have once again gone mad bue the over reading of this thread)

[Dunenewt]

Nema's system will only work in theory

[nemafakei]

Ok... would you please elaborate on whay not in practice?