Re: virus: The Capitalist vs the Socialist.
Sodom (sodom@ma.ultranet.com)
Tue, 14 Oct 1997 11:43:16 -0400
Nathaniel Hall wrote:
>
> > <Snip>
>
> Sodom responds:
>
> > This will be hard to follow because of all the breaks, but I'll try to
> > be succinct:
> >
> > Yes, the market will drive the prices up high enought to switch at some
> > point, however, prudence is valuable here. If you had to buy water like
> > you do gasoline, you would not wait til you were out to replace it. You
> > would be prepared long in advance. I know the economics of it well, but
> > the biggest reason it is not switched is not the cost of changing, but
> > the loss of money to the wealthy.
>
> Your perfectly free to buy a car that runs on say hydrogen but you know as well as I do
> the price of making a handful of such things. It is the cost of changing that keeps us
> from going somewhere else. For me it would mean getting rid of thousands of dollars in
> capital. (My car and my truck). It pretty much the same thing for your typical
> American. If someone came up with a car that managed to do 100 miles per buck it
> wouldn't matter that rich toes were being stepped on because other rich toes,
> (investment capitalists) , would be running to back such a thing if it existed. The
> wealthy only get wealth arbitrarily as the result of government tinkering. Otherwise
> they have to EARN it by giving us something of value in exchange for it.
>
> > Oil is power and just like politics,
> > people will not give up this power at ALL costs, including war and
> > destruction. We invaded Iraq not to insure democracy, or to save
> > Kuwaitis, but to insure our oil gets to us.
>
> This is true. But the butcher of Baghdad had it coming to him all the same. Too bad we
> did not have a man of principle at the helm at the time.
>
> >
> >
> > You are wrong in your facts about wealth and life expectancy. There is a
> > close correlation, and poverty does kill.
>
> Then why argue? You have just agreed with me.
>
> > But the longest lived people
> > in the world are the lower class Japanese who survive on rice and
> > vegetables. The U.S., which is wealthy, has the highest instances of
> > Obeciety, heart disease, cancer and a dozen other "rich" diseases which
> > keep our life expectancy lower than most other industrialized nations.
>
> True but that only proves there are other factors besides wealth which increase life
> expectancy. That is not the point of this discussion.
>
> >
> >
> > AS for the car, NO, i do not own one, and I doubt I will ever own a
> > gasoline powered car again. They are too inefficient and costly in my
> > opinion. I do miss them greatly - very greatly, and do occasionally rent
> > a car if I have out of town guests, or classes or something like that.
> > My transportaion costs total about 80.00 a month and I use public
> > transportation every day.
>
> But you do miss the car! Are you still going to call it evil or do you like wishing for
> things you believe to be evil?
>
> > You seem to be a staunch capitalist, which although I do think that
> > capitalism is essential for a healthy freedom and growth, i also think
> > that it is prone to abuse by the greedy and selfish. The U.S.A uses 1/4
> > of the worlds resources. I would gladly give up a little of my "wealth"
> > to help bring the overall standards up, and i do not think that
> > capitalism is interested in equality for all humanity. i am interested
> > in global equality, and unless the U.S of A shows a little more "empathy
> > and vision" i doubt it is will change to a benevolent nation.
> >
> > Sodom
> > I HAVE SEEN THE LIGHT, BUT I HAD TO CALL 1900pollute
>
> There is much hope for you Sodom. You have already tossed out faith as a valid means to
> knowledge but you are still enamored with it's morality : Altruism. Let me ask you a
> simple question: Do you think you have to make some excuse for the fact that you exist?
> If you believe in altruism you do. Morality under that code means that sacrifice is the
> moral and the good and self interest the bad. Why is it that good? How come others
> have a right to use you but you cannot morally claim such a thing for yourself? You use
> the word "greed" as an example of evil, but does simply wanting the good things in life
> something which is bad in and of itself? In a sacrifice someone wins and someone loses,
> but in a fair trade both sides win or the trade does not happen. Something for
> something. Notice I said fair: as long as you are honest about what you have to trade,
> you and the other person who does likewise, you trade your rationality , your reason,
> your thinking MIND with that of the person you trade with. This is the proper morality
> of creatures such as we that live by THINKING. Far from an evil code rational self
> interest it is in fact the most moral way for people to deal with each other! You've
> thrown away their superstition: it is now time for you to throw away the whip they say
> you should be using on yourself! The Nateman : I have seen the meaning of life, and it
> is I !
Sorry to take so long in response, I gave the computer 2 days off, But
I'm back.
It seems for the most part we agree. I am simply willing to pay more,
and legally force others to, to eliminate REALLY inefficient things. I
also think that the alternative to gasoline is so hight, because the
country as a whole is fighting against it. It is still embroiled in the
"Bigger is better mentality, and this causes a lot of neurosis' about
changing.
But, to answer your questions?
>Do you think you have to make some excuse for the fact that you exist?
well, I've tried and tried to make an excuse for my existence, but
no-one thinks I am sincere. But really, NO. there is no reason that a
preponderance of evidence can give me other that these two reasons: Man
evolved with his ape cousins as a response to leaving the rainforests
and foraging over great distances. As for me personally, I was planned
by my parents, they got pregnant the first time, and then biology took
over and voila!
I am "sypmathetic" to all life - to a point. Would I sacrafice myself
for the good of the whole? probably, if I was sure that the benifits
towards humanity or the Earth were great enough.
I do not believe that society has the right to dictate to anyone, or
control anyone except those that pose a "health risk" to those around
them. Violent people belong in prison, or a place with other violent
people. No one has the right to use another without there explicit
permission.
Simply wanting the good things in life is not greed. I play the stocks,
work hard and happy for pretty good money, and like having the best
computer and music equipment money can buy. For someone to be greedy, in
my opinion, they are willing to knowingly bring others into harms way
for profit or power. They are willing to lie or steal or otherwise be
dishonest: this is greed.
I do not think that capitalism is the best means of human enrichment. I
feel that at the moment though, it is. Technology will eventually make
capitalism obsolete. When all the needs af a majority of the population
can be met at virtually no cost, then capitalism will give way to the
next generation of large social structure. We are not there yet,
obviously.
At this point in humanities existence, the two areas I think we should
focus on are technological advancement and education to improve future
technological advancement.
Sodom
I HAVE SEEN THE LIGHT, AND NATEMAN WAS ORBITING WAYYYYY OUT THERE