Comment Re:Oh boy, here we go... (Score 5, Insightful) 413
The Republicans and Democrats appear to have given up trying to work together. Government will remain a mess until that changes.
It could be worse. They could be working together.
The Republicans and Democrats appear to have given up trying to work together. Government will remain a mess until that changes.
It could be worse. They could be working together.
You're saying that if I've been paying taxes all my life, and I have cancer and I could be cured for $50,000, but I don't have $50,000, the government should leave me to die, like that guy in the NEJM article http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/1...
Sounds good to me. Fuck off. I'm tired of the pretentious, entitled parasites who can be bought for an empty promise.
In reality, it's not capitalism that drives trade. Consumers drive trade, and consumers don't care whether their consumption is funded by capitalism or socialism.
The humans of a hundred thousand years ago would probably like a lot of the stuff we have now (say like comfy homes that can keep out large predators and a plentiful food supply that means they don't have to work to live). But despite their demand, they didn't get what they wanted.
Consumers don't make the stuff or services we use. They don't deliver them either. There is a vast, almost completely private infrastructure that does that. Consumption doesn't inherently create or do anything.
Do you seriously believe that switching to LED bulbs and driving a car that gets only 29mpg (which is terrible gas mileage in reality, only relative to your other gas guzzler does it seem reasonable) will achieve anything? Even if every single person in the world did this, it would make no effective difference.
It would do more than completely eliminating coal burning plants. Transportation generates a similar amount of CO2 to coal burning power plants. And in addition, massive reduction in electricity demand would reduce the number of coal power plants.
Some things simply cannot be solved by laissez faire capitalism. In fact it creates many problems, which is obvious to anyone willing to open their eyes for two seconds. That does not mean that the solution is the opposite, a totally planned central economy, but a sensible mix of the two. The knee-jerk reactionary repugnance to anything with even the mildest whiff of small-s 'socialism' is seriously damaging. It damages the health and happiness of every person, and now it is seriously damaging the planet. Nothing is black or white, perhaps a little subtlety should be given its chance. People have been sold the right-wing view for so long now they've forgotten what the middle ground even is. Centre-right policies are seen as far left, which is ridiculous.
It's not a mild whiff of "socialism". It's a massive restructuring of our society and economy on shaky grounds. What happens when the next imaginary ecothreat comes through? If we continue to use the same decision-making process as we're doing here, then it's going to be a long stream of poor decisions and a descent either into regional dissolution or even a new dark age, if the whole world should buy in for the duration.
If that doesn't make a difference, then those other countries will be committing ecological suicide.
Economic suicide doesn't work that way especially if the US's reduction turns out to be useless no matter the reason. It's the countries that make the pointless sacrifice that will be suiciding not the ones that don't.
Whatever merits the current market (or any free market, if possible), favoring individuals unequally with more than 7 billion people around is bound to problems
Problems that don't really exist, let us note. I have no problem with exceptional individuals being favored over 7 billion or so people who aren't exceptional.
Are you saying that it is morally better to be opposing Stalin than to be a Jew?
Are you saying it would be better for the Moon to be made of red cheese than green cheese? See how dumb non sequitur leading questions sound?
If I pay taxes, it's my money too.
There's always some excuse why you deserve it. I don't buy that it is your money and I don't buy that you deserve expensive health care that you are unwilling to pay for yourself.
The "totalitarian theory" that makes such an equation does not seek knowledge about both concepts, it intends a relativization of facist and, significantly, National Socialist crimes.
Which is reasonable, because ideology is irrelevant to whether a state is totalitarian or not. But sure, being murdered by a Communist is clearly morally better than being murdered by a Nazi.
That doesn't sound like a good deal to me. What would I get under socialism?
Heh, quite a bit till you run out of other peoples' money. Funny how many of the socialism arguments boil down to greed.
since the value of property is defined by economic activity
It's not. For example, a fancy mansion is quite expensive, but it doesn't generate or represent economic activity. Instead it is contrary status signaling - namely, I've expended a considerable amount of wealth to build and maintain this mansion.
If all else fails, lower your standards.
