|
dranger7070
|
12-27-2009, 01:34 AM
Post subject: Zeitgeist Addendum - This is for you wuf :)
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Wake up in the mornin feelin' like P. Diddy
Posts: 2,524
|
|
I was working gym duty today and I met this Lance Corporal that was a Sergeant Scout/Sniper before he got busted down in rank, and we started talking about this shit. I can't explain it really well (ask BooG) but just watch this movie. Its kind of mind blowing. It's easy to believe, but at the same time seems so sci-fi/impossible/improbable that its hard NOT to scoff at it. Idk, you guys decide.
Link on the left with the giant purple eye:
http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/
Edit: This is like 2 hours long, so make sure you have some time to watch, and pay attention to this.
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
spoonitnow
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: IRC Chat Room
Posts: 5,406
|
|
Welcome to 2007.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ripptyde
I only have 2 simple rules when I am coaching a new student.
Rule # 1: don't ask questions
Rule # 2: don't ask questions
I have no interest in discussing strategy with a protege'. Your job is to remain quiet and listen. I have a very systematic approach that I will share with the right candidate and I promise that I will turn you into a force of nature and show you elements of the game of poker that you never knew existed.
|
|
|
bigred
|
|
PROFESSIONAL TROLL
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Nest of Douchebags
Posts: 2,184
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by spoonitnow
Welcome to 2007.
|
|
|
LOL OPERATIONS
|
|
dranger7070
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Wake up in the mornin feelin' like P. Diddy
Posts: 2,524
|
|
Thanks for another awesome one-liner spoon. Some of us don't spend our whole lives on the computer so we don't always come across EVERYTHING the EXACT minute it comes out. -.-
|
|
|
|
spoonitnow
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: IRC Chat Room
Posts: 5,406
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dranger7070
Thanks for another awesome one-liner spoon. Some of us don't spend our whole lives on the computer so we don't always come across EVERYTHING the EXACT minute it comes out. -.-
|
If this had been a week later I could quote your post here and replace "minute" with "decade".
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ripptyde
I only have 2 simple rules when I am coaching a new student.
Rule # 1: don't ask questions
Rule # 2: don't ask questions
I have no interest in discussing strategy with a protege'. Your job is to remain quiet and listen. I have a very systematic approach that I will share with the right candidate and I promise that I will turn you into a force of nature and show you elements of the game of poker that you never knew existed.
|
|
|
bigred
|
|
PROFESSIONAL TROLL
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Nest of Douchebags
Posts: 2,184
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dranger7070
Thanks for another awesome one-liner spoon. Some of us don't spend our whole lives on the computer so we don't always come across EVERYTHING the EXACT minute it comes out. -.-
|
Some of us have been around long enough to know of the search feature. If something is so crazy (and not new) that you can't believe it hasn't been posted...it probably has.
|
|
LOL OPERATIONS
|
|
Deanglow
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: lol
Posts: 2,443
|
|
i'd rather gauge my eyes out with sandpaper covered dull chisels dipped in shit than watch that "documentary"
|
|
|
|
wufwugy
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,660
|
|
Wow, that was ridiculously awesome. It gives off a rather conspiratorial vibe, makes some small logical and factual mistakes, but pretty much got the fundamentals exactly correct. I kinda wish I'd watched it earlier, but didn't due to the whole conspiracy vibe thingy.
It was somewhat disjointed, and they didn't completely tie in the hypothesis that the monetary system itself is equal to the for-profit system. The argument for the inequality and oppressiveness of the for-profit system is spot on, though. Unfortunately, this is lost on the vast majority of people. I guess that's what happens when lives are sheltered and critical thought is discouraged all within a self-perpetuating system. It is indisputable fact that median standard of living does not reflect resources, and that power perpetuates itself via oppression. When you know nothing but horrible things, you tend to think of those horrible things as normal. And unfortunately, civilization is largely based upon those horrible things.
BTW, the film completely failed at explaining a logistical way to revolutionize the system, and I personally believe that, while it's hypothetically possible, it will never happen due to the nature of things
|
|
|
|
a500lbgorilla
|
|
JESUS TAKE THE KEYBOARD
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: This room is a good place to be
Posts: 8,379
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Deanglow
i'd rather gauge my eyes out with sandpaper covered dull chisels dipped in shit than watch that "documentary"
|
Still worth watching. I love the conspiracy "docus" that so capably change my mind. Like having the "Did we really land on the Moon?" vids make me think twice about what I know is fact.
|
|
|
|
wufwugy
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,660
|
|
It wasn't even close to what I expected. The film is basically about how the absolute pursuit for money is fucking us all over (some more than others), which is very duhhhhhhhhh. Even though the numbers back that up 100%, the vast majority of people still remain oblivious.
It's not really that fringe of an idea. It only appears so since power perpetuation is so subtle and pervasive, but as it is becoming less subtle, more people are becoming disillusioned. Elizabeth Warren, for example, due to her experience as chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel for TARP, has admitted to being blown away by the power and self-serving actions of the banks. And she's about as legit an academic is it gets
|
|
|
|
flomo
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: mashing potatoes
Posts: 878
|
|
FUCK the BANKS.
I'm closing my checking account.
Suck on that STUPID BANKS.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigred
Protect dog
|
|
|
dranger7070
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Wake up in the mornin feelin' like P. Diddy
Posts: 2,524
|
|
It seems I'm not the only one not to have heard of this...
|
|
|
|
spoonitnow
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: IRC Chat Room
Posts: 5,406
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dranger7070
It seems I'm not the only one not to have heard of this...
|
Yeah there are still a few dozen Taliban fuckers living in caves who haven't heard of it. Congrats.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ripptyde
I only have 2 simple rules when I am coaching a new student.
Rule # 1: don't ask questions
Rule # 2: don't ask questions
I have no interest in discussing strategy with a protege'. Your job is to remain quiet and listen. I have a very systematic approach that I will share with the right candidate and I promise that I will turn you into a force of nature and show you elements of the game of poker that you never knew existed.
|
|
|
givememyleg
|
|
WHO YA GONNA CALL?!??
Administrator
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: ISHPERMING MISHIGEN
Posts: 5,042
|
|
yeah i watched this earlier this year... really made me think about things i had already been thinking about. i highly recommend everyone watch it. it doesn't even really have that much of a "conspiracy nut" vibe.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wufwugy
BTW, the film completely failed at explaining a logistical way to revolutionize the system, and I personally believe that, while it's hypothetically possible, it will never happen due to the nature of things
|
yeah, it's a nice thought but i can never see it happening. i'm assuming that is how nearly everyone thinks who watches it. would be nice if they went more in depth on how it's possible, perhaps the idea will be refined in the coming years... it still is a relatively new concept.
|
Get your own badge! Click profile at the top and FTR Badge from the left nav.
"The Dragon in My Garage" by Carl Sagan
I say onto you, I've felt the dragon! I felt the touch of his tail, the breath of his fire, and I know without a shadow of a doubt that the dragon exists!
|
|
wufwugy
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,660
|
|
The problem with revolutionizing the system is that money talks, and money will quash revolution. Control is a feedback loop i.e. having control provokes the ability to increase control. Another problem is that EVERYBODY has to be on board. Like 70% of the world middle class has to know wtf is up, but that will never happen. The reason that's necessary is partly due to numbers, but also for example if the US completely revolutionized we would find ourselves becoming far less powerful and a different region taking over as a epicenter of control.
Honestly, we already live in a massively authoritarian world. In a sci-fi sense, it's often about billions of enslaved to a super small fraction of the population, but reality is that that can't really happen due to being too lopsided. What we currently have is pretty much close to the worst IMO. We currently have a super small fraction of super elite, a chunk of sub-elite (middle class), and the vast majority of everybody else getting royally fucked (billions living in poverty and essentially enslaved).
I don't know the numbers, but I would guess that modern middle class is only about 10% of the world population, and when you think about it, that's about how much 'sub-elite' population you would need in order to control the rest of the 90%. Obviously, things are getting worse, like that 10% is looking more like 9.6% or something.
And as far as the movie having a conspiratorial vibe and all....that kinda is bleh, but reality is that's not what is important about the film. The crux was all in rather verifiable and striking statistics and logic. Like how the top contributors to both POTUS candidates are bet hedging banks. That should be a gigantic eye opener, but sadly it's not. Humans are very good at not recognizing egregious problems even if they're standing right in front of them
|
|
|
|
boost
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 706
|
|
meh.. the middle class ftmp are volunteer slaves with added perks imo.
|
|
|
|
Penneywize
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 885
|
|
Learn economics, not crazy-bullshit conspiracy theories imo.
The for-profit motive is exactly what produces the best outcomes for society. I'm paraphrasing, but here it is: "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our necessities but of their advantages."
It's pretty hard to sum up classical economic theory in the space of one post, but I think the above quote from Adam Smith does as good a job as any brief attempt could. I haven't watched or read this Zeitgeist shit but it I feel that, like most conspiracy theories, it can probably be defeated by rational thought and education.
The sad thing is, corruption is the number one reason that issues of income inequality and other societal ills exist. Not capitalism. But hey, bandwagon-hopping's just a lot sexier than using your brain, isn't it.
|
|
|
|
boost
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 706
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
Learn economics, not crazy-bullshit conspiracy theories imo.
The for-profit motive is exactly what produces the best outcomes for society. I'm paraphrasing, but here it is: "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our necessities but of their advantages."
It's pretty hard to sum up classical economic theory in the space of one post, but I think the above quote from Adam Smith does as good a job as any brief attempt could. I haven't watched or read this Zeitgeist shit but it I feel that, like most conspiracy theories, it can probably be defeated by rational thought and education.
The sad thing is, corruption is the number one reason that issues of income inequality and other societal ills exist. Not capitalism. But hey, bandwagon-hopping's just a lot sexier than using your brain, isn't it.
|
lol.. in the same breath you say self serving motivations are the driving force of everything good in society, then you say corruption is everything that is wrong with society.
So which is it?
Also it is insanely closed minded to think that because one system (capitalism) has worked fairly well that there cant be another system which works even better. Classic economic babble was written by people who could not possibly see beyond capitalism, and therefore is poorly applied to any talk of a massive overhaul or complete revolution of the system.
|
|
|
|
spoonitnow
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: IRC Chat Room
Posts: 5,406
|
|
In before lock.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ripptyde
I only have 2 simple rules when I am coaching a new student.
Rule # 1: don't ask questions
Rule # 2: don't ask questions
I have no interest in discussing strategy with a protege'. Your job is to remain quiet and listen. I have a very systematic approach that I will share with the right candidate and I promise that I will turn you into a force of nature and show you elements of the game of poker that you never knew existed.
|
|
|
wufwugy
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,660
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
The for-profit motive is exactly what produces the best outcomes for society.
|
This is simply not true. It sounds great, but empirical data completely disagrees with it
We do NOT have for-profit industry to thank for the VAST majority of technological development over the centuries. Instead, those we have to thank are men who loved the work, loved the discovery, had personal ambition to develop understanding, and who mostly lived life poor and ostracized. The notion that profit drives tech is utter garbage propaganda perpetuated by conflict of interests. In fact, for-profit incentives for the most part quell discovery and advancement due to fear of obsoletion.
That which drives enhancement in areas of art and tech in society has always been mostly made up of non-profit incentives. If your position was correct, then we would be seeing for-profit industry pumping almost all science and art. Yet that is the opposite of what actually happens.
|
|
|
|
surviva316
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Confusing people with my liberal biblicisms
Posts: 1,625
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wufwugy
Elizabeth Warren, for example, due to her experience as chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel for TARP, has admitted to being blown away by the power and self-serving actions of the banks. And she's about as legit an academic is it gets
|
cleverly coded conspiracy theory about elizabeth warren?
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BooG690
I just wanted to share singing vaginas.  |
|
|
dranger7070
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Wake up in the mornin feelin' like P. Diddy
Posts: 2,524
|
|
lol
|
|
|
|
Pelion
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,206
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wufwugy
We do NOT have for-profit industry to thank for the VAST majority of technological development over the centuries. Instead, those we have to thank are men who loved the work, loved the discovery, had personal ambition to develop understanding, and who mostly lived life poor and ostracized. The notion that profit drives tech is utter garbage propaganda perpetuated by conflict of interests. In fact, for-profit incentives for the most part quell discovery and advancement due to fear of obsoletion.
That which drives enhancement in areas of art and tech in society has always been mostly made up of non-profit incentives. If your position was correct, then we would be seeing for-profit industry pumping almost all science and art. Yet that is the opposite of what actually happens.
|
I agree with most of what you and boost have said in this thread. It certainly makes no sense to talk about capitalism seperate from corruption. But this part about research is totally off. Its true that the people who do the work are for the most part doing it more or less out of passion and curiosity. But Particle accelerating black hole generators need massive funding. They need a hell of a lot more than your average scientist with a passion is going to be able to spend. Scientific research is funded for the most part by businesses or states for reasons of competition. In fact, Id be willing to bet that military investment in scientific research dwarfs anything else, and that is about the most self serving institution that exists.
But that doesnt really matter anyway. We live in a capitalist society. 50% of the worlds wealth is owned by the richest 2% of the population. Capitalism is driven by competition, so of course these people are going to want to invest in new competetive edges. And they have so much more than anyone else to invest that they are obviously going to end up being the main contributers. But that doesnt mean society would just stop investing in research and development just because society in general had control over where money went rather than leaving it in the hands of the 2%. As a society, we would invest in things that we expected to benefit society. We might even get around to investing in better, cleaner energy sources and ways to keep our elderly alive during the winter rather than spending it all on new ways to blow up brown people. The "for profit motive" certainly drives research and development. But it doesnt necessarily drive it in the directions that would most benefit society. And it certainly doesnt drive society in the direction of improving the standard of living of most of society. In fact, all of written history has shown us that it drives the wealthy few percent to stamp on the poorest 50% and use whatever violence they feel is necessary to ensure their own personal wealth, and the gap between the rich and poor continue to grow.
|
|
gabe: Ive dropped almost 100k in the past 35 days.
bigspenda73: But how much did you win?
|
|
IowaSkinsFan
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 7,148
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wufwugy
Wow, that was ridiculously awesome. It gives off a rather conspiratorial vibe, makes some small logical and factual mistakes, but pretty much got the fundamentals exactly correct. I kinda wish I'd watched it earlier, but didn't due to the whole conspiracy vibe thingy.
It was somewhat disjointed, and they didn't completely tie in the hypothesis that the monetary system itself is equal to the for-profit system. The argument for the inequality and oppressiveness of the for-profit system is spot on, though. Unfortunately, this is lost on the vast majority of people. I guess that's what happens when lives are sheltered and critical thought is discouraged all within a self-perpetuating system. It is indisputable fact that median standard of living does not reflect resources, and that power perpetuates itself via oppression. When you know nothing but horrible things, you tend to think of those horrible things as normal. And unfortunately, civilization is largely based upon those horrible things.
BTW, the film completely failed at explaining a logistical way to revolutionize the system, and I personally believe that, while it's hypothetically possible, it will never happen due to the nature of things
|
Honestly, I wanted to believe the economic part of Zeitgeist but logically it all seemed like a load of shit.
I'm wondering what kind of expertise you have on economics and what supporting argument you have for the supposed "bullshit monetary system."
|
|
|
|
wufwugy
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,660
|
|
Pelion,
you didn't say anything I disagree with, but I think you misunderstood my position. For-profit and self-serving industries do create tech, it's just not on the same order of magnitude per capita as non-profit. While R&D is involved with for-profit industry, it is more of a byproduct of competition than anything. Also, for-profit R&D only covers a portion of all science.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that for-profit incentives don't create tech. They do; it's just that the tech is very myopic compared to non-profit incentives. This is due to tech being a by-product of for-profit incentives while tech is not a by-product of non-profit incentives.
Also, the LHC is ridiculously underfunded, but if someday tech is created from this non-profit venture, I'm sure industry will pick it up, claim it to be their own, attempt to quash all other tech that would hurt their product sales, and only advance their tech just enough to sell slightly more novel products on a regular basis or to keep up with competition. I don't see anybody thanking Nikola Tesla or Isaac Newton for providing more basis for technological development than any corporation ever did
ISF,
actually the film did not provide adequate reason to believe that the monetary system = corruption/for-profit system. That was probably the biggest problem with it. I'm not saying that the monetary system itself is to blame for anything. At best, the film showed how the monetary system is being use to exploit the people, not that it's inherently corrupt.
I'm honestly not sure what to think. The film appeared to be claiming that inequality is a product of resource ownership which is a product of the monetary system in this global world. Honestly, I'm quite sure that actually figuring that out would win somebody a Nobel, and I don't think that the film qualified
What I liked about it wasn't its hypothesis that money = corruption (even though that could very likely be true), but illustrating the corruption of predominantly profit incentives.
|
|
|
|
wufwugy
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,660
|
|
Yikes, I just tried watching the original Zeitgeist. What a clusterfuck. While I would like to know what the point of the film is, that is a crazy amount of factual errors and conspiracy theories. I would like to think that the author got so much flak from the original that he took on a different perspective with some of addendum
|
|
|
|
givememyleg
|
|
WHO YA GONNA CALL?!??
Administrator
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: ISHPERMING MISHIGEN
Posts: 5,042
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
I haven't watched or read this Zeitgeist shit but it I feel that, like most conspiracy theories, it can probably be defeated by rational thought and education.
|
i love this sentence.
|
Get your own badge! Click profile at the top and FTR Badge from the left nav.
"The Dragon in My Garage" by Carl Sagan
I say onto you, I've felt the dragon! I felt the touch of his tail, the breath of his fire, and I know without a shadow of a doubt that the dragon exists!
|
|
Penneywize
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 885
|
|
First off, I kinda realize that my first post had that 'holier-than-thou, I'm-more-educated-than-you-on-this-subject' air to it that is straight up condescending and douche-tacular. So, yeah, sorry bout that, I don't think I have all the answers or anything - just tryin to put in my $0.02.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by boost
lol.. in the same breath you say self serving motivations are the driving force of everything good in society, then you say corruption is everything that is wrong with society.
So which is it?
|
Well, I didn't exactly say (or mean to say) that self-serving motivation is what drives "everything good" in society. The short version is that if each individual acts in their own self-interest, they, knowingly or not, produce optimal economic outcomes for everyone else in society as well. The theory is tried and tested, and firmly rooted in mathematics... but almost completely abstract. It's really pedantic shit that I won't bore you with here. Corruption is a different issue entirely, and does not logically follow from what is described as "self-motivated economic activity", despite the way it comes off sounding in non-academic discussion.
... And yeah I get that my argument is seeming like a huge "I'm right, just agree with me" cop-out, but I can't see myself typing up a treatise on economics to justify everything I'm saying. If that means I fail, then I can live with that, heh heh.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by boost
Also it is insanely closed minded to think that because one system (capitalism) has worked fairly well that there cant be another system which works even better. Classic economic babble was written by people who could not possibly see beyond capitalism, and therefore is poorly applied to any talk of a massive overhaul or complete revolution of the system.
|
Hey man. If anyone is able to come up with some new type of system that produces a better outcome for all at the expense of none, they deserve 100 years' worth of nobel prizes in economics. I can tell you that of all the research that has been, or is being done in universities world-wide, there is precious little to suggest that there exists anything better than what we've got to work with right now. What are the alternatives? State-controlled economies? The old-school barter system? All signs point to "fuck that shit".
Anyhow, I feel like all this has gone at least somewhat off-topic. I've noticed that there is some discussion about suppression of technology and such, as a means to maximize profits, etc. To relate my argument to this; it is essentially a form of corruption. Corruption has and always will exist in some form whether we take measures to prevent it or not... This isn't the fault of capitalism.
|
|
|
|
Penneywize
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 885
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by givememyleg
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
I haven't watched or read this Zeitgeist shit but it I feel that, like most conspiracy theories, it can probably be defeated by rational thought and education.
|
i love this sentence. |
I don't, sorry it sounded so gay. Besides, I did qualify all that by saying "probably".
|
|
|
|
Penneywize
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 885
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
. What are the alternatives? State-controlled economies? The old-school barter system? All signs point to "fuck that shit".
|
So I read up a little bit on the whole 'resource-based-economy' notion and I am pretty much of the mind that... Until we can eliminate scarcity, we're always going to have to make the fundamental choice of alternative uses; and capitalism is going to be the best way for this to happen naturally for the foreseeable future.
Again, I feel like a dick having to sound like a fucking textbook that insists upon itself, but there it is..
|
|
|
|
spoonitnow
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: IRC Chat Room
Posts: 5,406
|
|
Goddamn Canadians fucking up the thread
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ripptyde
I only have 2 simple rules when I am coaching a new student.
Rule # 1: don't ask questions
Rule # 2: don't ask questions
I have no interest in discussing strategy with a protege'. Your job is to remain quiet and listen. I have a very systematic approach that I will share with the right candidate and I promise that I will turn you into a force of nature and show you elements of the game of poker that you never knew existed.
|
|
|
boost
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 706
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
. What are the alternatives? State-controlled economies? The old-school barter system? All signs point to "fuck that shit".
|
So I read up a little bit on the whole 'resource-based-economy' notion and I am pretty much of the mind that... Until we can eliminate scarcity, we're always going to have to make the fundamental choice of alternative uses; and capitalism is going to be the best way for this to happen naturally for the foreseeable future.
Again, I feel like a dick having to sound like a fucking textbook that insists upon itself, but there it is.. |
But the problem is a form of corruption is the creation of scarcity. The easiest example is the diamond market. And the suppression of new tech is used to prolong scarcity as well. For example big oil buying up patents on battery tech with no desire to put these advances into the market.
Pretty much, the people in power have no interest in feeding the world by eliminating scarcity. Without scarcity that which they have has no value.
|
|
|
|
CoccoBill
|
|
Flush
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Finding my game
Posts: 423
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
If anyone is able to come up with some new type of system that produces a better outcome for all at the expense of none, they deserve 100 years' worth of nobel prizes in economics.
|
If the narrowing of the income gap and more just distribution of resources does not come at the expense of the top 2% of the planet's population, how do you suggest it would come? Why is it that this magnificent free market hasn't pulled all of the 3rd world out of poverty, why are the rich getting richer than ever and why is even the middle class getting smaller? Where is the so called trickle down effect? IMO even a less effective but more just system would be much better overall. I truly find it magnificent that the majority of americans think they are the ones who benefit from the system and are even willing to fight for and support the rights of the top 1-2% at their own expense. Talk about the con of the century.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
I can tell you that of all the research that has been, or is being done in universities world-wide, there is precious little to suggest that there exists anything better than what we've got to work with right now. What are the alternatives? State-controlled economies? The old-school barter system? All signs point to "fuck that shit".
|
So even the clusterfuck yesteryear that was solely created by lack of regulation is not proof enough that there's something wrong with the system? If state control drops the profit margins of large corporations by a few per cent but disables or at least limits corruption, how is that bad? Even Alan Greenspan had to admit he was wrong with his ideas of bank self-regulation, but I guess that doesn't mean anything.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
Anyhow, I feel like all this has gone at least somewhat off-topic. I've noticed that there is some discussion about suppression of technology and such, as a means to maximize profits, etc. To relate my argument to this; it is essentially a form of corruption. Corruption has and always will exist in some form whether we take measures to prevent it or not... This isn't the fault of capitalism.
|
Yes, it really makes no difference what the policy or the economic system is if there is corruption, and trust me there will be as long as there are human self interests involved. What's the best way to fight corruption and illegal activities? Well, we can either have more strict control (laws and regulations) or make the illegal activities legal. Just hoping that people won't try to find loopholes or exploit the system hasn't and will not work.
|
|
|
|
wufwugy
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,660
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by surviva316
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wufwugy
Elizabeth Warren, for example, due to her experience as chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel for TARP, has admitted to being blown away by the power and self-serving actions of the banks. And she's about as legit an academic is it gets
|
cleverly coded conspiracy theory about elizabeth warren? |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPmQk0MUMYI
|
|
|
|
Ash256
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1,760
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wufwugy
Yikes, I just tried watching the original Zeitgeist. What a clusterfuck. While I would like to know what the point of the film is, that is a crazy amount of factual errors and conspiracy theories. I would like to think that the author got so much flak from the original that he took on a different perspective with some of addendum
|
Yeah same, the original is a complete piece of shit
http://conspiracyscience.com/articles/zeitgeist/
Also that site is just awesome in general
|
|
|
|
wufwugy
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,660
|
|
A note on the hypothetical, inherent corruptness of the monetary system:
If you had to take a guess as to what the one most wrong thing with humanity is, the one thing that has caused the most problems, that one thing would most likely be agriculture. Good ol agriculture. That stuff that provides so much food for so many people, promotes modernization, promotes technology, etc. It may seem blasphemous to suggest that something so standard and 'good' is one of the worst things that has ever happened to the human race, but that's the reality. Agriculture is responsible for humans far exceeding ecological carrying capacity, far exceeding normal power concentrations, and bestowing misery upon populations which far exceeds misery in hunter/gatherer societies.
Likewise, monetarism can be analogized to agriculture. It is just as standard and 'good', but it may actually be the basis for mass suffering. I'm not suggesting that an analogy is any kind of proof, just using it to illustrate that it's not impossible for something so standard and 'good' to actually be unfathomably terrible
|
|
|
|
Jack Sawyer
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Old School
Posts: 2,535
|
|
isn't the for profit system that all things, including agriculture, are a part of what drives all that expansion?
agriculture is not at fault, but rather the need for the individual (company or person) doing the agriculturing that slowly drives " for humans far exceeding ecological carrying capacity, far exceeding normal power concentrations, and bestowing misery upon populations which far exceeds misery in hunter/gatherer societies. "
you want your profits to be ever increasing, everyone wants their profits to be ever increasing, unless you find robots who would work for you (and their maintenance bill to somehow magically not increase, so the mechanics and the parts shop should be in on the 0 inflation thing too) you need more money in the long term than you needed in the past to satisfy your basic need of sustenance.
|
My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...
Quote:
|
VHS is like a book and a book is like a stack of kindles.
|
Hey, I'm in a movie!
http://youtu.be/lGdnIrRKDTI
|
|
CoccoBill
|
|
Flush
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Finding my game
Posts: 423
|
|
I think the word you're looking for is "greed".
|
|
"Honesty is for the most part less profitable than dishonesty."
-Plato
"God has a lot to answer for when standing before me in the last judgment."
-E.Valtaoja
|
|
spoonitnow
|
|
12-29-2009, 11:43 AM
Post subject: Re: Zeitgeist Addendum - This is for you wuf :)
|
#39 (permalink)
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: IRC Chat Room
Posts: 5,406
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dranger7070
I was working gym duty today and I met this Lance Corporal that was a Sergeant Scout/Sniper before he got busted down in rank, and we started talking about this shit. I can't explain it really well (ask BooG) but just watch this movie. Its kind of mind blowing. It's easy to believe, but at the same time seems so sci-fi/impossible/improbable that its hard NOT to scoff at it. Idk, you guys decide.
Link on the left with the giant purple eye:
http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/
Edit: This is like 2 hours long, so make sure you have some time to watch, and pay attention to this. |
Did he go awol too?
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ripptyde
I only have 2 simple rules when I am coaching a new student.
Rule # 1: don't ask questions
Rule # 2: don't ask questions
I have no interest in discussing strategy with a protege'. Your job is to remain quiet and listen. I have a very systematic approach that I will share with the right candidate and I promise that I will turn you into a force of nature and show you elements of the game of poker that you never knew existed.
|
|
|
Pelion
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,206
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wufwugy
A note on the hypothetical, inherent corruptness of the monetary system:
If you had to take a guess as to what the one most wrong thing with humanity is, the one thing that has caused the most problems, that one thing would most likely be agriculture. Good ol agriculture. That stuff that provides so much food for so many people, promotes modernization, promotes technology, etc. It may seem blasphemous to suggest that something so standard and 'good' is one of the worst things that has ever happened to the human race, but that's the reality. Agriculture is responsible for humans far exceeding ecological carrying capacity, far exceeding normal power concentrations, and bestowing misery upon populations which far exceeds misery in hunter/gatherer societies.
|
Social structure is responsible for all of the misery you talk about. Firstly, there is no global food shortage. Farmers are still paid to destroy crops to artificially keep prices high. Communities where people starve are always communities where people are incredibly poor, and in areas which were first ripped apart by colonialists, and have often had continual civil wars going on around them since. This isnt a food shortage. These people simply cannot afford to buy food.
Secondly, Im pretty sure its true that world food supply is increasing faster than world population due to improvements in technology and infrustructure.
Finally, What do you think keeps populations down in hunter gatherer societies? Dying of things our society can fix. Things like food shortages and curable diseases. Agriculture allowed societies to grow, and then a million different factors contributed to this temporary fuckup that we call capitalism. Just because agriculture allowed the existence of societies which later developed the problems we see today does not mean that agriculture caused (or always will cause) those same problems. That's as silly as saying evolution caused all of humanities problems since without evolution there would be no humanity to have problems.
|
|
gabe: Ive dropped almost 100k in the past 35 days.
bigspenda73: But how much did you win?
|
|
a500lbgorilla
|
|
JESUS TAKE THE KEYBOARD
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: This room is a good place to be
Posts: 8,379
|
|
I liked it a lot more when I was a kid assuming the world was elegant and well-crafted. About 6 seconds after dealing with my first boss, that beautiful picture crumbled quick.
Also, http://conspiracyscience.com/articles/zeitgeist/ <- good link
|
|
|
|
Warpe
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Canuckistan
Posts: 3,905
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
...Well, I didn't exactly say (or mean to say) that self-serving motivation is what drives "everything good" in society. The short version is that if each individual acts in their own self-interest, they, knowingly or not, produce optimal economic outcomes for everyone else in society as well. The theory is tried and tested, and firmly rooted in mathematics... but almost completely abstract...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by boost
Also it is insanely closed minded to think that because one system (capitalism) has worked fairly well that there cant be another system which works even better. Classic economic babble was written by people who could not possibly see beyond capitalism, and therefore is poorly applied to any talk of a massive overhaul or complete revolution of the system.
|
...Hey man. If anyone is able to come up with some new type of system that produces a better outcome for all at the expense of none, they deserve 100 years' worth of nobel prizes in economics. I can tell you that of all the research that has been, or is being done in universities world-wide, there is precious little to suggest that there exists anything better than what we've got to work with right now. What are the alternatives? State-controlled economies? The old-school barter system? All signs point to "fuck that shit"... |
Philosophically, I agree with boost here, but am afraid Penney is probably right for all practical purposes in the near term. I would argue though that the recent economic meltdown necessitating massive government intervention to keep the whole thing afloat shows just goes to show how flawed and artificial the house of cards is.
|
|
|
|
wufwugy
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,660
|
|
I really don't like breaking apart arguments, but I think this will be the only way I can satisfactorily respond
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer
isn't the for profit system that all things, including agriculture, are a part of what drives all that expansion?
|
Not quite. Most historians believe that agriculture came about due to the natural human tendency to experiment, but then after it was discovered it spread like wildfire due to its ability to raise ecological carrying capacity (people wouldn't starve, wouldn't have to control populations).
Agriculture itself is a massive ecological paradigm shift. This shift then directly promotes shifts in society. Agriculture is the backbone of all modernization, and without it every society would revert back to primitive tribal conditions. Things like economy, science, infrastructure, large populations, cities, etc, are all 100% dependent upon agriculture.
Quote:
|
agriculture is not at fault, but rather the need for the individual (company or person) doing the agriculturing that slowly drives " for humans far exceeding ecological carrying capacity, far exceeding normal power concentrations, and bestowing misery upon populations which far exceeds misery in hunter/gatherer societies. "
|
What I'm referring to is entirely different. Like I said, agriculture creates a complete shift in how societies operate. It allows for massive growth and regional concentrations. "Jobs" did not, nor could they, exist before agriculture. But due to agriculture and the vast overabundance of food supply and the great decrease in daily work per capita, population levels naturally skyrocketed.
Also, the ecological shift in agriculture is unsustainable. It destroys soil, and there is no way around this. We've already destroyed a chunk of arable land in about 10k years, and the rate of destruction is currently far beyond what it has been for most of those 10k years. Eventually, people will be talking about peak agriculture the same way we're talking about peak oil
Quote:
|
you want your profits to be ever increasing, everyone wants their profits to be ever increasing, unless you find robots who would work for you (and their maintenance bill to somehow magically not increase, so the mechanics and the parts shop should be in on the 0 inflation thing too) you need more money in the long term than you needed in the past to satisfy your basic need of sustenance.
|
Sure. Agriculture is much more fundamental than this though. It is, after all, that which provides for every bit of modern society. Without agriculture, greed is stymied before it achieves even remotely close to the levels that it sees through modernization. This is simply due to things like population levels and density, infrastructure, jobs, etc.
Look at it this way: it is because of agriculture that Josef Fritzl was able to do what he did. The amount of horribleness that he caused those people could not even have come remotely close to happening in a non-agriculture society. This goes for just about everything evil. Stalin, Mengele, the Civil War, the Black Plague, the Spanish Inquisition, North Korea, slavery, clinical insanity, Rwandan Genocide.....all these and everything else in any way similar to these could not have happened without agriculture. I don't think there is any one other thing that could have prevented these other than never discovering agriculture. You could argue that the problem comes from human emotions, but reality is that if you were to alter our genes to the point that we're no longer capable of such evil, our species would most likely no longer be capable of surviving in the first place.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Pelion
Social structure is responsible for all of the misery you talk about.
|
Agriculture is what necessitates modern social structures. Business, organized religion, organized government, etc are not even possible without agriculture
Quote:
|
Firstly, there is no global food shortage. Farmers are still paid to destroy crops to artificially keep prices high. Communities where people starve are always communities where people are incredibly poor, and in areas which were first ripped apart by colonialists, and have often had continual civil wars going on around them since. This isnt a food shortage. These people simply cannot afford to buy food.
|
This is in a way true. However, agriculture is what allows this corruption in the first place. If the entire globe were hunter/gatherer, war and oppression would be far smaller due to population limits, travel and communication limits, technological limits, etc
Quote:
|
Secondly, Im pretty sure its true that world food supply is increasing faster than world population due to improvements in technology and infrustructure.
|
Yet it's all unsustainable. Agriculture ruins ecology. There may be a glut on the market now, but in a few thousand years there will not be. It may be possible to be agriculturally green, but that will create a negative feedback which will be fought by the more powerful positive feedback which has been essentially created by building civilization upon agriculture
Quote:
|
Finally, What do you think keeps populations down in hunter gatherer societies? Dying of things our society can fix. Things like food shortages and curable diseases.
|
Well, it's more along the lines of population sizes being purposely kept below ecological carrying capacity within each tribe. This allowed for the tribes to not become wiped out or suffer tremendously during times of scarcity.
This doesn't hold true post-agriculture though. Mass starvation and mass disease are impossible without agriculture, and history started these things long before capitalism was ever a thing. And it's not just that more people exist therefore in times of scarcity more people are affected, but that the societal and environmental shifts created by agriculture exacerbated the problems. The Black Death is a superb example of this. Waaaaaaaaaaay more people died in that than would have in an equal population level of tribal societies simply due to how society and infrastructure revolved around agriculture, and that itself creating previously impossible health, sanitation, and distribution issues.
Quote:
|
Agriculture allowed societies to grow, and then a million different factors contributed to this temporary fuckup that we call capitalism. Just because agriculture allowed the existence of societies which later developed the problems we see today does not mean that agriculture caused (or always will cause) those same problems. That's as silly as saying evolution caused all of humanities problems since without evolution there would be no humanity to have problems.
|
The analogy doesn't really fit. Agriculture is an aspect of humanity. It is something we do, something we base our lives in, but it is not something that inherently sustains us. Evolution, on the other hand, is something that sustains us, and isn't something we do or choose/have chosen
Also, it's not about agriculture *allowing* anything, but necessitating things. Agriculture doesn't 'allow' for massive population increase, it requires it, because if populations don't increase then agriculture would no longer provide much benefit. These population increases are then held in density due to necessity, and they also begin developing mass infrastructure and economies due to necessity. Plus, it's not like tribal society with an overabundance of supply has any choice but to increase population size. The reason for this could simply be that they don't have much else to do because they're not spending all their time looking for food, and so they gravitate towards the thing they do when supply is not a problem.
Every single thing modern that we have or think is due to agriculture. Name one thing that is very, very bad, and try to figure out how that thing could happen pre-agriculture. Hunter/gatherers do have things like murder and rape, but they don't have much of it, and they are not even remotely close to the systemic evils brought on by population density, technology, and the overabundance of population that has to find something to do other than what their genome evolved for.
The bottom line is that humans are not inherently good or bad. We're humans. But what agriculture has done has promoted a natural development of extremes in every direction. For example: prisons are amazingly fucking evil places, but not only could they not exist pre-agriculture, but they must necessarily exist post-agriculture. It's possible someday way in the super sci-fi future the destruction caused by agriculture will be eliminated, but that would be very far off indeed, and wouldn't delete any of the colossal misery necessarily a result of agriculture of previous generations.
FWIW, while I'm not sure if there is a concensus opinion on something so speculative as 'if you had to choose the worst thing, what would it be', but as far as I've seen, agriculture is usually the leading candidate among scientists and historians
|
|
|
|
Penneywize
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 885
|
|
Hey wuf / others, read through all your posts... Just tryin to get a feel for where we should take this discussion cuz the scope of what we're on right now is pretty mind-bending. So I've boiled things down a bit and if you'll permit it, I can type up my opinion on any of the following... Just let me know which is most relevant / interesting:
- How capitalism is not at fault for the poverity of 3rd world nations, and how our current system could actually do something meaningful in helping them "catch-up" with the rest of the industrialized world?
- Agriculture, how it is tied to capitalism, population growth, and how capitalism generally ensures the lowest prices possible for food world-wide?
- How the economic / financial collapse of '08 was not the fault of the price system, and how very wrong it was of governments to spend billions upon billions of dollars to stimulate the economy subsequently?
- A general defense of capitalism?
- Why these posts don't increase my postcount or WPP even though I put a lot of effort into them?
- Titties?
- STFU penney?
|
|
|
|
a500lbgorilla
|
|
JESUS TAKE THE KEYBOARD
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: This room is a good place to be
Posts: 8,379
|
|
Number 1, please. Let's try to shake some of this rich-nation shame. Though I won't complain if it's number 2.
|
Smithers, use the amnesia ray.
You mean the revolver, sir?
Precisely.
|
|
Pelion
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,206
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Pelion
Social structure is responsible for all of the misery you talk about.
|
Agriculture is what necessitates modern social structures. Business, organized religion, organized government, etc are not even possible without agriculture[/quote]
The same is true of oxygen/ our planet/ gravity/ Water dwelling creatures moving back onto land, etc. Im assuming you arent blaming the ills of capitalism on these things. The rest of your post really rests on this point, so here is the counter argument. "Just because A cannot exist without B does not mean B is responsible for all of the problems with A". My analogy totally fits. Agriculture is indeed something that man "has done". So is capitalism. But it only follows that agriculture necessarily leads to capitalism in the most pessimistic of minds. There is no necessary logical link between the two. We have had one trial (count them) in our history. If your 2 pair is beaten by a flush once does that mean 2 pairs are shit vs flush draws? Agriculture is certainly a prerequisite for capitalism, since with no agriculture there is no surplus of resources, and with no surplus there can be no elite class, but assuming agriculture necessarily leads to capitalism is baseless and pessimistic. Agriculture certainly lead to a surplus of resources, and an elite class developed who horded and protected and that surplus and ended up becoming the imperialist capitalist class we know today. But agriculture could just as easily be the means to support a fair and equal population. The problem is not inherent to the technology. It is a social problem. I was going to write a conclusion but obvious drunk post ends here. I may finish it tomorrow.
|
|
gabe: Ive dropped almost 100k in the past 35 days.
bigspenda73: But how much did you win?
|
|
wufwugy
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,660
|
|
Well since I'm drinking too...
I think it boils down to a difference in perspective. Normally, this is not something I like to say (facts are facts, not perspective), but the thing is that the premise upon which I even brought up agriculture isn't one upon which there is much debate or consensus in the first place. Therefore it's pretty difficult to say somebody is right or wrong.
I do recall a while back, on a different board, the question was posed 'what's the worst thing', and my response was something more along the lines of what you're countering with (i.e. evolution or oxygen or whatever allows humanity in the first place), yet the majority response among others was agriculture. I found that interesting, and somewhat enlightening
|
|
|
|
CoccoBill
|
|
Flush
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Finding my game
Posts: 423
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
- How capitalism is not at fault for the poverity of 3rd world nations, and how our current system could actually do something meaningful in helping them "catch-up" with the rest of the industrialized world?
|
"Could" being the key world. As long as human greed and self interest are in leading roles, it won't. Capitalism aims for maximum return to stakeholders, not at global welfare, justice and equality. I've yet to see compelling real life evidence for the trickle down effect.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
- Agriculture, how it is tied to capitalism, population growth, and how capitalism generally ensures the lowest prices possible for food world-wide?
|
I'd add a "should ensure" in there.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
- How the economic / financial collapse of '08 was not the fault of the price system, and how very wrong it was of governments to spend billions upon billions of dollars to stimulate the economy subsequently?
|
I think it was 100% created by greed and lack of regulation, and I think the stimulation package and how it was handled was utterly horrific for the general population, though I feel it might have been unavoidable to ensure economic stability on a global scale.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
- A general defense of capitalism?
|
Sorry, I have nothing here.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
- Why these posts don't increase my postcount or WPP even though I put a lot of effort into them?
|
I've been wondering the same. Goddamn racists.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
- Titties?
|
Yes please.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Penneywize
- STFU penney?
|
Not yet. Please show some real life evidence about the global benefits of capitalism. The multinational corporations and investors gaining wealth is not enough, I want to know how it benfits the poor nations.
http://lightparty.com/Economic/WorldBankIMFPoverty.html
|
|
|
|
CoccoBill
|
|
Flush
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Finding my game
Posts: 423
|
|
I have to say wuf that your post about agriculture was very good and made me think about it quite a bit. It seems like the easy explanation but I find it hard to accept it as conclusive. It might be the _first_ critical paradigm shift required for _our_ species on this planet to reach a point and allow for advanced development, but it is not some general rule. For example, some species of ants farm fungi for food, and certain termites even farm caterpillars, as you probably know from reading Dawkins. It is an interesting concept nevertheless and will require some more digesting. After some more beers.
|
|
|
|
wufwugy
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,660
|
|
Thanks
And about capitalism: by definition, it favors special interests. OTOH, socialism, by definition, favors general interests. What capitalism entails is pretty much just a rebranding of monarchy/serfdom. We've never actually seen real socialism yet, but some places around the Netherlands have some strong socialist applications
I support a mixture. But not so much a mixture as a logical, educated, and passionate approach with the ultimate goal of optimizing standard of living and happiness/potential for all including the 'forgotten people' of the third world.
|
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Pусский
Svenska
05-26-2012, 03:08 PM Australia Legalized Online Poker coming up in next 6 to 12 Months
Linear Mode
