An observation of the faults of current systems of government

[schola]

Originally Posted by Dave Kaminski

Is there some sort of superhuman governmental system in which we could share basic necessities and then compete over the leftovers? Viable?!

Like something we haven't thought of yet? Maybe.

I think nature/God/the Source/whatever is the superhuman system we should trust.

Ultimately the best way for us to achieve these goals is to raise our consciousness levels high enough that we don't need to be forced to do these things because we will be compelled to do them naturally.

But that can only happen on a person by person basis in my opinion. Hence my individualist stance.

[Dave Kaminski]

Originally Posted by schola

Like something we haven't thought of yet? Maybe.

I think nature/God/the Source/whatever is the superhuman system we should trust.

Ultimately the best way for us to achieve these goals is to raise our consciousness levels high enough that we don't need to be forced to do these things because we will be compelled to do them naturally.

But that can only happen on a person by person basis in my opinion. Hence my individualist stance.

Yep, I'm pretty sure I won't be alive when that happens, not physically in this body anyways.

Way too many people to convert to conscious thinking from a path of religious righteousness. What I'm shooting for here is an impact I can make before I do nap in the dirt.

[schola]

Originally Posted by Dave Kaminski

Yep, I'm pretty sure I won't be alive when that happens, not physically in this body anyways.

Way too many people to convert to conscious thinking from a path of religious righteousness. What I'm shooting for here is an impact I can make before I do nap in the dirt.

It depends on what you believe spiritually I guess. Some authors I have read claim that consciousness functions on a global scale like a chain reaction. And once you have enough "enlightened" individuals, it reaches critical mass and causes the whole earth to cross over into a new enlightened age. Kind of like dragging the unenlightened along for the ride whether they like it or not. Or something. Who knows where we're at right now on that scale.

Personally I believe everyone on the planet is in store for some bad times in the next few years, economically at least. I think at the end of it all, we'll probably rise up stronger and more conscious than ever.

[Dave Kaminski]

Originally Posted by schola

It depends on what you believe spiritually I guess. Some authors I have read claim that consciousness functions on a global scale like a chain reaction. And once you have enough "enlightened" individuals, it reaches critical mass and causes the whole earth to cross over into a new enlightened age. Kind of like dragging the unenlightened along for the ride whether they like it or not. Or something. Who knows where we're at right now on that scale.

Personally I believe everyone on the planet is in store for some bad times in the next few years, economically at least. I think at the end of it all, we'll probably rise up stronger and more conscious than ever.

Ah, yes, collective consciousness increases like that crossword puzzle experiment.

The one in Waking Life where they give a crossword puzzle to a control group a day after it came out and their scores went up by 25%

[schola]

Originally Posted by Dave Kaminski

Ah, yes, collective consciousness increases like that crossword puzzle experiment.

The one in Waking Life where they give a crossword puzzle to a control group a day after it came out and their scores went up by 25%

I remember reading about this in Discover Magazine a few years ago. It's quite interesting! This is actually something I've been trying to find for a while. I'm glad you posted it.

Check out the Global Consciousness project over at Princeton. Global Consciousness Project -- consciousness, group consciousness, mind

[Still Growing]

Originally Posted by Dave Kaminski

Even false history? It's been said that cavemen were not hunters, but actually scavengers. Won't find that in Catholic school textbooks, though.

In todays world someone could plant the trees. No need for trucks if you live in an area where there is food that could grow around you (like it worked for thousands of years).

Dave, of course there is false history as well. I am just saying that historically capitalism has worked better than communism.

Of course you know that there are too many humans in the world for us to live off the land naturally. Humans desire to reproduce and to survive is very strong and if you look at our species the same way as you would an ant farm you would see that Humans have collective thought. The competition, desire to reproduce and desire to survive as a species creates capitalism.

Your mind is thinking of the "ideal" and trying to find arguments for that "ideal". Since our civilizations are organic they can evolve into a culture where collective thought become the norm.

Pure capitalism can be very healthy, natural, giving and a lot of great things. There is a negative light on capitalism and a lot of socialists only see the evil in capitalism. Communism also has a negative light on it by capitalists. If you stand back and look at them objectively you'll see the merits of both. However, I believe that you'd have to come to the conclusion that capitalism works better with today's collective thought.

In an Economics class many years ago the professor told our class that if everyone would agree as a collective that he'd give us all an A- on our test. But, if anyone broke out of the collective he'd give them an A+. The teacher walked out and I stood up in front of the class and attempted to rally everyone to agree as a collective to get an A-. The votes were tallied and out of a class of 30 people, seven got A+s and the remaining of the class were forced to take the test. True story. ..... The point is that as a collective, a portion of people will strike out with selfishness. Eventually smart people are no longer rewarded for their efforts and they are instead rewarded for mediocrity. If the teacher stood up in front of the class and offered the same reward time and time again; eventually 95% of the class would catch on and get the A+ with little or no effort. You could say that everyone wins but the collective doesn't learn, they don't push themselves and hence the collective will suffer through lack of knowledge in the end.

If you take the above scenario and apply it to an entire country its like cancer. Eventually you have a society which tries to take without giving first. Capitalism often requires that you give something of value before you are allowed to take. Capitalism rewards those who think, who create, who change and who work very hard. I am a capitlist and I have created multiple successful businesses in my life time. All business creators know that to be truely successful you have to find a way to give the most to society and you are then rewarded greatly. There are get rich quick people, there are companies that bribe politicians but these are the ones that need to be sought out and punished. True capitalists are rewarded when they find ways to give something of value before they are rewarded. Communism rewards people for giving as little as possible and then they are rewarded the same as the person who gave 110%. It simply teaches people to be selfish. If you look at it from that perspective, don't you see how capitalism isn't as bad as you thought?

[Dave Kaminski]

I too, strive for the best solutions for all. I'm an aspiring web designer/developer/computer consultant/marketing consultant and would only propose a solution for a client if it were the best track of action. If not, I am not the best fit for said client. I may reap the rewards of pointing them in the right direction.

However, I take into account the negative aspects of my actions before proposing the solution. If it were "black hat SEO" or stolen software, etc. I couldn't do it.

Wouldn't the best gift to society be to make everyone in society able to participate, instead of dominating those outside of the capitalist's reach through "giving the capitalists what they want"

Capital: "My solution provides the cheapest and most efficient solution for my fellow capitalist"

Socialist: "My solution provides the cheapest and most efficient solution for my fellow man"

?

You're thinking in terms of the carrot and the stick. We're talking about life and poverty and slavery and control - there is no more stick or less carrot in communism or capitalism. The stick and carrot are how they are used and who they are used upon.

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Originally Posted by schola

Sure. It's not black and white. One is much better than the other though.

I'm still not convinced of that.

Originally Posted by schola

Fairness and equality for all is impossible. It's unnatural. And it isn't really a high-conscious goal for society to pursue anyway. Materialistically, there will always be haves and have nots. But if you are posting on this forum, I'd assume that wouldn't matter to you much.

It actually does matter very much to me. I may be a soft-hearted idealist. You assume a lot about me when you say that I agree and accept that fairness is impossible and it's no big deal for there to be haves and have nots. I'd much prefer no one went to bed hungry. We are far past the evolutionary stage where we have to think only of our own survival in my opinion. Perhaps because of my privilege I feel compelled to make life better for others in any way I can. I fail to see how this is a bad thing.

[schola]

Originally Posted by {aspiring_to_clarity}

I
It actually does matter very much to me. I may be a soft-hearted idealist. You assume a lot about me when you say that I agree and accept that fairness is impossible and it's no big deal for there to be haves and have nots. I'd much prefer no one went to bed hungry. We are far past the evolutionary stage where we have to think only of our own survival in my opinion. Perhaps because of my privilege I feel compelled to make life better for others in any way I can. I fail to see how this is a bad thing.

It's not a bad thing to care about other people. It's not bad to be idealistic either.

But "fairness" in the traditional sense can be horribly materialistic. Beyond basic necessities like food, water, and shelter, it has been shown that material wealth has no effect whatsoever on happiness. So who cares if the big rich CEO has 2 Ferraris and a yacht? Is he really happier than you?

Of course there is still starvation in this world that has to be dealt with. But I believe it is best to use free market solutions to deal with poverty and starvation, because they are proven. Look at China for example. China's standard of living is increasing at a ferocious pace due to capitalism.

Then look at the billions of dollars in government aid sent to Africa if you want an example of failed collectivist government solutions.

This is not an issue of morality. It is an issue of economics and philosophy.

Communism. Doesn't. Work.

Government charity creates apathy. We assume that government will take care of everyone else, so we don't go out of our way to help other human beings. The United States' private charities were a role model for the whole world back in the 19th century, before the welfare state programs were put into action. Now many of them have withered and died.

Not everyone under a socialistic system is apathetic of course. If you care as much as you say you do, I'm sure you already give to charities that fight world hunger and poverty. One that I really like to promote around here is Kiva.org. You should check it out!

[schola]

Originally Posted by Still Growing

In an Economics class many years ago the professor told our class that if everyone would agree as a collective that he'd give us all an A- on our test. But, if anyone broke out of the collective he'd give them an A+. The teacher walked out and I stood up in front of the class and attempted to rally everyone to agree as a collective to get an A-. The votes were tallied and out of a class of 30 people, seven got A+s and the remaining of the class were forced to take the test. True story. ..... The point is that as a collective, a portion of people will strike out with selfishness. Eventually smart people are no longer rewarded for their efforts and they are instead rewarded for mediocrity. If the teacher stood up in front of the class and offered the same reward time and time again; eventually 95% of the class would catch on and get the A+ with little or no effort. You could say that everyone wins but the collective doesn't learn, they don't push themselves and hence the collective will suffer through lack of knowledge in the end.

Sounds like a cool professor.

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Yes, Kiva is awesome.

[Dave Kaminski]

Originally Posted by schola

Government charity creates apathy. We assume that government will take care of everyone else, so we don't go out of our way to help other human beings. The United States' private charities were a role model for the whole world back in the 19th century, before the welfare state programs were put into action. Now many of them have withered and died.

Ok, exactly.

This is what I'm talking about - an integration of truths.

We should be, like Gandhi did, pushing for the improvement of our peoples' skills and mindsets, and not pushing for a change of government.

What would a government do if it found 300 million Americans choosing not to pay taxes? Or not to work day X? Can you fire everyone?

What would they do if we all decided to throw away our "stuff" and go back to necessities as a people and not a government. Get rid of this governmental mess. It's the people that need the work.

[schola]

Dunno Dave. Let's find out right?

[Dave Kaminski]

Oh trust me, before my life is over, I will find out.

I'm still learning and growing and searching and researching and re-researching and meeting and communicating and questioning, and I imagine I always will.

I will find out though, whether or not people in large groups can make a big change, because I WILL get those groups together for justice, or I will at least be a part of them and their spreading.

[schola]

His politics might or might not be your cup o' tea, but you should check out what the Ron Paul grassroots movement has been doing in this past year. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/25/fa...nt&oref=slogin

[Dave Kaminski]

I'm on the mailing list, he's got the right idea. Not in the US currently, though, and am pretty much touring the world at this point - observing other places.

There's a whole world out there to observe first hand - that's what I'm doing!

[escapee]

I think Ron Paul explained the problem of the current capitalism system well.

Check it out ...

So once again we hear the chant: "Capitalism has failed; we need more government controls over the entire financial market." No one asks why the billions that have been spent and thousands of pages of regulations that have been written since the last major attack on capitalism in the 1930s didn't prevent the fraud and deception of Enron, WorldCom, and Global Crossings. That failure surely couldn't have come from a dearth of regulations.

Capitalism should not be condemned, since we haven't had capitalism. A system of capitalism presumes sound money, not fiat money manipulated by a central bank. Capitalism cherishes voluntary contracts and interest rates that are determined by savings, not credit creation by a central bank. It's not capitalism when the system is plagued with incomprehensible rules regarding mergers, acquisitions, and stock sales, along with wage controls, price controls, protectionism, corporate subsidies, international management of trade, complex and punishing corporate taxes, privileged government contracts to the military-industrial complex, and a foreign policy controlled by corporate interests and overseas investments. Add to this centralized federal mismanagement of farming, education, medicine, insurance, banking and welfare. This is not capitalism!


Capitalism didn't give us this crisis of confidence now existing in the corporate world. The lack of free markets and sound money did. Congress does have a role to play, but it's not proactive. Congress's job is to get out of the way.

Has Capitalism Failed? - Ron Paul - Mises Institute

We have not had a real free market capitalism for more than 30+ years since Nixon severed the link between gold and dollars.

[escapee]

This is what people get with socialism / communism.

Socialism and the Chinese Earthquake - Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. - Mises Institute

A particular focus of much coverage has been the Xianjian Primary School, where hundreds of kids died. A parent of one of the children told the New York Times: "this is not a natural disaster. This is not good steel. It doesn't meet standards. They stole our children."

Now people are demanding that the local government be held accountable.

The problem is that these buildings were not up to standards, but the more fundamental question is why they were not. It is not merely a matter of obedience. It is a matter of economics. The people who build buildings need to be held liable for the structural integrity of the buildings. But of course a lack of accountability is a famed feature of all governments everywhere, in contrast with private enterprise.

China has undergone a private-enterprise revolution in the last decade and a half, one that has transformed the country and dramatically raised the living standards of the population. But the system that built the schools that collapsed is as stuck in the past as the system of Chinese communism itself. The government orders schools to be built and they must be built, period.

What if the resources aren't available? What if the workers lack the skill to accomplish the task? What if the machines that are to build them do not work properly and lack replacement parts? What if resource supply should be allocated differently according to the needs of the people? Under socialism, economics is beside the point. The schools must appear. This is the way the system works.

"The key to rational economic planning is the price." Ludwig Won Misses

[Dave Kaminski]

Damn you guys are good!

Thanks for helping to open my eyes - keep it coming!