Dec 5, 2016 at 12:44 PM -
Statboy:
the problem with world hunger was never how much food was produced, but that farmers give food to the people that pay for it, so that they themselves don't go broke
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:45 PM -
Reechard:
and if the farmers were given the resources they need to maintain their land and have their living, and simply produced as much as possible so that it could be distributed as necessary
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:45 PM -
Reechard:
rather than them having to sell to the highest bidder
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:45 PM -
Statboy:
once again who pays for this?
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:45 PM -
Reechard:
there is no "pay for this" in a post-currency society
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:45 PM -
Statboy:
currency is a means of encouraging work, without currency it becomes, who'll actually do the work?
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:46 PM -
Statboy:
which is right back to where Socialism fails
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:46 PM -
Reechard:
Socialism fails due to those factors
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:46 PM -
Reechard:
in a society that is strictly labor-driven
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:47 PM -
Reechard:
when you require 40 people to work 100 acres of farmland, and you implement socialism, the 20 that don't enjoy the work stop doing it
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:47 PM -
Reechard:
and the output suffers
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:47 PM -
Reechard:
in a post-labor system, it only takes 2 people to work 100 acres, and it takes probably 2-4 more to maintain the equipment necessary to work that 100 acre field
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:48 PM -
Reechard:
and there are enough people that are like my dad, that hate being idle, to maintain that system
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:48 PM -
Reechard:
boredom drives a post-labor system
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:48 PM -
Statboy:
hahahahaha
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:49 PM -
Statboy:
people won't work harder, because they are bored
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:49 PM -
theLumberJack:
sure they will
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:49 PM -
Statboy:
without incentive to provide for more than themselves and their own family, farmers won't produce more than they need
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:49 PM -
Reechard:
no, but there are *lots* of people who would get up and go to work for 8-10 hours a day (or ya know, do 4-6 hours)
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:49 PM -
Reechard:
because they're bored
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:50 PM -
Statboy:
not enough to do the hard work
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:50 PM -
Reechard:
what hard work?
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:50 PM -
theLumberJack:
but machines do the hard work
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:50 PM -
Reechard:
all of that shit is being automated
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:50 PM -
Reechard:
rapidly
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:50 PM -
Statboy:
so robots do all the farming?
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:50 PM -
Reechard:
robots already do all the fucking farming, Stat
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:50 PM -
VaultBot: blame the japs!!!!
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:50 PM -
Statboy:
false
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:51 PM -
Reechard:
no dude
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:51 PM -
Reechard:
absofuckinglutely true
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:51 PM -
theLumberJack:
they do a lot
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:51 PM -
Statboy:
being a farmer is still hard fucking manual labor
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:51 PM -
Reechard:
my allegory above where we used to need 40 people for 100 acres
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:51 PM -
Reechard:
is absolutely true
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:51 PM -
Reechard:
now 2 people can do it
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:51 PM -
theLumberJack:
blueberries are nealry completely automated here
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:51 PM -
Reechard:
it's not hard manual labor by the standards of 100 years ago
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:51 PM -
VaultBot: this guy played spy on the internetz all day
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:52 PM -
Statboy:
but you still haven't incentived the work. We've seen in practice, not in theory, that failure to incentivize work leads to not working
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:52 PM -
Reechard:
of course there would be incentives for employment
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:52 PM -
Statboy:
That's why Socialism worked in theory and failed in practice
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:52 PM -
Statboy:
beyond boredom? because in practice that doesn't produce work
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:52 PM -
Reechard:
incentives that are above and beyond the basic living that is guaranteed to everyone
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:53 PM -
Reechard:
the part that would be great about it
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:53 PM -
Statboy:
now you're talking like a republican
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:53 PM -
VaultBot: honestly reechard, the only solution i see, which also helps with the correct machine in place is wasteful
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:53 PM -
Reechard:
is you'd have a dozen people willing to go share the load of that 100 acres
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:53 PM -
Reechard:
because the farmer doesn't have to worry about maximizing his profit per acre
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:53 PM -
Statboy:
Republicans want social programs to meet the standard of living, and anybody who works be able to exceed it
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:53 PM -
Reechard:
he can focus on maximizing output
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:54 PM -
Reechard:
no
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:54 PM -
Reechard:
republicans want to create jobs
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:54 PM -
Reechard:
even if they go backwards and create additional steps in manufacturing processes
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:55 PM -
Statboy:
yes, because we currently don't have enough jobs for those who want to work
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:55 PM -
Reechard:
we don't have enough jobs for people who want to work
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:55 PM -
theLumberJack:
jobs don't necessarrily create value in an economy
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:55 PM -
Reechard:
because the baseline salary for laborers is shit
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:55 PM -
Statboy:
no, we want the manufacturing that is currently done to be done in America not overseas
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:55 PM -
Reechard:
and people are working 80-100hrs a week
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:55 PM -
Reechard:
to make ends meet
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:55 PM -
Reechard:
we already went over this
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:55 PM -
Reechard:
the manufacturing isn't necessarily leaving
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:56 PM -
Statboy:
alright hold on a second, because you keep making the same mistake here
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:56 PM -
Reechard:
and if it does, it's still only a small fraction of the jobs are leaving, and the rest are simply being automated away
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:56 PM -
Reechard:
the *MONEY* is still staying in the US
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:56 PM -
Reechard:
it's just going to 2 or 3 people instead of 1000
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:57 PM -
Statboy:
the problem is Minimum Wage currently does not equal cost of living. There are 2 parts to that equation Minimum wage AND cost of living. If you only increase minimum wage, cost of living will always rise making the wage increase moot
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:57 PM -
Reechard:
because we used to spend $.25 for the nylon for a pair of underwear to be imported into the US, but the process for making underwear has been automated, so now we spend $.25 for the finished product to be imported
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:57 PM -
VaultBot: ./report vaultbot for spam
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:57 PM -
Reechard:
we still sell the underwear for $2
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:57 PM -
Statboy:
the only way to affect that is to decrease cost of living
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:57 PM -
Statboy:
not increase minimum wage
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:58 PM -
Reechard:
but instead of the CEO and stockholders spending $.25 for the nylon and then $1 for someone to make the underwear, and then profiting $.75/ea
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:58 PM -
Statboy:
Socialist's only ever see minimum wage and ignore cost of living
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:58 PM -
Reechard:
now the CEO and stockholders spend $.25 for the underwear and have $1.75 profit
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:58 PM -
Reechard:
which is the entire reason we have issue with "the one percent" and inequality of wealth.
Dec 5, 2016 at 12:59 PM -
Reechard:
because the same amount of money stays in the US, it just all goes to one dude instead of to 1000 dudes.
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:00 PM -
Statboy:
So much is incorrect about that, that is laughable, but you won't read a long response that address's it, or even acknowledge what I'm saying about cost of living. So stay ignorant my friend I'm out
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:00 PM -
Reechard:
I completely understand that cost of living increases when minimum wage increases
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:01 PM -
Reechard:
I ignored it because I said the minimum wage should be *abolished*
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:01 PM -
Reechard:
if you have a minimum standard of living
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:01 PM -
Reechard:
then fast food workers should only get $1-2/hr for being there.
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:02 PM -
Reechard:
if you're going to insist on currency hanging around
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:03 PM -
Reechard:
I'm not the one being ignorant here, dude. You're latching on to antiquated systems of trade that would need to be entirely abolished for this to work
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:04 PM -
theLumberJack:
I've had a similar debate in my engineering ethics course. One side advocated for a world were currency would be obsolete, and the other side got hung up on how to pay for it.
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:04 PM -
Reechard:
right?
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:06 PM -
Reechard:
there needs to be a certain standard of ethics (*other than money*) that compels people to get up and do their job for a few hours a day. I'm not talking 40hr work weeks
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:06 PM -
Reechard:
*that* would bring the demand up high enough to give a lot more people a "job"
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:07 PM -
Reechard:
because the shit I'm doing 40-50hrs a week, we could split among 3 people, and we'd all have more time for leisure or a second job, or art...
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:07 PM -
theLumberJack:
I remember the end of the dialog going along the lines "How will people make a living?" "By living."
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:10 PM -
Reechard:
I'd still be perfectly willing to get up and do what I do for 4 or 5 hours a day. I thoroughly enjoy my job.
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:10 PM -
Reechard:
but I really don't like it eating 8-9hrs a day, 5 days a week, during the part of my life when I could be enjoying my kids
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:10 PM -
VaultBot: that says more about you than us
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:10 PM -
Reechard:
or just enjoying my youth
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:11 PM -
Reechard:
I'm honestly hoping in the next couple of years that I'll be comfortable enough to ask my boss if he'd be willing to cut my hours in half if he cuts my salary in half.
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:12 PM -
Reechard:
I think the 40 hour work week is asinine.
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:12 PM -
theLumberJack:
It is
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:14 PM -
Reechard:
"better work your ass off for the next 30 years so you can retire just in time to have some horrible health issue or another"
Dec 5, 2016 at 1:56 PM -
theLumberJack:
so have you guys had this disccussion in serious thing or
