• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

I knew central planning was bad, but didn't really know precisely how bad.

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,649
0
76
www.facebook.com

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
If Obama wanted, he could use the seizing of US assets as a reason to go to war and invade Venezuela.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,324
4
0
If Obama wanted, he could use the seizing of US assets as a reason to go to war and invade Venezuela.

There are many people here who have argued in favor of the Feds seizing natural assets.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,652
199
101
We have plenty of people both here on the forums and within the administration who agree completely with Chavez and his fellow scum. They'd like nothing more than to follow in his footsteps.
 

MooseNSquirrel

Platinum Member
Feb 26, 2009
2,564
293
126
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/venezuela/090114/where-old-cars-cost-more

Old cars cost more in venezuela than new ones do because of legislation that requires a 2 year wait for a new one.

Chavez seizes oil service firm:

“Military vehicles were used as the state oil company seized supply boats and two US-owned gas facilities.“

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8041366.stm
*
Price increases have been 30% over the past year also.

Why do so many people think socialism works?
The first story you posted has nothing to do with Central Planning...but it is related to protectionism.

The second has nothing to do with the first, but I suppose one could relate it to central planning, but I think you are stretching it.

All that said, things will not end well IN venezuela.
 
Last edited:

wirednuts

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2007
7,121
1
0
Why do so many people think socialism works?
because human labor wont be needed in the future. or very little of it. there simply wont be enough jobs to support the population. thats why america is already a capitalist and socialized mix. its only going to get more socialized as the technology grows.
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
8,990
84
91
We have plenty of people both here on the forums and within the administration who agree completely with Chavez and his fellow scum. They'd like nothing more than to follow in his footsteps.
Care to back up that assertion there? Name one.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,670
6
0
because human labor wont be needed in the future. or very little of it. there simply wont be enough jobs to support the population. thats why america is already a capitalist and socialized mix. its only going to get more socialized as the technology grows.
Thank goodness liberals encouraged more people to enter the workforce.

Clearly we need more of their brilliant central planning skills! :D
 

DucatiMonster696

Diamond Member
Aug 13, 2009
4,269
1
71
because human labor wont be needed in the future. or very little of it. there simply wont be enough jobs to support the population. thats why america is already a capitalist and socialized mix. its only going to get more socialized as the technology grows.
This is a Luddite fallacy.

Uses for human labor will always be there in the future. Even as technology displaces workers in certain areas other fields of industry where human labor where once to cost prohibitive spring up due to an inevitable surplus of labor and capital (from savings gained via automation). There have been tons of books and papers written by a crap load economists from all schools and political spectrums disproving the notion.
 
Last edited:

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
This is a Luddite fallacy.

Uses for human labor will always be there in the future. Even as technology displaces workers in certain areas other fields of industry where human labor where once to cost prohibitive spring up due to an inevitable surplus of labor and capital (from savings gained via automation). There have been tons of books and papers written by a crap load economists from all schools and political spectrums disproving the notion.
Do you really think in 100 years the majority of humanity will be expected to spend their lives being used as beast of burden still, like animals?

Or will work be a extension of what we do to better ourselves personally?

Such little vision conservatives have.

With such a negative view of life no wonder you guys go through life with a stick up your ass. Sad.
 
Last edited:

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
Most people do not work for free. That is some kind of insane liberal idea. They should probably lay off the weed.
In real life the majority of the most honest and groundbreaking ideas/works that change things are made...for free!

When people spend effort doing something for money you could argue that they compromise their vision so they do not do the worst sin in capitalism. -overproduce (IE people dont wan't your shit)

When you do something because you enjoy it you get the satisfaction of DOING IT FOR YOURSELF, not because someone else wants it their way.

Capitalism itself is very poor at adapting to what is radically different in the age of mass production.

Changing out the production line for something risky and risking the almighty investor confidence for that quarterly bottom line is unprofitable.

This is why we still are stuck pretty much in the 1970s tech driving around in 19th century vehicles.

Sure some things have gotten smaller, but even PCs for example are stuck in a 1980s (x86) architecture.

Free market fail.
 
Last edited:

DucatiMonster696

Diamond Member
Aug 13, 2009
4,269
1
71
Do you really think in 100 years the majority of humanity will be expected to spend their lives being used as beast of burden still, like animals?

Or will work be a extension of what we do to better ourselves personally?
You are falsely and melodramatically asserting that there is a "lump of labor" that is fixed and finite in a economy but this view is long since been held to be a fallacy by reputable economists. In fact the "Lump of Labor Fallacy" is at the core of the Luddite argument which deals with automation and the labor force it replaces.

In other words people won't stop wanting more stuff even with automation, people will not stop wanting more services (such as entertainment) even with automation, and people will not stop wanting to explore new facets of life just because of automation, etc.

Even as technology has made manufacturing and other jobs which once required human effort more cost efficient to accomplish with a machine this does not mean that the uses for human labor will dry up and go away. After all someone has to explore the stars, our oceans, etc. Someone has to provide all the varied forms of entertainment which please people and continue pushing the boundaries of knowledge, science, medicine, art etc.

Thus as technology increases and lowers the cost of production it allows for the development and uses of human labor in other areas which were once deemed to costly. Which means that technological advancements end up creating new demand for human labor when technology elsewhere has replaced it use completely and created a surplus.

Such little vision conservatives have.
If you can't wrap your mind behind the idea that new uses for human labor will develop as it is freed up in the future due to technological advancements then I suggest you should not hurl this statement around so freely.
 
Last edited:

MooseNSquirrel

Platinum Member
Feb 26, 2009
2,564
293
126
You are going to have a tough time arguing that one Steeplerot.

Look what happened to humanity once we figured out how to create excess food.

No one is missing all those hunter gatherers today :)
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
If you can't wrap your mind behind the idea that new uses for human labor will develop as it is freed up in the future due to technological advancements then I suggest you should not hurl this statement around so freely.
Horses and animals were once the muscle that drove humanities industry.

It is you who sound like a luddite.

Why must humans be made animals to be worked until exhaustion past their prime when automation can do the work freeing up one to find their own ideas of work?

This "work ethic" you think is immutable is a victorian era protestant farce steeped in centuries old racism and imperialism.

Ever thought of how actually stupid this old protestant imperative is getting to get up at the crack of dawn and busting your butt all day actually sounds to people in areas near the equator?

So have the rest of the world held under the thumb of the British empire. This is where it comes from.

It's a poorly thought out northern European tradition to bring "civilization" to "savages".

We live in barbaric times still, we literally just climbed out of serfdom a few hundred years ago.

Capitalism is not the end game. It is the ass end of unsustainable (wage) slavery when you look at it from the renaissance to the founding of modern democracy in Europe and here to now.

Everything from not being a literal slave to your landlord to 8 hour work days were hard won from the elites (the corporations now) and religion -just in the past 100 to 200 years.

We have a lot of old baggage to get over. How arrogant to think what we have will (or can) be sustainable.

The only legacy we will leave is a buncha trash and toxic wastes for future generations, who would even want to pass this mess on to future generations? They would curse our names for eternity.

I don't have all the answers to the future.

I am just saying it is good to think about doing better in the long run.

We all know this shit is busted. Regardless of how we disagree on who or what pet issue is to blame.
 
Last edited:

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,586
11
76
Do you really think in 100 years the majority of humanity will be expected to spend their lives being used as beast of burden still, like animals?

Or will work be a extension of what we do to better ourselves personally?

Such little vision conservatives have.

With such a negative view of life no wonder you guys go through life with a stick up your ass. Sad.
I might buy it if there was no world outside of the secular West. The rest of the world doesn't want what we want.
 
Nov 29, 2006
14,500
2,210
126
You are falsely and melodramatically asserting that there is a "lump of labor" that is fixed and finite in a economy but this view is long since been held to be a fallacy by reputable economists. In fact the "Lump of Labor Fallacy" is at the core of the Luddite argument which deals with automation and the labor force it replaces.

In other words people won't stop wanting more stuff even with automation, people will not stop wanting more services (such as entertainment) even with automation, and people will not stop wanting to explore new facets of life just because of automation, etc.

Even as technology has made manufacturing and other jobs which once required human effort more cost efficient to accomplish with a machine this does not mean that the uses for human labor will dry up and go away. After all someone has to explore the stars, our oceans, etc. Someone has to provide all the varied forms of entertainment which please people and continue pushing the boundaries of knowledge, science, medicine, art etc.

Thus as technology increases and lowers the cost of production it allows for the development and uses of human labor in other areas which were once deemed to costly. Which means that technological advancements end up creating new demand for human labor when technology elsewhere has replaced it use completely and created a surplus.



If you can't wrap your mind behind the idea that new uses for human labor will develop as it is freed up in the future due to technological advancements then I suggest you should not hurl this statement around so freely.
I think you are forgetting the most important part. Population is going to increase at crazy rates the higher it gets, all while we have less and less jobs available for people to do. Sure their will always be some jobs out there, but when population is going up while job growth is going down its not a good thing.

We need to cull the population to survive. Sad but true.
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,017
571
126
I think you are forgetting the most important part. Population is going to increase at crazy rates the higher it gets, all while we have less and less jobs available for people to do. Sure their will always be some jobs out there, but when population is going up while job growth is going down its not a good thing.

We need to cull the population to survive. Sad but true.
I don't feel like looking up a facepalm picture.
 

Spungo

Diamond Member
Jul 22, 2012
3,217
2
81
Most people do not work for free. That is some kind of insane liberal idea. They should probably lay off the weed.
Liberals fight for minimum wages because they believe people should be paid.
Conservatives fight against minimum wage because slavery = ok.


I think you are forgetting the most important part. Population is going to increase at crazy rates the higher it gets, all while we have less and less jobs available for people to do. Sure their will always be some jobs out there, but when population is going up while job growth is going down its not a good thing.

We need to cull the population to survive. Sad but true.
Indeed. Should we rebuild Auschwitz or should we start new ones here in the US?
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY