Religion IS crazy!

[Value Collector]

We are having a world war though. If we define World War as wars occuring on three continents at the same time - as opposed to great powers at war directly.

All great powers (and Australia, haha) are converging in the ME. China and India is standing around watching; with one of them setting up new chess boards in a a sea or two for a new match.

I'm hoping for an alien invasion so we could all stop killing each other for a while. But then we'd be stuffed by the aliens so hmm...

I woudn't describe the campaign against terror as a world war, it might be global in nature but its a different beast its not the major industrial type of war that I was saying Nukes have prevented.

 

[luutzu]

I woudn't describe the campaign against terror as a world war, it might be global in nature but its a different beast its not the major industrial type of war that I was saying Nukes have prevented.

Alright, not technically a World War... but global war then.

It might prove more dangerous than a WW in my opinion. With the Mutual Assured Destruction, that MADness prevent the crazies general and presidents from ending life on Earth. With terrorists, if they can get a hand on it it's done. There's no state we could attack to retaliate against - and if we do, they're everywhere so we can't nuke everywhere - can we?

Anyway, we're nuts. We could work together, build and make useful stuff to use and sell, making our lives and income better and not having to kill anyone doing it. Instead we just blow things up and try not to get ourselves kill or wreck the economy with it.

 

[Value Collector]

Alright, not technically a World War... but global war then.

It might prove more dangerous than a WW in my opinion. With the Mutual Assured Destruction, that MADness prevent the crazies general and presidents from ending life on Earth. With terrorists, if they can get a hand on it it's done. There's no state we could attack to retaliate against - and if we do, they're everywhere so we can't nuke everywhere - can we?

.

Yep, its a different beast alright, and there is no simple answer, nuking and carpet bombing doesn't work.

All that will really end it is the abandoning of the crazy ideals that lead to it, and in the meantime a lot of good intelligence* and special forces work, and bucket loads of Jdams, lots and lots of Jdams.

*2nd usage of the word, "the collection of information of military or political value" (not related to the 1st usage discussed earlier)

Anyway, we're nuts. We could work together, build and make useful stuff to use and sell, making our lives and income better and not having to kill anyone doing it. Instead we just blow things up and try not to get ourselves kill or wreck the economy with it

Yep, totally nuts, that's one of the main reasons I distain religion, because it is one of the major problems preventing that outcome, and it makes it harder to move past our inbuilt tribalism, and promotes irrational thinking, and prevents the change in attitudes we need.

 

[luutzu]

Yep, its a different beast alright, and there is no simple answer, nuking and carpet bombing doesn't work.

All that will really end it is the abandoning of the crazy ideals that lead to it, and in the meantime a lot of good intelligence* and special forces work, and bucket loads of Jdams, lots and lots of Jdams.

*2nd usage of the word, "the collection of information of military or political value" (not related to the 1st usage discussed earlier)



Yep, totally nuts, that's one of the main reasons I distain religion, because it is one of the major problems preventing that outcome, and it makes it harder to move past our inbuilt tribalism, and promotes irrational thinking, and prevents the change in attitudes we need.

Yea, Intelligence. there's a lot of double-speak in politics and military aren't there. "Peace is our occupation" is one from Dr Strangelove.

Religion and nationalism are obstacles, but if we remove it what do we replace it with? Capitalism seems to be the answer but then they'd do what they do seeing there is no loyalty or care for any people or any country - the whole world is then stuffed. Well some are more stuffed than others.

Maybe the answer is a few enlightened capitalists... like you and me; don't know about you, certainly is me, haha

 

[SirRumpole]

Maybe the answer is a few enlightened capitalists... like you and me; don't know about you, certainly is me, haha

.

Yes I agree with that, ethical capitalism is what we need.

Maybe more Warren Buffets and Bill Gates (although I think Gates was a bit unethical in the way he tromped over all his competitors) .

 

[Value Collector]

Religion and nationalism are obstacles, but if we remove it what do we replace it with?

That's like asking a person suffering from cancer what are they going to replace the cancer with once they are cancer free, the answer is nothing, you just go on living a healthy life.

Capitalism seems to be the answer but then they'd do what they do seeing there is no loyalty or care for any people or any country - the whole world is then stuffed. Well some are more stuffed than others.

Capitalism is just our economic system, it exists regardless of religion, and I can't see how its an either / or.

I mean if a person abandons their religion it doesn't mean they need some other indoctrination, they can just go on living as they were minus the fairy tales and beheadings, maybe get a sunday morning hobby, I see drone flying is taking off, maybe read a science book to qwell the curiosity, instead of a religious text.

 

[SirRumpole]

Capitalism is just our economic system, it exists regardless of religion, and I can't see how its an either / or.

I mean if a person abandons their religion it doesn't mean they need some other indoctrination, they can just go on living as they were minus the fairy tales and beheadings, maybe get a sunday morning hobby, I see drone flying is taking off, maybe read a science book to qwell the curiosity, instead of a religious text.

Yes but I think a lot of people turn to religion because they think that religion cares about them personally, whereas the capitalistic society just thinks about profits.

If you want to do away with religion then you have to replace it with a caring society, otherwise people will just go back to religion.

 

[luutzu]

That's like asking a person suffering from cancer what are they going to replace the cancer with once they are cancer free, the answer is nothing, you just go on living a healthy life.



Capitalism is just our economic system, it exists regardless of religion, and I can't see how its an either / or.

I mean if a person abandons their religion it doesn't mean they need some other indoctrination, they can just go on living as they were minus the fairy tales and beheadings, maybe get a sunday morning hobby, I see drone flying is taking off, maybe read a science book to qwell the curiosity, instead of a religious text.

Not exactly.

Religion and nationalism, or cancer (you don't like religion too much do you )... was defined as a thing that bind people towards a common goal, or a common community. So if we take that sense of "belonging" to one group or another, what will make then combine us together as a people? Being all "Earthlings" is some way off, we're making some strides towards seeing all human as one race - though some are more equal than others and all that.

The answer seem to be all that talk about Free Trade and globalisation and "The Market" bringing peace to the world and unite people through trade and exchange and smiles and a coke or two. That doesn't really work out in reality, so far.

So trade and capitalism will exists regardless... maybe it is really is what will unite us all a single people, eventually, when the playing field is a bit more balanced.

Anyway, let's leave discussions of world peace and how I'm going to solve it for another day.

 

[luutzu]

Yes but I think a lot of people turn to religion because they think that religion cares about them personally, whereas the capitalistic society just thinks about profits.

If you want to do away with religion then you have to replace it with a caring society, otherwise people will just go back to religion.

Hence, enlightened capitalists like myself, with all of my two cents

 

[Value Collector]

Yes but I think a lot of people turn to religion because they think that religion cares about them personally, whereas the capitalistic society just thinks about profits.

If you want to do away with religion then you have to replace it with a caring society, otherwise people will just go back to religion.

I think in general people are pretty caring, and we can care about profits 9 - 5 and then do good work after hours, look at the worlds biggest charitable donations, they are from capitalists or capitalist organisations.

Also, I feel the best way to lift people out of poverty is capitalism.

look at this type of work, this awesome, all funded through capitalism, to benefit people and build future business, trade is at the heart of capitalism, and trade lift people from poverty. this is mosaic company, one of the worlds largest fertiliser companies, publically listed on the NYSE



Not charity, just sound business, making profits and changing lives.

 

[SirRumpole]

I think in general people are pretty caring, and we can care about profits 9 - 5 and then do good work after hours, look at the worlds biggest charitable donations, they are from capitalists or capitalist organisations.

Also, I feel the best way to lift people out of poverty is capitalism.

look at this type of work, this awesome, all funded through capitalism, to benefit people and build future business, trade is at the heart of capitalism, and trade lift people from poverty.

Well, as I said I'm all in favour of ethical capitalism, the more the better.

That also involves a mindset in government to encourage ethical capitalism (and ethical government) and not just assume that any business is good business if it makes money for a few.

Ethical capitalism imo means considering and giving equal weight to the effects of its decisions on all those who would be affected by its operations, the shareholders, employees, customers, suppliers, the environment and society.

Several of our major businesses haven't got the idea yet I don't think.

 

[Value Collector]

not just assume that any business is good business if it makes money for a few.

I think the biggest reason profits flow to a few is that the vast majority of people never consider taking an ownership interest in the economy.

Society raises us to be workers earning a wage, which is great, but in general teaches people nothing about the other side of capitalism, owning the capital and investing in the businesses and assets that make up the economy.

100's of times I have heard children asked what jobs they want when they grow up, never have I heard a child asked what sort of companies do they want to own, never at high school was the working of capital markets and investments explained.

Yet we wonder why the 1% own nearly everything, because the 99% were never taught that owning it was an option.

Super is a start, but people should be taught that from the moment they start working they need to be thinking about building an ownership interest in the world around them.

 

[SirRumpole]

Super is a start, but people should be taught that from the moment they start working they need to be thinking about building an ownership interest in the world around them.

That's fine for some areas but it's questionable whether the profit motive is good for everybody or everything.

I don't think medical drugs should controlled as much by business interests as they are now. The idea that companies can patent genes is just one area where corporations have tried to muscle in on what should be a public interest area. Public interest vs private interest is a big issue.

Do you want the police privatised ? The courts ? Social work ? Natural Resource Assessment ?

People need encouragement to go into those public good areas without having a profit motive.

 

[Value Collector]

That's fine for some areas but it's questionable whether the profit motive is good for everybody or everything.

.

Profit is just really your payment for supply of the goods you produce. Whether we are talking about companies or people, we all have talents or skills or assets, we will be good at producing something, and when we use these talents or skills or assets to produce goods and services for others, we will generate profit, which we can use to purchase goods or services from others.

people say its driven by greed and it is to an extent, but to make profit you have to be serving others, my local baker invested money to build a set of ovens much much bigger than he needs to make his own bread, and he focuses on producing more bread than he can eat, with the aim of feeding others, and making a profit so he can buy other stuff from other guys who have invested to produce more stuff than they need, every one makes money by providing services to others.

I don't think medical drugs should controlled as much by business interests as they are now. The idea that companies can patent genes is just one area where corporations have tried to muscle in on what should be a public interest area. Public interest vs private interest is a big issue.

If the company has spent millions in producing a genetically modified organism, I see no problem with them using a patent to protect that investment, patents don't last for ever.

If a company spend millions producing a new strain of corn that's 20% more productive and uses less water, I think they should be able to patent that and sell seeds to farmers under a contract.

Do you want the police privatised ? The courts ? Social work ? Natural Resource Assessment ?

No some things are better handled by government.

 

[Tisme]

Profit is just really your payment for supply of the goods you produce...................



No some things are better handled by government.

Like Nickel Refineries for example

 

[luutzu]

I think in general people are pretty caring, and we can care about profits 9 - 5 and then do good work after hours, look at the worlds biggest charitable donations, they are from capitalists or capitalist organisations.

Also, I feel the best way to lift people out of poverty is capitalism.
....

That's an idealised version of capitalism, of course.

Ideally, people, capitalists, ought to be thinking of doing good work 9 to 5. After hours are set aside for family, kids, and trying to get lucky.

When a business do good work, when they create value, they should be rewarded and make good profit to boot. But thing is, and we all know this... there are many ways to make profit - making good product or services is the worst and riskiest part of making money.

Building a better mouse trap require a lot of work, taking a lot of risks, and the results may be complete failure. To make money only, on the other hand... use the money you have and buy off a few politicians; push the costs of, say, clean environment and waste onto the Earth itself, or onto those who either live with it or pay to have it clean up themselves.

If we judged by the number of wealthy individuals versus the number of people sliding into poverty past five years... it does not appear that wealth were created by enriching the other people. Was created by what economists call rent-seeking. Influence politics so that the state will sell you its essential monopolies, you buy it for a steal and jack up the price: result is the few with the cash got real rich, the many who have to use the infrastructure better get second job.

 

[Value Collector]

Like Nickel Refineries for example

In some cases, governments are big stake holders in resource projects, they will take huge royalties over time, and huge amounts of taxes on employee wages and company profits.

So in some cases it makes sense for government to help get projects going.

By the way I have no idea on the details of the nickel project you are referring to, I haven't been following it.

 

[Value Collector]

That's an idealised version of capitalism, of course.

Ideally, people, capitalists, ought to be thinking of doing good work 9 to 5. After hours are set aside for family, kids, and trying to get lucky.

When a business do good work, when they create value, they should be rewarded and make good profit to boot. But thing is, and we all know this... there are many ways to make profit - making good product or services is the worst and riskiest part of making money.

Building a better mouse trap require a lot of work, taking a lot of risks, and the results may be complete failure. To make money only, on the other hand... use the money you have and buy off a few politicians; push the costs of, say, clean environment and waste onto the Earth itself, or onto those who either live with it or pay to have it clean up themselves.

If we judged by the number of wealthy individuals versus the number of people sliding into poverty past five years... it does not appear that wealth were created by enriching the other people. Was created by what economists call rent-seeking. Influence politics so that the state will sell you its essential monopolies, you buy it for a steal and jack up the price: result is the few with the cash got real rich, the many who have to use the infrastructure better get second job.

(maybe we should move this to the philosophy thread)

I see huge amounts of value generation everyday, everywhere I look I see companies adding value, I think we just take our system for granted.

Sure there is always going to be people doing the wrong thing, and we should try and limit that, but the foundation of our system are strong. Just remember when you sit and eat dinner tonight, you are benefiting from the best food production and delivery system ever constructed on this planet, and it was built by "Greedy capitalists" all working and investing to make sure you're fed, they will probably also make sure your lights are on and your entertained for the night (Hopefully by a marvel or star wars film or maybe a classic Disney film)

 

[SirRumpole]

they will probably also make sure your lights are on

Private enterprise did not build the power generation or distribution system in this country, they just want to get their hands on what they see as continual profits without risk.

"Socialise the risk and privatise the profit" is the way this country is now operating.

 

[Value Collector]

Private enterprise did not build the power generation or distribution system in this country, they just want to get their hands on what they see as continual profits without risk.

"Socialise the risk and privatise the profit" is the way this country is now operating.

did the government physically build the system or did they tender contracts for construction out to private companies?

Does the government own all of the system? or are sections of the generation owned and built by private companies?

What about the fuel? are the coal mines/gas fields operated by government or private?

are the vehicles used to run around and maintain everything made by the government or private companies?

what about all the physical parts and tools, does the government own the saw mills, pine forests etc that provide the power poles, the copper mines and cable mills that produce the wire, the factories that produce countless other parts and chemicals used to run power stations?

I think if you took all the parts of the system away that are either owned, constructed, supplied by or maintained by private companies or contractors you wouldn't have a system.

So yes, private companies are keeping your lights on.