ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Socialism

Report this
Created by: DUKAT!!!!

darmokattanagra

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 390

Report this Feb. 13 2013, 2:08 pm

Pretty soon, we won't be buying model kits from the store, we'll be buying the print file online and then we can print and build it.  Or we'll be able to replace the back plate off our phone and remote, create a tool, etc.

And what about those who don't have the means to "buy print files" because the 3D printer has put them out of a job?

jcan1701

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5

Report this Feb. 13 2013, 7:35 pm

I'm saying that if people don't work, the whole society is affected, which is motivation for people to work harder.  


And if others work harder, why should I?  This is the whole question that throws the whole socialism thing out the window.  If you are going to do all the work, then there is no need for me to do the work. I'll get the benifits just the same.  So why should you do the work for my lazy self, who won't do the work because I don't have to?  This is a trick question because there is no right answer, and yet it is the right question to ask when asking about socialism.

Sehlat123

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 496

Report this Feb. 13 2013, 9:55 pm

Quote: darmokattanagra @ Feb. 13 2013, 2:08 pm

>

>And what about those who don't have the means to "buy print files" because the 3D printer has put them out of a job?

>


What about any people who have been made obsolete by technology? Then get a new job. Unless they have a big government like what you are advocating. Then they can live off welfare and unemployment insurance, and never have to work again.


"Borg. Sounds Swedish."

Lone Palm

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 207

Report this Feb. 13 2013, 10:46 pm

And what about those who don't have the means to "buy print files" because the 3D printer has put them out of a job?


As Sehlat said, they'll have to get new jobs. And that's how an economy grows. Technology increases the productivity of indivduals thereby diminishing the need for redundant workers. This is a good thing, because it releases workers who become available to emerging industries. If these workers were otherwise employed then the emerging industries (like Starship Construction) would not have a pool from which to draw workers and would not be able create a new product/service for the economy. 


This is why the gold standard, deflation, and saving are so important. Stable currency like gold/silver gains purchasing power over time. If a person has saved during times of employment, then he is likely to make it through times of unemployment until a job becomes available. 

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46342

Report this Feb. 14 2013, 9:25 am

Quote: Lone Palm @ Feb. 13 2013, 10:46 pm

>

>And what about those who don't have the means to "buy print files" because the 3D printer has put them out of a job?

>As Sehlat said, they'll have to get new jobs. And that's how an economy grows. Technology increases the productivity of indivduals thereby diminishing the need for redundant workers. This is a good thing, because it releases workers who become available to emerging industries. If these workers were otherwise employed then the emerging industries (like Starship Construction) would not have a pool from which to draw workers and would not be able create a new product/service for the economy. 

>
Exactly!


You'd figure that people would take a basic economic course and learn about creative destruction.


How many blacksmiths lost their jobs as people moved to the automobile?  But let's forget about the engineers, designers, assemblers, mechanics, etc. that built/maintain the cars.  Then let's add the gasoline industry... etc.


As we all know, technology has created a lot more jobs than it's put people out of work.


How many tens of thousands of jobs did Apple alone create?  And then when you add all the secondary companies that create products to add to one of the many Apple products...


I guess they want get rid of all the technology we have, removing millions of jobs from the market, and go back to an agrarian society....


FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46342

Report this Feb. 14 2013, 9:36 am

Quote: Lone Palm @ Feb. 13 2013, 10:46 pm

>This is why the gold standard, deflation, and saving are so important. Stable currency like gold/silver gains purchasing power over time. If a person has saved during times of employment, then he is likely to make it through times of unemployment until a job becomes available.
This is also why individual responsibility is so important.  We are responsible to save for the future, including rainy days.

darmokattanagra

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 390

Report this Feb. 14 2013, 10:29 am

Get a new job.




My point is, you like the idea of the 3D printer and hope it will eventually lead to real replicators but you clearly don't understand what an invention like that would mean for capitalism. Why would anyone care about gold, silver or anything else we currently consider valuable if they could be created out of virtually nothing? What would be of enough value to motivate people to work?

Lone Palm

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 207

Report this Feb. 15 2013, 7:42 am

My point is, you like the idea of the 3D printer and hope it will eventually lead to real replicators but you clearly don't understand what an invention like that would mean for capitalism. Why would anyone care about gold, silver or anything else we currently consider valuable if they could be created out of virtually nothing? What would be of enough value to motivate people to work?


Capitalists don't forever desire or expect gold to be the economic standard. Just as gold replaced spices, a new, but free market determined, commodity (like platinum) will one day replace gold. If technology brings us to the point where gold and silver can be fabricated so easily, this is a gain for the eonomy. Gold and silver are metals and have uses other than money. Silver is used for computer manufacturing, for example.  For easily fabricated silver, the price would drop allowing for manufacturing costs to decrease as well. The savings could then be passed on to consumers whose purchasing power, as measured in the new commodity (platinum) standard, has increased. 


Given the vastness of space, we have a long way to go, as it applies to expanding the economy, before productive individuals lose motivation to work. 

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46342

Report this Feb. 15 2013, 2:47 pm

Quote: Lone Palm @ Feb. 15 2013, 7:42 am

>Given the vastness of space, we have a long way to go, as it applies to expanding the economy, before productive individuals lose motivation to work.
Reminds me of the Rule of Acquisition #75: Home is where the heart is, but the stars are made of latinum.

darmokattanagra

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 390

Report this Feb. 16 2013, 12:02 pm

For easily fabricated silver, the price would drop allowing for manufacturing costs to decrease as well. The savings could then be passed on to consumers whose purchasing power, as measured in the new commodity (platinum) standard, has increased.

Again, I don't think you understand the implications of an invention like the replicator. Why would you need to replicate raw materials like silver or platinum if you could just as easily replicate whatever it is that you were intending to use those materials to manufacture? What value would your product have if everyone else could replicate it themselves?

Given the vastness of space, we have a long way to go, as it applies to expanding the economy, before productive individuals lose motivation to work.

If our only motivation for exploring space is to "expand the economy" then we don't deserve to be out there.

chr33355

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1551

Report this Feb. 16 2013, 3:49 pm

Quote: Lone Palm @ Feb. 13 2013, 10:46 pm

>

>And what about those who don't have the means to "buy print files" because the 3D printer has put them out of a job?

>As Sehlat said, they'll have to get new jobs. And that's how an economy grows. Technology increases the productivity of indivduals thereby diminishing the need for redundant workers. This is a good thing, because it releases workers who become available to emerging industries. If these workers were otherwise employed then the emerging industries (like Starship Construction) would not have a pool from which to draw workers and would not be able create a new product/service for the economy. 

>This is why the gold standard, deflation, and saving are so important. Stable currency like gold/silver gains purchasing power over time. If a person has saved during times of employment, then he is likely to make it through times of unemployment until a job becomes available. 

>
 Gold and silver are no more stable than the dollar.  Only worth what they are because people say that it worth that.  There is a reason we left the gold standard and a reason going back wil be a terrible idea.


God in an Alcove

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 43

Report this Feb. 17 2013, 3:36 am

Quote: FleetAdmiral_BamBam @ Feb. 11 2013, 9:26 am

Quote: God in an Alcove @ Feb. 11 2013, 3:29 am

>

>I'm sorry, but I'm seeing a contradiction here. You are saying that "government is force," and clearly opposing this, but at the same time, you support government, even if it may be in a limited fashion. You are acception some force.

>Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with the concept of a limited government. It's just a matter, to me, of how the government is limited combined with how the government limits us.
Go back to the biggest question all: WHY?

See, force can be use for good and bad.  When the Colonies in America decided they wanted liberty, they had to use force to accomplish it.  The USA has used force to stop tyranny like in our two World Wars.

People use force to protect themselves from assault - that's opposing force - one for good and one for bad.

 

The role of the US Government, per the Constitution, is to protect liberties, not use force to destroy them.


"Why" is not the biggest question. That question is answered easily; Because the Constitution says so. It is our right.


The question is "how." And that, thanks to beaurocracy (much of it corporately inspired) is a difficult question to answer.

God in an Alcove

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 43

Report this Feb. 17 2013, 3:39 am

Quote: FleetAdmiral_BamBam @ Feb. 11 2013, 9:32 am

Quote: God in an Alcove @ Feb. 11 2013, 3:30 am

Quote: FleetAdmiral_BamBam @ Feb. 09 2013, 9:37 am

>

>

>And you're free to donate to them.  You could even come to one of the many "soup kitchens" and food patries and donate your money and time.  But I don't believe in forcing you to support another, regardless of the "reason."  If I force you to pay for someone else's needs against your will, then you've just become a slave.

>

You said earlier that you were in the military. That's a reason.

But nobody forced me to be in the military - I chose to do so of my own accord.  The role of the US military is defense, not forcing others to subjugate themselves to the USA.


You said that your parents were on welfare. No one forced them, either. They chose that.


And your claim that "the role of the US military is defense, not forcing others to subjugate themselves to the USA" is I'm sorry to say, but laughable at best. If it were true, we would not have American military forces stationed in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, and Lybia. Yet we do.

God in an Alcove

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 43

Report this Feb. 17 2013, 3:47 am

Quote: FleetAdmiral_BamBam @ Feb. 11 2013, 9:42 am

Quote: God in an Alcove @ Feb. 11 2013, 3:33 am

>

>Maybe you have, but that doesn't mean I've seen it. I joined this community only several months ago, and due to my work/family schedule, I don't get to log in often. Needless to say, I missed any such links. So I'm asking you to post them again.
I'll see what I can do, but no promises right now as I don't have the links to the research right in front of me.  I highly encourage you to do your own research as you can learn a whole lot more from that than from reading my references (but at least it'll give you a start.)

 

Edit:  I found a few papers that I subscribe to, and according to them, they find that for every increase of 10% in unemployment benefits, there's a correlating of raising the average time unemployed by of 4-8% in the U.S.

 

 

 

 

 

But here's something that I found from Art Laffer (which I also found similar charts other places since source data was same):

 

 

 

 

.

 

The data for the chart came from BLS.

 

Now remember, other than the taxation / redistribution of wealth problem, we find that there are two other correlated problem:

1) The percentage of employed rises as benefits expand.

2) The duration employed is linked to the length of benefits

 

Think of it this way: If you received as much money as you wanted forever, why work?


I'm going to have to look into that data more, thank you for providing a starting point.


However, it seems that your argument is, basically, that "more benefits means more people working for longer periods of time." Wouldn't such people, as a result, be paying more taxes (in the long run), effectively providing for more benefits?


Also, that pertains primarily to your own statements and the second graph. Im not sure I see the point of the first.

Lone Palm

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 207

Report this Feb. 17 2013, 6:24 am

Again, I don't think you understand the implications of an invention like the replicator. Why would you need to replicate raw materials like silver or platinum if you could just as easily replicate whatever it is that you were intending to use those materials to manufacture? What value would your product have if everyone else could replicate it themselves?


One might not need to replicate raw materials, as opposed to the object itself, but the principle of manufacturing is still 100%, because of limitations that will inevitably exist. For example, a replicator cannot replicate objects that are bigger than the replicator itself. Such objects would require assembly. Nor could the replicator create an object without a blueprint, which would require manufacturing via computer program/software. Even in Star Trek, where Industrial Replicators exist, starships have been shown to be manufactured piece by piece, as opposed to simply replicated in its entirety. Manufacturing, and therefore labor, will persist.  

If our only motivation for exploring space is to "expand the economy" then we don't deserve to be out there.


Economics is the scientific study of production, distribution, and consumption of goods. Human behavior is fundamental to that end. Economic wealth, which is the totality of goods and servies, must expand for Space Exploration to become a reality... for a space vehicle and the transportation it provides is a good/service. Do not confuse "expanding the economy", which is an expansion of goods and services, for hoarding money. Economic expansion is inescapable where innovation occurs.

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum