User Tag List

First 21011121314 Last

Results 111 to 120 of 164

  1. #111
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnyboy View Post
    One cannot objectively ascribe the term fair to any real world situation; its application is necessarily born from subjectivity. By posing such a question, therefore, one either seeks data on the subjective opinions of the masses, or he seeks to illuminate the prejudiced nature of such discussions. Either way, I'll give it a go...

    We gather the entirety of humanity together to observe the creation of two distinct, dichotomous states of being. Each person must decide whether he or she will continue on in state A or state B. These states represent the entirety of future experiences: structure, preferences, lifestyles, opportunities, abilities, etc. If, upon knowing these states completely, roughly half the population willfully chooses one, and the rest willfully choose the other, then these states are equal and represent a fair set of circumstances. If one state is preferred over the other, then there exists unfairness.

    How'd I do?
    Poorly.

    The thread's title is not what does the concept of fair mean.

    It is, do the rich pay their fair share of taxes. When one asks, "what is fair?" in such a thread, a reasonable person would understand the question to mean, "what is fair?" (in the context of the conversation regarding tax progressivity)

    So what exactly is fair? Given the amount the term has been used over the last several months, I would think there would be some consensus as to what it means.

    Is fair when the rich forfeit all of their $ except enough to subsist on?

    Is fair when they have to give up more than they take home?

    What is fair? What is a fair way to address revenue issues, when the amount of money we need arithmetically can't be raised by the rich alone.

    Is it fair to rain benefits on people who have no stake in paying for those benefits? Is it fair to burden future generations with the bill for an entitlement system that those receiving the benefits aren't willing to pay for?

    Is it fair to ask our creditors to endlessly make up the difference?

    Is it fair to ruin our financial stability in an effort to avoid any short term pain?

    What is fair?

  2. #112
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Fair is in the eye of every beholder.

    Your fair and my fair, not to mention everyone else's, are quite different.

    And as such, an appeal to some unknowable fairness can't be the basis for any logical discussion of tax policy.

  3. #113
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    Fair is in the eye of every beholder.

    Your fair and my fair, not to mention everyone else's, are quite different.

    And as such, an appeal to some unknowable fairness can't be the basis for any logical discussion of tax policy.
    Well then, I'm sure glad I didn't appeal to fairness in any of my reasoning.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  4. #114
    Senior Member UniqueMixture's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    estj
    Enneagram
    378 sx/so
    Socionics
    esfp
    Posts
    3,038

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post


    Good job selectively responding to what I wrote, bud.
    Just face it Zara. All the best places in the world the places that you yourself said you prefer to spend your time are turning away from the philosophy you espouse. No matter how much you rail against me, that's not going to change. The world will continue to change and the world of kant and american capitalism will be relegated to being a minor historical blip. It's just the nature of reality, it's nothing personal. Because, as you have previously shown the inability to accept, to some degree all these arguments over "truth" and "righteousness" are just idiotic games. In all likelihood, the world will continue on as it always has and many horrible and wondrous things that you never could have imagined will happen. You don't control truth, you're just a man, and one day you will die. So instead of trying to act as though you are the savior of America by bringing wise economic counsel to the dregs of the internet, why don't we just be real?

    You're right in a sense, what I hope will one day happen is quite unlikely to happen, but humanity doesn't have a lot of hope staying on this rock battling it out for resources like fucking rats in a cage.

    http://www.ill.eu/news-events/press-...ps-of-current/

    Fuck politics. It won't work. As you said, scarcity is an inherent condition of life on this planet as we know it. However, what if we can understand phenomena like the above link so we can create room temperature superconductors?

    http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releas...-dmo041112.php

    http://bluebrain.epfl.ch/

    ^What if we can model neurological behavior so we can predict it accurately and find ways to help prevent people from having negative outcomes before the fact or repair their function afterwards?

    Not to mention generation of next generation energy from efficient solar panels, cleaning of dirty water that kills

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht1_V...layer_embedded

    ^Or what if we can mine asteroids and bring them to the earth to reduce scarcity?

    http://www.nature.com/news/mathemati...ishing-1.12243

    ^Sometimes capitalism can slow the exchange of ideas and decrease technological output by focusing so much on an individual company's profit margin to the exclusion of all other concerns.

    http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2...fa_fact_lehrer

    ^You see it is quite possible that environments of scarcity evolve creatures who tend to be more tribal and focused only on the good of first or perhaps second order genetic kin and their mates

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...-conservatives

    ^and because altruism ie. the willingness to sacrifice for the good of those that perhaps you may not ever encounter is evolutionarily novel it correlates with intelligence. And organisms which are more intelligent and possibly when more cooperative in an environment of abundance are those which tend to win out over the long haul

    I mean, for fucks sake, it's not like capitalism is "at odds" with technology. They can work together to accomplish larger goals. But be sure, the solution to problems is an engineering problem, not a political one. And yes, I hate the earth's resources being wasted

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15532333...-experts-warn/

    So, if you can tell me how the republican party fucking cutting the deficit and trading a bunch of numbers over servers in the big stupid valuation game we call the stock market is going to save us from all of that, then I will gladly convert to your point of view, but until then.. I respectfully disagree.
    For all that we have done, as a civilization, as individuals, the universe is not stable, and nor is any single thing within it. Stars consume themselves, the universe itself rushes apart, and we ourselves are composed of matter in constant flux. Colonies of cells in temporary alliance, replicating and decaying and housed within, an incandescent cloud of electrical impulses. This is reality, this is self knowledge, and the perception of it will, of course, make you dizzy.

  5. #115
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UniqueMixture View Post
    It's obvious you are not even familiar with the basic concepts of a resource based economy so how am I supposed to discuss them? You can use the free market to sell technologies that make current business models irrelevant, like selling a hydroponics system or a 3d printer that makes a lot of manufacturing superfluous. So it is not so much a matter of convincing those in power to change their minds, but a reality that will be forced on society as the market itself meets the demands of consumers.
    There is a pretty big leap from, 3-D printers exist to 3-D printers have made most manufacturing obsolete.

    Care to fill in the gap.

    Because like most of the other things you post, this has just enough plausibility (and the flashiness of new tech.) to draw you in hook line and sinker, but not so much that any serious government policy maker is actually taking it into consideration.

    The same goes for the resource economy. When I'm reading about it in politico, the economist, the national interest, the new republic, the hill, the national journal, the financial times, the atlantic, foreign policy, national affairs, and bloomberg I'll decide to care.

    I was writing about the Natural gas reserves in Colorado right after the energy committee hearings on it. Now everyones talking about fracking and the domestic energy boom.

    Are we all going to be talking about any of this next year, or will it be another catchy pop-culture politics idea fallen by the way side?

  6. #116
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Well then, I'm sure glad I didn't appeal to fairness in any of my reasoning.
    In any case, I would say that using the word "fair" is the most pointless thing to do. No matter how well intentioned, it just gives one's opponents the impression that you're some weenie giving a Rodney King speech.. "Can't we all just get along?" It shows you have no leverage at all, and they can continue what they do.

    I think there are only two productive ways of calling out an injustice. One is the Tolstoy/MLK path of non-violent resistance (or the Gandhi and Jesus path). Never bring attention to the notion of fairness, but to the notion of their injustice specifically. You have to find the right targets and, more or less, "troll" them until they unleash all of their ugliness on to you. Your side ends up being martyred, but society will cry foul, and subsequent generations benefit.

    The second is return their level of "unfairness" with an ungodly amount of unfairness of your own. Take the Serbian/Croation route. Tie them up, castrate them, start raping their children in front of them while they lie on the floor helpless and bleeding to death. No one has a smug comeback in the face of an insane rapist mob. They will, of course, come back a generation later and return the favor. Then the cycle repeats.

  7. #117
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UniqueMixture View Post
    @freeeekyyy and @DiscoBiscuit there are alternatives like the Resource based economy which deal with the same concerns in a more ethical and egalitarian manner which conservatives do not even look at. I am not sure if it is because the idea has not become very popularized or because of greed or ignorance (not just on the part of conservatives by the way). The reality of the situation is that we cannot keep our current economy without suffering the problems that the economy creates in the real world namely poverty, starvation, homelessness, and war which are all tied to resource scarcity as population increases. The plain truth is that we will continue to have these problems until we move from capitalism which posits that exponential growth can continue ad infinitum on a world with limited resources to a more realistic economy based on sustainability.
    Homelessness, poverty, hunger and war are never going away.

    We can only minimize the effect they have.

  8. #118
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    In any case, I would say that using the word "fair" is the most pointless thing to do. No matter how well intentioned, it just gives one's opponents the impression that you're some weenie giving a Rodney King speech.. "Can't we all just get along?" It shows you have no leverage at all, and they can continue what they do.

    I think there are only two productive ways of calling out an injustice. One is the Tolstoy/MLK path of non-violent resistance (or the Gandhi and Jesus path). Never bring attention to the notion of fairness, but to the notion of their injustice specifically. You have to find the right targets and, more or less, "troll" them until they unleash all of their ugliness on to you. Your side ends up being martyred, but society will cry foul, and subsequent generations benefit.

    The second is return their level of "unfairness" with an ungodly amount of unfairness of your own. Take the Serbian/Croation route. Tie them up, castrate them, start raping their children in front of them while they lie on the floor helpless and bleeding to death. No one is going to come back with their "smug" comebacks in the face of complete mob insanity. They will, of course, come back a generation later and return the favor. Then the cycle repeats.
    Ummm... Right now we're at kind of a level where those methods need not enter into it.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  9. #119
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Ummm... Right now we're at kind of a level where those methods need not enter into it.
    We don't enter it, because liberals are a society of enablers. They're like George McFly in Back to the Future. "AWW shucks, Biff! Very funny, guys!"

  10. #120
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    We don't enter it, because liberals are a society of enablers. They're like George McFly in Back to the Future. "AWW shucks, Biff! Very funny, guys!"
    There's no good reason to take it to that level yet, Trotsky. I do think the left-wing has been very timid. I think it's been so timid that it hasn't even tested whether or not it can succeed with much milder pressures than the ones you describe.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

Similar Threads

  1. Rate the functions per their comfort levels in time of stress
    By UnitOfPopulation in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-02-2013, 08:25 PM
  2. [E8] How do you deal with an aggressive 8 in the work place?
    By knight in forum Enneatypes
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 07-24-2012, 09:20 PM
  3. [Fe] Fe help stat: what do I wear to an academic reception in the evening, no dinner?
    By Usehername in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-09-2010, 10:12 PM
  4. GM, So do I own the equivalent of a Pontiac G5 in stock now, or what?
    By Brendan in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-10-2009, 08:43 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO