User Tag List

First 4567816 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 303

  1. #51
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    I see that some of these nations are ranked higher on the Index of Economic Freedom than the U.S. (like Canada and New Zealand) and that is why they are happier. I'm highly skeptical of Venezuela though (when was the study done?); that country is a mess today and don't even have enough toilet paper and many other items these days.
    I think my point is more that free market capitalism doesent bring this happiness, but happiness of people is has many different factors in it. Also, in some ways free market capitalism brings good things, but that is clearly not required for peoples happiness. But where i think free market capitalism is a bad thing is that it divides people, some get more happy, other get less, often those who get more are a minority, so this average joe does not benefit from free market capitalism much, and much of those that do benefit form it only in terms of being able to take loans for a new big house or something similar. But look what happens when banks start to give loans for people that cant really pay for them(are not rich enough), the whole economy shits on itself and even reflects to other countries world wide.. But thats a whole different thing..

    The real difference between how people living in the country are effected by free market capitalism vs "eu style socialism" is from things like do you get free healthcare, for example dental care that costs like 10-100€ max or is free if you dont have have enough incomes(or can go to private sector if you prefer and want to pay more extra) and do you pay bit more taxes if you make enough money to live comfortably anyways vs do you need to pay for some insurance money so that if you need to have dental care, you dont have to pay thousands or possibly tens of thousands on hospital bills. Or if the university costs more than the school books(if you werent fast enough to get them from university library) vs having to pay shit loads of money to be able to go to a proper university.
    When it comes to usa, i think its good that they have some stuff like scholarships and other "eu style socialist" stuff, but too many people who cant see that really we are just all people here and we should try to make this place for all of us, or as many as possible at least, but instead not enough money for funding even proper roads to some places is not being collected from those who already have enough to even build their own roads if they just wanted it.. And then other places where cash flows its like a paradise. But then if you look at the people living in that paradise, many are not even happier with their lives than some regular guy in Denmark. And that regular guy who makes a proper living, doesent have to worry about too much study loans, doesent have to worry about if they need to go to hospital other than can doctors that he trusts save him. This person is the average in denmark, is it the average person in many countries ran by free market capitalism or is free market capitalism a requirement for an average person to have better means to a better life?
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  2. #52
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Studmuffin23 View Post
    This goes back to a debate between Aristotle and Plato.

    The argument essentially boils down to eternal principles vs. practical convenience.

    Plato believed that abstract moral values were the only stabilizing force in human societies. If they break down, so does everything else. (This concept would be echoed by Karl Marx centuries later).

    Aristotle, by contrast, believed that pragmatic efficiency was the only stabilizing force in human societies. If one course of action offers a practical advantage, go for it. It's an extremely utilitarian way of thinking.

    Aristotle's approach can be identified with free-market capitalism, as well as political progressivism.

    Plato's approach can be identified with socialism (and other principle-based concepts such as anarchism, monarchy, etc. )

    Typically, Aristotle's camp is more successful within political reality, whereas Platonic experiments have failed miserably time after time. However, it is my humble opinion that governments cannot take Plato's side because human political institutions are inherently Aristotelian; they're focused on creating a happy environment for their citizens, as opposed to reforming the morals of their citizens.

    The Platonic ideal seems to be a more natural fit in the leave-the-world brand of religion. Quakers, Christian/Buddhist monks, and other spiritual-seekers have implemented his approach pretty well within their communities.
    I am staunchly utilitarian and a socialist by a few different interpretations of the word. I also hate Plato. I don't think these things form any kind of contradiction. And if you go back to the writings of Karl Marx and Adam Smith, you'll find Smith is the one that speaks of our dependence on the moral virtue of people, and Marx is the one who thinks (correctly or not) that his ideas will follow from the actions of a selfish, morally reprobate humanity (see conflict theory).
    Go to sleep, iguana.


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

  3. #53
    deplorable basketcase Tellenbach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,953

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP
    I think my point is more that free market capitalism doesent bring this happiness, but happiness of people is has many different factors in it.
    I agree, but I do think a free market economy and the prosperity it brings creates the environment where it's easier to be happy. Social scientist Arthur Brooks thinks it is earned success that brings happiness; achieving one's dreams brings happiness. One is much more likely to have dreams, to pursue dreams, and to fulfill dreams under a free market economy (Compare N. Korea with the USA).

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP
    And that regular guy who makes a proper living, doesent have to worry about too much study loans, doesent have to worry about if they need to go to hospital other than can doctors that he trusts save him. This person is the average in denmark, is it the average person in many countries ran by free market capitalism or is free market capitalism a requirement for an average person to have better means to a better life?
    Money doesn't buy happiness. Getting welfare doesn't buy happiness; quite the contrary, people on welfare are more miserable because they haven't earned success. It is the feeling of accomplishment that completes a person. I'll use an example I've used before. China has lifted 400 million people from poverty using free market capitalism principles.

    Lastly, a quote:

    "Money never made a man happy yet, nor will it. The more a man has, the more he wants. Instead of filling a vacuum, it makes one." Benjamin Franklin
    Senator Rand Paul is alive because of modern medicine and because his attacker punches like a girl.

  4. #54
    Senior Member Studmuffin23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9
    Posts
    171

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    I am staunchly utilitarian and a socialist by a few different interpretations of the word. I also hate Plato. I don't think these things form any kind of contradiction. And if you go back to the writings of Karl Marx and Adam Smith, you'll find Smith is the one that speaks of our dependence on the moral virtue of people, and Marx is the one who thinks (correctly or not) that his ideas will follow from the actions of a selfish, morally reprobate humanity (see conflict theory).
    It's really interesting that you mentioned that. In recent years, I've began to see free-market capitalism and socialism begin to switch places in that respect, with the former evolving into a Platonic ideal and the latter evolving into a utilitarian approach.

    By the way, on the subject of Marx you merely misunderstood my terminology. And it also depends a lot on your own interpretation of their ideas. They each have roots in both Plato and Aristotle, depending on how you look at it.

  5. #55
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    I agree, but I do think a free market economy and the prosperity it brings creates the environment where it's easier to be happy. Social scientist Arthur Brooks thinks it is earned success that brings happiness; achieving one's dreams brings happiness. One is much more likely to have dreams, to pursue dreams, and to fulfill dreams under a free market economy (Compare N. Korea with the USA).
    Incorrect. Under the free market those who have ties to those with power and/ or money find it far easier to achieve than those without. They have more opportunities, better education, more time to spend how they like (since most things are taken care of for them) and a better name to trade upon. Those without must struggle to get anywhere.

    The only way to make a free market work is to ensure that nothing is passed on from generation to generation. Make each individual equal from childhood. Of course this would mean taking every child from their parents and not allowing them to claim them as theirs...pretty insurmountable. Any other route is undermined by nepotism and illogical claims of authority "I am the son of Alan Sugar and hence you should recruit me as I'll be awesome at business".
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    Money doesn't buy happiness. Getting welfare doesn't buy happiness; quite the contrary, people on welfare are more miserable because they haven't earned success. It is the feeling of accomplishment that completes a person. I'll use an example I've used before. China has lifted 400 million people from poverty using free market capitalism principles.

    Lastly, a quote:

    "Money never made a man happy yet, nor will it. The more a man has, the more he wants. Instead of filling a vacuum, it makes one." Benjamin Franklin
    Using China as a reference to a free market...unusual as it opposes most of what America stands for like free speech and those reviews you so willingly embraced before. China also has very strict import restrictions which isn't very free market to my eyes.

    People on welfare are less happy on average and they do have a sense of not being worth much because they haven't earned what they have, this is true. How does ensuring that they are kept there by big business going to help?
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  6. #56
    deplorable basketcase Tellenbach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,953

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander
    Under the free market those who have ties to those with power and/ or money find it far easier to achieve than those without. They have more opportunities, better education, more time to spend how they like (since most things are taken care of for them) and a better name to trade upon. Those without must struggle to get anywhere.
    And yet, millions of destitute immigrants reach our shores and become successful, contributing members, often times in the same generation.

    For example: 3.5 million Jewish immigrants entered the US at the turn of the last century with an average of $9 in their pockets. Now look at them.

    The only way to make a free market work is to ensure that nothing is passed on from generation to generation. Make each individual equal from childhood. Of course this would mean taking every child from their parents and not allowing them to claim them as theirs...pretty insurmountable. Any other route is undermined by nepotism and illogical claims of authority "I am the son of Alan Sugar and hence you should recruit me as I'll be awesome at business".
    We are born with different skills and gifts, so giving everyone the same pot of money won't change that. That is the mistake of the equality crowd. Redistribution of wealth has never worked; if it worked, we would have seen it in the dozens, if not hundreds of examples by now. I would also argue that market forces will correct for errors of nepotism. A company that rewards family over talent isn't going to be as competitive as the company who hires the best people.
    Senator Rand Paul is alive because of modern medicine and because his attacker punches like a girl.

  7. #57

    Default

    Money actually does make people happier but only up to a certain point. Once you have shelter, food, internet and a couple of other basic stuff, new money will not make you happier. Having $400.000 and the next year having $450.000 will not make you happier. In fact, that year might be waaay more sad than any of your other years. Your relationships may brake, someone may die...
    "A negative mind will never give you a positive life." http://bosniannames.com/

  8. #58
    deplorable basketcase Tellenbach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,953

    Default

    @Standing Here I agree with that.

    Here's an interesting study on happiness and lottery winners:

    Adaptation level theory suggests that both contrast and habituation will operate to prevent the winning of a fortune from elevating happiness as much as might be expected. Contrast with the peak experience of winning should lessen the impact of ordinary pleasures, while habituation should eventually reduce the value of new pleasures made possible by winning.
    Lottery winners and accident victims: Is happiness relative?

    Basically, lottery winners are very happy when they win but the level of happiness levels off several months back to baseline levels.
    Senator Rand Paul is alive because of modern medicine and because his attacker punches like a girl.

  9. #59
    Senior Member Rambling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    401

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grey_beard View Post
    In a slightly different vein, this also applies to those who attended Ivy League schools in the U.S.--

    https://theamericanscholar.org/the-d...ite-education/

    The piece talks about the infinite 'breaks' and 'consideration' given to students at Ivy League schools, where deadlines and rules are constantly bent;
    whereas people going to (say) flagship state universities, will often lose grades for missing deadlines, even for events beyond their control.

    The attitude carries on after University, where connected people from the 'right' institutions have doors opened to them because of their connections,
    but they think it is solely due to their own personal charisma and genius.

    It's a good read.
    I always thought that the idea was that removal of the fear of failure helped people to excel of their own volition. It reduced the pressure to being *only* that pressure which the individual placed upon themselves to succeed...

    He typifies the average Ivy League student as a hoop-jumping INTP, I think...

    And as for the rant about solitude at the end - irrelevant to his point. As is the part about being able to talk to anyone - why choose *that* as a measure of educational success? He might as well berate himself for not being able to do his *own* plumbing. Or maybe get his other half to talk with the tradesmen... Intelligent people are rarely tongue tied in my view.

    But an interesting read, even though I disagreed with much of it. Thanks for posting it.

  10. #60
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    And yet, millions of destitute immigrants reach our shores and become successful, contributing members, often times in the same generation.

    For example: 3.5 million Jewish immigrants entered the US at the turn of the last century with an average of $9 in their pockets. Now look at them.
    As with type, it doesn't prohibit the outcome just reduces it's chances.

    Why do you think that generation after generation of the same family is what you term as "successful"? Probability is that their genes aren't that strong,so what's the defining factor?
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    We are born with different skills and gifts, so giving everyone the same pot of money won't change that. That is the mistake of the equality crowd. Redistribution of wealth has never worked; if it worked, we would have seen it in the dozens, if not hundreds of examples by now. I would also argue that market forces will correct for errors of nepotism. A company that rewards family over talent isn't going to be as competitive as the company who hires the best people.
    Without a level playing field how can you say it will all work out?

    It's been pointed out that even the government's policy is affected by how influential and rich the person wanting change is (by quite a large factor). So even a democracy will not save you from the predatory nature of "success" so deregulation would just make it easier. Your idea that companies would be encouraged to be "nice" by some mystic force is just not upheld within business now. Nepotism lives and breathes even with regulation, why would enabling companies to do whatever they wish change that?

    If your incompetent son puts in a manufacturing process which makes lots of waste, so what? Just dump it!
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

Similar Threads

  1. Slavery, child labor, organized religion and a free-market economy
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-22-2013, 11:21 PM
  2. Define capitalism, socialism, free market fundamentalism, communism, etc.
    By ygolo in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-14-2012, 06:34 PM
  3. Why your diet may not be working like you want...
    By sdalek in forum Health and Fitness
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-03-2007, 08:01 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