|
hakimashou posted:If you give people impossible ideals they discount the whole idea of reasoned ethics. I think possibly the reason people discount reasoned ethics is because they are taught that actually good ideals aren't important and that being a selfish bastard, such as you are advocating, is perfectly acceptable. You get points for striving towards a moral ideal, you get even more points for succeeding to a degree. You get no points for saying "actually moral idealism is hard so let's just accept really bad ideas like 'you can't do anything about people being selfish and caring only about their immediate surroundings'" OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 03:27 on Feb 16, 2017 |
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 03:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 22:40 |
|
|
spectralent posted:"And therefore, we should just do nothing" If I ran the world we'd soak the rich to pay for good schools for everyone. But we wouldn't hold it against rich people if they sent their kids to rich people schools either.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 03:25
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I think possibly the reason people discount reasoned ethics is because they are taught that actually good ideals aren't important and that being a selfish bastard, such as you are advocating, is perfectly acceptable. There's a pretty broad field between "being a selfish bastard" and "wanting the best for your own kids." I'm sure some selfish bastards somewhere couldn't care less about their kids' education, and many very selfless people nevertheless do everything they can to get the best outcome for their own kids.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 03:27
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:If I ran the world we'd soak the rich to pay for good schools for everyone. But we wouldn't hold it against rich people if they sent their kids to rich people schools either. Please tell me what kind of school turned out someone with this level of dumbshit view of the world.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 03:28
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:There's a pretty broad field between "being a selfish bastard" and "wanting the best for your own kids." No not really, the key prhase there is "their own". The possessive gives it away. It's quite possible to look after relatives out of selflessness sure, but doing it is not at all an indicator of selflessness, especially not when you do it mostly because they're your relatives.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 03:30
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:If you give people impossible ideals they discount the whole idea of reasoned ethics. So to follow, if we push people to behave morally, they start lynching gay kids? gently caress me we're doomed. hakimashou posted:If I ran the world we'd soak the rich to pay for good schools for everyone. But we wouldn't hold it against rich people if they sent their kids to rich people schools either. This is an incompatible set of views.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
spectralent posted:So to follow, if we push people to behave morally, they start lynching gay kids? That isn't following at all. And its not an incompatible set of views. Lets say someone makes two million dollars a year, and is taxed at a rate of say, 75%. He ends up taking home 500,000 dollars. Much of the 1,500,000 dollars he's paid in taxes is used to fund great schools for everyone, but he chooses to spend 90,000 dollars of his money to send his two daughters to a private school with other rich people, and we don't hold it against him. In this example we've both soaked the rich to pay for good schools for everyone, and also not held it against the rich guy that he sends his kid to a rich people school.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 03:47
|
|
|
Yes we do because we could also take that 90k and put that towards even better schools.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 03:51
|
|
|
the problem is the schools of the elites tend to breed people who are racist, ignorant, classist, mysoginist, small minded pricks. I mean just look at the conservative leadership until brexit, a load of them went to loving school / college together. it ain't good. mixing with a good cross section of society when growing up is good for children.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 03:54
|
|
|
Segregating rich kids into rich people schools also means they never get to interact with the rest of us and realise we're people too and not just props they can burn fifty pound notes of in front of for laughs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 03:55
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:the problem is the schools of the elites tend to breed people who are racist, ignorant, classist, mysoginist, small minded pricks. Wasn't the conservative leadership before brexit anti-brexit though?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 03:56
|
|
|
No?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 03:58
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Wasn't the conservative leadership before brexit anti-brexit though? that isn't the point he was making, friend.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 03:58
|
|
|
I mean yes some of the tories hitched their horse to the pro EU wagon but like half of them were rabid leavers and the other half were probably only in it for the money.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 03:59
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Wasn't the conservative leadership before brexit anti-brexit though? well firstly Cameron was stupid enough to call the referendum in the first place, and to have it as a 50+ anything wins instead of 2/3rds like a sane person. gove + boris johnson were pro brexit. e/ yeah and my point was that cameron's administration was populated by people who went to school together.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 03:59
|
|
|
The biggest problem with the Conservative leadership being a bunch of rich white people is that it fundamentally didn't matter to them what the result of the referendum was: they're rich, from rich families, with a bunch of rich friends, so even in the event of a fairly catastrophic Brexit, they'll still be better off than 98% of the country. And yeah, they might have some friends who aren't from the UK, but they're probably rich as well, so the Home Office will get those visas processed ASAP, man. And maybe their family businesses could take a hit from perfidious EU bureaucrats during Brexit, but they can just pass legislation that gives them more money/subsidies (right, Gideon?). And they'll keep the borders open for rich people from other countries so they can launder mob money by buying expensive property. Why expend energy on a project when you'll come out smelling of money regardless of the outcome?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 07:37
|
|
|
kingturnip posted:The biggest problem with the Conservative leadership being a bunch of rich white people is that it fundamentally didn't matter to them what the result of the referendum was: they're rich, from rich families, with a bunch of rich friends, so even in the event of a fairly catastrophic Brexit, they'll still be better off than 98% of the country. This is a big part of the reason we're saying that schools for rich people are bad. Meeting people and making friends from different walks of life might have given them some perspective. Then again, Gove went to state school and that didn't stop him from turning into a oval office as soon as he got into Oxford.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 08:13
|
|
|
While a certain amount of nepotism is ultimately natural (purely on evolutionary grounds if nothing else, although that way lies  so perhaps I should steer clear), it's interesting to note that in more equal societies (e.g. the Nordic countries) parents feel it's less necessary to invest quite so much in their kids, because they know the state will ultimately take care of them.Conversely, if you have a society where many parents invest in their children to ludicrous degrees (by sending them to private school, for instance, or avoiding inheritance tax), that perhaps gives you a gauge that there's something wrong with the society. Alternatively: if you're stuck in a situation where a bunch of people including friends and relatives are tied to train tracks, perhaps you should have dealt with the moustache-twirling villain before it got to this point. Paul.Power fucked around with this message at 08:18 on Feb 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 08:14
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:The same reason people love their family and friends more than strangers. Have you actually read the post you quoted? Because I said quite clearly that feelings of tribalism with human beings you know is something I understand and yes, a part of human nature, but a) it's not the best part - it's responsible for a lot of bad poo poo, and b) "loving your country" is not tribalism with humans you know - countries are a goddamn fiction because there's absolutely nothing linking you to all those million people you'll never ever loving know in your life. You're basically saying that you'd save people from your country before you'd save people from elsewhere, which is such a despicable view once you ditch the lovely racist romance and actually consider how it'd work in action I don't even know where to begin. Have you actually read history books and travelled the world? Because there's so much deep interlinking between all the cultures of the world that it'd be stupid to consider a country a unit of culture - we humans are all too linked together through the migrations and invasions and counter-invasions of history to even make a unit of culture a clear thing. Countries are not groups of people - they're just administrative entities. It's stupid to feel like it's your family, and you're a racist, sorry. Judge people by their individual actions, not by a string of characters in their passport.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 08:41
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Lets say someone makes two million dollars a year, and is taxed at a rate of say, 75%. He ends up taking home 500,000 dollars This isn't how taxes work.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 09:09
|
|
|
Gort posted:This isn't how taxes work. For the sake of quick arguments and math and not derailing the thread can we just pretend he sais "effective tax rate of 75%" instead?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 09:12
|
|
|
Please explain all economics using the freddo method.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 09:20
|
|
|
If you eat a freddo, you get fat. It's not rocket science now why don't youse lot get yer 'eads together and sort are country aht
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 09:23
|
|
|
J..just one? *looks at room strewn with freddo wrappers* uguu~
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 09:26
|
|
|
mehall posted:For the sake of quick arguments and math and not derailing the thread can we just pretend he sais "effective tax rate of 75%" instead? I don't think you're going to get any of those talking to him, regardless of approach
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 09:35
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:If you give people impossible ideals they discount the whole idea of reasoned ethics. Indeed, perhaps there is some median value of moral standard at which we will see a maximum return of moral behaviour, and asking too much or too little will result in a less moral society. Hang on, I think I've got a curve around here somewhere to illustrate this
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 09:40
|
|
|
Remember even Diane Abbott sent her kids to private school. You're going to get awfully lonely up there on your high horse taking such a hardline against these things
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 09:42
|
|
|
Cerv posted:Remember even Diane Abbott sent her kids to private school. You're going to get awfully lonely up there on your high horse taking such a hardline against these things It's a much more common ethical standard for normal people than MPs though. Also hakimashou posted:I've been friends with a British person for years and he's explained it all to me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 09:58
|
|
|
Pochoclo posted:Have you actually read the post you quoted? Because I said quite clearly that feelings of tribalism with human beings you know is something I understand and yes, a part of human nature, but a) it's not the best part - it's responsible for a lot of bad poo poo, and b) "loving your country" is not tribalism with humans you know - countries are a goddamn fiction because there's absolutely nothing linking you to all those million people you'll never ever loving know in your life. That literally is an administrative entity for the provision of a public service across the region tended to by a (pseudo) nation-state. It doesn't even have a cool flag. It does have a snazzy logo and a font though. Are they all racists? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 10:18
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:I've seen many of my friends post things about 'We love the NHS'. For real though the NHS is the most logical reason to like this country.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 10:29
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:I've seen many of my friends post things about 'We love the NHS'. Only if they put it on a red flag with a white circle a la that picture posted the other page:   Nationalist Health Service
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 10:44
|
|
|
Cerv posted:Remember even Diane Abbott sent her kids to private school. You're going to get awfully lonely up there on your high horse taking such a hardline against these things 'Even' Diane Abbott? Is she meant to be the Gold Standard now?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 10:53
|
|
|
Politics is a team sport, this is the red team thread, obviously if someone on our team does something we disagree we can't complain about it when others do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 11:00
|
|
|
Cerv posted:Remember even Diane Abbott sent her kids to private school. You're going to get awfully lonely up there on your high horse taking such a hardline against these things I don't think theres anything massively wrong with someone choosing to send their kid to a grammar or private school (as long as its not "my child shall not socialise with the labouring classes"). I also don't think choosing to send your child to a comprehensive when they could have gone to a grammar is wrong
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 11:01
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:I've seen many of my friends post things about 'We love the NHS'. This is what the poster I was responding to was advocating, adjusted for your use case: "I will put the needs of those who were born in a territory where the NHS operates, before the needs of those born outside of it" You tell me, friend. P.S: in case you didn't notice, I'm not saying that saying "man I love the UK" is racist because surprise, I also have said that on occasion and it has a completely different meaning to what the poster I was responding to meant when he said "loving your country". Pochoclo fucked around with this message at 11:31 on Feb 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 11:28
|
|
|
Pochoclo posted:This is what the poster I was responding to was advocating, adjusted for your use case: Tabloid complaints about health tourism aside, I think they really do try to help everyone that falls on them in a time of need, and recover it where possible, but the system is very much cemented to the idea of the nation-state. It's not ideal, because it can leave foreign nationals stuck trying to negotiate medical bills with their embassy, but I have to say I prefer it to the US system where everyone is equal by place of birth and it's only the contents of your pocketbook that counts. Maybe it's me who is the national socialist. Maybe the best pragmatic option is expanding the EHIC card type system across more countries, but that is still at its heart appealing to the nation-state.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 12:05
|
|
|
We all know that the only bad nationalism is the inclusive multicultural Scottish variant, and all forms of English or British imperial revanchism are good and proper.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 12:13
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:we wouldn't consider it to be morally wrong for someone to save the life of a friend or family member instead of a stranger if they were somehow only able to save one of the two. Yes, that would be morally wrong. At least, if your decision was based on who you were related to (not on who you had the most chance of saving, or just tossing a coin, and the answer was your relative). You shouldn't put your life or your family's life ahead of the lives of other people. We might understand and forgive someone who did that in an extreme situation, but their behaviour would still be morally wrong. And you're using the example of family in this post to make a broader argument that it's not morally wrong to prioritise people of your nationality over people of different nationalities. This is also incorrect.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 12:29
|
|
|
Unfortunately the only current alternative seems to be liberal global capitalism, where people are free to amass tokens that somehow denote their value. The family, the nation, the state, the religion, those are defense mechanisms against this type of thing, and tend to do best when they provide services to their members to protect against it. But they then come with their own internal hierarchies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 12:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 22:40 |
|
|
Paxman posted:You shouldn't put your life or your family's life ahead of the lives of other people. beep boop
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 12:36
|
|