|
I don't feel jealous of people that earn more than me.
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 11:43 |
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I mean, I agree, but the reason I agree is because I am selfish and want to have some of my life one day maybe that isn't oriented around work and not spending money because I have things I need to keep it for. Jesus that is a miserable, puritan way of looking at things. So you get to keep your income (that you work for, dutifully paying the albeit inadequate rate of taxation levied upon you) as long as you excoriate yourself with guilt and self-loathing? Who does that help?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:Jesus that is a miserable, puritan way of looking at things. So you get to keep your income (that you work for, dutifully paying the albeit inadequate rate of taxation levied upon you) as long as you excoriate yourself with guilt and self-loathing? Who does that help? You don't have to feel guilty about it, you just shouldn't go making up magical systems that justify your imperfect ability to adhere to moral absolutes. You're human, you're limited, that doesn't change the ideal way to treat others and you shouldn't put your finger in your moral compass because it's pointing towards a cliff. You can remain aware of the correct course of action while acknowledging your inability to follow it at the same time without either engaging in self flagellation or sophistry to try and stop yourself having a nagging awareness that there's room for improvement. The desired goal is that you lend absolutely no support whatsoever to the many lovely ideologies that exist to salve the guilty consciences of the wealthy and prevent them from being driven to engage with their peers. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 01:02 on Feb 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
I'm not going to fight over the size of our scraps while the lords feast
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:02
|
|
|
I get a bit jealous with people who are much richer than me, but I know it's silly. I do get annoyed though with people who seem totally unaware of how fortunate they are, especially when they seem quite knowledgeable of the word in other respects.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:I don't feel jealous of people that earn more than me. Im just pleased I'm considered working class somehow. Talk about a red letter day!
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:You don't have to feel guilty about it, you just shouldn't go making up magical systems that justify your imperfect ability to adhere to moral absolutes. In what way is giving up all your money on an individual basis actually going to tangibly help, though? At best it'll maybe feed a few more people for a week. The correct course of action is undertaken collectively and that course is the expropriation of the capitalist class, either through taxation or collectivisation. Anything else is a feelgood band aid.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:04
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:In what way is giving up all your money on an individual basis actually going to tangibly help, though? At best it'll maybe feed a few more people for a week. The correct course of action is undertaken collectively and that course is the expropriation of the capitalist class, either through taxation or collectivisation. Anything else is a feelgood band aid. The two are not mutually exclusive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:06
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:The two are not mutually exclusive. no but one works and one demonstrably doesn't Namtab posted:I'm not going to fight over the size of our scraps while the lords feast you are getting really good at this and I wish I had the ability to metaphor properly
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:In what way is giving up all your money on an individual basis actually going to tangibly help, though? At best it'll maybe feed a few more people for a week. Depends what you do with the money. Give a man a fish and he can eat for a day. Give that man a fishing rod? He can catch fish forever. It's what I've always thought anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:The two are not mutually exclusive. I know morale would be a lot higher for the coming revolution if I wasn't constantly flagellating myself for making more than the man next to me, and nipping at the woman in front of me for making more than I do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
I mean maybe morale might also be improved if you had five people free of the worst extremes of poverty rather than one person with some lovely pictures of their skiing lodge in the alps. I find it hard to credit a belief that emphasizes the power of collective action but ignores the superiority of the collective welfare over the individual. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 01:12 on Feb 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:10
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I find it hard to credit a belief that emphasizes the power of collective action but ignores the superiority of the collective welfare over the individual. I don't particularly believe in privileging either the collective over the individual or the individual over the collective. Any vision of socialism I'd want to be a part of has the two working in harmony. A human politics built on solidarity, not a dystopian machine crushing all before it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:20
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I mean maybe morale might also be improved if you had five people free of the worst extremes of poverty rather than one person with some lovely pictures of their skiing lodge in the alps. I guess the argument here is how far do you expect the better paid worker to go. charity is a good thing if you're earning more than you need, but expecting a person to live in guilt and forego all pleasure isn't good and seems like it'd be an unhealthy way to live
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:22
|
|
|
I find it difficult to see communism as anything other than a rejection of the idea that any amount of individual wellbeing can make up for the suffering of the collective. No matter how much you give one person, if two people are deprived of everything, then your situation is worse than if you give all three enough to spare them the excesses of poverty. Like say I'm earning, for example, £100k, to my mind £20k is enough to live a much better life than many people do, you could give away two thirds of your income to three people and still have enough for a good life for yourself and for them to have much better lives than they might otherwise lead. And it would be a drat sight better than spending it all on yourself. And again, you don't need to feel guilty about it, there is an option between feeling guilty and trying to argue that actually your actions are good. You can just... know what you should be doing without turning into some kind of weird flagellant. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 01:26 on Feb 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:I don't particularly believe in privileging either the collective over the individual or the individual over the collective. Any vision of socialism I'd want to be a part of has the two working in harmony. A human politics built on solidarity, not a dystopian machine crushing all before it. Nah I think we should live as the human hive
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I find it difficult to see communism as anything other than a rejection of the idea that any amount of individual wellbeing can make up for the suffering of the collective. The thing about communism is that it isn't capitalism, and each person will be given what they need. The other thing is that we don't live in a communist system. I have a about £100 left over each month after rent, bills and basic leisure spending. Am I inherently immoral if I spend this on myself? E: quote:And again, you don't need to feel guilty about it, there is an option between feeling guilty and trying to argue that actually your actions are good. You can just... know what you should be doing without turning into some kind of weird flagellant. Namtab fucked around with this message at 01:30 on Feb 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
I would say you could probably find space to buy a few big issues here and there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:29
|
|
|
Private charity is literally the free market alternative to state intervention.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:29
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Depends what you do with the money. Give a man a fish and he can eat for a day. Give that man a fishing rod? He can catch fish forever. It's what I've always thought anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:29
|
|
|
Lord of the Llamas posted:Private charity is literally the free market alternative to state intervention. And the thing about free market alternatives to state intervention is that they're generally still better than neither.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:31
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Give a man a fishing trawler and he can't look after it on his own. Give a couple dozen men a trawler in collective ownership and they can all feed themselves forever and also have a few hours off because angling is pretty inefficient in comparison. These metaphors are out of control
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:31
|
|
|
Ah, the wobbly ship model.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:33
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Give a man a fishing trawler and he can't look after it on his own. Give a couple dozen men a trawler in collective ownership and they can all feed themselves forever and also have a few hours off because angling is pretty inefficient in comparison. Give a couple dozen men a trawler and they'll take out a loan and hire some other men to work it and pay them peanuts, while making a small fortune off their backs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:34
|
|
|
Farage has finally snapped and is demanding Carswell be expelled from UKIP. A little moment of good news amongst all the grimness
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:36
|
|
|
Pochoclo posted:Give a couple dozen men a trawler and they'll take out a loan and hire some other men to work it and pay them peanuts, while making a small fortune off their backs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:38
|
|
|
Give an entire country trawlers and they will make cod go extinct.Cerv posted:Farage has finally snapped and is demanding Carswell be expelled from UKIP. On what basis? Like, why does Farage get to say what UKIP does at the moment?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:38
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Give a man a fishing trawler and he can't look after it on his own.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:42
|
|
|
Far age is king of ukip and his supporters want him knighted E: omg it's because he thinks carswell stopped him getting knighted Namtab fucked around with this message at 01:46 on Feb 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:42
|
|
|
Always nice to be reminded that Labour don't have a monopoly on embarrassing public feuds.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:46
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:John Galt could, imo
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
Well this is a thing Police are being overwhelmed by the number of reports about child sexual abuse and need to consider alternative approaches for less serious cases, the UK’s lead officer on child protection has said. Simon Bailey, the head of Operation Hydrant – the nationwide inquiry into historical child sexual abuse – said forces were operating beyond capacity because of the sheer volume of reports. “The numbers are continuing to rise,” he told the Times. “We have reached saturation point ... The police service has responded to the threat but it has now reached that point whereby we have to try and turn the tide. We have to look at alternatives.” Options would include giving counselling and rehabilitation to lower level offenders, so that officers could concentrate on dealing with the most dangerous paedophiles with access to children, and those looking at the most serious images of abuse, Bailey said. Offenders found to have viewed online images should only be spared a custodial sentence if they were risk assessed and would not have the potential to come into contact with children, he said. They would also continue to be monitored. Bailey, who is the chief constable of Norfolk and lead on child protection for the National Police Chiefs’ Council said: “Let’s be really clear: somebody going online and using their credit card to direct the abuse of a child in the Philippines should be locked up, categorically. “That individual who is not in contact with children and doesn’t pose a threat to children and is looking at low-level images ... when you look at everything else that’s going on, and the threat that’s posed of contact abuse to children, we have to look at doing something different with those individuals.” https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/feb/28/child-sexual-abuse-claims-overwhelming-police-says-lead-officer
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 06:59
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:'Who?' -Jeremy Corbyn That's not a con, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 07:10
|
|
|
His Divine Shadow posted:That's not a con, though. What do you mean?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 07:44
|
|
|
Namtab posted:Owl my boy I think that workers who earn more should be allowed to enjoy some of it. This is a bad argument to use because assuming higher income has been earned amounts to claiming that the capitalist system is bestowing resources fairly, a claim we need to challenge. TomViolence posted:At best it'll maybe feed a few more people for a week. That's a pretty good best, you know, and plenty of reason to do it. I once saw someone argue that we shouldn't give money for famine relief in a poor country because the people we'd save would only die of something else later. As if 'later' weren't the best possible thing!
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 09:01
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:Well this is a thing Luckily this is just historical cases. Freaking boomers have a lot to answer for
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 09:16
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/836330609681260546 The real fight starts now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 09:33
|
|
|
The well paid poster paying 50k in tax is giving a share of their extra money to help others less fortunate in society to be pulled up out of poverty. They are happy to do this as without these people living good, enjoyable and productive lives, the society in which they live and from which they derive their high salary will be worse off. Their problem is that the people they have entrusted to manage this part of the arrangement are more interested in secreting this money away to their mates such that when they have finished their national service they might receive their share of the ill gotten gains as well. In addition they have decided that the original high salary earner should probably get out, either because they are dumb or maybe the numbers ultimately say this seemingly counter intuitive step is for their personal financial benefit. Either way, pretty desirable people to have in charge.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 09:47
|
|
|
So how is every one celebrating #GlobalScouseDay?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 10:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 11:43 |
|
|
has pancake day been rebranded?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 10:18
|
|