"Parenting Without Punishing"

Nathan A. Barclay wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message
...

Go back to basic principles even MORE Fundamental than any supposed
"rights"!: The ACTUAL ORIGINAL INTENT BEHIND "freedom of
speech" is that the Truth be known, not that immature idiots and Evil
*******s should have the right to deceive others any way they want
to at any time for Evil purposes.

The reason why we have freedom of speech enshrined in our Constitution is
that when government starts arbitrarily deciding what is the "Truth" and who
are the "immature idiots and Evil *******s," that power can be horribly
misused, sometimes by intent and sometimes just because whoever is in power
(even the majority) is wrong.
----------------------
Nonsense. The English weren't even doing any such thing at the
time of the revolution. The framers knew doodley **** about your
modern propaganda machines called the media. The danger to freedom
is never the People deciding what is True, but minority nobilities
or rich private minority cabals!


We do make a few exceptions in extreme cases,
but your attitude goes way, way too far in arrogantly assuming that you know
what Truth is and that people who disagree with you must be the ones who are
wrong.
-------------------
The assertion that the Truth is so hard to detect is merely
disinformation by the rich who want you to question yourselves
so they aren't killed for their economic and political crimes!
It's merely desperate propaganda!


History has shown that such arrogance is too dangerous to be allowed
to become a legal basis for silencing one's opponents.
--------------------------
Propaganda!!
History was WRITTEN by such arrogsant rich minorities, and they LIE
about the availability of the Truth just to protect their wealth!
Steve

"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message
...
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:

We do make a few exceptions in extreme cases, but
your attitude goes way, way too far in arrogantly assuming that you know
what Truth is and that people who disagree with you must be the ones who
are wrong.
-------------------
The assertion that the Truth is so hard to detect is merely
disinformation by the rich who want you to question yourselves
so they aren't killed for their economic and political crimes!
It's merely desperate propaganda!

You prove my point for me even while you dispute it. Your economic fantasy
of how things would work in a perfect world ignores numerous clearly proven
realities about human nature and about the limitations of democratic control
(not the least of which is how little the majority can reasonably be
expected to know about the average issue with a zillion issues to decide).
Variants of communism have been tried in the Soviet Union and China, among
other places, and while some of the problems in such places can reasonably
be attributed to the fact that their governments were totalitarian rather
than democratic, other serious problems demonstrated in those nations would
almost certainly crop up even in a democratically controlled communistic
society.

In the short term, fairer distribution of society's wealth could benefit the
poor. But consider the exponential effect of any reduction in the rate of
economic growth in the long term. Even if the rate of economic growth in a
communistic society would be 99% of what it would be in a capitalistic
society, the total growth in a communistic society in a century would be
less than 37% of what a capitalistic society would achieve. Add another
century and that drops to less than fourteen percent. And with a bigger
difference in the growth rate, the exponential effect can be felt a lot more
quickly. It is that exponential effect that destroyed the Soviet Union by
causing them to fall farther and farther behind - even in spite of their
being able to copy innovations from capitalist nations instead of having to
invent everything themselves.

At any one moment in time, yes, capitalism is a highly unfair system. But
if capitalism can grow the pie at even a slightly faster rate than communism
can - and all of the evidence indicates that it can do at least that - the
long-term result is that even the poor in a capitalistic society will have
more wealth than the citizens in a communistic society would. The fairness
of communism is bought only by robbing the future.

Getting back to the issue of freedom of speech, the point is that Truth
often has more than one angle to it - and some angles are easier to see than
others. Silencing competing viewpoints is very dangerous.

"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message
...
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:

We do make a few exceptions in extreme cases, but
your attitude goes way, way too far in arrogantly assuming that you know
what Truth is and that people who disagree with you must be the ones who
are wrong.
-------------------
The assertion that the Truth is so hard to detect is merely
disinformation by the rich who want you to question yourselves
so they aren't killed for their economic and political crimes!
It's merely desperate propaganda!

You prove my point for me even while you dispute it. Your economic fantasy
of how things would work in a perfect world ignores numerous clearly proven
realities about human nature and about the limitations of democratic control
(not the least of which is how little the majority can reasonably be
expected to know about the average issue with a zillion issues to decide).
Variants of communism have been tried in the Soviet Union and China, among
other places, and while some of the problems in such places can reasonably
be attributed to the fact that their governments were totalitarian rather
than democratic, other serious problems demonstrated in those nations would
almost certainly crop up even in a democratically controlled communistic
society.

In the short term, fairer distribution of society's wealth could benefit the
poor. But consider the exponential effect of any reduction in the rate of
economic growth in the long term. Even if the rate of economic growth in a
communistic society would be 99% of what it would be in a capitalistic
society, the total growth in a communistic society in a century would be
less than 37% of what a capitalistic society would achieve. Add another
century and that drops to less than fourteen percent. And with a bigger
difference in the growth rate, the exponential effect can be felt a lot more
quickly. It is that exponential effect that destroyed the Soviet Union by
causing them to fall farther and farther behind - even in spite of their
being able to copy innovations from capitalist nations instead of having to
invent everything themselves.

At any one moment in time, yes, capitalism is a highly unfair system. But
if capitalism can grow the pie at even a slightly faster rate than communism
can - and all of the evidence indicates that it can do at least that - the
long-term result is that even the poor in a capitalistic society will have
more wealth than the citizens in a communistic society would. The fairness
of communism is bought only by robbing the future.

Getting back to the issue of freedom of speech, the point is that Truth
often has more than one angle to it - and some angles are easier to see than
others. Silencing competing viewpoints is very dangerous.

Nathan A. Barclay wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message
...
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:

We do make a few exceptions in extreme cases, but
your attitude goes way, way too far in arrogantly assuming that you know
what Truth is and that people who disagree with you must be the ones who
are wrong.
-------------------
The assertion that the Truth is so hard to detect is merely
disinformation by the rich who want you to question yourselves
so they aren't killed for their economic and political crimes!
It's merely desperate propaganda!

You prove my point for me even while you dispute it. Your economic fantasy
of how things would work in a perfect world ignores numerous clearly proven
realities about human nature and about the limitations of democratic control
(not the least of which is how little the majority can reasonably be
expected to know about the average issue with a zillion issues to decide).
---------------------
Your moronic assertions about some magical unstated undemonstrable
reason why democracy wouldn't work to give us equality with freedom
in modern Plutokleptocracies, when it worked fine for 150,000 YEARS
in pre-Plutokleptocratic times in all human tribes, is merely an
obnoxious little low mean lie, nothing more.

There ARE NO supposed "realities of human nature" that were not then
also operant in tribal times that did not represent a fairly simple
emotional disorder due to isolated cases of abuse which was then and
now best treated by affection and social control, and if need be,
systematic restraint and unrelanting humiliation for such behaviors,
nor are there any other such magical features to ACTUAL Human Nature NOW
that are not misbehaviors best treated as CRIMES and both deterred
and punished severely in order to eradicate them!

Your fantasy that this immature insecure greed-syndrome is "natural"
is nothing more than an ugly myth caused by your emotionally sick
partisan desire to succeed at thievery! Your supposed "normalcy" is
nothing but an sick emotional anomaly, in a modern society in which
it has become a pandemic, but one which in True Human Society is best
detected early in children and treated and prevented.


Variants of communism have been tried in the Soviet Union and China, among
other places,
--------------
So when 10% of the people enslave the other 90% and make them do all
the work, and when that minority takes 95% of their productive wealth
and sell it abroad to get rich and bank it in offshore banks just
like Capitalist money-launderers, and then rides around in limnousines
and fine clothes while the poor sew up their few cheap clothing items,
and when they let the poor divide the remaining pittance and call it
"equality", then that is "communism" to you???

Because it IS what happened in Russia and in China!!!!!
And that is NOT COMMUNISM!!!

Communism is when people are paid equally for their labor hours
because there is NO exploitation of one man by another!


and while some of the problems in such places can reasonably
be attributed to the fact that their governments were totalitarian rather
than democratic,
--------------------
Nope!
All govts are "totalitarian" to the people whose actions they intend
to suppress. Doesn't mean they're not right!

Soviet Russia and Red China and Europe waaay back when, were all
feudalisms. THAT is why their govt'al power was WRONG, it was
used to suppress the will of the majority!! It had nothing
whatsoever to do with the fact that it presecuted people for
violating its law, but instead, with what any such laws ARE!


other serious problems demonstrated in those nations would
almost certainly crop up even in a democratically controlled communistic
society.
----------------------
Totalitarianism is a meaningless term. If you don't like what a govt
does you call it totalitarian, even if most people like it just fine
because it guarantees them the liberty of genuine equality. The rich
call taxes "totalitarian", and so on...

No society CAN be "totalitarian", because no society has the manpower
to ever control every aspect of each other's lives, they have to work
for a living and consequently DON'T HAVE TIME, any more than one
can pull onseself into the air by one's bootstraps!

So it amounts to a society using its police to suppress antisocial
behaviors that we agree democratically we want to punish. Saying
that is "totalitarian" is merely a word game of attempting to
unjustly inflame your audience when most of them already disagree
with you!!

Any "totalitarian" govt that did that thoroughly what we all agreed
upon democratically, is merely being extremely effective, and it
should be COMMENDED!


In the short term, fairer distribution of society's wealth could benefit the
poor. But consider the exponential effect of any reduction in the rate of
economic growth in the long term.
-------------
You also have an undemonstrable notion that somehow magically, that
without individal greed being given sway to steal, that overall
productivity would drop. You forget collective greed, which is a
social GOOD, by which people work together to obtain MORE than
they'd EVER have individuallY, and it works even BETTER than the
emotional illness that is "private" greed!

People can democratically decide to produce just as well or better
than any greedy pirate mentality who seeks only to get rich himself,
and usually by enslaving others while HE sits on his ass! A group
of people who want more consumer devices, can jolly well MAKE THEM
together, for each other working nights and weekends when they WANT
a huge boost in their consumer life!


Even if the rate of economic growth in a
communistic society would be 99% of what it would be in a capitalistic
society,
----------------
No "growth" is needed. Remaining the same size is fine and normal.
But that norm is NOT based on any notion of inflated stock prices,
instead its economy is NORMALLY several times larger than Capitalism,
because people work HARDER when they KNOW they are going to benefit
far MORE for each of their hours of labor than they had under thieving
Capitalism! When they know the rich have been put to work, and that
the bean counters who worked for them are now working production
lines, and that criminality has been prevented and the lazy will be
starved to death if they will not work, and as soon as they KNOW they
will get an EQUAL share of production for each of their hours of labor,
they know they will NOT be exploited, and that they can get as much
as they are willing to make! Consequently they will want MORE and MORE!
They will order goods, and those orders will authorize as many needed
extra hours of labor as they are willing to work to make those things
and deliver them to THEM, the people who MADE them!!


the total growth in a communistic society in a century would be
less than 37% of what a capitalistic society would achieve.
--------------------------
There is not even any known source for any such lie.
You totally confabulated.


Add another
century and that drops to less than fourteen percent. And with a bigger
difference in the growth rate, the exponential effect can be felt a lot more
quickly. It is that exponential effect that destroyed the Soviet Union by
causing them to fall farther and farther behind - even in spite of their
being able to copy innovations from capitalist nations instead of having to
invent everything themselves.
---------------------------
Total nonsense. Their masters wanted a lot, but wanted their slaves
to build it all for them. This deprived their slaves, and their
slaves decided not to work. This happens in every serfdom! It happens
whenever ANYONE is paid less than ANYONE else for the same hour of
labor!! It is differention of hourly compensation that causes this,
not any "evil commmmmmmmmunissm", as Nixon would say, his jowls
shaking!


At any one moment in time, yes, capitalism is a highly unfair system.
-------------------------
Nope!
Since each hour of labor is unfair, it is always just that unfair,
exactly, and can never be any better or fairer, because those who
do not work get the benefit of your labor, and that affects BOTH
your labor, AND your desire to work for those rich, instead of for
yourselves!.


But
if capitalism can grow the pie at even a slightly faster rate than communism
can - and all of the evidence indicates that it can do at least that - the
long-term result is that even the poor in a capitalistic society will have
more wealth than the citizens in a communistic society would. The fairness
of communism is bought only by robbing the future.
----------------------
Your dribble-down economic theory, which says that more will dribble
down the chins of the filthy rich to somehow feed the poor better,
does NOT work. The rich want to be ever richer, and they want ever
more for their investments, and that depresses the worker psyche and
loyalties to the system. The cycles of both investor and consumer
confidence based on uncontrolled greedy speculation, fluctuate wildly
and collapse periodically.

Whereas a society where each gets an absolute equal share of goods and
products of their every labor hour, have the greatest possible reason
to keep working avidly, and to make as much as they want. And if their
economy slumps at all it is absolutely zero cause for alarm, they
are only simply laying off a bit so they can all have a vacation!!


Getting back to the issue of freedom of speech, the point is that Truth
often has more than one angle to it - and some angles are easier to see than
others. Silencing competing viewpoints is very dangerous.
-------------------------------
There are NO "viewpoints", there is only the Truth, and lies!!
Steve

Nathan A. Barclay wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message
...
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:

We do make a few exceptions in extreme cases, but
your attitude goes way, way too far in arrogantly assuming that you know
what Truth is and that people who disagree with you must be the ones who
are wrong.
-------------------
The assertion that the Truth is so hard to detect is merely
disinformation by the rich who want you to question yourselves
so they aren't killed for their economic and political crimes!
It's merely desperate propaganda!

You prove my point for me even while you dispute it. Your economic fantasy
of how things would work in a perfect world ignores numerous clearly proven
realities about human nature and about the limitations of democratic control
(not the least of which is how little the majority can reasonably be
expected to know about the average issue with a zillion issues to decide).
---------------------
Your moronic assertions about some magical unstated undemonstrable
reason why democracy wouldn't work to give us equality with freedom
in modern Plutokleptocracies, when it worked fine for 150,000 YEARS
in pre-Plutokleptocratic times in all human tribes, is merely an
obnoxious little low mean lie, nothing more.

There ARE NO supposed "realities of human nature" that were not then
also operant in tribal times that did not represent a fairly simple
emotional disorder due to isolated cases of abuse which was then and
now best treated by affection and social control, and if need be,
systematic restraint and unrelanting humiliation for such behaviors,
nor are there any other such magical features to ACTUAL Human Nature NOW
that are not misbehaviors best treated as CRIMES and both deterred
and punished severely in order to eradicate them!

Your fantasy that this immature insecure greed-syndrome is "natural"
is nothing more than an ugly myth caused by your emotionally sick
partisan desire to succeed at thievery! Your supposed "normalcy" is
nothing but an sick emotional anomaly, in a modern society in which
it has become a pandemic, but one which in True Human Society is best
detected early in children and treated and prevented.


Variants of communism have been tried in the Soviet Union and China, among
other places,
--------------
So when 10% of the people enslave the other 90% and make them do all
the work, and when that minority takes 95% of their productive wealth
and sell it abroad to get rich and bank it in offshore banks just
like Capitalist money-launderers, and then rides around in limnousines
and fine clothes while the poor sew up their few cheap clothing items,
and when they let the poor divide the remaining pittance and call it
"equality", then that is "communism" to you???

Because it IS what happened in Russia and in China!!!!!
And that is NOT COMMUNISM!!!

Communism is when people are paid equally for their labor hours
because there is NO exploitation of one man by another!


and while some of the problems in such places can reasonably
be attributed to the fact that their governments were totalitarian rather
than democratic,
--------------------
Nope!
All govts are "totalitarian" to the people whose actions they intend
to suppress. Doesn't mean they're not right!

Soviet Russia and Red China and Europe waaay back when, were all
feudalisms. THAT is why their govt'al power was WRONG, it was
used to suppress the will of the majority!! It had nothing
whatsoever to do with the fact that it presecuted people for
violating its law, but instead, with what any such laws ARE!


other serious problems demonstrated in those nations would
almost certainly crop up even in a democratically controlled communistic
society.
----------------------
Totalitarianism is a meaningless term. If you don't like what a govt
does you call it totalitarian, even if most people like it just fine
because it guarantees them the liberty of genuine equality. The rich
call taxes "totalitarian", and so on...

No society CAN be "totalitarian", because no society has the manpower
to ever control every aspect of each other's lives, they have to work
for a living and consequently DON'T HAVE TIME, any more than one
can pull onseself into the air by one's bootstraps!

So it amounts to a society using its police to suppress antisocial
behaviors that we agree democratically we want to punish. Saying
that is "totalitarian" is merely a word game of attempting to
unjustly inflame your audience when most of them already disagree
with you!!

Any "totalitarian" govt that did that thoroughly what we all agreed
upon democratically, is merely being extremely effective, and it
should be COMMENDED!


In the short term, fairer distribution of society's wealth could benefit the
poor. But consider the exponential effect of any reduction in the rate of
economic growth in the long term.
-------------
You also have an undemonstrable notion that somehow magically, that
without individal greed being given sway to steal, that overall
productivity would drop. You forget collective greed, which is a
social GOOD, by which people work together to obtain MORE than
they'd EVER have individuallY, and it works even BETTER than the
emotional illness that is "private" greed!

People can democratically decide to produce just as well or better
than any greedy pirate mentality who seeks only to get rich himself,
and usually by enslaving others while HE sits on his ass! A group
of people who want more consumer devices, can jolly well MAKE THEM
together, for each other working nights and weekends when they WANT
a huge boost in their consumer life!


Even if the rate of economic growth in a
communistic society would be 99% of what it would be in a capitalistic
society,
----------------
No "growth" is needed. Remaining the same size is fine and normal.
But that norm is NOT based on any notion of inflated stock prices,
instead its economy is NORMALLY several times larger than Capitalism,
because people work HARDER when they KNOW they are going to benefit
far MORE for each of their hours of labor than they had under thieving
Capitalism! When they know the rich have been put to work, and that
the bean counters who worked for them are now working production
lines, and that criminality has been prevented and the lazy will be
starved to death if they will not work, and as soon as they KNOW they
will get an EQUAL share of production for each of their hours of labor,
they know they will NOT be exploited, and that they can get as much
as they are willing to make! Consequently they will want MORE and MORE!
They will order goods, and those orders will authorize as many needed
extra hours of labor as they are willing to work to make those things
and deliver them to THEM, the people who MADE them!!


the total growth in a communistic society in a century would be
less than 37% of what a capitalistic society would achieve.
--------------------------
There is not even any known source for any such lie.
You totally confabulated.


Add another
century and that drops to less than fourteen percent. And with a bigger
difference in the growth rate, the exponential effect can be felt a lot more
quickly. It is that exponential effect that destroyed the Soviet Union by
causing them to fall farther and farther behind - even in spite of their
being able to copy innovations from capitalist nations instead of having to
invent everything themselves.
---------------------------
Total nonsense. Their masters wanted a lot, but wanted their slaves
to build it all for them. This deprived their slaves, and their
slaves decided not to work. This happens in every serfdom! It happens
whenever ANYONE is paid less than ANYONE else for the same hour of
labor!! It is differention of hourly compensation that causes this,
not any "evil commmmmmmmmunissm", as Nixon would say, his jowls
shaking!


At any one moment in time, yes, capitalism is a highly unfair system.
-------------------------
Nope!
Since each hour of labor is unfair, it is always just that unfair,
exactly, and can never be any better or fairer, because those who
do not work get the benefit of your labor, and that affects BOTH
your labor, AND your desire to work for those rich, instead of for
yourselves!.


But
if capitalism can grow the pie at even a slightly faster rate than communism
can - and all of the evidence indicates that it can do at least that - the
long-term result is that even the poor in a capitalistic society will have
more wealth than the citizens in a communistic society would. The fairness
of communism is bought only by robbing the future.
----------------------
Your dribble-down economic theory, which says that more will dribble
down the chins of the filthy rich to somehow feed the poor better,
does NOT work. The rich want to be ever richer, and they want ever
more for their investments, and that depresses the worker psyche and
loyalties to the system. The cycles of both investor and consumer
confidence based on uncontrolled greedy speculation, fluctuate wildly
and collapse periodically.

Whereas a society where each gets an absolute equal share of goods and
products of their every labor hour, have the greatest possible reason
to keep working avidly, and to make as much as they want. And if their
economy slumps at all it is absolutely zero cause for alarm, they
are only simply laying off a bit so they can all have a vacation!!


Getting back to the issue of freedom of speech, the point is that Truth
often has more than one angle to it - and some angles are easier to see than
others. Silencing competing viewpoints is very dangerous.
-------------------------------
There are NO "viewpoints", there is only the Truth, and lies!!
Steve

"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message
...
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:

You prove my point for me even while you dispute it. Your economic
fantasy of how things would work in a perfect world ignores numerous
clearly proven realities about human nature and about the limitations of
democratic control (not the least of which is how little the majority
can
reasonably be expected to know about the average issue with a zillion
issues to decide).
---------------------
Your moronic assertions about some magical unstated undemonstrable
reason why democracy wouldn't work to give us equality with freedom
in modern Plutokleptocracies, when it worked fine for 150,000 YEARS
in pre-Plutokleptocratic times in all human tribes, is merely an
obnoxious little low mean lie, nothing more.

Would you mind giving me a ride in your time machine sometime? I'd be
interested to see these fully democratic tribes from the distant past of
yours. Oh, what, you don't have a time machine? Then how do you know how
democratic they were or weren't?

In the short term, fairer distribution of society's wealth could benefit
the poor. But consider the exponential effect of any reduction in the
rate of economic growth in the long term.
-------------
You also have an undemonstrable notion that somehow magically,
that without individal greed being given sway to steal, that overall
productivity would drop. You forget collective greed, which is a
social GOOD, by which people work together to obtain MORE
than they'd EVER have individuallY, and it works even BETTER
than the emotional illness that is "private" greed!

Can you provide some practical, real-world examples?

Even if the rate of economic growth in a communistic
society would be 99% of what it would be in a capitalistic
society,
----------------
No "growth" is needed. Remaining the same size is fine and normal.
But that norm is NOT based on any notion of inflated stock prices,
instead its economy is NORMALLY several times larger than Capitalism,

Over the long term, an economy that is growing will inevitably eventually
become bigger than one that is not. The process might take years, or even
centuries, but it will happen.

But on the other hand, I see no basis for your claim that the economy would
somehow magically become several times larger to begin with.

Capitalism! When they know the rich have been put to work,

Where do you get your crazy notion that most of the rich do not work?

"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message
...
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:

You prove my point for me even while you dispute it. Your economic
fantasy of how things would work in a perfect world ignores numerous
clearly proven realities about human nature and about the limitations of
democratic control (not the least of which is how little the majority
can
reasonably be expected to know about the average issue with a zillion
issues to decide).
---------------------
Your moronic assertions about some magical unstated undemonstrable
reason why democracy wouldn't work to give us equality with freedom
in modern Plutokleptocracies, when it worked fine for 150,000 YEARS
in pre-Plutokleptocratic times in all human tribes, is merely an
obnoxious little low mean lie, nothing more.

Would you mind giving me a ride in your time machine sometime? I'd be
interested to see these fully democratic tribes from the distant past of
yours. Oh, what, you don't have a time machine? Then how do you know how
democratic they were or weren't?

In the short term, fairer distribution of society's wealth could benefit
the poor. But consider the exponential effect of any reduction in the
rate of economic growth in the long term.
-------------
You also have an undemonstrable notion that somehow magically,
that without individal greed being given sway to steal, that overall
productivity would drop. You forget collective greed, which is a
social GOOD, by which people work together to obtain MORE
than they'd EVER have individuallY, and it works even BETTER
than the emotional illness that is "private" greed!

Can you provide some practical, real-world examples?

Even if the rate of economic growth in a communistic
society would be 99% of what it would be in a capitalistic
society,
----------------
No "growth" is needed. Remaining the same size is fine and normal.
But that norm is NOT based on any notion of inflated stock prices,
instead its economy is NORMALLY several times larger than Capitalism,

Over the long term, an economy that is growing will inevitably eventually
become bigger than one that is not. The process might take years, or even
centuries, but it will happen.

But on the other hand, I see no basis for your claim that the economy would
somehow magically become several times larger to begin with.

Capitalism! When they know the rich have been put to work,

Where do you get your crazy notion that most of the rich do not work?

Nathan A. Barclay wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" wrote:

Your moronic assertions about some magical unstated undemonstrable
reason why democracy wouldn't work to give us equality with freedom
in modern Plutokleptocracies, when it worked fine for 150,000 YEARS
in pre-Plutokleptocratic times in all human tribes, is merely an
obnoxious little low mean lie, nothing more.

Would you mind giving me a ride in your time machine sometime?
I'd be interested to see these fully democratic tribes from the
distant past of yours. Oh, what, you don't have a time machine?
Then how do you know how democratic they were or weren't?
--------------------------
Tribes of people in the wilderness before high population densities
numbering 50 to 200 couldn't be anything else, they wouldn't be able
to agree to do anything except voluntarily, and that means informal
democracy. If they ****ed off their members they'd leave, they had
nothing keeping them there unless their primary ethic was to get
along, and that points to even better than mere democracy, but to
freedom and consensus!!


In the short term, fairer distribution of society's wealth could benefit
the poor. But consider the exponential effect of any reduction in the
rate of economic growth in the long term.
-------------
You also have an undemonstrable notion that somehow magically,
that without individal greed being given sway to steal, that overall
productivity would drop. You forget collective greed, which is a
social GOOD, by which people work together to obtain MORE
than they'd EVER have individuallY, and it works even BETTER
than the emotional illness that is "private" greed!

Can you provide some practical, real-world examples?
-----------------------------------
We use collective greed constantly, in wanting things from government
we exert collective greed, in wanting peace and law and order and
rights and infrastructure and social guarantees. Most of the things
you probably imagine to be private greed are actually expressions of
collective greed that motivates us to good ends! You see, greed itself
is not the problem, but only whether it brings us together or pushes
us apart.


Even if the rate of economic growth in a communistic
society would be 99% of what it would be in a capitalistic
society,
----------------
No "growth" is needed. Remaining the same size is fine and normal.
But that norm is NOT based on any notion of inflated stock prices,
instead its economy is NORMALLY several times larger than Capitalism,

Over the long term, an economy that is growing will inevitably eventually
become bigger than one that is not. The process might take years, or even
centuries, but it will happen.
--------------------------------------
Duh, I think that's what "growing" means. But what growth means to
Capitalists is actually the migration of wealth to the wealthy, not
actual growth in our productive capacity due to organization and
technology. These are actually opposites.


But on the other hand, I see no basis for your claim that the economy would
somehow magically become several times larger to begin with.
--------------------------------
The "economy" wouldn't, but the redistribution of wealth on a fairer
basis would MORE than double most people's buying power for the same
labor week, because the luxury items of the wealthy would no longer
be produced, and other consumer items would be instead, and because
the indolent rich and their cashiers and accountants that keep track
of what the poor owe the rich now, would then be employed at producing
consumer goods like the rest of us!


Capitalism! When they know the rich have been put to work,

Where do you get your crazy notion that most of the rich do not work?
-----------------------
Watching them. I have known a large number of them.
Steve

Nathan A. Barclay wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" wrote:

Your moronic assertions about some magical unstated undemonstrable
reason why democracy wouldn't work to give us equality with freedom
in modern Plutokleptocracies, when it worked fine for 150,000 YEARS
in pre-Plutokleptocratic times in all human tribes, is merely an
obnoxious little low mean lie, nothing more.

Would you mind giving me a ride in your time machine sometime?
I'd be interested to see these fully democratic tribes from the
distant past of yours. Oh, what, you don't have a time machine?
Then how do you know how democratic they were or weren't?
--------------------------
Tribes of people in the wilderness before high population densities
numbering 50 to 200 couldn't be anything else, they wouldn't be able
to agree to do anything except voluntarily, and that means informal
democracy. If they ****ed off their members they'd leave, they had
nothing keeping them there unless their primary ethic was to get
along, and that points to even better than mere democracy, but to
freedom and consensus!!


In the short term, fairer distribution of society's wealth could benefit
the poor. But consider the exponential effect of any reduction in the
rate of economic growth in the long term.
-------------
You also have an undemonstrable notion that somehow magically,
that without individal greed being given sway to steal, that overall
productivity would drop. You forget collective greed, which is a
social GOOD, by which people work together to obtain MORE
than they'd EVER have individuallY, and it works even BETTER
than the emotional illness that is "private" greed!

Can you provide some practical, real-world examples?
-----------------------------------
We use collective greed constantly, in wanting things from government
we exert collective greed, in wanting peace and law and order and
rights and infrastructure and social guarantees. Most of the things
you probably imagine to be private greed are actually expressions of
collective greed that motivates us to good ends! You see, greed itself
is not the problem, but only whether it brings us together or pushes
us apart.


Even if the rate of economic growth in a communistic
society would be 99% of what it would be in a capitalistic
society,
----------------
No "growth" is needed. Remaining the same size is fine and normal.
But that norm is NOT based on any notion of inflated stock prices,
instead its economy is NORMALLY several times larger than Capitalism,

Over the long term, an economy that is growing will inevitably eventually
become bigger than one that is not. The process might take years, or even
centuries, but it will happen.
--------------------------------------
Duh, I think that's what "growing" means. But what growth means to
Capitalists is actually the migration of wealth to the wealthy, not
actual growth in our productive capacity due to organization and
technology. These are actually opposites.


But on the other hand, I see no basis for your claim that the economy would
somehow magically become several times larger to begin with.
--------------------------------
The "economy" wouldn't, but the redistribution of wealth on a fairer
basis would MORE than double most people's buying power for the same
labor week, because the luxury items of the wealthy would no longer
be produced, and other consumer items would be instead, and because
the indolent rich and their cashiers and accountants that keep track
of what the poor owe the rich now, would then be employed at producing
consumer goods like the rest of us!


Capitalism! When they know the rich have been put to work,

Where do you get your crazy notion that most of the rich do not work?
-----------------------
Watching them. I have known a large number of them.
Steve

"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message
...
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:

Tribes of people in the wilderness before high population densities
numbering 50 to 200 couldn't be anything else, they wouldn't be able
to agree to do anything except voluntarily, and that means informal
democracy. If they ****ed off their members they'd leave, they had
nothing keeping them there unless their primary ethic was to get
along, and that points to even better than mere democracy, but to
freedom and consensus!!

You're ignoring the fact that living on one's own was both lonelier and more
dangerous than living with the tribe. Thus, the power to banish people from
the tribe, or to impose punishments that members of the tribe would have to
banish themselves to avoid, offered the potential for a great deal of
leverage. That would certainly have undermined freedom and the need for
consensus.

Further, it would not be especially hard for a tribal government to take the
form of a "big-tough-hunter-ocracy" where a group of the biggest, strongest
men impose their will on the rest of the tribe because the others don't dare
to challenge them - and aren't willing to take a chance on whether they
could survive if they killed off their best hunters in the night, even if
they would be willing to kill them and even if they were not too afraid to
try. There is no particular reason to think that everyone would be given an
equal voice and vote.

I'm not saying that an essentially democratic tribal government would be
impossible. I'm just saying that it cannot be taken for granted.

Can you provide some practical, real-world examples?
-----------------------------------
We use collective greed constantly, in wanting things from government
we exert collective greed, in wanting peace and law and order and
rights and infrastructure and social guarantees. Most of the things
you probably imagine to be private greed are actually expressions of
collective greed that motivates us to good ends! You see, greed itself
is not the problem, but only whether it brings us together or pushes
us apart.

I will certainly agree that collective greed works well in pursuing
collective goals - goals that are shared and that can be reached more
efficiently working together than working alone. But many goals are
individual, not collective, and your own stance against vouchers shows how
miserably collective greed can work when different people have different
goals.

"I want a Viper."

"Sorry, but our collective greed says you have to get a Porsche instead."

"I want a house with yellow bricks."

"Sorry, but our collective greed says that houses have to have red bricks."

A system centered around collective greed can fail miserably when
individuals need or want things that the collective does not care about, or
when the collective takes advantage of differences in what individuals want
as an excuse to provide them with less.

Over the long term, an economy that is growing will inevitably
eventually become bigger than one that is not. The process
might take years, or even centuries, but it will happen.
--------------------------------------
Duh, I think that's what "growing" means. But what growth means to
Capitalists is actually the migration of wealth to the wealthy, not
actual growth in our productive capacity due to organization and
technology. These are actually opposites.

You're being absurd.

Suppose I spend $5,000 on a machine that lets me produce widgets in half the
time it takes other people to produce them. That provides economic growth
because I can produce twice as many widgets in the same amount of time.

If widgets normally cost $50, it might look at first glance like I can keep
selling my widgets for $50 and pocket the difference for myself. But if I
would try such a thing, other people would notice and start thinking, "Hey,
he's getting rich off those widgets. I'll buy my own widget-making machine
and make some of that money for myself." Once widget-making machines become
more common, we have to reduce our prices in order to compete with each
other, so most of the benefit from the widget-making machines ends up going
to people who buy widgets instead of to us. If I'm the first one to get a
widget-making machine, I might make a lot of money before that happens. But
in the long term, it is the customers that can now buy widgets for maybe $30
each (since some of the money has to go to pay back the cost of the
machinery) instead of $50 that get most of the benefit.

That phenomenon, repeated over and over, is why America's economy has grown
to a point where our poor would be considered rich by the standards of quite
a few other nations. You can argue that you think your communistic approach
would work better, but you would have to be blind, a liar, or a lunatic to
claim that the rich are the only ones who benefit from a capitalistic
system's growth.