Socialism is the ideal way to go. Change my Mind - Page 21 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

As either the transitional stage to communism or legitimate socio-economic ends in its own right.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15012000
SSDR wrote:[usermention=36101](many higher paying occupations that prefer university degrees fire people for divorcing due to socially looking "unstable" or "corrupt").


Please cite examples of this, especially examples of people getting fired for appearing "corrupt" because they got divorced.

Divorce, sadly, has become an accepted norm in our society, and nobody's getting shit-canned for it...
#15012094
SSDR wrote:No one should value anything.

Absurd. We can't help it, we evolved to value stuff, and it's a good thing we do.
I don't want to be valued by anyone. That's social slavery.

Non sequitur.
Value is slavery.

More absurdity.
One being judgmental on how "expensive and nice" something is, like "name brand clothing" is fucked up.

Maybe, but people evolved to value status. Deal with it.
#15012125
@Truth To Power,

People were conditioned (raised, brainwashed, manipulated via media or social norms, etc.) to value things and other people. Some social media websites such as Zionist Facebook manipulated people to value each other according to how many likes and friends and subscribers one has. This is egoistic capitalist culture that is Zionist. And you believing that valuing things is "good" is an useless belief that helps you support something that is used to control people.

I don't evolve to any value status shit. And some other people don't either. So you deal with that.
#15012505
SSDR wrote:People were conditioned (raised, brainwashed, manipulated via media or social norms, etc.) to value things and other people.

No, it's biologically hardwired, because people have to value things and other people to survive.
Some social media websites such as Zionist Facebook manipulated people to value each other according to how many likes and friends and subscribers one has. This is egoistic capitalist culture that is Zionist.

That is an absurd non sequitur, sorry.
And you believing that valuing things is "good" is an useless belief that helps you support something that is used to control people.

People's biological nature can be used to control them. Deal with it.
I don't evolve to any value status shit. And some other people don't either. So you deal with that.

I understand that some people are dysfunctional and could not have survived to reproduce in any society but a compassionate and wealthy modern democracy.
#15012563
Truth To Power wrote:No, it's biologically hardwired, because people have to value things and other people to survive.

That is an absurd non sequitur, sorry.

People's biological nature can be used to control them. Deal with it.

I understand that some people are dysfunctional and could not have survived to reproduce in any society but a compassionate and wealthy modern democracy.


Nobody "has" to value anything. It's not forced. It's just that people are conditioned to think that they need to value things so that they can be controlled by the elites. There is no fixed human nature. Humanity always changes. So you deal with that.

And real consciousness always existed, since every person is different. Socialists have always been around individually, but at a popular level, real consciousness was not widely accepted by societies until the 1800's. Prior to this time period, when slavery, human trafficking, and family economics were common, anyone who attempted to rebel against elites were shamed, shunned, killed, or mocked.

There's people now that have ideas that won't be supported for another 1,000 years. It's just that their views are not accepted since they don't meet the elites' standards of today, since it's potentially a threat to their wealth and control. Go ahead and try to stop them, you won't do anything. So deal with it.
#15012715
SSDR wrote:Nobody "has" to value anything. It's not forced.

Wrong again. If you don't value what helps you survive, you don't survive.
It's just that people are conditioned to think that they need to value things so that they can be controlled by the elites.

Nonsense.
There is no fixed human nature.

Wrong.
Humanity always changes.

That just means there is variation over a fixed substrate.
So you deal with that.

<yawn>
And real consciousness always existed, since every person is different.

Non sequitur.
Socialists have always been around individually, but at a popular level, real consciousness was not widely accepted by societies until the 1800's. Prior to this time period, when slavery, human trafficking, and family economics were common, anyone who attempted to rebel against elites were shamed, shunned, killed, or mocked.

Then how did the Protestant Reformation happen?
#15012776
@Truth To Power,

I personally don't value anything. Realizing what I need first is not valuing. If I choose water over gold, I don't value water more than gold. But why would a capitalist society value gold over WATER? Humans need water. But, humans don't materially need gold to physically survive.

You believing that real consciousness is "nonsense" shows that you think that reality and life are nonsense. Thus, showing that you're not alive.

Why do you believe that there's a fixed human nature? What makes you think that there is a fixed human nature?
#15012952
SSDR wrote:But why would a capitalist society value gold over WATER? Humans need water. But, humans don't materially need gold to physically survive.

The combination of scarcity (supply) and utility (demand).
You believing that real consciousness is "nonsense"

Your nonsensical claims are not real consciousness. They merely reflect your delusions.
shows that you think that reality and life are nonsense. Thus, showing that you're not alive.

Incomprehensible.
Why do you believe that there's a fixed human nature? What makes you think that there is a fixed human nature?

All the failed attempts by socialists, religious cults, despots, etc. to change it.
#15012972
@Truth To Power,

In a capitalist economy, humans would have more demand for gold than for water because capitalist elites taught the masses to love gold, so that they can buy gold for higher prices. Since capitalist economics value gold more than water, people demand to own and sell gold more. The economy makes the people like that. You don't realize that because you lack real consciousness.

"Your nonsensical claims are not real consciousness. They merely reflect your delusions."

- You mad?

"Incomprehensible."

- This is because you don't understand basic terms that are used to educate people who lack real consciousness.

Socialism is not an "attempt" nor an "experiment." This is a reactionary viewpoint of what socialism is.
#15013417
SSDR wrote:In a capitalist economy, humans would have more demand for gold than for water because capitalist elites taught the masses to love gold, so that they can buy gold for higher prices.

You don't seem to understand how absurd that claim is. If gold is only valued because capitalist elites taught the masses to love it, why did they pick gold? Why not zinc, iron pyrites, beef jerky, or peanut butter?
Since capitalist economics value gold more than water, people demand to own and sell gold more. The economy makes the people like that. You don't realize that because you lack real consciousness.

People value gold because of its combination of utility (demand) and scarcity (lack of supply).
Socialism is not an "attempt" nor an "experiment." This is a reactionary viewpoint of what socialism is.

Or what you imagine socialism is.
#15013481
@Truth To Power,

You tell me. Why do many elites pick gold? Because they FEEL that it looks very nice. And they feel this way because societies condition people to feel this way. Scientifically, gold also doesn't corrode.

Demand and the lack of supply exist in non socialist economies. In socialism, these concepts don't exist because they don't need to exist.

150 years ago, one could imagine a man being in outer space. Decades later, in 1961, the Soviet Union made that imagination a reality. In order to improve science and the progress of technologies, people must have excelling imaginations.
#15013996
SSDR wrote:Why do many elites pick gold? Because they FEEL that it looks very nice.

Don't be ridiculous. Flowers look nicer than gold.
And they feel this way because societies condition people to feel this way.

Absurd circular "reasoning."
Scientifically, gold also doesn't corrode.

And has numerous other properties that give it high UTILITY (demand) relative to its SCARCITY (supply), which makes it VALUABLE.

GET IT???
Demand and the lack of supply exist in non socialist economies.

In all economies.
In socialism, these concepts don't exist because they don't need to exist.

They indisputably DO still exist because they also correspond to objective reality in socialist economies -- especially lack of supply.
150 years ago, one could imagine a man being in outer space. Decades later, in 1961, the Soviet Union made that imagination a reality. In order to improve science and the progress of technologies, people must have excelling imaginations.

And on your planet, that might even be relevant.
#15014116
@Truth To Power,

Don't be ridiculous. Flowers look nicer than gold.

Yes many people feel that flowers do look nicer than gold. So why is gold more valuable? Because the ELITES know that gold can't be grown, so they're taking advantage of that. You see how it's not about what the majority feel, it's about how the elites feel.
And has numerous other properties that give it high UTILITY (demand) relative to its SCARCITY (supply), which makes it VALUABLE.

GET IT???

Gold is more rare than flowers because gold can't be grown like how flowers can. In a non socialist economy, the more rare something is, the more it's valued. But in socialism, no matter how rare a material or a natural/artificial resource is, it would not be valued more or less because in socialism, the concept of value doesn't need to exist.
In all economies.

Not in socialism. Socialism operates very differently than capitalism because there is no currency. The concepts of debt, value, credit, and exchange does not exist. And nothing is demanded on a consumer viewpoint because nothing is made to be sold.
They indisputably DO still exist because they also correspond to objective reality in socialist economies -- especially lack of supply.

In a socialist economy, if there was no gold left, the socialist economy wouldn't be destroyed because nothing is economically valued.
And on your planet, that might even be relevant.

Without excelling imaginations, we wouldn't have automobiles, locomotives, aircraft, spacecraft, factories, nor advanced military equipment.
#15014235
SSDR wrote:Yes many people feel that flowers do look nicer than gold. So why is gold more valuable?

Same reason anything is valuable: its combination of scarcity (supply) and utility (demand).
Because the ELITES know that gold can't be grown, so they're taking advantage of that.

<sigh> Sand can't be grown either. Why didn't the elites choose sand?

Your ignorance of economics appears to be comprehensive.
You see how it's not about what the majority feel, it's about how the elites feel.

Value is not about how the majority feels, or how elites feel. It is ONLY about how the two people who want the item most feel.
Gold is more rare than flowers because gold can't be grown like how flowers can.

Gold can be mined. It's scarcer because it is much harder to mine gold than to grow flowers.
In a non socialist economy, the more rare something is, the more it's valued.

Wrong again. Only one whelk in 4 million has a left-handed shell spiral. You don't see anyone bidding up the prices of left-handed whelks, do you?

You clearly do not know even the most basic facts of economics.
But in socialism, no matter how rare a material or a natural/artificial resource is, it would not be valued more or less because in socialism, the concept of value doesn't need to exist.

That is why socialism will always fail spectacularly: no one will be able to figure out what should be produced. Socialists could as easily expend their labor and capital looking for left-handed whelks as growing flowers -- or food.
Not in socialism.

Yes, in socialism.
Socialism operates very differently than capitalism because there is no currency. The concepts of debt, value, credit, and exchange does not exist.

Dreaming. There is no production without value, no division of labor without exchange.
And nothing is demanded on a consumer viewpoint because nothing is made to be sold.

So although left-handed whelks taste the same as right-handed ones, the workers can just decide they'd rather throw the right-handed ones away.
In a socialist economy, if there was no gold left, the socialist economy wouldn't be destroyed because nothing is economically valued.

A capitalist economy would not be destroyed in the absence of gold either. But a socialist economy would be destroyed no matter what the gold situation, because without value, no one would know what to produce.
Without excelling imaginations, we wouldn't have automobiles, locomotives, aircraft, spacecraft, factories, nor advanced military equipment.

Non sequitur.

Logic is not exactly your strong suit, is it?
#15014271
@Truth To Power,

<sigh> Sand can't be grown either. Why didn't the elites choose sand?

Your ignorance of economics appears to be comprehensive.

Sand is not as rare as gold. Plus people walk on sand more than they do on gold. And of course you would say your second sentence, Nazi.
Wrong again. Only one whelk in 4 million has a left-handed shell spiral. You don't see anyone bidding up the prices of left-handed whelks, do you?

You clearly do not know even the most basic facts of economics.

I do not need economics to motivate me to work. This is because I am not a slave unlike you.
Dreaming. There is no production without value, no division of labor without exchange.

You're speaking in a non socialist context. Your beliefs are just aggressive opinions that lack real consciousness.
A capitalist economy would not be destroyed in the absence of gold either. But a socialist economy would be destroyed no matter what the gold situation, because without value, no one would know what to produce.

No capitalist would know what to produce because they love money. A socialist does not need the concept of value for working motivation.
Non sequitur.

Logic is not exactly your strong suit, is it?

This is not a political statement. You're going off topic by calling someone who doesn't support slavery "illogical."
  • 1
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21

Have you ever been to Israel? Why do you need to[…]

^ You know what I'm getting at, that's not enough […]

Yes, I am sure that people come only because they […]

EU-BREXIT

The UK is already the most deregulated economy in[…]