Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
¡¡¡Tema cerrado!!!
Asunto: »Political & economic ideologies (communism, capitalism et
You two both have extreme views on this issue. And that makes both of these cartoons really funny so thanx for posting them. ;)
Levitate at least goes in the right direction even though he goes an extra mile. Well, a couple of extra miles really. :P
Here's a nice facebook post I just saw today:
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.
The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan".. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.
The second test average was a D! No one was happy.
When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.
As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.
To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed. Could not be any simpler than that. (Please pass this on) These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read and all applicable to this experiment:
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.
Can you think of a reason for not sharing this?
Neither could I.
Levitate at least goes in the right direction even though he goes an extra mile. Well, a couple of extra miles really. :P
Here's a nice facebook post I just saw today:
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.
The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan".. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.
The second test average was a D! No one was happy.
When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.
As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.
To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed. Could not be any simpler than that. (Please pass this on) These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read and all applicable to this experiment:
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.
Can you think of a reason for not sharing this?
Neither could I.
That's a classic story :-)
Oh, the unbearable argumentation in your messages. Oh wait, there is none.
You made a statistical error (not the first time, you did the same when discussing gun control), but you refuse to acknowledge that.
By the way, don't blame me for bringing up libertarianism. You're the one brought it up here by putting those cartoons here. So if you really don't like me defending libertarianism, you must be masochistic ;-)
(editado)
You made a statistical error (not the first time, you did the same when discussing gun control), but you refuse to acknowledge that.
By the way, don't blame me for bringing up libertarianism. You're the one brought it up here by putting those cartoons here. So if you really don't like me defending libertarianism, you must be masochistic ;-)
(editado)
Yes indeed, stupid of me. Does remind me of the religious topic and why posting in there is totally useless ......
But there is a big difference between ideology and religion.
seek levitations on this forum. Religious idiologies... il en y a beaucoup... and they are part of our life.
A religion becomes an ideology when the believers cannot tolerate the existence of those people who have different views or ideas of their beliefs, and refuse to accept any way of understanding the religion other than their own way of doing it.
There is a difference, in essence, but a very short way separates them.
A religion becomes an ideology when the believers cannot tolerate the existence of those people who have different views or ideas of their beliefs, and refuse to accept any way of understanding the religion other than their own way of doing it.
There is a difference, in essence, but a very short way separates them.
You two both have extreme views on this issue. And that makes both of these cartoons really funny so thanx for posting them. ;)
Levitate at least goes in the right direction even though he goes an extra mile. Well, a couple of extra miles really. :P
Here's a nice facebook post I just saw today:
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.
The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan".. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.
The second test average was a D! No one was happy.
When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.
As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.
To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed. Could not be any simpler than that. (Please pass this on) These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read and all applicable to this experiment:
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.
Can you think of a reason for not sharing this?
Neither could I.
funny but entirely false.
The error is in believing exist some deserving for having money.
and are false all 5 points...
1 you can. it's called taxation
2 not true. there is the public spending moltiplicator
3 false, see above (and it forget economy of scale!!!)
4 stupid statement, you can, as demonstrate europe demand crisis
5 when it happens is not because of a failure of ideology, but for a failure of system (it happens in libertarian capitalism as well as in socialist countries)
Levitate at least goes in the right direction even though he goes an extra mile. Well, a couple of extra miles really. :P
Here's a nice facebook post I just saw today:
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.
The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan".. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.
The second test average was a D! No one was happy.
When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.
As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.
To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed. Could not be any simpler than that. (Please pass this on) These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read and all applicable to this experiment:
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.
Can you think of a reason for not sharing this?
Neither could I.
funny but entirely false.
The error is in believing exist some deserving for having money.
and are false all 5 points...
1 you can. it's called taxation
2 not true. there is the public spending moltiplicator
3 false, see above (and it forget economy of scale!!!)
4 stupid statement, you can, as demonstrate europe demand crisis
5 when it happens is not because of a failure of ideology, but for a failure of system (it happens in libertarian capitalism as well as in socialist countries)
A religion becomes an ideology when the believers cannot tolerate the existence of those people who have different views or ideas of their beliefs, and refuse to accept any way of understanding the religion other than their own way of doing it.
Nope. The difference is that a ideology has a logical reasoning behind it. Nationalism, communism, libertarianism, socialism, liberalism, ... behind all those ideologies, there is a logical reasoning (specific for that ideology). A reasoning you might disagree with, but still logical.
A religion is a set of beliefs, that have no specific logic (God exists is not a specific logic, as there are probably thousands of religions). Religions all over the world differ, ideologies are worldwide (with small differences within one ideology).
Nope. The difference is that a ideology has a logical reasoning behind it. Nationalism, communism, libertarianism, socialism, liberalism, ... behind all those ideologies, there is a logical reasoning (specific for that ideology). A reasoning you might disagree with, but still logical.
A religion is a set of beliefs, that have no specific logic (God exists is not a specific logic, as there are probably thousands of religions). Religions all over the world differ, ideologies are worldwide (with small differences within one ideology).
The error is in believing exist some deserving for having money.
The error is in your understanding of what money represents.
After your basic survival needs are satisfied, then money is not more than a grade for you. When you use it to buy iPhone, then yes,, you must deserve this. Above basic survival needs money works exactly like the grades from the class example. So, government should only secure people's basic survival needs and maintain fairness and order.
The error is in your understanding of what money represents.
After your basic survival needs are satisfied, then money is not more than a grade for you. When you use it to buy iPhone, then yes,, you must deserve this. Above basic survival needs money works exactly like the grades from the class example. So, government should only secure people's basic survival needs and maintain fairness and order.
Well true, I was speaking about a religious ideology, .. when a religion can become an ideology due to the fellows who make it.
And they do it for some reasons.
And they do it for some reasons.
1 you can. it's called taxation
Well, I am willing to give you this one, this depends on the POV of a person.
2 not true. there is the public spending moltiplicator
Explain to me how. How do you give something to someone who didn't work for it without taking anything from someone who worked for it.
3 false, see above (and it forget economy of scale!!!)
3 is in essence the same as 2 (just other words), so let's drop this one.
4 stupid statement, you can, as demonstrate europe demand crisis
Calling it stupid doesn't make it false. You cannot create wealth (in terms of money) by dividing it. When you define wealth as more than just in terms of money, you can (because 1 euro means more to someone who earns nothing than to someone who earns 1,000,000 euros).
5 when it happens is not because of a failure of ideology, but for a failure of system (it happens in libertarian capitalism as well as in socialist countries)
No. There is no country that applies libertarian capitalism. And pooling the points is what is creating the lack of motivation for the students to study. Ergo, if you don't pool, you don't lack that motivation.( Pooling being the government and the points being money.)
Well, I am willing to give you this one, this depends on the POV of a person.
2 not true. there is the public spending moltiplicator
Explain to me how. How do you give something to someone who didn't work for it without taking anything from someone who worked for it.
3 false, see above (and it forget economy of scale!!!)
3 is in essence the same as 2 (just other words), so let's drop this one.
4 stupid statement, you can, as demonstrate europe demand crisis
Calling it stupid doesn't make it false. You cannot create wealth (in terms of money) by dividing it. When you define wealth as more than just in terms of money, you can (because 1 euro means more to someone who earns nothing than to someone who earns 1,000,000 euros).
5 when it happens is not because of a failure of ideology, but for a failure of system (it happens in libertarian capitalism as well as in socialist countries)
No. There is no country that applies libertarian capitalism. And pooling the points is what is creating the lack of motivation for the students to study. Ergo, if you don't pool, you don't lack that motivation.( Pooling being the government and the points being money.)
So, government should only secure people's basic survival needs and maintain fairness and order.
Exactly. And if the government ensures people's primal needs, then it is for the government itself much easier to mentain law and order, it is obvious. And more.... basic needs are basic needs, be happy those, whom the government provides them.
Do you want more? Think about it and learn, work hard, have courage and brains to do your own business etc.
(editado)
Exactly. And if the government ensures people's primal needs, then it is for the government itself much easier to mentain law and order, it is obvious. And more.... basic needs are basic needs, be happy those, whom the government provides them.
Do you want more? Think about it and learn, work hard, have courage and brains to do your own business etc.
(editado)
I think this is by far the most interesting monarch there is, prince Hans-Adams II of Liechtenstein. The state as a service company. The only monarch I deeply respect for what he does and what he stands for.
(editado)
(editado)
You seem to give too much importance to money.
Money is just a tool, to able able to exchange value. Value is what you create by working. A carpenter for example is able to build furniture, and helps building a house. The material before he starts has some value, but the final product is much more valuable.
Taxation only makes sense, when a land has a good productivity.
Point 1 makes no sense. Wealth itself doesn't. Money is an exchange tool, if you keep much money, you're taking it out of the system. That money is no more available, and can't be used for exchanges, nor for creating value.
Rich people generally become rich, because they wanna have always more, and know how to avoid taxes.
How can you say, that taxation could change anything?
Point 2 is definitly true. It makes sense to help someone, while he's searching a job. But he's not producing any value during that time, he's using the value (or money, if you prefer) someone else has produced.
Point 3: the government is here, to keep the system working, ensure his people's security. I don't get what you mean.
Point 4: you can't multiply wealth, you can only multiply value. If you multiply wealth, it will lose its value. Multiplying money like the US or Japan do only creates inflation, and the money loses its value.
Point 5: True. It doesn't matter, if it's a failure of ideology or system. Such a scenario means a huge loss of productivity...
(editado)
Money is just a tool, to able able to exchange value. Value is what you create by working. A carpenter for example is able to build furniture, and helps building a house. The material before he starts has some value, but the final product is much more valuable.
Taxation only makes sense, when a land has a good productivity.
Point 1 makes no sense. Wealth itself doesn't. Money is an exchange tool, if you keep much money, you're taking it out of the system. That money is no more available, and can't be used for exchanges, nor for creating value.
Rich people generally become rich, because they wanna have always more, and know how to avoid taxes.
How can you say, that taxation could change anything?
Point 2 is definitly true. It makes sense to help someone, while he's searching a job. But he's not producing any value during that time, he's using the value (or money, if you prefer) someone else has produced.
Point 3: the government is here, to keep the system working, ensure his people's security. I don't get what you mean.
Point 4: you can't multiply wealth, you can only multiply value. If you multiply wealth, it will lose its value. Multiplying money like the US or Japan do only creates inflation, and the money loses its value.
Point 5: True. It doesn't matter, if it's a failure of ideology or system. Such a scenario means a huge loss of productivity...
(editado)
The error is in believing exist some deserving for having money.
The error is in your understanding of what money represents.
After your basic survival needs are satisfied, then money is not more than a grade for you. When you use it to buy iPhone, then yes,, you must deserve this. Above basic survival needs money works exactly like the grades from the class example. So, government should only secure people's basic survival needs and maintain fairness and order.
well, I don't believe it.
Money does not measure in any way any virtue.
money measure only the access to wealth.
About what gov must do, that is your libertarian religi.. ehm ideology.
free to believe in it, but it is no more real than the opposite ideology was.
The error is in your understanding of what money represents.
After your basic survival needs are satisfied, then money is not more than a grade for you. When you use it to buy iPhone, then yes,, you must deserve this. Above basic survival needs money works exactly like the grades from the class example. So, government should only secure people's basic survival needs and maintain fairness and order.
well, I don't believe it.
Money does not measure in any way any virtue.
money measure only the access to wealth.
About what gov must do, that is your libertarian religi.. ehm ideology.
free to believe in it, but it is no more real than the opposite ideology was.