Ha ha no kidding  Now this is a quiz.  I think I did pretty well. That diamond is old, we need a new political spectrum for the new age. Don't get what I'm hinting at? Think of Zeitgeist/Anarchy/Pirate Party/etc (and no, they can't be truly included in that diamond). All of those can be well accommodated for. Zeitgiest is far bottom, Anarchy is far top, Pirate Party is about half way between the middle and top and very liberal. no. the pirate party would be totally independent of the economic axis, some pirates would be in the top, some in the bottom. Did you take the quiz, or are you basing your opinions solely from that graph? i took it, i am a centrist. and im basing my opinion my knowledge of the pirate party, they don't really care about the economic in general, as long as they can get music and movies for free. pirates are stretch all over the economic axis. |
|
|
|
Ha ha no kidding Now this is a quiz. I think I did pretty well. That diamond is old, we need a new political spectrum for the new age. Don't get what I'm hinting at? Think of Zeitgeist/Anarchy/Pirate Party/etc (and no, they can't be truly included in that diamond). All of those can be well accommodated for. Zeitgiest is far bottom, Anarchy is far top, Pirate Party is about half way between the middle and top and very liberal. no. the pirate party would be totally independent of the economic axis, some pirates would be in the top, some in the bottom. |
|
|
|
first dude: "hey i have way too many potatoes, here is some".
second dude: "i have too much milk, here is some."
First dude: I have too many potatoes, but sure would love some milk. Want to trade? Second dude: Sure, I have way too much milk, and I'd love some potatoes. What do you say to 5 potatoes per gallon? First dude: It's a deal, and any time you want more, just come on by. Of course, this is inefficient, and there's no guarantee that the guy who has milk wants potatoes. Maybe the guy who wants potatoes has corn, and the guy who has milk wants corn, but not potatoes. That's why we invented money. To facilitate trade. simpler solution: put it one big pile, take what you need. That might work. Except: How do you deal with the people who inevitably take more than they "need"? Or who takes, but doesn't add to the pile? For that matter, how do you decide how much you "need"? change the "need" to "want", does not really matter. if people are unwilling to trade, there would be no gain for a "thieve", except having rotten potatoes laying around. |
|
|
|
first dude: "hey i have way too many potatoes, here is some".
second dude: "i have too much milk, here is some."
First dude: I have too many potatoes, but sure would love some milk. Want to trade? Second dude: Sure, I have way too much milk, and I'd love some potatoes. What do you say to 5 potatoes per gallon? First dude: It's a deal, and any time you want more, just come on by. Of course, this is inefficient, and there's no guarantee that the guy who has milk wants potatoes. Maybe the guy who wants potatoes has corn, and the guy who has milk wants corn, but not potatoes. That's why we invented money. To facilitate trade. simpler solution: put it one big pile, take what you need. |
|
|
|
Yeah, kokjo say this, so this must be true. im not in favor of communism, im way more a center person. people on this forum is just narrow minded and needs to know that there are alternatives, it is therefor i am arguing in favor for communism. and if it came down to which side im on in the epic intellectually battle of the crazy-libertards and the evil-commies, i would be on the commies side. they are both about equally bad. Why you're wasting your time on forum about money, anyway ?
for the discussions, trolling, and the tech stuff. do you say that i should not be here because i have different opinions then the rest of you? are you afraid? |
|
|
|
first dude: "hey i have way too many potatoes, here is some".
second dude: "i have too much milk, here is some."
In a small group or family, sure. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_numberDunbar's number is a suggested cognitive limit to the number of people with whom one can maintain stable social relationships. These are relationships in which an individual knows who each person is, and how each person relates to every other person.[1] Proponents assert that numbers larger than this generally require more restrictive rules, laws, and enforced norms to maintain a stable, cohesive group. It has been proposed to lie between 100 and 230, with a commonly used value of 150.
(...)
Dunbar's surveys of village and tribe sizes also appeared to approximate this predicted value, including 150 as the estimated size of a Neolithic farming village; 150 as the splitting point of Hutterite settlements (...)thats is not a limit, because we know about it, and are therefor able to work around it. communism can scale. |
|
|
|
Personal responsibility. It's a bitch.
and if people did not have to care about it, they would be more productive. So who should be responsible? No-one? Or are we saying that's the government's job? To be responsible for every one? I can't imagine what a society of irresponsible people might look like. Oh wait a sec... it's the fucked up society I'm currently living in. hey that dude likes making potatoes, lets leave him with his potatoes. hey that other dude likes milking cows, let him milk cows. first dude: "hey i have way too many potatoes, here is some". second dude: "i have too much milk, here is some." there was no trade, and both parties are happy and did what they liked. capitalism: both dudes either needs to do both things(which they don't like), or have long and tiresome negotiations to finally exchange some potatoes for some milk. |
|
|
|
i agree with stardust, there are many things that can not be represented with that test.  |
|
|
|
this fuqa is a jew, no?
yeah sure he is. A representative of Reporters Without Borders called the newly announced network “another step of the state to control information.”
journalists had revealed that coverage of sensitive issues in Russia is allowed, but direct criticism of Vladimir Putin or then President Dmitry Medvedev is not.
Former KGB officer Konstantin Preobrazhensky criticized RT as "a part of the Russian industry of misinformation and manipulation".
they are all jew scum, i see it clearly now. |
|
|
|
Personal responsibility. It's a bitch.
and if people did not have to care about it, they would be more productive. |
|
|
|
and liberalism rob people of their home, if they can't pay the bills...
they shouldn't have signed the mortgage. then they would still be without homes. Not at all. They could rent, live with friends, or parents, or get together with some other people and share a house. so they could not live in an empty house, because someone could potentially earn money from it, if someone was willing to buy? i do not agree that there should be homeless people, when there are empty homes. |
|
|
|
and liberalism rob people of their home, if they can't pay the bills...
they shouldn't have signed the mortgage. then they would still be without homes. |
|
|
|
Well...communism + anarchism seems to be all right. I just wonder how it could work in this day of age; in that movie I watched, about the Spanish, they were mostly farmers and the like. In the digital age, where most people are in some kind of technical job, would communism still work all right? You'd have to be close to farms (not a problem in Texas, but I imagine a place like NY might have a tougher time feeding lots of people), or barter for your food, which would essentially be capitalism.
people just need to realize that there are enough resources for all to live happily, instead of the "fuck you, this is mine" capitalistic attitude. |
|
|
|
socialism is a precursor to communism.
liberalism is a precursor to civil wars and anarchy. By that do you mean "Classical" liberalism, or what the US calls liberalism? And you say anarchy like it's a bad thing. and you are saying communism like its a bad thing. 'cause it is. It's killed thousands, if not millions, of people worldwide. no, a fucked up paranoid and delusional leader did. Funny how so many fucked up and delusional leaders use communism as the excuse to kill their people, innit? and liberalism rob people of their home, if they can't pay the bills... |
|
|
|
socialism is a precursor to communism.
liberalism is a precursor to civil wars and anarchy. By that do you mean "Classical" liberalism, or what the US calls liberalism? And you say anarchy like it's a bad thing. and you are saying communism like its a bad thing. 'cause it is. It's killed thousands, if not millions, of people worldwide. no, a fucked up paranoid and delusional leader did. |
|
|
|
socialism is a precursor to communism.
liberalism is a precursor to civil wars and anarchy. By that do you mean "Classical" liberalism, or what the US calls liberalism? And you say anarchy like it's a bad thing. and you are saying communism like its a bad thing. |
|
|
|
vote with the report to mod button.  |
|
|
|
jew babble  And anyone who disagrees with you is Jewish, therefor implicitly biased. Are we done yet? His reasoning is iron-clad, I'll give you that. Of course, as one of my favorite satirists said: "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." - H. L. Mencken +1 |
|
|
|
socialism is a precursor to communism.
liberalism is a precursor to civil wars and anarchy. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
