Wish instead of learning bullshit math, I was taught how to ~~repair stuff around my house that I use everyday~~ do things that frequently use the Pythagorean theorem
FTFY
Honestly though, you don't know what you don't know, right? So nbd. But yeah, home improvement goes a lot smoother when you know your basic geometry math. So genuinely, I wish you were taught both.
You know how long Caesar was dictator for life before he was assassinated? Less than a year.
But the damage was done, and Rome had a civil war over whether it would go back to being a Republic like it had been or if it would have an autocratic ruler. Obviously, the latter won out.
A lesson from history.
Are you upset that Trump won?
Aaaand you trust Trump to do that, without any oversight?
My point about the presence of ideology in this discussion is that it started without ideology being a factor, that I was discussing economics the same way one might discuss physics out biology. You brought ideology into it, and I answered those points as best as I could given the blatant misunderstandings that I perceived regarding the economic aspects of your ideology. As an avowed socialist myself, I won't try to claim that I don't have views impacted by ideology but that doesn't mean ideology can't be set aside when discussing sciences like economics. Indeed, seeing ideology aside is imperative to understanding the real nature of the observable world, and these observations must inform one's ideology least one start saying things like "2+2=5". Which is precisely what I feel you've been doing. You're rejecting explanations of how economies work because it doesn't fit your ideological views. That is folly.
Given that your original question has been answered repeatedly, and you've rejected those answers, I can only conclude that the questions were asked in bad faith. I don't think further conversation will be productive. The only "fight" to be "won" is one that you started, and I'm tired of playing chess with pigeons. If you feel that means you "won" the discussion, then more power to you. Feel free to hit me up again when you want to actually understand things as they are, instead of how you think they ought to be.
Ah yes, Hanlon's razor. Genuinely a great one to keep in mind at all times, along with it's corollary Clarke's law: "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice."
But in this particular case I think we need the much less frequently cited version by Douglas Hubbard: "Never attribute to malice or stupidity that which can be explained by moderately rational individuals following incentives in a complex system."
I thought of that too, but I don't think Trump's ego allows him to consider that he might die some day.
I was thinking about this. How funny would it be if Trump just... Did nothing? Refused to sign legislation, made zero executive orders, just golfed for four years straight? It's not like he needs to keep people happy so they'll re elect him, he's no longer eligible to run.
The problem is that winning only postponed his problems for four years, and he certainly is already worried about when that time comes. He'll be looking for a solution, and for that he'll need the favor of people in power. So it's amusing to think he might just chill, but I really doubt he will :(
lol
Go on, pigeon. Shit on the chess board some more and blame other people for your own actions. I'm sure if you shit hard enough, nothing will be your fault.
Corruption happens because of consolidation of power. The abolition of money wouldn't prevent that, not even a little. Similarly, anarchy also doesn't prevent corruption, as anarchy doesn't prevent a consolidation of power.
The issue of hoarding money doesn't go away if we abolish money, either. Remember, money is nothing more than a storage of value. If there's no money, a person seeking power can hoard other things of value to create leverage and power over others. This hoarding of value, whether it's in the form of money or not, is what's detrimental to the economy.
And economies are not controlled by money, they're controlled by people as a group.
I ain't suggesting we just go ham with unregulated production
But you just suggested anarchy, so yes you are.
the solution is to have people solve that themselves
Yes yes, by forming committees to gather data, debate solutions, pick a solution, and then enforce their decision. Exactly.
That's government.
Again, because money is just a storage of value, things like inequality will be possible with our without it. Abolishing money wouldn't get rid of inequality.
You're giving me "money is the source of all evil" vibes because a lot of your arguments seem to be coming from ideology as opposed to an actual understanding of what money is. If I may, let me share something seemingly unrelated with you.
A reporter by the name of G.M. Gilbert sat through the Nuremberg trials, and wrote a book called the Nuremberg Diary in which he discusses his experience watching the most heinous Nazis attempt to justify their actions. After making such a study of human kind, he had this to say: “In my work with the defendants I was searching for the nature of evil and I now think I have come close to defining it. A lack of empathy. It’s the one characteristic that connects all the defendants, a genuine incapacity to feel with their fellow men. Evil, I think, is the absence of empathy.”
Money is an economic tool. It is a thing. It has no inherent power; without people to use it, money just sits still the same as a book or a shoe. As a tool, it enables certain behaviors, but it doesn't create them.
This conversation started as a mere discussion of how an economy would work, but you're taking it in the direction of right and wrong, good and evil. Well, those are human things that existed before money and will exist after money. Money is not the source of evil, and getting rid of it would do more harm to the average human than it would do good.
I get it. Actually kinda nice to see somebody else making a point about the difference between money and currency, usually I'm the one doing that! Almost refreshing lol
Fascists love the notion of a natural order, because it gives them license to hold power over people "lower in the hierarchy." They'll use anything and everything to establish whatever "natural order" serves their purpose at any given moment, and IQ works quite nicely in a lot of situations.