I Apologize for hating America so much
#72
My 32 year old son have had our political differences,but as I've seen him go from adolescence to adult hood,having a beautiful wife and daughter,a very nice home,a better paying job with better benefits(because he's better educated and smarter technology wise than his old man
,I'm starting to see a gradual maturity change in him and can see how much he's changed since our head butting days when he was about 18 or 19! Like the old saying about a 16 year old son and father that could never communicate. The son left home and when he came back 5 years later and started talking to his father and said in amazement: "Father I just can't get over how much you have learned in 5 short years!
OPT
,I'm starting to see a gradual maturity change in him and can see how much he's changed since our head butting days when he was about 18 or 19! Like the old saying about a 16 year old son and father that could never communicate. The son left home and when he came back 5 years later and started talking to his father and said in amazement: "Father I just can't get over how much you have learned in 5 short years!
OPT
#73
If you want to call China Communist, even though it clearly isn't, then the ideas that I stated before, I will now refer to as "Egalitarian". Because they are radically different from what is in place in China.
I'm well versed in history, but if you could point to a time in history where real egalitarianism has been tried, not one party dictatorships, or deformed workers' states... I would quite enjoy reading about it. I know for a fact that the "Paris Commune", although only in existence for a few months, was a near perfectly realized form of a Decentralized planned economy... Egalitarian.
So you believe people can't manage themselves, and need to be told what to do? I suppose Democracy is inherently wrong then? People need to be told what to do, they need to be managed in a top-down manner? I suppose dictatorship is most efficient, and just, in that case.
All I suggested, if you boil it right down to the core, is that democracy is defended vehemently in government, why shouldn't we expand this to our places of employment? We're so willing to accept dictatorship, and according to you, that is just.
Other than high school, I have a few hobbies, and work at a local garden center. They are a very small company, and don't really make a particularly large profit, I honestly believe they do what they do because they love doing it. I recognize the constraints of current society, and intend to operate within its limitations. Living with my parents would serve no one's interest.
I'm well versed in history, but if you could point to a time in history where real egalitarianism has been tried, not one party dictatorships, or deformed workers' states... I would quite enjoy reading about it. I know for a fact that the "Paris Commune", although only in existence for a few months, was a near perfectly realized form of a Decentralized planned economy... Egalitarian.
So you believe people can't manage themselves, and need to be told what to do? I suppose Democracy is inherently wrong then? People need to be told what to do, they need to be managed in a top-down manner? I suppose dictatorship is most efficient, and just, in that case.
All I suggested, if you boil it right down to the core, is that democracy is defended vehemently in government, why shouldn't we expand this to our places of employment? We're so willing to accept dictatorship, and according to you, that is just.
Other than high school, I have a few hobbies, and work at a local garden center. They are a very small company, and don't really make a particularly large profit, I honestly believe they do what they do because they love doing it. I recognize the constraints of current society, and intend to operate within its limitations. Living with my parents would serve no one's interest.
You're saying that society will run fine because everyone will be in a job they like and choose. Not always the case. Without financial incentive and reward jobs will go undone. People will say, "Why should I do this job where I get dirty and sweaty when I can do the job I please." There will be many positions that will never be filled and things will break down on both a small scale and countrywide. Why would someone in charge of a potentially dangerous job like cutting down trees do it if the pay wasn't there? Why risk your life for someone else to have the wood to build their house? On a large scale who's going to run a huge company that produces the cars we need and be responsible for the decisions that effect millions of people?
We take jobs because we choose to and/or have need to. That's life. No one, unless you enlist, is telling you that you have to take this job, like it or not. Reality may push you into something you don't care for but you still have the freedom to decide if you want to take a job with certain pay and benefits. If you don't want to work for a living you can make that choice but sooner or later you've got to feed yourself.
#74
It means that they're living within the confines of society. I can't expect to live without masters in the current society. Would I prefer a less exploitative master to a more exploitative master, I think so, yes.
Ideally, profits wouldn't exist, because money wouldn't exist. Right now, however, profits are part of what goes on.
Didn't address any of my other points... I can't help but feel that if I were speaking of conservatism and religion, I wouldn't get called naive, and my age wouldn't matter a bit. It's a bit disappointing. If my age really stands in the way of these ideas being taken as reasonable, even though I've articulated them in a perfectly reasonable way, then I expect any teenager with any political ideas that may or may not be in line with your own, to be equally naive, and discredited. But I don't believe I would observe that.
Ideally, profits wouldn't exist, because money wouldn't exist. Right now, however, profits are part of what goes on.
Didn't address any of my other points... I can't help but feel that if I were speaking of conservatism and religion, I wouldn't get called naive, and my age wouldn't matter a bit. It's a bit disappointing. If my age really stands in the way of these ideas being taken as reasonable, even though I've articulated them in a perfectly reasonable way, then I expect any teenager with any political ideas that may or may not be in line with your own, to be equally naive, and discredited. But I don't believe I would observe that.
#75
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Elkaholic
Land, Trail and Environmental Issues
1
Sep 6, 2015 02:44 PM
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)









