@nivrig I think I'm okay not seeing those things again.
I remember and early version of RealAudio in the mid 90s had a ham-radio like feature where you could voice chat with randos. The people I met on there were also hams, we found an urge to give our calls out of habit.
@georgetakei It's not good that the bus provider messed up, but 5-y/o kid are stronger than we think. They need to know never to go off alone with a stranger, but most people are good and despite it's problem it's mostly a friendly world. 🌏
@kwf I lived a building with a 1960s space heater in the bathroom wall. This makes me wonder if it had GFCI and if the chassis was bonded to earth ground.
Fifty years ago, if the right decisions had been made, today might look very different. We likely would not be talking about a "climate crisis" or a "climate emergency."
But the right decisions were not made. Instead, our capitalist rulers pushed ahead with their growth-at-any-cost mantra. And now we face certain disaster.
There are still choices to made, a struggle to be waged, in hopes of making the collapse of society slightly less costly for some people in some places. We must engage in that fight.
But suffering is inevitable, great suffering, both for humans and for the natural environment that our industries and our consumerism are in the process of destroying.
Here is an article by Indi Samarajiva that traces our history of bad decisions and that describes "What ‘Winning’ Against Climate Change Actually Looks Like." As he warns, you won't like it.
@Vincarsi
I don't know a better system to pay for policing than to set a tax and use force to make people pay. People who wish to opt out still get the benefit of less crime. You can't turn the benefit off like utility service. I think it's the same way with living in a world without people dying of curable things for lack of money. @HeavenlyPossum@Qbitzerre
@Vincarsi I don't want to go crazy confiscating a large share of property to pay for policing, hunger, medicine, military bases around the world, fighting "wars" against vices, fighting cancer, etc; but I think there's a strong case for taking people's stuff, on a very limited basis, so that people don't die due to lacking some basic need. @HeavenlyPossum@Qbitzerre
@Vincarsi
I think it's happening, especially in areas like accepting gay rights, not tolerating domestic violence, and freedom of speech. Things could always be better, but compared to what I remember as kid toward the end of the Cold War and the beginning of the AIDS epidemic, things are pretty darn good right now. @HeavenlyPossum@Qbitzerre
@Vincarsi
This is like saying you pay less for raw materials or machines than the value they create. Labor is one input to producing things. I don't see it as a key part of producing value. Technology is increasing efficiency: value per human effort. I suppose in the socialist view, people who create those technologies should do it for the common good. Asking them to do it for free brings to mind Atlas Shrugged (the book, not its far-right fans).
@Vincarsi
The book isn't about people in crisis. It's about people in a prosperous society creating even more value. In the book, the government puts more and more restrictions on them until they finally decide to stop creating. It's not a realistic scenario but rather an allegory. It's saying people won't keep creating those things if people in power take them by force for a greater good. @HeavenlyPossum@Qbitzerre
@Vincarsi
Everyone has families to care for. If you're running a business, payroll is most important. It's not like once you own the means of production, you have an advantage over vendors and are at a disadvantage to suppliers. That scenario could happen, but there's nothing about owning means of production that requires that. @HeavenlyPossum@Qbitzerre
@Vincarsi
I think they left and we're not that prosperous in isolation, but they were waiting out the collapse of govts that interfered with productive activities before returning. I did not see it as a desirable thing but rather an extreme example of the result of interfering with other's lives. @HeavenlyPossum@Qbitzerre
@Vincarsi
I think a libertarian enclave could be successful if truly left alone, but if they simply banished unproductive or criminal citizens, the rest of the world would have a legitimate complaint that the libertarian state is freeloading off other places that end up absorbing the banished people. @HeavenlyPossum@Qbitzerre
@Vincarsi
I see your point about having wealth vs not having wealth. I don't see it applying to having employee arrangement, but if you're saying employees with no wealth, then I get it. Wealth is the key.
Since WWII return on capital has been enormous while the price of labor stagnated. I get the appeal of just taking people's wealth, but I really think that's wrong a wouldn't work. I don't have a plan that would work though. @HeavenlyPossum@Qbitzerre
@Vincarsi
Humankind would never be this prosperous without each other. Specialization and then trading with one another leads to prosperity. @HeavenlyPossum@Qbitzerre
@Vincarsi
I agree with Rand that selfishness (by the definition of going after what you want in life, not the definition of stealing, abusing others, etc) is a virtue. I am against "sacrifice" in the sense of being personally worse off. But as you say, part of human tendencies is to want to help one another.
Regarding the average Ayn Rand fan, they're total jerks, unfortunately. @HeavenlyPossum@Qbitzerre
@Vincarsi
Not permitting people to exert power over one another is fundamental to way I view human interactions.
It gets tricky because it takes a system of laws and enforcers who have a monopoly on violence to prevent a mob from exerting power. That's obviously difficult. We're paradoxically freer if the honest police make angry people maintain a non-threatening distance from religious minority event or a demonstration for an unpopular cause. @HeavenlyPossum@Qbitzerre
@Vincarsi
I wish that were true. I see people as usually good, but it only takes a few exceptions to mess things up. In the absence of a criminal justice system, people form benevolent gangs or clans that look out for each other and rely on fear or retribution as a deterrent. There's still the issue of ownership. In the worst case figures like the woman at the motor company in Atlas Shrugged emerge, along with people who act as muscle to back up her decisions. @HeavenlyPossum@Qbitzerre
@Vincarsi
I hope your idea is correct because my idea is unstable because it depends on institutions. There's no leviathan making sure people follow the system, and there's no guarantee that future generations will want to follow it. It would be nice if respecting one another were part of our nature. @HeavenlyPossum@Qbitzerre
@Vincarsi
I read in a book long ago that if the same number of people on Allies' side who risked their lives to fight fascism had instead coordinated to non-violently resist fascism, letting the fascist kill them without fighting back, they would have succeeded with no worse rate of fatalities. I'm not sure if it's true, but it's seems plausible given that millions died fighting. @HeavenlyPossum@Qbitzerre
@Vincarsi
Murderers blame all kinds of things for their crimes. In this case they're blaming socialism, i.e. the threat of bailing out a politically connected company with tax dollars taken by force, but really the murderer is to blame. @HeavenlyPossum@Qbitzerre
@Vincarsi
Yeah, looking for something the victim did wrong as a justification is crap.
Common criminals have excuses and people who are supposed to the good guys but commit crimes have excuses. @HeavenlyPossum@Qbitzerre
@Vincarsi People not letting you leave, beating you, etc are not part of private ownership of means of production. In fact, I see it as antithetical to private property. It may have trapping of freedom, but if you can't travel and make agreements with others without threats of violence, that's not freedom.
@itzpaquet
I always think of the Enlightenment as requiring animal-powered agriculture. Maybe that's just how it happened in Europe. If a group of people in the Americas development a concept of personal liberty first and then developed navigation and showed up around the world in ships, the whole history of the world could have different. I could be writing this in Nahuatl from Southern Italy. @HeavenlyPossum@Vincarsi@Qbitzerre
