[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 480 KB, 1280x800, 1291781818295.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3139198 No.3139198 [Reply] [Original]

So /sci/ I have a dilemma. Not exactly asking for socialism or anything but I have a few scenarios I think should be observed. We produce enough food that the government literally pays farmers to not grow it and throw the overproduction away. Yet we have people who go each night wondering where their next meal is going to come from. We have entire neighborhoods of empty houses and building becoming more dilapidated every day. Yet we have homeless people in every city. Our doctors are by a staggering margin some of the most overpaid in the world. Yet basic healthcare is a constant fear for some people. Don't you think we as a nation should be better than this by now? Don't you think its shameful that we as a society would rather have a house fall into ruin than let people have a roof over their heads? I am not asking for full blown government regulation of business here. But I can't think of us as a civilized society when problems like this are apparent and championed under the horn of " Some people are lazy".

>> No.3139208

nope. humans suck.

greedy bastards, only slightly better than animals.

>> No.3139235

>>3139208
I always wonder if we will ever see the day that we act upon the fact that we are post-scarcity and actually start caring about our fellow man rather than seeing a dollar sign

>> No.3139236

Frankly I think we should guarantee every citizen a basic standard of living. Healthcare, food, modest government housing, options for continuing education (useful fields only), etc.

The catch is if you want welfare, the government should own you. If you have a job your paycheque goes to the welfare fund. If you don't have a job the government finds you one or makes one for you (always need more people to haul garbage, clean streets, do basic construction work, etc.). If you don't hold down the job, no more government assistance. No coasting.

>> No.3139253

>>3139236
I agree, I feel as though welfare is a flawed concept of sorts. Foodstamps and direct payment of rent for those who work in government provided jobs and do minimal work. Actual money if you choose to work above the maintenance threshold. That way if you want a new tv you gotta earn it but there is never a fear that you won't be able to survive.

>> No.3139274

>The catch is if you want welfare, the government should own you

The government DOES own you. Who do you think is paying for all the banker bailouts, the wall street casino, the military industrial empire, the bloated trillion dollar healthcare system, the student loan monopoly, corn subsidies, police state video cameras on every corner, etc.?

YOU. How do they get it all? Taxes. And if you don't pay your taxes, you go to jail. Who pays for jail? You. You and any future borrowers of the fiat system.

>> No.3139291

>>3139274

Dude, read the rest of the paragraph, I was talking about providing decent assistance to people but making it absolutely impossible to coast by on welfare.

I have no idea what the hell you are talking about or what it has to do with the above.

>> No.3139295

>>3139236
>>3139253

Then its called having a job.

The problem with socialism is precisely because it wants to support people with no jobs, indefinitely.

Spending a few thousand government dollars per person to support them for a few months until they can find a job IS ENTIRELY REASONABLE AND RATIONAL. Most every capitalist except the extremes understand this. But you must cut that funding the moment you can tell that the person is simply not willing to work and would rather live off social security with no constructive input.

>> No.3139302

the human race needs to be chemically modified to enhance our empathy and down regulate our hateful emotions.....i believe the first step into a true utopia is constant regulation of specific neurotransmitters and hormones........seemingly impossible now but i believe in the future once we colonize a new planet or a create a new nation, all people under that jurisdiction will be administered with with such a modification

not exactly completely relevant with OP but an idea i was pondering earlier and thought someone may want to entertain

>> No.3139310

>>3139236
I agree. I think there should be a WORK safety net for the people who can't make their own way in the market system. A military-like government entity that people can join, live in barracks, eat in a mess hall, and do whatever work for the public interest the government can set them to.

>> No.3139312
File: 29 KB, 528x543, 1289130723075.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3139312

>this thread

:)

>> No.3139313

>>3139302

Not going to happen, it will be stopped by:

"BUT MY FREEDOM!"
"YOU CAN'T TOUCH MY DNA"
"I AM ALREADY PERFECT"
"I AM NOT FLAWED"
"THIS IS OFFENSIVE!"
"OMG EVIL SCIENCE"
"GOD WILLS IT!"

Sadly, the only thing genetic modification will be used is to make rich people sexy...or genderbend.

>> No.3139319

where's the motivation to get a job then?

>> No.3139322

>>3139295
Clearly you didn't read the posts entirely. If you don't have a job a lowest of the low level position will be provided to you. Something like sorting trash at a landfill for recycling purposes. Or a lunchlady at a school. Jobs that a braindead monkey could do. The only excuse you could have for not working would be a disability or to have someone else who is paying for you. There would be two classes of job and two classes of money. Government provided and always attainable and then real jobs and money for those who strive to improve themselves

>> No.3139329
File: 30 KB, 646x365, 1303873437203.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3139329

>>3139319

I'd work for free if it weren't to perpetuate said picture.

>> No.3139333
File: 12 KB, 482x412, 1300183634529.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3139333

>>3139319
Many people do jobs because they like to do jobs. Just sayin'

>> No.3139336

>>3139302
>>3139302
there is a drug that chemically produces empathy. It was commissioned for creation by the US government and then immediately banned, like most things in America, when it was learned that you could have fun with it. You might have heard of it. Its called Ecstacy

>> No.3139339

>>3139319
See
>>3139322

>> No.3139345

>>3139329
Us "average" Americans eat the scraps that fall from the table of the rich. Fortunately the rich are SO rich that the scraps are pretty cool! Fords, Chevies, Big Screen T.V.s etcetera...  Who cares if Bill Gates makes Billions every year?? Give me my pittance ($50-$60k) and I won't revolt.

>> No.3139352

>>3139322

The problem with this happens when the Government keeps creating these low level jobs to the point of redundancy, at which point they start relayering roads unnecessary just so that these people have a "job" to do.

If you keep catering to the lowest denominator, they'll STAY at the lowest level, instead of being forced to improve and do something useful.

>> No.3139372

>>3139329
Such bullshit.

It's a strictly material definition of "wealth", when most of the actual wealth of the country is in the skills and labor potential of the people.

The 50% "poorest" mostly spend whatever comes into their hands, knowing they can get more. Therefore, they don't have "wealth", even though they mostly enjoy quite comfortable lifestyles.

To make it even more ridiculous, they aren't even trying to correct for age: young people who are investing in their education or spending what they earn on fun are "poor" with no wealth, even though they have their whole lifetime in their hands to spend as they will, while people on the brink of retirement are "rich" with lots of "wealth" because they have a lifetime of productivity behind them and have saved so they won't be a burden on their families, and very old people in retirement homes are "poor" again because they have gone decades spending their savings without earning anything.

It's such nonsense. Anyone who thinks it's important to equalize that distribution of "wealth" is a complete idiot.

>> No.3139377

>>3139345

History and psychology suggests people are willing to tolerate ridiculous levels of poverty but only if that has always been the status quo. They revolt when things were good but then get bad.

tl:dr If we had been born into serious poverty we'd probably be used to it, but instead we're middle class so take away our cheap cars and ipods and we bust out the torches and pitchforks.

>> No.3139380

>>3139372
>if we don't let people starve to death because they can't get work, they will become addicted to shitty government-enforced bullshit labor jobs and society will crumble!

>> No.3139381

>>3139352
I think you are overestimating the laziness of people who wouldn't have money to spend on normative niceties and severely underestimating the need for infrastructural build out in America. Just building public transit rails across the country and garbage sorting would be enough to occupy thousands of people for quite some time. And working one of these jobs would never be held as a social norm, living in government housing would be a constant social stigma for people. I can only hope that that would be enough for them to catch even an iota of ambition. I am being idyllic here I admit but I still think that this system would work way better than our current

>> No.3139388

>>3139352

There is always more mindless, manual labour to do. Always. The day when there is literally nothing more we could have people do is the day we should just start printing more money and giving it to people.

>> No.3139397

bunch of nubs

realize that the median income in USA is 40k

realize that world GDP is ~60trillion

if you split it among 6billion people, it's 10k USD

average american needs to have a 75% reduction in living quality for wealth to be spread around evenly.


no, not one of you are thinking clearly about equality of humans. just humans that matter. you know, americans and other cool people.

>> No.3139405

>>3139397
What are you talking about?

>> No.3139410

>>3139352
You can't force people to improve themselves. But force people who can't make it in the free market to be useful. There are always useful things for them to do. If they ever finish fixing all the roads and painting all the bridges, have them plant trees or build new parks. Provide night classes for those who want to take charge of their lives.

>> No.3139412

>>3139405
Brown people-shaped animals.

Ignore him.

>> No.3139425

>>3139397
>if you split it among 6billion people

Nobody here has suggested anything remotely like this. Fuck off.

>> No.3139439

>>3139253
This. People should be given the necessities to live, but luxuries should be worked for.

>> No.3139441

>>3139425
Anyway, the other 800 million people would be totally screwed then.

>> No.3139442

>>3139388

But you don't seem to be thinking about how such a system would be funded. That's the most important question. Having people swat flies at their local FBI office for a subsistence wage isn't going to contribute to the economy. You need people to produce goods, not have them doing the same thing over and over, wasting them. Such a welfare program would be wasteful to the overall economy.

>> No.3139449

>>3139412
This is the argument I hate to hear all the time. People who argue against one charity with another. We don't have it in our capacity to save the world. We will someday and when that day comes I will be the first in line to do my part. But we have people within our own country suffering and we need to develop a stable system for ourselves if we intend to help others. I am proposing that we make everyone in America productive. Can you imagine what we would be capable of as a nation if we completely eliminated 95% of the homeless population, had nobody sucking down unemployment and welfare, cheating the system for all they can? We would be a beacon to other countries, we might even incite some of that national competitiveness that took our science skyward in the 50's and 60's. And then we can help the entire world. I realize I am being absolutely ridiculous here but I am sick of being faulted for hoping for the best from humanity

>> No.3139452

>>3139388

I gave you that example precisely because my country has that exact problem.

Funnily enough, its racially motivated. The majority must be supported, but because the "princes of the land" are so goddamn incompetent, the government "creates" useless jobs for contractors to toil over and over to no benefit for the community.

Yeah, guess which country this is.

>> No.3139462

>>3139442
>>3139442
You seem to assume the working class would be supplanted with this calibur of people. This would be a level of work reserved for those who would by todays standards be on welfare or homeless. The housing provided would be as minimal as possible. Internet, cable, furniture, all things that you must provide. You would be getting a single bed, single bathroom apartment with no furniture and a cot for you to sleep on. This isn't meant to be a way of life. This is a way to avoid the elements.

>> No.3139464

$100,000 estate cap.

problem solved.

>> No.3139476

>>3139452
can I sincerely ask which country you are speaking of so that I may research it without getting my intelligence blatantly insulted?

>> No.3139472

>>3139442

The system proposed here would require way more work from an individual on welfare than is required now.

The assistance would be better, but all in all I would not expect a massive number of people to flock to the bare minimum and shitty job forever option.

And again, the jobs need not be useless to society. We always need more houses built. Always. You talk about needing products to be made, but thanks to a little thing called the industrial revolution, that is exactly the kind of mindless work that these people can be made to do.

>> No.3139483

>>3139452

Read the OP, we're talking about the US in here. If you want to talk about another country, make your own thread.

>> No.3139490

>>3139462

It's a simple question. How would you propose funding such a system?

>>3139472

>You talk about needing products to be made, but thanks to a little thing called the industrial revolution, that is exactly the kind of mindless work that these people can be made to do.

This system was already tried in Russia and China, both systems failed miserably. Government bureaucrats can't account for the needs and wants of millions of people.

>> No.3139514

>>3139476

Starts with "Malay". No, I am not one of them.

>>3139483

Point taken.

Point given: The problem is universal, and will pop up in any country with sufficient infrastructure and development. There is simply not enough dumb jobs to do. Machines make masses of farmers obsolete, and more complex buildings and structures today cannot be handled by someone plucked off the street. As the world advances, so does number of lowest-level job decreases.

>> No.3139519

>>3139490
>It's a simple question. How would you propose funding such a system?

. . . The same way all social programs are funded. Slightly increase taxes or cut something else (MILITARY!!!).

>This system was already tried in Russia and China, both systems failed miserably. Government bureaucrats can't account for the needs and wants of millions of people.

Um, bullshit. We're talking here about finding or providing jobs for people who can't find jobs on their own and need government assistance.

The government takes these people, goes to the market, says "hey, we've got people here, who needs some mindless labour done?", and then places those people where they are needed.

If there is absolutely no demand for these workers, the government makes jobs for them doing things that are at least useful to society.

This would not cost a ton, this would not fuck up the current economy, this has nothing to do with what was tried in Russia and China.

>> No.3139537

>>3139462
>You would be getting a single bed, single bathroom apartment with no furniture and a cot for you to sleep on.
Fuck that. Barracks.

>> No.3139561

>>3139490
>government bureaucrats can't account for the needs and wants of millions of people.
You can't run an entire economy this way. But you can run the lowest 10% this way. If you break even or fall a little short, it's still cheaper than the welfare and food stamp program.

>> No.3139563

>This would not cost a ton, this would not fuck up the current economy, this has nothing to do with what was tried in Russia and China.

You don't know that for certain. You don't know how much such a system would cost, how many bureaucrats would need to be paid, how many services need to be enacted for the system to run properly. All of this costs money. It's not so easy as printing a couple dollars to patch things up. Look at the systems in place in Europe. They're all broken. The Euro is about to become confettti because a few assholes made promises they knew they couldn't keep just so they could get reelected and continue enacting policies that only benefit their buttfucking buddy elites. How many times does history have to prove you wrong? How many people have to suffer before it becomes clear that government doesn't fix problems, it creates them? Look at the US; does anyone actually think that what the government is doing is actually fixing the economy? Do you see the recovery? Cause I sure don't. All I see ishigher prices at the food stores, higher prices at the gas pumps, higher tuition costs, the list goes on.

>> No.3139590
File: 63 KB, 300x300, AWSM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3139590

>MFW this system of welfare seems too legit to quit
Lets make it happen guys. I'm calling my congressman first thing Monday

>> No.3139610

>>3139563
The current system is obviously not working yet you scoff at the idea of an alternative. What is it you want? This would get rid of the artificially inflated price of produce and help build out the USA's infrastructure for about as cheap as you possibly could get it done. There would be no more welfare, no more WIC, and severely reduced unemployment costs along with promoting work within our country. I don't see how you find this would cost more money and even still I would love to hear your alternative because you seem displeased with absolutely everything

>> No.3139615

>>3139563

mfw he thinks the economy of europe is worse off than america

>> No.3139650

>>3139563
>You don't know that for certain. . . . All of this costs money.

Don't see how it could possibly cost much more than the current welfare system with its already existing bureaucrats, services, etc.

>Look at the systems in place in Europe. . . . a few assholes made promises they knew they couldn't keep just so they could benefit their buttfucking buddy elites.

What in the hell does that have to do with anything.

"Sometimes politicians in Europe make promises they can't keep therefore this suggestion for how to improve American welfare is obviously a bad idea!"

What?

>> No.3139655

>>3139615
He would be right.

>> No.3139682

>>3139563
>>3139490

Rah! Rah! Communism! Social programs are bad . . . because of, uh, Russia! Don't you read history! How many times do you have to see that governments only kill their people! Especially communist ones!

Even though communist Cuba has better healthcare and employment rates than we do . . . and communist China is on track to overtake us as well. IGNORE THAT!

WE WASTE TONS OF MONEY ON MILITARY AND WE HAVE ABSURDLY LOW TAXES BUT WE DEFINITELY CANNOT AFFORD ANY SOCIAL SPENDING!

>> No.3139696

>>3139610
>>3139650

Why spend the money on infrastructure if it's not going to be used? Take a look at this video, this is the supposed paradise you speak of:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0h7V3Twb-Qk

Who is going to pay for all the upkeep of said unused infrastructure? People don't work for free, you know.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UW2mg9i4pjk

See that hotel? No one is occupying it. There is no demand for it. I wonder how long before it looks like the piece of shit it once was?

For the record, I want government to get out of the way. I don't want any alternative, because politicians are slimy two-faced liars who game the system to benefit other people. It pains me to have to keep explaining to you a truth about your governments. But what exactly have they done for you lately? Why do you continue trying to propose alternatives to a broken system when the problem lies with the politicians? You can't fix people, they don't change. They all want to get their own, but they don't want to work hard to get it. That's why I don't seek a replacement, because history has told me that "this time, its gonna be different" is actually the same bullshit over and over. Somewhere in your mind, lies this idea that people can simply WILL prosperity if they put enough faith in other people. Again, history would prove you very wrong.

>> No.3139712

>socialism

I wonder why americans hate it so much (generalizing fuck you). Canadian here living in a social country and I'm sure my standard of living is much better than yours.

>> No.3139723

>>3139712
Because COMMIES

>> No.3139729
File: 577 KB, 996x1191, Joseph_McCarthy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3139729

>>3139723
Forgot my image

>> No.3139732

>>3139682

China is communist only in name. Their enactment of free market policies for the past few decades definitely changed the fate of China. China has fewer regulations than America. Gee, I wonder why everything is made in China? I wonder why China continues to grow at double the rate of America? I wonder why American companies continue to outsource labor to China?


>WE WASTE TONS OF MONEY ON MILITARY AND WE HAVE ABSURDLY LOW TAXES BUT WE DEFINITELY CANNOT AFFORD ANY SOCIAL SPENDING!

I'd like military spending cut by more than 3/4 if you're wondering. One role of the federal government is national defense (it's in the constitution), not playing babysitter with peoples lives.

>> No.3139742

>>3139696
The problem you are attempting to find here has to do with lack of planning. They shouldn't be put on throwaway projects like senseless construction. They should be the backing workforce for government initiatives. You want a continental rail system, you got your workers. You want the garbage off your streets, you got your workers. You want to maintain your sidewalks and pot-holed streets, once again you have your workers. Do nothing projects such as the ones you posted only serve to display mismanagement. If we never attempt to build a better world it won't be built

>> No.3139745

>>3139732

Talk to a real Chinese person about the paperwork and bribes necessary to start up a company and come back here to say that.

>> No.3139758

>>3139696
You've seriously got some kind of comprehension issue here.

I say: "The government should help poor people out but make sure they're working in some useful capacity in order to get the aid."

You hear: "The government should take control of the economy and waste money having people build useless infrastructure. Vive la Communist Revolution!"

To answer your question, I've actually been living a lie in this thread. I'm really a Canadian, and the socialist party over here has gotten me healthcare, tuition freezes, and a home energy audit, among other things.

>> No.3139764

>>3139464
Protip: Estate caps on private wealth would incentivize wantonly wasteful consumption on luxuries today. There would be no incentive to save for the future, and since savings form investment would mess with economic efficiency.

>> No.3139768

>>3139745
The growth is still in China, and that was my point. I never said it was easy, but you have to wonder why people keep saying that China is going to be the global economic engine for the foreseeable future.

>> No.3139769

>>3139732

>>3139745

This. I frequently host Chinese foreign language students. Nobody who says "China is communist only in name" has ever been to China, dealt with the Chinese government, or talked to a Chinese national.

>> No.3139779

>>3139410
If this was activity whose benefits outweighed its cost, it would already exist the way you want it. If you feel its benefits outweigh the cost, then you can put your money down, make it happen and profit.

>> No.3139801

>>3139519
The cost of budgeting for this, administrators to lead this agency, managers to oversee the retarded/infirm, etc. etc. would cost something. It transfers wealth from those who can persuade others to give them money to those who can't do that.

>> No.3139815
File: 187 KB, 525x500, Pirates.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3139815

One room, 6mX5m+bathroom.
Healthy but cheap food.
Water.
Healthcare.
Standard computer changed every 5 years.
Internet.
Here, you have no homeless, no hungry, less sick people(who cost a shiton money, but it's not instantaneous, so less visible).
Even if they don't go search for jobs, they can contribute to the economy via internet.

And honestly, with shits like khan academy becoming legion, you really think some percentage of these government sponsored people would not try to improve themselves?
(i know i wouldn't, or all of 4chan for that matter, but we are a minority.)

Pic related, we would have internet.

>> No.3139816

>>3139682
Full employment and healthcare are simple goals to achieve when you allocate resources away from their most efficient uses.

I.e. conscription into army, keeping your electrical grids unstable to buy drugs and doctors and so on.

Must explain why so many Americans swim to Cuba.

>> No.3140045
File: 69 KB, 650x433, Arab_Expansionism_Into_Bahrain.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3140045

Op. Too many questions.

pic related.

It's the Saudi Army entering Bahrain on Friday.

>> No.3140049
File: 71 KB, 661x953, 1280748121415.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3140049

>> No.3140063

>>3140045

We supply the Saudis with guns so.....why did we give them ice cream trucks?

>> No.3140075

op, if what you said is true (that we use tax payer money to make food more scarce than it really is, thus driving up the prices), doesn't that imply nefarious intent on the behalf of corporate interest?

I had no idea this was the case and would like to see some sources to back up your claims, I find it hard to believe the government would intentionally make food (a vital resource to life and prosperity) more scarce than it really is so that tax payers have to pay more for food, using taxpayer money to the people cutting the food supply so the taxpayers have to pay more for food.

That shit seems WAY too fucked up to be true.

tl;dr:

Op is full of shit claiming that we intentionally pay food producers to make food more scarce. Learn to reality before you make a thread.

>> No.3140097
File: 34 KB, 448x310, Go.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3140097

>>3140063

Ha!

Yeah, I don't think Saudi Arabia is much of model society. The CIA says that Saudi businesses lure African and Sub-Continent immigrants to the peninsula for work and then basically keeps them as indentured workers, not giving them the salaries promised and keeping them from ever making enough money to leave. Modern slavery, state sanctioned.

>> No.3140232

>>3140075
Are you fucking serious? You didn't know this? Farmers in the midwest have been overproducing for years. Farming methods have advanced to the point where we don't hardly need to try to grow food to our needs.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/01/AR2006070100962.html

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1680139-3,00.html

http://www.foodfirst.org/backgrounders/subsidies

and the entirety of the film Food Inc.

Seriously. Fucking educate yourself before you try and call people out

>> No.3140236

>>3140075
What's it like, living so far away from where your food is produced that none of your friends live on farms?

>> No.3140567

>>3140236

Great.

>> No.3140590

>>3139236

Then you support welfare.

>>3139253

Then you support welfare.

>>3139291

> impossible to coast by on welfare
> given food, shelter, etc for nothing

You just defined coasting by, and you support it.