next »

[Superb Joe]

*plays song of liberty on ocarina (it's just c-right 6 times), Ron paul swoops down from the sky on feathered wings, wearing a tunic fashioned after the constitution, and kisses me on the mouth*

[PompiPompi]

Fuck human compassion.

I don't know why people keep trying to argue with Pompi.  He is just so deep in his capitalism la-la land that nothing you say is comprehended by him.

I do have compassion. I just find it more honest to care about those who care about me.
Nobody care about everyone equally. People saying they care about the world, and supposingly care about everybody, are not honest with themsevles. They obviously care about some people over others. And if you do care about some people over others, why is it wrong for me to not care about everyone or the world?

[Nix]

If you're responding to me Dragonmaw, I'm not saying that rich vs poor is fair but that it's not the biggest issue. I'm denying that everyone should be on the same economic level (whether it was said here or not, it has been said by others in similar discussions). In a capitalist system there will always be a dichotomy between the rich and the poor. What needs to change is the bottom line. The dichotomy shouldn't be so fierce and limiting. People should be allowed to succeed based on merit and drive rather than capital investment and familial wealth. I said that if you work hard enough you can get to the top from the very bottom. This is true. I will say that it is way too difficult. So many great minds are lost to society simply because they weren't born to the right family. This is in part psychological -- many poor families view economic success with disdain. I say this from experience in my own life -- and partly financial.

Pompi: have you read Ayn Rand?

[Tumetsu]

If you are really willing to put the effort in, you can rise above the ranks from the depths of poverty. Get good grades, get a scholarship to a good university, and go to business school. The big issue is that not everyone wants to be a rich and powerful business-person. Why should the librarian or the clerk have less political power and have to work harder than the the CEO just to get by, often barely? That's where the problem lies. Capital investment and business is far more favored by the US system than plain old hard work. Capitalism as it is now simply doesn't respect the "little people" who make the gears turn each and every day. We're always going to have people with more money than everyone else as long as we have capitalism, but those who aren't in the upper class shouldn't have to struggle every day to make ends meet. There are lazy people, sure. But there are also people who work three jobs from dawn to dusk and still have to buy instant mac&cheese with food stamps to feed their families. Let the rich be rich, but the poor shouldn't be so damned poor.

Good point and mostly what I meant but better expressed. I read about this from Bigthink sometime ago (can't remember article though) which pointed out this problem. From my foreign vantage point it looks like middle-class has some hard time on US, like the chart I provided seems to suggest. Unfortunately it is where we in here Finland are slowly going on :S

Also, by rising through ranks and being successful I didn't mean to become successful businessman with millions but one who establishes stable and good financial life. At least that is what I have understood "american dream" to mean but I might have mistaken.

I do have compassion. I just find it more honest to care about those who care about me.
Nobody care about everyone equally. People saying they care about the world, and supposingly care about everybody, are not honest with themsevles. They obviously care about some people over others. And if you do care about some people over others, why is it wrong for me to not care about everyone or the world?

While I don't care as much for strangers as my immediate close-ones doesn't mean I have to be indifferent about them. By what you describe is normal for human behavior resulted from evolution, but unfortunately it often doesn't seem to lead sustainable and better future of humankind and therefore is questionable attitude IMO.

[Dragonmaw]

I wasn't responding to you I was just pointing out the inherent fallacy in saying that an economic system with such a dramatic disparity is "fair" simply because it has the same rules.

To continue my analogy, it should be more like a collegiate team against an NBA team. There's still a disparity, but at least they are (relative to the first example) close to each other.

[Superb Joe]

WELCOME. TO. NBA JAM. reads rand's mirthless foreword

[Falmil]

One of my problems is that a CEO is paid X times the salary of a some other employee, when in fact, a CEO doesn't really do anything special. An engineer could do a CEO's job, albeit, poorly or not as well. On the other hand, a CEO could not do an engineer's job at all. The same with a lot of different positions. I am not really aware of why a CEO is so important or gets paid so much when its all the workers below him that do all the work AND the middle managers doing most of the management.

[Capntastic]

One of my problems is that a CEO is paid X times the salary of a some other employee,

X is about 400.

[Tumetsu]

One of my problems is that a CEO is paid X times the salary of a some other employee, when in fact, a CEO doesn't really do anything special. An engineer could do a CEO's job, albeit, poorly or not as well. On the other hand, a CEO could not do an engineer's job at all. The same with a lot of different positions. I am not really aware of why a CEO is so important or gets paid so much when its all the workers below him that do all the work AND the middle managers doing most of the management.

While I agree with what you say, we got one special advice from visitors from work life at my university (technology university, I'm for CS degree):

When setting up IT-company, never ever put (main) programmer for CEO. Like ever.

Somehow I can believe that regarding how many my programmer buddies think about business world :D

[SirNiko]

Management is difficult, though. I am an engineer who was recently promoted to an assistant manager position. It is a lot of work to not only be responsible for doing my work, but for deciding what I should be doing (not to mention three other people I must manage when my boss is away on business!). The CEO cannot be expected be an engineer, a grant writer, and an accountant all at once, so he relies on the managers to manage their departments towards his broad goals. It is really stressful, and a lot of the other engineers have chosen not to pursue that path.

I am concerned that, in a theoretical world where pay is much closer to balanced, that people at the high end would simply choose not to be managers. Getting paid more money so I can take care of my parents is a major motivator towards my chosen career path.

[Irock]

If everyone were payed equally, everyone would be an indie game developer and then we'd die.

[dustin]

I am concerned that, in a theoretical world where pay is much closer to balanced, that people at the high end would simply choose not to be managers. Getting paid more money so I can take care of my parents is a major motivator towards my chosen career path.

Maybe your talking about much more balanced then I'm thinking of but it doesn't have to be theoretical.  Lots of countries have a more balanced pay grade then the U.S. and they still have plenty of manager type people.

[eclectocrat]

Who's gonna enforce whatever it is you want?

The gub'ment.

One thing I agree with Ron Paul (ron paul) about, is that we don't need more rules, we need fewer, and we need to enforce them fairly. If we eliminated tax cuts for the most profitable company in history (exxon), and removed the barriers of entry to small business (especially dumping by overseas competitors and intellectual property liabilities), enforced the law evenly, then you'd find a much 'fairer' (in pompi's words) society. Small business can solve most problems more efficiently than big government (certainly NOT all problems), and there are plenty of laws with which to protect society. That's why Ron Paul (ron paul) is against drug prohibition, because it creates money sucking agencies, criminalizes harmless activities, doesn't actually prevent drug use. Ron Paul ... (ron paul) says that we already have laws which criminalize dangerous behaviour, so if someone gets high and drives around, we don't need to throw them in jail for having drugs, we have a law that punishes intoxicated operation of a vehicle.

What Ron Paul (ron paul) is aware of is that we're not living in a capitalist society, we're living in a corporatist feudalism, where power has become so concentrated that those at the top end up bending/breaking/creating rules in order to further concentrate their power, just look at monsanto as a prime example.

Pompi is talking dispassionately about a theoretical capitalist society, one which traditional small government Republicans and Libertarians like Ron Paul (ron paul) espouse. Many people on this board are retorting with attacks on the current system, which is not really democratic capitalist anymore.

The only ones who really grasp all of this is Superb Joe... and Ron Paul (ron paul).

[JutsBeaumont]

I've barely even done anything in this debate and I don't know how you guys can even tolerate attempting to talk to Pompi. He consistently avoids questions, provides answers that do answer and misuses terms and ideas.

[eclectocrat]

ron paul

[Capntastic]

I've barely even done anything in this debate and I don't know how you guys can even tolerate attempting to talk to this guy.

Which guy?

[Dragonmaw]

PompiPompi presumably

[JutsBeaumont]

Which guy?

Pompi, yeah. I edited the post a few minutes ago because I realized the discussion had begun to involve more people. Also elaborated a bit on what I meant, even if most of it is blatantly obvious.

[Capntastic]

I just think it's interesting how better Pompi is at discrediting libertarian ideology than I am.  I'm learning a lot here!

Edit:  Not that he's really representative of libertarian thought in general, just that a lot of his fallacies are common in those circles.

[i wanna be the guy]

ron paul!