|
deafpanda
Stranger
Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 984
Loc: Inguland
Last seen: 12 years, 7 months
|
Re: Blair - the man, the music [Re: Phred]
#2904556 - 07/19/04 04:33 AM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
You do? Try this experiment -- refuse to pay them. When the government comes to get you, refuse to go with them. Then you can tell us what term best suits the methods the government used on you.
Okay, point taken.
"Being forced against your will to do the "moral" thing isn't a demonstration of morality on the part of the one being forced."
Sure, it's a demonstration of morality on a state level.
"So they therefore have less rights than others? It is okay to initiate force against them because (through no fault of their own) they were born a Rockefeller?"
But if you are born a Rockefeller, you have the world at your feet. I would still "initiate force" against the poor, there's no inconsistency there. The poor would pay relatively less because they have less money. Overall, they're carrying an equal tax burden.
"Same comment as above. The ones born in the US should be forcibly deported to Niger?"
Heh, no...stop using hyperbole . Redistribution of income is simply taxing the rich more than the poor, and giving the very poor benefits.
"Protecting your property isn't initiating force."
But I'm saying the patents for life-saving drugs shouldn't be considered legitamate property.
"The problem is that the second premise contradicts the facts of reality. The laws of nature are such that not all individuals (of any species) have an equal chance of survival."
It in no way contradicts the facts. I was not saying "Everyone does have an equal chance", I was saying "everyone SHOULD have an equal chance". The laws of nature do dictate what you say, but the laws of nature are also such that animals will initiate force against each other on a regular basis. We, rightly, should be above the laws of nature, as humans.
"Actually, the second one doesn't look "good" at all. It looks like evasion of fact."
I wasn't commenting on a fact, I was commenting on an ideal state of affairs.
"What contradictions will be "lead to" if the first premise is followed?"
I'm saying if both of them were followed at the same time it would lead to contradiction. I don't think if either one was followed there would be a contradiction.
|
deafpanda
Stranger
Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 984
Loc: Inguland
Last seen: 12 years, 7 months
|
Re: Blair - the man, the music [Re: Ancalagon]
#2904577 - 07/19/04 05:08 AM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
"Sigh. Very common fallacy. SOME drug companies have recouped their costs many times over, some meaning not all. The part of this equation that might be hard to see, is that those companies that haven't recouped their costs no longer exist(whether through acquisition by a more profitable company or outright bankruptcy)."
This is true.
"That would truly be a disaster. When government takes control of something, ALL incentive is lost for that something to succeed. The chance of making a profit on investments is what drives companies to invest millions(and billions...) into the research of new drugs. A chemist working towards the creation of a new AIDS drug will work his ass off with the knowledge that if he and his coworkers don't produce after a given time, there funding will be cut. A chemist working directly for the government, however, can cut corners and generally half-ass(at best) his way through the day with the knowledge that whether he produces or not, he'll be payed."
Now this is interesting. The UK and the US couldn't have different track records in regard to private/public services. I am aware that your healthcare system, transport infrastructure etc. are all private (is this right?) and works fine. In the UK, until about '92, our railways were working perfectly. They got privatised, and now the government regular has to hand out sums in the region of hundreds of millions of pounds. Overall, billions have been wasted on "rebranding" and private companies who have no prior experience of this industry fucking things up. There have been three major accidents on our railways since the privatisation, there were none before.
Recently, Blair has started part-privatising hospitals with the same ridiculous results. Costs are typically doubling. The same companies always get the contracts aswell, usually donors to Blair's party, always incompetent. As usual, the government has to fork out to end up with an actual finished hospital.
I know there are huge benefits from introducing competition (usually) with efficiency being driven up to lower costs, but this just hasn't proved to be the case in the UK. Maybe our companies are just shit, I don't know.
"Are you SURE it's typical for drug companies to make profits of 600%? Are you SURE the companies that make profits of 600% aren't the small number of companies that met success as opposed to the potential majority that didn't?"
I can only speak for the UK here, but there has been a lot of price-fixing by the major drugs companies - they all band together and agree not to price their products competetively. Some work is being done on this by some watchdog or other. Yes, profits of 600% were being enjoyed by all the drugs companies. This may not be the case any more.
"If you come to power and decree that the profit return on life-saving drugs may be no more than X%, I ASSURE you that the healthcare manufacturers, with their research departments, will leave your country in droves. Profit is incentive and incentive is what gets things done."
Yes, this is very true, and is why something like this needs international co-operation. Which I know is not likely to come in the near future.
"True capitalism raises the standard of living for ALL the citizens of a nation. Statists have such a problem with the rich getting richer that they completely ignore the fact that the poor are also getting richer, though they are not rich."
If this is what is happening in the US, then that's cool. In the UK, the poor are no better off in real terms (adjusted for inflation) than they were a decade ago.
"Statists also love to throw around statistics that show how poor the bottom quartile or quintile of people are, with total disregard to the fact that people VERY RARELY stay in a bottom quartile or quintile throughout their lives, and in fact, a good many people who are in that bottom portion of the chart at one point of their lives, are in the top portion at some other point."
Again, in the UK, I would say this isn't true. People born into lower socio-economic groups tend to get a worse education and so end up poorer by, on average, a great deal.
"Socialism doesn't work...at all. The last century has proven that. The sooner people accept that government cannot fix problems, only exacerbate them, the better off humanity as a whole will be."
Well, maybe there's some fundamental difference between the US and Europe which makes capitalism innefective here. Socialism certainly can work - Germany, the Scandinavian countries and the UK in the 70s proved that. Of course, I would never recommend socialism to the US, don't get me wrong. Similarly, though, our experiences of capitalism leave much to be desired.
|
deafpanda
Stranger
Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 984
Loc: Inguland
Last seen: 12 years, 7 months
|
Re: Blair - the man, the music [Re: zappaisgod]
#2904587 - 07/19/04 05:15 AM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
The 600% figure was true as of a few months ago.
Your recommendations are a recipe for economic growth. Do you consider this to be the standard by which countries should be judged?
What I am alluding too, really, is what do you do once you've grown as much as is feasible and practical? I mean what should a country be aiming at, beyond economic growth?
|
Evolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
|
Re: Blair - the man, the music [Re: deafpanda]
#2905050 - 07/19/04 09:43 AM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
deafpanda said: "Being forced against your will to do the "moral" thing isn't a demonstration of morality on the part of the one being forced."
Sure, it's a demonstration of morality on a state level.
States don't have morals. A state is an unfeeling, unthinking apparatus of centralized power. Stealing does not cease to be theft when farmed out to others. It is not a moral man who sends agents of the state to extort funds from his fellow man to give to another, but a moral coward who does not have the strength of conviction to give of himself, nor the creativity or foresight to look beyond the use of force for other methods to fund his schemes.
-------------------- To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.' Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence. Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains. Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.
|
deafpanda
Stranger
Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 984
Loc: Inguland
Last seen: 12 years, 7 months
|
Re: Blair - the man, the music [Re: Evolving]
#2905075 - 07/19/04 09:57 AM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Stealing does not necessarily have to be wrong. Just as lying and even killing can be justified, so can stealing, if it is for the common good, in my opinion.
|
Evolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
|
Re: Blair - the man, the music [Re: deafpanda]
#2905198 - 07/19/04 10:55 AM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Well then, you are in the good company of Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin and numerous others who have seen nothing wrong with the destruction of humanity for the 'common good' (whatever your whims may deem that to be).
-------------------- To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.' Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence. Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains. Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: Blair - the man, the music [Re: Phred]
#2905337 - 07/19/04 12:03 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Try this experiment -- refuse to pay them
Try this experiment while you're at it - don't use any roads built with tax money, don't expect your child to be educated in schools built with tax money, don't expect any garbage removal and don't expect the police (paid for by tax money) to help you or any members of your family. And don't expect tax money to pay to keep criminals off your streets. See how it goes.
Protecting your property isn't initiating force.
Try this experiment. Formulate a version of the drug in your own lab and try and sell it for a cheaper price. See what force is initiated against you.
So they therefore have less rights than others?
Straw man. Almost everyone pays tax - not just Rockefeller.
The laws of nature are such that not all individuals (of any species) have an equal chance of survival.
Sounds like the kind of idea Himmler was pushing in the 30's. People generally live in cities these days. Not "nature". Certainly if we lived by the laws of nature Bill Gates wouldn't have survived. Without police to protect him, he would have been robbed and killed long ago.
Actually, the second one doesn't look "good" at all. It looks like evasion of fact.
Nope - it looks like the best method of ensuring the survival of the planet and our species.
-------------------- Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
CJay
Dark Stranger


Registered: 02/02/04
Posts: 931
Loc: Riding a bassline
|
Re: Blair - the man, the music [Re: deafpanda]
#2911296 - 07/21/04 04:15 AM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Sure, Blair is as you say a leaf on the winds of world politics, but like all chief politicians he's the leaf that increased the beef.
I agree that the tories are a scary lot, wspecially with that nosferatu Howard at the Helm.
Labour has turned into a doublespeak word and all in all things are all moving one way.
Saddam was teed up with precision for decades, as the post WW2 world leader America set about making sure the status quo was kept in their favour for as long into the future as possible.
Like you say who will be better? Has anyone ever been? The queue to take Blair's job is packed with no answer. But that doesn't detract from the fact he's a complete wanker.
Who needs a f*ckin leader on this scale anyway? I mean how can one person head 60 million? It's a bit out of proportion and this is a major problem as I see it.
Ban 'em
Power addict type personalities are all it encourages. I contest that people who go for these positions have an instability of character based on a need to feed their power addictions. We as humans all develop habits, obsessions and addictions; and some of us cannot control our limits. We become unhealthy. Well in every nation a certain section of society is displays a pathological need to gain power. These people mostly become politicians. They convince all the time how we need them, defer their insecurities onto the masses, and set about their megalomaniac ways.
And - Yes I suppose British people should count themselves lucky that they do not have Bush. .....except inadvertently they do......
|
Phred
Fred's son


Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
|
Re: Blair - the man, the music [Re: Xlea321]
#2911957 - 07/21/04 10:42 AM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Alex123 writes:
Try this experiment. Formulate a version of the drug in your own lab and try and sell it for a cheaper price. See what force is initiated against you.
If by "version" you mean an analog unprotected by patent, you are legally free to do so. If by "version" you mean the same patented compound, then of course you will be charged.
Almost everyone pays tax - not just Rockefeller.
Read what I wrote, not what you pretend I wrote. I didn't say "all others".
Sounds like the kind of idea Himmler was pushing in the 30's.
Lol! When stumped for a response, drag out the tired old "that sounds just like what the Nazis used to say," ploy. Tiresome.
People generally live in cities these days. Not "nature".
And this is relevant to my point how?
Certainly if we lived by the laws of nature Bill Gates wouldn't have survived.
Incorrect. Gates is certainly competent enough to have been a hunter gatherer, or perhaps a tool maker for hunters.
Without police to protect him, he would have been robbed and killed long ago.
Lol! This is true of countless individuals. Way to dodge the point being made.
The fact remains that not all individuals are as suited for survival as others. Some individuals are so ill-suited that without the assistance of other humans they will surely die. This is not some Himmleresque brainwashing making me say this, it's a simple acknowledgment of reality.
Nope - it looks like the best method of ensuring the survival of the planet and our species.
The planet will survive regardless of human action. As for survival of our species -- it is indisputable that human prosperity increases in direct relation to human freedom. The more prosperous an individual becomes, the greater are the number of survival options available to that human.
This is not rocket science, Alex. It's self-evident.
pinky
--------------------
|
|