One bedroom per person

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
81

All those things, how good of an interviewer/interviewee you are and so on, are partly determined by genetic fitness.
How good you are at your job is partly determined by genetic fitness also, and of course there’s environmental factors as well.

Welfare rarely increases, because capitalists almost always inevitably find some other meaningless activity for other people to do.
The more meaningless activities, the more our health, and nature declines, unless the activities are so meaningless, they have no tangible consequences in the physical, material world.
It’s mostly the rich, upper middle class and to a lesser extent welfare recipients who benefit from robots, not the middle and working classes.

In order to save nature and our health, I’d like to see a decline in production/consumption.
There’s two ways to do this, put everyone on welfare, which is harmful, because the weak wouldn’t get weeded out, and it’s healthy to work, or get rid of some of the robots.
We don’t have to go back to the stone age, thousands of species weren’t dying out in the previous ages due to man’s activity, perhaps a few here and there.

You can struggle too much, or too little, see my thinking isn’t extreme like yours.
Too much struggle, and your population is threatened, too little, and your population is threatened.
There’s an ideal path, where the struggle isn’t so much, that your life is dreadful and your species survival is in jeopardy, or too little, that your life is decadent and your species survival is still in jeopardy.

The vast majority of people today are under the spell of endless growth.
There are a few dissenting voices, most of them calling for a return to primitivism.
What I am advocating is a middle path, we can never wind back the clock exactly, but I’d like to see humanity wind the clock back to the 18th or 19th century in some regards.
Humanity needs to learn balance, the fate of our survival depends on it.
Too much to eat and drink, and your stomach bursts, too little, and you starve.
That much is obvious, but the same principle applies to reproduction and technological sophistication, it’s just a lot harder to see.

What happens though is, civilizations get really big, then they get decadent, and then they decline.
The bigger they are, the harder they fall, we’re so big now, that when we fall, and we will, we may not manage to pull ourselves back from the brink.

82

Then it’s time, “We The People” as in you, advocate of the proletariat, stop pussy footing around and let democracy slip through your fingers, while your beloved “working class” idiots continue to contribute to the social sham and vote for politicians whose only goal is to give the rich bailots and keep the poor weak.

PS: Removing welfare will not help the poor and give the rich even more power.

When the unemployment is 50 percent, mark my words there will be a 40 percent increase in dole handouts.

Your crazy. It’s not healthy to work, humans weren’t designed for it, do you really think being a slave in a factory is healthful physically or mentally?
The only kind of work I advocate, is building a log cabin, gettin your gun and shooting a wild animal once in a while.

The fall of society has always been to three factors - bad management, public idiocy, and built up angst. Decadence is not a "cause’.

83

I disagree, it’s healthy to physically and mentally exercise, to be challenged, to have obstacles to overcome and problems to solve.
It makes us who we are, helps us grow, evolve, mature, builds character.
What I’d like to see is, not the poor become richer, but luxuries regulated.

Civilizations fall for many reasons, but one of the primary ones is they get soft, weak and feeble, then picked apart by hungrier, more virile civilizations.
Edward Gibbon attributed Rome’s fall to Germanic barbarians to decadence.

People who live off the dole don’t build cabins and hunt, they couch surf and order pizza.

84

I know some people who live off the dole, build cabins and grow veggies (you need to get out of the city to observe these people).

85

Once again, what would you do with people refusing to follow such imposed limitations?

86

And if they react to such proposals violently? :sunglasses:

87

I don’t think you understand the consequences of a lot of the things you would like to see being imposed.

Easy to find a job? :laughing: :sunglasses:

What would you call the current United States economic climate? :sunglasses:

88

Well, at least we agree on taking out the current power structure. I just disagree with your notions of creating an entirely new one to supplant it with.

89

Competition of power, survival, and sheer will. There is nothing to decide what is and what isn’t…

90

The complete automation of society more than likely if it continues will be something like 10% of the world’s population controlling the robots to enslave the other 90% and that of course assumes that they don’t use them to completely annihilate the other 90%…

91

Hmmm, I guess there are such people, come to think of it I’ve heard a story or two myself.
Still, I’m sure they’re the exception, not the rule.

92

Anybody who doesn’t like our policies can leave, I wouldn’t force anyone to stay who didn’t want to.
So long as you didn’t break one of our more serious laws, such as murder, rape, kidnap or torture someone, or steal or vandalize tens of thousands of dollars worth of property, I would give criminals the option to leave and never come back (brandishment and permanent exile), or stay and face the consequences, which’d range from re-education (for immorality), to restitution (for fraud, theft and vandalism), to flagellation (for assault), depending on the nature of the crime.
I have no interest in merely imprisoning/quarantining people the way we do now, locking criminals together for long periods of time without subjecting them to re-education/restitution doesn’t work so well, it just isolates them from society, helps them become better criminals, in many cases.
I think that’s fair, you don’t like our laws and way of life, you’re free to leave, join another society, or be a hermit.
My society wouldn’t claim large chunks of wildeness as its property, nor would it recognize the claims others have on it.
So if there’s a large patch of wilderness near our society, you may go there, and do as you wish, so long as we didn’t catch you burning it.
If there was a large patch of wilderness ‘in the USA’, and we wanted to build there, we’d build there, if no one lives and works there, it’s up for grabs.

93

If you stay on welfare after a year or two, you can’t have anymore kids, if you insist on having them, you’ll be deported, if you resist, you’ll either be punished or executed, depending on the nature of your resistance.
If that means thousands of people will be exiled, punished or executed, so we can have a sustainable society, then so be it, we can’t have millions of beggars having kids.

94

Yes, I would like to destroy the current power structure, and replace it with large tracts of wilderness, and greener, more harmonious, virtuous and sustainable societies, where as you would like to replace it with more anarchic societies.
What sort of anarchism do you envision?
I’d like to see humanity experiment with a variety of alternatives to the Scientific Materialist, plutocratic societies that’re prevalent today.
Here I’m proposing one such alternative, but I’m open to all sorts of possibilities.

95

Then again, some wilderness needs to be protected from human habitation, or at least large scale human habitation.

96

Sounds like fascism and ignorance of biology to me.

There isn’t a “beggar gene” that people pass on to their kids. Someone born employed has an equal genetic chance of having the same attitude towards employment as someone born unemployeed.

Employment isn’t a “thing”, it’s a social attitude, so your entire argument is founded on ridiculousness.

With increasing rules and restrictions, coupled with social injustices of the world and society, this attitude will increase, as disdain for society and it’s mental slavery increases.

You’re crazy. People develop severe leg problems from standing up at the cash register all day, how is working at fast food or at a factory healthy, or standing doing nothing good for mental health?
Spongebob is dumber than Patrick.

You can’t win an argument against Trixie, Trixie is the most reasonable person I know and sticks to the facts and reason.

97

Comment displays your ignorance. People have families, communities, leaving and moving to another country isn’t something people push a button and do, its an arduous life changing event.

I think this is one of your (few) good ideas (you don’t have many).
But I would like to expound on this.
Harmless criminals should be allowed to stay, but for other criminals we have anarchy islands 1 2 and 3 4.
Serious murderers are put on Island level 3 with the other serious murderers,
Con artists are put on Island level 2, etc, so they can be conned by other con artists.
Burglars are put on Island 1, so they can live in fear of being robbed by other burglarers.
Rapists are put on island 4, so they can rape each other.
So everyone’s happy. And that’s true justice.
If they get sick of tasting their own medicine, truly repentant criminals may be allowed to return.

98

Each continent should have no more than 1 million people on it (start by killing the educated lazy fuckers who cannot work the land).

99

There isn’t a beggar gene or beggar genes?
How do you know?
There almost certainly is a gene or genes that makes people more whiney than others, we just haven’t found it yet, or maybe we have.
People are the way they are, their personality, their abilities and so on, mainly because of their genes.
You don’t understand the first thing about biology, what I’m proposing is what we did with breeds of dogs, the ones who were had working, intelligent, obedient and so on, they were fed well and those who weren’t, weren’t fed well or were fixed.
That’s how we ended up with the breeds of dogs we liked.

People develop all sorts of health problems from living off others, lack of motivation, low self esteem, atrophy, immaturity, no sense of self, purpose or direction…

100

Youre an unreasonable fascist and I’m done dealing with you.

There is no beggar gene just as their is no lesbian gene, lesbians have higher testosterone than other girls, just as there is no gay gene, gays exist because of hormones in their brain and the sexual attraction part of their brain was not masculine at all. Gays and lesbians rarely give birth to more gays and lesbians.

You seem like the kind of guy who puts is foot down and says “this is the way it’s going to be”, you are the guy who castrates all dogs and tells them to be your slave or else they are “unworthy” you will castrate them.

Also your arguments are ludicrous, you are seriously sitting telling me that somebody who works in a fast food and comforms to the bullshit society sells, has more power, purpose, sense of self, maturity and motivation than a starving artist or philosopher sage…done arguing with crazy people.