Wrestling Forum banner
R

Reaction score
1,419

Profile posts Latest activity Discussions About

  • Tater ·
    I share your :mark: for the Star Trek comparison.

    Ideally, what I'd like to see in the future is public ownership of automation so everyone can share in the wealth but still allow people to make profit on the side if they want to earn extra for themselves. Under a system like that, people wouldn't be wage slaves because their basic needs would already be met and they wouldn't be forced to keep jobs they hate or continue working for employers that exploit them. That takes the power out of the hands of the corporations and puts it back into the hands of the people. Is your boss treating you like shit or not paying you very well? Now you can tell them to fuck off without having to worry about losing your home or going hungry.
    Tater ·
    It would be impossible to 100% equally distribute all resources to each individual person. There will always be some people that have more stuff than other people. Just because some people have more wealth than others doesn't mean we have to allow them to control the economy or have undue influence over the government.

    The biggest issue facing society as far as the economy goes is the one that never gets talked about. Namely, the oncoming robot revolution. In another 10 or 20 years, most manual labor jobs and many white collar jobs will be done by automated technology. This is not a futurist problem that can be ignored. It's already happening. Cashier jobs have been lost to self-checkout stands. Bank teller jobs are now ATMs. Fast food restaurants will be fully automated. Factories that used to employ thousands now need 5 people to run the machines. All those millions of driving jobs are about to be gone when self driving cars go into mass production, which in turn will be mass produced by factories full of automated technology. Trump won the election by winning over the Rust Belt that has been decimated by "free trade" agreements but he is full of shit when he says he can bring the jobs back. Those factory jobs ain't never coming back because they don't exist anymore. What hasn't been outsourced to slave wage third world countries is already automated and soon there won't be any need for sweatshop workers anymore either.

    Everyone is asking how we bring the jobs back to the USA but the question everyone should be asking is how we distribute resources and wealth once human labor becomes obsolete.
    Tater ·
    As I've already pointed out, I don't mind the existence of wealthy people, just so long as the wealth is distributed equally enough to eliminate poverty and as long as there isn't a wage slave class serving the interests of the wealthy. The second part of that is the wealthy being "elite". As long as their wealth doesn't give them undue influence over the government, I don't see the problem. I'd ban literally all private money from politics. Next I would ban all lobbyists. The government should exist to serve the interests of the public at large; not the interests of the "elite". The only influence on their decisions should be the influence of the masses.

    That said, once poverty has been eliminated and once the government is serving the interests of the people, I see no problem with keeping some parts of capitalism. Think of it as a hybrid system. Design it to benefit everyone but don't try to force everyone to have identical incomes. I'm fine with a movie star making more money than a plumber as long as the plumber is still making a healthy income of his own.
    Tater ·
    The USA's original motto was E Pluribus Unum, which stands for "out of many, one". Somewhere along the way that changed into "I got mine and the rest of you can fuck off".

    I don't care if there are rich people as long as other people aren't living in poverty or being exploited to create the rich people. It doesn't seem like an impossible task to me.
    Tater ·
    You completely missed the point being made. I made the comparison of healthcare and cell phones as an example of something that can be lived without and something that can't. Then you brought up slave labor like I was saying that it's okay because I mentioned cell phones. Of course that's not okay. The point is, certain things, like healthcare, should not be for-profit industries. I'm certainly not against private property and private citizens producing items and profiting from them. As long as the system is designed to prevent wealth hoarding, I see nothing wrong with keeping currency. With the technology we have today, there are more than enough wealth and resources to go around so that nobody is living in poverty. I don't have a problem with money. What I have a problem with is the masses basically being used as free range slave labor so those at the very top can hoard all the wealth.

    As far as personal freedoms go, I am 100% anarchist. As long as you are not hurting somebody else, there should be no laws whatsoever governing what you do with your own person.
    Tater ·
    People aren't going to die if they can't get a cell phone. People die if denied healthcare. I see a pretty big difference between the two.
    Tater ·
    I'm more anarchist, less communist. I don't think everything should be publicly owned. Certain things should be yes but certainly not everything. There's nothing wrong with a healthy dose of capitalism when it comes to cell phones. When it comes to health care though, that's just kinda fucked up. Not everything should be for profit.
    Tater ·
    You need to study up more on leftist libertarianism if you think I am pro-communist. Communism is state owned everything. I'm a power to the people kind of guy.
    Blackbeard ·
    The atmosphere and tone of the battles feel really authentic though. Little things like getting mud splattered all over your weapons when you hit the ground never ceases to amaze me. And the destruction has been cranked up which I feel has been sorely lacking from the previous instalments.

    I was wondering, do you think because BF1 is about WW1 that BF2 might be about WW2? :jericho2

    HOW DARE YOU MENTION PC IN MY PRESENCE!!! :damnyou

    Gears 4 is awesome. I thought the campaign was fantastic, I really like the direction they seem to be taking the series in. And Horde is a blast.......if you have a team who knows what they're doing of course :side:
    Blackbeard ·
    The multiplayer is pretty awesome as well. Tbh even though it's WW1 it does feel like I am playing a WW2 game at times, I can't complain though because I've missed that genre so badly.

    I've been hearing great things about Titanfall 2. That's probably one of the games I'll see if I can pick up at Christmas. Right now I am not planning to buy any new games as I've got quite the backlog. BF1, Gears 4, Skryim and Tomb Raider should keep me pretty busy up till then. Dead Rising 4 is probably the other game I'll ask for at Christmas.
    Blackbeard ·
    It is man. Are you enjoying the fall games? I just dipped my toe into the Bf1 campaign today :wow DICE really have learned their lessons from the previous two campaigns. An actual powerful, thought provoking story for a change.
    Blackbeard ·
    Appy polly loggies mate, I had a family issue that required my attention so I had to ignore the forum for a while. But I am back now! :D
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
Top