Message from @LOLTRON
Discord ID: 463692102149341196
look at how well stopping global warming has gone. and you think something whos tag line is "cheaper everything" will somehow go over better?
But I must take my leave for now. Have to go to the gym for an hour.
you wont be able to solve this problem thinking purely economicly because economicly you cant compete with "everything you want for less" this is why no form of economic system has ever competed with capitalism. you could tell people that basicly they will lose all their jobs if they try something but people will shoot back at you that they will just go on welfare and they will be right that in the best case scenario that means they never have to work but still have the same standard of living (theoreticly).
the only way you can compete with this idea is by teaching people to care more about something other than their own financial well being, this is where communism went wrong and ironicly where fascism and national socialism actually did something right for a change. communism tried to compete with capitalism by basicly saying anyone who wanted something would get it in their system promissing that their progress would increase while also they would end wealth disparity, they couldent actually deliver either promiss. what the nazis and fascists promissed though wasent immediate success or the end of wealth disparity rather they restructured their social system by making important things other than wealth and consumerism which changed the relationship between different classes (to some extent). it was kind of like religion to some extent which was another tool throughout history which managed to be something that the working class of a nation would care about more than their own finantial status.
if you want people to work when they would not normally need to work you need to both highlight parts of working class labor that are already positive toward the working class besides basic survival in a monitary system and additionally you must fortify these highlights with new social benefits, make them feel like valued people in a society, status does not have to be tied to economy and when its not you get people to do things without them realisticly having an economic reason to
ultimately what you need to do is also broker the proper labor to wage ratio that the working class deserve, this is something that communism did try to promiss but i disagree with their methodology and their failure shows. you cant get the results you need by completely replacing the upper class with new people what you have to do is use the lower classes to convence the upper class to take a smaller cut of production values. not so much that they will shut down and some WILL shut down at first, but a balance needs to be struck in a fight against rampent consumerism thats basicly causing people to buy more, products cost less, working class paid less, population go down, production skyrocket, and resources drain like sand through our open fingers
attempting to engineer society never ends well
well, unless you view humans killing each other as ending well, then it usually works perfectly
humans will kill eachother anyway
true, but we've been on a violence decline for some time now, for whatever reason
people working to maintain peace at any cost
that "at any cost" should stand out
that is a radically different goal than making sure everyone has some kind of work
as being a soldier is a job
seems like a tangent then
social engineering does work when it works, as i pointed out it did work for the nazis and fascists, it even worked for the nationalist japanese. all 3 of these groups did go to war with the rest of the world but that wasent because they managed to successfuly socially engineer the populations to care about something more than financial success (though that helps a tramendous degree) it was because the people up top had a plan for directing the future of the nation in a direction which required more resources then they could realisticly get from out of their small, sometimes resource poor regions.
religion is social engineering
its worked for longer than the concept has been in nomiclature
the idea of the warrior culture is a form of social engineering where their is a social benefit associated with being part of a militia or army beyond that of the economic motivation that is lumped onto it
the easiest form of social engineering, is to convince people there is a common enemy
each one of those examples pretty much required putting a group at the bottom, and telling everyone else to destroy them.
they didn't fix the problem of the welfare class by putting them to work, they fixed the problem by putting them to death.
they made a welfare class out of other humans. they made or relied on the existence of another group.
well the nazi's did, the japanese and fascist didint
Foreign suspect rates in germany 2017 for burglary
https://twitter.com/derhorus_x/status/1014867722088349697
Was australia not marked when you posted that thing like a day ago?
Also it would be enlightening to see a diagram that also takes into account how many people from each of these countries live in germany, there is most likely a reason why french criminality is up like that
@LEER yes, in the cases of neighboring states overrepresentation are obvious. especially for western countries.
in the references you find the data for the population and suspects.
btw. to solve the problem one criminological study (only german) only took in account suspects with residence in one country Schleswig-Holstein. for non western neighboring states, the rates are still significant.
https://kfn.de/wp-content/uploads/Forschungsberichte/FB_137.pdf
pages 62-76
regarding the whole water debate thing... i have no idea how it turned into that by the way.... someone said that the US Post Office is a necessesary function of the govt or that we need it ran by the government for whatever reason. all i said was that -- no, why should it be ran by the govt when the market can take care of it just as easily (and better). theres no good reason why the USPS should be ran by the govt.... i ask you... or else what? you also said that the govt does not monopolize this service bcuz Fed Ex and UPS can also mail letters in the large package envelopes (while illegal for them to handle regular letter envelopes due to the govt holding an arbitrary legal monopoly over this mailing service for no good reason). so you basically admitted that businesses can handle the service just as well in the market so what is the point in prohibiting UPS and Fed Ex from delivering regular mail envelopes like the USPS does. seems like an unfair business practice if you ask me to stamp out any competition! the USPS should be privatized.... no reason for it to be ran by the govt. they should be forced to compete alongside other mailing businesses in a level playing field of market competition. looks like the USPS will eventually crash and fail regardless bcuz of the inherent flaws and mismanagement of central planning. the question is... should tax payers be forced to prop up a failing business.... absolutely not! PM me if you disagree
make no mistake -- the USPS holds an unfair, government-protected legal monopoly over the regular slips of letter envelope mail. Lysander Spooner challanged their market share by offering the same service at a fraction of the cost.... and was quite sucessful at offering the same service at a much lower cost... but guess what... he got shut down by the govenment! Squashed! bcuz well.... just bcuz!
this is just common sense, people.... i dont see how this got twisted around to a debate about me defending your right to own the bottled water in your own fridge that you bought and paid for! i usually have about 15 gallons on hand of pure R/O water that i buy from a pure water store. that i don't own this water in the meantime before using it up or giving it away sure flies in the face of common sense -- nobody else would have the right to claim it without my consent. its funny how as if this water issue is somehow comparable to the unfair govt-protected monopoly of the USPS! its quite the non-sequitor.... the logic just does not follow. let me know if you disagree
is the water debate that thing sargon asked jared taylor in his interview of him?
iono, i was just reading some posts in the general discussion, and i was like.... "ahem.... excuse me, but i disagree [that the US Post Office is a necessary function of govt]"
and then SPLASH! water/property rights debate.... LOL
ah probably not then