COVID-19 ... how we cope :)

[Bob Armstrong]

Covid-19 - Uptick Expected with the Fall

[Trying to get the thread back on message]

Americas - USA

Biden Administration Announces $600M to Produce No-Cost COVID Tests

https://time.com/6316160/covid-tests...lctg=206908353

Bob A (Position: It is not a Higher Authority plot to achieve depopulation; it is a biological warfare "Oops")

[Peter McKillop]

Hi Peter:

Thanks.

1010??

Bob A

Hi Bob. It used to be the case that the CT software wouldn't accept a post if it was less than ten characters. Don't know if that's still the case but I figured sure+period+space+1010 would pass the constraint, if any.

[Dilip Panjwani]

Hi Guys:

The variety of individuals makes the world go round.......actually, I like individuals........I even have some individual friends....

What I don't like are:

1. systems that give individuals obscene influence/wealth for little reason (Inherited wealth = capital = advantage over labour).

2. Similarly I do not like it when one individual is obscenely wealthy from the system, yet the system demands a large pool of impoverished INDIVIDUALS to keep it running (Individuals who are in a couple, both working a few part-time jobs, and trying to raise two kids on minimum wage).

3. Individuals who are adamant about keeping the obscene wage gap between INDIVIDUALS around the world because they are winning (Due to advantages the system showers on them).

Yes, the common good should come before the individual......humans are a social species. But the rights of the Individual are also to be respected and protected from the tyranny of the majority, which can happen in any system.

Bob A (DM'er)

Bob,
You are not the only one who hates a system that give individuals obscene wealth generation power just because they have exclusive access to capital; Libertarians hate Capitalism too.
But as a Marxist you decide to have even a worse system that robs even truly hard and smart working individuals, with legal theft (in Socialism the theft is partial, and in Marxism it is total!)
Why do you not go for a system which gives everyone access to capital? Even laborers can join hands and become entrepreneurial laborers, if they are not happy with what their employer is offering them as wages...
How many times does someone have to remind you that legal theft is wrong when there are other fair ways to provide good opportunities to all (in which even the lazy bums would realize that they need to develop themselves and work to survive, and maybe start making a decent effort...)?

[Pargat Perrer]

Of course Libertarianism will soon be having its small step beginnings in Canada with our next Prime Minister Pierre P!
And I do not answer questions from nasty trolls generally, for obvious reasons...

It doesn't take a genius to brush away all tough questions by saying "I don't answer questions from nasty trolls." The fact that you do this, while simultaneously trolling all of Bob A.'s posts about DM, makes you look particularly weak and pathetic.

So here's a tough question for you: you are quoted in a later post here writing:

"Why do you (Bob A.) not go for a system which gives everyone access to capital? Even laborers can join hands and become entrepreneurial laborers, if they are not happy with what their employer is offering them as wages..."

Excuse me, but this is EXACTLY what started to happen with the dot-com boom in from the mid-90s to about 2002. I think it was March 2002 or thereabouts when the dot-com bubble burst with a tremendous implosion.

Everyone and their grandmothers were starting their own dot-com business online. Laborers, you bet! They all wanted out of the factory or construction jobs and into the world of big business! Any old idea .... let's sell pet rocks online! Next thing you know, VC firms are putting money into it because it was the craze to do so, with almost no analysis of the underlying ideas.

The bubble had to burst, it is a model that cannot work. Libertarianism is fundamentally flawed. If you offer capital to all, then all will take it and .... almost none of them have an actual workable idea. What then happens to that capital? Poof! Vanished!

Why Dilip do YOU not go for a system in which you recognize that good ideas are few and far between and only those who actually HAVE them should be allowed access to capital? And when these few people with good ideas actually reach a pinnacle of success, and BEFORE they can use their profits to own multiple mansions and yachts and Lear jets --

all of which create a different and more obscene and threatening kind of bubble which takes much longer to burst but will burst with global depression implications, which we are on the cusp of right now and which we experienced in the 1930s --

you force them to give back PART OF their profits for the betterment of society at large?

As Bob Gillanders has written, there should be a reasonable limit on wealth. Bob G. uses an arbitrary value, but maybe it should be a percentage of GDP or something dynamic like that. In any event, it acts as a damper to prevent negative feedback.

Let me use an analogy from audio engineering: if a band is playing a song, and one particular frequency is allowed via feedback to soar in value far above all the other frequencies (analogous to some out-of-control capitalist whose net worth soars far above 99% of the other individual net worths), what do you get? A distorted sound where that one frequency dominates completely and makes everyone cover their ears. So an audio engineer dampens those frequencies having this feedback property. The analogy is not quite right, because the dampened frequency is not "redistributed" to other frequencies, but the principle is the same. Feedback generally needs to be limited.

You call this theft ... others call it redistribution ... it is really just dampening of undesired feedback with redistribution to the rest of the system. It is NECESSARY for the health of the system. In fact, the very reason it is taking SO LONG for this wealth bubble to burst is because we DO HAVE some feedback dampening via taxation ... so we have in fact stretched out the time it takes for the feedback to reach ear-piercing levels. What we DON'T have is the proper level of this feedback dampening. I believe this is what Bob G. is calling for, more dampening / redistribution.

So answer these questions if you can:

1. Why cannot Libertarianism allow limitation of access to capital to only those whose ideas pass at the very least a "smell test"?

2. Why cannot Libertarianism see that uncontrolled wealth needs to be dampened and redistributed for the good of the system, with the only constraint being that the entrepreneurs who achieved success are still rewarded sufficiently as to entice OTHERS with good ideas to follow in their footsteps?


Neither of these questions even addresses Natural Law, which has already been shown to be simply dictatorship in disguise, because SOME entity at the top decides exactly WHAT the Natural Law is that must be consistently pressed upon the entire society ... that is to say, what constitutes and what does NOT constitute the ephemeral concept of "fair competition".

It is the combination of this dictatorial Natural Law, together with the refusal to allow any feedback dampening and the idea that capital should be almost equally accessible to all. that damns Libertarianism to the political hinterlands.

[Pargat Perrer]

Covid-19 - Uptick Expected with the Fall

[Trying to get the thread back on message]

Americas - USA

Biden Administration Announces $600M to Produce No-Cost COVID Tests

https://time.com/6316160/covid-tests...lctg=206908353

Bob A (Position: It is not a Higher Authority plot to achieve depopulation; it is a biological warfare "Oops")

Bob A, I am truly sorry that Dilip continues trolling this Covid-19 thread and many other threads launched by you that are NOT about political systems.

He calls me a nasty troll, yet he continues to invade all these non-political threads with his Libertarianism BS. If anyone should be banned from posting here, it should be Dilip.

I contributed here by responding to his latest gibberish .... but I suppose a Covid-19 thread cannot help but be transformed into a political thread .... ?

Any kind of worldwide pandemic is definitely going to cause deep political ramifications. But Dilip's trolling is really getting shrill and he just seems to be losing control of himself. He's so desperate to be rich! LOL

[Dilip Panjwani]

Bob,
It seems you have hired the nasty trolling services of Pargat to not have to yourself respond to posts which expose the stupidity of DM... you need to admit that legal theft is immoral, when there are other fair ways to avoid unfair exploitation of the 'not so wealthy'...

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Dilip:

Pargat marches to his own drummer.......sometimes we agree.....sometimes not.

Libertarianism



Progressive Taxation is NOT "Legal Theft".....it is the WILL of the Majority. If the obscenely wealthy don't like progressive taxation, then let them try to get more control of the system than they already have, and get it deleted from the law.............and Natural Law is first and foremost "BALANCE".......I happen to know something about "Natural Law"........Natural Law will never allow the current Capitalist Wage Gap!!! And your Libertarianism has given no indication of how it (A Capitalist system from my point of view & Wikipedia's - see below) will prevent the necessary growth of the wage gap without any kind of regulation. Libertarianism and Natural Law are in contradictory modes - there is an internal contradiction in Libertarianism!!

You need to read up on your Libertarianism:

Wikipedia

"Libertarianism (from French: libertaire, 'libertarian'; from Latin: libertas, 'freedom') is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as a core value.^[1][2][3][4] Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and political freedom, and minimize the state's encroachment on and violations of individual liberties; emphasizing the rule of law, pluralism, cosmopolitanism, cooperation, civil and political rights, bodily autonomy, freedom of association, free trade, freedom of expression, freedom of choice, freedom of movement, individualism, and voluntary association.^[4][5] Libertarians are often skeptical of or opposed to authority, state power, warfare, militarism and nationalism, but some libertarians diverge on the scope of their opposition to existing economic and political systems. Various schools of libertarian thought offer a range of views regarding the legitimate functions of state and private power. Different categorizations have been used to distinguish various forms of Libertarianism.^[6][7] Scholars distinguish libertarian views on the nature of property and capital, usually along left–right or socialist–capitalist lines.^[8] Libertarians of various schools were influenced by liberal ideas.^[9]

In the mid-19th century,^[10] libertarianism originated as a form of left-wing politics such as anti-authoritarian and anti-state socialists like anarchists,^[11] especially social anarchists,^[12] but more generally libertarian communists/Marxists and libertarian socialists.^[13][14] These libertarians sought to abolish capitalism and private ownership of the means of production, or else to restrict their purview or effects to usufruct property norms, in favor of common or cooperative ownership and management, viewing private property as a barrier to freedom and liberty.^[19] While all libertarians support some level of individual rights, left-libertarians differ by supporting an egalitarian redistribution of natural resources.^[20] Left-libertarian^[26] ideologies include anarchist schools of thought, alongside many other anti-paternalist and New Left schools of thought centered around economic egalitarianism as well as geolibertarianism, green politics, market-oriented left-libertarianism and the Steiner–Vallentyne school.^[30] After the fall of the Soviet Union, libertarian socialism grew in popularity and influence as part of anti-war, anti-capitalist and anti- and alter-globalisation movements.^[31][32]

In the mid-20th century, American right-libertarian^[35] proponents of anarcho-capitalism and minarchism co-opted^[13] the term libertarian to advocate laissez-faire capitalism and strong private property rights such as in land, infrastructure and natural resources.^[36] The latter is the dominant form of libertarianism in the United States.^{[34] "}

Bob A (DM'er)

[Dilip Panjwani]

Hi Dilip:

Pargat marches to his own drummer.......sometimes we agree.....sometimes not.

Libertarianism



Progressive Taxation is NOT "Legal Theft".....it is the WILL of the Majority. If the obscenely wealthy don't like progressive taxation, then let them try to get more control of the system than they already have, and get it deleted from the law.............and Natural Law is first and foremost "BALANCE".......I happen to know something about "Natural Law"........Natural Law will never allow the current Capitalist Wage Gap!!! And your Libertarianism has given no indication of how it (A Capitalist system from my point of view & Wikipedia's - see below) will prevent the necessary growth of the wage gap without any kind of regulation. Libertarianism and Natural Law are in contradictory modes - there is an internal contradiction in Libertarianism!!

You need to read up on your Libertarianism:

Wikipedia

"Libertarianism (from French: libertaire, 'libertarian'; from Latin: libertas, 'freedom') is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as a core value.^[1][2][3][4] Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and political freedom, and minimize the state's encroachment on and violations of individual liberties; emphasizing the rule of law, pluralism, cosmopolitanism, cooperation, civil and political rights, bodily autonomy, freedom of association, free trade, freedom of expression, freedom of choice, freedom of movement, individualism, and voluntary association.^[4][5] Libertarians are often skeptical of or opposed to authority, state power, warfare, militarism and nationalism, but some libertarians diverge on the scope of their opposition to existing economic and political systems. Various schools of libertarian thought offer a range of views regarding the legitimate functions of state and private power. Different categorizations have been used to distinguish various forms of Libertarianism.^[6][7] Scholars distinguish libertarian views on the nature of property and capital, usually along left–right or socialist–capitalist lines.^[8] Libertarians of various schools were influenced by liberal ideas.^[9]

In the mid-19th century,^[10] libertarianism originated as a form of left-wing politics such as anti-authoritarian and anti-state socialists like anarchists,^[11] especially social anarchists,^[12] but more generally libertarian communists/Marxists and libertarian socialists.^[13][14] These libertarians sought to abolish capitalism and private ownership of the means of production, or else to restrict their purview or effects to usufruct property norms, in favor of common or cooperative ownership and management, viewing private property as a barrier to freedom and liberty.^[19] While all libertarians support some level of individual rights, left-libertarians differ by supporting an egalitarian redistribution of natural resources.^[20] Left-libertarian^[26] ideologies include anarchist schools of thought, alongside many other anti-paternalist and New Left schools of thought centered around economic egalitarianism as well as geolibertarianism, green politics, market-oriented left-libertarianism and the Steiner–Vallentyne school.^[30] After the fall of the Soviet Union, libertarian socialism grew in popularity and influence as part of anti-war, anti-capitalist and anti- and alter-globalisation movements.^[31][32]

In the mid-20th century, American right-libertarian^[35] proponents of anarcho-capitalism and minarchism co-opted^[13] the term libertarian to advocate laissez-faire capitalism and strong private property rights such as in land, infrastructure and natural resources.^[36] The latter is the dominant form of libertarianism in the United States.^{[34] "}

Bob A (DM'er)

Bob,
I agree that there are wolves in sheep's clothing, who call ultra-capitalism as Libertarianism. But let us concentrate on substance rather than on nomenclature...
Would you please answer the simple question on substance:
Is it not immoral to persecute the hard and smart working minority by implementing legal theft (forced transfer of hard-earned money from those who earned plenty of it by hard and smart work, to those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so) as the only way to have a fair society, instead of supporting your future, to be democratically elected Prime Minister who believes that there are Libertarian (not Capitalistic or Marxist) ways to provide the fairness?

[Neil Frarey]

I think we are rapidly heading toward guaranteed income for those who qualify.

Very shortly most all warehouse workers will be replaced by robots...

... how many warehouse employees currently earn a living from that occupation?

Too many???

[Pargat Perrer]

Bob,
It seems you have hired the nasty trolling services of Pargat to not have to yourself respond to posts which expose the stupidity of DM... you need to admit that legal theft is immoral, when there are other fair ways to avoid unfair exploitation of the 'not so wealthy'...

LOL totally off the rails!

Bob A. doesn't need to admit anything. If you won't answer questions, why should he?

[Pargat Perrer]

I think we are rapidly heading toward guaranteed income for those who qualify.

Very shortly most all warehouse workers will be replaced by robots...

... how many warehouse employees currently earn a living from that occupation?

Too many???

Interesting timing ... I am just finishing reading Asimov's The Robots of Dawn .... all about humanoid robots that are embedded in human society, in the far future.

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Pargat:

Presently..........

Bob A

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Neil:

Dead on ......... not enough work........why do menial jobs robots can do.......read Josef Pieper......"Leisure the Basis of Culture (1950)"


Amazon - "In his book, Leisure, the Basis of Culture, Pieper makes the claim that the reconstruction of Western Culture demands a rebirth of the notion of leisure."
Google Books - "One of the most important philosophy titles published in the twentieth century, Josef Pieper's Leisure, the Basis of Culture is more significant, even more crucial, today than it was when it first appeared more than fifty years ago. ..."

Universal basic income (UBI)^{[note 1]} is a social welfare proposal in which all citizens of a given population regularly receive a guaranteed income in the form of an unconditional transfer payment (i.e., without a means test or need to work).^[2][3][4] It would be received independently of any other income. If the level is sufficient to meet a person's basic needs (i.e., at or above the poverty line), it is sometimes called a full basic income; if it is less than that amount, it may be called a partial basic income.^[5] No country has yet introduced either, although there have been numerous pilot projects and the idea is discussed in many countries. Some have labelled UBI as utopian due to its historical origin.<sup>[6][7][8]

In Canada, we refer to it as a GAI (Guaranteed Annual lncome).

This will certainly blow the Libertarian "Smart and Hard Working" vs "Lazy Bums" argument out of the water!

Bob A</sup>

[Bob Armstrong]

The Hard and Smart Working Minority vs Those [The Majority] who did not make the effort to develop Themselves [The Not-Smart & Lazy]

Libertarianism



Dilip Panjwani - Post # 3413 - 23/9/23

Is it not immoral to persecute the hard and smart working minority by implementing legal theft (forced transfer of hard-earned money from those who earned plenty of it by hard and smart work, to those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so) as the only way to have a fair society, instead of supporting your future, to be democratically elected Prime Minister who believes that there are Libertarian (not Capitalistic or Marxist) ways to provide the fairness?

Question

Anyone want to rip this apart before I do??

Bob A (DM'er)

[Sid Belzberg]