Politics Unfiltered

[Romulus9]

(07-23-2014 11:07 PM)Decagon Wrote:  Actually, the ChuCha bets represent a socialist system. We get money for doing absolutely nothing, just posting, and can gamble away the money at will.

Actually, the ChuCha bets don't.

We are compensated for posting (working). If we are prolific posters, we are compensated as such. We can then do with it as we please. Those who don't do as much don't get as much. They don't whine and bitch about unfair practices. They just don't get as much.

Shamelessly taking that money and redistributing it to people who aren't doing shit would be the socialist system.

[Decagon]

You have a very simplistic view of socialism. Socialism is the minimum wage, unions, a lot of things. It means taking care of the sick and old. I've worked for minimum wage, and I've worked for a union. Right now, working for minimum wage sucks, and the minimum wage needs to be raised. I'm fortunate enough not to be working for minimum wage right now, but I know what it's like to barely scrape by in the American economy, and it sucks.

[Warlord]

Dec, you're an atheist right? I'm not being a shitbag by asking this question, but just asking to lead into my point.

I understand why you think a government should help the poor, feed them, clothe them, and treat them when they are ill. It seems like the right thing to do, doesn't it?

But if you are an atheist, a true atheist, you must know in your heart that we are living in Darwin's world. From Darwin's perspective, we are all animals, and nothing but animals. It doesn't matter how far we've climbed on the evolutionary scale. In the end, we are still bound by Darwin's law.

And Darwin's law states that only the strong survive. Socialism and communism are much closer to Abrahamic religions in theory than they are to Darwin. The idea that man should love one another and care for one another, because it is the right thing to do, is very Christ-like, and very unlike Darwin's Law.

If there is no spark of divinity in us, and we are all truly animals, then of what use is it to help others? Asking society as a whole to care for the weak works against our instinct, and against Darwin's Law.

There is no sympathy or empathy in nature. There is no helping the weak. In nature, the weak are food for the strong. And so no atheist should have a problem with capitalism, as in practice, capitalism has taken us as close to Darwinian Law as modern man can get without actually having to skewer each other with spears.

Just food for thought, buddy. I'm not poking you with a stick or trying to rile you up. If I didn't respect you I wouldn't waste my breath to type that all out, so I hope you don't get angry or think I'm having a go at you.

[Decagon]

Why would an atheist necessarily believe in Spencerism/Social Darwinism? Darwin himself didn't believe in it. Actually, caring for the sick, injured and old is part of the herd instinct, which I wrote about in the Religion Unfiltered topic. It's in our nature to care for the sick and old because some day, we'll most likely be sick or old.

[Warlord]

(07-24-2014 12:13 AM)Decagon Wrote:  Why would an atheist necessarily believe in Spencerism/Social Darwinism? Darwin himself didn't believe in it. Actually, caring for the sick, injured and old is part of the herd instinct, which I wrote about in the Religion Unfiltered topic. It's in our nature to care for the sick and old because some day, we'll most likely be sick or old.

Well, let me respond to that. I don't want to put words in your mouth, so if my inferences are wrong feel free to correct me.

You think the minimum wage should be raised, not for the good of society, but for your own good. You make more than minimum wage now, mind you. So I guess you want minimum wage raised just in case the economy tanks and you get laid off and have to take a crap job. You aren't necessarily concerned about whether or not your fellow man makes good.

You want free, quality healthcare. Again, not for the good of humanity, but for the simple fact that when you get ill, you want to get treated cheaply and efficiently. Whether or not your fellow man benefits from this is immaterial.

Again, correct me if you feel differently and I am talking out of my ass here, but that seems incredibly selfish to me. I don't know how anyone could support socialism for those reasons, and shit on capitalism at the same time. At least with capitalism no one is hiding their true intentions behind veiled pleasantries.

If you support socialism because you think man helping man is the right thing to do, I can respect that. I won't necessarily agree with it, but I will respect it. And I would politely ask anyone who believes in helping the needy out of love, empathy, or justice to re-examine their spirituality, or lack thereof.

If you support socialism because you think it will best serve your own personal needs, I can respect that too. But at that point I would recommend capitalism one more time. It much more effectively serves the man who wishes to better himself to the best of his ability.

After all, you can't look out for number one when the group is there to redistribute your wealth anytime you get too far ahead. At least with capitalism your ability to keep what you earn is much greater, which also means your ability to care for yourself just increased.

[Spyder]

(07-23-2014 11:35 PM)Decagon Wrote:  You have a very simplistic view of socialism. Socialism is the minimum wage, unions, a lot of things. It means taking care of the sick and old. I've worked for minimum wage, and I've worked for a union. Right now, working for minimum wage sucks, and the minimum wage needs to be raised. I'm fortunate enough not to be working for minimum wage right now, but I know what it's like to barely scrape by in the American economy, and it sucks.

The goal should not be to stay at a minimum wage, and the incentive should not be to stay there either. Working for minimum wage SHOULD suck. Barely scraping by is society's incentive to better itself.

I believe in a safety net to help people get through rough patches, but that safety net should not be so comfy that people decide to stay in it. Rewarding poor lifestyle choices and decisions only leads to more of them.

[lloyd mayflower]

One thing is for sure, minimum wage should outstrip ANY benefits you can receive for welfare. Work has to pay. If that means minimum wage needs to be raised then so be it.

[the ollie reed fan club]

(07-24-2014 03:16 AM)lloyd mayflower Wrote:  One thing is for sure, minimum wage should outstrip ANY benefits you can receive for welfare. Work has to pay. If that means minimum wage needs to be raised then so be it.

Agreed, this is where the argument either way gets sticky.

[Spyder]

(07-24-2014 03:16 AM)lloyd mayflower Wrote:  One thing is for sure, minimum wage should outstrip ANY benefits you can receive for welfare. Work has to pay. If that means minimum wage needs to be raised then so be it.

(07-24-2014 03:20 AM)the ollie reed fan club Wrote:  

(07-24-2014 03:16 AM)lloyd mayflower Wrote:  One thing is for sure, minimum wage should outstrip ANY benefits you can receive for welfare. Work has to pay. If that means minimum wage needs to be raised then so be it.

Agreed, this is where the argument either way gets sticky.

Minimum wage has always increased as inflation increased. I worked for $4.25 an hour bagging groceries as a 16 year old. It's $7.93 in my state now.

But I agree with you. We should cut the amount that welfare recipients get.

[Dickagon]

I wouldn't have a problem with food stamps if they restricted more shit. I can't tell you how many times I've been in Publix and some bitch that looks like the mom from Precious is buying pounds of crabs legs and lobster tails. White people usually go for the frozen gluten free organic bullshit. My favorite is Spanish people. If you see some Mexican people buying their food with ebt they've got cheap cuts of meat and essentials like rice and canned vegetables. I like seeing my tax dollars working like that, not people blowing through the money on bullshit.