FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Not our debt.
Not our debt.
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
 | |||
 | |||
"Well if I had 4 turnips and I lent you one. Then I bartered one with Merv the perve for half of this swede. What would I have left after 5 months?" Rotten, corrupted, stinking turnips. Probably.  | |||
"Well if I had 4 turnips and I lent you one. Then I bartered one with Merv the perve for half of this swede. What would I have left after 5 months?" Rotting vegetables | |||
"Well if I had 4 turnips and I lent you one. Then I bartered one with Merv the perve for half of this swede. What would I have left after 5 months? Rotten, corrupted, stinking turnips. Probably. "Exactly. Otherwise known as the economy  | |||
"It's not our debt and not our economy. Why we paying it off? Simple enough question, probably has complicated answers though." Ate you talking about Greece?... | |||
| |||
"It's not our debt and not our economy. Why we paying it off? Simple enough question, probably has complicated answers though. Ate you talking about Greece?..." No, just my name is greek, i'm not greek myself. UK debt. I didn't ask anyone to borrow on my behalf. The laws of this country don't allow me to live my life the way i want to (i'm not thinking of harming anyone), so why do i have to pay off their debt? I'd get along just fine if allowed to do what i want and don't need their system or debts. NI covers my people and their needs, i'd like to fuck off their economy and leave them to deal with it themselves, and have more freedom in the process. | |||
| |||
"It's not our debt and not our economy. Why we paying it off? Simple enough question, probably has complicated answers though." Simple answer it is our debt. The government does not have any money. We allow them to use our money for the national good; we also authorise to borrow from other nations on our behalf. For example during World War I the UK national debt increased from £650m in 1914 to £7.4 billion in 1919. That was money borrowed from others and had to be paid back with interest. Much of the above WWI debt has still not been paid off and probably never will be. That is why we need to elect a fiscally responsible government who will not borrow wildly to fund their schemes | |||
"Thing is, it is your debt whether you asked for it or not, and there is no chance of any of it being paid back anytime soon. And it is going to get larger before it gets any smaller. Only way to avoid it is to buy yourself a small island, set your own laws and taxes, and do what you want. You will have to run your island so you might want to attract a few people there to help you out, maybe someone who knows how to catch food as a start. Then you might need someone to help build a few things, he can build a little house for the guy who catches the food, and in exchange the guy who catches the food will feed him. You then might need some nice things like electricity and running water, so you will have to buy these but what with? So you might have to ask the man who catches the fish to catch a few more so you can sell them, and you might have to ask the man who builds things to build a few more so you can sell those. All the while you will let them live on your island. You then might want to get a few more folks to come and help. But if they get sick you might need a doctor and medicine and how are you going to manage that? Then the people who come might need teaching, things like reading, writing, catching food, making things etc, who is going to pay for that? Easy to see how it gets complicated isn't it "I know how to do all that stuff, plus my council tax pays for that right now and the debt is not needed. So yeah, where are these islands, i would like to move there. i'll allow sexy, intelligent, people to join me. Psychos and rapists need not apply. | |||
"It's not our debt and not our economy. Why we paying it off? Simple enough question, probably has complicated answers though. Simple answer it is our debt. The government does not have any money. We allow them to use our money for the national good; we also authorise to borrow from other nations on our behalf. For example during World War I the UK national debt increased from £650m in 1914 to £7.4 billion in 1919. That was money borrowed from others and had to be paid back with interest. Much of the above WWI debt has still not been paid off and probably never will be. That is why we need to elect a fiscally responsible government who will not borrow wildly to fund their schemes "  | |||
"Thing is, it is your debt whether you asked for it or not, and there is no chance of any of it being paid back anytime soon. And it is going to get larger before it gets any smaller. Only way to avoid it is to buy yourself a small island, set your own laws and taxes, and do what you want. You will have to run your island so you might want to attract a few people there to help you out, maybe someone who knows how to catch food as a start. Then you might need someone to help build a few things, he can build a little house for the guy who catches the food, and in exchange the guy who catches the food will feed him. You then might need some nice things like electricity and running water, so you will have to buy these but what with? So you might have to ask the man who catches the fish to catch a few more so you can sell them, and you might have to ask the man who builds things to build a few more so you can sell those. All the while you will let them live on your island. You then might want to get a few more folks to come and help. But if they get sick you might need a doctor and medicine and how are you going to manage that? Then the people who come might need teaching, things like reading, writing, catching food, making things etc, who is going to pay for that? Easy to see how it gets complicated isn't it
I know how to do all that stuff, plus my council tax pays for that right now and the debt is not needed.
So yeah, where are these islands, i would like to move there. i'll allow sexy, intelligent, people to join me. Psychos and rapists need not apply."You really think your council tax covers all of your individual needs as a citizen of the country? Average council tax = c£1000 per year, wouldn't get you very far! | |||
"Thing is, it is your debt whether you asked for it or not, and there is no chance of any of it being paid back anytime soon. And it is going to get larger before it gets any smaller. Only way to avoid it is to buy yourself a small island, set your own laws and taxes, and do what you want. You will have to run your island so you might want to attract a few people there to help you out, maybe someone who knows how to catch food as a start. Then you might need someone to help build a few things, he can build a little house for the guy who catches the food, and in exchange the guy who catches the food will feed him. You then might need some nice things like electricity and running water, so you will have to buy these but what with? So you might have to ask the man who catches the fish to catch a few more so you can sell them, and you might have to ask the man who builds things to build a few more so you can sell those. All the while you will let them live on your island. You then might want to get a few more folks to come and help. But if they get sick you might need a doctor and medicine and how are you going to manage that? Then the people who come might need teaching, things like reading, writing, catching food, making things etc, who is going to pay for that? Easy to see how it gets complicated isn't it
I know how to do all that stuff, plus my council tax pays for that right now and the debt is not needed.
So yeah, where are these islands, i would like to move there. i'll allow sexy, intelligent, people to join me. Psychos and rapists need not apply.
You really think your council tax covers all of your individual needs as a citizen of the country? Average council tax = c£1000 per year, wouldn't get you very far!"It's more than that here. But even then 30,000 households x £1,000 = enough to cover it? | |||
"Thing is, it is your debt whether you asked for it or not, and there is no chance of any of it being paid back anytime soon. And it is going to get larger before it gets any smaller. Only way to avoid it is to buy yourself a small island, set your own laws and taxes, and do what you want. You will have to run your island so you might want to attract a few people there to help you out, maybe someone who knows how to catch food as a start. Then you might need someone to help build a few things, he can build a little house for the guy who catches the food, and in exchange the guy who catches the food will feed him. You then might need some nice things like electricity and running water, so you will have to buy these but what with? So you might have to ask the man who catches the fish to catch a few more so you can sell them, and you might have to ask the man who builds things to build a few more so you can sell those. All the while you will let them live on your island. You then might want to get a few more folks to come and help. But if they get sick you might need a doctor and medicine and how are you going to manage that? Then the people who come might need teaching, things like reading, writing, catching food, making things etc, who is going to pay for that? Easy to see how it gets complicated isn't it
I know how to do all that stuff, plus my council tax pays for that right now and the debt is not needed.
So yeah, where are these islands, i would like to move there. i'll allow sexy, intelligent, people to join me. Psychos and rapists need not apply.
You really think your council tax covers all of your individual needs as a citizen of the country? Average council tax = c£1000 per year, wouldn't get you very far!
It's more than that here. But even then 30,000 households x £1,000 = enough to cover it?"Not even close, but this could be a long afternoon if we are going to go through it | |||
"Thing is, it is your debt whether you asked for it or not, and there is no chance of any of it being paid back anytime soon. And it is going to get larger before it gets any smaller. Only way to avoid it is to buy yourself a small island, set your own laws and taxes, and do what you want. You will have to run your island so you might want to attract a few people there to help you out, maybe someone who knows how to catch food as a start. Then you might need someone to help build a few things, he can build a little house for the guy who catches the food, and in exchange the guy who catches the food will feed him. You then might need some nice things like electricity and running water, so you will have to buy these but what with? So you might have to ask the man who catches the fish to catch a few more so you can sell them, and you might have to ask the man who builds things to build a few more so you can sell those. All the while you will let them live on your island. You then might want to get a few more folks to come and help. But if they get sick you might need a doctor and medicine and how are you going to manage that? Then the people who come might need teaching, things like reading, writing, catching food, making things etc, who is going to pay for that? Easy to see how it gets complicated isn't it
I know how to do all that stuff, plus my council tax pays for that right now and the debt is not needed.
So yeah, where are these islands, i would like to move there. i'll allow sexy, intelligent, people to join me. Psychos and rapists need not apply.
You really think your council tax covers all of your individual needs as a citizen of the country? Average council tax = c£1000 per year, wouldn't get you very far!
It's more than that here. But even then 30,000 households x £1,000 = enough to cover it?"Defence & security Healthcare Government admin Schooling Infrastructure and roads Think tanks And a multitude of other things that make this place the UK... Plus you should always run at a slight debt as a country, as you will be using the money at the optimum time to get the most from it.... Keep it too long and it just erodes in value, giving less of an opportunity to put it to work, especially in this environment. And yeah we should of stored value and yeah Labour should not of sold our gold and taxes should be cut across the board, for rich and poor alike, but that hasn't happened, so it's our debt... | |||
"You really think your council tax covers all of your individual needs as a citizen of the country? Average council tax = c£1000 per year, wouldn't get you very far! It's more than that here. But even then 30,000 households x £1,000 = enough to cover it? Not even close, but this could be a long afternoon if we are going to go through it "Hmm, i have better things to do probably... Anyway the debt question has been answered. Kind of weird how the economy runs and debts can be passed on and everything is money based. I think governments should seriously consider finding money from actual sources of money instead of putting us into debt and only use debt for emergencies, and for emergencies we should get debt free loans from countries who care to maintain good connections with us. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"You really think your council tax covers all of your individual needs as a citizen of the country? Average council tax = c£1000 per year, wouldn't get you very far! It's more than that here. But even then 30,000 households x £1,000 = enough to cover it? Not even close, but this could be a long afternoon if we are going to go through it
Hmm, i have better things to do probably...
Anyway the debt question has been answered. Kind of weird how the economy runs and debts can be passed on and everything is money based.
I think governments should seriously consider finding money from actual sources of money instead of putting us into debt and only use debt for emergencies, and for emergencies we should get debt free loans from countries who care to maintain good connections with us."Have you ever thought about standing as a Conservative MP??  | |||
"Servicable debt is fine." Until the point at which you cannot refinance it, at which point it is not fine at all!! | |||
"You really think your council tax covers all of your individual needs as a citizen of the country? Average council tax = c£1000 per year, wouldn't get you very far! It's more than that here. But even then 30,000 households x £1,000 = enough to cover it? Not even close, but this could be a long afternoon if we are going to go through it
Hmm, i have better things to do probably...
Anyway the debt question has been answered. Kind of weird how the economy runs and debts can be passed on and everything is money based.
I think governments should seriously consider finding money from actual sources of money instead of putting us into debt and only use debt for emergencies, and for emergencies we should get debt free loans from countries who care to maintain good connections with us.
Have you ever thought about standing as a Conservative MP?? "No. I don't believe in a privileged class. Neither do i adhere to christian values. I'm actually considering becoming a part of something outside of politics altogether. | |||
"You really think your council tax covers all of your individual needs as a citizen of the country? Average council tax = c£1000 per year, wouldn't get you very far! It's more than that here. But even then 30,000 households x £1,000 = enough to cover it? Not even close, but this could be a long afternoon if we are going to go through it
Hmm, i have better things to do probably...
Anyway the debt question has been answered. Kind of weird how the economy runs and debts can be passed on and everything is money based.
I think governments should seriously consider finding money from actual sources of money instead of putting us into debt and only use debt for emergencies, and for emergencies we should get debt free loans from countries who care to maintain good connections with us.
Have you ever thought about standing as a Conservative MP??
No. I don't believe in a privileged class. Neither do i adhere to christian values.
I'm actually considering becoming a part of something outside of politics altogether."Based on our thoughts earlier you should seek an all powerful dictatorship somewhere, I think you might be rather good! But on a serious note, your OP and further comments are basically the Tory policies over the decades, individuals looking after themselves with minimal interference from the state | |||
"Servicable debt is fine. Until the point at which you cannot refinance it, at which point it is not fine at all!! " If you have to refinance it, it isn't serviceable. | |||
" NI covers my people and their needs, i'd like to fuck off their economy and leave them to deal with it themselves, and have more freedom in the process." no it doesn't NI is no where close to the level it would need to be to cover you and your people, hence the debt. | |||
"Based on our thoughts earlier you should seek an all powerful dictatorship somewhere, I think you might be rather good! But on a serious note, your OP and further comments are basically the Tory policies over the decades, individuals looking after themselves with minimal interference from the state "Have actually said i'd like to be a dictator when discussing politics before, would make life easy for me. I don't act like one though. Plus i do think people should be able to run their life themselves, and the only law that needs to exist is 'have some sense and don't harm anyone else intentionally'. I believe in regulations for safety of others whenever it's possible and cutting corners there to save money is not on, if a body is needed to regulate this stuff then so be it. I also believe in autonomy, especially if it's non-harmful. People often don't conform to one set of ideals, don't think i do. | |||
" Kind of weird how the economy runs and debts can be passed on and everything is money based. I think governments should seriously consider finding money from actual sources of money" think of money as "promise of work" as that's all it is. its a transferable value of work. ie i no longer have anything i can trade with the farmer for food because i have nothing useful to them, but i have something useful to someone else, so i convert my work into money which is a physical representation of the value of my work which is acceptable to all. as for governments finding money from sources of money, people get pissed off when the government takes more from them. | |||
| |||
" Earth nearing the point of no return from global warming? " well that's just an out an out lie right there. co2 has been historically much much higher than it is currently. it isn't a point of no return its simply a "point where we feel effects for a time before levels change" but then again we have to accept the earth isn't static it WILL change from the conditions we're used to even without our input. | |||
| |||
" Kind of weird how the economy runs and debts can be passed on and everything is money based. I think governments should seriously consider finding money from actual sources of money think of money as "promise of work" as that's all it is. its a transferable value of work. ie i no longer have anything i can trade with the farmer for food because i have nothing useful to them, but i have something useful to someone else, so i convert my work into money which is a physical representation of the value of my work which is acceptable to all. as for governments finding money from sources of money, people get pissed off when the government takes more from them. " See, that is how the monetary system we have now first started out. It was fair. What we have now is a veeery different beast. Rather than providing a product or service in exchange for money, which is then used to buy an alternate product or service. What we have now is money (or capital) used to create a product or service, for the sole purpose of creating more money. That is just one of the many mechanisms which have led to our current debt based economy. | |||
"This topics got me thinking now. If we do want NWO (like the world leaders say they do), then why isn't it based on co-operation that benefits everyone? Why's it based on exploitation* of some people and gaining for certain people? *by exploitation i mean unfair exploitation." Because the 'new world order' is essentially fascism on a global scale. The exact opposite of co-operation. | |||
| |||
"This topics got me thinking now. If we do want NWO (like the world leaders say they do), then why isn't it based on co-operation that benefits everyone? Why's it based on exploitation* of some people and gaining for certain people? *by exploitation i mean unfair exploitation." Because if you wanted everyone in the world to live at the standard you do now you'll have to kill roughly 4-5 billion people. Or we can lower yours and my standard of living to a level that we in the west haven't had to deal with for centuries to bring up the rest of the world. Neither of which are popular solutions. | |||
" Kind of weird how the economy runs and debts can be passed on and everything is money based. I think governments should seriously consider finding money from actual sources of money think of money as "promise of work" as that's all it is. its a transferable value of work. ie i no longer have anything i can trade with the farmer for food because i have nothing useful to them, but i have something useful to someone else, so i convert my work into money which is a physical representation of the value of my work which is acceptable to all. as for governments finding money from sources of money, people get pissed off when the government takes more from them. See, that is how the monetary system we have now first started out. It was fair. What we have now is a veeery different beast. Rather than providing a product or service in exchange for money, which is then used to buy an alternate product or service. What we have now is money (or capital) used to create a product or service, for the sole purpose of creating more money. That is just one of the many mechanisms which have led to our current debt based economy." Err your aware you just said the same thing in two differnt ways? Using money to create a product to create more money. Is using money to pay for a product or service to create a product to sell for money. You can't just create something from money you have to use the money to pay for work to make the product the idea is you efficiently use the money to make a product that is worth more than the raw materials you used to make it (hence Value added). For the purpose of your argument you probably should have gone with an attack on fractional reserve banking and Fiat currencies where we are largely now reliant upon the promise of future work (debt) rather than the exchange of previous work. | |||
" Kind of weird how the economy runs and debts can be passed on and everything is money based. I think governments should seriously consider finding money from actual sources of money think of money as "promise of work" as that's all it is. its a transferable value of work. ie i no longer have anything i can trade with the farmer for food because i have nothing useful to them, but i have something useful to someone else, so i convert my work into money which is a physical representation of the value of my work which is acceptable to all. as for governments finding money from sources of money, people get pissed off when the government takes more from them. See, that is how the monetary system we have now first started out. It was fair. What we have now is a veeery different beast. Rather than providing a product or service in exchange for money, which is then used to buy an alternate product or service. What we have now is money (or capital) used to create a product or service, for the sole purpose of creating more money. That is just one of the many mechanisms which have led to our current debt based economy. Err your aware you just said the same thing in two differnt ways? Using money to create a product to create more money. Is using money to pay for a product or service to create a product to sell for money. You can't just create something from money you have to use the money to pay for work to make the product the idea is you efficiently use the money to make a product that is worth more than the raw materials you used to make it (hence Value added). For the purpose of your argument you probably should have gone with an attack on fractional reserve banking and Fiat currencies where we are largely now reliant upon the promise of future work (debt) rather than the exchange of previous work. " Come on mate, at least have a little respect for an ideology which is different to your own. They are clearly not the same thing. Thatcher makes roof, sells roof to butcher, uses money to buy shoe for horse. In that system you have a product, money is then used as an arbitrary resource in order to facilitate the exchange of another resource (product or service). Now we have thatcher borrows money from bank (debt) creates multiple roofs in order to make more money from the initial investment. Far more money than is actually needed (profit). One uses money as a facilitator, the other uses it simply as a means to generate more money. How can you not see the difference? | |||
"This topics got me thinking now. If we do want NWO (like the world leaders say they do), then why isn't it based on co-operation that benefits everyone? Why's it based on exploitation* of some people and gaining for certain people? *by exploitation i mean unfair exploitation. Because if you wanted everyone in the world to live at the standard you do now you'll have to kill roughly 4-5 billion people. Or we can lower yours and my standard of living to a level that we in the west haven't had to deal with for centuries to bring up the rest of the world. Neither of which are popular solutions." Even in this country we have those who have too much and those with not enough, so not sure what quality of life we would have to go down to? I do understand that i have no obligation to anyone else to improve their life and quality of it, i just feel it's not fair that some people don't even have their basic needs met. And yeah i get it's more complicated than just people being shafted by the greedy who need power to feel like they are important, and need to be important for some weird reason that i'm sure a professional psychologist understands better than i do. But i'm not like them, i don't think i am anyway. I live in a socialist country, i like those ideals and don't see why they don't apply across the world (or to this country properly either). And why, despite most balanced individuals not wanting to see others go without, how this system even got put in place. | |||
"This topics got me thinking now. If we do want NWO (like the world leaders say they do), then why isn't it based on co-operation that benefits everyone? Why's it based on exploitation* of some people and gaining for certain people? *by exploitation i mean unfair exploitation. Because if you wanted everyone in the world to live at the standard you do now you'll have to kill roughly 4-5 billion people. Or we can lower yours and my standard of living to a level that we in the west haven't had to deal with for centuries to bring up the rest of the world. Neither of which are popular solutions. Even in this country we have those who have too much and those with not enough, so not sure what quality of life we would have to go down to? I do understand that i have no obligation to anyone else to improve their life and quality of it, i just feel it's not fair that some people don't even have their basic needs met. And yeah i get it's more complicated than just people being shafted by the greedy who need power to feel like they are important, and need to be important for some weird reason that i'm sure a professional psychologist understands better than i do. But i'm not like them, i don't think i am anyway. I live in a socialist country, i like those ideals and don't see why they don't apply across the world (or to this country properly either). And why, despite most balanced individuals not wanting to see others go without, how this system even got put in place." You'd have to go down a lot further than you are simply by living here your in the top 5% of the world. The ideals do not apply across the world because you and I and most people in this country do not want to give up our TV's mobile phones wide choice of foods and meat. Which is what you'd have to give up to equal everything out world wide. You'd need about 3 planet earth's to keep everyone in the level that's considered average in the west. Or like I said kill a lot of people. | |||
" Kind of weird how the economy runs and debts can be passed on and everything is money based. I think governments should seriously consider finding money from actual sources of money think of money as "promise of work" as that's all it is. its a transferable value of work. ie i no longer have anything i can trade with the farmer for food because i have nothing useful to them, but i have something useful to someone else, so i convert my work into money which is a physical representation of the value of my work which is acceptable to all. as for governments finding money from sources of money, people get pissed off when the government takes more from them. See, that is how the monetary system we have now first started out. It was fair. What we have now is a veeery different beast. Rather than providing a product or service in exchange for money, which is then used to buy an alternate product or service. What we have now is money (or capital) used to create a product or service, for the sole purpose of creating more money. That is just one of the many mechanisms which have led to our current debt based economy. Err your aware you just said the same thing in two differnt ways? Using money to create a product to create more money. Is using money to pay for a product or service to create a product to sell for money. You can't just create something from money you have to use the money to pay for work to make the product the idea is you efficiently use the money to make a product that is worth more than the raw materials you used to make it (hence Value added). For the purpose of your argument you probably should have gone with an attack on fractional reserve banking and Fiat currencies where we are largely now reliant upon the promise of future work (debt) rather than the exchange of previous work. Come on mate, at least have a little respect for an ideology which is different to your own. They are clearly not the same thing. Thatcher makes roof, sells roof to butcher, uses money to buy shoe for horse. In that system you have a product, money is then used as an arbitrary resource in order to facilitate the exchange of another resource (product or service). Now we have thatcher borrows money from bank (debt) creates multiple roofs in order to make more money from the initial investment. Far more money than is actually needed (profit). One uses money as a facilitator, the other uses it simply as a means to generate more money. How can you not see the difference? " Except that for thatcher to create multiple roofs he would need multiple workers and considerable amount of resources at once. Hence why he borrows money. He borrows money uses that to buy supplies in bulk and employ people roofs get built wages get paid then spent and money borrowed paid back with interest. Except now instead do omen man making one roof and buying one product you have 5 men making 5 roofs buying 5 products, 1 man running things organising supplies and logistics one banker lending money one or more investors providing money to the banker each swing a return on her money who can now use that additional money to reinvest or buy more products | |||
"This topics got me thinking now. If we do want NWO (like the world leaders say they do), then why isn't it based on co-operation that benefits everyone? Why's it based on exploitation* of some people and gaining for certain people? *by exploitation i mean unfair exploitation. Because if you wanted everyone in the world to live at the standard you do now you'll have to kill roughly 4-5 billion people. Or we can lower yours and my standard of living to a level that we in the west haven't had to deal with for centuries to bring up the rest of the world. Neither of which are popular solutions. Even in this country we have those who have too much and those with not enough, so not sure what quality of life we would have to go down to? I do understand that i have no obligation to anyone else to improve their life and quality of it, i just feel it's not fair that some people don't even have their basic needs met. And yeah i get it's more complicated than just people being shafted by the greedy who need power to feel like they are important, and need to be important for some weird reason that i'm sure a professional psychologist understands better than i do. But i'm not like them, i don't think i am anyway. I live in a socialist country, i like those ideals and don't see why they don't apply across the world (or to this country properly either). And why, despite most balanced individuals not wanting to see others go without, how this system even got put in place. You'd have to go down a lot further than you are simply by living here your in the top 5% of the world. The ideals do not apply across the world because you and I and most people in this country do not want to give up our TV's mobile phones wide choice of foods and meat. Which is what you'd have to give up to equal everything out world wide. You'd need about 3 planet earth's to keep everyone in the level that's considered average in the west. Or like I said kill a lot of people. " Giving up tv and meat isn't that bad, already done that. Think i'd manage without a phone if i had access to the internet for communicating with people but most people (important to me) still keep in touch via phone, they'd have to change that though if they were forced to. GMO foods being accepted would help as well. | |||
"It's not our debt and not our economy. Why we paying it off? Simple enough question, probably has complicated answers though." It's actually quite a complex scam, the debt doesn't really exist as it was born from nothing. It is though a good enough reason to take more money from us but this has been going on for century's. My advice as the subject matter is very long winded is to do some reading. | |||
"This topics got me thinking now. If we do want NWO (like the world leaders say they do), then why isn't it based on co-operation that benefits everyone? Why's it based on exploitation* of some people and gaining for certain people? *by exploitation i mean unfair exploitation. Because if you wanted everyone in the world to live at the standard you do now you'll have to kill roughly 4-5 billion people. Or we can lower yours and my standard of living to a level that we in the west haven't had to deal with for centuries to bring up the rest of the world. Neither of which are popular solutions. Even in this country we have those who have too much and those with not enough, so not sure what quality of life we would have to go down to? I do understand that i have no obligation to anyone else to improve their life and quality of it, i just feel it's not fair that some people don't even have their basic needs met. And yeah i get it's more complicated than just people being shafted by the greedy who need power to feel like they are important, and need to be important for some weird reason that i'm sure a professional psychologist understands better than i do. But i'm not like them, i don't think i am anyway. I live in a socialist country, i like those ideals and don't see why they don't apply across the world (or to this country properly either). And why, despite most balanced individuals not wanting to see others go without, how this system even got put in place. You'd have to go down a lot further than you are simply by living here your in the top 5% of the world. The ideals do not apply across the world because you and I and most people in this country do not want to give up our TV's mobile phones wide choice of foods and meat. Which is what you'd have to give up to equal everything out world wide. You'd need about 3 planet earth's to keep everyone in the level that's considered average in the west. Or like I said kill a lot of people. Giving up tv and meat isn't that bad, already done that. Think i'd manage without a phone if i had access to the internet for communicating with people but most people (important to me) still keep in touch via phone, they'd have to change that though if they were forced to. GMO foods being accepted would help as well. " Oh no you wouldn't have the internet it's far too expensive and takes too many resources to maintain that and we couldn't expand it to everyone at the same level anyway so it would go. Education would have to take a major hit to. So would housing batteries etc would become limited to industrial and agricultural use. Most plastics again limited use along with the majority of rare earth elements etc. To bring everyone up is going to take vast resources to provide the infrastructure you see so most of the stuff we have would have to be rationed or no longer produced as the resources would be needed elsewhere factories and productions lines would have to shift from house hold goods to industrial goods etc. | |||
" GMO foods being accepted would help as well. " A separate topic really bur while genetic modification provides great potential current production methods make it very risky the potential to spread antibiotic resistance to wild bacteria is a huge risk. Also have a read on Klebsiella planticola it's a bacteria that inhabits the roots of all plants on earth we wanted to modify it to turn vegetation waste into alcohol (and the left over become brilliant fertiliser) all well and good. Problem being it killed live plants too. And this is an incredibly virrilant bacteria it's literally every were and spreads rapidly and we gave it better abilities it could now kill other bateria. If it had been used before the problems were realised you and I would currently be talking about what we were going to do as the last generation of humans on earth as it proceeded to wipe out all plant life on the planet GM is very promising but we have to be exceptional careful with it. | |||
"Giving up tv and meat isn't that bad, already done that. Think i'd manage without a phone if i had access to the internet for communicating with people but most people (important to me) still keep in touch via phone, they'd have to change that though if they were forced to. GMO foods being accepted would help as well. Oh no you wouldn't have the internet it's far too expensive and takes too many resources to maintain that and we couldn't expand it to everyone at the same level anyway so it would go. Education would have to take a major hit to. So would housing batteries etc would become limited to industrial and agricultural use. Most plastics again limited use along with the majority of rare earth elements etc. To bring everyone up is going to take vast resources to provide the infrastructure you see so most of the stuff we have would have to be rationed or no longer produced as the resources would be needed elsewhere factories and productions lines would have to shift from house hold goods to industrial goods etc." I don't think our atmosphere could handle any more satellites anyway, might be best if internet use was rationed, so everybody who wanted it got a bit of it but not enough to deprive anyone else? Education would be fine, and people managed before the industrial age. In fact the industrial age is what fucked us up mainly and brought about most of the exploitation we have today. I'm talking a world where resources have no financial value, it's theoretical obviously. When things have no financial value there might not be a shortage of them. | |||
"Giving up tv and meat isn't that bad, already done that. Think i'd manage without a phone if i had access to the internet for communicating with people but most people (important to me) still keep in touch via phone, they'd have to change that though if they were forced to. GMO foods being accepted would help as well. Oh no you wouldn't have the internet it's far too expensive and takes too many resources to maintain that and we couldn't expand it to everyone at the same level anyway so it would go. Education would have to take a major hit to. So would housing batteries etc would become limited to industrial and agricultural use. Most plastics again limited use along with the majority of rare earth elements etc. To bring everyone up is going to take vast resources to provide the infrastructure you see so most of the stuff we have would have to be rationed or no longer produced as the resources would be needed elsewhere factories and productions lines would have to shift from house hold goods to industrial goods etc. I don't think our atmosphere could handle any more satellites anyway, might be best if internet use was rationed, so everybody who wanted it got a bit of it but not enough to deprive anyone else? Education would be fine, and people managed before the industrial age. In fact the industrial age is what fucked us up mainly and brought about most of the exploitation we have today. I'm talking a world where resources have no financial value, it's theoretical obviously. When things have no financial value there might not be a shortage of them." Satalites and their launches don't really affect the atmosphere hydrogen + oxygen = water :p Interesting aside there a British company could potentially monopolise launches in the comming few decades adding mainly to our economy. We're up to 220 launches a year atm I think. It's not the internet use its the resources needed to make the hardware + the energy to run them and cool them. We'd either have to greatly expand nuclear or accept that were going back to candles and rolling blackouts for the most part | |||
"Satalites and their launches don't really affect the atmosphere hydrogen + oxygen = water :p Interesting aside there a British company could potentially monopolise launches in the comming few decades adding mainly to our economy. We're up to 220 launches a year atm I think. It's not the internet use its the resources needed to make the hardware + the energy to run them and cool them. We'd either have to greatly expand nuclear or accept that were going back to candles and rolling blackouts for the most part " Shops could turn their lights off when they shut as well. Never seen the point in them keeping them on. I wish i could sit in on people who're talking about this stuff to see what anyone in power is actually doing. Well, we shall see. Bet i'm dead before the good stuff happens, but i reckon things will improve in my lifetime, like they have to a degree for all the time i've been alive. I'm going to the chippy, not had chips for ages. | |||
"There is no money left 2008 Richest 100 double their net worth 2015 Something doesn't add up." Thanks in part to Labour's PFI finance schemes for hospitals. The NHS hospitals are paying millions a year to private investors who financed the building of the new hospitals for them | |||
" Kind of weird how the economy runs and debts can be passed on and everything is money based. I think governments should seriously consider finding money from actual sources of money think of money as "promise of work" as that's all it is. its a transferable value of work. ie i no longer have anything i can trade with the farmer for food because i have nothing useful to them, but i have something useful to someone else, so i convert my work into money which is a physical representation of the value of my work which is acceptable to all. as for governments finding money from sources of money, people get pissed off when the government takes more from them. See, that is how the monetary system we have now first started out. It was fair. What we have now is a veeery different beast. Rather than providing a product or service in exchange for money, which is then used to buy an alternate product or service. What we have now is money (or capital) used to create a product or service, for the sole purpose of creating more money. That is just one of the many mechanisms which have led to our current debt based economy. Err your aware you just said the same thing in two differnt ways? Using money to create a product to create more money. Is using money to pay for a product or service to create a product to sell for money. You can't just create something from money you have to use the money to pay for work to make the product the idea is you efficiently use the money to make a product that is worth more than the raw materials you used to make it (hence Value added). For the purpose of your argument you probably should have gone with an attack on fractional reserve banking and Fiat currencies where we are largely now reliant upon the promise of future work (debt) rather than the exchange of previous work. Come on mate, at least have a little respect for an ideology which is different to your own. They are clearly not the same thing. Thatcher makes roof, sells roof to butcher, uses money to buy shoe for horse. In that system you have a product, money is then used as an arbitrary resource in order to facilitate the exchange of another resource (product or service). Now we have thatcher borrows money from bank (debt) creates multiple roofs in order to make more money from the initial investment. Far more money than is actually needed (profit). One uses money as a facilitator, the other uses it simply as a means to generate more money. How can you not see the difference? Except that for thatcher to create multiple roofs he would need multiple workers and considerable amount of resources at once. Hence why he borrows money. He borrows money uses that to buy supplies in bulk and employ people roofs get built wages get paid then spent and money borrowed paid back with interest. Except now instead do omen man making one roof and buying one product you have 5 men making 5 roofs buying 5 products, 1 man running things organising supplies and logistics one banker lending money one or more investors providing money to the banker each swing a return on her money who can now use that additional money to reinvest or buy more products " Except your massively oversimplifying things, and that simply isn't how things work anymore. For one you are ignoring the industrial revolution for one thing. Because the owner of the thatching company is now motivated to have more than he needs (profit) he sacks 5 thatchers, and now one man is effectively earning the share of 6. That's why conceptually it is easier to imagine in the way I originally laid out. Money product money, instead of product money product. It's a systemic change, which you cannot argue has not taken place. | |||
"Kind of weird how the economy runs and debts can be passed on and everything is money based. " National DEFICIT (economic debt) is how much more money we SPEND than we actually HAVE. We are now spending, like, only HALF as much money that we... well, don't have. Which, in turn, goes onto the national DEBT, which basically fucks up the economy. | |||
"There is no money left 2008 Richest 100 double their net worth 2015 Something doesn't add up. Thanks in part to Labour's PFI finance schemes for hospitals. The NHS hospitals are paying millions a year to private investors who financed the building of the new hospitals for them" Also schools. Often too elaborate and well overspecced. All off of the Govt's books so that Gordon "I'm a fucking star" Brown's smoke and mirrors produced impressive growth and only massive, rather than humongous, debt. ps Did i mention Gordon "I'm really a fucking cunt" Brown? | |||
| |||
"Why can all the other countries get bailouts with monies when getting in debt, but not UK?." Because in most cases they ALREADY owe us money. So what are they bailing us out with?.. Note I said "In MOST cases"... | |||
"Why can all the other countries get bailouts with monies when getting in debt, but not UK?." Because we do our own, with ridiculous QE and devaluing sterling. | |||
 | |||
"Why can all the other countries get bailouts with monies when getting in debt, but not UK?. Because in most cases they ALREADY owe us money. So what are they bailing us out with?.. Note I said "In MOST cases"..." Good point as they don't owe us monies. | |||
"Why can all the other countries get bailouts with monies when getting in debt, but not UK?. Because we do our own, with ridiculous QE and devaluing sterling." That's right so no one can bail us out. I recon USA should help. | |||
"Why can all the other countries get bailouts with monies when getting in debt, but not UK?." I'm sure we got offered a bailout because of all the food banks and austerity cuts, Cameron turned it down. I can't find the story though? Seems to have been removed from the internet completely for some weird reason, either that or i'm shit at googling now. | |||
"Why can all the other countries get bailouts with monies when getting in debt, but not UK?. Because we do our own, with ridiculous QE and devaluing sterling.That's right so no one can bail us out. I recon USA should help." Fat fucking chance of that, they were about the only side in WWII that joined in on expenses. We've only just finished paying the fuckers off. So much for freedom. Besides them owing some $18 trillion or so. More chance of Abba lending us some. | |||
