ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags anarchism , antifa , bomb incidents , Conspiracy Cells of Fire , terrorism incidents

Reply
Old 9th April 2017, 11:44 AM   #81
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,332
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Sure you do.
Why?

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
And even if you didn't, plenty of people want to change it so you still do, by your own argument.
Change what, exactly?

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
No that's not how it works. If I promote a religion which is exactly the same as christianity but with "God" replaced with "Tod" then I still have a burden of proof for the entire religion and not just the "Tod" instead of "God" part.
Well, I think the Christian would tell you that you have it right except for the name, and they would probably let you pass on the name because God goes by many names, so you might as well add "Todd" to the list.

But why not use a real world example. If you really believe this, how come it's so hard to get you to argue for your anarchist beliefs?


Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th April 2017, 01:50 PM   #82
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,077
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Why?
Because belief systems don't propagate themselves. Besides, it's what you do, irrespective of whether you should.

Quote:
Change what, exactly?
It's irrelevant, and your burden of proof isn't even contingent on anyone proposing something different from your pet system in the first place. But if you are somehow under the impression that it is relevant, try this as an answer: everything.

Quote:
Well, I think the Christian would tell you
Who cares what the Christian world would tell you?

Quote:
But why not use a real world example. If you really believe this, how come it's so hard to get you to argue for your anarchist beliefs?


Thanks for proving my point in my response to HLafordlaes, it can be established that you are the one with a pet system to promote as well as approaching it as a dogma, given your refusal to argue for it and delusional impression that it is up to other people to argue for any change they'd want to make to it.
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin

Last edited by caveman1917; 9th April 2017 at 03:46 PM.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th April 2017, 03:51 PM   #83
Archie Gemmill Goal
Illuminator
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 4,414
Well this thread has derailed but let's be honest the 'system' is flawed as hell. Trying to argue for it is one thing but assuming it's right because it exists is another. I'm all for a little bit of rage against the machine at this point.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th April 2017, 02:57 AM   #84
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,077
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
I'm all for a little bit of rage against the machine at this point.
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th April 2017, 05:04 AM   #85
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,332
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Because belief systems don't propagate themselves.
They kind of do, actually. They also change and evolve over time.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Besides, it's what you do, irrespective of whether you should.
In what way do I do this?

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
It's irrelevant, and your burden of proof isn't even contingent on anyone proposing something different from your pet system in the first place. But if you are somehow under the impression that it is relevant, try this as an answer: everything.
You assert that people want to change it but can't identify what changes or even what "it" is, and somehow I'm supposed to debate something unknown before an unknow entity..?

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Who cares what the Christian world would tell you?
Most likely someone who wanted to create a religion identical to Christianity in every way except what you call the deity. Your analogy, remember?

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Thanks for proving my point in my response to HLafordlaes, it can be established that you are the one with a pet system to promote as well as approaching it as a dogma, given your refusal to argue for it and delusional impression that it is up to other people to argue for any change they'd want to make to it.
Your conclusions don't follow from your assertions, and your assertions are unfounded. Also, you failed to answer the question.
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th April 2017, 05:36 AM   #86
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,077
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
They kind of do, actually.
No they don't. Children aren't born with yours or anyone else's belief system. People need to promote belief systems for them to propagate.

Quote:
In what way do I do this?
Create, as they occur, a thread for every injury or death caused by Trojka/IMF/related policies. In each such thread denounce the event and proclaim something like "doesn't it make you ache to live in a world of their creation?".

Create, as they occur, a thread every time when that "police" gang employs violence against some FAI/CCF/related person, and deplore that this gang did not rather, say, stood outside this person's home with signs saying "your policies are hurting people" or something.

Then ask that question again.

Quote:
You assert that people want to change it but can't identify what changes
I just identified it: "everything".

Quote:
or even what "it" is
The system you promote, ie the status quo minus a couple of changes you might like to make to it.

Quote:
Most likely someone who wanted to create a religion identical to Christianity in every way except what you call the deity. Your analogy, remember?
I remember my analogy. So you now accept all tenets of christianity except for his name being God or Tod? After all, that's the only change I want to make to a belief system for which I can point to some people who already believe it, so it's all I should argue, no?

Quote:
Your conclusions don't follow from your assertions, and your assertions are unfounded. Also, you failed to answer the question.
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin

Last edited by caveman1917; 10th April 2017 at 05:38 AM.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th April 2017, 01:12 PM   #87
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,332
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
No they don't. Children aren't born with yours or anyone else's belief system. People need to promote belief systems for them to propagate.
Right, and what prompts a person to pass along a belief system? They hold that belief system. You might consider being less rigid in your use of language?

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Create, as they occur, a thread for every injury or death caused by Trojka/IMF/related policies… <snip>

Create, as they occur, a thread every time when that "police" gang employs violence against some FAI/CCF/related person…<snip>.
I’m not going to do that, but if I did I’m pretty sure my takeaway would be that people who collectively deny the existence of laws might have a very hard time in exactly the ways you just described. I fail to see how documenting this would prove my promotion of anything. I will remind you that pointing out the stupidity of Anarchists isn’t the same thing as promoting whatever they’re against. In the real world, things are more nuanced than that.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Then ask that question again.
Would you answer it? For whatever reason you seem very reluctant to provide direct answers. Ever.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
I just identified it: "everything".
Since that doesn’t make your ideas clear, and since “everything” included the entire universe the vast majority of which has nothing to do with our discussion, maybe some examples would be in order?

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
The system you promote, ie the status quo minus a couple of changes you might like to make to it.
:yawn: What system do I promote?

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
I remember my analogy.
Good, it seemed you had forgotten it. I hope everything is okay.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
So you now accept all tenets of christianity except for his name being God or Tod?
Curious. Could you identify the specific statement I made that leads you to believe that?

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
After all, that's the only change I want to make to a belief system for which I can point to some people who already believe it, so it's all I should argue, no?
It depends on what you want. Do you want to start a new religion? That would probably do it. Do you want to convince everyone in the world? I don’t think anything would do that. Do you want to convince me personally? I’ve never seen someone else’s religious convictions as reason for me to share them.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Do I need to lead you through your unfounded assertions and demonstrate that your conclusions don’t follow?
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th April 2017, 01:51 PM   #88
Axiom_Blade
Master Poster
 
Axiom_Blade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,939
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
/sarcasm
I'm glad you cleared that up for us.
Axiom_Blade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2017, 08:45 AM   #89
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,077
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Since that doesn’t make your ideas clear, and since “everything” included the entire universe the vast majority of which has nothing to do with our discussion, maybe some examples would be in order?
Of the status quo? Sure. For instance, given that you've brought up the subject in your OP, suppose someone walks into a supermarket and takes what they need - they'd get attacked by your "police" gang while they're ranting about something called "shoplifting". A clear initiation of violence, so it seems a good place for you to start, given your earlier appeals to something called "non-violence".
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2017, 09:38 AM   #90
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,332
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Of the status quo? Sure. For instance, given that you've brought up the subject in your OP, suppose someone walks into a supermarket and takes what they need - they'd get attacked by your "police" gang while they're ranting about something called "shoplifting". A clear initiation of violence, so it seems a good place for you to start, given your earlier appeals to something called "non-violence".
That's weird because I go into supermarkets and take what I need all the time, and I have never had violence with police over it. I disagree that police violently interfering with shopping is a part of the status quo.

What part of this am I supposed to defend? The existence of markets? The existence of police? I think the existence of markets is a good thing because they are useful in distributing goods to people who want and need them.

What next?

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2017, 09:52 AM   #91
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,077
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
That's weird because I go into supermarkets and take what I need all the time, and I have never had violence with police over it.
That's odd. Is there anything else you might be doing other than going to supermarkets and taking what you need? You're not handing over money to some random person there to bribe them into not calling that gang to attack you, are you?
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin

Last edited by caveman1917; 11th April 2017 at 09:53 AM.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2017, 11:12 AM   #92
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,332
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
That's odd. Is there anything else you might be doing other than going to supermarkets and taking what you need? You're not handing over money to some random person there to bribe them into not calling that gang to attack you, are you?
Random person?

No, the cashier handles it.

So the issue is the person isn't willing to exchange money for the goods he wants?
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th April 2017, 09:23 AM   #93
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,077
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Random person?
Yes. Anyway, your counter-claim having been refuted, now argue the merit of the attacks by your gang upon people who go to the storage facilities to take what they need.
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th April 2017, 09:59 AM   #94
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,332
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Yes. Anyway, your counter-claim having been refuted,now argue the merit of the attacks by your gang upon people who go to the storage facilities to take what they need.
Counter claim?

I don't "bribe" anyone when I take my merchandise. It's a novel idea, though.

Has the supermarket become a "storage facility" now?

I think if the person taking what he needs is able to pay for it, then he should do so. If he's not able to pay for it, then he should be directed to a "storage facility" that does not require payment.

I don't think he should be attacked.

Overall I support the systems that allow and encourage the existence of supermarkets because they solve the problems of distribution which are far more difficult to solve than the "problem" of obtaining the money needed to use them.

However, I'm not closed-minded. If you have a better idea, I encourage you to do the work to make it a reality.

I'll also suggest that if you want to make a supermarket that doesn't require shoppers to trade money for goods, do it! There will be a lot of problems to work out, primarily how to pay your employees and how to restock your merchandise, but I stand ready to applaud your success when you figure it out.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th April 2017, 11:07 AM   #95
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,077
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Counter claim?
Yes, your claim that it isn't part of the status quo that when someone goes to the supermarket and takes what they need that they get attacked by your gang.

Quote:
I don't "bribe" anyone when I take my merchandise.
Sure you do.

Quote:
Has the supermarket become a "storage facility" now?
That's what it is. A physical structure (a building) where goods are stored.

Quote:
I don't think he should be attacked.
Yet he is. I know you really don't like empirical evidence, but you can easily test this for yourself. Go try it, and this time don't bribe people into not sending the gang to attack you. See what happens and report back.

By now you have already expressed two different general principles by which you should oppose that gang's actions:

- "Non-violence", the gang is clearly the initiator of violence.

- Solving the problem of distribution of things to people who need them, which the gang interferes with by attacking people when they take what they need from a nearby storage facility.

Quote:
However, I'm not closed-minded. If you have a better idea, I encourage you to do the work to make it a reality.
You're really not very good with this burden of proof thing, are you?

Do you promote that a person taking what they need from a storage facility should be attacked by a gang? If yes, go ahead and make your case.

If no, you apparently promote that said person should be "directed towards" another storage facility. You don't really say how exactly, so I'll just consider it as some person standing at the nearby facility pointing towards another facility. If so, feel free to go ahead and make your case. Here are already two things to consider:

- It would be irrational for someone to go to another storage facility, further away, just because at the nearby facility some random dude is performing some sort of pointing ritual.

- It is globally inefficient not to distribute goods in the facility most nearby the people who need them.

Irrational, inefficient, and mainly consisting of some random dude performing some ritual... Your belief system is off to a good start.
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin

Last edited by caveman1917; 12th April 2017 at 11:21 AM.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th April 2017, 05:02 PM   #96
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,332
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Yes, your claim that it isn't part of the status quo that when someone goes to the supermarket and takes what they need that they get attacked by your gang.
It’s been my experience, which may be different for people who are unwilling to pay for their goods.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Sure you do.
No. Purchasing is not the same as bribery.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
That's what it is. A physical structure (a building) where goods are stored.
Ah, so you’ve grasped the concept that sometimes the same thing can have more than one noun that labels it. Good.

At the same time previously you used the term “supermarket”, and selling things is part of the definition of “market” including supermarkets.

su·per·mar·ket
ˈso͞opərˌmärkət/
noun
1. a large self-service store selling foods and household goods.


http://lmgtfy.com/?q=supermarket

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Solving the problem of distribution of things to people who need them, which the gang interferes with by attacking people when they take what they need from a nearby storage facility.
If the system is designed to work with money, then I disagree

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
You're really not very good with this burden of proof thing, are you?
I’m good enough to be amused by your efforts to shift the burden of proof.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Do you promote that a person taking what they need from a storage facility should be attacked by a gang? If yes, go ahead and make your case.
Referring the person to a facility where he is allowed to take goods without paying shouldn’t require a “gang” to attack anyone.

At the same time, if it were my business and it were a choice between attacking him and letting him go with a small amount of stolen merchandise, I’d let him go. I’d notify the police and not allow him back in the store again, but I don’t see that attacking him makes anything better. I might reconsider that if I have so many thieves that it threatens the business.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
If no, you apparently promote that said person should be "directed towards" another storage facility. You don't really say how exactly, so I'll just consider it as some person standing at the nearby facility pointing towards another facility. If so, feel free to go ahead and make your case. Here are already two things to consider:
Since much better methods of communication are available, that would be silly. You are amusing.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
It would be irrational for someone to go to another storage facility, further away, just because at the nearby facility some random dude is performing some sort of pointing ritual.
It’s perfectly rational if the “facility” he is at does not permit the taking of goods without payment. Since facilities that allow taking without paying are available, he should be directed to one. Also, who says the other facility is further away? For all you know it’s across the street. Some of these facilities will even package their goods and leave them on people’s doorsteps.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
It is globally inefficient not to distribute goods in the facility most nearby the people who need them.
What is your proof for that statement? I would say that it’s inefficient to try to force a facility that was created by one economic model to attempt to function on a different economic model. The problems of resupply, compensating your laborers, and meeting other expenses were solved by the first economic model. If those problems are not solved by the new economic model, the “supermarket” will be a dark and empty building within weeks. Then it wouldn’t be a benefit to anyone. That’s not efficient at all.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Irrational, inefficient, and mainly consisting of some random dude performing some ritual... Your belief system is off to a good start.
If you squint your eyes and only look at it from a certain angle in dim lighting...yeah. In the light of day with open eyes, no.
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th April 2017, 05:30 PM   #97
sadhatter
Philosopher
 
sadhatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,258
Another person makes something, I want that thing, I know if I take that thing they get no benefit, logically I would then decide to offer them something for the thing I want.

I don't see how any reasonable person could not understand that premise. No one is bribing anyone, every person of average intellect knows that if you want something from someone you either trade or fight, it's binary unless someone wants to give something away.
sadhatter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th April 2017, 06:53 PM   #98
Darth Rotor
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 38,457
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
My boy?
First line in your sig.

@Jules:
I found intriguing your trying to nail down a definition of anarchist.
It occurs to me that nailing down a discrete definition of principles is the opposite of what an anarchist would ever do, unlike the fascist who is trying to impose a certain sort of order to/on things.
An anarchist is better defined by what he/she's against, which in terms of social order amounts to ... everything... in the extreme case.

Last edited by Darth Rotor; 12th April 2017 at 06:59 PM.
Darth Rotor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2017, 05:23 AM   #99
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,077
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
No. Purchasing is not the same as bribery.
Yes it is.

Quote:
I’m good enough to be amused by your efforts to shift the burden of proof.
I'm not shifting any burden of proof.

Quote:
It’s perfectly rational if the “facility” he is at does not permit the taking of goods without payment.
No it isn't. It would be rational for him to ignore the people promoting the belief about it not being "permitted" to take goods without "payment", and to just take what he needs anyway.

Quote:
What is your proof for that statement?
Physics.

Which one is more energy efficient? Have the goods transported to the nearby facility and taken there by the people who need them, or have them transported to a further-away facility and have people transport themselves there individually to take what they need?

Assume that a person is 100 kg and the good 1 kg. Assume that it is equally efficient to transport the good to either facility (suppose it comes in batch by truck from some much-further-away central distribution facility). Nearby and further-away here mean relative to the location of the people who need the goods.

Quote:
If you squint your eyes and only look at it from a certain angle in dim lighting...yeah. In the light of day with open eyes, no.
You really don't need to squint your eyes to see what pile of crap that belief system you promote is. Let's walk through it. Suppose a rational person has a need for a good and goes to the closest facility which stocks it. There they meet you.

Person: *takes good* and thereby fulfills need.

You: "You must go to this other facility which is further away to take this good."

Person: "Who the hell are you?"

You: "I'm the manager. I solve the problem of distributing goods to people who need them."

Person: "Well you seem to be doing a crappy job. It incurs less of a cost if you simply call in for more such goods to be transported to your facility rather than me individually fetching them from a further-away facility. I'll just ignore you."

You: "If you ignore me then I'm calling a gang to attack you."

Person: "Wow, not only are you incompetent at your task of distributing goods to people who need them, you've apparently got some serious attention-seeking issues as well."

You: "You can of course always hand me over some money so that I won't do that..."

Person: "Ah, a bribe, how unexpected."

You: "Well I like to call it a 'purchase' rather than a 'bribe'".

Person: "Right, gotcha, nudge nudge wink wink."

Why should you be manager of the facility, if you're so crappy at the task of distributing goods to people who need them, and can find nothing better to hide your incompetence behind than taking bribes and calling upon gangs to attack people who ignore your incompetent "management"?
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2017, 05:27 AM   #100
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,077
Originally Posted by sadhatter View Post
Another person makes something, I want that thing.
The facility owner/manager makes everything there? Wow! Thinking about the things in my local supermarket and the rate at which they are taken, that must be one hell of a job he is doing. Just wow!
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2017, 11:45 AM   #101
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,332
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Yes it is.
If that’s true, then you should be able to easily find a thesaurus that agrees with you.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
I'm not shifting any burden of proof.
Uh-huh.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
No it isn't. It would be rational for him to ignore the people promoting the belief about it not being "permitted" to take goods without "payment", and to just take what he needs anyway.
Is that what you do? If not, why not?

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Physics.

Which one is more energy efficient? Have the goods transported to the nearby facility and taken there by the people who need them, or have them transported to a further-away facility and have people transport themselves there individually to take what they need?

Assume that a person is 100 kg and the good 1 kg. Assume that it is equally efficient to transport the good to either facility (suppose it comes in batch by truck from some much-further-away central distribution facility). Nearby and further-away here mean relative to the location of the people who need the goods.
So many unfounded assumptions in that.

Why assume one facility is further away than the other? Why assume they are supplied from the same source? Why assume only one source? Why assume weight and distance are the sole aspects of efficiency? Most importantly, why would you disregard established relationships that depend on the exchange of money to make these transactions happen?

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
You really don't need to squint your eyes to see what pile of crap that belief system you promote is.
The only “flaw” you identify is that a person can’t just take whatever he wants without paying for it, but you overlook the tens of thousands of people who are able to easily obtain fresh produce and goods from all over the world. That’s a very strong benefit that you purposefully ignore.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Let's walk through it. Suppose a rational person has a need for a good and goes to the closest facility which stocks it. There they meet you.
Sure, only your scenario wasn’t very realistic so I’ve made some modifications:

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post

Person: *takes good* *Attempts to steal product* and thereby fulfill need.

You: "You must go to this other facility which is further away to take this good." “That will be $4.99. Cash, check or charge?”

Person: "Who the hell are you?"

You: "I'm the manager. I solve the problem of distributing goods to people who need them.". “I run this store, which provides quality foods and goods from local farmers and from all over the world. I see you fancy that jar of Olives imported from Greece. I’ve tried them personally, and they are very good, but you can’t just walk out with them. They cost $4.99.”

Person: "Well you seem to be doing a crappy job. It incurs less of a cost if you simply call in for more such goods to be transported to your facility rather than me individually fetching them from a further-away facility. I'll just ignore you."

Manager: “Look, if our customers don’t pay for their merchandise, then we can’t resupply because we wouldn’t have the money to pay for it. We also wouldn’t have the money to pay our employees, pay the electric and water bills, maintain the building, pay the rent, keep the parking lot in good shape and all the other expenses that go with running a business. If we do charge for our goods, then we’re able to provide a huge variety of products to tens of thousands of people every month. Giving away merchandise for free sounds great, but we wouldn’t be able to keep this store open for very long.”

Person: “Okay, that makes sense. Here’s a $5.00 bill. Keep the change.”

Manager: “And another $0.35 for the sales tax.”

Person: “@#$%!”

You: "If you ignore me then I'm calling a gang to attack you."

Person: "Wow, not only are you incompetent at your task of distributing goods to people who need them, you've apparently got some serious attention-seeking issues as well."

You: "You can of course always hand me over some money so that I won't do that..."

Person: "Ah, a bribe, how unexpected."

You: "Well I like to call it a 'purchase' rather than a 'bribe'".

Person: "Right, gotcha, nudge nudge wink wink."

Why should you be manager of the facility, if you're so crappy at the task of distributing goods to people who need them, and can find nothing better to hide your incompetence behind than taking bribes and calling upon gangs to attack people who ignore your incompetent "management"?
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2017, 12:01 PM   #102
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,077
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Person: *takes good* and thereby fulfills need.

You: “That will be $4.99. Cash, check or charge?”

Person: "Who the hell are you?"

You: "I'm the manager. I run this store, which provides quality foods and goods from local farmers and from all over the world. I see you fancy that jar of Olives imported from Greece. I’ve tried them personally, and they are very good, but you can’t just walk out with them.”
Person: "Of course you can. Look, I'll prove it to you." *walks out with them*
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2017, 12:03 PM   #103
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,271
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
You're really not very good with this burden of proof thing, are you?
I'm starting to see a pattern, here.
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2017, 12:40 PM   #104
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 37,230
This discussion is no longer fun. And since fun is the only reason to get into a debate with a hard line anarchist,I am out of here.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2017, 02:35 PM   #105
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,332
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Person: "Of course you can. Look, I'll prove it to you." *walks out with them*
Very pithy, but supermarkets already deal with a certain amount of theft. This fantasy theft in your scenario may feel satisfying to you on some level, but it doesn't change the fundamentals of economics.

Wanting a world where everyone gets everything they want just for the taking is a beautiful dream, but it will take a lot more than magical thinking and rage to make it happen.



Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2017, 03:55 PM   #106
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,332
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Of the status quo? Sure. For instance, given that you've brought up the subject in your OP, suppose someone walks into a supermarket and takes what they need - they'd get attacked by your "police" gang while they're ranting about something called "shoplifting". A clear initiation of violence, so it seems a good place for you to start, given your earlier appeals to something called "non-violence".
I think I have a solution to this supermarket dilemma, that simultaneously allows the supermarket to exist, properly funded, and also allows people to take what they want if they need to.

Set it up on a co-op model. Merchandise will be priced to meet expenses and operating costs while also maintaining a reasonable economic cushion.

RFID technology already exists to scan an entire grocery cart, so we'll use that.

It's assumed that most but not all people who use the supermarket will pay for their items. They can pay full price, above full price, or any fraction of full price they feel is appropriate to their situation including nothing at all.

A running total is kept of merchandise taken and merchandise paid for.

"Full price" includes the cost of your merchandise, plus a "tax" to cover the merchandise taken but not paid for. Because this tax could change from day to day, it's posted so people know ahead of time. "The non-payer tax today is 7%", or whatever the math happens to come to.

Such a system would be very socially conscious, and stable so long as it's not abused too badly.
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2017, 06:13 AM   #107
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 22,675
Unfortunately a co-op would still require anarchists to produce something, so it's a non-starter.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2017, 11:41 AM   #108
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,077
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
I think I have a solution to this supermarket dilemma, that simultaneously allows the supermarket to exist, properly funded, and also allows people to take what they want if they need to.

Set it up on a co-op model. Merchandise will be priced to meet expenses and operating costs while also maintaining a reasonable economic cushion.

RFID technology already exists to scan an entire grocery cart, so we'll use that.

It's assumed that most but not all people who use the supermarket will pay for their items. They can pay full price, above full price, or any fraction of full price they feel is appropriate to their situation including nothing at all.

A running total is kept of merchandise taken and merchandise paid for.

"Full price" includes the cost of your merchandise, plus a "tax" to cover the merchandise taken but not paid for. Because this tax could change from day to day, it's posted so people know ahead of time. "The non-payer tax today is 7%", or whatever the math happens to come to.

Such a system would be very socially conscious, and stable so long as it's not abused too badly.
What if nobody pays (or at least not enough)?
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2017, 12:01 PM   #109
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Wanting a world where everyone gets everything they want just for the taking is a beautiful dream, but it will take a lot more than magical thinking and rage to make it happen.
Indeed. It would take actual magic.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2017, 12:28 PM   #110
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,332
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
What if nobody pays (or at least not enough)?
Then it would be a failure, but I think enough people would be willing to pay that it wouldn't be. There are many museums and other attractions that charge a "suggested donation", and the majority people pay it.

What's your opinion?
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2017, 01:06 PM   #111
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,077
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Then it would be a failure
And then what? No more goods distribution?

Quote:
What's your opinion?
People won't pay. Which leads us to the question: why should they? If people can take what they need for free then what should the workers be paid for?
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2017, 01:57 PM   #112
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,332
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
And then what? No more goods distribution?
If the store fails then it cannot distribute goods.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
People won't pay. Which leads us to the question: why should they?
Enlightened self interest or altruism? Why do people at Starbucks drive through often pay for the order of the car behind them? Why do people give to charity?


Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
If people can take what they need for free then what should the workers be paid for?
Which workers are you referring to?

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th April 2017, 05:11 AM   #113
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 22,675
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Then it would be a failure, but I think enough people would be willing to pay that it wouldn't be. There are many museums and other attractions that charge a "suggested donation", and the majority people pay it.

What's your opinion?
Are there any museums that subsist entirely on such donations?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th April 2017, 05:13 AM   #114
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 22,675
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
And then what? No more goods distribution?
No more goods production.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th April 2017, 05:32 AM   #115
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,077
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
If the store fails then it cannot distribute goods.
The store didn't fail, you failed to manage it properly. If you have too few incoming tokens relative to your required outgoing tokens so as to replenish your stocks, then you either have to acquire more incoming tokens or reduce your required outgoing tokens. Such is elementary.

Quote:
Enlightened self interest or altruism?
No that's not what I mean. If goods are free then why would workers still need to be paid? What would they use the money for if they can just get what they need for free?

Quote:
Why do people give to charity?
Because indulgences have fallen out of favour.

Quote:
Which workers are you referring to?
The ones at the distribution facility you are taking the role of managing.
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin

Last edited by caveman1917; 20th April 2017 at 06:00 AM.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th April 2017, 07:27 AM   #116
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,332
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
The store didn't fail, you failed to manage it properly. If you have too few incoming tokens relative to your required outgoing tokens so as to replenish your stocks, then you either have to acquire more incoming tokens or reduce your required outgoing tokens. Such is elementary.
On what basis do you assume the store wouldn't receive enough "incoming tokens"?

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
No that's not what I mean. If goods are free then why would workers still need to be paid? What would they use the money for if they can just get what they need for free?
I think it's up to you to answer questions about your pet system, isn't it?



Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th April 2017, 07:46 AM   #117
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,332
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Are there any museums that subsist entirely on such donations?
Yes, but I'd add that for the ones that don't supplemental income in addition to what they collect at the gate is the norm.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2017, 04:22 AM   #118
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,077
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
On what basis do you assume the store wouldn't receive enough "incoming tokens"?
On what basis do you assume it would?

Quote:
I think it's up to you to answer questions about your pet system, isn't it?
My pet system? You're the one who just made it up.
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2017, 04:23 AM   #119
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,077
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
No more goods production.
Why would that be?
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2017, 07:49 AM   #120
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Why would that be?
Because there's no longer a reason to produce goods.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:35 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.