| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Negoba 
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5210
|
 Posted: January 31 2013 at 13:00 |
 Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Negoba wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
A lack of empathy causes both to some degree. We happen to live in a society which teaches that empathy is either naive or unpatriotic or both.
|
I sense a change in you during my absence. |
I would be a pretty boring individual if I was the same wouldn't I?
I have a different focus now than before I would say although my beliefs remain largely unchanged.
|
I like what I see. It seems like a focus not only on what top-down should not be doing but also on what bottom-up should be doing.
Not assuming that agent-based processes are good, though still believing they are far superior to attempts at system manipulation from above?
This is of course me projecting. But any accuracy to this?
|
|
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
|
 |
The Doctor
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: June 23 2005
Location: The Tardis
Status: Offline
Points: 8543
|
Posted: January 31 2013 at 13:13 |
Negoba wrote:
Dean wrote:
Negoba wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
I would like to go on the record as saying that many of them are and a good number of them are probably more so than the average politician. |
That's a pretty broad generalization that can't be verified because it's so vague.
This argument of "Who's worse, CEO or Senator?" is pointless.
I suspect in both cases it becomes an issue of scale. A small business owner with 12 employees usually has direct contact with those employees regularly, has a better sense of who they are and what they do within the company. You can apply rewards and punishments more appropriately that way. When scales get large, the top parts of leadership get very detached and make decisions based on reports and spreadsheets. Their world is other high level managers and their representatives. In the case of both government and business, this loss of perspective leads to bad decisions even if there is no malice. |
I think a clarification of terms is needed - I wouldn't call a small business owner with 12 employees a CEO since it is unlikely that the business of that scale would have a teir of executive management for the CEO to be in charge of or board of directors or shareholders for the CEO to report to. This isn't a question of scale but of job function - the head of a small business is more likely to be the owner and therefore more likely to be fully involved in what the business does, rather than in charge of those who are involved in what the business does. This is the point I was trying to make a million pages back. The owner of a small business is not a CEO. |
This is a good point. There are qualitative differences in the jobs. But there are also quantitative factors in terms of degrees of separation. |
What does this discussion have to do with Kevin Bacon?  Seriously though, when I speak of CEOs, I'm not talking about the guy who started his company in his garage, was successful at it, incorporated his company and has 15 employees. Although, technically they are CEOs, when I speak of CEOs, I'm usually talking about third party (non-owners) executives of publicly-traded companies. SBOs come in all shapes, sizes and degrees of ethics and niceness. I have worked and done business with some great SBOs and have unfortunately also worked for some sleazy and mean SBOs. But those are much harder to paint with broad strokes than the CEO of the multi-national who writes himself a bonus check for 50 million at the end of the year after laying off 5000 employees.
|
|
I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you?
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: January 31 2013 at 13:28 |
The Doctor wrote:
What does this discussion have to do with Kevin Bacon?
Seriously though, when I speak of CEOs, I'm not talking about the guy who started his company in his garage, was successful at it, incorporated his company and has 15 employees. Although, technically they are CEOs |
Technically they are not Chief Executive Officers.
|
|
What?
|
|
The Doctor
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: June 23 2005
Location: The Tardis
Status: Offline
Points: 8543
|
Posted: January 31 2013 at 13:32 |
Dean wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
What does this discussion have to do with Kevin Bacon?
Seriously though, when I speak of CEOs, I'm not talking about the guy who started his company in his garage, was successful at it, incorporated his company and has 15 employees. Although, technically they are CEOs |
Technically they are not Chief Executive Officers. |
Corporations here have 4 officers (although these 4 positions can be held by as little as 1 person), President and/or CEO, Treasurer and/or CFO, Vice President and Secretary. This is not at all dependent on the size of the corporation or whether or not the company is privately or publicly held.
|
|
I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you?
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: January 31 2013 at 14:18 |
Negoba wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Negoba wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
A lack of empathy causes both to some degree. We happen to live in a society which teaches that empathy is either naive or unpatriotic or both. |
I sense a change in you during my absence. |
I would be a pretty boring individual if I was the same wouldn't I?I have a different focus now than before I would say although my beliefs remain largely unchanged. |
I like what I see. It seems like a focus not only on what top-down should not be doing but also on what bottom-up should be doing.
Not assuming that agent-based processes are good, though still believing they are far superior to attempts at system manipulation from above?
This is of course me projecting. But any accuracy to this? |
I really think Pat's ideas remain the same. He just has seemed more capable lately of conveying that his libertarianism (or anarchism) is not a dogma but the system or whatever that he genuinely feels is better for actual people, for all people.
|
|
|
|
Finnforest
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 03 2007
Location: The Heartland
Status: Offline
Points: 17246
|
Posted: January 31 2013 at 14:36 |
^Yep, if one believes a free market is going to lift more people up than unsustainable redistribution policies, that would be compassionate despite what we are told about the greed of libertarians.
|
|
...that moment you realize you like "Mob Rules" better than "Heaven and Hell"
|
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
|
Posted: January 31 2013 at 18:07 |
The Doctor wrote:
One thing that I don't think I've brought up before, but has been wrangling around in my head for a long time, and now's as good a time as any to bring it up. Let's say A and B get into a physical fight (this is the easiest analogy I can come up with) and there are no rules in the fight. However, B being the ethical person he is, fights a good, fair fight. A, on the other hand does not, he bites, he hits and kicks below the belt, pulls a kinfe and so forth. A and B are equally skilled at fighting and are of equal size. Who will win? I think it's pretty obvious that A will take the fight. Now, let's apply that analogy to the business world without rules. Who do you think is going to come out on top? The nice guys who treats people fairly, or the bad one who has zero scruples and will do anything and everything to win? My point is, without rules, eventually the scum will rise to the top and while there are ethical and decent people in the business world now, those people will not be able to survive without the rule of law. And so, in the long run, the only people you will be able to do business with are the evil ones. Does government sometimes prop up the bad guys? Yes, of course. Can the good guys survive in the business world without the government there to set the rules? I don't think so. |
I think your analogy is inappropriate, or rather I think it doesn't go far enough. In the real world, A and B don't exist in isolation, but there are a number of spectators who witness their fight. A may defeat B by using underhanded tactics, but in doing so he alienates the rest of the community. No one trusts him. No one wants to do business with him, because he has shown himself to be of low character. The next time he gets into a fight, he will have to go up against not only A, but everyone who objected to the way A was treated. In the long run, such tactics can never succeed. I think people have an innate sense of justice. We always root for the underdog in movies. Even the youngest children frequently proclaim "but that's not FAIR!" Of course some people will act badly, but they will pay for their misdeeds in the court of public opinion. And again, no one is suggesting that there should be no laws, so I don't see what your "fight with no rules" analogy has to do with libertarianism.
|
|
|
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
|
Posted: January 31 2013 at 18:10 |
The T wrote:
I really think Pat's ideas remain the same. He just has seemed more capable lately of conveying that his libertarianism (or anarchism) is not a dogma but the system or whatever that he genuinely feels is better for actual people, for all people. |
I have to say, I really miss Pat's extended, passionate and extremely erudite defense of his ideas. I suppose there is a certain zen-like quality to his ultra-laconic posts of late, but I find the level of detachment somewhat less satisfying.
Edited by thellama73 - January 31 2013 at 20:38
|
|
|
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
|
Posted: January 31 2013 at 18:46 |
|
So many changes going on in here!
Indeed, the libertarian movement has always been disregarded as "radical right" and "uber pro business"
Can't really fix the first until mentalities change and people become more informed, but it is upsetting what seems so obviously populist, so "pro person" and focus on fairness and responsibility has become so ridiculed.
|
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
|
Posted: January 31 2013 at 18:50 |
thellama73 wrote:
JJLehto wrote:
Well right off the bat CPI is silly because it doesn't include food and energy.
|
CPI does include food and energy, actually.
|
Hmmm, well I have been lied to it appears.
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
I would like to go on the record as saying that many of them are and a good number of them are probably more so than the average politician.
|
More than the average politician eh? IDK about that but without doubt corporate CEOs and managers seem to live blitzed off their ass on power 24/7. It doesn't need to be the CEOs either....managers of the bottom of the ladder are some of the most power crazed, tyrannical minded people I've dealt with. Which is why government is bound to fail. 
|
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
|
Posted: January 31 2013 at 19:04 |
|
One of the pillars of libertarian thought is the idea that pursuing self-interest is part of human nature and that everyone will respond to incentives. This means that greed and lust for power can strike anyone, in any walk of life, and it's the reason we favor decentralizing power as much as possible. Many on the left seem to think the businessman they accuse of greed and opportunism in the private sector suddenly transforms into an angel with only the public interest at heart when he runs for office on a Democratic ticket.
CEOs can be greedy amoral monsters.
Politicians can be greedy amoral monsters.
Only one of the two groups can force me to do something I don't want to do though.
|
|
|
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
|
Posted: January 31 2013 at 19:21 |
|
no basis to this except personal experience but it seems managers are worse as you go down the ladder.
I think its because they have too grasp on to whatever little "power" they have and run with it. Also the fact you are also on a "lower rung"
Granted at the very top I guess having so much real power can also make you insane.
Basically, people running other people does bad things to them, and I want as little as possible.
Doc may find this funny but as I work in the corporate culture longer it made me more anti government.
Anyone with experience in a corporation, IDK how they can argue for even more hierarchal bureaucracy, and worse to make very big decisions over the lives of millions. Government and business are essentially the same I realize. I mean as in how they operate and run, structurally. I want none of that in my government!
|
|
Padraic
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169
|
Posted: January 31 2013 at 20:35 |
|
|
|
King of Loss
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 21 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Status: Offline
Points: 16839
|
Posted: February 01 2013 at 05:06 |
JJLehto wrote:
So many changes going on in here!
Indeed, the libertarian movement has always been disregarded as "radical right" and "uber pro business"
Can't really fix the first until mentalities change and people become more informed, but it is upsetting what seems so obviously populist, so "pro person" and focus on fairness and responsibility has become so ridiculed.
|
The funny thing about that is America has never been and is going further from those principles. In fact, progressivism has empowered the big business interests much more so through the government-business complex, such as universities. For example, they've made countless billions every year with the modern scam of universities all in the name of "educating" them. One of the main backers of the current university system, Mr. Rockefeller (A huge proponent of progressivism in some ways) said this about education:
"In our dreams, people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands. The present eduction conventions of intellectual and character education fade from their minds, and, unhampered by tradition, we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive folk. We shall not try to make these people, or any of their children, into philosophers, or men of science. We have not to raise up from them authors, educators, poets or men of letters. We shall not search for great artists, painters, musicians nor lawyers, doctors, preachers, politicians, statesmen – of whom we have an ample supply. The task is simple. We will organize children and teach them in a perfect way the things their fathers and mothers are doing in an imperfect way."
So much for the fabled "progressive" system in educating the general population and this scam has made big business happy with a surplus of a docile workforce that can neither think or create competition, the one thing big business interests such as the ones found in the Rockefeller Foundation, loathes. This is one of the things they fear the most, the freedom to think, which is generally an essential component in maintaining free markets
Edited by King of Loss - February 01 2013 at 05:08
|
|
King of Loss
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 21 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Status: Offline
Points: 16839
|
Posted: February 01 2013 at 05:14 |
thellama73 wrote:
One of the pillars of libertarian thought is the idea that pursuing self-interest is part of human nature and that everyone will respond to incentives. This means that greed and lust for power can strike anyone, in any walk of life, and it's the reason we favor decentralizing power as much as possible. Many on the left seem to think the businessman they accuse of greed and opportunism in the private sector suddenly transforms into an angel with only the public interest at heart when he runs for office on a Democratic ticket.
CEOs can be greedy amoral monsters.
Politicians can be greedy amoral monsters.
Only one of the two groups can force me to do something I don't want to do though.
|
I hate to quote Mao Zedong, but to illustrate your point better:
Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.
Do any private enterprises do that when they are completely separated from direct or indirect government control? I've not had anyone force me to eat my Broccoli.
|
|
The Doctor
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: June 23 2005
Location: The Tardis
Status: Offline
Points: 8543
|
Posted: February 01 2013 at 08:28 |
King of Loss wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
One of the pillars of libertarian thought is the idea that pursuing self-interest is part of human nature and that everyone will respond to incentives. This means that greed and lust for power can strike anyone, in any walk of life, and it's the reason we favor decentralizing power as much as possible. Many on the left seem to think the businessman they accuse of greed and opportunism in the private sector suddenly transforms into an angel with only the public interest at heart when he runs for office on a Democratic ticket.
CEOs can be greedy amoral monsters.
Politicians can be greedy amoral monsters.
Only one of the two groups can force me to do something I don't want to do though.
|
I hate to quote Mao Zedong, but to illustrate your point better:
Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.
Do any private enterprises do that when they are completely separated from direct or indirect government control? I've not had anyone force me to eat my Broccoli. |
Any answer to that question except "I don't know what they would do if completely separated from government control," would be meaningless. No, I can't say yes they would if given the opportunity, but I don't think you can say no they wouldn't either. Maybe you want to find out the answer to that. I don't.
|
|
I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you?
|
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
|
Posted: February 01 2013 at 11:45 |
Sure the US has never been strictly adhering to those princicples, but generally there was a time when it did.
Yeah the education system is a mess, especially at the university level. I knew progressivism was doomed when I learned the New School (founded by social democrats and socialists for the purpose of real education) was run by a Senator and his goal was to make it more "normal"
Government has killed everything!
I wish there were some independent from government univeristies, but also had "avant garde" or "progressive" qualities. Well Im sure they exist but I cant think of any
|
|
King of Loss
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 21 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Status: Offline
Points: 16839
|
Posted: February 01 2013 at 17:17 |
JJLehto wrote:
Sure the US has never been strictly adhering to those princicples, but generally there was a time when it did.
Yeah the education system is a mess, especially at the university level. I knew progressivism was doomed when I learned the New School (founded by social democrats and socialists for the purpose of real education) was run by a Senator and his goal was to make it more "normal"
Government has killed everything!
I wish there were some independent from government univeristies, but also had "avant garde" or "progressive" qualities. Well Im sure they exist but I cant think of any |
The whole point is to teach you enough to do the jobs available, but not to teach you to think critically of anything.
|
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
|
Posted: February 01 2013 at 18:14 |
|
Man I've said this before, I'm not as world traveled and knowledgeable as you, I just dont know!
All I know is government sucks, corporations sucks, working for someone else, in either regard, sucks.
Never wanted to take out more loans but maybe I should so I can get started on a masters ASAP and work to becoming to a prof. I can't take it anymore!
|
|
The Doctor
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: June 23 2005
Location: The Tardis
Status: Offline
Points: 8543
|
Posted: February 01 2013 at 18:20 |
JJLehto wrote:
Man I've said this before, I'm not as world traveled and knowledgeable as you, I just dont know!
All I know is government sucks, corporations sucks, working for someone else, in either regard, sucks.
Never wanted to take out more loans but maybe I should so I can get started on a masters ASAP and work to becoming to a prof. I can't take it anymore!
|
Ha. I've always wanted to work in academia myself. Originally I wanted to be a philosophy prof (prior to switching my major to accounting), now I'd like to be a Constitutional Law prof. Academia rules. The real world sucks. But with any luck, this is all just a computer simulation anyway, and in 30 years or so, I'll take off my VR glasses and find a much better world. 
|
|
I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you?
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
"Freedom" thread or something
