Boycott Google

At this point I only have three questions for Serendipper.

  1. Roughly what % of the population needs to work to take care of everyone’s needs (food, clothing, shelter, furniture, appliances, medication, phones, some transportation, etcetera).

  2. How did you arrive at this figure?

  3. How do we get from the system we have, to a system where so long as a few people volunteer, everyone’s needs are met?

@Karpel

There’s no doubt in my mind the elite are steeped in conspiracy and the occult.
There’s no doubt in my mind paranormal phenomena are occurring on planet earth.
I don’t claim to know exactly what these phenomena represent, but we can’t expect mainstream academia and media to do anything but discourage us from acknowledging and investigating them, as they’re heavily controlled by the conspirators themselves.

I’ve arrived at the bridge of death lol

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0D7hFHfLEyk[/youtube]

If N = amount of work that needs to be done by a human and P = the number of people willing to work, then I’m saying that P will always be greater than N. Of course, by “work” I don’t mean uncompensated work. It’s not like I’m saying people will work for free for the good of society. If fact they’ll probably be paid quite a bit since the poor will be robust consumers instead of economic drags.

N is inversely proportional to technology and technology rises exponentially. If P>N was true in 1974, it’s true today and will only get exponentially more true as time moves on.

In 1930s a farmer could feed 4 people
In 1970s a farmer could feed 73 people
Today a farmer can feed 155 people.
kxrb.com/how-many-people-does-one-farmer-feed/

Not to mention we throw lots of food away and build warehouses to store it rather than mark prices down to sell it. We have 1.4 billion pounds of cheese investors.com/politics/edit … us-cheese/

Anyway, 330,000,000/155 = 2,129,032 farmers. 2,129,032/330,000,000 = 0.65% of the population are farmers. That’s not counting exports or what we destroy to maintain high prices, but a rough estimate just to show how ridiculously small the required number of workers is.

Put the tax structure back like it was in the 50 year span when america was great and then basicincome.org/

If you received $10k UBI, you could sit on your butt all day, maybe talking on ILP, or you could get a job and have that income plus the $10k. And the minimum wage would increase on its own since an increase would be required to motivate people to work, so the job you decided to take would likely pay much more than the options you currently have. The point is: you are not forced to work. You are incentivized, but not forced. This is the only way to be libertarian. And the rich guy giving up some of his pirated loot doesn’t count as a loss of liberty. And yes “pirated” is the right word to describe what’s taken without permission.

If I offered you $10/hr, you might say “Sounds good from my perspective!”, but I don’t tell you I’m making $50/hr on your labor, then it’s not a fair and informed agreement from which to garner permission to capitalize on your labor. How can you agree how to split a pie when you don’t know how big it is? Does that make sense? I know it makes sense because that used to be the case, and once my workers discovered such then threatened to go on strike because of it. I knew what I was doing was wrong, which is why I had to hide it. I justified it with the capitalist narrative of doing a service by providing jobs, but the jobs were means to rip people off. And that’s the case with most jobs: the point is to put you to work like an animal and capitalize on your labor. Some jobs are opposite and the worker is overcompensated, but most are not a deal that an employee would agree to if they were made aware of the profit that their labor generated.

And the other part of the narrative is that “they were free to do it too!” I told myself that, but no, I was dependent upon having people who didn’t have much expectation out of life because otherwise they would never have agreed to profitable terms. Most of them could only be described as neurological degenerates victim of being born on the wrong side of town. They are the seeds that fell in stony places. There’s probably no fixing them, but we can help the next generation not suffer similar fate.

Nah, science will get bored and seek new puzzles.

Hopefully. But this is dependent on serious social and paradigmatic shifts within the science community, the corporate and government organizations that fund research, and people who are not good at dealing wiht the emotions of being out of control and confused dealing with that.

That’s my best guess also. That not only are people brainwashed to dismiss, but also that active steps are taken to suppress by people who know these things are real.

@Serendipper

You’re delusional.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Adolf_Hitler

Hitler was anti-Christian and at most, a lukewarm theist, if not an atheist.

The vast majority of scholars agree with me, not with you.

The burden of proof is on you.

It’s because I’m even handed and level headed, relative to you, I know there’s wisdom and folly in the left and right, and even more wisdom outside of them, whereas you’re blind to the folly of your side.
You’re deeply polarized, your worldview is overly simplistic, void of any nuance.

No it’s because the left have a childlike belief that human nature doesn’t exist, that we’re born a bank slate, and insofar as it exists, it’s good, and they’re willing to disregard history, evolutionary psychology, and common sense, willing to explain away, excuse and attribute every atrocity man has committed throughout the ages to flawed institutions, misunderstandings and scarcity, in order to maintain this belief (ignorance is bliss).

The left is full of servile, slavish sheep fit for sheering and slaughter, which’s not to say the right is any better, they have their own delusions.

My father, and his friends are genuine Christians.
He’s generous, humble, forgiving, not materialistic and his faith is sincere.
He’s not perfect, but since when did Christianity require its adherents to be as such?
The whole point of the thing is original sin, people are innately flawed, otherwise they
wouldn’t need the free gift of salvation in the first place, they could earn it.
JWs aren’t real Christians, they do everything out of fear, instead of inspiration, they’re religious, not spiritual.

Jesus was referring to religious Jews who were proud, proud like Hitler, who thought they were too good to hang around drunkards, gamblers, prostitutes and thieves.
Jesus was telling them they weren’t any better than those people, worse even because they were hypocrites, whereas the Pharisees and Hitler wanted to marginalize or eradicate those people.

No foster care and the state is.

Religion is to theism what ideology is to atheism.

If most religions, most of the time promoted or turned a blind eye to tyranny, so have most ideologies, most of the time.

There are some exceptions in both camps.

@Serendipper

I don’t want to eradicate anyone, I just want everyone to put in their fair share.

I don’t want to be a slave to the overclass, nor the underclass, feminazis and outgroups.

The process was half-guided, through sexual and social selection, and genes trying to maintain and replicate themselves, and half-unguided, through natural selection, and genetic mutations.

As for freewill, I have mixed thoughts about that, my thinking strongly leans determinism, but there may be room for freewill.

I don’t see it that way, I think it’s more of a libertarian thing to individuate or atomize people, the left must divide everyone into oppressor and oppressed groups, and if they can’t find enough, they’ll exaggerate or manufacture such groups into existence.

even after whites are extinct or a tiny minority in the Americas, which’s their objective, the left will say the Chinese are oppressing the Hindus, or the Hispanics the blacks, it never ends.

@Serendipper

If by right wing we mean corporatism, than yes, it’s right wing, it’s corporatists masquerading as socialists, but if by right wing you mean capitalism, than no, it’s not.
Most political parties who proclaim to be socialists and capitalists are in fact corporatists.

@Serendipper

Just like theists, most atheists submit to the soft tyranny in the 1st world and hard tyranny in the 3rd.

Both Hillbillies and Hippies are too libertarian (in the contemporary Anglo-American sense of the word) to accept hard tyranny, for now.

Protestantism is a fundamentally irreligious spiritual movement.

It allows for religion, but ultimately God/the bible is suppose to be the only spiritual authority over man, not other men.

Protestantism is to the church what libertarianism is to the state.

That’s why Protestantism has fragmented into dozens of major and thousands of minor branches, yet they all consider each other to be protestant, so long as they agree on a few core tenets of Christianity, whereas there’s only one Catholic and one Orthodox Church, and if you don’t adhere to 100% of its doctrines, you’re damned.

Many of them believe the pope is the anti-Christ because he believes he’s an authority, whereas there is no authority between man and God but Jesus in proper Protestantism.

Angela Merkel is mixed, like all heads of state in the west, you can find bits and pieces of theocracy, secularism, corporatism, capitalism, socialism, conservatism, libertarianism, progressivism, nationalism and globalism in her government.

Nazi = national socialist.

It’s degrees, not black/white like you think.

Most atheists want to disarm the people, pay their taxes and vote for heads of state who’re by and large corporatists like Hillary Clinton and Justin Trudeau, and where they are genuinely socialist, they’re pro-outgroup, underclass and women and anti-ingroup, middle class and men.

They don’t need religion, they’re indoctrinated by public education to not challenge the system, or to challenge it in a superficial way, like by dyeing their hair unnatural colors, body piercings and tattoos, or to challenge it in a divisive way, that pits working class, urban, outgroup women against middle class, suburban, ingroup men.

While it’s true many religions, much of the time, taught their followers to support the powers that be 1. so have many ideologies, after their followers believed they had been established 2. that can be a good thing, if the powers that be aren’t that bad, and the immediate alternatives are worse 3. not all religions, all of the time.

You could say Islam began as a rebellion against established powers, for better or worse, and some of Muhammad’s followers instituted proto-socialist and democratic reforms.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_socialism

And spirituality and theism apart from religion is neutral regarding established powers, just as atheism is, and many irreligious spiritualists and theists fought against tyranny.

As I’ve said elsewhere, man (some more than others) has a tendency to worship entities, and if he doesn’t get his fix by worshipping God, he often turns to nation, or mankind.
We see this especially on the left, which tends to be more atheist (altho there’re many libertarian atheists, and some new age leftists), but we see it on the right too.
The left has a kind of faith in the goodness as well as in the technological prowess of humanity most religions lack.
The bible talks over and over again about man’s shortcomings.
Now sometimes it is the environment that is to blame, or some supposed evil has gotten an undeservedly bad rap, but not always or necessarily most of the time.

@Serendipper

And yet here we are, it’s nearly 2020, what has Jacque and his project accomplished in the last 50 years?
Can you show me one environmentally friendly, self-sustaining city, or even village? Where so long as 1 10th of 1% of the population voluntarily labors, 100% of the population eats?
Where there’s no need for government, for there’s no competition, all basic necessities are as accessible as air?
Show me one and I will happily join it, but until you do, I’ll remain skeptical such a dream can ever be realized in our lifetime, if ever.
Man can be such a greedy animal, that even if all valuables were as plentiful as air, I’m not sure it’d be enough to quell his competitive drives, tho it’d probably help.

Agreed.

I knew real unemployment was higher, but is it really that high?

I guess if you include children and retirees in ‘people not looking for work’ it is.

We can just make big business improve working conditions, raise wages (and perhaps reduce prices for essential goods) by externally regulating or nationalizing them, we don’t have to raise taxes to make welfare easier to get/pay more, than threaten to go on welfare if big business doesn’t improve working conditions, raise wages and reduce prices.

And if we make welfare easier to get/pay more, than some essential workers (that is, workers who provide everyone with essential goods) will quit, other essential workers won’t quit, and the ones who don’t quit will have to work harder to provide for everyone, which may prompt more of them to quit, until we all starve, but even if they don’t quit, why should they have to work harder, and longer (you may have to raise the workweek)?

Welfare or UBI is more authoritarian, you have to force some to work harder so others don’t have to work at all, in addition to taxing the rich.

If that were true, the rich would voluntarily share most of their riches with the poor.

Why would businesses reduce wages if it meant people couldn’t afford to consume their goods? And if wages and prices drop equally, than what’s the problem?
People will have less money, but goods will cost less too, so they’ll still be able to afford them. Why would wages drop more than prices?

And again, we can always reduce the workweek so prices and wages remain about the same, and everyone works.

Nonsense.

We set wages now.

No, I’m a proponent of national democratic socialism, not communist dictatorship.

@Serendipper

I remember a socialist once told me that in the middle ages 99% of people had to farm so 100% of people could eat, and that now, thanks to advances in automation and energy production, only 1% of people had to farm so 100% of people could eat.

However, what he overlooked was, people specialize more now than they did then, which’s also contributed to our increased productivity.
Sure, way back then 99% of people had to farm, but 99% of people also had to make their own soap, clothes, etcetera, everyone had to do almost everything for themselves and their families.
So now, only 1% of the population has to farm (not to mention distribute and prepare our food), but that 1% that farms doesn’t make our soap, another 1% has to do that, but that 1% that makes our soap doesn’t make our clothes, another 1% has to do that, and so on.

So while advances in production would have made our lives easier, if it weren’t for capitalists failing to increase wages, I think our productivity has been grossly exaggerated by some radical socialists and communists in order to make it seem like only 1% of the population has to work.
No many, if not most of the people that work now, still have to work, and everyone that can should share in that work.

When necessary, I think the scientific community can often be herded by the deep state in the same way all of us and our institutions are herded: just throw money in the direction you want them to go in.
Give money to the so called ‘debunkers’ and ‘skeptics’ (misnomers, in truth they’re denialists) to publicly reprimand, ridicule, shame and slander dissidents.
Give money to academic admin to cut off their funds or expel them.
If you can’t buy someone, buy someone else who can ruin their life.

So you concede that the atheist hitler went to great lengths to pretend to be christian for the purpose of committing atrocity. Well that’s even worse because it displays just how necessary religion is.

How do you know that? Did you take an exhaustive poll?

And the burden of admitting you’re wrong is on you.

I grew up christian, but I grew out of it just recently. I was indoctrinated conservative capitalist by dad, then was an employer and small business owner myself where I practiced it, then changed my mind thanks to the internet enabling me to research. Now you tell me I’m blind to the folly of my side, I’m polarized, and my worldview is simplistic?

The sheep are on the right.

Rightwing / Leftwing
Religion / nonreligion
Authoritarianism / Democracy
Claims of knowing absolute truth (objectivism) / Relativism
Consolidations of power and wealth / Dispersal of power and wealth.

I’ll concede there are some goofy leftists who disregard evidence to advance a worldview that seems virtuous, but that ethos doesn’t encapsulate the party.

I was christian for at least 20 years and was on my way to becoming a preacher. When I was 20, I filled 2 church pews with my friends.

Me too. The only difference since getting away from the faith is that I no longer try to be good because it’s right, but because it’s sensible. Having integrity just made me hate people who didn’t have it. I went on about that a year ago here viewtopic.php?f=1&t=193887&p=2698622#p2695431

Be ye therefore perfect even as your Father in heaven is perfect.

Right, it’s the idea that you are a defect. The church institutionalized guilt.

No he damned them to hell and they crucified him for it.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7X-ZdkW9rt4[/youtube]

Jesus divides people into good and bad, sheep and goats, wheat and tares. The wheat goes into the barn and the tares into the oven. When you start thinking this way, you’re equipped to commit atrocities in the name of good.

Hitler didn’t like the homosexuality and sexual immorality that the jews brought to germany. Germany was a homosexual paradise before Hitler came along.

Keep in mind that Jesus wasn’t even real. His words have been added to. Like the story of the woman caught in adultery where Jesus said “let he who is without sin cast he first stone.” That was added late, which means someone just made it up because it was how they wanted to portray him. And the scribes didn’t give a shit about accuracy; they just wrote whatever, and no one could read anyway, so it didn’t matter.

King James tried to hammer it all together, but that was 1600 years after the facts.

Jesus was just another in a long list of anthropomorphized sun gods.

Growth is measured by the extent to which one has outgrown their childhood indoctrination.

Religion is something practiced. Ideology is something discovered by reason and held until a reason changes it.

For instance I don’t consider myself a relativist, but if it helps convey necessary information quickly, then you can think about me that way. Iow, I’m not allied with relativists, I don’t pledge allegiance to them, I don’t consider them a group, and I don’t really even think about it at all. But when I was a christian, I identified as a christian and I was allied with christians and was ready to pledge allegiance.

Taxing the rich to pay for the poor would likely never affect you, except that it might raise your wages and make society a healthier, smarter, and happier place.

But you need to punish the lazy.

Sexual selection is a natural process. There is no one who determined what primitive humans should consider sexy in order to advance the species in the right direction.

I don’t think one can exist without the other.

The only reason whites are being oppressed is that they’re uneducated and proud of it.

The point isn’t that a utopia can be created, the point is that servitude can be eliminated. It could have been 40 years ago.

How can you agree without suffering cognitive dissonance? If drudgery is unnecessary, then how can anyone be compelled to do it?

There are 150 million tax returns filed and 330,000,000 people, so I don’t know how to divide the numbers, but the rate would be closer to 50% than 5%.

It’s not more authoritarian than taxation now (or ever) and it’s not compelling anyone to work harder or softer or compelling anyone to do anything except pay a % of their profits back into the system. Other than that, they’re free to do what the hell ever: get a job, don’t get a job, get rich, live in mom’s basement, go to school, jump off a bridge, whatever.

Well, if communism ever happens, it will happen of its own volition. Communism can never ever be instituted by force before technology ushers it in naturally. Scarcity and communism cannot coexist. That’s why Marx put communism in the WAY distant future (like star trek).

Wages will plummet because people are willing to work for less because they’re starving because you cutoff their welfare.

Wages drop because of hunger and prices drop because lack of demand. That’s not a good thing. Innovation would also slow to a crawl.

Wages are a function of people’s willingness to work. Prices are a function of people’s willingness to buy. I don’t know which will drop more.

They’ll just pay less for the shorter week.

How else do you expect companies to hire people to make stuff that no one has the money to buy?

The minimum? That’s $7.25. I don’t call that “setting wages”. A bump up to $15, I would.

Well, setting prices, wages, forcing companies to hire, and generally micromanaging the economy is essentially what the communist dictators tried to do.

Sending everyone money would not prevent any work from being done; it would only remove the compulsion to do it. It would also raise wages and, because of that, would also raise prices (since people have more money to spend).

I don’t think you’re that concerned about the economic mechanics and it’s more about punishing people who don’t choose to contribute to the profits of the elites, which for some reason you view as noble.

You know, a few generations ago is was a shame to work for another person because it meant you couldn’t stand on your own and were relegated to prostituting yourself at a fraction of what you’re worth (because you’d be a helper, an apprentice, an underclassman of some sort). Then somewhere in the midst of the industrial revolution it became fashionable to regard your worth by who you work for and we lost the shame of it and the pride of self-reliance. Now it’s about who you serve. People who work at the biggest factory in town are like an aristocracy of sorts who command addition credit for loans and other favors simply because they happen to work for a reputable place. It’s less about who they are and more about who they serve.