Quake3World

i think puff is kracus' alt

bitWISE wrote:Poverty must exist to allow for riches. Evil must exist to allow for good. What is the point of doing anything at all if everything in life is gray?

If people who worked at McDonalds lived just as well as CEOs who would want the responsibility of being CEO? If CEOs lived like people who worked at McDonalds why would anyone want the responsibility of CEO?

true, but if most salaries were clustered around the mean (say in the middle 30-40 %ile, there would still be incentive to be a CEO but without inequality being so great

We are not species that functions as a whole. We are nothing more than wolves competing to be the alpha male.

not true. it's our status as the supreme social animal that has given us the dominant position we occupy in the world. altruism is hardwired into us, and our notions of in-group and out-group have been conditioned until now by geographical contiguity, but are expanding with global communications

think about it: why did so many people give money to the tsunami relief or katrina or whatever? give money to people they don't know and will more than likely never meet?

me > individuals
me > society

personally, i think believing in some greater good is pure nonsense, so there's no intrinsic reason to support society by your means.
however, as other considerations or illusions are existant, the answer is not that simple - for example it is certainly beneficial to play along the rules, though at times it's even more beneficial to break them. furthermore serving a societies goals imbues one person with a meaning of 'sense' for their lives and thus comforts them by this illusion.

another thought you should take into consideration is that of death penalty in combination with the concept of a implicit contract between citizen and state.
to me it seems obvious that once you're sentenced to death, the contract has irrevokably outlived it's usefullness for you and it would be wise not to follow it any more. (by all consequences! shoot your way out of prison and flee to another country.)
( a discussion of this should focus on the exact way in which this contract is 'implicit' since this would help to clarify what could be considered a treach of contract from the society's side. for example, if the contract would look like "you help me to survive and i will help your citizens to survive" a death sentence would certainly be a violation of the contract. if this happened the contract would be inane.

Massive Quasars wrote:

bitWISE wrote:Poverty must exist to allow for riches. Evil must exist to allow for good. What is the point of doing anything at all if everything in life is gray?

If people who worked at McDonalds lived just as well as CEOs who would want the responsibility of being CEO? If CEOs lived like people who worked at McDonalds why would anyone want the responsibility of CEO?

We are not species that functions as a whole. We are nothing more than wolves competing to be the alpha male. Working had to improve our lives and the lives of our children. Emotion keeps us from outright betrayal of our own kind but given a harsh enough ultimatum, any of us would choose individual pursuits over a society's desires.

Poverty doesn't have to exist, material wealth gains have the potential to make no nation poor in absolute terms. In relative terms of course, some nations will still be considered poorer than others.

Poverty will always exist because a lot of people are really lazy and really dumb. Most people have altruistic tendencies, but rarely do the overpower the need for #1. Supporting these people in turn then creates the social pressures we experience.

Yeah, we could wipe out poverty by redistributing income everywhere, but then you're only a few generations away from society self-imploding.

Massive Quasars wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:what good is a society that doesn't look after the individual?

A society that doesn't excessively interfere with the actions of an individual, looks after the individual's interest.

I go with this.

ToxicBug wrote:EDIT: I'm not letting you post in this thread, it's way over your head.

-DM

rofl

its a freedom

the freedom to be poor

JulesWinnfield wrote:

Massive Quasars wrote:

bitWISE wrote:Poverty must exist to allow for riches. Evil must exist to allow for good. What is the point of doing anything at all if everything in life is gray?

If people who worked at McDonalds lived just as well as CEOs who would want the responsibility of being CEO? If CEOs lived like people who worked at McDonalds why would anyone want the responsibility of CEO?

We are not species that functions as a whole. We are nothing more than wolves competing to be the alpha male. Working had to improve our lives and the lives of our children. Emotion keeps us from outright betrayal of our own kind but given a harsh enough ultimatum, any of us would choose individual pursuits over a society's desires.

Poverty doesn't have to exist, material wealth gains have the potential to make no nation poor in absolute terms. In relative terms of course, some nations will still be considered poorer than others.

Poverty will always exist because a lot of people are really lazy and really dumb. Most people have altruistic tendencies, but rarely do the overpower the need for #1. Supporting these people in turn then creates the social pressures we experience.

Yeah, we could wipe out poverty by redistributing income everywhere, but then you're only a few generations away from society self-imploding.

That's a horrible oversimplification.

For me its the individual, but with respect to everyone else its the society...fuck'em.

seremtan wrote:

bitWISE wrote:Poverty must exist to allow for riches. Evil must exist to allow for good. What is the point of doing anything at all if everything in life is gray?

If people who worked at McDonalds lived just as well as CEOs who would want the responsibility of being CEO? If CEOs lived like people who worked at McDonalds why would anyone want the responsibility of CEO?

true, but if most salaries were clustered around the mean (say in the middle 30-40 %ile, there would still be incentive to be a CEO but without inequality being so great

We are not species that functions as a whole. We are nothing more than wolves competing to be the alpha male.

not true. it's our status as the supreme social animal that has given us the dominant position we occupy in the world. altruism is hardwired into us, and our notions of in-group and out-group have been conditioned until now by geographical contiguity, but are expanding with global communications

think about it: why did so many people give money to the tsunami relief or katrina or whatever? give money to people they don't know and will more than likely never meet?

Ok, I'll agree the gap between entry level and CEO salary needs to be smaller. However, those who fucked off and dropped out of high school shouldn't be getting an easy ride.

ahh the old, " i spent a few extra years in school while you were shoveling dirt for 12 hours a day" argument.

every worker is important. what good is a CEO without a few labourers to build the infrastructure the CEO needs to live and make his business work?

anyone that works for a living is deserving of respect and consideration on the same level as some CEO.