War and Economics
JakobVirgil wrote:
wcoltd wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
is this the Parable of the broken window?
if so lost opportunity costs out weigh the benefits.
or is it the idea that we should band together in an common cause
in which case it smacks of fascism.
either way the only economy I care about is my own.
(and if I am feeling generous the unemployment rate)
economic "growth" does not get my motor running.
if so lost opportunity costs out weigh the benefits.
or is it the idea that we should band together in an common cause
in which case it smacks of fascism.
either way the only economy I care about is my own.
(and if I am feeling generous the unemployment rate)
economic "growth" does not get my motor running.
What about defending the world from an alien invasion? Does that get you moving? Would you be more productive if you were working to combat an immenent threat of doom?
Suppose we were to stage an alien invasion, wouldn't people work harder to combat this threat? Perhaps we would devise all sorts of countermeasures to "alien" technology that would have use outside of war. There would be tremendous wastes of human resources, yes, but most of human resources are dormant, a dormancy that only the fear of immenent doom can awaken.
economic/technological growth for their own sake is a perverse misuse of human striving.
I would prefer a world worth living in to one that is buzzing with "purpose".
If I had my druthers we would all buy a little less work a little less and love a little more.
and by love I mean have sex.
I think it's worth it if it means we can have real life laser guns and photon cannons and energy shields.
So it's sex that gets you going. Perhaps we can devise some kind of sexy war, where hot sexy supermodels are held captured by invading "aliens"... Yes... my plan is all coming together now.
The Builderbergs will be pleased.
wcoltd wrote:
What about defending the world from an alien invasion? Does that get you moving? Would you be more productive if you were working to combat an immenent threat of doom?
Suppose we were to stage an alien invasion, wouldn't people work harder to combat this threat? Perhaps we would devise all sorts of countermeasures to "alien" technology that would have use outside of war. There would be tremendous wastes of human resources, yes, but most of human resources are dormant, a dormancy that only the fear of immenent doom can awaken.
Suppose we were to stage an alien invasion, wouldn't people work harder to combat this threat? Perhaps we would devise all sorts of countermeasures to "alien" technology that would have use outside of war. There would be tremendous wastes of human resources, yes, but most of human resources are dormant, a dormancy that only the fear of immenent doom can awaken.
Do you know how much the US government and other western powers are spending on weapons R&D NOW? Do you want to spend more? What is the point of this completely fantasy enemy?
wcoltd wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
wcoltd wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
is this the Parable of the broken window?
if so lost opportunity costs out weigh the benefits.
or is it the idea that we should band together in an common cause
in which case it smacks of fascism.
either way the only economy I care about is my own.
(and if I am feeling generous the unemployment rate)
economic "growth" does not get my motor running.
if so lost opportunity costs out weigh the benefits.
or is it the idea that we should band together in an common cause
in which case it smacks of fascism.
either way the only economy I care about is my own.
(and if I am feeling generous the unemployment rate)
economic "growth" does not get my motor running.
What about defending the world from an alien invasion? Does that get you moving? Would you be more productive if you were working to combat an immenent threat of doom?
Suppose we were to stage an alien invasion, wouldn't people work harder to combat this threat? Perhaps we would devise all sorts of countermeasures to "alien" technology that would have use outside of war. There would be tremendous wastes of human resources, yes, but most of human resources are dormant, a dormancy that only the fear of immenent doom can awaken.
economic/technological growth for their own sake is a perverse misuse of human striving.
I would prefer a world worth living in to one that is buzzing with "purpose".
If I had my druthers we would all buy a little less work a little less and love a little more.
and by love I mean have sex.
I think it's worth it if it means we can have real life laser guns and photon cannons and energy shields.
So it's sex that gets you going. Perhaps we can devise some kind of sexy war, where hot sexy supermodels are held captured by invading "aliens"... Yes... my plan is all coming together now.
The Builderbergs will be pleased.
I think you have me wrong I meant the love of a good women not sport sex.
_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??
http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/
01001011 wrote:
wcoltd wrote:
What about defending the world from an alien invasion? Does that get you moving? Would you be more productive if you were working to combat an immenent threat of doom?
Suppose we were to stage an alien invasion, wouldn't people work harder to combat this threat? Perhaps we would devise all sorts of countermeasures to "alien" technology that would have use outside of war. There would be tremendous wastes of human resources, yes, but most of human resources are dormant, a dormancy that only the fear of immenent doom can awaken.
Suppose we were to stage an alien invasion, wouldn't people work harder to combat this threat? Perhaps we would devise all sorts of countermeasures to "alien" technology that would have use outside of war. There would be tremendous wastes of human resources, yes, but most of human resources are dormant, a dormancy that only the fear of immenent doom can awaken.
Do you know how much the US government and other western powers are spending on weapons R&D NOW? Do you want to spend more? What is the point of this completely fantasy enemy?
It's not spending that really matters it's motivation when there was the threat of immenent doom the rate of technological progression of the last remnants of Nazis and the Japanese was astonishing. They built the atomic bomb, and jet planes, anti radar technology the begginings of air to air missiles. All this within a matter of months with relatively sparse resources.
The point is to develop cool stuff we don't already have.
wcoltd wrote:
It's not spending that really matters it's motivation when there was the threat of immenent doom the rate of technological progression of the last remnants of Nazis and the Japanese was astonishing. They built the atomic bomb, and jet planes, anti radar technology the begginings of air to air missiles. All this within a matter of months with relatively sparse resources.
Nonsense. Do you think these technologies come out of the thin air? You are just ignoring how much the powers actually paid and how much other needs of the society are cut back in order to fund the project.
Quote:
The point is to develop cool stuff we don't already have.
That sums up the stupidity of this sci-fi fanboy mentality.
01001011 wrote:
wcoltd wrote:
It's not spending that really matters it's motivation when there was the threat of immenent doom the rate of technological progression of the last remnants of Nazis and the Japanese was astonishing. They built the atomic bomb, and jet planes, anti radar technology the begginings of air to air missiles. All this within a matter of months with relatively sparse resources.
Nonsense. Do you think these technologies come out of the thin air? You are just ignoring how much the powers actually paid and how much other needs of the society are cut back in order to fund the project.
No, These technologies come from great men like Werner Von Braun, Kelly Johnson, Richard Feynman, and the teams of people who put their insights into action. War can produce exceptional people. Would these people have gone on to be just as innovative absent war (or cold war)? I think not. Though there are exceptional people absent war like Herbert Dow and John D. Rockefeller, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, Burt Rutan, Lau Che Ping (I spelled that entirely wrong), Henry Ford, Andrew Carnegie, Norman Borlaug and Peewee Herman. (Everybody's list is subjective)
Quote:
The point is to develop cool stuff we don't already have.
That sums up the stupidity of this sci-fi fanboy mentality.
I am glad to see that somebody here listens to Peter Schiff.
That's funny but if you are going to argue focus on the arguments themselves rather than the fact that they are being made by an acknologed idiot. I am a damn fool, I already know this. So if there is a stupid mentality I ascribe to it. This isn't about me or my mentality, it's about the argument, and labels do nothing to discredit an argument. If an argument is stupid, it's a stupid argument, but that doesn't change what it is, you have to explain why it's so stupid.
wcoltd wrote:
No, These technologies come from great men like Werner Von Braun, Kelly Johnson, Richard Feynman, and the teams of people who put their insights into action. War can produce exceptional people. Would these people have gone on to be just as innovative absent war (or cold war)? I think not.
Feynman's quantum field theory has nothing to do with war. I think you are confusing with Fermi, who had been a successful nuclear physics well before the war. And where do you think they get the material to do their experiments?
Quote:
Though there are exceptional people absent war like Herbert Dow and John D. Rockefeller, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, Burt Rutan, Lau Che Ping (I spelled that entirely wrong), Henry Ford, Andrew Carnegie, Norman Borlaug and Peewee Herman. (Everybody's list is subjective)
So you defeat yourself.
Quote:
I am glad to see that somebody here listens to Peter Schiff.
That's funny but if you are going to argue focus on the arguments themselves rather than the fact that they are being made by an acknologed idiot. I am a damn fool, I already know this. So if there is a stupid mentality I ascribe to it. This isn't about me or my mentality, it's about the argument, and labels do nothing to discredit an argument. If an argument is stupid, it's a stupid argument, but that doesn't change what it is, you have to explain why it's so stupid.
I already explained why your point is stupid, but making such an argument in economy just because of a sci-fi fantasy is even more stupid.
01001011 wrote:
wcoltd wrote:
No, These technologies come from great men like Werner Von Braun, Kelly Johnson, Richard Feynman, and the teams of people who put their insights into action. War can produce exceptional people. Would these people have gone on to be just as innovative absent war (or cold war)? I think not.
Feynman's quantum field theory has nothing to do with war. I think you are confusing with Fermi, who had been a successful nuclear physics well before the war. And where do you think they get the material to do their experiments?
Quote:
Though there are exceptional people absent war like Herbert Dow and John D. Rockefeller, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, Burt Rutan, Lau Che Ping (I spelled that entirely wrong), Henry Ford, Andrew Carnegie, Norman Borlaug and Peewee Herman. (Everybody's list is subjective)
So you defeat yourself.
Quote:
I am glad to see that somebody here listens to Peter Schiff.
That's funny but if you are going to argue focus on the arguments themselves rather than the fact that they are being made by an acknologed idiot. I am a damn fool, I already know this. So if there is a stupid mentality I ascribe to it. This isn't about me or my mentality, it's about the argument, and labels do nothing to discredit an argument. If an argument is stupid, it's a stupid argument, but that doesn't change what it is, you have to explain why it's so stupid.
I already explained why your point is stupid, but making such an argument in economy just because of a sci-fi fantasy is even more stupid.
I was referring to Feynman's work on the atomic bomb.
what I was trying to say with that last point, is that labels are pointless unless you do it for therepeutic reasons (I think it's a poor therapy).
wcoltd wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
I never saw that episode, it seems awesome.
That one has Kirk telling one of the local women, "Your future doesn't include walking into a disintegrator when you're told to", to which she says, "I'm afraid mine does. I too have been declared a casualty. I must report to a disintegrator by noon tomorrow".
Later, the planet's ruler asks Kirk, "What kind of monster are you?", to which he replies, "I'm a barbarian, you said it yourself".