[QUOTE=H0RSE;261761]Why are we talking about markets and nations? They are man made tings. The Ark is just people trying to survive.
No market. No nation.[/QUOTE]
Does it have law and order? Is there a governing class? Are there commodities? Does barter/trade occur?
Yes to all.
It might as well be a nation and there certainly exists a market within it.
I suggested once, to each of you to stay ontopic, that’s not a “continuation”
you’re certainly free to ask a moderator to split the topic and move it to a more correct forum, where it would likely get more exposure and more differing points of view and I would applaude such a gesture
but the question remains, what motivates the security to kill the resistance scum ?
I remember reading on the Bethesda site that people who work for the security get larger rations of food and water, which would certainly encourage people to join, but it takes more than that to kill someone. But imagine you have very little resources and they are rapidly running out, and some people come along as say hey we want some. I doubt the security see the resistance as wanting to be equal, they probably see them as trying to take it all for themselves, which puts all of their lives, as well as possible loved ones, in danger.
im just talking to talk really i want this thread to go back to what it use to be about
Like one of the videos said, the Security is the “thin blue line” that is keeping the Ark afloat. Whatever the Resistance’s reasons are, the fact of the matter is they’re causing a lot of destruction and turmoil. People are likely scared of having their homes blown to bits. They go out there and fight, risking their lives to keep the peace, fragile though it may be.
You’re all using inference to work this out. Why don’t you look at the FACTS.
The FACT is that the Security were told the Resistance was harbouring a biological weapon. They have no reason to believe anything other than that since their superiors have told them this is fact. They are simply trying to protect the ENTIRE populace of the Ark from (in their minds) certain death. This is very noble that they go in to battle to erradicate this terrorist threat.
The other FACT is that the Resistance are told that it is a vaccine that they are protecting that the Security is trying to take away from them.
Neither side at the troops level are bad. They are simply trying to fight for their people. The people at the head of the Security and Resistance however: they are filth. It’s very political and there are hidden agendas that I’m sure will come out in the wash at the end.
It reminds me of your “friend” who helps you out in Bioshock. I see both Security and Resistance’s leaders as very similar to Atlas.
[QUOTE=Atavax;261700]modern society in every developed country are men playing gods, men, valuing life and handing down judgments. Killing every unemployed and criminal puts off more stress on a society’s resources then not doing so, and thats why many societies don’t do it. Why do you think most modern governments don’t kill drains on society such as unemployed and criminals?
Why does a man work 18 hour shifts in a sweatshop? He doesn’t have a gun to his head; he could live in the middle of nowhere and survive. The wealthy are not stealing his labour. The wealthy offer him more then he could produce by himself.[/QUOTE]
lol, what? I don’t know how to respond to that, even suggesting such a proposition would be enough to end any regime. And no, killing off criminals requires the least resources.
"Housing the approximately 500,000 people in jail awaiting trial who cannot afford bail costs $9 billion a year.
States spend an estimated 7 percent of their budget on corrections. Correctional authorities spent $38.2 billion to maintain the Nation’s State correctional systems in fiscal year 2001, including $29.5 billion specifically for adult correctional facilities.
Day-to-day operating expenses totaled $28.4 billion, and capital outlays for land, new building, and renovations, $1.1 billion. "
I disagree, he is being forced passively to work in there. Liberalization of economies and relaxation of labor laws due to pressure from the IMF has resulted in this situation where the capitalists have deliberately left the proletariat without any other option.
[QUOTE=Ajax’s Spear;261760]That isn’t inherently related to being a successful nation-state, though. Indeed, many third world countries endure both bloody and bloodless revolutions, and don’t always end up on the greener side of things.
And especially in the case of Egypt, as I think it’s fair to assume that’s one of the countries you’re referring to, they aren’t actually toppling anything, save for a few superficial concessions from Mubarak. If they actually want his administration to abdicate, it’s at least going to take a show of force from the military at the behest of the citizenry.[/QUOTE]
Actually it is the military which stands to lose the most if democratic rule is established. Since the coup in the 1950s, it has been the military which has been pulling the strings. All the presidents have come from the army. Heck, half of the cabinet and most governors are from the army.
“a man by himself is nothing” Doesn’t this actually contradict with the Randian logic you have expressed earlier or did you mean a man without the assistance of the rich?
What is this “If you didn’t have wealthy people build you up, you wouldn’t even be able to build a fire.” stuff? I am sorry but your take on this seems less like a statement based on reason and more like a pro-capitalist propaganda piece. I think to imply that it is the ones with self-interest at heart who are the driving force behind the betterment of the world is oxymoronic.
The capitalists have made this wealth that you talk of, by trampling the proletariat, democracy and society’s solidarity. The state of Africa or the poverty hells that South American and South Asian countries have become is a direct consequence of the those with wealth having a hold on society and on governments.
“Rich governments now spend $1bn a day on subsidies to farmers - six times what they give in aid to poor countries. These subsidies generate large surpluses of sugar, cotton and other products, which are then dumped on world markets.
There, they are sold for less than it costs to produce them, meaning that Third World farmers cannot compete with the prices and go out of business.”
Source
[QUOTE=Nail;261756]It’s an educated populace that topples regimes, it’s happening now, those aren’t military coups, which is the norm
anyways, the security guys are just trying to do the job they were sent out to do, kill them filthy resistance scum
[/QUOTE]
It isn’t necessarily the educated who are intrinsic to toppling of regimes but those who feel they have been wronged, they can be the poor, the working class, the ones driven by propaganda (the 1979 revolution for instance) or self-interest, like in Albania.
Seyu
what is more stressful for a society, supporting the drains on society, or killing the drains when you consider that killing the drains would lead to a revolution? revolution is more costly, so societies typically don’t kill off the drains.
what do you think is passively forcing a man to work 18 hour shifts at a sweat shop?
people were claiming that the wealthy try to bring you down, and i was pointing out the many ways the wealthy are building you up in ways that are easy to not realize. It was not me spouting some type of propaganda and you claiming that it must be only reflects negatively on yourself.
it is simple. There is one thing separating modern man from man of thousands of years ago. Knowledge. You take away that one thing from anyone born today and they’re essentially a caveman. In developed nations, the wealthy typically fund the vast majority of the governments. I think in the US, 90% of taxes are paid by the wealthiest 10% of Americans. Through the public education that developed nations provide, the wealthy are essentially bringing the poor from caveman to modern day individual.
The knowledge is a transmission in a way, but I fail to see the relation with the money… You need not to confuse knowledge and education, many illiterate people can teach you so many stuffs that your brain could not even stock.
The ancestral ways of transmiting art / hunt / fishing etc is to me as important as the education you gain in school, and even a “poor” guy can transmit that. I agree tho that its not necessarily the case in our modern society, but as a street person I can tell you that many unemployed people hangin in the street teached me stuff about life, and usefull ones. You cant just “kill” someone under the pretext that he’s an economical burden to the society, economy is not life… Its a very Malthusian concept you have here, and I think we are at a state of our history where we need to step back a bit, see the society we live within, and try to change some stuffs.
Its maybe a very utopic vision I have there, but it’s growing more and more lately, I’m bored of this linear way of life : school / work / death…
Ontopic : I think that as usual both parts are being manipulated by their respectives figures, as its almost allways the case in any war, basically the soldiers can’t really be judged for what they have done, the decisioners on the other hand are the real culprit.
Peace
No, the wealthiest 10% of Americans have 80% of the wealth. The ultra-rich have tax loopholes, write-offs and off-shore accounts to lessen their tax burden.
[QUOTE=Atavax;261822]Seyu
what is more stressful for a society, supporting the drains on society, or killing the drains when you consider that killing the drains would lead to a revolution? revolution is more costly, so societies typically don’t kill off the drains. [/quote]
Okay, yea, that was the point I was making.
what do you think is passively forcing a man to work 18 hour shifts at a sweat shop?
people were claiming that the wealthy try to bring you down, and i was pointing out the many ways the wealthy are building you up in ways that are easy to not realize.
I explained that in my previous post.
It was not me spouting some type of propaganda and you claiming that it must be only reflects negatively on yourself.
I feel sorry if that came off as offensive but your arguments are based more on emotions and rhetoric than facts. What I assumed to be Randian/Individualistic opinions on your part seem more like basic Republican ideology now. I think it is best if we drop this argument, it is impossible to battle conviction and faith with logic.
it is simple. There is one thing separating modern man from man of thousands of years ago. Knowledge. You take away that one thing from anyone born today and they’re essentially a caveman.
Are you implying that to be an intellectual it is a prerequisite to be rich?
In developed nations, the wealthy typically fund the vast majority of the governments. I think in the US, 90% of taxes are paid by the wealthiest 10% of Americans.
It is 68% actually. Well, 20% of Americans own 85% of the wealth and the top 10% have a 90% ownership in stocks. Source
Through the public education that developed nations provide, the wealthy are essentially bringing the poor from caveman to modern day individual.
How do you explain this(page 43) then?
except i was making a point, and you tried refuting it, and i just spelled out how your argument compliments my point and does not refute it.
there is nothing stopping a man from going to a part of the world that is not populated and making a living there. If the effect of the wealthy is so harmful like you suggest, then he should be able to flourish there. But he obviously can’t because the wealthy hugely benefit his life.
[QUOTE=Seyu;261869]
I feel sorry if that came off as offensive but your arguments are based more on emotions and rhetoric than facts. What I assumed to be Randian/Individualistic opinions on your part seem more like basic Republican ideology now. I think it is best if we drop this argument, it is impossible to battle conviction and faith with logic.[/QUOTE]
i largely dislike republicans and my opinions greatly differ from them, it is your close-mindedness that is lumping opinions differing from your own into the categories of “republican” and “conviction and faith”. None of my arguments thus far has been emotional, or based on faith.
no. I am implying that possessing money or material wealth is not the only form of wealth. There are people that make less then minimum wage in the US that are much happier and in many respects much wealthier then people making millions of dollars a year.
well, i didn’t see those numbers from your source, but, i wasn’t willing to spend half on hour and scouring the site for them. it seems at the very least, the 68% the top 10% pay is right, though. regardless the specifics, it still proves the point that the wealthy are the primary funders of the government that provides vast amounts of resources to the poor.
that doesn’t contradict anything i said. And while we could discuss the tendencies for the poor to stay poor and the rich to stay rich, i think thats getting a bit far away from the topic of this thread.
