Talking to Libertarians and the language of birds.

[immoderate]

This is not one of those "how do I answer this wacko?" posts. This is the result of several exchanges where his arguments were chopped to pieces. He said that I may have a point...

Some people will push to gain money at all cost without regard to actual need or positive results. Some wont, it is not a blanket end result of behavior that results in the exaggerated ends you reference. But the one thing I am certain of is, under a free market capitalism, (where government has minimal interference with business and production) there is a much greater chance of an upside result as opposed to some companies that me decide to disregard the consequences of their action. These kind of companies wouldn't last on their own for long AND the ultimate result will be minimized to the actual industry they represent. Government, or the democratic masses, on the other hand have a tremendous opportunity to turn a stated good into a tremendous burden on the population, because they bring the full force of the masses to bear on any vocal minority. The examples of Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany etc. are prime examples of what the ends can turn into when you start down the road of social utopia for the masses.

You may think I took that out of context, but it's in the middle of more paragraphs of the same. I hear a cry for help here.

Let me say that we both belong to an atheist organization that has weekly social meetups. So I don't want to alienate him. He is also a nice guy, but a glutton for punishment, so he's hard to stifle. The group mostly runs from progressives all the way to Marxists, but we get an occasional conservative/Libertarian type, most don't last long, because sooner or later, they will crave vindication, and try to prove that Barack Obama is a Socialist, or Arthur Laffer is a prophet, or greed is good, or tax cuts raise revenues, or something by Ayn Rand. Then the socialists pounce, some good rhetoricians. Not pretty, but entertaining. I'm not seeking any type of reaction in particular. I though y'all should see this.

--imm

[RandomThoughts]

1. The first concept in your quote.

Some people will push to gain money at all cost without regard to actual need or positive results


I think that quote needs something else, 'Some people will push to gain money at all cost without regard for what they do to get money'. Not just about results, but also about what a person could become to get money.

That is why I think a person should hold there values and what they think is important, and many do and achieve things like money.


When thinking about money, many think in terms of root of all evil. I don't think money is evil, only when you put it above things you say like positive results, and if you put it above who you choose to be and what you choose to think is a better way to think on things.

My observations show that to interact in much of society money is needed, and many of those interactions can be good for both the individual and other people, although they could be bad also.

But my point is getting money at all cost is wrong, but getting money knowing it is not the most important thing is far different then that. Although not making it the most important thing, and holding values may make it more difficult to get money for some people.

[immoderate]

2. I put it more succinctly.

I asked if that meant "some" would spend a hundred to make fifty. Direct questions are evaded. Never admits it when he is caught. And is tough to disengage. As I said glutton for punishment.

He can't say what you said because it's true, and that's what he's trying to deny. He has claimed that capitalism is a (the only) moral system. Don't ask.

--imm

[RandomThoughts]

3. Capitalism has no morals.

It requires lack of morals and trains that.

Unless your morals come from the source of money first.

Then it says that those that 'work' as that system wants, deserves the most regardless of how they do it.


If capitalism was moral, then explain the morals of that person? I do agree people have different morals, and that is probably the real issue.

I would spend 1000 to make a dollar, because making a dollar is not the goal.

Although putting it into spending concepts is playing on 'money's' home field, also why money tries to change heaven into a market place.

I don't think in spending and buying terms, probably why I don't have any money. Although I know I should have money, since it is needed for many things, although would not do things I disagree with to get money, or would try not to.


It should be added, there are some people that think having morals is a restriction or a way to keep them from living free. In Thomas Covenant series it was when the leaders changed there do not harm oath and went dark side, although I do not recommend those books. In the movie with Pacino and Reeves, it is said the conscious and guilt is a bag of bricks just set it down. I disagree with that also. The conscious guides you on how to live in ways that are not just about an individual, but also about helping many in society.

Some think having a conscious is a bad thing. "Cremation of care" ritual at Bohemian grove is part of that. It is also mentioned as crucifying Christ within a persons heart.

There are lots of other shows that can be seen as that being the concept for 'the cap' or 'the band' although they can be seen other ways also.

Note most business people are not like that, and many didn't even realize the meaning of that thing at Bohemian grove, even while they were there.


It should be noted, there is a difference between people that do not think of the ritual that way, and those that think that thought is correct. Many people can be at such a thing, but without thinking of it that way for them, it has no effect, nor does it imply they are part of those thoughts.

It is an attempt to get that thought into people when such things are done, but it does not get into most people, most people, including those that are at those things do not think that way, and so such things fail to get to them. Although it does get to some people.

Some people think of it in milder terms, they think of it like on the show West Wing, when the character playing the president in that show made a decision to go to war after watching toy soldiers on a tv. Some think of that type of thing as being able to make the tough decisions, although that can be a path to removing empathy and care.

In many views some people think they have to go a little dark side in a dark side world, although that can be training to pull them down that path.