Could a "bottom up" approach version of Socialism work?

The primary goal of this site is to provide mature, meaningful discussion about the Vancouver Canucks. However, we all need a break some time so this forum is basically for anything off-topic, off the wall, or to just get something off your chest! This forum is named after poster Creeper, who passed away in July of 2011 and was a long time member of the Canucks message board community.

Moderator: Referees

Re: Could a "bottom up" approach version of Socialism work?

Postby Strangelove » Sun Jan 15, 2012 7:17 pm

Listercat wrote:Enslaving the best and brightest will NEVER result in the results "Socialism" purports to aspire to.


Agreed. Socialism is the enemy of ambition, talent, freedom, and individuality.

Nice fantasy, but it just plain doesn’t work in the real world.

Bottom-up or top-down, socialism is as evil & stupid as Bradley The Rat Marchand.
____
The Ring Leader
User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
 
Posts: 7614
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm

Re: Could a "bottom up" approach version of Socialism work?

Postby Strangelove » Sun Jan 15, 2012 7:21 pm

Farhan Lalji wrote:One thing I strongly dislike about Government jobs is that it's all about "Seniority." There's seemingly no way to prove that you're "better" than someone so that you can command a higher salary and/or commissions.


Glad to see you post that Farhan!

(thought you might be devolving into some kinda pinko) ;)
____
The Ring Leader
User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
 
Posts: 7614
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm

Re: Could a "bottom up" approach version of Socialism work?

Postby Farhan Lalji » Sun Jan 15, 2012 11:40 pm

Strangelove wrote:
Farhan Lalji wrote:One thing I strongly dislike about Government jobs is that it's all about "Seniority." There's seemingly no way to prove that you're "better" than someone so that you can command a higher salary and/or commissions.


Glad to see you post that Farhan!

(thought you might be devolving into some kinda pinko) ;)


LOL.

Fuck no! If someone were to classify my political beliefs, I'd probably be labelled as a "Libertarian" (although I don't quite fit the definition). I tend to generally have Conversative views about the economy and Liberal views about morality, etc., but it's not 1:1.

I am a huge advocate of Free Enterprise and Free Market. I am extremely anti Federal Reserve.

Morality wise - I respect religion but do not like "Bible Thumpers" or anyone else that twists religion to their advantage. As far as morality goes, I think Liberals tend to believe that one can "act any way they want as long as everyone is harmonious and law abiding." Conservatives attempt to get everyone on the same page through religious principles of some sort (atleast I think?).

I don't mind the idea of a 'body' of sorts attempting to get everyone on a "similar page", but I don't think religion is the answer to that unfortunately. It just ends up being extremely counter productive (which is why I tend to lean 'left' in terms of morality). Having said that - I think it would be interesting if everyone was taught/introduced to/ some kind of 'Western Philosophical/Spiritual teachings of some sort" which could kind of get everyone on the same page with certain beliefs viewpoints (hopefully, that makes senese).
Farhan Lalji
 

Re: Could a "bottom up" approach version of Socialism work?

Postby LotusBlossom » Mon Jan 16, 2012 11:01 am

Cornuck wrote:
Potatoe1 wrote:You guys seem to be losing your shit down there.


Agreed. The 2 party system is a complete failure. Fear of "socialism" is huge down here, but healthcare is such a disgrace there doesn't seem to be another option.

The worst part is how the agenda down here seeps across the northern border.


Talked to some ppl down in STL last week during my work week and even though I say we pay in our taxes for our health care program, many of them said they'd take in a heartbeat.

Just to bring up the fact the US has 10 times the population of Canada plays a big factor with healthcare, and with funding it with a system like ours. It would be more of a mess. At the same time, just because you're not rich doesn't mean you should be denied basic health care. Flawed indeed, but what system isn't really flawed in one way or another?
Didn't you know?I'm Front Page news! ;)
User avatar
LotusBlossom
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:53 pm
Location: Metro Vancouver

Re: Could a "bottom up" approach version of Socialism work?

Postby Sick Bunny » Mon Jan 16, 2012 1:58 pm

LotusBlossom wrote:Just to bring up the fact the US has 10 times the population of Canada plays a big factor with healthcare, and with funding it with a system like ours. It would be more of a mess. At the same time, just because you're not rich doesn't mean you should be denied basic health care. Flawed indeed, but what system isn't really flawed in one way or another?


This chart says it all:

Image

One way or another, somebody's making a LOT of money out of the mess down there...
User avatar
Sick Bunny
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 9:12 am

Re: Could a "bottom up" approach version of Socialism work?

Postby Arachnid » Mon Jan 16, 2012 4:04 pm

I am neither Left nor Right and was actually leaning towards No Party politics until I started studying Sustainability.
I use to think Green was the answer in that it is non-partisan (there are just as many Big C Conservatives in the National party as Big M Marxists) with one central goal...but that is just a pipe dream when the economy is good and jobs are not on the agenda...
Unbelievalbe that I actually kinda agree with Kapish :shock:

Lets face it, there is no true capitalism or democracy or communist or even socialist state.

UN Local Agenda 21 is about localizing economies of scale.

For example; you take a block of a neighbourhood (or a larger geocode area but still manageable). Now within that block you form your own 'governing movement' (funny enough, much like the Occupy movement). Each house becomes a specialist. One may be a solar array due to it's southern roof placement, another may be best for rain catchment, some may have an ideal unused yard for growing vegetables or chicken & eggs. Now the 'Socialism' part, if you can call it that is equal distribution of the self-sustaining neighbourhood. The food can be distributed to local businesses/restaurants, households and churches. Any excess can be put back into capital projects. District heating is quite popular in Europe (in Iceland there Geothermal heat is free) and some neighbourhoods and farms in Germany own their own utility companies. Feed-in Tarif often creates a profit for the community and when not upgrading or self-sustaining projects then the profit can be distributed (much like a dividend in a company like Westjet)

To control all this is a use of democracy in the strictest sense.
One person, one vote. Using this here inter web thingy.
There would be no centralization of funds or government.

Big governments and corporations will always exist but to give power to the people on a house to house level would be the only course we may chart. If a neighbourhood becomes self-sufficient think of how competitive that would become with other places to live and if people choose not to, so be it. That's where we are free to live how and where. Of course, why would you not live in a neighbourhood that has free electrical, hot water, water, eggs, veggies...hell, with Aqua-agriculture you can raise fish in the same tank as you grow veggies that is self-sustaining...

I was recently at UBC's Centre for Interactive Research in Sustainability and they are doing some amazing things there. Not just on Sustainability but on how we interact and govern ourselves (they vote online each day for the ideal temperature of the office they work in). Check it out if you get a chance. http://cirs.ubc.ca/

The whole point of this is for the people not to be dependent on their government for jobs or cheaper oil/utilities or affected by corporations commodity of food & water, etc...

Anyways, I love this shit, it's what I do now for better or worse 8-)
There is no such thing as climate change...there is no such thing as climate change...there is such thing as climate change...
Arachnid
CC Legend
 
Posts: 5198
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:56 pm
Location: Old Berlin

Re: Could a "bottom up" approach version of Socialism work?

Postby Potatoe1 » Mon Jan 16, 2012 4:58 pm

Sick Bunny wrote:
LotusBlossom wrote:Just to bring up the fact the US has 10 times the population of Canada plays a big factor with healthcare, and with funding it with a system like ours. It would be more of a mess. At the same time, just because you're not rich doesn't mean you should be denied basic health care. Flawed indeed, but what system isn't really flawed in one way or another?


This chart says it all:

Image

One way or another, somebody's making a LOT of money out of the mess down there...



Marketing, advertising, legal fees and lobbyists.

All of which you eliminate if you make it public.

Lets face it, health care is just one of those things that seems to clash with the free market system.

Not only is the US system horribly inefficient and corrupt, but it actually hurts their greater economy because the best and brightest often stay in a shitty situation because they are afraid of losing health benefits.

Would you quit your job and start a business if it meant your family would lose their health benefits?

And how about children, my Sister told me the bill to have her daughter down in the US was 14K. She has coverage but it
was kind of alarming to hear what someone who isn't covered would have to pay just for delivery.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Could a "bottom up" approach version of Socialism work?

Postby Sick Bunny » Mon Jan 16, 2012 6:40 pm

Potatoe1 wrote:Marketing, advertising, legal fees and lobbyists.


Which also explains why it will never be fixed.

Not when the only electable president is either a limp noodle, or a right-wing creationist cretin (<-- see wot?) more concerned with all things gay.

Bring on the revolution I say!
User avatar
Sick Bunny
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 9:12 am

Re: Could a "bottom up" approach version of Socialism work?

Postby Strangelove » Mon Jan 16, 2012 11:05 pm

Farhan Lalji wrote:I don't mind the idea of a 'body' of sorts attempting to get everyone on a "similar page", but I don't think religion is the answer to that unfortunately. It just ends up being extremely counter productive (which is why I tend to lean 'left' in terms of morality). Having said that - I think it would be interesting if everyone was taught/introduced to/ some kind of 'Western Philosophical/Spiritual teachings of some sort" which could kind of get everyone on the same page with certain beliefs viewpoints (hopefully, that makes senese).


Hmmm not sure if I completely understand. My religion says I must not swear and must not burn suspected witches at the stake. HOWEVER, if it were legal I wouldn't hesitate to fuckin put the torch to any fuckin sumbitch I caught partakin in any kind of FUCKIN "Western Spirituality" :drink:

(hopefully, that makes senese). :mrgreen:
____
The Ring Leader
User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
 
Posts: 7614
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm

Re: Could a "bottom up" approach version of Socialism work?

Postby Farhan Lalji » Tue Jan 17, 2012 12:23 am

Strangelove wrote:
Farhan Lalji wrote:I don't mind the idea of a 'body' of sorts attempting to get everyone on a "similar page", but I don't think religion is the answer to that unfortunately. It just ends up being extremely counter productive (which is why I tend to lean 'left' in terms of morality). Having said that - I think it would be interesting if everyone was taught/introduced to/ some kind of 'Western Philosophical/Spiritual teachings of some sort" which could kind of get everyone on the same page with certain beliefs viewpoints (hopefully, that makes senese).


Hmmm not sure if I completely understand. My religion says I must not swear and must not burn suspected witches at the stake. HOWEVER, if it were legal I wouldn't hesitate to fuckin put the torch to any fuckin sumbitch I caught partakin in any kind of FUCKIN "Western Spirituality" :drink:

(hopefully, that makes senese). :mrgreen:


Lol.

I guess the point I'm trying to make, is that legality should take complete precedence over one's religion.....and that "religious repurcussions and/or implications" should not be taken into consideration in Government decisions. (if that makes sense). The whole concept of not being able to do something because it's "not religious" and/or "upsets religious folk" should be abolished in my opinion (i.e. freely allowing one to choose to have an abortion without bible thumpers like John Agnew throwing a hissy fit. Or having a greater investment into Scientific research, such as stem cell research, without worrying about whether religious folk will be upset by it).

Having said that - I think there should be some principles........or "thought"..........that successfully unite people. I think Conservatives have tried to achieve that through religion, but I think that often does more 'harm' than 'good' (i.e. the creation of 'pretentious bible/scripture thumpers that use religion as a platform to judge others in a condenscending way).
Farhan Lalji
 

Re: Could a "bottom up" approach version of Socialism work?

Postby Per » Tue Jan 17, 2012 7:54 am

Strangelove wrote:My religion says I must not swear and must not burn suspected witches at the stake.

I thought your religion said you must burn suspected witches at the stake... :?

Exodus 22:17 "You shall not suffer a witch to live".

Otherwise, what was that whole inquisition/Salem/etc business all about?

As late as the 17th century some 300 witches were burnt at the stake in Sweden, and I hear there are Christian groups still doing it in Africa. :shock:

http://www.youtube.com/verify_age?next_ ... Lv-dVk_bPo
User avatar
Per
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1842
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:45 am

Re: Could a "bottom up" approach version of Socialism work?

Postby Knucklehead » Tue Jan 17, 2012 11:19 am

The only way to make government work is to get rid of anyone who WANTS the job!

Make all citizens over the age of 18 or 19 eligible for a draft.

Draft 350 people from across the country to sit as members of parliment for a term of 4 years, either serve or spend that time in jail.

No special interest groups, lobbiests, back room party hacks or carreer politicians.

After serving a term your name is removed from the rolls.
Knucklehead
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 11:39 am

Re: Could a "bottom up" approach version of Socialism work?

Postby Cornuck » Tue Jan 17, 2012 12:50 pm

Knucklehead wrote:Draft 350 people from across the country to sit as members of parliment for a term of 4 years, either serve or spend that time in jail.


That is a very scary idea...
Over 40 years of pain - I just want one day of glory.
User avatar
Cornuck
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
 
Posts: 4892
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Chester, NE

Re: Could a "bottom up" approach version of Socialism work?

Postby Knucklehead » Tue Jan 17, 2012 1:06 pm

What's scary about it?

That you might be drafted?

That we may wind up with 350 raving lunatic, egotistical, ideologes who are only concerned with their own self interests?
Knucklehead
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 11:39 am

Re: Could a "bottom up" approach version of Socialism work?

Postby Cornuck » Tue Jan 17, 2012 1:11 pm

Knucklehead wrote:That we may wind up with 350 raving lunatic, egotistical, ideologes who are only concerned with their own self interests?


Point taken...

I guess "Free beer for everyone" is better than war in the middle east. :D
Over 40 years of pain - I just want one day of glory.
User avatar
Cornuck
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
 
Posts: 4892
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Chester, NE

PreviousNext

Return to Creeper's Bar & Grill

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 4 guests