| We hope you enjoy your visit to this forum. If you are reading this then it means you are currently browsing the forum as a guest, we don’t limit any of the content posted from guests however if you join, you will have the ability to join the discussions! We are always happy to see new faces at this forum and we would like to hear your opinion, so why not register now? It doesn’t take long and you can get posting right away. Click here to Register! If you are having difficulties validating your account please email us at admin@dbzf.co.uk If you're already a member please log in to your account: |
| A "Free Market" System is Not Sensible | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Dec 28 2017, 01:47 AM (395 Views) | |
| ll DragonBallZ Fan ll | Dec 28 2017, 01:47 AM Post #1 |
![]()
|
A "Free Market" System is Not Sensible Society does not necessarily always value rational things, and others are able to profit tremendously off of the stupidity/ignorance/ect. of the masses that support it. Examples of this are Musicians, actors, athletes, celebrities ect. ect. that in a rational society, are definitely not necessarily more deserving than an Engineer for instance (as our modern world is based on Science and Tech, not Rap/Justin Beiber-type Pop music, Kim Kardashian's a*** , ect. ect). Consider, a huge portion of the nation's wealth is being put into sectors of society that serve no real productive purpose/lack in value while areas of high value such as intellectual pursuits are dramatically underfunded and discouraged (in many respects). This is due to society at large sharing the same collective delusions and valuing trivial bullsh't over serious, productive endeavors. This will always incentivize and produce a non-rational society unless structures are fundamentally challenged/altered. Lets take Professional athletes as the first example: NBA- Out of 456 players in the league in 2017-18, 120 make $10,000,000 or more for one years worth of work and 389 make more than $1,000,000. The minimum salary for a 1st year player is over $800,000 per year. Links here: A. http://www.espn.com/nba/salaries//page/1 B. http://www.cbafaq.com/minimums.htm NFL- Minimum salary for 1st year players is over $450,000 per year. 656 players make at least $1,000,000 per year or more. Links here: A. www.spotrac.com/blog/nfl-minimum-salaries-for-2017/ B. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/salary.htm MLB- 112 players make $10,000,000 or more per year. Out of 251 players total, 240 make $1,000,000 or more per year Actors and musicians that "make it" get huge salaries and the ones that don't get salaries on par with other "common" jobs. Now, contrast that to absolutely necessary fields such as Science & Maths, Engineering, Architecture, Construction Work, Waste Management, Medical Doctors, Teachers, Repairs, Farming, Electricians, Labor Intensive work, ect. ect. and fields that, although not necessary, should be prioritized/held in high esteem in a non-superficial, deep, passionate, engaged society (i.e. rational) such as Literature, History, Philosophy, Art, ect. ect. Consider the process of becoming a Scientist (which, depending on the subject matter, is perhaps the chief field pushing innovation forward that makes all of our lives orders of magnitude more comfortable than our ancestors could have ever dreamed of--as well as revealing deep truths about the nature of our existence and the universe). One must first pay large sums of money to attend a school for 4-5 years, then proceed to further schooling for another 5-7 years (while attempting to live off of a stipend of $15,000-$25,000 or so per year--i.e.very poor), then must find a post-doc position for another 3-7 years or so which is typically only $20,000-$35,000 a year, by which time a person has been nearly dirt poor for a 15 years or more and then, finally, may find a research/professorship position (however there is absolutely no guarantee since the funding is so low due to the irrationality I have discussed--thus competition is fierce) or they very well may end up empty handed (no Science research job and/or professorship) even after that approaching two decade long process. Here are some of the fundamental questions involved: Why do we treat some of the greatest minds amongst us doing work that is absolutely imperative so poorly? Why do we treat others doing necessary work (e.g. Construction Workers, sewer management, ect.) so poorly? Why are we putting people who do not contribute anything to the productivity of society and/or our expanding knowledge about ourselves/the Universe up on a pedestal (e.g. Katy Perry, Kardashians, Pro Athletes, ect. ect.)? Do you see any problems with this, or do you believe that the Market is the best determining agent in matters such as this? Edited by ll DragonBallZ Fan ll, Dec 31 2017, 05:10 AM.
|
![]() "You're going to love this. Trust me." AMV1 AMV2 AMV3 AMV4 AMV5 AMV6 AMV7 AMV8 | |
![]() |
|
| + Ginyu | Dec 28 2017, 02:02 PM Post #2 |
![]()
Leve Feyenoord 1!
![]()
|
Well, the answer to this for me always simply comes down to: What's your alternative? Our system is not ideal, but can you create an ideal one? I've never heard a better alternative to our current free capitalist market. |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Ask GinyuTokusentai | |
![]() |
|
| ll DragonBallZ Fan ll | Dec 28 2017, 05:58 PM Post #3 |
![]()
|
"Capitalism" as it is generally used, is consistent with both a "Free Market" system and various forms of "Constrained/Regulated Market" systems. I am arguing for a form of "Constrained Market" system (in the short term) as I think they still have usefulness and are feasible to implement in the current climate/Zeitgeist. However, it is important to note that the type of "Constrained Market" system I am proposing is very different than typically conceived of by people such as Sanders, Green Party, ect. ect. (which I will elaborate on). First note, many people's distractions also fall in line with what is currently incentivized/glorified/respected/honored in our society. Many people will always have trouble "breaking the mold" of societal norms (in my view) because there is good reason to believe that average range human intelligence or below is only intelligent enough to understand the rules of the society for which they were born into or otherwise are later introduced to and become acclimated with (although even this, the latter, falls into the higher range of average human intelligence compared to the former). Now, even with this dynamic, we can produce a highly healthy, rational, productive, intellectual, creative society if the framework is properly structured (e.g. think Star Trek). Second, consider, athletes, actors, ect. is that they are not what allows society to continue to function. In fact, they are taking advantage of the "toys" provided by the very few Scientists and Engineers, held together by the necessary labor intensive workers, and are simultaneously sh'tting on these people (even if they are not aware of it). Furthermore, it is really inverting the pyramid of who works harder and allows society to function. Construction workers are so much more important than Baseball players even though our current system would lead an outside observer to conclude the opposite (based on factors such as wealth, status, resources, living comfort, ect.) Now, the economy already is "rigged", so all you would have to do is "rig" it in a different direction (as well as the imperative of getting people more interested in productive, creative, activities rather than frivolousness--note, rigging the economy would in it of itself shift peoples interests due to the incentive structure). That is, jobs that have high utility value (e.g. "Blue Collar" laborers, Architects, Scientists, ect.) objectively contribute far more to society than Justin Bieber (although the current system incentive structure would suggest that this is the other way around). The current Market system is based on preference value while I am arguing for a utility value system. It would still be a market system, there would still be an abundance of greedy, self-interested people, ect. ect, However, by necessity, the work they would be doing if they wanted to increase their wealth would be productive and actually benefit society rather than frivolous--e.g. Models would not be paid much at all in such a society while being a Construction worker, many "Blue Collar" intensive labor, Scientist, Architect, ect. ect. would be paid well (just nearly flip everything on its head, roughly speaking)). This is why I said such a system is feasible in the short-term given the current climate/Zeitgeist. It would essentially be like a Social Democratic society but rather than the type of "Inverse Capitalism" that Bernie Sanders, Jill Stein/Green Party, ect. promote, it would be based on a productivity/utility incentive structure. Edited by ll DragonBallZ Fan ll, Dec 28 2017, 05:59 PM.
|
![]() "You're going to love this. Trust me." AMV1 AMV2 AMV3 AMV4 AMV5 AMV6 AMV7 AMV8 | |
![]() |
|
| ll DragonBallZ Fan ll | Dec 29 2017, 07:24 AM Post #4 |
![]()
|
My basic argument is this: The people doing the overwhelming bulk of the work should be quasi-proportionally related to the ones reaping the benefits (which is not at all our current model). In order to ensure this, we would still operate under a "Market" system, but simply constrain the Market by switching off of a "preference based" value to a "utility based" value structure. Practically, this would be enforced by regulatory incentives. The argument for a "Free Market/quasi-Free Market" is basically: "If people are stupid/ignorant and make horrible decisions as a consequence of this ("this" being the dynamic I described before), then let them be stupid/ignorant and make horrible decisions. Who are you and/or the people doing the overwhelming bulk of the work that allows society to function, pushes it forward and lets us survive to voice disapproval/complain about that? Who are "they" to promote intervening with the system in order to course correct this scheme even if people's collective ignorance/stupidity and horrible decision making is objectively running humanity off of a cliff (as well as the ecosystem at large) all while oppressing the people doing all the work?" (Note: That is not a straw-man of what is being promoted) |
![]() "You're going to love this. Trust me." AMV1 AMV2 AMV3 AMV4 AMV5 AMV6 AMV7 AMV8 | |
![]() |
|
| ll DragonBallZ Fan ll | Dec 29 2017, 08:33 AM Post #5 |
![]()
|
The current system is taking as a given the notion that a preference value system is inherently more "just" than a utility value system (while this is not at all obvious and I have raised a large number of profound concerns of the logical consequences in valuing people's individual preferences rather than their productive contributions). In fact, most of my argument is centered around this fundamental Philosophical point |
![]() "You're going to love this. Trust me." AMV1 AMV2 AMV3 AMV4 AMV5 AMV6 AMV7 AMV8 | |
![]() |
|
| 0 users reading this topic | |
| « Previous Topic · Deep Discussion · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
4:52 PM Jul 13
|
Theme Designed by McKee91
Powered by ZetaBoards Premium · Privacy Policy

















4:52 PM Jul 13