minimum wage

[FBM]

In a nutshell: http://www.trueactivist.com/give-2-minu ... olks-poor/

[MrJonno]

Yep, that's Jonno's conservatism showing through (he is an anti-libertarian in the true sense; aka an authoritarian). Conservatives are well known to be driven by fear and emotion.

All politics is driven by fear and emotion, the only difference between people is what they are scared of, if you want logic become a scientist.

Yes I do believe in authority and order its what keeps 7 billion people alive

[pErvinalia]

I'm most certainly not driven by fear of a rabid underclass. Most progressives aren't. I'm pretty sure you got mugged once and got a whack on the head.

Oh, and by the way, I am a scientist.

[JimC]

Yep, that's Jonno's conservatism showing through (he is an anti-libertarian in the true sense; aka an authoritarian). Conservatives are well known to be driven by fear and emotion.

All politics is driven by fear and emotion, the only difference between people is what they are scared of, if you want logic become a scientist.

Yes I do believe in authority and order its what keeps 7 billion people alive

You just seem a little over the top about it.

Yes, modern society cannot function without a certain degree of imposed order by the apparatus of the state. But it is an apparatus that must always be kept in check by legal processes, and, ultimately, the will of the people, or it becomes a monster.

[MrJonno]

When have I said anything nasty about controlling people, I don't like the underclass, I wish they hadn't been born but as they are they need to be kept alive and paid of via welfare. Plenty of genuine conservatives would just let them starve to death.

With educational opportunities a small % will drag themselves out of it and good for them but realistically apart from free education and ensuring they don't starve there isn't much more that can be done to help the rest. Massive government spending it not going to make up for appalling parental control

[Drewish]

When have I said anything nasty about controlling people, I don't like the underclass, I wish they hadn't been born but as they are they need to be kept alive and paid of via welfare. Plenty of genuine conservatives would just let them starve to death.

With educational opportunities a small % will drag themselves out of it and good for them but realistically apart from free education and ensuring they don't starve there isn't much more that can be done to help the rest. Massive government spending it not going to make up for appalling parental control

The problem is that you lack sufficient contempt for the wealthy, and aren't overflowing with sympathy for the poor. Therefore you must be either irrational or evil. Or wasn't that made clear yet?

[MrJonno]

The problem is that you lack sufficient contempt for the wealthy, and aren't overflowing with sympathy for the poor. Therefore you must be either irrational or evil. Or wasn't that made clear yet?

I don't really like anyone much apart from my cats and sometimes my wife. Self interest drives me but that includes ensuring the poor are taken care of and the rich pay enough taxes to ensure decent public services

[Drewish]

The problem is that you lack sufficient contempt for the wealthy, and aren't overflowing with sympathy for the poor. Therefore you must be either irrational or evil. Or wasn't that made clear yet?

I don't really like anyone much apart from my cats and sometimes my wife. Self interest drives me but that includes ensuring the poor are taken care of and the rich pay enough taxes to ensure decent public services

And if we could have a civil conversation about what the best course of action is, from a self interest perspective, that would be a nice discussion. However, your transgression here is your motivation. By not seeking to selflessly put other's first, you have been judged a monster. Therefore anything you say can be dismissed.

[pErvinalia]

Nah, I've been dismissing lots of Jonno's authoritarian nonsense for years now based on what he has said. I would have thought you too would find his authoritarian overtones distasteful. Honestly, you seem full of hate. Fairly ironic you enquiring about a "civil conversation".

[MrJonno]

Problem with self interest is everyone's is different, to allow a functioning society you need authority to sometimes overrule it

Democracy is other people telling you what to do (which I accept), libertarians have a real problem with this

[FBM]

I wouldn't have a problem with a genuine philosopher kind/benevolent dictator, but the problem is that nobody's found one yet. Absolute power corrupting absolutely and all that.

My main interest in this discussion is to reveal the fallacious nonsense of hijacking Darwinism as if it justified ruthlessness and extreme selfishness. There is no scientific basis for it and anyone who claims that science tells them they should be cut-throat and indifferent to the suffering of others, including strangers, is patently full of shit, as I have shown in my previous posts on social darwinism.

[MrJonno]

I've never seen any incompatibility between self interest and a strong welfare state. I may not directly need much of the welfare state at the moment but I easily could in the future. Not having to step over hungry diseased/dying people in the streets or worrying them munging me is as much in my self interest as the people who use it.

I do question is genuine altruism exists through?, if you give money to charity and it makes you feel better is it still altruism?

[FBM]

I think the whole "real altruism" concept is a left-over from xtian morality. The sooner we do away with it, the better, imo. There's a very poor and very old woman who collects cardboard to sell for recycling. She stacks it near this apartment building until she's collected enough to push in a cart to the recycler's. She weighs it down with bricks to keep the wind from blowing it around. I've got a soft spot for poor old people. I don't think they should be allowed to be poor. So, every few days I put a few bucks under one of the bricks (always the same one). Does it make me feel good? Sorta. Is that why I do it? I don't think so. It's not ego masturbation for me. I respect her as a fellow human and I wish old people didn't have to collect cardboard in their last few years on this planet. Anybody who says she deserves to be poor can go fuck themselves.

[FBM]

[Drewish]

Nah, I've been dismissing lots of Jonno's authoritarian nonsense for years now based on what he has said. I would have thought you too would find his authoritarian overtones distasteful. Honestly, you seem full of hate. Fairly ironic you enquiring about a "civil conversation".

I did not defend his views. I made it clear that he and I can't discuss why we differ because of the way our views will be twisted by others in this thread. You seem to believe you have a full understanding of my perspective, when it's fairly clear to me that my position is beyond you. So please, assert your own beliefs but stop trying to tell me what it is I believe, because you aren't capable of comprehending it.

My main interest in this discussion is to reveal the fallacious nonsense of hijacking Darwinism as if it justified ruthlessness and extreme selfishness. There is no scientific basis for it and anyone who claims that science tells them they should be cut-throat and indifferent to the suffering of others, including strangers, is patently full of shit, as I have shown in my previous posts on social darwinism.

I made it clear that I am not indifferent to the suffering of others. I am indifferent to the suffering of strangers, but not to those whom I know personally, or who are part of my local community. I assert that there were benefits to reciprocity as well. However, this does not mean that the costs of helping strangers halfway around the world are at all outweighed by the benefits. It also does not justify a system of automated wealth distribution, or the power structure needed to care such an action out. Your earlier quote does nothing to disprove that position.