Technocracy a better answer, a Scientific one.

mohammed
mohammed's picture
Posts: 119
Joined: 2008-08-20
User is offlineOffline
Technocracy a better answer, a Scientific one.

 www.technocracy.org 

If you never heard of it, it could possibley take a year to fully understand. But, it is the only Government designed by science and is based on an energy economy instead of money like every other government ever conceived. while we still have our current form of government i usually side with the democracts VS the republicans. 

From what i know about libertarians they seem to think the market will do whats best and we have seen that just isnt the case. The market does whats best for itself, not people, planet, reason, etc...


Jormungander
atheistScience Freak
Jormungander's picture
Posts: 938
Joined: 2008-07-15
User is offlineOffline
You seem to thinking of

You seem to thinking of Anarcho-capitalists. They think that the market will do best and that we should just let it run its course. Libertarians want a limited government. They don't all agree on how small a government is the correct size, but most favor reasonable limits on the free market. I have noticed that when people don't like libertarianism they equate it with anarchy and then criticize anarchy. I am a libertarian, but I like a few market protections (OSHA, insured banking, workers protections).

That being said I would like to have a more free market then what we currently have. I would prefer fewer protectionist policies and fewer trade barriers.

I don't mean to derail the thread by jumping in with my views on libertarianism, but your criticism doesn't seem to match up with my conception of it.

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
coulda swore a technocracy

coulda swore a technocracy was a form of government solely devoted to progression and solving any/all problems through technological advancement?... not... this... crap

What Would Kharn Do?


Jormungander
atheistScience Freak
Jormungander's picture
Posts: 938
Joined: 2008-07-15
User is offlineOffline
Now that I am done with my

Now that I am done with my libertarian comment I will share some of my views about the proposed technocracy. I will use quotes from the website you provided the link to in my analysis.

Quote:

(1) Register on a continuous 24-hour-per day basis the total net conversion of ... the amount of physical resources available in the form of consumable goods and services for consumption by the total population during a length of time sufficient to allow all industrial processes to complete a cycle.

This sounds very authoritarian. Do we really want some group of overlords tracking all goods and services and knowing every purchase that you make. I like to use some goods and services anonymously. Some kind of central tracking system that knows every purchase and every product made is NOT something that I support. I think that this is the system used in the dystopic society described in Player Piano.

 

Quote:

(4) Provide a specific registration of the type, kind and quantity of goods and services, where produced and where obtained.

Again, why the need for such strict accounting and control over my private purchasing habits?

 

Quote:

(5)  Provide a specific registration of consumption by each individual.

They love this idea of tracking every single purchase that you ever make that they repeat it again and again. Their burning desire to control and monitor all commerce scares me. I like my privacy too much to buy into this.

 

Quote:

MONEY IS INADEQUATE

On the contrary, money functions just fine. And really, they want to replace our arbitrary units of currency (money) with their own slightly different arbitrary unit of currency (using energy as money). Also, if energy was money, then any change in the available amount of money would result in a sudden increase or decrease in the value of currency (since they want energy to be currency).

 

Quote:

MAN ENDANGERS HIS ENVIRONMENT

Sure, I agree with this. But we can be nicer to the environment without surrendering our purchasing decisions over to a group of technocrats.

 

Quote:

If man was to survive, he would have to change many of his ways; he would have to abandon his concepts of individual anarchy; also, he would have to repudiate his politics, his business enterprises

Ugh. I think I'm going to be sick. These people want to steal away our freedoms so badly. No freedom in business decisions and no freedom in private purchasing decisions. It is a constant assault against individuality. They do come up with good excuses for wanting to steal away our freedoms though. All of their goals our very positive. They want to save the environment and help give everyone the access to products and services that we desire. And all they want in return is total control over politics (and an end of all political systems that could compete with them), industry, your private purchasing decisions and an end to the concept of personal decision making in general. I'll pass on that. They shouldn't expressly say they want to steal away all our decision making abilities; that will scare most people away from their political goals. I know that it scares the sh*t out of me.

 

This proposed system is reviling. They say that they want to control so much in our lives and society. It sounds to me that they just want control and are using their ecological concerns as a way to get people to give them the power that they crave. I would rate technocracy as one of the worst political systems I have ever encountered.

Just for fun: can anyone guess which popular science fiction author described a society of technocrats? In his novels he actually referred to them as technocrats many times. And I am talking about a different author than Vonnegut.

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2642
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
AuthorS. They borrow from

AuthorS. They borrow from each other. The technocrats I believe you are referencing were originally put in place by the capitalists of the pre-foundation era.

I always see 'Them' or 'They' within the protests without describing who 'they' are from people dogmatically attached to the present form of capitalism. Why do you detach yourself?

What you call 'authoritarian', I call efficient.

If the usage and the production can be monitored then waste is decreased.

THAT means changes can be made to production in order to satisfy all demands.

The current system is flawed because one need only look at market projections and cut their production in order to increase the price and GOUGE the consumer. Likewise, if too much is produced without a demand for it then I have to tolerate yet another dollar store in middle Tennessee. lol.

For easy examples of this, I direct you to research EZ-Bake ovens, Red Rider bb guns, and Tickle-me Elmo. Those are the results of rampant libertarianism or what I'm sure would be referred to as smart capitalism. Of course, those same people that label that as 'smart' didn't have to print news articles about poor parents driven mad by their inability to procure one because production was scaled back in order to measure the demand prior to setting a MSRP.

 

 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


Jormungander
atheistScience Freak
Jormungander's picture
Posts: 938
Joined: 2008-07-15
User is offlineOffline
darth_josh wrote:The current

darth_josh wrote:

The current system is flawed because one need only look at market projections and cut their production in order to increase the price and GOUGE the consumer.

There is a very easy way to avoid being gouged on new products: wait to buy them. Do not purchase a brand new product. Give it a few months and the price will decrease as more are produced. There is what I like to think of as an 'idiot tax' applied to many brand new products. Those iPhone fanboys who lined up the first day to get it were gouged hard. They got an inferior product at an inflated price. They payed the 'idiot tax' buy purchasing a new form of electronics right when it was first released. Those who waited just a few months got a cheaper, better form of the same thing with fewer bugs. As for the examples of popular Christmas time toys: don't buy them. Period. Unless you are willing to pay too much. It is that simple. If you purchase the 'hot new toy!' for Christmas you will be paying to much for it. Teach your children to wait and save money before getting a toy. My parents did not buy me toys. Instead they paid me for chores and told me to build up money to buy whatever I wanted. Really they would have made me do the chores anyways (getting paid was a privilege for good children, if I misbehaved I was given no money), but they wanted to throw in an economic lesson so they made it into a kind of work program rather than just directly purchasing me toys. I fondly remember saving up my $5 a week to be able to purchase Beast Wars action figures and squirt guns.

 

darth_josh wrote:

poor parents driven mad by their inability to procure one

It is not that dramatic. Get your kid some other toy. Discourage your children from buying into consumerist hype. Teach them that they will not always get what they want and teach them to wait to get things that they want. Peoples' burning desire for instant gratification is sickening. My parents have more than once discussed celebrating Christmas a few days later so we could get everything on sale. They are religious, but as my mother says "I celebrate Jesus' birth every day," so they don't care about that day in particular.

 

darth_josh wrote:

I always see 'Them' or 'They' within the protests without describing who 'they' are from people dogmatically attached to the present form of capitalism. Why do you detach yourself?

I suppose it is just my writing style. I remember on a different thread that I kept referring to 'libertarians' as 'they' even though I am one. In the future I will try and use 'us' and 'we' when describing groups that I belong to. I don't want to accidentally mislead anyone into thinking that I don't identify myself as an atheistic capitalism-loving socially tolerant libertarian.

 

I love your sig by the way. Maybe I'll look through my big list of quotes and make a sig of my own sometime.

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India


mohammed
mohammed's picture
Posts: 119
Joined: 2008-08-20
User is offlineOffline
lol its funny to see all the

lol its funny to see all the misconceptions and misunderstandings of Technocracy. Like i said some people take as long as a year to get the concepts. Energy accounting is incredible! it's all about balance and a system of distribution that deals with real values (energy). Our money system is based on exponential growth and scarcity. Which one is sustainable? 

BTW technocracy has democracy built into it, social and political things are voted on.

If we never have Technocracy i think we will have to end up with something like it. Something sustainable, not a system that requires growth in a finite world.
The economy can NOT continue to grow. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY

Anyway I'm not going to go into detail on it as you can go to the website to find out more. i just wanted to bring it to more peoples attention. Keep in mind you cant go to the website and read a couple things and understand it though, as some people in this thread seem to think they do (you are way off).

 

 

Quote:
coulda swore a technocracy was a form of government solely devoted to progression and solving any/all problems through technological advancement?... not... this... crap

you are truly an idiot The Doomed Soul. Technocracy inc. was started after the US government decided to do the great energy survey. its also been around for a very long time, look it up dumb ass. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy_Incorporated

 And yes it IS based on thermodynamics!

 

 


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Aha, with out much thinking

Aha, with out much thinking on this, basically to live as an average American is not realistic .... considering the reality of our tiny planet and resources ....


Jormungander
atheistScience Freak
Jormungander's picture
Posts: 938
Joined: 2008-07-15
User is offlineOffline
mohammed wrote:you are truly

mohammed wrote:

you are truly an idiot The Doomed Soul... look it up dumb ass

And to think I spent the effort making a post about this. You have just identified yourself as an internet asshole. When someone doesn't like what you say you bust out insults worthy of an elementary school play yard. I see that you are no longer worth any of our time or effort to respond to.

 

 

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India


Nikolaj
Superfan
Nikolaj's picture
Posts: 503
Joined: 2008-04-27
User is offlineOffline
"The Culture"

Since Sci-Fi was brought up, I'll use a Sci-Fi example to provide my two cents.

I have in the "Sci-Fi draught"-thread promised to give a run-down of the "Culture"-universe of Iain M. Banks, and have yet to do so, but I'll talk a bit about it here.

Banks' Galactic civilisation simply named "The Culture" is my personal Utopia. I would love to live in that society. And it is esentially a Technocrasy. But it works only because some very specific prerequisites are in place in that society which are the following:

- An economy of abundance (The Culture is a galaxy spanning civilisation that includes literally millions of solar systems, so they have lots of raw-materials available)

- An extremely advanced (an unrealistically advanced perhaps?) technological level. (The Culture has the means to extract and consume the above-mentioned raw materials with little waste of energy).

- Most importantly among these technological advances is sentient machines. The culture's technocracy is controlled completely by intelligent machines called "minds" that oversee everything on a given planet, spacecraft or spacestation. And this is what I love about the culture, and what some might have as the main reason for NOT wanting to live there.

And here's why:

The Minds take care of all the needs of the people (they aren't actually "human" in that the culture doesn't come from Earth, but they are humanoid) in the Culture, and everyone is free to do whatever they want. That is, people don't have to work, all work is done by drones that are controlled by the minds (think of them as an extension of the minds "Body", they are like the arms and fingers of a mind). The Minds also "see" practically everything, and so can always be called upon for help with anything, and can save anyone who is in peril. In many ways the Mind of any given planet or spacecraft is like the "God" of that particular world.

But unlike any deities here from Earth, the minds don't demand anything of anyone. There is no law, no money, and no expectations in the Culture, which means that people can murder and rape if they so choose (and are not stopped by the Mind, or someone else nearby, like a robot or another person. By the way "Robots" in the Culture are just like people. They are individuals, with thoughts and emotions of their own, and live among the people as equals).

The only consequence of doing something "wrong" is that it will be known. It is almost impossible to do something that the Mind doesn't notice, and if you do something that others don't approve of (rape and murder would certainly fall into that catagory), then people will know, and you will likely be shunned for it. But you won't be punished in any literal way.

The Culture is sort of a Technocracy, since the Minds make sure everything is done as efficiently as possible, but in another sense it is an anarchy, since everyone, including the Minds, can do whatever they want. The only real restriction is privacy. You are unable to do something that noone will know of. At least the Minds will know. So you can't plot and exploit and manipulate others, because since minds are also sentient, emotional individuals, they aren't going to sit idly by, if someone is being a dick, and ruining the party for everyone else.

And if a mind is the one being a dick, which is theoretically possible, since they are individuals, the other minds will know and object. I have not read any books in which that happens, though I understand that his book "Excetion" deals with this theme.

So basically, somewhere deep down, I am a Technocrat, just like I am an Anarchist deep down. Because this is my ideal world.

But I am also a pragmatist, and I can tell the difference between a Sci-Fi thought-experiment, and what is feasable in real life (for the moment). Which is why I am just a good old fashioned Scandinavian Social Democrat, because it is, in part, what has made my little corner of the world one of the safest, one of the richest, and one of the happiest places in the world.

I will always back anything that can help bring us closer to a society resembling the Culture, but if it could ever happen (which I am not convinced it can, though I believe it is possible), then it will not happen for another thousand years by any stretch of the imagination, so I will live in the present, and prepare for a brighter future, only when it makes the present better too.

And supporting the implementation of Technocracy here and now, because I like the vision of the Culture, would be really daft, because it will not make a better, more free, and more caring society, here on this planet, at this point in history.

Give me an economy of abundance, and sentient, emotionally compassionate machines that can run the show, and I'll get back to you on wether I'm ready for Technocracy.

Well I was born an original sinner
I was spawned from original sin
And if I had a dollar bill for all the things I've done
There'd be a mountain of money piled up to my chin


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2642
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Jormungander

Jormungander wrote:

darth_josh wrote:

The current system is flawed because one need only look at market projections and cut their production in order to increase the price and GOUGE the consumer.

There is a very easy way to avoid being gouged on new products: wait to buy them. Do not purchase a brand new product. Give it a few months and the price will decrease as more are produced. There is what I like to think of as an 'idiot tax' applied to many brand new products. Those iPhone fanboys who lined up the first day to get it were gouged hard. They got an inferior product at an inflated price. They payed the 'idiot tax' buy purchasing a new form of electronics right when it was first released. Those who waited just a few months got a cheaper, better form of the same thing with fewer bugs. As for the examples of popular Christmas time toys: don't buy them. Period. Unless you are willing to pay too much. It is that simple. If you purchase the 'hot new toy!' for Christmas you will be paying to much for it. Teach your children to wait and save money before getting a toy. My parents did not buy me toys. Instead they paid me for chores and told me to build up money to buy whatever I wanted. Really they would have made me do the chores anyways (getting paid was a privilege for good children, if I misbehaved I was given no money), but they wanted to throw in an economic lesson so they made it into a kind of work program rather than just directly purchasing me toys. I fondly remember saving up my $5 a week to be able to purchase Beast Wars action figures and squirt guns.

And this was a good thing?

I'll spare you any anecdotal evidence and just be glad that I had a taste of both worlds, affluent and dirt poor, to draw conclusions from.

 

Quote:
darth_josh wrote:

poor parents driven mad by their inability to procure one

It is not that dramatic. Get your kid some other toy. Discourage your children from buying into consumerist hype. Teach them that they will not always get what they want and teach them to wait to get things that they want. Peoples' burning desire for instant gratification is sickening. My parents have more than once discussed celebrating Christmas a few days later so we could get everything on sale. They are religious, but as my mother says "I celebrate Jesus' birth every day," so they don't care about that day in particular.

Sounds great on paper. However, the practical application of this logic has failed so many times in the past.

Dude, people have robbed pawn shops to get the money to buy their children these things. Why can't the producers simply work within the market instead of driving it themselves?

 

Quote:
darth_josh wrote:

I always see 'Them' or 'They' within the protests without describing who 'they' are from people dogmatically attached to the present form of capitalism. Why do you detach yourself?

I suppose it is just my writing style. I remember on a different thread that I kept referring to 'libertarians' as 'they' even though I am one. In the future I will try and use 'us' and 'we' when describing groups that I belong to. I don't want to accidentally mislead anyone into thinking that I don't identify myself as an atheistic capitalism-loving socially tolerant libertarian.

Wow. I just have world socialist atheist as a label. lol. In this society, I'd probably have to save my money to buy a bigger one. lol. 

Quote:
I love your sig by the way. Maybe I'll look through my big list of quotes and make a sig of my own sometime.

It changes from time to time. I've even been arrogant enough to quote myself before.

I'm anxious to see what you will choose. The words we identify with (such as our labels) don't necessarily carry our happy thoughts, but a lot of frustrations it seems.

The phrases in the sigs when analyzed from a psychological point of view betray the deeper issues. Unfortunately, I don't have the formal training to even begin a study in order to develop a mental health corollary. lol.

 

 

Just for the record with regard to this conversation, may I know whether or not you have children of your own?

I have four.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


Jormungander
atheistScience Freak
Jormungander's picture
Posts: 938
Joined: 2008-07-15
User is offlineOffline
darth_josh wrote:And this

darth_josh wrote:

And this was a good thing?

Yes, I consider it a positive lesson that was taught to me by my parents. It taught me not to rely on instant gratification. Only by saving and waiting could I get what I desired. It was the kiddy version of working and handling money.

 

darth_josh wrote:

Just for the record with regard to this conversation, may I know whether or not you have children of your own?

I have four.

I am in college and I am young. NOT getting anyone pregnant is high on my list of things to do. Though I am within 9 months of graduating, so I suppose it wouldn't be the end of the world if I did get someone pregnant. I won't pretend to understand child raising (how do you parents manage it?), but I do know that some parents engage in economic activities that I as a child knew not to engage in.

 

darth_josh wrote:

Sounds great on paper. However, the practical application of this logic has failed so many times in the past.

Dude, people have robbed pawn shops to get the money to buy their children these things. Why can't the producers simply work within the market instead of driving it themselves?

Why can't the parents learn just a little patience when it comes to impulse buys for toys? (and yes, the 'hot new toy!' for Christmas is a needless impulse buy) My parents had money and they choose not to buy me toys. Also pawn shops do not rob anyone, it is well understood that if you sell things to a pawn shop then you are loosing money. For people who sell things because they need to eat I can understand it. People who sell things at a pawn shop because they think that they need to get a toy invoke no sympathy in me. Though you are right that it is a little sad that some businesses build up hype for a product by making people think that their isn't enough to go around.

Also, I don't mean to use anecdotal evidence and I understand that my anecdotal evidence will persuade no one who doesn't already agree with me. It is just that I hold no sympathy for people have trouble securing toys because my parents correctly taught me that you do not get toys unless you wait and save for them. I mastered that concept as an eight year old. The fact that some adults have not gotten it saddens me.

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
Jormungander wrote:Now that

Jormungander wrote:

Now that I am done with my libertarian comment I will share some of my views about the proposed technocracy. I will use quotes from the website you provided the link to in my analysis.

Quote:

(1) Register on a continuous 24-hour-per day basis the total net conversion of ... the amount of physical resources available in the form of consumable goods and services for consumption by the total population during a length of time sufficient to allow all industrial processes to complete a cycle.

This sounds very authoritarian. Do we really want some group of overlords tracking all goods and services and knowing every purchase that you make. I like to use some goods and services anonymously. Some kind of central tracking system that knows every purchase and every product made is NOT something that I support. I think that this is the system used in the dystopic society described in Player Piano.

 

I didn't read Player Piano but, how is it authoritarian just knowing what you purchase? It doesnt say anything about controlling what you purchase. I think banks already know what goods and services you use anyway.

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2642
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
I understand your point,

I understand your point, Jormungander.

I think I have failed to properly convey mine.

What happens to children whom are denied the reward despite their work? Aren't those parents the ones that engage in the crazy ideal of giving their children everything they never had as a child?

Should they be exploited by the markets for ridiculous profit?

I was using toys as to be more delicate with this subject.

I am loathe to bring other commodities into the conversation because emotions run higher and hotter with some people regarding food, shelter(see housing crisis), gas, clothing, and even electricity(see TVA 20% increase despite record profits).

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
mohammed

mohammed wrote:

 

Quote:
coulda swore a technocracy was a form of government solely devoted to progression and solving any/all problems through technological advancement?... not... this... crap

you are truly an idiot The Doomed Soul. Technocracy inc. was started after the US government decided to do the great energy survey. its also been around for a very long time, look it up dumb ass. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy_Incorporated

 

... So i was right, this isnt a "Technocracy" at all (as backed by dictionaries, encyclopedias, and Sci-fi concepts)

This crap your pointing to is just a bizarre social and economic control system (from wiki), masquerading as another concept.

 

So... can haz cookie noa?

What Would Kharn Do?


JillSwift
Superfan
JillSwift's picture
Posts: 1758
Joined: 2008-01-13
User is offlineOffline
The Doomed Soul wrote:So...

The Doomed Soul wrote:
So... can haz cookie nao?
*tosses you a Doomie treat*


 


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
JillSwift wrote:*tosses you

JillSwift wrote:

*tosses you a Doomie treat*

 

OM NOMNOMNOMNOM OM NOM

 


mohammed
mohammed's picture
Posts: 119
Joined: 2008-08-20
User is offlineOffline
 Doomed soul, you sound

 Doomed soul, you sound exactly like a theist to me in an Athesit VS thesit debate. Totally ignorant of what you are talking about. there is nothing sci-fi about this plan. that is like saying the design for a computer is sci-fi. this was designed from facts and the basic plan was final in 1931. You just refuse to learn. god damn you are fucking stupid.

One of the Scientist M. king Hubbert even predicted peak oil!!! what the hell is wrong with you? oh thats right your the guy who was talking about the merits of lavey Satanism, pfft! no wonder....

 


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
mohammed wrote: Doomed

mohammed wrote:

 Doomed soul, you sound exactly like a theist to me in an Athesit VS thesit debate. Totally ignorant of what you are talking about. there is nothing sci-fi about this plan. that is like saying the design for a computer is sci-fi. this was designed from facts and the basic plan was final in 1931. You just refuse to learn. god damn you are fucking stupid.

One of the Scientist M. king Hubbert even predicted peak oil!!! what the hell is wrong with you? oh thats right your the guy who was talking about the merits of lavey Satanism, pfft! no wonder....

 

I repeat

... So i was right, this isnt a "Technocracy" at all (as backed by dictionaries, encyclopedias, and Sci-fi concepts)

This crap your pointing to is just a bizarre social and economic control system (from wiki), masquerading as another concept.

 

So... can haz >ANOTHER< cookie noa?

------

If dictionaries, encyclopedias, and sci-fi concepts... all back my definition... where does that leave you again? oh thats right, with WIKI

What Would Kharn Do?


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2642
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
THAT WILL BE QUITE

THAT WILL BE QUITE ENOUGH!!!!

Debate the issue or count the moments until the mods call time out.

That means reasoned arguments and/or questions. Politics are heated enough.

Are we clear?

 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
1... 2... 3... 4... 5...

1...

 

2...

 

3...

 

4...

 

5...

 

Mississipi...

 

Wait, is there 2 P's in Mississipi?

What Would Kharn Do?


mohammed
mohammed's picture
Posts: 119
Joined: 2008-08-20
User is offlineOffline
 I didn't read Player Piano

 yeah this thread is being hijacked by the doomed soul typing as much garbage as he can.


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2642
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Many stores already use

Many stores already use 'discount' cards in this manner. The information garnered from your Kroger Plus card or some such is actually sold to firms conducting market analysis in reference to the store's layout, location, and in some ways customer base.

However, those don't affect production, but distribution.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2642
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
mohammed wrote: yeah this

mohammed wrote:

 yeah this thread is being hijacked by the doomed soul typing as much garbage as he can.

You're not helping, but it can be brought back to the subject.

Trust me, I used to be the ad hom king. It just kills the convo when you call someone a dumbfuck though.

If you're truly fluent in the idea then the fact that someone hasn't read the material shouldn't dissuade your argument in support of it.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
mohammed wrote: yeah this

mohammed wrote:

 yeah this thread is being hijacked by the doomed soul typing as much garbage as he can.

 

Yes, yes it is... I hear by proclaim myself king shit of this garbage heap

Come 1, come all, and wonder at the mysteries, of the odorous kingdom...

 

And what happened to the irrelavent drivel i was attempting to reply to Mohammed?

"If you dont understand energy accounting economics, you CAN NOT understand technocracy" and all that jazz (sorry if thats not 100% accurate, i was skimming after all  )

 

So i think i will rebuttle with the point that, if the true definition of technocracy hold true, then all the economic energy crap (i repeat, like a theist) CRAP, would not exist, as it would be opposed to underlining principles of technocracy itself...

What Would Kharn Do?


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2642
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
The Doomed Soul wrote:So i

The Doomed Soul wrote:


So i think i will rebuttle with the point that, if the true definition of technocracy hold true, then all the economic energy crap (i repeat, like a theist) CRAP, would not exist, as it would be opposed to underlining principles of technocracy itself...

Which definition is the 'true' definition?

From the site? wiki? answers.com?

From the technocracy.org site (which finally started working for me at 5am):

Quote:
The Internet is an invaluable tool in enabling the public to access the original scientific investigation of the North American Continent by the Technical Alliance. The general usage of the Internet has led to some confusion because other individuals or organizations are also using the name "Technocracy". No other postings on the Internet are official Technocracy Inc. informational outlets.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


mohammed
mohammed's picture
Posts: 119
Joined: 2008-08-20
User is offlineOffline
darth_josh wrote:The Doomed

darth_josh wrote:

The Doomed Soul wrote:

 

So i think i will rebuttle with the point that, if the true definition of technocracy hold true, then all the economic energy crap (i repeat, like a theist) CRAP, would not exist, as it would be opposed to underlining principles of technocracy itself...

Which definition is the 'true' definition?

From the site? wiki? answers.com?

From the technocracy.org site (which finally started working for me at 5am):

Quote:
The Internet is an invaluable tool in enabling the public to access the original scientific investigation of the North American Continent by the Technical Alliance. The general usage of the Internet has led to some confusion because other individuals or organizations are also using the name "Technocracy". No other postings on the Internet are official Technocracy Inc. informational outlets.

Darth nice to see someone rational in my thread. dont bother with doomed soul, he was trying to argue for satanism in another thread.

Anyway if you dont understand energy accounting economics, you CAN NOT understand technocracy. so make sure you read up on how energy accounting works.

 

Anyway, back to my main point about Technocracy. Its a system based on balance and sustainability. Our current system is based on growth. and if one watched the video on Arithmetic, Population and Energy that i linked they would understand why a system based on growth is almost as stupid as the doomed soul. (the doomed soul of a non believer lol)


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
darth_josh wrote:The Doomed

darth_josh wrote:

The Doomed Soul wrote:

So i think i will rebuttle with the point that, if the true definition of technocracy hold true, then all the economic energy crap (i repeat, like a theist) CRAP, would not exist, as it would be opposed to underlining principles of technocracy itself...

 

Which definition is the 'true' definition?

From the site? wiki? answers.com?

From the technocracy.org site (which finally started working for me at 5am):

Quote:
The Internet is an invaluable tool in enabling the public to access the original scientific investigation of the North American Continent by the Technical Alliance. The general usage of the Internet has led to some confusion because other individuals or organizations are also using the name "Technocracy". No other postings on the Internet are official Technocracy Inc. informational outlets.


 

What i originally said;

The Doomed Soul wrote:

coulda swore a technocracy was a form of government solely devoted to progression and solving any/all problems through technological advancement?

 

What is written, as per encyclopedia (my most readily available non-paper at least )

Technocracy : A form of government in which scientists and technical experts are in control; "technocracy is described as that society in which those who govern justify themselves by appeal to technical experts who justify themselves by appeal to scientific forms of knowledge". A governmental or organizational system where decision makers are selected based upon how highly knowledgeable they are, rather than how much political capital they hold.

Technocrats are individuals with technical training and occupations who perceive many important societal problems as being solvable, often while proposing technology-focused solutions. The administrative scientist Gunnar K. A. Njalsson theorizes that technocrats are primarily driven by their cognitive "problem-solution mindsets" and only in part by particular occupational group interests. Their activities and the increasing success of their ideas are thought to be a crucial factor behind the modern spread of technology and the largely ideological concept of the "Information Society." Technocrats may be distinguished from "econocrats" and "bureaucrats" whose problem-solution mindsets differ from those of the technocrats.

 

http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Technocracy_%28bureaucratic%29

I suppose that''ll do as a refference for now

 

Now, notice my simplistic correlation?

----------

BUT, Mohammed's Technocracy from Technocracy, INC   (funny that its a business now... self defeatism ftw  )

Specifically states http://www.technocracy.ca/simp/isnot.htm  (which is the unfortunate canadian link i am forced to view from tech, inc)

 

Technocracy is not:

-A political party...

-A political theory... Bullshit, both are precisely what a fuckin Technocracy is

 

-A financial racket ... Energy Accounting Economics, REALLY help fuck that point over

 

-A religious organization... Got me there, i havent seen anything about saying 3 Hail R.A.M's before supper

 

-A philosophical concept... Blends in to much with politics and changing human society, so... Bullshit

 

-A varient of Communism, Socialism, Facsism, or any other “-ism”  I seem to recall it drawing from all 3 (especailly Socialistic ideals)

 

-Rule by a technological “elite” ... *Cough* "Some forms of technocracy are a form of de facto elitism, whereby the "most qualified" and the administrative elite tend to be the same." *Cough* Oh snap http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Technocracy_%28bureaucratic%29

 

-Putting scientists or engineers in “power” ... ""technocracy is described as that society in which those who govern justify themselves by appeal to technical experts who justify themselves by appeal to scientific forms of knowledge"." Guess they missed that.

http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Technocracy_%28bureaucratic%29

 

-A corporate dictatorship ... Meh, depends how smart the corporation is, Zieg Heil Mirco$oft!

 

-A shadowy villain in a role-playing game ... You better fucking believe it is... and that list is damn near innumerable

 

-A dead organization ... dont care

 

-Seeking to overthrow the government and “take over”  ... and what would you classify mass Governmental, Economic, Social, and Technological CHANGE as?

 

-In support of violent change  ... if they could do it in a highly efficient manner that whats theorized to be better in the long run... yes they would.

 

 

Nao can i PWZ haz my fookin cookie?

Mohammed, i think you've been sold the wrong idea

What Would Kharn Do?


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2642
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
mohammed wrote:Anyway, back

mohammed wrote:

Anyway, back to my main point about Technocracy. Its a system based on balance and sustainability. Our current system is based on growth. and if one watched the video on Arithmetic, Population and Energy that i linked they would understand why a system based on growth is almost as stupid as the doomed soul. (the doomed soul of a non believer lol)

I must say that I think there are far too many variables unaccounted for in what I've read and watched so far.

Planning for sustainability of a region also means planning for its possible failure. The trendevents newsletter outlines these possibilities. However, it doesn't look as if there are anythuing more than glittering generalities thrown at it.

There are facets of this which are compatible with my personal world outlook. However, I remain skeptical. I will keep watching Prof. Bartlett, but his initial 'selling point' of doubling hypotheses doesn't fit even 20% of the models of the past 5 years.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


mohammed
mohammed's picture
Posts: 119
Joined: 2008-08-20
User is offlineOffline
 Glad to hear you will keep

 Glad to hear you will keep looking into it. its a great plan. not perfect but it is the FIRST attempt at designing a sustainable system. Do i think Technocracy will be what we end up with? no, i do not. but i know that the "price system" can only take us so far and we are pushing it to its limits. 


Jormungander
atheistScience Freak
Jormungander's picture
Posts: 938
Joined: 2008-07-15
User is offlineOffline
darth_josh wrote:Many stores

darth_josh wrote:

Many stores already use 'discount' cards in this manner. The information garnered from your Kroger Plus card or some such is actually sold to firms conducting market analysis in reference to the store's layout, location, and in some ways customer base.

However, those don't affect production, but distribution.

Yes, there are current means to track your purchases. If you use credit or debit cards then all of your purchases are known. The stores that use discount cards only do that so they know what to advertise. The thing that I am really against is that there would be a central political body that monitors all goods and services. I think that centralized bodies trying to control economies have a history of dismal failure. Centralized bodies can regulate economies just fine, if private enterprise is still allowed. But put a centralized body in charge of every small detail and historically economic failure is fast approaching. This reminds me of one of my favorite quotes:

"If we were directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we would soon want for bread."

– Thomas Jefferson

 

Quote:

dont bother with doomed soul, he was trying to argue for satanism in another thread.

Satanism is a purely atheistic religion. The believe in neither God nor Satan. It is just a pseudo-religious excuse for selfish hedonism. I find it a little silly, but I don't look down upon Satanists. I think that they are honest in their desires and intentions, unlike most people. It takes balls to admit that you are purely self serving and will never lend help to those you deem unworthy. Also, even if he was a member of a retarded religion, that has nothing to do with you defending Technocracy Inc.

For that matter I propose that we use 'Technocracy Inc' to describe the system advocated by mohammed. I have read multiple authors using the word 'technocracy' in the way that The Doomed Soul defined it. I don't even think that "Technocracy Inc." is advocating technocracy as everyone else that I have ever read seems to understand it.

 

Quote:

If you're truly fluent in the idea then the fact that someone hasn't read the material shouldn't dissuade your argument in support of it.

Mohammed has not defended Technocracy Inc at all. He just gave us a link to the site and then insults The Doomed Soul. If he did describe why he supports it and why he thinks that it is the best system of politics and economics, then we could have a civilized debate. If not then we will just get more insults and he will turn people away from Technocracy Inc just because of his attitude.

 

Quote:

The general usage of the Internet has led to some confusion because other individuals or organizations are also using the name "Technocracy".

They are wrong on that one. I have read books written in the 60's and 70's that use technocracy in the way that The Doomed Soul and myself understand it. I suppose we will just have to deal with the confusion arising from very different definitions being applied to this one word.

 

Gauche wrote:

I didn't read Player Piano but, how is it authoritarian just knowing what you purchase? It doesnt say anything about controlling what you purchase. I think banks already know what goods and services you use anyway.

They don't just want to know about every purchase made, they also want direct control over all manufacturing and an end to private business as we know it. A centralized body that holds direct control over all industry is as authoritarian as you can get when it comes to economics. Also there is the disturbing loss of privacy.

 

darth_josh wrote:

I was using toys as to be more delicate with this subject.

I am loathe to bring other commodities into the conversation because emotions run higher and hotter with some people regarding food, shelter(see housing crisis), gas, clothing, and even electricity(see TVA 20% increase despite record profits).

You are right about that. The discussion on toys has very low stakes. Bring the same discussion into the realm of food and shelter and suddenly it is life and death. Though as far a food goes: our food prices are artificially inflated do to protectionist legislation. We could get cheaper food if we slashed import tariffs, but then people don't like globalization so instead we deal with inflated food prices. I think we could prevent future housing crises if the government did not bail out loaning companies that make poor decisions. In fact, by bailing out those large foolish loaning companies, the government is punishing smaller loaning companies that made wise decisions. This would have been the big chance for smaller wiser loaning companies to seize control of the market. But instead the government uses a bailout to keep those who made retarded economic decisions in business. As far as I am concerned the government bailout is virtually guaranteeing that this will happen again. What do the large loaning companies have to loose? If they do something that most economists tell them before hand is disastrous and end up in trouble, big government will just give them another bailout. I suppose things like that make me economically libertarian; the government getting its filthy hands in our economy tends to screw everything up.

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2642
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Jormungander wrote:You are

Jormungander wrote:

You are right about that. The discussion on toys has very low stakes. Bring the same discussion into the realm of food and shelter and suddenly it is life and death. Though as far a food goes: our food prices are artificially inflated do to protectionist legislation. We could get cheaper food if we slashed import tariffs, but then people don't like globalization so instead we deal with inflated food prices. I think we could prevent future housing crises if the government did not bail out loaning companies that make poor decisions. In fact, by bailing out those large foolish loaning companies, the government is punishing smaller loaning companies that made wise decisions. This would have been the big chance for smaller wiser loaning companies to seize control of the market. But instead the government uses a bailout to keep those who made retarded economic decisions in business. As far as I am concerned the government bailout is virtually guaranteeing that this will happen again. What do the large loaning companies have to loose? If they do something that most economists tell them before hand is disastrous and end up in trouble, big government will just give them another bailout. I suppose things like that make me economically libertarian; the government getting its filthy hands in our economy tends to screw everything up.

I think it is important to point out that these organizations you have mentioned(We can both name a few bailouts) seem to have been the natural result of deregulation. Would you concur?

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


mohammed
mohammed's picture
Posts: 119
Joined: 2008-08-20
User is offlineOffline
 Quote:Satanism is a purely

 

Quote:
Satanism is a purely atheistic religion. The believe in neither God nor Satan.

 

no it is not atheistic. satanism is the worship of a mythical character in the buybull. lavey satanist do not believe in god? maybe but they do believe in ghost and spirits according to their web site. and are not true satanist

 

As far as Technocracy goes, there is plenty of material to read on their web site check it out. I have already stated that although i agree with the core concepts of technocracy i don't think it will ever be implemented but something like it that is designed around sustainability and science will be the next level.

 

You said i havent argued my point but i have.  i stated over and over and no one has addressed my statement about the price system being based on growth and that any system based on growth is doomed tho failure. 

Quote:
I think that centralized bodies trying to control economies have a history of dismal failure.

they used money... like i said study energy accounting or you wont understand.

 

today sure looks good for our economy doesnt it... this would not happen in Technocracy's system. whats the fix for it? growth in markets lol!

 

 


Jormungander
atheistScience Freak
Jormungander's picture
Posts: 938
Joined: 2008-07-15
User is offlineOffline
mohammed wrote:no it is not

mohammed wrote:

no it is not atheistic. satanism is the worship of a mythical character in the buybull. lavey satanist do not believe in god? maybe but they do believe in ghost and spirits according to their web site. and are not true satanist

No they don't. You are just factually wrong on that matter. They do not believe in God or the Devil. They do not worship any kind of devil or any kind of anthropomorphic being. Also you might be using a No True Scottsman fallacy. They are 'true satanists,' they just don't believe in an anthropomorphic devil. They use Satan as an extended metaphor. They expressly state that Satan is just a metaphor and not a being in any sense. Like I said: it is silly and pseudo-religious, but it is not actually devil worship.

 

mohammed wrote:

they used money... like i said study energy accounting or you wont understand.

But energy accounting IS money. It is just saying energy=currency. That is no better or worse than saying gold=currency. Making you currency tied to some resource won't fix all of society's economic problems. Technocracy Inc wants to pretend that their energy accounting will really mean something for the economy, but it won't. All it will due it turn energy into a unit of currency. Perhaps it is not even a bad idea to use energy as currency, but I still wouldn't support a centralized accounting system that tracks all purchases and controls production. I hate to bust out yet another sci-fi reference, but I remember reading about a futuristic society that used energy as its unit of currency. There is no fundamental problem with that concept, it just won't help us anymore then declaring that gold is money would help us.

 

mohammed wrote:

today sure looks good for our economy doesnt it... this would not happen in Technocracy's system.

I agree that they would not have our economic problems. Instead they would have different economic problems arising from trying to centrally run an economy. Also if energy became cheaper or more expensive, there would be a currency crisis under that system.

 

darth_josh wrote:

I think it is important to point out that these organizations you have mentioned(We can both name a few bailouts) seem to have been the natural result of deregulation. Would you concur?

That is a tricky subject for me. On the one hand government interference seems to make things worse. On the other hand the private businesses by themselves made all these problems. If only we could outlaw bad decision making. I suppose this would have to be classified as one of the few acceptable regulations on the free market that I will accept. I like insured banking to avoid banking disasters, and now I suppose I might support regulated loaning to prevent loaning disasters. If businesses prove that they can not be trusted then it is time for Uncle Sam to let them fail (I endorse that option) or for Uncle Sam to regulate them to the point that they can not cause large economic problems. Both options are painful, but we are in a bind in this matter. If only there was a way to regulate them a little (to prevent the worst abuses), and still let them feel the pain caused by their poor decisions.

 

Also it is weird how everything brought up in this thread reminds me of sci-fi. I don't normally associate politics or economics with fantasy futuristic societies, but this thread is full of connects to them. And I haven't even brought up Frank Herbert's Ixian technocrats yet. Those are technocrats that I can get behind.

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India


mohammed
mohammed's picture
Posts: 119
Joined: 2008-08-20
User is offlineOffline
you are STILL avoiding my

you are STILL avoiding my argument about growth system VS sustainable system!!! i cant believe it....

 

Quote:
No they don't. You are just factually wrong on that matter. They do not believe in God or the Devil. They do not worship any kind of devil or any kind of anthropomorphic being. Also you might be using a No True Scotsman fallacy. They are 'true satanists,' they just don't believe in an anthropomorphic devil. They use Satan as an extended metaphor. They expressly state that Satan is just a metaphor and not a being in any sense. Like I said: it is silly and pseudo-religious, but it is not actually devil worship.

 

I'm sorry you are wrong. you are only Talking about Lavey satanist and they can not be the real satanist because they do not believe in Satan and were not the original satanist.
The idea behind them is basically as you said but you are ignoring the originals and most importantly the ones who do believe.
 

they are Laveyans period. I have not met many but i have met a few true satanist and they believe and worship the Satan from the bible. they are not the same as laveyans because they believe in that deity. a guy who calls himself straight but only has sex with men will never convince me he is straight no matter how much he says to me I'm giving him the "no true Scotsman" argument.

 

Quote:
 But energy accounting IS money. It is just saying energy=currency.

WOW! now i KNOW you haven't read anything about it and you are talking out of your ass... i might as well quit talking to you. Energy accounting is not money at all.

let me go ahead and lay out the differences since you are lazy or something else. 

Unlike money, energy units could not be saved earned or traded and the amount you have expires and renews every year to 2 years depending on how long  the balanced load period is determined to be. the amount of units depends on the amount of net energy we can produce and everything is valued based on the amount of energy it takes to produce it.. a real value that doesn't change unless we become more efficient and then it becomes cheaper. no low end or mid grade products or planned obsolescence.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Jormungander
atheistScience Freak
Jormungander's picture
Posts: 938
Joined: 2008-07-15
User is offlineOffline
mohammed wrote:you are

mohammed wrote:

you are talking out of your ass ... you are lazy or something else.

I totally called it. In post #30 I predicted this thread would go in one of two directions: more petty insults and no meaningful discussion with mohammed, or mohammed would start actually arguing for Technocracy Inc and we could have a meaningful discussion. Mohammed has chosen the petty insults path so I suppose he wants to alienate everyone from Technocracy Inc by insulting us.

 

mohammed wrote:

i have met a few true satanist

What a coincidence, I have met a few True Scottsmen that never put sugar on their porridge. They assured me that the false Scottsmen who do like sugar on their porridge are just fakers. And yes, there are theistic satanists, but they aren't the True SatanistsTM, they are just one form of satanism. And The Doomed Soul was not arguing in support of theistic satanism anyways.

 

mohammed wrote:

you are STILL avoiding my argument about growth system VS sustainable system!!!

You never made an argument about it. You made the unsupported assertions that our pricing and growth system must fail. You can't make unsupported claims and then call them arguments. I have read other sources on growth-free economics, but they did not attack our pricing system. They either proposed static currency or meaningless inflation in which money is slowly devalued but there is no true growth. I don't think that our pricing system has to fail. I know you think it does, but you never argued in favor of your side, you just stated it as though it were the truth. First convince me that we can't have a no-growth economy with static currency AND convince me that we can't have a no-growth economy with money having a shifting arbitrary value that has meaningless inflation. If either of those options are possible then we don't even need to end the current pricing system; we would just need to adjust it a little as conditions change. Also I think we can learn a lesson from Terry Pratchett: "'Multiple exclamation marks,' he went on, shaking his head, 'are a sure sign of a diseased mind.'"

 

mohammed wrote:

Unlike money, energy units could not be saved earned or traded and the amount you have expires and renews every year to 2 years depending on how long  the balanced load period is determined to be. the amount of units depends on the amount of net energy we can produce and everything is valued based on the amount of energy it takes to produce it.. a real value that doesn't change unless we become more efficient and then it becomes cheaper.

That is money. You trade energy units for goods and services; how is that not money? It is not even the first time that I have heard proposals to make money expire after a certain amount of time. You are just saying that: money=energy (so energy availability determines the value of currency) and money expires every two years. Also it is not a 'real value;' it is just as arbitrary as saying money=gold and expires every two years, or money=gold and never expires, or money=energy and never expires, or money is purely arbitrary and is tied to no commodity.

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India


mohammed
mohammed's picture
Posts: 119
Joined: 2008-08-20
User is offlineOffline
Quote: And The Doomed Soul

Quote:
 And The Doomed Soul was not arguing in support of theistic satanism anyways.

it doesnt matter. laveyism isnt satanism not matter what he calls it.

Quote:
 You never made an argument about it. You made the unsupported assertions that our pricing and growth system must fail

i dont think you are reading anything... here is my argument AGAIN.... show me how a system based on growth is better than a system based on balance and sustainability.
Anything that grows in and finite system will reach a point that growth ends. Period. If that system needs growth to be healthy as does ours the system is doomed to failure.
We are no longer on the gold standard. you need some education here ya go... http://www.chrismartenson.com/crashcourse

 

Quote:
That is money. You trade energy units for goods and services; how is that not money?

your arguments are so weak... this is like saying my cat breaths too; how is that not like being human?

As already stated moneys value changes. energy units do not. money does not expire while you are holding it. Energy units do expire and can not be horded OR TRADED. the value of an item is determined by the energy it cost to make it so therefore the value is NOT arbitrary.  im blown away that you could even think for a second that money sounds like energy accounting. you do not have the ability to debate this subject.

 

Talking to you is pretty much pointless.

 


Jormungander
atheistScience Freak
Jormungander's picture
Posts: 938
Joined: 2008-07-15
User is offlineOffline
mohammed wrote:here is my

mohammed wrote:

here is my argument AGAIN.... show me how a system based on growth is better than a system based on balance and sustainability.

That is not an argument. You still have not argued in support of your system. At best you insult or say that the current system is doomed. Argue in support of your system if you want us to believe in it.

 

Quote:

Anything that grows in and finite system will reach a point that growth ends. Period. If that system needs growth to be healthy as does ours the system is doomed to failure.

I addressed this in post #35. Should I quote what I already wrote on this? Or can I trust you to read it the first time I wrote it? People have theorized zero growth markets. It is just that a zero growth market does not necessitate Technocracy Inc's method of economic control. That is the main problem here. Even IF you proved that our market system is doomed, most people would not accept Technocracy Inc. They would support other methods of altering our economy instead. Argue in support of Technocracy Inc, or you will never convince anyone to see things your way.

 

Quote:

money does not expire while you are holding it

Money that expires is still money. As I previously said: some people already support expiring money to prevent hoarding. It is still money though. If these energy units can be traded for goods and services then by definition it is a kind of money. Your claims that it is not does not change the fact that it is.

money n., pl. -eys or -ies. A medium that can be exchanged for goods and services and is used as a measure of their values.

It seems the dictionary agrees with me.

 

Quote:

We are no longer on the gold standard. you need some education here ya go... http://www.chrismartenson.com/crashcourse

I never said that we are on the gold standard, by claiming that I do hold that position you are putting words in my mouth. I do not support a gold standard. I am just saying that a gold standard is no more or less arbitrary than an energy standard.

 

Quote:

im blown away that you could even think for a second that money sounds like energy accounting.

Other way around: energy account is a form of money, not that money is a form of energy accounting.

 

Quote:

you do not have the ability to debate this subject.

 

Talking to you is pretty much pointless.

Wow, those petty insults really showed me. Truly your wit has a rapier's edge.

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
Jormungander wrote:Also it

Jormungander wrote:

Also it is weird how everything brought up in this thread reminds me of sci-fi. I don't normally associate politics or economics with fantasy futuristic societies, but this thread is full of connects to them. And I haven't even brought up Frank Herbert's Ixian technocrats yet. Those are technocrats that I can get behind.

Part of the Dune Universe, right? Vaguely rings a bell

 

What Would Kharn Do?


mohammed
mohammed's picture
Posts: 119
Joined: 2008-08-20
User is offlineOffline
 wow you guys are sad...

 wow you guys are sad... Part of the Dune Universe? from something that was created in 1918... stupid...

BTW Jormungander  I wasnt trying to rip you apart i was just being honest, there is a big difference. you just dont have a logical mind.

 


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
mohammed wrote: wow you

mohammed wrote:

 wow you guys are sad... Part of the Dune Universe? from something that was created in 1918... stupid...

BTW Jormungander  I wasnt trying to rip you apart i was just being honest, there is a big difference. you just dont have a logical mind.

... for clarification

The Doomed Soul wrote:

Jormungander wrote:

Also it is weird how everything brought up in this thread reminds me of sci-fi. I don't normally associate politics or economics with fantasy futuristic societies, but this thread is full of connects to them. And I haven't even brought up Frank Herbert's Ixian technocrats yet. Those are technocrats that I can get behind.

Part of the Dune Universe, right? Vaguely rings a bell

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ix_(Dune)

And i was right, Ixians are from the Dune Universe... im on a roll today

 

 

 

Mohammed, havent your had enough, humble pie, yet?

and i swear if you rant about "humble pie" having nothing to do with technocracy, im gonna smack you

What Would Kharn Do?


mohammed
mohammed's picture
Posts: 119
Joined: 2008-08-20
User is offlineOffline
Doomed soul, i can not

Doomed soul, i can not believe you think you have done anything other than prove your stupidity. give it up, you are challenging people that are way out of your league.  now with threats you have crossed the line imo.

 

Mods is there someway to put him on ignore?



 


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
mohammed wrote:Doomed soul,

mohammed wrote:

Doomed soul, i can not believe you think you have done anything other than prove your stupidity. give it up, you are challenging people that are way out of your league. 

 

*giggles* Oh you... you always did know how to make a girl feel wanted, teehee

 

When, exactly, were you planning on proving me wrong? Because im getting bored of proving you wrong

What Would Kharn Do?


mohammed
mohammed's picture
Posts: 119
Joined: 2008-08-20
User is offlineOffline
  Darth_Josh wrote:THAT

 

Darth_Josh wrote:
THAT WILL BE QUITE ENOUGH!!!!

Debate the issue or count the moments until the mods call time out.

That means reasoned arguments and/or questions. Politics are heated enough.

Are we clear?

 

Darth  already had to step in and say enough is enough to you.  You have not presented any reason, and i have had enough. Maybe there should be an age requirement here because i think i have had my fill of debating with children.

 


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
...mohammed wrote: 

...

mohammed wrote:

 

Darth_Josh wrote:
THAT WILL BE QUITE ENOUGH!!!!

 

Debate the issue or count the moments until the mods call time out.

That means reasoned arguments and/or questions. Politics are heated enough.

Are we clear?

Darth  already had to step in and say enough is enough to you.

 

In which i immediately responded with

The Doomed Soul wrote:

1...

2...

3...

4...

5...

Mississipi...

Wait, is there 2 P's in Mississipi?

mohammed wrote:

You have not presented any reason, and i have had enough.

But then i decided to actually put forth a tiny amount of effort, and actually refute your T.INC (Post #27, the big long one with blue, purple and grey links  )

Which Jormungander actually came along and agreed with... Holy shit, 2 retards, right?... what can i say, we multiply like rabbits

mohammed wrote:

Maybe there should be an age requirement here because i think i have had my fill of debating with children.

Awh come on, your a sucker for pain and you know it

 

What Would Kharn Do?


mohammed
mohammed's picture
Posts: 119
Joined: 2008-08-20
User is offlineOffline
 OK Doomed, If you think

 OK Doomed, If you think you can handle it i challenge you to a moderated/judged debate in the debate forum.

 

I will argue that systems like our current one that are based on growth will fail and that we need a new system based on sustainability the form of distribution will be one that can be measured (energy). And that the system will be based on thermodynamics. you can argue the opposite.


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
mohammed wrote: OK Doomed,

mohammed wrote:

 OK Doomed, If you think you can handle it i challenge you to a moderated/judged debate in the debate forum.

 

I will argue that systems like our current one that are based on growth will fail and that we need a new system based on sustainability the form of distribution will be one that can be measured (energy). And that the system will be based on thermodynamics. you can argue the opposite.

 

/facepalm   Have you paid attention to anything, anyone in this forum has been saying? I dont care about your energy economics, i only care that you and T.INC are masqurading it under the name Technocracy, its like me writing "HOLY BIBLE" on a fucking math text book.

THATS what i have a problem with, and THATS what you havent clued into yet... i hope that was clear

What Would Kharn Do?


Jormungander
atheistScience Freak
Jormungander's picture
Posts: 938
Joined: 2008-07-15
User is offlineOffline
mohammed

mohammed wrote:

BTW Jormungander  I wasnt trying to rip you apart i was just being honest, there is a big difference. you just dont have a logical mind.

Says the man who throws insults in nearly every post at either me or The Doomed Soul. Also you still have not in any way argued for Technocracy Inc, just more insults against us.

 

mohammed wrote:

OK Doomed, If you think you can handle it i challenge you to a moderated/judged debate in the debate forum.

You don't even argue for your system here, so why should we hear you argue for it in another thread? You make unsubstantiated claims that our current system must fail, but that is about it for your "argument." That and a man who can't resist ad hominems such as yourself just doesn't belong in the debate forum. If by some horrible twist of fate there really was a moderated debate on this issue I would want to be involved. Perhaps then you would automatically be declared the loser when you whip out at least one insult per post.

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
mohammed wrote: OK Doomed,

mohammed wrote:

 OK Doomed, If you think you can handle it i challenge you to a moderated/judged debate in the debate forum.

 

I will argue that systems like our current one that are based on growth will fail and that we need a new system based on sustainability the form of distribution will be one that can be measured (energy). And that the system will be based on thermodynamics. you can argue the opposite.

 

I guess i'll further point out, IF we are to have a debate, its topic would be about what "TECHNOCRACY" is... which i would totally agreed to doing, if we dont already exhaust its entertainment value in this forum.

 

What Would Kharn Do?


Jormungander
atheistScience Freak
Jormungander's picture
Posts: 938
Joined: 2008-07-15
User is offlineOffline
The Doomed Soul wrote:I

The Doomed Soul wrote:

I guess i'll further point out, IF we are to have a debate, its topic would be about what "TECHNOCRACY" is... which i would totally agreed to doing, if we dont already exhaust its entertainment value in this forum.

Looking around online gives me multiple definitions for it. There is no one definition, in fact there seems to be quite a few. But for the purposes of this discussion I suppose we can simplify it to our version of technocracy vs Technocracy Inc's central planning/energy accounting system.

I for one will welcome our new technocratic overlords. Perhaps if I can impress them with my engineering abilities they will welcome me into their fold. /sarcasm

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India


mohammed
mohammed's picture
Posts: 119
Joined: 2008-08-20
User is offlineOffline
 not up to the challenge i

 not up to the challenge i see. im not surprised. im not here to argue about Technocracy inc. who did coin the phrase some 75 years ago. thats why they incorporated.

I already spelled out what im arguing for. I will argue that systems like our current one that are based on growth will fail and that we need a new system based on sustainability . The form of distribution will be one that can be measured (energy). And that the system will be based on thermodynamics. I don't care about the obfuscation the word Technocracy has endured. That wasnt the point of my post at all.

 

As far as insults go, apparently you havent seen many RSS shows where they debate people on stikam, calling someone a dumb ass happens pretty frequently and is usually well deserved. Of course i wouldnt do that in a "formal" debate but the shoe really fit here. 

The whole i reason i brought technocracy into the picture was to show there is a design other than what we have now and even though it isnt perfect its better than our current one.  and it was an example of forward thinking and appling the scientific method to society.

 

Doomed either accept my debate or not.