Newsgroups: comp.robotics
Path: brunix!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!uunet!hobbes!earth.armory.com!rstevew
From: rstevew@armory.com (Richard Steven Walz)
Subject: Re: Does Socialism Take Jobs Away?
Organization: The Armory
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 1994 03:50:06 GMT
Message-ID: <Ctu7zn.1z6@armory.com>
References: <Ct8z84.np1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <1994Jul27.180501.13633@mixcom.mixcom.com> <Ctow3M.M1A@armory.com> <31fk4p$4dm@access1.digex.net>
Sender: news@armory.com (Usenet News)
Nntp-Posting-Host: deeptht.armory.com
Lines: 282

In article <31fk4p$4dm@access1.digex.net>,
Ray "Oliver" Cromwell <rjc@access1.digex.net> wrote:
>In article <Ctow3M.M1A@armory.com>,
>Richard Steven Walz <rstevew@armory.com> wrote:
>>In article <1994Jul27.180501.13633@mixcom.mixcom.com>,
>>Vince Mulhollon <vince@myhost.subdomain.domain> wrote:
>>>If you are trying to make a serious arguement about the "beauty" of
>>>the theory of socialism at least don't shoot yourself in the foot
>>>by discussing the sickeningly low productivity of socialist programs
>>>and nations.
>>---------------------------------
>>Gee, Germany has been doing fine. I suppose you think the Swedes are lazy.
>>I would say that Einstein was lazy, and he justified that human pasttime.
>>I think that leisure and time for thought is a human goal. Are you jealous
>>if someone achieves it???
>>-Steve
>
>   Neither of which practice your so-called "plan of production"
>model of socialism. Germany and Sweden, for all the generous
>state programs they have and progressive taxes, are still market
>economies with private ownership of the means of production. 
>They practice a slightly more statist version of the US mixed economy,
---------------------------------
Slightly is a cute distortion to save face! Yes, all these countries have
"companies", but they are charged their fare charge for the societal upkeep
they make necessary, thus making them simply a typical socialism. Their
taxes are significant! And the people are cared for! A so-called "mixed"
economy is what socialism is about!
-S

>namely "industrial policy."  Sweden is essentially a "company town"
>with only one major producer.  It should be noted that Germany
>is "doing fine" only by some completely screwed up measure. Germany,
----------------------------------
That's not what no less than six Germans have written to tell me this week
without other Germans contradicting them. They think they are doing fine
and they will be doing much better after this year! It takes a while to
re-unify a divided country, you know!!! Before that their standard of
living was higher than ours, and investment in Germany has not flagged with
the re-unification, because they know the Germans, as a people and as a
nation are going to be good for it!!!
-S

>indeed most of Europe, has an average unemployment rate of 10%
>compared to 5-6% in the US, or the 1% in "non socialist Russia"
>(you did say they weren't socialists didn't you? Well, if they are
>capitalists, then capitalism is superior to your ideal of
>"European pseudo-socialism" If they are fascists, then
>fascism is better.) Oh, and Britain, which had its own mini-Socialist
>Revolution, is doing very poorly indeed.
--------------------------
One, you ignore that the EC counts all able-bodied who have no jobs. We
haven't EVER done that, and it's estimated in the US to be over 13%!!!
We have only been counting unemployment claims, and once that runs out,
which it NEVER does in Europe, people stop reporting unemployment, so that
we can lie to our people about it!!! Reagan and Bush cooked up another
adjustment to that to make it LOOK better!!!
-S

>>>Don't make me bring up the subject of starving russians.
>>---------------------------------
>>The Russians never had socialism, and now they are starving with capitalism
>>worse than ever. 
>
>  Ah, but the Russian's had a 99% employment rate. I guess whatever
>they had, it was better than socialism!
----------------------------------
They achieve that by keeping young men in the army and out of the labor
force! They have universal conscription!!! Also, they lied a lot and still
are sensitive about that. They call unemployables "retired".
-S

>[blah blah blah, idiotic health care rant deleted. I'm thinking of
>nominating it for the net.legends FAQ]
----------------------
That just proves you're an asshole. care for more?
-S

>>>I would be annoyed if we destroyed Ford, Chrysler, etc and only produced
>>>Trabants and bicycles, but,
>>--------------------------------
>>We may have to regardless for ecological reasons. But I think Ford can
>>figure out how to build good buses, and likely some solar vehicles and low
>>cost errand vehicles. And they might even learn how to make mag-lev trains!
> 
>  Oh joy, multibillion dollar uneconomical mag-lev trains. Can we
>please flush as much money down the toilet as the Japanese? 
---------------------------------------
I said MIGHT. A higher temp superconductor could help a lot! But if that
doesn't come, then good trains of modern principle and/or good reliable bus
systems would be almost as efficient.
-S

>>They seem to learn everything else they say they can't when we make them!
>
>   Oh, I'm sure they could build solar power cars if they wanted. The
>only problem is, no one would buy them, and Ralph Nader would be
>campaigning against them as "death cars"  You see, to build a solar
>powered car that someone would want, you'd have to reduce the weight
>and size of the car to absurd values. You do this by using light weight
>materials (carbon composites would be way too expensive) and thus
>the car becomes a death trap. Not only that, but battery technology
>has only recently got to the level of making them feasible (you do want
>to drive the car during cloudy/night weather), and even at that, it
>might not be enough. At current solar efficiencies, you can only get
>about 100-150 W/m^2. That's a far cry from the energy you can get from
>gas.
--------------------------------------------
I agree with your math. Now agree with mine. YOU know we can't keep
throwing CO2 and CO into the air with no trees to absorb it!!! This means
stop burning as much or most of the petroleates, and stop chopping down
trees here and in the rainforest! If we can keep the reactors running at
low percentage of full power rating, which is the way the French keep their
reactors safe, I could go for that. I think we have found enough deep salt
mines to put a lot of radioactive waste till we can get into space or
figure out fusion plasma containment to the point where it's available.
Or we could use wind and tides and solar in a mix and simply slow down a
bit on some days. That wouldn't harm us so much! As for death cars, I have
seen fast solar cars, but the danger is from larger, heavier vehicles, if we
cordon traffic directions into freeway-like accesses with little difference
in relative speeds. As for converted vehicles, there are short haul
volkswagons and hondas now which meet most short commuter needs. And those
are lower speed accidents. You don't need mass to protect you in a
collision as much as you need crumple mass and body restraint and air bags.
And Ralph Nader liked the lower weight car the DOT built which was about
half styrofoam crumple sections and got 100 miles per gallon or could be
run solar! And you don't PUT ALL the solar arrays on the CAR!!! You leave
them at home or you charge at different storage stations and leave your
batteries. Most roofs come up to several kW's that way!
-S

>>If the people owned them, they would have the voice in saying what they
>>want, and not putting up with constantly changing fashion that isn't
>>anything but some art major showing off his new CAD program on the same old
>>chassis!
>
>  If the people owned then, and did as you wish (I bet they wouldn't),
>they quickly be out of a job as no one would buy what they'd produce.
-------------------------------------
If they had to to save the planet and because of government mandate, then
they would, now, wouldn't they!?! Don't be a sap! We're getting rid of
CFC's and nobody liked that. we got rid of DDT and the farmers hated that,
and so on.
-S

>>>I would be DEAD if we destroyed the best health care system in the 
>>>world or our nations farmers.
>>---------------------------------
>>I didn't see a mass die off in Canada, among ANY group or class of illness.
>>State your problem! And why would anyone destroy a bunch of poor farmers
>>that already work for a beaurocracy anyway, the BANK! Nothing worse than
>>THOSE bastards! I'v done lots of farming. I know all about it!
>
> (yeah, I bet you were a farmer. Tell us another one.)
-----------------------------------
I was a farm worker for several years in my life, yes, and I have relatives
with land in NE Missouri! I have plowed and harrowed, planted fertilized
and harvested about 1800 acres of land in corn and soybeans and picked our
truck farm produce. So don't be an ass!
-S

>It's funny to see a socialist turned fiscal conservative. I wonder if you 
>would  hold the same views if people were denied treatment for the goal of
>"cutting waste" Oh that's right, that would never happen under socialism.
>Ah, the majority is always right and always makes the optimal decisions.
>(like putting people up against the firing squad, lynching, declaring
>speech codes, etc) Just keep repeating it to yourself 
>and never lose faith in the holy vision!
---------------------------------
I'm not PC and I believe in limits on government. What YOU don't like is
that I ALSO believe in limits on business!!! Limits on people I don't like.
Business is a different animal than the personal lives of people! It's an
animal that can devour people's economic existence, just like government
can destroy people's freedom. Both need to be protected in a balance. But
if someone wants their free speech to be a rabble rousing to riot for the
"right" to either kill, pollute, restrict free speech, or allow business to
take over a government and its people and divide fairly earned wealth
unequally by the hour, then I will pull the trigger, I assure you!!!
If you think that it is a paradox that I would shoot someone for exercising
speech to preach against free speech, I don't believe it to be. A right
that can be used to destroy itself is not a legitimate use of that right.
It is WORSE than crying fire in a crowded theatre!!! Basic human rights
must be protected as the FIRST duty of a government and its people! There
is as much right to equal pay per hour for all occupations as there is a
right of free speech. There is as much right to care when you're sick as
there is to the right to the pursuit of happiness and freedom of movement!
I don't want to remove rights, I want to add them at the expense of
excessive controlling wealthy interests. There is as much right to have a
house to live in that you don't have to pay rent on as there is a right toa
trial by jury!!! There is such a thing as the best of the US Bill of Rights
and the Guarantees under the Soviet Constitution, which was never lived up
to at all! They are NOT in conflict!
-S

>>>Also I personally, publicly declare that I will refuse to be a 
>>>network engineer if ^h^h^h when we fully socialize amerika.
>>----------------------------------
>>Goody, we need more assholes digging ditches.
>
>  We will all be digging ditches by that day.  Either that, or we'll
>all spend our time fighting stupid crimes of the democratic majority.
-------------------------------------------
You are deluded and have NO idea what you're talking about. If you take on
the majority, you will become fertilizer! Especially when they have figured
out the game and know what they deserve from a government.
-S

>>>I will not have spent years training and studing so that I can
>>>become one with the earth by becoming a peasant farmer, after
>>>all automation is destroyed so we ALL can finally do menial
>>>brainless make-work.
>>----------------------------------------
>>I hate to tell you, but that's NOT the impact of socialism! You should do
>>some reading. I think you have in mind Luddites, not socialists.
>
>When the promise of "scientific" socialism and the glorious utopia it
>would create didn't pan out, now the threat of global destruction if
>we don't turn back to tribal "communist" living is trumpeted. Socialists
>will assume the Luddite position if it will help them gain power.
>They will assume any position. They will play old against young, black
--------------------------------------
You're about thirty years to late to make a fool of yourself with that
disinformation!!!!:)
-S

>against white, poor against rich, dumb against smart -- anything
>to insert themselves into political system. You will find plenty of
>socialists who are luddites, who speak out against technology, etc
>(try alt.politics.radical-left for example) if such a position will
>make certain people fearful and angry and more sympathetic to their
>position. In short, they act as political parasites.
-------------------------------------
There are always marginalized idiots, like the clowns that don't want their
food irradiated and then leave it grow out in front of a giant fusion
reactor and then cook it down with excessive heat!!!:) :)
-S

>>>I will leave this country when ^h^h^h if it falls apart, just like
>>>my ancestors left germany when it fell apart.
>>------------------------------------
>>Where will you go?! I don't know about you, but my ancestors left Germany
>>to avoid conscription in the Franko-Prussian war! I can't think of anywhere
>>decent to live that isn't more socialist than we are and getting more so!:)
>
>  Eastern Europe, Russia, China, Honk Kong, South America. Take your
>pick. The fact of the matter is, most of the world is moving away
>from socialism, and most of the reasonable socialists have now
>adapted and assumed a position of "market socialism" (welfare state
>capitalism) The rest of the extremist lot (many located on usenet),
>are either lonely kooks debating theory or writing propaganda (such
>as Worker's World), or struggling over the questions posed by
>Mises ages ago.
------------------------------
Eastern Europe wants its old socialist security back, as long as they don't
give up their rights of speech and freedom to work or not, as they see fit.
They want the right to work when they want to, and not to when they don't.
Sounds reasonable to me!! And little by little, all the nations of the
world are embracing these "mixed" system virtues, as you call them, when
all they are are classic socialism!!! Three of the eastern block and two of
the independent states have now elected socialists, 2 or 3 to 1!!! The
first thing they wanted was a right to full employment and medical! Go run
off into Africa and try to hunt gnus. As soon as you're tired of gnu
everyday, as they won't let you shoot anything else, you can come back and
figure out that it's a nice place to live, and nicer even than before!
-S

>   Japan just elected a "socialist" Prime Minister. When do you expect
>him to start tearing down the keiretsu's and nationalizing the economy?
>(more than it already is) I didn't think so. So much for your dream.
>I will enjoy having you as my caddy at the country club.
-----------------------------------
Japan has a ways to fall. But fall it will. It can't sustain the remnants
of ancient warlords and castes forever. And the kids are getting lazy and
wild! It'll go socisalist REAL soon!
-S

>-rjc, capitalist oppressor in training. 
----------------------------------
Just another fool who wants money instead of freedom and community. What a
lonely idiot.
-Steve Walz   rstevew@armory.com

