• The Dark Side 💕 Welcome Guest 💕
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Notable Threads Urgent Hotlines
    Bereavement Mindfulness
    Suicide Support Anger Management
  • TDS Moderators: AlphaMethylPhenyl | paranoid android

What would you change about society to make it ideal for you?

My ideal would involve:

Respect for families. Government-paid 18-month leave of absence from the job for one parent upon the birth of a child. (Like they already do in one N. European country - Sweden, I think it is.)

Respect for human beings. Turn prisons into places focused on reform, not punishment. Legalize all drugs. Provide minimum-level welfare for every human being on earth, so that they can pursue their passions and devote themselves to their families. Make education a priority, make spending on education double spending on "defense". Provide free education for anyone who needs it.

Respect for people who cultivate awareness, compassion and love. Government-paid holidays for people who want to take intensive meditation, yoga, or conflict resolution programs. Make such programs available in schools and prisons.

Respect for the planet. Government support of organic agriculture (without, of course, compromising organic standards). Eliminate all genetically-modified organisms in food.

Respect for animals. Government-supported programs encouraging vegetarians and people who are willing to experiment with vegetarian meals; reduction of animal testing and dissection; outlaw factory farms (= concentration camps for animals).

There are more, but these are the first that came to mind.
 
MyDoorsAreOpen says:

I would make sure every kid spent some of his childhood in a culture very different from his own, so that he had an appreciation for the sheer number of alternatives there are in almost every situation.

Bravo!!!
Have the gov send every high-schooler to another culture for a year!
Increase tolerance and understanding!
Open people's minds and hearts!
 
I think there are two interpretations of this thread. One interpretation is, "What changes would we make that are feasible?"

Another interpretation is, "If we waved a magic wand and had unlimited moneyand resources, what would we do?"

No offense to anyone, but I think some people are responding to this thread with the second interpretation in mind. How is the government supposed to pay for all these things that some people want?
 
Legalize ALL recreational drugs (as in put them in the hands of doctors instead of pigs)
curb/eliminate the jingoism of the united states
make lobbying of govt officials illegal

i could go on but cant really think straight right now (poppy pods plus 500mg codeine)
 
Fjones said:
I respectfully disagree. Y ou have made an unreasonable generalization. YEs, there are SOME rich people who became rish through the means you described. And there are also many rich people who did NOT get rich by the shady means you described.

For you to make the generalization that all rich people are shady, borderline criminal and con artists, is just wrong.
Click to expand...

And what percent of them do you think became rich through means that were not capitalistic and manipulative? Very few. Some doctors, lawyers, other professionals, couple of business owners... The rest are capitolists. Do you know what capitolism means in laymen terms? It means I have the power now, so I will flex that power to keep the power. There are even laws that force businesses to do whatever is in the best interests of the shareholders. That means that if a marketing team finds out saying to you "you a fat piece of shit, to eat your god damn hotdog before mcdonalds shoves it up your ass" proves to be lucrative, the business must do it!

Its completely unscrupulous.
 
3DayRun said:
It might fuck up society, but what if society was indoctrinated from birth? Constantly blasted with propaganda that promotes faith and abcense of sin? Sure, it's a stretch, but it creates a land on one ideal, one belief, and unity. Everyone could be happy. In fact, so many would believe it would be considered "truth" and those that did not could be branded mentally ill and treated.
Click to expand...

Lol this has been tried many many times. Leads to complete disasters, war, mass murder, torture, that kind of thing :)
 
Draigan said:
And what percent of them do you think became rich through means that were not capitalistic and manipulative? Very few. Some doctors, lawyers, other professionals, couple of business owners... The rest are capitolists. Do you know what capitolism means in laymen terms? It means I have the power now, so I will flex that power to keep the power. There are even laws that force businesses to do whatever is in the best interests of the shareholders. That means that if a marketing team finds out saying to you "you a fat piece of shit, to eat your god damn hotdog before mcdonalds shoves it up your ass" proves to be lucrative, the business must do it!

Its completely unscrupulous.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm sorry sir, but I do not share your disparaging view of capitalism. I don't think the government should be taking people's money away just because they have a lot of it. That sounds like theft to me, and I do not support that.

People are entitled to build a business and sell their product. It isn't McDonald's fault that people eat their food and get fat. McDonald's sells a product that people like, and thus the corporation makes a lot of money. The same goes for most successful corporations.

You talk a good game, but you aren't backing it up with any facts. It's very easy for you to sit there and solve the world's problems by calling all rich people crooks and saying the government should forcibly take their money and redistribute it among others.

Frankly, some of the attitudes on here sicken me. There are so many people hating on the rich and blaming them for all of society's problems.

The government is incredibly wasteful and ineffective. Our elected officials throw billions of dollars around in failed programs, incarcerate millions for petty offenses, violate our civil rights, and legislate discrimination into the law books.

Yet people think the solution is to give this government MORE power and MORE money to waste?

No sir, I do not share your views and I find them highly offensive. I am a capitalist and I am proud to be one.
 
OmG man... Are you completely blind to the atrocities committed by big corporations? Did you not just hear a word I said?

And for your big fat information (lol) many people don't have a choice when it comes to eating at Mcdonalds or not because they are fucking brainwashed by advertisements. Sheesh. Cant you see its taking advantage of people?

No wonder you defend capitolism. For if capitolism is evil, then your way of life is not all rosey peachy. No wonder you are so defensive about the situation.

And just one question. Do you think your invested interests might be skewing your subjective outlook on things?

Maybe its about time you take the shit end of the stick.
 
Careful. If you fall from your high horse, you might hurt yourself.

People do NOT HAVE A CHOICE but to eat at McDonald's?

ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?

It's simple: DON'T EAT THERE!

Exactly what information did you Just give? All you did was "LOL" at your own ignorant and foolish statement.

Also, you are being really presumptuous and ignorant. I see you have assumed that I am a member of the wealthy elite.

WRONG!

I can almost guarantee I am worse off financially than anyone here. You have some gall to make these broad assumptions about my life just because I am not a socialist or a communist like you.

I see you do not believe in personal choice and individual responsibility at all.

I was going to spare you the embarrassment of looking foolish by adding a note at the end of my last post explaining that I am not a member of the wealthy elite, but i was curious to see if you would make that idiotic assumption, which you most certainly did.

It is pathetic that you cannot discuss capitalism without dumping your biased shit all over me. Attack my beliefs if you must, but do not attack me. I haven't done anything to anyone.

You are way out of line and I suggest you reconsider your approach.
 
I didnt attack you. What are you talking about? I have core facts bro.

Capitolism
- inforces rich getting rich while poor stay poor.

-Is made by law to do whatever it takes to make money. That means continuing wars, ruining peoples self images, paying people at the bottom extremely low wages etc.

-Is a system that reliess heavily on the consumption of goods. For instance if oil is instinct, capitolism will likely crash.

-Often very unfriendly to the environment because people who might have had chances at other shots of life, given a different system in place, are stuck in positions where they must ruin the environment.

- often drives men to insane power madness disorders. For instance many wars are continuously pushed to go further because it is in the best interest of share holders.

- Enforces heavy advertising campaigns which can be very very harmful to peoples self esteem. Examples of this can be like implying that a bald man should feel ashamed of himself, or sending unrealistic images about the "normal body type." These unrealistic images are generally created by only selecting a very tiny percent of the overall body types of the world. Anyway... I could go on about advertising but surely just about everyone knows that things have gone too far.

-capitolism is doomed to fall apart because it relies on the consumption of goods to continue.

- and here is the kicker. Capitolism is a system which enforces a method of making money off of money. Before the futile systems of europe, this process was called usery by just about all major religions and governments, and it was punishable by death. You see it is only in this modern age that people have come to accept the idea of profiting off of others with of your initial capitol. Before this idea was considered atrocities against man!!!! An easier way to consider usery is just plain flat out exploitation

The previous were just some facts I could think of off the top of my head, but in more discussion I could think of more examples and specific occurrences. ACtually, a good example (possibly hypothetical) could be say WakArnolds has enough land to grow cows in america without cutting down any trees. WakArnolds finds out that they can grow cows in the amazon forest for much much cheaper but they have to cut down a shit load of trees to do it. WakArnold's duty to the shareholders is to cut down the rainforest, even though it is horrendously bad for the environment!! This really is the fundamental flaw of capitolism. It is based on profit not the well being of the society.

Please before you start taking cheap shots at my inability to properly get past my subjective judgments(i.e calling me an idiot) of the situation, remember that personal attacks are considered irrelevant in any formal debate discussion. At no point did I attack your character. I questioned your beliefs. This is healthy to question each others view points. It leads to refinement.
 
Last edited:
Draigan said:
I didnt attack you. What are you talking about? I have core facts bro.

Capitolism
- inforces rich getting rich while poor stay poor.

-Is made by law to do whatever it takes to make money. That means continuing wars, ruining peoples self images, paying people at the bottom extremely low wages etc.

-Is a system that reliess heavily on the consumption of goods. For instance if oil is instinct, capitolism will likely crash.

-Often very unfriendly to the environment because people who might have had chances at other shots of life, given a different system in place, are stuck in positions where they must ruin the environment.

- often drives men to insane power madness disorders. For instance many wars are continuously pushed to go further because it is in the best interest of share holders.

- Enforces heavy advertising campaigns which can be very very harmful to peoples self esteem. Examples of this can be like implying that a bald man should feel ashamed of himself, or sending unrealistic images about the "normal body type." These unrealistic images are generally created by only selecting a very tiny percent of the overall body types of the world. Anyway... I could go on about advertising but surely just about everyone knows that things have gone too far.

-capitolism is doomed to fall apart because it relies on the consumption of goods to continue.

- and here is the kicker. Capitolism is a system which enforces a method of making money off of money. Before the futile systems of europe, this process was called usery by just about all major religions and governments, and it was punishable by death. You see it is only in this modern age that people have come to accept the idea of profiting off of others with of your initial capitol. Before this idea was considered atrocities against man!!!! An easier way to consider usery is just plain flat out exploitation

The previous were just some facts I could think of off the top of my head, but in more discussion I could think of more examples and specific occurrences. ACtually, a good example (possibly hypothetical) could be say WakArnolds has enough land to grow cows in america without cutting down any trees. WakArnolds finds out that they can grow cows in the amazon forest for much much cheaper but they have to cut down a shit load of trees to do it. WakArnold's duty to the shareholders is to cut down the rainforest, even though it is horrendously bad for the environment!! This really is the fundamental flaw of capitolism. It is based on profit not the well being of the society.

Please before you start taking cheap shots at my inability to properly get past my subjective judgments(i.e calling me an idiot) of the situation, remember that personal attacks are considered irrelevant in any formal debate discussion. At no point did I attack your character. I questioned your beliefs. This is healthy to question each others view points. It leads to refinement.
Click to expand...

I am not even bothering to read your entire post. You don't think you attacked me in your previous post?

LET ME QUOTE YOU SINCE YOU SEEM TO HAVE A VERY SELECTIVE MEMORY:

"No wonder you defend capitolism. For if capitolism is evil, then your way of life is not all rosey peachy. No wonder you are so defensive about the situation.

And just one question. Do you think your invested interests might be skewing your subjective outlook on things?

Maybe its about time you take the shit end of the stick. "

Did you just happen to forget that you wrote that?

"YOUR WAY OF LIFE" "YOUR INVESTED INTERESTS" "YOU TAKE THE SHIT END OF THE STICK"

You don't see that as a baseless personal attack? Exactly which part of any of that can possibly be construed as a constructive argument? What way of life are you talking about? What invested interests? Why should I take the shit end of the stick? What does that even mean?

Also, your reading comprehension could use some work. I did not call you an idiot. I said you made an idiotic assumption. Do you understand the distinction?

Also, someone famous once said, "You are entitled to your own opinions. You are not entitled to your own facts." You don't seem to understand the difference between opinionand fact. What you presented as fact was actually your slanted opinion about how evil capitalism is.

I might be more inclined to hear your "facts" if you could spell some of the key words in your post correctly.
 
Last edited:
Draigan said:
And for your big fat information (lol) many people don't have a choice when it comes to eating at Mcdonalds or not because they are fucking brainwashed by advertisements. Sheesh. Cant you see its taking advantage of people?
.
Click to expand...

ROFLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

Wow. Just wow.

People can hate on these lawyers and doctors and professionals that keep getting cheap shots taken at, but the world *needs* them. Your gonna operate on yourself are you? Lol YEAH OK. Your going to defend YOURSELF in court are you? LOL YEAH OK.

Wow I feel sad for wingnutlives, this thread has truly turned into a joke.
 
sigh... "No wonder you defend capitolism. For if capitolism is evil, then your way of life is not all rosey peachy. No wonder you are so defensive about the situation.

And just one question. Do you think your invested interests might be skewing your subjective outlook on things?

Maybe its about time you take the shit end of the stick. "

No this is called questioning your ideas, asking you questions about your own views of you outlook and its possibility to be skewed, and implying that if you have the shit end of the stick you will be able to see some of the horror capitolism is creating.

That is why they are not personal attack, but instead tools of debate. If your not going to read the post I guess theres nothing more I can say...
 
I actually think wingnutlives' main goal was accomplished. There were a lot of interesting and thoughtful posts that covered a broad variety of topics. I think the thread had pretty much run its course, as there wasn’t much to be said that hadn't already been said.

So now, we have a debate about capitalism. That is okay with me. I have noticed that there are quite a few people on here who dislike capitalism. Some take this disliking to the extreme, like Draigan. His venomous hatred for capitalism and capitalists is readily apparent.

For starters, he automatically assumed I was wealthy just because I support capitalism. This is just so very wrong. I am poor.

Draigan, did I automatically assume you are poor just because you despise capitalism? No, I did not.

I don't know if Draigan wants to have the government forcibly remove money from the wealthy and redistribute it to the poor, but it sure sounds that way. I have numerous problems with this.

1) Who decides what amount of wealth is acceptable? How much is acceptable? Where do we draw the line? And then what, ANY amount earned over that line gets taken away and given to the poor?

2) Being a medical doctor is more important and more difficult to do than cleaning toilets or flipping burgers. Thus, the doctors become wealthy and the people who flip burgers and clean toilets typically remain poor. I don’t have a big problem with this. If the people cleaning toilets or flipping burgers have a problem with this, they should try to find something else to do. There should be more of a reward for being a doctor than for being a toilet cleaner. We want to encourage the best and brightest mind to become doctors, medical researchers, etc.

3) Yes, it would be nice if all people helped other people. BUT THAT IS UP TO EACH INDIVIDUAL. Some people do, and some people don’t. Do you wish to make it a CRIME to not help others? Who decides the level of help that is required to be an acceptable human being?

4) Many people who are rich are so because they provide something people want. Doctors provide medical treatment, lawyers provide legal counsel for those who need it. Actors and singers provide entertainment for millions. I have spent THOUSANDS of hours in my life listening to my favorite music. I am GLAD that many of these musicians are millionaires. They deserve it. They have made my life better with their contributions.

Athletes provide entertainment or the fans and are among the best of the best at what they do. They work hard and train hard. They spend countless hours in the gym and countless hours practicing. I am glad they are well compensated, because I enjoy watching football and baseball and tennis. If people don't think actors, singers, and athletes should be millionaires, they don’t have to support them. No one forces them to go to movies or baseball games or buy their music.

People who are millionaires as a result of running a successful corporation have provided products that the public wants and needs. People like McDonalds; people like coke and Pepsi, people like Nike and Reebok and under armor. Why SHOULDN’T the important members of these corporations be wealthy? What exactly are you saying should happen? Do you want them to reap the rewards of selling the first ten thousand items, but after that, they cannot collect any money for additional sales? How does that make sense?

5) What is your problem with advertising? People should be allowed to spend their money to advertise their goods! No one is forced to listen to these ads! DO you assign ANY responsible to individuals? The way you talk about advertising, you make it sound like you think no one is responsible for anything bad that happens to them:

Alcoholic? Not your fault, it is the fault of those TV and billboard ads that FORCED YOU TO DRINK ALCOHOL .

Lung cancer? Not your fault, it is the tobacco company’s fault, they made smoking look cool!

Diabetes, congestive heart failure, high blood pressure as a result of a poor diet? Not your fault, it is all those ads that made junk food look so tasty.

IS this what you think? Seriously? Come on, people can inform themselves about what is healthy and what isn’t. People make their own choices. If people develop some sort of inferior complex because of advertisements that promote hair restoral products, that is their own problem. If a company can make money by supplying a demand for hair restoration, so be it. That is how economics works. Products that are in demand will sell. Those that are in high demand will sell very well and the people who created them will likely become millionaires. What is the problem with that?

I am asking you to actually examine the points I have just made and address them, instead of attacking me or making broad sweeping generalizations about capitalism or rich people.
 
Draigan said:
sigh... "No wonder you defend capitolism. For if capitolism is evil, then your way of life is not all rosey peachy. No wonder you are so defensive about the situation.

And just one question. Do you think your invested interests might be skewing your subjective outlook on things?

Maybe its about time you take the shit end of the stick. "

No this is called questioning your ideas, asking you questions about your own views of you outlook and its possibility to be skewed, and implying that if you have the shit end of the stick you will be able to see some of the horror capitolism is creating.

That is why they are not personal attack, but instead tools of debate. If your not going to read the post I guess theres nothing more I can say...
Click to expand...

You are just repeating myself. You are telling me that I am wrong and I cannot comprehend the debate because I "do not have the shit end of the stick."

That is a personal attack. I don;t know how else to explain it to you. Instead of analyzing my statements, you are attacking me. It is as simple as that really. If my argument is invalid, explain why it is invalid. What does my personal wealth or lack thereof have to do with the validity of my argument?

Do you really not realize how absurd this is?

What if I said to you, "WELL, IF YOU WERE RICH MAYBE YOU COULD ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND THIS DEBATE, BUT UNTIL THEN, I AM GOING TO SAY THAT YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT?

Would you like that? Well, that is what you are doing to me.
 
Draigan, I will ask you one more time to explain what you mean by this:

"No wonder you defend capitolism. For if capitolism is evil, then your way of life is not all rosey peachy. No wonder you are so defensive about the situation.

And just one question. Do you think your invested interests might be skewing your subjective outlook on things?

Maybe its about time you take the shit end of the stick. "

"YOUR WAY OF LIFE" "YOUR INVESTED INTERESTS" "YOU TAKE THE SHIT END OF THE STICK"

????????????

You don't see that as a baseless personal attack? Exactly which part of any of that can possibly be construed as a constructive argument? What way of life are you talking about? What invested interests? Why should I take the shit end of the stick? What does that even mean?

PLEASE ANSWER ME. What way of life??? What invested interests? What do you mean by "shit end of the stick?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top