CF Election Game: The Vote

[Chris81]

Somebody vote for the Hawk party already (poor Chris)

I propose that if this poll ends in a tie between Mzungu and myself we shall engage in mortal combat.

Or each of us promise the loser a prominent cabinet position, whichever.

That's alright, the Hawk party is my attempt to play devil's advocate and poke a little bit of fun at those neocons out there.

Apparently no one wanted to vote for a party with extreme militaristic aspirations, control over everyone's life, and deficits don't mater attitude. That very good, however I just want to know one thing.

How on earth did president Bush get reelected?

 

[WiredSpirit]

Which direction is CF likely headed?

 

[Tielec]

Somebody vote for the Hawk party already (poor Chris)

I propose that if this poll ends in a tie between Mzungu and myself we shall engage in mortal combat.

Or each of us promise the loser a prominent cabinet position, whichever.

Anything less than the most mortal of combat would be a disappointment.

 

[Heavens]

United federation of planets all the way.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

United federation of planets all the way.

Pfft, we'll never get rid of our caste system

 

[mzungu]

Somebody vote for the Hawk party already (poor Chris)

I propose that if this poll ends in a tie between Mzungu and myself we shall engage in mortal combat.

Or each of us promise the loser a prominent cabinet position, whichever.

En guard monsieur, I challenge you to a bout in BFBC2; Otherwise why don't we form a coalition and do some good to humanity, EH?

YouTube - Battlefield Bad Company 2 Russian Squad Story (Multyplayer)

 

[Ar Cosc]

Just over 12 hours left. The left-wing parties are in the lead, but at the moment, they're going to need to cut a deal with someone to form a coalition. There could still be a right wing government for CF!

 

[callmeMurph]

I prefer a neither wing government.

 

[Ar Cosc]

I prefer a neither wing government.

There isn't really any middle ground between the parties we have though!

 

[callmeMurph]

There isn't really any middle ground between the parties we have though!

True, but I like to think that Libertarian is neither right nor left. Conservatives like telling people how they should live in their personal life, I don't agree with that. Liberals like to tell people how they should use their money, I don't agree with that either.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Honestly, the assumption that the only conceivable alternative to laissez faire capitalism is socialism (or vice versa) is quite naively black-and-white, and usually employed by the fringes to demonize the opposition. (*cough* Glenn Beck *cough*)

 

[callmeMurph]

Honestly, the assumption that the only conceivable alternative to laissez faire capitalism is socialism (or vice versa) is quite naively black-and-white, and usually employed by the fringes to demonize the opposition. (*cough* Glenn Beck *cough*)

I don't know how anyone could assume that. Laissez faire capitalism and socialism are just two of many options. However, there are only two main options, free markets or controlled markets. The degree of control may change. I don't see any other main options than those two though.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

To me, capitalism works somewhat like this:

Imagine that there's a village with a stretch of forest and a well of fresh water, both of which can sustain the whole community.
But one day, one of them decides that it'd be preferable to hoard all of that for himself, letting others pay for the privilege of using HIS resources. After all, hasn't he invested in drilling the well deeper? Doesn't he supply the equipment that is necessary to log the forest? But not only that, he finds that using up all of the water and all of the wood makes for a much more luxurious life - and when the limited resources finally run out, he just moves to the next stretch of land and repeats the exercise, always keeping one step ahead of the destruction he wreaks, and encouraging others to live in the same way. Those who follow his example rarely see why anything should be wrong with that: they live in abundance, and the negative effects of their lifestyle are not apparent to them - these happen elsewhere, and will only be a concern for future generations.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

I don't know how anyone could assume that. Laissez faire capitalism and socialism are just two of many options. However, there are only two main options, free markets or controlled markets. The degree of control may change. I don't see any other main options than those two though.

Oh, I agree. This, of course, leads to two questions: can markets be truly "free", not only from democratic/political controls, but also from the vested interests of a monetary elite that may very well run contrary to those of the general populace - and is it desirable to remove all controls?

Personally, I think that the problem that needs to be avoided in both controlled and "free" markets is an abuse of power. Give too much power to the entrepeneurs, and they will abuse it. Give too much power to the state, and the administration will abuse it.
The problems that surfaced in the Eastern Block during the Cold War are the very problems unbridled capitalism produces - except that in that case, there was but a single "corporation", namely the party dicatorship.

 

[Ar Cosc]

To me, capitalism works somewhat like this:

Imagine that there's a village with a stretch of forest and a well of fresh water, both of which can sustain the whole community.
But one day, one of them decides that it'd be preferable to hoard all of that for himself, letting others pay for the privilege of using HIS resources. After all, hasn't he invested in drilling the well deeper? Doesn't he supply the equipment that is necessary to log the forest? But not only that, he finds that using up all of the water and all of the wood makes for a much more luxurious life - and when the limited resources finally run out, he just moves to the next stretch of land and repeats the exercise, always keeping one step ahead of the destruction he wreaks, and encouraging others to live in the same way. Those who follow his example rarely see why anything should be wrong with that: they live in abundance, and the negative effects of their lifestyle are not apparent to them - these happen elsewhere, and will only be a concern for future generations.

Unfettered capitalism at any rate.

At the other extreme, you get the situation whereby nobody will invest in either the well or the forest, because they don't think there is enough reward in it for them.

Both systems have their merits, but both are far from perfect. It's sad to see partisanship push people further towards the wings to differentiate themselves, when the best solution almost always lies with compromise.

 

[callmeMurph]

To me, capitalism works somewhat like this:

Imagine that there's a village with a stretch of forest and a well of fresh water, both of which can sustain the whole community.
But one day, one of them decides that it'd be preferable to hoard all of that for himself, letting others pay for the privilege of using HIS resources.

He has no right to hoard it for himself unless he is the one that started the village. He also has no right to it if he sold, in some form or another, parts of the village to other people.

After all, hasn't he invested in drilling the well deeper? Doesn't he supply the equipment that is necessary to log the forest?

Drilling the well deeper does not mean he owns the well. Supplying the equipment to log the forest doesn't mean he owns the forest.

But not only that, he finds that using up all of the water and all of the wood makes for a much more luxurious life - and when the limited resources finally run out, he just moves to the next stretch of land and repeats the exercise, always keeping one step ahead of the destruction he wreaks, and encouraging others to live in the same way. Those who follow his example rarely see why anything should be wrong with that: they live in abundance, and the negative effects of their lifestyle are not apparent to them - these happen elsewhere, and will only be a concern for future generations.

This is not the free market approach to capitalism.

Perhaps F.A. Hayek can explain...

YouTube - "Fear the Boom and Bust" a Hayek vs. Keynes Rap Anthem

 

[mzungu]

Unfettered capitalism at any rate.

At the other extreme, you get the situation whereby nobody will invest in either the well or the forest, because they don't think there is enough reward in it for them.

Both systems have their merits, but both are far from perfect. It's sad to see partisanship push people further towards the wings to differentiate themselves, when the best solution almost always lies with compromise.

On the contrary; There is such a thing as the need to belong to a community and the need to work together. Humans have always banded together for the common good. It all depends on the Education and upbringing. One can instil the pride of achievement without monetary profit.

It is the few Greedy who spoil it all for the rest.

 

[callmeMurph]

Working together is what capitalism is all about.

 

[Ar Cosc]

On the contrary; There is such a thing as the need to belong to a community and the need to work together. Humans have always banded together for the common good. It all depends on the Education and upbringing. One can instil the pride of achievement without monetary profit.

It is the few Greedy who spoil it all for the rest.

Of course, but the selfish part of human nature will always be there. Appealing to it is almost invariably a stronger motivator than community or altruism, noble as they may be.

 

[MarkSB]

This is like a real election.... no good choices.

I like Jayem on healthcare, and Panzerkampfwagon on national security.