In the utopia, is it a crime for a citizen to live off the grid?
Printable View
You just asked that and I just answered it.
I think there's a combination required between socialist and capitalist models. When the government controls all the industries, universal policies piss people off and you get Venezuela, and in your best scenario you get the USSR economic crisis.
I would certainly try to do away with the monetary system but I'm a practical person I believe you have to think in terms of where we are and how to get where we want to go. How is everything to be regulated without money, to make sure everyone eats, to make sure there is still ambition and competition?
In an economy that still uses money, anyone could choose to use a private hospital or a private school or whatever, but they'd still have to pay for the public ones. In Argentina, there's no motivation to help the public hospitals so they fell to shit. However, the United States has some of the best schools in the world because the state schools are competing with the private schools.
I think in a system without money, competition would need to exist with resources, the university or hospital that was getting the best feedback would get the best toys from R&D.
But more questions come up, how is food distributed without control? Do you just make the supermarkets free? Do you use a dictator of the proletariat only to let him become corrupt or killed by an usurper?
This is where my solution of changing the system comes into play. I think it should be done by local governments first, where cities can try experiments that allow all their citizens, employed and not, to receive food stamps so that a certain amount of food is simply free for everyone.
The problem then is trade, the city couldn't afford to do this unless it owned a bunch of farms as a public utility, and then what's the stop the government from changing hands and benefiting off of scarcity itself?
I'm going to come back to this.
My utopia would be a global forest, where nobody relies on technology or law and everyone's actions are derived from sympathy and compassion, and everyone feels safe and full and loving... Our days are spent playing and wondering and warming under the sun and foraging (many people think foraging for food sounds like a chore, but it can be pretty delicious if done right). Our nights are spent cuddled together, as we drift into our dreams swathed in warm rays of moonlight... Pretty much what I came from.
Human beings are so far removed from Utopia that they forget that it's essentially in their backyard.
~tamias
I'd like to hear his response, but I think it is something like this...Quote:
Why? What offense against the state have they committed, specifically?
"We are the government! We deserve money from every possible outlet... Wait, what did you say Sergeant Willburnes? Someones going back to nature and living in the mountains like thier ancestors? How can we make money off of that... We can't?!? What! That's prepostorous... Quick, Willburnes, lock him away!"
Because you''re not doing anything for society? You're only working to benefit yourself. Not to mention you may be endangering the wildlife by hunting and setting up camps in areas not approved for human habitation.
Citizens of other countries aren't benefiting your society either. Perhaps you should declare war on all other countries.
Since when is it the mandate of every human being to help others? I know it's nice to do, but we're talking about a hypothetical person here that's off the grid. If you didn't know that this person existed, you wouldn't feel slighted by their not helping you.
But this is ignoring the glaring flaw with this reasoning, which is that you're proposing you execute, that is, kill, or in other words, do harm to, a person whose only crime is not helping others. That is what we call massively hypocritical. And amoral to the extreme. In fact, I would call that evil.
Leave it to government to hand things out that people owned to start with.
Thats like saying that since non-US countries aren't paying taxes, the US should declare war on all other countries. Your reasoning has no basis. The people living IN the country should be doing their part to help the people further their lives.
And not necessarily "helping others" as you say, but at least working. Like, even though as a construction worker you might not immediately benefit others, but you're doing your part for society.
Your "glaring flaw" is not a flaw at all. This is not hyocritical. If we did not remove the person, then it would be hypocritical. And like I said before, we wouldn't kill them straight away, but give them a choice to work.
Your last argument against me also does not make an ounce of sense relating to what you quoted. What is the government handing out?
Perhaps someone else can explain my post to you. You obviously missed my points entirely. I'm finished with you.
"I'm finished with you."
Yeah, go move onto another topic to start stupid arguments! I looked at your post history a while ago and saw that you just love doing it. I thought I'd humour you. Thanks for the fun, though. I'm sorry you failed to get me angry like you hoped you would.
So long!