Treasurers Debate (1 Viewer)

[katie_tully]

She was trying to attack the fantastic idea of communism through a silly, silly example.

Nah. It wasn't silly. Socialists are irrational. Take the worm for example. Irrational. Like you. Are my small sentences driving that point home?

Katie, did you know that the commies also want to steal your babies to make Soylent Green?

Sweet, for serious? I'd like to know their method as that could become quite profitable. OH WAIT, WHAT, PROFIT? PROFIT IS A PRODUCT OF THE DEVIL.

How do you expect to know the correct ratio between "toll booth hours" and "ER hours"?

Well given that financial dudes can work out a whole host of crap, I don't think it'd be too hard to work out how much work in the ER is proportionate to that in a toll booth.

Nobody is going to want to spend 6+ years at university so they can be paid proportionately the same amount of money as a year 10 drop out who sits in a toll booth all day.
Also considering a range of other factors like:
a. The toll booth person is not responsible for the lives of other people so therefore
b. The toll booth person, realistically, doesn't work 24 - 30 hours straight like many ER doctors.
Which brings us to a whole host of other problems such as:
a. If you decide that the proportionate amount of hours for a toll booth operator to an ER doctor is say, 4:8 (which is still grossly unfair), you're going to need a turn over of ER doctors every 4 hours...which is impossibe.

Not everybody is equal. Deal with it.

 

[katie_tully]

I mean, seriously. I'm dropping out of uni now to go work at a toll booth in the hope that one day I will be paid proportionately the same amount as an ER doctor.

Why have any aspirations?

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

If you think it's so fantastic, move to Cuba. Win/Win.

Oh that's always been the dream.

Why have any aspirations?

Why indeed. Why do you want to do something in medicine (assuming that you do)? I dare say that most people who want to aspire to a job don't always do it for the money. Examples? Nursing and teaching are pretty good examples. Buh wait, nah, hardly anyone does that so the examples are moot amirite? And for the people that only want it for the money? There's always other people willing to do it. If they don't want to work as a actuary because they think they're being overworked, they can go and scrub the subway rails instead. Everyone is a winner!

Nah.

No.

It wasn't silly.

Yes it was.

Socialists are irrational.

No.

Take the worm for example.

No.

Irrational.

No.

Like you.

No.

Are my small sentences driving that point home?

No.

Sweet, for serious? I'd like to know their method as that could become quite profitable. OH WAIT, WHAT, PROFIT? PROFIT IS A PRODUCT OF THE DEVIL.

No.

Well, people making a profit unfairly while people live in poverty is the work of the devil, yeah.

Nobody is going to want to spend 6+ years at university so they can be paid proportionately the same amount of money as a year 10 drop out who sits in a toll booth all day.

Yes they will.

Also considering a range of other factors like:

No.

a. The toll booth person is not responsible for the lives of other people so therefore
b. The toll booth person, realistically, doesn't work 24 - 30 hours straight like many ER doctors.
Which brings us to a whole host of other problems such as:
a. If you decide that the proportionate amount of hours for a toll booth operator to an ER doctor is say, 4:8 (which is still grossly unfair), you're going to need a turn over of ER doctors every 4 hours...which is impossibe.

Yeah, I'd agree that a ratio of 4:8 (aka: 1:2) is pretty unfair. It's cool that you're once again resorting to silly hyperbole to get your point across, and use silly ratios that no-one ever suggested (ratio would probably be closer to 1:10 or summat) . And yeah, it's impossible to get a lot of people to work as doctors over less rewarding jobs because a) no-one wants to become a doctor and b) people who work in medicine hate their jobs and only do it for the money.

You're a tard. Die. And besides, when I'm king of my communist world there'll be very little choice. You'll do what you're told, you'll be paid a certain amount of money for contributing a certain amount to society and you'll live happily off the same income as everyone else.

Not everybody is equal. Deal with it.

No.

 

[katie_tully]

use silly ratios that no-one ever suggested

(ratio would probably be closer to 1:10 or summat)

You're a tard. Die. And besides, when I'm king of my communist world there'll be very little choice. You'll do what you're told, you'll be paid a certain amount of money for contributing a certain amount to society and you'll live happily off the same income as everyone else.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

I think you've misunderstood my ratio comment, you capatilist scumwhore.

 

[katie_tully]

capatilist scumwhore

I cannot argue with that. It could be worse. I could be a capitalist scumwhore.

 

[katie_tully]

Although it does scare me that you're the standard of teaching quality Australia can look forward to.
capitalist

 

[volition]

Well given that financial dudes can work out a whole host of crap, I don't think it'd be too hard to work out how much work in the ER is proportionate to that in a toll booth.

Actually, yes it would be too hard, unless they happen to be superhuman. There is no price mechanism within communism, which is why, not ONLY is it a poor theory 'in practice', it is ALSO a poor theory 'in theory'. Which is contrary to the standard wank you hear from people about "oh in theory its so good, but it just never worked in practice".

The reason? The calculation problem, raised by Mises back in like the 1920's or 30's, which absolutely destroyed the possibility of central planning ever working. There is NO WAY to properly apportion goods without a price mechanism (especially for capital goods, which in communism are sadly all owned by the state). Now, being a socialist/communist I can understand why you think prices don't even matter. Truth is, they are essential to the functioning of any modern economy and a good economy will use information from everywhere. Remember when I was telling you about the Efficient Market Hypothesis and distributed information?

The central planners of communism can be the nicest, most benevolent, well meaning guys you've ever heard of. But they'll still fail, because the mind of one/few can never match the combined strength of everybody in an economy who is expressing their own desires and preferences via their spending habits. Not only is it a problem requiring supercomputers far more advanced than anything we've ever known, we have no way to actually represent demands and subjective preferences in equations, let alone KNOW what everybody subjectively demands.

The simplest and best way to avoid the calculation problem and to know the value of something, is to let people trade voluntarily for it.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Although it does scare me that you're the standard of teaching quality Australia can look forward to.

Will you next be saying that I will be filling the minds of children with anti-Zionist thought? Because that's exactly what I plan on doing.

Volition: Jesus Christ man. You get someone to sit down and work out what two people do, how long they do it for and then you calculate how much work is involved. Hell, if that's too difficult then you assign some rough values to each job and you simply adjust it from there. And subjectivity doesn't come into it.

Communism ftw.

 

[katie_tully]

Ack. You lie.

 

[volition]

You get someone to sit down and work out what two people do, how long they do it for and then you calculate how much work is involved. Hell, if that's too difficult then you assign some rough values to each job and you simply adjust it from there.

Better get back to reading Das Kapital in preparation for your violent uprising, somewhere in this paragraph you've just solved one of the greatest calculation problems in economics ever posed :S

 

[katie_tully]

If only it were as easy as he hypothesises.
What communism lacks, and what it needs is something it will never achieve; a benevolent dictator. Somebody who can objectively 'work out' how much each job is worth.

Unfortunately all jobs are not relative and all people are not equal...so like you know, CAPITALISM PREVAILS ONCE AGAIN?

 

[katie_tully]

Apparently there are quite a few people who hate freedom.

lol @ Julia Gillard being a communist when she was a student.

 

[volition]

lol @ Julia Gillard being a communist when she was a student.

Lol @ thinking she was only a communist back then

She's still a communist now, just in disguise that's all! haha

She's quite ambitious, I reckon she'll challenge for leadership, too bad nobody likes her and so won't let her be leader. I'm tipping this Greg Combet (spelling right ?) guy to be the next labor leader after Rudd.

 

[katie_tully]

Oh I know. I bet she has a Che Guevara tat on her thigh or something

Eh @ Combet in power. Yuk.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

I think we're being had by Neb. Why does he hate freedom so much

Nono, I'm being 100% serious sir. I mean, who knows, maybe it's not as practical as I'd like. I'm no economist so I can't really say with any certainty. Buh whatever, cuz the merits of communism are totally better than what we have now. You're all just scared because me and my cronies with AK47's (given to us by communist USSR [assuming that communist USSR reforms {which it will}]) will take away your lavish McMahon's Point mansions and shift you into a nice brutalist concrete home like everyone else, hopefully somewhere more west of the Harbour.

Unfortunately all jobs are not relative and all people are not equal

Yes they are, capatalist cumquat.

 

[katie_tully]

I don't think I could live any further west of the Harbour than what I am now.

Joke over now though, Che. You lost.

 

[sam04u]

I missed it, anyone know if I can get it online?

 

[withoutaface]

It's on The Australian website.