RE: Individualism Is Stupid ( Or Why Libertarianism And Objectivism Is Stupid)
December 6, 2017 at 1:08 am
(This post was last modified: December 6, 2017 at 1:11 am by AFTT47.)
This isn't my best subject but two things are obvious to me:
Pure capitalism is very cold, heartless and amoral - but very efficient.
Collectivism (or communism, socialism - whatever we want to call it) is well-intentioned, empathetic - and proven to be utterly ineffective. Instead of us all being equally rich, it results in us all being equally poor.
So, like everything else in life, we must endeavor to select the best trade-off.
That's the way it is with engineering (which is my strong suit). You ALWAYS come up against trade-offs. How do you build the best car? You don't. There is no such thing. You can build the most economical car (it will totally suck by any measure other than economy) or the most practical car (it will be totally boring and help you maintain your virginity) or the most luxurious car (it will be quite impractical, expensive, uneconomical and help you maintain your virginity) or the fastest car (which will be almost uninsurable, uneconomical, uncomfortable and most likely to land you with an STD virus).
You have to find the best balance between the positives and the negatives. It's a bitch because not everyone will agree on what that best balance is.
That's the way it is with economic systems - but even worse. There is no ideal or best system but unlike where we have a choice to purchase a particular type of car, we have little practical choice of what economical system we live under. There isn't even a best set of compromises because good luck getting everyone to agree on what that best middle ground is. It's a never-ending battle and it's probably always going to be a never-ending battle until we live under a totally different paradigm where such things are irrelevant. That isn't something any of us are at all likely to see.
Pure capitalism is very cold, heartless and amoral - but very efficient.
Collectivism (or communism, socialism - whatever we want to call it) is well-intentioned, empathetic - and proven to be utterly ineffective. Instead of us all being equally rich, it results in us all being equally poor.
So, like everything else in life, we must endeavor to select the best trade-off.
That's the way it is with engineering (which is my strong suit). You ALWAYS come up against trade-offs. How do you build the best car? You don't. There is no such thing. You can build the most economical car (it will totally suck by any measure other than economy) or the most practical car (it will be totally boring and help you maintain your virginity) or the most luxurious car (it will be quite impractical, expensive, uneconomical and help you maintain your virginity) or the fastest car (which will be almost uninsurable, uneconomical, uncomfortable and most likely to land you with an STD virus).
You have to find the best balance between the positives and the negatives. It's a bitch because not everyone will agree on what that best balance is.
That's the way it is with economic systems - but even worse. There is no ideal or best system but unlike where we have a choice to purchase a particular type of car, we have little practical choice of what economical system we live under. There isn't even a best set of compromises because good luck getting everyone to agree on what that best middle ground is. It's a never-ending battle and it's probably always going to be a never-ending battle until we live under a totally different paradigm where such things are irrelevant. That isn't something any of us are at all likely to see.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Albert Einstein
Albert Einstein