RE: Why are all Atheists Stalin loving, pinkos??
March 8, 2015 at 3:30 pm
(This post was last modified: March 8, 2015 at 3:35 pm by Thumpalumpacus.)
(March 8, 2015 at 3:02 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: I just think it doesn't really make that much sense though. I can say anything looks good on paper.
Not really. Some plans are obviously bad. If you planned to feed a growing population by raising crops in a desert, clearly a plan that doesn't account for irrigation doesn't look good on paper. On the other hand, a plan that does account for irrigation can come acropper for some random reason -- a locust invasion, say -- but still look good on paper, because locust invasions aren't known to happen in that part of the world.
The businessmen who built their hotels on the shores of the Indian Ocean, and made a mint before 26 Dec 2004 -- did their business plan look good on paper? I think so.
(March 8, 2015 at 3:02 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: If it's a bad plan that doesn't work, then it doesn't look good on paper or anywhere else.
The trick is to see that before it comes to pass, right? Have you never made a plan that went awry, that looked good on paper but didn't survive its encounter with reality? I have. It happens. It's called failure, and all humans do it.
(March 8, 2015 at 3:02 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: Communism isn't a good idea that is ruined by people, it's just a bad idea. The fact that it doesn't take something obvious, like human's wanting to own stuff, in account is part of it being a bad idea.
I think its bigger failure is the fact that extorting from the productive in order to support the unproductive generates resentment in people who don't like having the fruits of their labor expropriated. The real failure, in other words, is that it removes the incentive to excel.
And I agree, communism doesn't look good even on paper. I prefer to think of it as noble, but impractical.
(March 8, 2015 at 3:02 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: The same applies to the football analogy. If you aren't taking something into account, then it's just a bad idea.
Well, the thing is, sometimes -- as in the football analogy -- the variables cannot be taken into account because they are strictly unknown until the time of the called play.
Put it this way: if everything were really so cut-and-dried, we wouldn't have so many plans fail. But no one can have command of all the pertinent facts of a situation as complex as a football play, or even more complex things like economies. A play might fail based on a patch of mud causing a slip, or a replacement linebacker being unable to perform a blitz as effectively.
