Find fields & stores near you!
Find fields and stores
Zipcode
PbNation News
PbNation News
Community Focus
Community Focus

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-14-2013, 10:51 AM #1
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Dreaming up a new American Dream

Prefaced by my other thread speculating on the decline of American life and the lack of guiding alternatives, I think it might be fun to discuss where to take America from here on out

First a little background:

The dream of colonial america was the creation of a grand republic inspired by the ideals and virtues of the 18th century.

This ideal failed. In response, America went to war over two competing alternates: Agrarian Aristocracy or Isolated Industry. Industry won out.

When this dream died, the FDR generation rolled out a new one. This ideal was one of a global American Empire abroad and a social democracy at home.

We are nearing the end of this paradigm. We need a new dream. I have yet to see one pop up. This is a very broad and open question. It is also a decent chance for a break from all the bickering.

What do you all think?

Last edited by Iamamartianchurch : 03-14-2013 at 10:54 AM.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sponsored Links Remove Advertisement
Advertisement
Old 03-14-2013, 01:13 PM #2
Lazarusrat
 
 
Lazarusrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Lazarusrat owns a Planet Eclipse Lv1
I think we are seeing the new American dream unfolding before our eyes based on the social attitudesof teh Gen Xers and Gen Ys.

I expect that as Gen X and Y replace the Boomers as America's major demohraphic we will see an America that values more ecological friendly practices as seen by the increasing Reduce, Reuse, Recycle menality, greater personnal responsablity based on Gen Xers and Ys have less debt and greater finacial concerns compared to teh Boomers (except when it comes to student loans. $80,000 in debt to get a poli-Sci degree!? Are you ****ing crazy!?), a foreign policy based on less international involvement and an end to the US as the world's policemen, and finaly more social involvement in matters as seen by the continuing increase in the 18-24 voter demographic.
__________________
"If you prepare for the zombie apocalypse, you'll be prepared for all hazards," CDC spokesman Dave Daigle told Reuters over the phone on Thursday.
Lazarusrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 02:10 PM #3
ElJefe13
 
 
ElJefe13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Utah
ElJefe13 has achieved Level 1 in PbNation Pursuit
ElJefe13 has achieved Level 2 in PbNation Pursuit
ElJefe13 supports Empire
I'm seeing the new American dream as getting the most stuff and fun while doing nothing and not having any responsibility cause YOLO.
__________________
Women are like Wookies; you always let them win.
ElJefe13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 03:16 PM #4
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElJefe13 View Post
I'm seeing the new American dream as getting the most stuff and fun while doing nothing and not having any responsibility cause YOLO.
The intent is to be constructive.

Thanks,
Martian
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 03:49 PM #5
Treghc
 
 
Treghc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Seattle
Treghc is a Supporting Member
Treghc is a founding member
 has been a member for 10 years
Treghc is a Forum Captain
I do think there will be a strong movement towards both personal and collective (societal) self-sufficiency in just about every aspect. The newest generations of people are already adamant about keeping our Earth clean, keeping our resources in tact, and focusing on efficiency over quantity. Economic and government reforms must be made, of course, but I think this lends still towards the idea that Gen X and Gen Y are focused on balance and self-sufficiency.

The global empire does need to roll back and let the world do what they can to achieve the goals that they want. Industrialization is coming to an end as the world and economy of information trading takes precedence. It's become so easy to make things and so easy to simply live with basic necessities that such tasks are not only unnecessary for people, but already being filled with robotics(you really need to read more Asimov, Martian ).

I'm heavily interested in seeing how the role of technology will apply to the society of tomorrow. When manual labor is losing grounds due to such technology, there's really not many directions to head.

As an ideological whole, there's going to be a big push towards efficient methods that promote renewable and recyclable ideas and actions that inevitably will lead to more isolationism over world domination.
__________________
“But men, they say a lot of foolish things. In the end, the only words I can find to believe in are mine." - Joe

Tarsier Slave


We are Sapien
Treghc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2013, 12:50 PM #6
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazarusrat View Post
I think we are seeing the new American dream unfolding before our eyes based on the social attitudesof teh Gen Xers and Gen Ys.

I expect that as Gen X and Y replace the Boomers as America's major demohraphic we will see an America that values more ecological friendly practices as seen by the increasing Reduce, Reuse, Recycle menality, greater personnal responsablity based on Gen Xers and Ys have less debt and greater finacial concerns compared to teh Boomers (except when it comes to student loans. $80,000 in debt to get a poli-Sci degree!? Are you ****ing crazy!?), a foreign policy based on less international involvement and an end to the US as the world's policemen, and finaly more social involvement in matters as seen by the continuing increase in the 18-24 voter demographic.
Could you be more specific. This doesn't really tell me anything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
I do think there will be a strong movement towards both personal and collective (societal) self-sufficiency in just about every aspect. The newest generations of people are already adamant about keeping our Earth clean, keeping our resources in tact, and focusing on efficiency over quantity. Economic and government reforms must be made, of course, but I think this lends still towards the idea that Gen X and Gen Y are focused on balance and self-sufficiency.

The global empire does need to roll back and let the world do what they can to achieve the goals that they want. Industrialization is coming to an end as the world and economy of information trading takes precedence. It's become so easy to make things and so easy to simply live with basic necessities that such tasks are not only unnecessary for people, but already being filled with robotics(you really need to read more Asimov, Martian ).

I'm heavily interested in seeing how the role of technology will apply to the society of tomorrow. When manual labor is losing grounds due to such technology, there's really not many directions to head.

As an ideological whole, there's going to be a big push towards efficient methods that promote renewable and recyclable ideas and actions that inevitably will lead to more isolationism over world domination.
I'll tackle this by paragraph.

1) They make a lot of noise but little else. Rabble rabble rabble. What these people should be doing is rolling back their own lives. Instead of yelling at business or government. You say reforms need to be made, but to what and why?

2) I'm on board with scrapping the global empire. However, it must be recognized that someone will fill our former role as long as there is a means to do it. We can't pretend that everyone else will act benevolently now that big bad America is gone. A lot of people think America is evil incarnate for meddling in world affairs but the truth is, someone would have been in our shoes, Americans should be thankful and proud that they were not on the receiving end licking someone elses boots for scraps.

The information economy is more or less contingent on mass communication which is contingent on industrial society. If you believe industrial society is going away, you can consider mass communication a memory. The information economy is great, for the top end. It leaves little for most people to take part in, people who don't posses the faculties required to participate.

3) Realistically, future tech will be whatever remnants of industrial technology work with the viable sustainable alternatives solar wind and hydro. What ever comes from that is anyone's guess. It's safe to assume that mass anything is going to be unheard of. Unless of course we are able to magically convert over our entire infrastructure to accept nuclear power or some equivalent. Want to make some money? Try to figure out a way to harness ocean current.

4) So America rolls back the empire. This is going to significantly defund almost every great society project. It is also going to leave Americans with much less and a much lower standard of living than they have come to expect. None of which is a bad thing. But it bears worth keeping in mind.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2013, 01:12 PM #7
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
I think for myself, I desire an America that is more secure with itself. What that means is that we aren't chasing utopia. I think the first thing to do is to come to terms with human nature. That can repair a lot of damage on its own from a healthy dose of reality.

Second, we can stop pretending that countries are their borders and all within it are simply people who agree, philosophically, with some political axioms. While this is certainly true to some extent, the true borders of a nation are human borders. The real identity is that of the people themselves, not the institutions they establish. It is true that institutions will reflect their creator.

America needs a sense of identity beyond its political institutions. This identity does not have to be uniform. In fact, it shouldn't be. If we are to remain a union, we ought to find these identities among ourselves, where we live. Instead of trying to identify ourselves by posturing (Look at how X we are).

I hope that somewhere down the line, the racial supremacists among us will stop believing it is our duty to hold the hands of and Shepard others. I think its obvious who I'm talking about and it ain't the neo-nazis or the KKK (et. al.)
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2013, 04:17 PM #8
Treghc
 
 
Treghc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Seattle
Treghc is a Supporting Member
Treghc is a founding member
 has been a member for 10 years
Treghc is a Forum Captain
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
I'll tackle this by paragraph.

1) They make a lot of noise but little else. Rabble rabble rabble. What these people should be doing is rolling back their own lives. Instead of yelling at business or government. You say reforms need to be made, but to what and why?
As these newer generations of people become older, wiser, and as the older generations are unable to do their job due to their age, they'll be able to take action. Changing the way government is run requires taking control of the government (either through revolt or obtained reformation).

There needs to be reformation made to how government interacts with economy. Principalities are consuming larger and larger responsibilities of the toils and troubles of what is happening in this country. While I'll be the first to admit that our population isn't exactly the most educated, nor the most selfless, I place a large portion of that blame on the social conditioning enacted in our every day lives. Part of this is inherent with a capitalistic, free market economy; the easy place to get a job at is the corporation that destroys small business due to low prices, but only pays you enough to buy at the very place you work at. Ingenious model for the corporation. Detrimental to a 'growing' market.

I know I told you earlier that I was very vague with my response. I'm trying to get more in to detail without derailing the main topic of this thread. So I'll just leave a couple of things there.

Quote:
2) I'm on board with scrapping the global empire. However, it must be recognized that someone will fill our former role as long as there is a means to do it. We can't pretend that everyone else will act benevolently now that big bad America is gone. A lot of people think America is evil incarnate for meddling in world affairs but the truth is, someone would have been in our shoes, Americans should be thankful and proud that they were not on the receiving end licking someone elses boots for scraps.
This is very true and it's a very hard thing to try and overcome. Being the superpower of the world has its perks and plenty of them. But this has become a nation of overabundance, gluttony, and greed. Our perspective in the world is as brainwashed as any other nation in the world. Our leisurely lifestyles have bred far too many people that can be content with simply breathing air. Ridding us of our power would enforce perspective and likely enact a level of workmanship we haven't seen in a long time. We always do our best when we have something to fight for.

Quote:
The information economy is more or less contingent on mass communication which is contingent on industrial society. If you believe industrial society is going away, you can consider mass communication a memory. The information economy is great, for the top end. It leaves little for most people to take part in, people who don't posses the faculties required to participate.
I should have clarified; I was talking about the workings of this country. Our industrialization is outsourced now, as it has been doing so with other first world countries. It's being outsourced not just to other countries, but to the field of robotics. I foresee robotics taking the largest role in the evolution of this. Why pay anyone when machinery can make more machinery at no labor cost? This is a future we will be living in, be it 20, 30, or 40 years from now.

[quote]3) Realistically, future tech will be whatever remnants of industrial technology work with the viable sustainable alternatives solar wind and hydro. What ever comes from that is anyone's guess. It's safe to assume that mass anything is going to be unheard of. Unless of course we are able to magically convert over our entire infrastructure to accept nuclear power or some equivalent. Want to make some money? Try to figure out a way to harness ocean current.[quote]

I don't disagree.

Quote:
4) So America rolls back the empire. This is going to significantly defund almost every great society project. It is also going to leave Americans with much less and a much lower standard of living than they have come to expect. None of which is a bad thing. But it bears worth keeping in mind.
I think, for the long term goal of reformation for modern times, the losses are worth it. Like I said earlier, we perform our best when we have something to fight for. I believe fighting for the top spot is better for a nation than being at the top spot.
__________________
“But men, they say a lot of foolish things. In the end, the only words I can find to believe in are mine." - Joe

Tarsier Slave


We are Sapien
Treghc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2013, 05:08 PM #9
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
As these newer generations of people become older, wiser, and as the older generations are unable to do their job due to their age, they'll be able to take action. Changing the way government is run requires taking control of the government (either through revolt or obtained reformation).
Age isn't a mark of wisdom anymore. Medicine does good to ensure even the most unintelligent can lead long lives. I'd say the best answer to this question would be found in the past, when people lived with less. I'm tired of revolting and revolution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
There needs to be reformation made to how government interacts with economy. Principalities are consuming larger and larger responsibilities of the toils and troubles of what is happening in this country. While I'll be the first to admit that our population isn't exactly the most educated, nor the most selfless, I place a large portion of that blame on the social conditioning enacted in our every day lives. Part of this is inherent with a capitalistic, free market economy; the easy place to get a job at is the corporation that destroys small business due to low prices, but only pays you enough to buy at the very place you work at. Ingenious model for the corporation. Detrimental to a 'growing' market.

I know I told you earlier that I was very vague with my response. I'm trying to get more in to detail without derailing the main topic of this thread. So I'll just leave a couple of things there.
The way that I see it, just let these states figure out their own solutions to the problems at a grassroots level. No dickhead in DC could possibly know what's best for a town in Idaho. Get out of that towns way seems to be the best course, if only by the virtue that they can react faster.

With declining average IQs, it's doubtful education does anything for most who are pushed through the system. Look at New York. 80 percent of high school graduates do not understand remedial subjects. But the number of graduates has risen 40 percent. Our education system has been crap since the 1930's.

Capitalism is viking economics, a trait we inherited from the British. It's something that belongs to the soul of the people. You can't change the personality by changing the economic system. So you get government to kick some people in line, but what does that change? We still all want the cheapest price and we will go anywhere to get it. Those on the other end will do anything to give it to you. It doesn't leave room for the kind of benevolence you are looking for. If I don't do X ethically questionable action, someone else will.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
This is very true and it's a very hard thing to try and overcome. Being the superpower of the world has its perks and plenty of them. But this has become a nation of overabundance, gluttony, and greed. Our perspective in the world is as brainwashed as any other nation in the world. Our leisurely lifestyles have bred far too many people that can be content with simply breathing air. Ridding us of our power would enforce perspective and likely enact a level of workmanship we haven't seen in a long time. We always do our best when we have something to fight for.
Indeed. Although I should say that I wish people would be content with just breathing air. There would be less land fills of talking plastic fish.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
I should have clarified; I was talking about the workings of this country. Our industrialization is outsourced now, as it has been doing so with other first world countries. It's being outsourced not just to other countries, but to the field of robotics. I foresee robotics taking the largest role in the evolution of this. Why pay anyone when machinery can make more machinery at no labor cost? This is a future we will be living in, be it 20, 30, or 40 years from now.
It's outsourced because the Imperial economy drove the standard of living higher than the costs of production. Or I should say, higher than what the work is worth. Either way, in order to compete, outsourcing had to happen. The information economy only works because of the imperial economy.

Most people aren't fit for white collar work. Assuming that robots can do most industrial production with the exception of maintenance, what is to be done with hordes of people with no shoes that fit?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
I think, for the long term goal of reformation for modern times, the losses are worth it. Like I said earlier, we perform our best when we have something to fight for. I believe fighting for the top spot is better for a nation than being at the top spot.
Is the economy the only broken area you see? I'm only asking because it seems to be your sole focus.

Last edited by Iamamartianchurch : 03-18-2013 at 05:16 PM.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2013, 06:24 PM #10
Treghc
 
 
Treghc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Seattle
Treghc is a Supporting Member
Treghc is a founding member
 has been a member for 10 years
Treghc is a Forum Captain
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
Age isn't a mark of wisdom anymore. Medicine does good to ensure even the most unintelligent can lead long lives. I'd say the best answer to this question would be found in the past, when people lived with less. I'm tired of revolting and revolution.
It may not be a guarantee, but there's no denying that wisdom still comes with age for most people. Their level of wisdom will differ greatly, but wisdom comes from experience and more time usually equates to more experience. Even then, it's rather aside the point I was trying to address, which was how the newer generations plan to change the way this country and its workings are handled. To be more direct: as time goes by, the opportunities for the newer generations will become more abundant and actions for change will be more available for them.

Quote:
The way that I see it, just let these states figure out their own solutions to the problems at a grassroots level. No dickhead in DC could possibly know what's best for a town in Idaho. Get out of that towns way seems to be the best course, if only by the virtue that they can react faster.
I can agree with this statement and see the logic behind it. In order for this to happen though, big government needs to change first; retraction can only occur when the government wants to contract. That being said, the role of universal governance still is pertinent for a large population. We have simply gone way overboard on that universal control.

Quote:
With declining average IQs, it's doubtful education does anything for most who are pushed through the system. Look at New York. 80 percent of high school graduates do not understand remedial subjects. But the number of graduates has risen 40 percent. Our education system has been crap since the 1930's.

Capitalism is viking economics, a trait we inherited from the British. It's something that belongs to the soul of the people. You can't change the personality by changing the economic system. So you get government to kick some people in line, but what does that change? We still all want the cheapest price and we will go anywhere to get it. Those on the other end will do anything to give it to you. It doesn't leave room for the kind of benevolence you are looking for. If I don't do X ethically questionable action, someone else will.
This is why I've stressed government and economic change, primarily how government controls economics. Introducing salary caps or percentage payouts for employees is one way to curb the great viking dominance.

Yes, people always want the cheapest price. We're all perfect examples of that. It doesn't mean we should deprived of a decent pay to the point where options aren't even possible. Keeping compensation for the elite few does the country no good. Giving compensation to the majority of the working class helps strengthen the very foundation, thus increasing a nation's prosperity as a whole. The more the middle or lower class gets paid, the more they can afford. The more they can afford, the more they will purchase. The more they purchase, the more business can expand and hire more people. It's a cyclical method of prosperity. Unfortunately, it doesn't met instant gratification for the business owner. He/she will have to wait a bit longer to earn the big bucks. Addressing a salary cap as a percentage of that business' overall income promotes entrepreneurism, business development, and consumer power all the same.

Quote:
It's outsourced because the Imperial economy drove the standard of living higher than the costs of production. Or I should say, higher than what the work is worth. Either way, in order to compete, outsourcing had to happen. The information economy only works because of the imperial economy.

Most people aren't fit for white collar work. Assuming that robots can do most industrial production with the exception of maintenance, what is to be done with hordes of people with no shoes that fit?
To the first paragraph, I understand that.

As for the second, I admit it's not something I've given too much thought toward. I suppose they'd either have to live up to what's expected of them or find a new place to live.

Quote:
Is the economy the only broken area you see? I'm only asking because it seems to be your sole focus.
I'm putting a strong focus on it because it seems to be a predominant downfall in this country right now. More specifically, I'm worried with how the economy is governed and controlled/maintained. It is not the only broken area though.

---

This was posted over the course of a couple of hours. My thought process may have been sidetracked through it.
__________________
“But men, they say a lot of foolish things. In the end, the only words I can find to believe in are mine." - Joe

Tarsier Slave


We are Sapien
Treghc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2013, 10:16 PM #11
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
was how the newer generations plan to change the way this country and its workings are handled. To be more direct: as time goes by, the opportunities for the newer generations will become more abundant and actions for change will be more available for them.
Maybe the incessant need to change things is bad? Consider it a preference of variance in species instead of a need to create a new one. I could be misunderstanding.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
I can agree with this statement and see the logic behind it. In order for this to happen though, big government needs to change first; retraction can only occur when the government wants to contract. That being said, the role of universal governance still is pertinent for a large population. We have simply gone way overboard on that universal control.
It doesn't need to change first, actually people just have to make the change in their heads first.

"we aren't going to put all our faith in this omnipotent entity"

There always always always needs to be a central authority. However, even monarchs (not every single one) had their limits. I'd like to discuss what you think those limits should be. Time to get specific my friend.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
This is why I've stressed government and economic change, primarily how government controls economics. Introducing salary caps or percentage payouts for employees is one way to curb the great viking dominance.
I was trying to demonstrate that as long as rules are in place, people will still do whatever they can get away with, within their limits. Good behavior doesn't come from the enforcement of law, it comes from the enforcement of behavior. Otherwise you get into a habit of adding restriction after restriction until the population has given itself tyranny.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
Yes, people always want the cheapest price. We're all perfect examples of that. It doesn't mean we should deprived of a decent pay to the point where options aren't even possible. Keeping compensation for the elite few does the country no good. Giving compensation to the majority of the working class helps strengthen the very foundation, thus increasing a nation's prosperity as a whole. The more the middle or lower class gets paid, the more they can afford. The more they can afford, the more they will purchase. The more they purchase, the more business can expand and hire more people. It's a cyclical method of prosperity. Unfortunately, it doesn't met instant gratification for the business owner. He/she will have to wait a bit longer to earn the big bucks. Addressing a salary cap as a percentage of that business' overall income promotes entrepreneurism, business development, and consumer power all the same.
I liked my idea of a ratio based system better than caps and static limits. Then again, all this thought about the economy is gridlocked into the idea that it should always grow, always expand and so forth. That's probably a good chunk of the problem.

Here's the deal though, every job I ever had has been a contract. No one is forcing me to sign it. I accept my salary and have had to negotiate with each employer to get a rise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
As for the second, I admit it's not something I've given too much thought toward. I suppose they'd either have to live up to what's expected of them or find a new place to live.
That is a LOT of people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
I'm putting a strong focus on it because it seems to be a predominant downfall in this country right now. More specifically, I'm worried with how the economy is governed and controlled/maintained. It is not the only broken area though.
Curious. Business has, as far back as at least the era of the "robber barons," petitioned the government to meddle in the affairs of economics. Instead of competing by way of market innovation, rival companies of the big names just go to the government to level the field for them. Throw some cash at some weak and unprincipled politicians and your competitors suffer under the weight of legislation.

I think the whole fundamental outlook on economics needs to change. We can start by stopping the worship.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2013, 10:16 PM #12
Seahawk6060
 
 
Seahawk6060's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
When you pose the question, I think of what I'd like for my children and their children.

-A future that appreciates and fosters the ideas of individual liberty and economic freedom.
-Individuals that hold themselves to high standards of conduct, hard work, and education.
-Citizens that involve themselves in their political system and expect only the best from their elected representatives.
-Government that makes rational decisions, based on long-term objectives and strategic goals.

I don't think any of this is rocket science. If you stick to some fundamental principles like these, you can adapt to any situation and evolve as the future requires.

It's not clear to me that we need a new dream. We put man on the moon and proved beyond the shadow of the doubt that we can do great things. I think we've lost touch with some of the fundamentals that made us great in the first place. If the foundation isn't there, nothing you build on top of it is going to make any difference.

The dream seems very clear to me, it's how to achieve that ideal that remains elusive.
Seahawk6060 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2013, 10:02 AM #13
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seahawk6060 View Post
When you pose the question, I think of what I'd like for my children and their children.

-A future that appreciates and fosters the ideas of individual liberty and economic freedom.
-Individuals that hold themselves to high standards of conduct, hard work, and education.
-Citizens that involve themselves in their political system and expect only the best from their elected representatives.
-Government that makes rational decisions, based on long-term objectives and strategic goals.

I don't think any of this is rocket science. If you stick to some fundamental principles like these, you can adapt to any situation and evolve as the future requires.

It's not clear to me that we need a new dream. We put man on the moon and proved beyond the shadow of the doubt that we can do great things. I think we've lost touch with some of the fundamentals that made us great in the first place. If the foundation isn't there, nothing you build on top of it is going to make any difference.

The dream seems very clear to me, it's how to achieve that ideal that remains elusive.
I've developed an untested theory that individual liberty is a slow poison. You can track its development from a reasonable set of restrictions on the state into an ever growing list of demands from one group imposed onto another. A negative conception of liberty to a positive conception. As all civilizations are subjected to rising and falling, this point may be moot.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2013, 11:15 AM #14
Treghc
 
 
Treghc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Seattle
Treghc is a Supporting Member
Treghc is a founding member
 has been a member for 10 years
Treghc is a Forum Captain
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
Maybe the incessant need to change things is bad? Consider it a preference of variance in species instead of a need to create a new one. I could be misunderstanding.
If things are bad now, the only thing can help is some sort of change. Sticking to the given path of failure doesn't solve anything. I think the problem is that we are constricting that very variance you wish to promote. Everything being done is done as further and further restrictions on the way people act. Our "freedom" is diminishing to an all-powerful centralization of control.

Quote:
It doesn't need to change first, actually people just have to make the change in their heads first.
I hear this a lot. "People need to change their heads," but I don't believe it to hold any truth at face value. The overwhelming majority of people don't change. They become wiser through experience, sure, but their core values almost always remain the same. We have to change the way people are brought up in order to hope to change the way a population thinks.

Quote:
"we aren't going to put all our faith in this omnipotent entity"

There always always always needs to be a central authority. However, even monarchs (not every single one) had their limits. I'd like to discuss what you think those limits should be. Time to get specific my friend.
We don't need a large government body searching in to every citizen's lives in order to determine whether or not one person has a chance of killing a couple. Such decrees are best left at a state level. We don't need big government to tell us what we can or cannot do with our own body (drugs, prostitution, assisted suicide, etc). Again, these are best left to determine at a state level.

The role of government should be to enact laws that provide overall safety for its citizens and to promote unity between the states. The states themselves should be allowed to govern their people more freely, with less influence from big government. Allow people to decide for themselves what they want and give them options. No two people are exactly alike and having different areas to live with like-minded people will provide better prosperity and unity. Government should just make sure these states are working together for a bigger picture. It doesn't need to delve in to peculiarities of the individuals.

Quote:
I was trying to demonstrate that as long as rules are in place, people will still do whatever they can get away with, within their limits. Good behavior doesn't come from the enforcement of law, it comes from the enforcement of behavior. Otherwise you get into a habit of adding restriction after restriction until the population has given itself tyranny.
Oh, I understand completely. But some things happen to be easy to track and therefore easy to enforce. Taxes are one of these things.

Quote:
I liked my idea of a ratio based system better than caps and static limits. Then again, all this thought about the economy is gridlocked into the idea that it should always grow, always expand and so forth. That's probably a good chunk of the problem.

Here's the deal though, every job I ever had has been a contract. No one is forcing me to sign it. I accept my salary and have had to negotiate with each employer to get a rise.
As do I. I just didn't want to think I was stealing the idea

If we want to be purely ideological, sure... economy will have to stop growing at some point. I seriously doubt now is the time, nor is the foreseeable future in my lifetime. Technology will continue to grow. People will continue to reproduce without recourse. Science will advance and more people will live longer and have more money. The economy needs to keep up until these things begin stagnation. Either that, or we completely restructure our economic philosophies.

Quote:
That is a LOT of people.
We can do without a LOT of people. Call me selfish, but I care little for those unable to survive in their environment.

Quote:
Curious. Business has, as far back as at least the era of the "robber barons," petitioned the government to meddle in the affairs of economics. Instead of competing by way of market innovation, rival companies of the big names just go to the government to level the field for them. Throw some cash at some weak and unprincipled politicians and your competitors suffer under the weight of legislation.

I think the whole fundamental outlook on economics needs to change. We can start by stopping the worship.
Agreed.
__________________
“But men, they say a lot of foolish things. In the end, the only words I can find to believe in are mine." - Joe

Tarsier Slave


We are Sapien
Treghc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2013, 01:14 PM #15
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
If things are bad now, the only thing can help is some sort of change. Sticking to the given path of failure doesn't solve anything. I think the problem is that we are constricting that very variance you wish to promote. Everything being done is done as further and further restrictions on the way people act. Our "freedom" is diminishing to an all-powerful centralization of control.
The meddling I was talking about was referring to was about fundamentals. Going back to liberty for an example. The original negative conception of liberty was a protection on the part from the whole. We currently conceive a positive form of liberty that constitutes a rebellion of each part from the whole. It is that change I am against.

In order for the part to be rebel from the whole, the differences between each part need to be done away with. This requires a strong centralized entity. Consequently, the whole is only able to function through differences in each part. Ironically, the rebelling parts appear to be gaining freedom even though this centralized authority is working to equalize the parts in turn restricting each of them. Voluntary shackling.

I just don't want any more revolutions. I want order. There's nothing new under the sun.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
I hear this a lot. "People need to change their heads," but I don't believe it to hold any truth at face value. The overwhelming majority of people don't change. They become wiser through experience, sure, but their core values almost always remain the same. We have to change the way people are brought up in order to hope to change the way a population thinks.
Values are not what they were six years ago. We are saying the same thing though. I was perhaps too vague.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
We don't need a large government body searching in to every citizen's lives in order to determine whether or not one person has a chance of killing a couple. Such decrees are best left at a state level. We don't need big government to tell us what we can or cannot do with our own body (drugs, prostitution, assisted suicide, etc). Again, these are best left to determine at a state level.
Yeah you know the point of justice isn't to prevent crime or death.

I don't buy into that whole "your body" thing. My perspective is quite different.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
The role of government should be to enact laws that provide overall safety for its citizens and to promote unity between the states. The states themselves should be allowed to govern their people more freely, with less influence from big government. Allow people to decide for themselves what they want and give them options. No two people are exactly alike and having different areas to live with like-minded people will provide better prosperity and unity. Government should just make sure these states are working together for a bigger picture. It doesn't need to delve in to peculiarities of the individuals.
I'm a little confused on which government is which so I'll try to address it as I understand it.

Federal government:
I'm on board with it providing security from outside sources, and protecting the rights enumerated in the constitution. I'm also on board with federal government over watching state entities. I'm not on board with the federal government making rules for states that go beyond enforcement of constitutional rights. I don't know what you mean by unity of the States. I don't care if they like or agree with each other. I only care that they don't go to war with each other. Even then, preservation of the union is not an absolute requirement if it isn't going to work.

States:
Enforcing plurality for each state must go. The same must be said for towns and communities. Yes this violates 50 years of rallies and matches. However people are happiest and most cooperative when they are allowed to live among shared values and shared identity. The state government should be the intersection point between the bottom up state-level decision making and the top down federal-level decision making. I think we are roughly in agreement here.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
Oh, I understand completely. But some things happen to be easy to track and therefore easy to enforce. Taxes are one of these things.
I think my alternative is easy to track.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
If we want to be purely ideological, sure... economy will have to stop growing at some point. I seriously doubt now is the time, nor is the foreseeable future in my lifetime. Technology will continue to grow. People will continue to reproduce without recourse. Science will advance and more people will live longer and have more money. The economy needs to keep up until these things begin stagnation. Either that, or we completely restructure our economic philosophies.
Growth slows and declines all the time though. Recession depression and so forth. I'm more interested in sustainability at a break even point. It's a culture thing I don't expect to change just make known.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
We can do without a LOT of people. Call me selfish, but I care little for those unable to survive in their environment.
well that is that then.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2013, 05:08 PM #16
Treghc
 
 
Treghc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Seattle
Treghc is a Supporting Member
Treghc is a founding member
 has been a member for 10 years
Treghc is a Forum Captain
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
The meddling I was talking about was referring to was about fundamentals. Going back to liberty for an example. The original negative conception of liberty was a protection on the part from the whole. We currently conceive a positive form of liberty that constitutes a rebellion of each part from the whole. It is that change I am against.

In order for the part to be rebel from the whole, the differences between each part need to be done away with. This requires a strong centralized entity. Consequently, the whole is only able to function through differences in each part. Ironically, the rebelling parts appear to be gaining freedom even though this centralized authority is working to equalize the parts in turn restricting each of them. Voluntary shackling.

I just don't want any more revolutions. I want order. There's nothing new under the sun.
With the advancement of technology allowing the ease of one's voice to be heard, I deem it damned near impossible to achieve what you ask for. Rebellious people will always be out there. Now that they are given multiple avenues to speak out and be heard, disparity between everyone is intensified. Even you and I would not be able to have this discussion without technology. I think this comes down to whether you want such technology to continue to grow, or if you prefer to keep the world the way it is before; a more aristocratic, authoritarian order.

We can continue down the path of what one wants until we finally realize that there is no ultimate goal apart from one's individual needs and wants. Why should anyone want to give up anything to follow someone else's thoughts? In the end, I want to do what I want to do and that should be allowed, as long as it doesn't cause direct harm to any other person. That's part of why this country was founded. Individual liberty was one of the primary focuses of this country and it is something that should be preserved.

For your last paragraph, I can compare it to music. Every melody, every harmony, and every rhythm in music has been written and/or performed already. That doesn't stop new music from coming out. The arrangement of these things is can create new attachments. I see no reason why governance and philosophy can't be same.

Quote:
Values are not what they were six years ago. We are saying the same thing though. I was perhaps too vague.


Quote:
Yeah you know the point of justice isn't to prevent crime or death.

I don't buy into that whole "your body" thing. My perspective is quite different.
Don't take this as an assumption by me, but you don't think we shouldn't have control over our own bodies?

Please explain.

Quote:
I'm a little confused on which government is which so I'll try to address it as I understand it.

Federal government:
I'm on board with it providing security from outside sources, and protecting the rights enumerated in the constitution. I'm also on board with federal government over watching state entities. I'm not on board with the federal government making rules for states that go beyond enforcement of constitutional rights. I don't know what you mean by unity of the States. I don't care if they like or agree with each other. I only care that they don't go to war with each other. Even then, preservation of the union is not an absolute requirement if it isn't going to work.
That is almost spot on what I'm going for. I'd add the federal government should enforce that open trade not be blocked between states.

Quote:
States:
Enforcing plurality for each state must go. The same must be said for towns and communities. Yes this violates 50 years of rallies and matches. However people are happiest and most cooperative when they are allowed to live among shared values and shared identity. The state government should be the intersection point between the bottom up state-level decision making and the top down federal-level decision making. I think we are roughly in agreement here.
We are in agreement with this as well.

Quote:
I think my alternative is easy to track.
I'm attracted to the idea. Believe me.

Quote:
Growth slows and declines all the time though. Recession depression and so forth. I'm more interested in sustainability at a break even point. It's a culture thing I don't expect to change just make known.
The idea is to grow and, even with recessions, remain sustainable to the point that we don't break. By this, I mean things like the recession we just had and are currently recovering from. It has been manageable to get through and not even that great of a loss. We go through them and I don't see anything overly negative about them. Sure, I'd like the cycles to be less dramatic than they are, but it's not inherently a bad model as it is.

I'm less concerned about the boom and bust cycle than I am about income inequality.

Quote:
well that is that then.
__________________
“But men, they say a lot of foolish things. In the end, the only words I can find to believe in are mine." - Joe

Tarsier Slave


We are Sapien
Treghc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2013, 10:25 PM #17
Seahawk6060
 
 
Seahawk6060's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
I've developed an untested theory that individual liberty is a slow poison. You can track its development from a reasonable set of restrictions on the state into an ever growing list of demands from one group imposed onto another. A negative conception of liberty to a positive conception. As all civilizations are subjected to rising and falling, this point may be moot.
In the case of individual liberty, I don't consider myself libertarian. I listen to Ron Paul and he speaks to principles and seems to have a lot of integrity. He then convinces me that he lives in some alternate reality that I'm unfamiliar with. I can recognize that there needs to be a balance between individual liberty and social considerations.
Seahawk6060 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2013, 10:40 PM #18
barrel roll
secedere
 
barrel roll's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: FL/GA border
barrel roll is one of the top 500 posters on PbNation
barrel roll is Legendary
Yes, balance individual rights with MTV and Dancing with the Stars.

If you haven't figured out that it is a constant battle....

Aaaaah **** it, I'm going to bed.
__________________
--- UNDRPRVLGD Goggle Straps n stuff ---
If this be treason, make the most of it.-Patrick Henry
I'm a damn veteran, I've got more rights and privileges than you do.
MQ2 rebuild kits, MP4 ram rebuilds, general 'cocker teching
Will soon be making super slick mid/half block bolts
barrel roll is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2013, 09:22 AM #19
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seahawk6060 View Post
In the case of individual liberty, I don't consider myself libertarian. I listen to Ron Paul and he speaks to principles and seems to have a lot of integrity. He then convinces me that he lives in some alternate reality that I'm unfamiliar with. I can recognize that there needs to be a balance between individual liberty and social considerations.
I think individual liberty is manageable as long as morals aren't too relative.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2013, 05:57 PM #20
Tuff
Supports 2nd Amendment
 
Tuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NH
Tuff is a founding member
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
The dream of colonial america was the creation of a grand republic inspired by the ideals and virtues of the 18th century.

This ideal failed. In response, America went to war over two competing alternates: Agrarian Aristocracy or Isolated Industry. Industry won out.

When this dream died, the FDR generation rolled out a new one. This ideal was one of a global American Empire abroad and a social democracy at home.

We are nearing the end of this paradigm. We need a new dream. I have yet to see one pop up. This is a very broad and open question. It is also a decent chance for a break from all the bickering.

What do you all think?
In response to the bold/underline: While that is factually accurate, the Civil War had a lot of reasons for happening, those being two of them. It seems od to view them as potential candidates for the "American Dream" but I suppose the label is fair. I think out next dream is a return to an old dream. We need to go somewhere new and that place is up.....into space. It is a slow an expensive endeavor, but there are a lot of private companies experimenting with space travel. Talks of an eventual settlement on the Moon or "tourist" trips into space for a significant sum of money (millions at first, cheaper as time goes on) to experience zero gravity or an entirely new celestial body.

We need to really begin pushing Astronomy in schools, even elementary ones. Because Astronomy can be a complex science subject for so many (and one that not all have an interest in) many K-6 schools suffer from lack of knowledge to teach the concepts correctly, and interest is not perked with younger kids, and an opportunity is missed. I tell kids now Mars is going to happen in their lifetimes, hoping to generate excitement. You need to do more than tell them, they need to see Curiosity often, they need to see a hypothetical landing on Mars, how a journey there would last, etc.

Anyhow, I think Outer Space is the next American Dream we need to push for. I want to see America be the first country to put a human being on Mars, and return them safely in a 14-16 month period. The moon was supposed to be exciting (and it was for a while) but Mars is an entirely different planet. One with far more interesting landscapes and terrain than our Moon, and a place that....in hundreds of years, we could ultimately colonize. It would be interesting to see it colonized by a few different countries, with a variety of values brought into place there for how "Martians" should govern their new world. Teraforming Mars to accomodate human beings wuld appear something ripped from Total Recall or an Issac Asimov novel, but the truth is, the technology to begin the process of teraforming Mars already exists. It would just take a lot of time, and a lot of dedication from people to be willing to pay the money.

It would be great if we could cut back on entitlement programs and certain military projects to fund NASA and various private firms more appropriately to realize this dream.
__________________
IrishMafia
Proud American
Tuff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2013, 06:53 PM #21
F1VENOM
 
 
F1VENOM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
 has been a member for 10 years
A new dream? How about one that's more inclusive of technology beyond that of cell phones and gaming consoles. A society that strives to capitalize on our intellectual capacity and places education and infrastructure above another aircraft carrier.

Martian, permission to tear apart Tuff's bad science. Por favor.
__________________
"Originally posted by visualx: hey everyone, look at me. i call people poor though i make absolutely nothing; brag about my job as an intern or some ****; hate on people for not being fat like me; and absolutely never have any idea what i'm talking about, though i always have a ****ing righteous indignation with everything i say! aren't i ****ing amazing?! do you all like me yet?! oh, you know that hate is just a guise! good thing i have a ****ing amazing life! now let me go **** my fat girlfriend and cry myself to sleep"
F1VENOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
Forum Jump