Thoughts on a Conversation With NavCat

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Well, that's why the original plan was that ONLY landowners could vote... they assumed that ONLY Landowners would have enough 'skin in the game' to be educated and vote for the best candidate. I'm all for equality, but I do think that giving every mouth breather voting privileges does have some drawbacks... mostly that they're easily swayed by smooth talking snake oil salesmen (or saleswomen in the case of Gov Palin).

The problem with that is that in high-density areas many intelligent, educated people rent so that they are more free to travel, or because the city they live in is cost-prohibitive for purchasing a home, or because purchasing is cost-prohibitive. At the same time, property is inexpensive and readily available in poor, rural areas.

Tying voting to literacy might be a better idea.

[LMNO]

I prefer passing a current-events quiz and/or basic economics.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Well, that's why the original plan was that ONLY landowners could vote... they assumed that ONLY Landowners would have enough 'skin in the game' to be educated and vote for the best candidate. I'm all for equality, but I do think that giving every mouth breather voting privileges does have some drawbacks... mostly that they're easily swayed by smooth talking snake oil salesmen (or saleswomen in the case of Gov Palin).

The problem with that is that in high-density areas many intelligent, educated people rent so that they are more free to travel, or because the city they live in is cost-prohibitive for purchasing a home, or because purchasing is cost-prohibitive. At the same time, property is inexpensive and readily available in poor, rural areas.

Tying voting to literacy might be a better idea.

As someone that rents, I am well aware of that. My comment was on what the original plan was... and why. Most intelligent, educated people didn't rent until the 20th century. The majority of people in the 18th century that didn't own land were often illiterate, or had just immigrated and would likely not be well informed.

Times have changed, and land ownership is obviously not the same as it was... but the idea that everyone over 18 gets a vote was not originally part of the plan and I don't think that letting everyone with a pulse and a ID vote is necessarily good for the country.

Hell, I'd argue that most of the 'wedge' issues would disappear if it weren't for the hordes of uninformed, gullible voters.

[LMNO]

Fomenting class warfare, ITT.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

In what possible way is the federal reserve a private corporation.  Its owned by the government and operated by the suits in Washington.

Do you EVER look anything up before you type?

[navkat]

I prefer passing a current-events quiz and/or basic economics.

I think a US Constitutional comprehension quiz would be chief.

IF it were Constitutional to do this at ALL, it would be reserved to state's rights.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Bad analogy.  Sharks do what they do because they have a brain about as complex as an analog relay.  Enormous mega-corporations do what they do for reasons that cannot be explained without first having read Milton or Dante.

1.  Limit the size of corporations.  This can be done by taxing the dogshit out of C corps, and leaving S corps pretty much alone.  This only works if you follow #2.

2.  Prevent corporations from owning other corporations.  Period.

3.  Remove the corporate veil, then bust the shit out of anyone caught forming trusts.

4.  Abolish the stock exchange, and all public trading in private entities.  The stock exchange is one of the three reasons we are in the shape we're in today.

The above allows individuals to profit from their own hard work, but prevents corporations from assuming a life of their own.

This would definitely go a long way toward solving the problem. Only hitch is that it'll never happen as long as corporate money rules Washington.

[LMNO]

But corporate money is PEOPLE!

[Elder Iptuous]

I prefer passing a current-events quiz and/or basic economics.

I think a US Constitutional comprehension quiz would be chief.

IF it were Constitutional to do this at ALL, it would be reserved to state's rights.

that would prohibit our legislators from voting.....

[navkat]

I prefer passing a current-events quiz and/or basic economics.

I think a US Constitutional comprehension quiz would be chief.

IF it were Constitutional to do this at ALL, it would be reserved to state's rights.

that would prohibit our legislators from voting.....

Nice.

[Triple Zero]

Another thing that would help is to remove the legal precedent that identifies a corporation as an "entity" entitled to pretty much the same rights as an individual.

That's the "corporate veil" I mentioned.

then let's break it down. corporate entities are scary as fuck.

In my philosophy about Emergence I described them as lifeforms. That doesn't mean I agree with their existence, just that I'm not surprised. They're not alive like humans are, either. Or dogs, or mice. If I were to place them on some sort of animal scale, I'd liken them to Amoeba. Primitive, shapeless and caring only for food and survival.
In that respect, I think corporations as a lifeform are barely touching the second circuit on the 8 Circuits Model. Nations and tribes might go a littlebit further.

ok enough sidetracking.

Corporations act like they're persons, but they are not.

Even without the law saying that they are, you can tell it is in their interest to appear as humans. To disguise themselves. Like this gloopy amoeba with a simile of a human face at the end of one of its tentacles. I noticed for the first time when I saw some ads on the street for a new energy corporation. The text on the ad was talking as if the corporation was a person, talking directly to me, saying something like "Actually, nothing changed." (EnergyCorpA is now named EnergyCorpB). But if nothing changed, why'd they change their name? Of course EnergyCorpA got eaten by the larger amoeba of EnergyCorpB, which was now extending one of its masked tentacles to keep up its appearance of humanity, while being a faceless megacorporate entity.

ok still sidetrakcing, sorry, I'll stop now

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I agree with Trip... though maybe I'd call corporations "memetic entities"... but thats just semantics

[navkat]

Another thing that would help is to remove the legal precedent that identifies a corporation as an "entity" entitled to pretty much the same rights as an individual.

That's the "corporate veil" I mentioned.

then let's break it down. corporate entities are scary as fuck.

In my philosophy about Emergence I described them as lifeforms. That doesn't mean I agree with their existence, just that I'm not surprised. They're not alive like humans are, either. Or dogs, or mice. If I were to place them on some sort of animal scale, I'd liken them to Amoeba. Primitive, shapeless and caring only for food and survival.
In that respect, I think corporations as a lifeform are barely touching the second circuit on the 8 Circuits Model. Nations and tribes might go a littlebit further.

ok enough sidetracking.

Corporations act like they're persons, but they are not.

Even without the law saying that they are, you can tell it is in their interest to appear as humans. To disguise themselves. Like this gloopy amoeba with a simile of a human face at the end of one of its tentacles. I noticed for the first time when I saw some ads on the street for a new energy corporation. The text on the ad was talking as if the corporation was a person, talking directly to me, saying something like "Actually, nothing changed." (EnergyCorpA is now named EnergyCorpB). But if nothing changed, why'd they change their name? Of course EnergyCorpA got eaten by the larger amoeba of EnergyCorpB, which was now extending one of its masked tentacles to keep up its appearance of humanity, while being a faceless megacorporate entity.

ok still sidetrakcing, sorry, I'll stop now

I really liked this sidetrack.

Picturesque, metaphorical language speaks to my grey matter.

[Golden Applesauce]

Another thing that would help is to remove the legal precedent that identifies a corporation as an "entity" entitled to pretty much the same rights as an individual.

That's the "corporate veil" I mentioned.

then let's break it down. corporate entities are scary as fuck.

In my philosophy about Emergence I described them as lifeforms. That doesn't mean I agree with their existence, just that I'm not surprised. They're not alive like humans are, either. Or dogs, or mice. If I were to place them on some sort of animal scale, I'd liken them to Amoeba. Primitive, shapeless and caring only for food and survival.
In that respect, I think corporations as a lifeform are barely touching the second circuit on the 8 Circuits Model. Nations and tribes might go a littlebit further.

ok enough sidetracking.

Corporations act like they're persons, but they are not.

Even without the law saying that they are, you can tell it is in their interest to appear as humans. To disguise themselves. Like this gloopy amoeba with a simile of a human face at the end of one of its tentacles. I noticed for the first time when I saw some ads on the street for a new energy corporation. The text on the ad was talking as if the corporation was a person, talking directly to me, saying something like "Actually, nothing changed." (EnergyCorpA is now named EnergyCorpB). But if nothing changed, why'd they change their name? Of course EnergyCorpA got eaten by the larger amoeba of EnergyCorpB, which was now extending one of its masked tentacles to keep up its appearance of humanity, while being a faceless megacorporate entity.

ok still sidetrakcing, sorry, I'll stop now

I really liked this sidetrack.

Picturesque, metaphorical language speaks to my grey matter.

It speaks to a lot of people's gray matter.  In fact, picturesque, metaphorical language speaks so well to so many people's gray matter that well-reasoned arguments are only needed to convince the people to come up with new metaphorical language to persuade everyone else.

With a population that has largely never seen the inside of a formal logic classroom, much less actual critical thinking, all you need to mobilize a voting majority are vacuous animal based metaphors.  See, corporations are like babies, so you shouldn't through them out with the bathwater of all the bad things that have happened to your government.  Or they're like parasites, and while it's an interesting academic ethical dilemma if it's "fair" to wipe out a species just because that species happens to eat you, feet-on-the-ground salt-of-the-earth people like yourself with children to feed know that there's no reason to give 20% of your labor to tapeworms.  Or they're like packs of wolves, an optimal grouping for efficient resource gathering, unfairly set upon by individual wolves who seem to think that it's unfair that other wolves should work together, and try to force every other wolf down to their level of social and organizational incompetence rather than forming packs of their own.

There's a reason the top religions of the world all rely on simple parables to teach complicated theology, rather than just teaching the skills needed to understand complicated theology.

(That said, I do like the image of a giant ameoba with a smiley face on it trying to convince people that it's just a really big, oddly shaped person.)

[Adios]

Aside from the education issue it seems to me that everything is decided on tunnel vision. In other words, "What is good for me and mine right now?".

is it the selfishness, or the shortsightedness that bothers you? (or both)
how could you expect anyone to do anything that appears to the to be not to their personal advantage?

I never said it bothered me. I protect me and mine just as much as the next person.