Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wierd]

Oh, I dunno... The same kind of scientific and medical malfeasance behind the Tuskegee syphilis experiment maybe?  If you have a huge demographic of test subjects that you dont mind doing dubious things to, the mind boggles what a dangerous government could think up.

[Trekkin]

Oh, I dunno... The same kind of scientific and medical malfeasance behind the Tuskegee syphilis experiment maybe?  If you have a huge demographic of test subjects that you dont mind doing dubious things to, the mind boggles what a dangerous government could think up.

I wasn't being entirely serious (thus the stereotypical mad scientist "what could possibly go wrong") but this would by its nature be the most scrutinized scientific experiment in history and by design among the most transparent. Every science denialist, conspiracy wackaloon, and wannabe scientist in the country would be thrown into this together at 18, right when most people are at their most insufferably ultracrepidarian. Every case of the sniffles would ignite a firestorm of scrutiny.

EDIT: I'm well aware this is a terrible idea. Nevertheless, if we need something with a limitless need for new bodies and requirements literally anyone alive can satisfy, there's a short list and most of the things on it are worryingly abusable.

[Maximum Spin]

IDK, maybe we could try not putting people in mandatory work programs? You know, maybe, people don't actually owe you anything.

[Trekkin]

Well, sure, but Zanzetkuken's (EDIT: and Redking's) proposals upthread would require that they do, and we've been assuming arguendo that we'd want to implement that in the first place and thus skipping to the logistical issues rather than the moral ones.

So yeah, people don't owe the country for existing, but even if someone decided they did I think we've been reaching a consensus that there'd be no useful way to redeem that debt anyway.

[wierd]

Indeed.  I hinted that direction with the vitriol in my first post on this subject;  There would NOT be an efficient, nor truly effective solution.

The people that would want this (typically, the ultra-conservative bent kind of people), are also typically the people that want "Free market!" solutions.  I pointed out that the free market has already decided that human labor is obsolete. The track record for this demographic is to decide on ideological grounds, then ignore the consequences, while pretending the market fairy will fix everything when it wont. 

The kind of projects that would actually allow this to work, even for a short time, are right up there with "Socialist wellfare!!" solutions.  EG, the kind of thing that is completely antithetical to the supporting group.

(Even the !!SCIENCE!! suggestion from Trekken is antithetical to them; science gives empirical, REAL answers, when ideological FAKE answers that they can turn any way they want seem to be their preference.  That, and they have invested heavily in denouncing basic science at all levels to sustain their fossil fuel empires, to cater to the religious base concerning how "Evolution is JUST a theory!", and have consistently worked to GUT education funding every chance they can get-- Meaning the science suggestion is likely to be stillborn out the gate too.)

While many such persons might think this would make them feel good.... I dont think they would actually like the resulting consequences.

[Kagus]

I'm not sure we're doing a better job of including differing viewpoints here...

[wierd]

It is OK to differ.  It is not OK to believe that an unworkable plan is valid.

[Kagus]

It is OK to differ.  It is not OK to believe that an unworkable plan is valid.

Nor is it necessarily okay to explain why it's invalid by attaching a strawman to it and pointing vigorously.

Normally I wouldn't particularly care, it's a funny strawman and he's got the best straw; it's yuge... But we did just have a member explain how they felt like they were being personally attacked and dogpiled when trying to present an opinion that went against the common grain. I feel that a bit more tact could be applied in order to not imply that they are a part of the problem when explaining the potential problems with their held opinions.

We're all stupid most of the time, and being able to recognize and respect that in each other is a lot more important than folks may realize.

[wierd]

True enough.

It's just.... There is no real way this is going to work, or could work.  The prognosis of needing a universal basic income to deal with the fallout of nearly perfect automation, both in terms of mental vocations (like engineering, software design, art, etc) and in terms of raw material processing/manufacture, is very much accepted by quite a few modern economists.

Throwing millions of people into the mix that would be effectively stateless, and without rights?...  Into the same problem space as above?  Yeah. Bad juju.  Double bad juju if one claims to champion for a free market solution. (The free market has long since decided that automation is a more attractive target than employing people, because paying people is inefficient, and unfeeling robot labor is maximally efficient.)

Those are not really strawmen.  Nor is pointing out that the GOP, and its conservative supporters, tend to favor "Free market" magic, over real science and real economics being given to them.

Strawmen are fabricated things intended to more readily discredit somebody, based on ideals they do not hold.  When the major demographic really does hold those ideals, it is a whole lot less straw stuffed.

Does that mean that ZTG and Redking are in that mix?  No.  They were not the intended group I was describing anyway.  The majority of people that would be for this kind of treatment for citizenship are going to be hardcore conservatives, not conservative leaning centrists.  If you would note, I did indeed use the weasel words "most" and "typically" in the prior rhetoric. 

[Hanslanda]

It is OK to differ.  It is not OK to believe that an unworkable plan is valid.

Nor is it necessarily okay to explain why it's invalid by attaching a strawman to it and pointing vigorously.

Normally I wouldn't particularly care, it's a funny strawman and he's got the best straw; it's yuge... But we did just have a member explain how they felt like they were being personally attacked and dogpiled when trying to present an opinion that went against the common grain. I feel that a bit more tact could be applied in order to not imply that they are a part of the problem when explaining the potential problems with their held opinions.

We're all stupid most of the time, and being able to recognize and respect that in each other is a lot more important than folks may realize.

Kagus brings the wisdom today.

[Maximum Spin]

You want to know the truuuuuuth?

The prognosis of needing a universal basic income to deal with the fallout of nearly perfect automation, both in terms of mental vocations (like engineering, software design, art, etc) and in terms of raw material processing/manufacture, is very much accepted by quite a few modern economists.

It won't work.


There is nothing that can work.

[wierd]

In which case, the problem is self correcting, because once the masses start starving, the system will be upended.

[Reelya]

It came up that clicking quotes in the Ameripol Thread isn't jumping to the correct page.

I went back and checked, and it seems like it broke on page 866, which was around september 19th 2017. Clicking any quote or post title in this thread after that point no longer jumps to the correct position.

This is making it hard to follow conversations, obviously. So to fix that someone would have to alert Toady that's there's some potential glitch in the forum code or the data for this thread. Other than that, maybe it's time for a new Ameripol thread to cover the midterm elections and beyond.

[Kagus]

It came up that clicking quotes in the Ameripol Thread isn't jumping to the correct page.

I went back and checked, and it seems like it broke on page 866, which was around september 19th 2017. Clicking any quote or post title in this thread after that point no longer jumps to the correct position.

This is making it hard to follow conversations, obviously. So to fix that someone would have to alert Toady that's there's some potential glitch in the forum code or the data for this thread. Other than that, maybe it's time for a new Ameripol thread to cover the midterm elections and beyond.

That's odd, I managed to follow the links to a few AmeriPol quotes without issue, including the one that brought up the discussion in the first place.

Out of curiosity, try setting your "displayed posts per page" to the maximum, then following one of the links again.

[Reelya]

It looks like if it's on 15 or 25 posts per page* then it borks out from post #12975. For whatever reason, that doesn't happen if you set it to 50 posts per page. However, I don't really want to set it to 50 posts per page for the entire forum, just because links on this one thread will be screwy with less.

EDIT: however on 25 posts per page it seems to be broken for most pages since post # 12975, but works for a few only on the current page. Go back a page or two and the links aren't working properly.