Print

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

[Graknorke]

It would be pretty much impossible to do any large scale projects, then.

Also decentralized systems (of all types) have the problem of being ineffectual at countering problems from outside of itself. How would such a system raise an army to counter an invasion? It would have to be global in scale so there arent any outside influences.

The idea would be that people could do large scale projects, but it would be as a collection of equals rather than employees under a manager.

Some projects (like making highways or jetliners or whatever) are simply too big for that. It'd be like a government where every citizen votes on every detail. We have representative governments for a reason, and these would have to get representatives too, which means individuals would have more power than other individuals, meaning...

No stable power vacuum exists as far as I know.

Oh, I know it's completely unworkable. The basic concept is still something that I would consider a good thing though.

[misko27]

It would be pretty much impossible to do any large scale projects, then.

Also decentralized systems (of all types) have the problem of being ineffectual at countering problems from outside of itself. How would such a system raise an army to counter an invasion? It would have to be global in scale so there arent any outside influences.

The idea would be that people could do large scale projects, but it would be as a collection of equals rather than employees under a manager.

As someone who has led a few projects, do you know how that actually works out? It sucks. When is the last time you have ever heard of, say, a skyscraper being built by hobbyists? The sheer scale of the endeavor is mind-boggling, the complexity staggering, the danger very real. Without any form of system-wide self-consistency, problems show up, holes appear, more work is done on some areas then others, and the end result is lacking.

People don't build roads of their own accord. They only way that happens is enough people with experience in it have reason (such as being paid) to do it. If the people are poor, or hell even simply not rich, they don't get a road.

The ultimate problem though, is simply that enough people disagree with the system to make it break down. Unlike an organized system, with this one any significant number of disagreers can take down everything.

[scrdest]

Can we please get back on topic and move this discussion elsewhere, if need be?

[Descan]

I would, myself, prefer the Canadian system with a few minor (and one or two rather major) tweaks.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

But free healthcare and education, with a basic income guarantee, and the minimum wage could stay where it is. Hell, it could even be lower! If you're getting enough money to stay off the street anyway, than a living minimum wage is less pressing of an issue.

I'd also prefer factories and workplaces be owned and operated by their workers, who can then hire out for managers and such people who know how to organize a place efficiently. Dunno how to deal with getting rid of detrimental workers, though (people who take more than they put in). If you quit or are fired, you lose your ownership of the place. To create new factories and fund them, the current system of creation of such works. But instead of them owning it, they get a multiplied share of the factory that a worker gets. Twice, thrice, I don't know. But they own that and that percentage of the profit of the factor goes to them.

And electorally, a bicameral system, a house of direct representatives who people vote for by name, and a party-driven senate, you vote for the party you want to represent you in the senate and you vote for the single person you want to represent you in the house.

The party publishes a list of people they'll put in the senate, with the top dog being the prime minister if they get the most votes in the senate. The party list is decided on by a primary voted by civilians who are members of the party.

Something like that, anyway. Don't need to go whole-hog anarchism if the idea is to give everyone a fighting opportunity to live and prosper, and to not punish someone with death-by-starvation if they fail once in a while.

[kaijyuu]

Can we please get back on topic and move this discussion elsewhere, if need be?

But it's a happy topic!

Kinda.

[Gunner-Chan]

Can we please get back on topic and move this discussion elsewhere, if need be?

But it's a happy topic!

Kinda.

Nope. It's not a happy topic. Everyone switch or topic goes on a hiatus for a day or so. Too many passions and ideals can be stirred up when it comes to politics.

[Helgoland]

Can we please get back on topic and move this discussion elsewhere, if need be?

But it's a happy topic!

Kinda.

Might turn nasty soon though. Better avoid that.
FAKEEDIT: What Janet said.

[scrdest]

Can we please get back on topic and move this discussion elsewhere, if need be?

But it's a happy topic!

Kinda.

No, it's politics. Politics are inherently non-happy, and moreover they make the thread incredibly flammable.

[Graknorke]

Politics are inherently non-happy

Pssh, you're just looking at it wrong.
Anything can be happy if you have the appropriate mindset.

[Helgoland]

Okay, wanna switch to information content of swearwords? *gets popcorn*

[kaijyuu]

Politics are inherently non-happy

Pssh, you're just looking at it wrong.
Anything can be happy if you have the appropriate mindset.

Genocide, hooray!

[Graknorke]

Politics are inherently non-happy

Pssh, you're just looking at it wrong.
Anything can be happy if you have the appropriate mindset.

Genocide, hooray!

Genocides don't happen for no reason.
Someone has to want it.

[kaijyuu]

From this we can conclude not all happies are created equal.

[Loud Whispers]

Nope. It's not a happy topic. Everyone switch or topic goes on a hiatus for a day or so. Too many passions and ideals can be stirred up when it comes to politics.

Aw, it seemed chill. Alas, no more politicohaps from me ITT today, I accede.

[scrdest]

From this we can conclude not all happies are created equal.

And we hold this truth to be self-evident.