Print

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

[Bauglir]

Hitler's actions were based off of existing feelings. His expansion into Austria, Czechoslovakia, and Poland were all based off of the popular ideal of a pan-Germanic state.

I'm not saying leaders are all that matter, either. It's hardly binary.

[SalmonGod]

When I voted in the last elections, it was on an electronic voting machine that treated it like a multiple choice test.  Is writing in a fictional character even an option anymore?

And what if you disagree with the practice of voting?

Huh, that's a good question. I didn't know that there were jurisdictions in which write-in candidates were not allowed (Wikipedia suggests that this is the case). In that case, I suppose you might as well not vote. Might want to figure out who's in charge of those rules and petition them to change them, but that sort of campaign is a good deal more investment of effort and time than simply writing in a vote.

Also, if you disagree with the practice of voting, I recommend writing in "Anarchy" or a similar non-democratic system. I mean, I suppose it depends on what it is about voting that you disapprove of, but at this point you're basically hijacking the system to use it as a means of expression (since you don't want to condone any major candidates, this is about the only option you have left).

Not only was there no option present for write-in (IIRC, the machine literally just had buttons along the side of the screen for option A-D), but it forced me through voting for a whole bunch of positions that I had no clue I'd be voting for along with the presidency.  I knew there were other elections coinciding, but I didn't know I would be forced to participate in them like that.  The voting station was my local fire department, which only had two machines for a line that wrapped multiple times around the building.  There were only 4 people staffing the place, and they were all busy either checking someone into a station or otherwise managing the line.  It was a nightmare and huge waste of time that I gave up half a night's sleep to participate in, when all I wanted to do was vote for one guy who had zero chance of winning anyway.

As for my disagreement with the practice of voting, that does come down to my political beliefs basically rejecting everything the way it is.  Writing in Anarchy would be the best thing for me at this point.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Hitler's actions were based off of existing feelings. His expansion into Austria, Czechoslovakia, and Poland were all based off of the popular ideal of a pan-Germanic state.

I'm not saying leaders are all that matter, either. It's hardly binary.

I was responding to MorleyDev, but he edited the relevant part out.

[MorleyDev]

Yeah, sorry I was editing it to make some minor changes and then my laptop bloody crashed >.< I'll admit that sentence was largely me making an appeal to PR by going "Yup WW2 was terrible and all Hitlers fault", and figured I'd try and at least add some "But let's get away from Godwin's law" to it and then crash -_-

[Bauglir]

Ah, my bad, sorry.

[SalmonGod]

From Global Citizens United -- one of many collective mouthpiece profiles used by Occupy-affiliated peoples on Google+

Why You Work So Hard - Do You Know?

Prior to the 1970's, for 150 years, every decade without fail, Americans enjoyed a rising level of wages.  As Worker Productivity went up, Employer's paid their Employee's their fair share.  This productivity and pay rise relationship was inseparable and resulted in a consistent rise in the standard of living over the same period.

In the early 1970's economists estimated that if worker productivity continued its pace, one of three things would have happened by today;

A. ) We'd work less hours, 20-25 hours, for the same wage.
B. ) We'd be paid higher wages, over $90,000 on average.
C. ) A mixture of working less hours and receiving higher wages.

Thanks in large part to Technology, worker productivity has consistently increased as expected.  This means that workers have been consistently improving their efficiency, to all time highs. Which in turn has consistently increased profits for Corporations, to all time highs.

Workers now make more money for Corporations, this is reflected in the Corporate profits.  So why have wages lowered? and why have hours increased? the very opposite of what was predicted.

The Answer:

People work longer, for less, simply because Employer's have a larger number of workers to choose from.   

What two factors continue to make the workforce larger?

 ❖ Globalization - expanded the global workforce from 500 million to 2 billion, companies hired cheap labor immigrants and off-shored work. 

 ❖ Technology - continues to be the largest and primary destroyer of jobs.

Meanwhile a small minority, Corporations and their Investor's, have become rich beyond their wildest dreams.  As Workers have become more efficient, their Owners have pocketed the Worker's increased productivity, the extra profit, without having to pay the Worker any compensation.
 
So how did American Workers deal with stagnant wages? 

Americans have worked more, and more, but this still wasn't enough!  Inflation meant American's could no longer maintain their traditional lifestyle expenditure - they would need to adjust - but they didn't..

Corporations awash with this extra wealth that their Worker's were creating for them, spotted a second opportunity, a chance to double dip.  So after they paid themselves large managerial wage increases the likes the world has never seen before, they did this...

They took the extra wealth created by the Worker, that traditionally would have been used to increase the Worker wage.  Then loaned it back to the Worker via bank loans and credit cards... with interest. 

As a result, Employer's became even richer, massive economic inequality developed, stock market's went wild, personal debt level's soared, a credit bubble burst and the workers, aka the general population, suffered one last blow, they lost around half of their wealth, eighteen years worth of savings.   

Americans today are still working increasingly longer, without compensation in the broader sense, for little in a statistical sense, but fiercely to maintain a level of lifestyle would be comfortably possible if economic benefits were shared as they once always were.

[Tabbyman]

Voting...

I personally think it would work if you could vote for what you want done with your tax dollars. Or your democratic decision-making power. Otherwise you have no choice but to vote for one liar or another who's going to go back on his promises.

Not only that, if a political leader actually tries to significantly change the world, he tends to get shot in the head. To make an American example: If Obama actually followed through on his promises he'd have been shot in the head too, but nope, he's being a good little boy and doing what he's told by his true masters, whoever they may be.

It's not much different up here in Canada, but as far as I recall nobody who tried to make a difference has ever been in power here. Maybe some of those good old fashioned politicians that supposedly existed back before my day... But I'm skeptical.

Either way, democracy would be nice. I'd like to see it actually exist some time before I'm dead, but that would require a major overhaul of society, replacing all the corporations with democratically run workplaces at the very least. I'm not sure how quickly such a thing can occur against the will of the rulership...

[Mrhappyface]

Impose birth control! Eat the poor! Instate human eugenics! Destroy the computers! Break some eggs to make lemonade!

[MetalSlimeHunt]

What are you going on about?

[Bauglir]

Sounds like alternating caricatures of the major political parties, as constructed by loonies of the opposing major party, in the US. Then a generic mixed metaphor that I do not actually understand.

[SalmonGod]

I modestly propose that we must break some omelettes to soylent the lemonade groves.

[GalenEvil]

Now introducing: Soylent Soda! "How's it taste," you ask? It differs from person to person.

[Putnam]

Now introducing: Soylent Soda! "How's it taste," you ask? It differs from person to person.

Well, some people just have really bad taste.

[lordcooper]

Some folk don't taste very nice, is basically what we're getting at.

[Duuvian]

MrHappy is one of the guys who show up once in a while on these forums and ends up being enlightened in his own way is all. He is on his dream journey so to speak if that is more relateable except in waking internet form. Also how the hell do you spell relateable? The spellchecker doesn't recognize it and the grammatical security my robot teacher provides is reassuring.