Is the American Dream Dead?

#201
#201
utgibbs said:
On what issue? Whether I think everyone should have a computer? Whether everyone should have internet access? Both?

Well, again, I think it was first proposed by Newt Gingrich in some form or fashion. I would probably disagree with his initiatives, but the sentiment is excellent.

Everyone should have access. How to do it? It would require a feasability study to find the most efficient method, however, my inclination probably would lean towards library expansions with generous computer / networking access. Libraries, after all, are an enduring symbol of civilization. However, maybe "a laptop for every child" is today's rabbit in every pot....
Click to expand...

aren't you claiming an increase in both obesity and childhood cancers? What would giving every kid a laptop and free internet access lead to? Are you willing to trade cancer for juvenile diabetes?

Kids spend far too much time in front of their electronic babysitters now. It's been shown that kids who "benefited" from an OLPC project in Africa used their little windup laptops to surf porn.

Once again, you come into something with good (allegedly) intentions and as usual, you haven't thought through the unintended consequences. Perhaps you're just selfish, preferring to feel good about yourself, while not giving a damn about what your dreams would actually do to the real world outside your back door, behind the woodshed, getting humped by an Enlightened gorilla.
 
#202
#202
utgibbs said:
I think you are struggling because you have already been repudiated by real world examples outside your backdoor:

1. Cuban experience
2. London food delivery (which, by the way, has a bustling street market culture still)
3. Cost of free range eggs compared to factory eggs already

I would say the only bromide is this insistence that de-industrialization requires a return to the Pleistocene, especially when I am VN's champion of Enlightenment gifts. It is the inertia of being locked in an ideology.

I find this deeply ironic though. What you are admitting above is, actually, Capitalism cannot and does not work. You are suggesting the decentralization of production - required for effective competitiveness - cannot be done in many circumstances. Maybe you have a point. And maybe that's why a mixed economy is far more efficient for production, jobs, etc.

Regarding how easy it would be to decrease production and increase computer access, another real world example:

Guiya E-waste Guangdong 4100 tons/day

Largest E-waste (electronic) landfill in the world. Thanks to the glory of planned obsolescence. :salute: I've got the numbers for everyone else too. I will admit, "easy" was too hyperbolic on my part. Just as "impossible" is hyperbolic on yours.

By the way, the internet is the invention of those evil Enlightenment guys in that evil government institution CERN. I'm not sure how the private sector didn't invent it first. Funny that.

I don't consider you one of the GoF, volinbham, and you are a good debater. So I won't bust the three letters of doom on you. :wink:
Click to expand...


London is in full on industrialization for it's distribution system.

You've yet to show how free range chicken and eggs can be produced on the scale necessary to meet demand. The closest you've come is to suggest people should eat less chicken (eggs too I assume).

The fact that technological products (computers) have short life cycles is no evidence that removing industrialization would make them widely available.

I'm not at all against decentralization. I do favor the specialization and division of labor combined with scale that industrialization brings since it allows for products to be produced at price points making them accessible. You've consistently failed to show how your model would accomplish this.

As for the creation of the Internet, we all know it's DARPA roots. You conveniently forgot all the parts/pieces/tools used by the developers to create the early systems (products of industrialization) and the role that industrialization played in taking a tool created for the government and translating that into a ubiquitous service easily available throughout the country. Millions of routers, servers, untold miles of cable, millions of tools, industrialized ISPs driven by Capitalism, etc. All that took a government project and turned it into the Internet as we know it today. Without a Cisco (or Level 3 or any number of telecomm for-profit, industrialized companies), we aren't talking on the VN.

Saying look at Cuba is no answer.
 
#203
#203
utgibbs said:
On what issue? Whether I think everyone should have a computer? Whether everyone should have internet access? Both?

Well, again, I think it was first proposed by Newt Gingrich in some form or fashion. I would probably disagree with his initiatives, but the sentiment is excellent.

Everyone should have access. How to do it? It would require a feasability study to find the most efficient method, however, my inclination probably would lean towards library expansions with generous computer / networking access. Libraries, after all, are an enduring symbol of civilization. However, maybe "a laptop for every child" is today's rabbit in every pot....
Click to expand...

Libraries? Do they magically provide Internet access? Do you have any idea of the hardware and software embedded in the systems used to deliver the Internet? Any idea of the component parts and tools used to build that hardware and software? Will all those parts and pieces grow naturally on free range farms?
 
#205
#205
I'd also like to hear you price of cheese doodles vs price of strawberries explanation.

Why do you think strawberries cost more? Could it be they are more labor intensive? Require a longer time period to grow (be made)? Could it be they are more perishable?

So how do we make the price of strawberries come down. Hmmmmm. How about mass production? No that's industrialization. How about herbicides/pesticides/fertilizers? Nope that's causing cancer beyond mummy levels.

They have to be grown close to everyone or close to train tracks. (who makes those locomotives and all the parts/software to run them - the library maybe?).
 
#207
#207
volinbham said:
London is in full on industrialization for it's distribution system.

You've yet to show how free range chicken and eggs can be produced on the scale necessary to meet demand. The closest you've come is to suggest people should eat less chicken (eggs too I assume).

The fact that technological products (computers) have short life cycles is no evidence that removing industrialization would make them widely available.

I'm not at all against decentralization. I do favor the specialization and division of labor combined with scale that industrialization brings since it allows for products to be produced at price points making them accessible. You've consistently failed to show how your model would accomplish this.

As for the creation of the Internet, we all know it's DARPA roots. You conveniently forgot all the parts/pieces/tools used by the developers to create the early systems (products of industrialization) and the role that industrialization played in taking a tool created for the government and translating that into a ubiquitous service easily available throughout the country. Millions of routers, servers, untold miles of cable, millions of tools, industrialized ISPs driven by Capitalism, etc. All that took a government project and turned it into the Internet as we know it today. Without a Cisco (or Level 3 or any number of telecomm for-profit, industrialized companies), we aren't talking on the VN.

Saying look at Cuba is no answer.
Click to expand...

You haven't really made an effective retort. You are hand waving saying "it's hard." When I give you a real world, population sized model of a country that implemented exactly the those types of changes (NOT under capitalism, btw) and went from a population who missed a meal a day (because they suddenly lost access to oil) to a population eating well over the daily recommended allowance in under five years you say it "is no answer."

Well, there's a word for that: bulls&^t. I've got an answer. You lack a retort.

London gets its food by rail and by ship. It is 50% more efficient than NYC - the example you cited. NYC moves 14,000 tons / day of garbage by rail and by ship. Your argument that "industrialization" does it is ridiculous. Technology does it; not industrialization; and in fact, NYC government moves the garbage. Moreover, I have also cited the thriving, decentralized street market culture still alive and well in London, yet more real life examples of plenty sans industrialization and more real life examples which dismiss your hand-waving.

Last time I checked, a Communist country makes all those ubiquitous routers and servers....

Also, I think you might want to bone up on computer development history.
 
#208
#208
volinbham,

What is the over-under on 90 million barrels of day?

How do you propose to deal with global heating and climate change?

How do you propose to deal with peak oil?

This is not a call-out post.
 
Last edited:
#209
#209
volinbham said:
I'd also like to hear you price of cheese doodles vs price of strawberries explanation.

Why do you think strawberries cost more? Could it be they are more labor intensive? Require a longer time period to grow (be made)? Could it be they are more perishable?

So how do we make the price of strawberries come down. Hmmmmm. How about mass production? No that's industrialization. How about herbicides/pesticides/fertilizers? Nope that's causing cancer beyond mummy levels.

They have to be grown close to everyone or close to train tracks. (who makes those locomotives and all the parts/software to run them - the library maybe?).
Click to expand...

More demand = lower price. Strawberries also don't have to be processed into cheese-doodles. There are some big externalities that aren't being paid for....

You are still not making sense on this "where will it be made" / "how will it be made" argument. Clearly, we can make all of these things now, why should that stop after de-industrialization? Moreover, the argument you are trying to make is completely blown apart by the fact that a Communist country makes these things now.
 
#210
#210
utgibbs said:
You haven't really made an effective retort. You are hand waving saying "it's hard." When I give you a real world, population sized model of a country that implemented exactly the those types of changes (NOT under capitalism, btw) and went from a population who missed a meal a day (because they suddenly lost access to oil) to a population eating well over the daily recommended allowance in under five years you say it "is no answer."

Well, there's a word for that: bulls&^t. I've got an answer. You lack a retort.

London gets its food by rail and by ship. It is 50% more efficient than NYC - the example you cited. NYC moves 14,000 tons / day of garbage by rail and by ship. Your argument that "industrialization" does it is ridiculous. Technology does it; not industrialization; and in fact, NYC government moves the garbage. Moreover, I have also cited the thriving, decentralized street market culture still alive and well in London, yet more real life examples of plenty sans industrialization and more real life examples which dismiss your hand-waving.

Last time I checked, a Communist country makes all those ubiquitous routers and servers....

Also, I think you might want to bone up on computer development history.
Click to expand...

So you are equating industrialization with capitalism now?

I didn't think who owns the production mattered - it's the manner of production. A communist country can certainly have industrialized farming and food production. China certainly does and I would bet Cuba uses industrialization as well.

All the food in London doesn't stop at the train station - it still requires trucks, warehouses, forklifts, etc. to move it to stores using any number of products that are made affordable by industrialization.

As for the routers I assume you are speaking of China - if you are claiming they are not industrialized then you've created a new definition of industrialization.
 
#211
#211
utgibbs said:
More demand = lower price. Strawberries also don't have to be processed into cheese-doodles. There are some big externalities that aren't being paid for....

You are still not making sense on this "where will it be made" / "how will it be made" argument. Clearly, we can make all of these things now, why should that stop after de-industrialization? Moreover, the argument you are trying to make is completely blown apart by the fact that a Communist country makes these things now.
Click to expand...

If you consider food waste in a land fill an externality then you are ignoring externalities of strawberry production.

We can make these things now but to do it on the scale we do now requires industrialization.

It appears you believe cheese doodles are being forced on the American public when they should be eating strawberries and the reason for this is industrialization. You've provided no explanation and I find it troubling that you so freely prescribe what you believe people ought to eat (strawberries and free-range chicken in small doses since you believe we eat too much meat).
 
#212
#212
utgibbs said:
volinbham,

What is the over-under on 90 million barrels of day?

How do you propose to deal with global heating and climate change?

How do you propose to deal with peak oil?

This is not a call-out post.
Click to expand...

I certainly don't see the need to de-industrialize.

and I certainly see Capitalism as the better way to deal with these then some central planning model.
 
#216
#216
volinbham said:
I certainly don't see the need to de-industrialize.

and I certainly see Capitalism as the better way to deal with these then some central planning model.
Click to expand...

Wow, I didn't think you would dodge this bad. And you had the temerity to call me a hand-waver?

Sorry, but I've cited concrete examples from the real world on how to do things successfully (and I forgot about the Amish within the US. How did they get rich again? Oh yeah - selling their surplus.) I've demonstrated the monstrous inefficiencies and waste in the current system.

You've now said the very system which created these problems will make it go away.

In fact, you have summed up why I have to insist on repeating the phrase "gifts of the Enlightenment."

You have "faith" the world will right itself when all the evidence outside the back door says, "no honeychild, no." The gifts of the Enlightment are observing the real world outside the backdoor, measuring it, and taking heed and note.

I ask you again:

What is the over / under on 90 million barrels of oil a day?

How do you specifically propose to deal with global heating and climate change?

How do you specifically propose to deal with peak oil which will quickly drive up the price of cheese doodles, and every other part of "industrial" production?
 
#217
#217
volinbham said:
If you consider food waste in a land fill an externality then you are ignoring externalities of strawberry production.

I didn't. I considered it a wasted resource called TOPSOIL.

We can make these things now but to do it on the scale we do now requires industrialization.

4100 tons / day of electronic waste (just for one) suggest it could be done a lot more efficiently for everybody.

It appears you believe cheese doodles are being forced on the American public when they should be eating strawberries and the reason for this is industrialization. You've provided no explanation and I find it troubling that you so freely prescribe what you believe people ought to eat (strawberries and free-range chicken in small doses since you believe we eat too much meat).

Again, as far as I can tell, free range eggs and factory farm eggs cost nearly the same. I find it disturbing you think I'm telling people what to eat. Surely you aren't allowing your kids to observe the food pyramid! I've said these things are better for you. I've said eating fewer calories is better for you. It's stuff your kindergarten teacher might say! :facepalm: We have a monoculture system which makes low grade, low quality processed corn, soybean, and wheat products cheap. Dedicate a small fraction of that to strawberries (for instance) and strawberries become a viable economic alternative. With beneficial health and nutriment ramifications. Ramifications, vinb, not enforcement.
Click to expand...

Ramifications, vinb. Not "restrictions" on choice, although again, it is a two way street. You force me to make more expensive healthy food choices to subsidize your cheese doodles. YOU ARE TRAMPLING ON MY FREEDOM!
 
#218
#218
so it was wrong to use an example of China in his earlier post but perfectly fine for you to grab an example from there? Interesting

and those foods already are a viable option but the ones who need it the most don't choose them. I would consider education a better objective than free-range strawberries
 
#219
#219
UTGibbs, here's your problem: isntead of seeing waste and thinking the corps could find ways to waste less you feel the government needs to be the one to do that. The government has way more levels of waste and red film than any corp ever could. This is why the government constantly needs to borrow more just to keep afloat and the corps actually make a profit.
 
#220
#220
utvolpj said:
so it was wrong to use an example of China in his earlier post but perfectly fine for you to grab an example from there? Interesting

and those foods already are a viable option but the ones who need it the most don't choose them. I would consider education a better objective than free-range strawberries
Click to expand...

I would never value organic strawberries over education. But the fact is cheese doodles are an enforced choice thanks to the perverse economics of monoculture agriculture.
 
#221
#221
NEOCON said:
UTGibbs, here's your problem: isntead of seeing waste and thinking the corps could find ways to waste less you feel the government needs to be the one to do that. The government has way more levels of waste and red film than any corp ever could. This is why the government constantly needs to borrow more just to keep afloat and the corps actually make a profit.
Click to expand...

The government seems to be borrowing to put said corps from the Red into the Black.

To the tune of a few trillion now, and that's just recent history.

Poverty programs look mighty damn efficient from where I'm sitting. :salute:
 
#222
#222
utgibbs said:
I would never value organic strawberries over education. But the fact is cheese doodles are an enforced choice thanks to the perverse economics of monoculture agriculture.
Click to expand...

oh please.

I challenge you to find one person who is "forced" to buy cheese doodles over strawberries.

My guess is that the only example you'll be able to come up with is the hungry, homeless guy who corners you as you come out of your local Whole Foods. Instead of those fine organic strawberries or free-range eggs, you toss him that .39 cent pack of cheese doodles you picked up as a snack for your chinchilla.
 
#224
#224
utvolpj said:
so it was wrong to use an example of China in his earlier post but perfectly fine for you to grab an example from there? Interesting

and those foods already are a viable option but the ones who need it the most don't choose them. I would consider education a better objective than free-range strawberries
Click to expand...

By the way, China, if anything, destroys his premise that free, unfettered capitalist industrialization is the way forward. I'm not sure how it fits in his model at all.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top