FWIS3

You all probably think I'm insane or kidding, either works and probably both are true.

So I'll make my case and decide for yourself.

As an engineer one of the tools we use is called modeling.
Modeling doesn't mean this is how the real world version works, it's only representative of the real world version.
There are many models for the same thing.
e.g. there are numerous models for the operation of a transistor.
None are completely correct and none are completely wrong.
They are used to understand a given aspect and as such are usually given a domain in which they work and going outside this the model fails to predict correct behaviour of the real world version.

The next thing we do in engineering is to cut through the crap.
A complex system can be placed in an enclosed box, the workings of which we don't care about, and we observe the inputs and the outputs. Most complex systems can be broken down into very simple terms and thus we get a model that closely resembles the input/output within any degree of error and we use that simple system as the model when describing the overall behaviour of the real world system. The colloquial saying is, if it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, flies like a duck, it's probably a duck.

Now that we have that out of the way, lets look at various models for humans:
1) Dictatorship (Monopoly)
2) Democracy
3) Monarchy
4) Oligarchy

Now lets look at debt.
Debt is a promise to pay. So is money.
That's pretty much how it works.
Many currencies actually have this printed and some used to have it printed.
When you are in debt what that means is that you promise to pay someone X amount.
When you have money it means someone else is promising to pay you if you wish to use that money.
In its simplest terms and in actual practice that's what debt and money are.

Now combine the world debt into its actual meaning.
Each country has a promise to pay someone/something by virtue of it being in debt.

Each citizen in that country thus has a promise to pay since they are a part of that country.
The national debt is rising almost everywhere.
That means each of us is promising to pay more and more each year.

We are all indebted to some entity. We have to work to pay off that debt.
Our children are born into debt by the same reasoning. They will have to work to pay off their debt.

Next, note that there the majority of wealth is in the hands of a very small minority.
By majority of wealth the top few percent pretty much own more than half the worlds wealth.
The top 1% own about 50% of the worlds wealth.

Now combine the various forms of models for human interactions.
Which fits the above model?

Democracy doesn't. It can't explain why we are in an infinitely increasing cycle of debt.
It's not a dictatorship, or Monarchy since they also don't fit the data. Even those countries that claim dictatorship or Royal governance are in debt.

An Oligarchy doesn't work either since they too are in debt.
Individually none work to describe a country for several reasons the most obvious is that almost all countries are in debt.
This means the entity we are in debt to is not country dependent.
The USA for example isn't the creditor to the rest of the world even though its the richest country in the world.
It is in fact, in debt to more than any other country.

So lets look globally.
We obviously don't have a democracy globally.
We don't have a dictatorship as this implies one entity and we'd know who that is.
Its not a Monarchy ruling the world either, there is no King or Queen of the world.

An oligarchy fits the model.
A small percentage of people that own the world.
They literally do own about half the world.
Expand that 1% to a few percent and most of the world is now owned by a small percentage and its getting more each year.
Your debt is giving them more money and more wealth.

Now, call this system what you want, an oligarchy seems to not offend people much, not sure why.
Everyone kind of knows this anyway and just accepts it.

I prefer to call it by its simpler name.
Slavery.
You and I were born into debt. We work our lives away to repay that debt and the debt keeps growing.
The only way to satisfy that debt is to produce children and get them to help pay it off but this in turn creates more debt for us.
It's a never ending cycle.
There is no way you or your children can get to be on the other side where they gain money from others debt.
That's a closed door. Membership only. Rarely an exception is given but statistically its closed.
Even if you make billions, it doesn't secure your family or their children from the debt cycle.
Just look at the many examples of people who thought they had made it only to find in a very short order that, no, no they didn't.

So people can call it what they want but when everyone is forced to work to pay back debt that was created for them at birth that is not a free society. Its indentured servitude that never ends. Or simply a form of slavery.

Try living off the grid. Go somewhere on Earth and just live off the land or sea.
You are a creature of the Earth, you should be able to live freely as you see fit.
It's almost impossible. There is always some debt that needs to be paid even though you are entitled to the Earth as much as any other living creature and should not have to pay for that privilege.

The natives had it right to begin with. Property can't be bought. That is an illusion exercised by might and war and is only temporary when you consider the history of humans on Earth.

The model seems correct, certainly more correct than the alternatives.
It fits the data and explains a lot that the others don't.
Anytime you get confused as to why something is happening that defies common logic for a democracy, look at the world this way and it makes sense.
It's a just model no need to get upset over it, so test the bounds of it.
You just may not like what you see.
I know I didn't.

don't you have a boat to work on?

rofl

I'm currently warming up the boat and cooking dinner.
Its pretty cold here with just one little heater to keep the whole boat warm.
Cooking helps as the open flame warms the cabin up nicely.
But the boat is now a mess. Its all in wet paint. I'm covered in it.
So there is nothing left form me to do other than post some weird stuff and freak people out!
And I'm all out of Earl Grey tea...

I know what you're thinking lol

Wow oh wow, this is awesome. You see, what you just wrote happens exactly in this this book I read once where a bunch of people were really upset about modern-day slavery where they had to give away their work for free because of their right to liberty, and decided to say fuck you to the system and leave it. After all, they didn't owe anything to the system! Best to retreat into the mountains rather than pay a cent of tax to those who do not let you live your life as is your right as a free man! Who is John Galt?

Rommie wrote:Wow oh wow, this is awesome. You see, what you just wrote happens exactly in this this book I read once where a bunch of people were really upset about modern-day slavery where they had to give away their work for free because of their right to liberty, and decided to say fuck you to the system and leave it. After all, they didn't owe anything to the system! Best to retreat into the mountains rather than pay a cent of tax to those who do not let you live your life as is your right as a free man! Who is John Galt?

Huh. I see I wasn't the only one to think exactly that thought.

I'm not saying that at all.
What I'm saying is the disparity is too huge between the wealthy and the not wealthy and continually rising.
That's what is making it slavery, the fact that we can never pay off any debt cycle to a small minority that reap the benefit of that labor. Can it be called anything else? people rejected monarchies for that reason.

Nor am I saying that there shouldn't be a debt to society, in fact there should be, but that's not what is happening unless you consider that the 1% are society because that's where the repayments are going and they are as I say increasing.

Now change the flow so actual society gets the benefits of its labor instead of the top echelon and you no longer have slavery.

See the difference?

Same model but if say over 50% of the people get to reap the rewards then it can't be classified slavery.
The majority of people are benefiting.
The more people that work and the less people that take the closer it gets to slavery when the the ratio of work to take is near balance.
Right now its about 1% that take 50% of the wealth and growing.

So I ask, at what point in time in the future can we call it what it is?
When it's 0.5% that own 50%?
When it's 0.1% that own 90%?
When one person owns the entire world and everyone works to repay him?

I'm calling it now because its already too high imho.

I have no idea how either of you got Ayn Rand out of this. It's actually the opposite.

The more that I think about it, the more confused how you two got out of my post that it was anything like Rand's work.

1) In Rand's world, the high flyers (the 1% ers) went on strike because of all the moochers and the looters and the government taking from them.
2) Rand wanted to give less to the lower class and less to the government.
3) My post has nothing to do with a political ideal. It is simply an model. As such you can use it to see what is happening now and use it to predict what will happen in the future. There is nothing about objectivism or self interest in it.
4) If anything it's pointing to the fact that currently we are living in Rand's ideal world and it sucks.

What my model is proposing is that the 1% are taking more than they are giving. IOW, they are the moochers not the other way around.
My model suggests to equalise things the government and the people should be getting a far greater percentage than the 1%. Governments are paying the 1% not the other way around.

So I'll try this another way.
Right now we have 1% of the population owning about 50% of the wealth.
That rate of change of wealth is changing so that the 1% are getting more wealth at the expense of the rest.
We can look at that another way, if we keep the 50% figure constant and calculate for the percentage of people that own half the world, then mathematically it can be shown that the percentage of people that own 50% of the world is declining.

We've all done calculus. Work out the limits. The final outcome is one person owns half the world.
This leads to a couple of interesting questions:
1) Calculating when this is likely to happen or be near enough not to bother with the difference. For me less than about a dozen people owning half the world is close enough. Your mileage may vary.
2) If it's not going to happen, what will stop it from happening and how?

With (1) its pretty hard to figure out. The change isn't constant and pesky things like revolution interrrupt the flow to the top.

With (2) there are two likely outcomes, it will be by force or by mutual benefit decision making.
Historically its been a mix.
Some cultures ended up having the rich forgive all debt. The cycle would then just repeat.
Others where there was no debt forgiveness would revolt. Then a new government is formed. It needs money and it takes on loans.

My point here is that this is not something new. Its been happening for centuries over and over.
The cause is IMHO directly tied with usury. All major 1st world countries still practice it.
Like history will never repeat and like the lessons of the past meant nothing.

Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.
Welcome to fiscal and political insanity.
I think its high time we change what we've been doing.
Of course, people think I'm the insane one.

Honestly, I still think it reads like Rand (and trust me, I've read a lot of her stuff at younger ages). All of the really "ideal" characters are actually self-made: John Galt was a scholarship genius kid, Howard Roark likewise in the Fountainhead. Further, in her world it was not by any means the 1%ers who were all giving up and leaving, it was plenty of everyday people who were fed up and walking off the job because they weren't getting anything out of the system as others were just taking it, and not just the masses either- the 1% in Rand's books were actually more moochers than creators.

Anyway, if you really think that's how Atlas Shrugged goes down I'd suggest you don't remember it right- I obviously don't like the book much, but there was definitely enough in there that's similar to what all you wrote.

Finally, I would point out that calling what the average Westerner's life is like is slavery is disingenuous to those who lived through real slavery (and the millions who still do so today), akin to how people who feel persecuted are not undergoing the Holocaust. Not exactly like you can walk away and go live on a boat in true slavery, and last I checked no one's forcing me to be an astronomer. And finally, if you think it's all as equal as one person ruling the whole world, I think there are a lot of Ukrainians and Russians (for example) who would like to trade places with you.

Listen, I'm one who worries about rising income inequality and such, but seriously, if you think a problem with over seven billion parts can be summarized into just one formula I'd call you a really crappy engineer and not use anything you ever build.

I might just be a crappy engineer.

Lets look at your issue with 7 billion variables and break it down in real terms.
I can use electronics to describe it or physics.
I'll go with the latter because you're more familiar with it.
A car travelling down the road at 60mph.
How far will it get in 1 hour?
I have no need to calculate the trillions of trillions of molecules the car will need to displace, no need to calculate the friction of the tires and the heat generated and each individual atom that moves during the course of the cars travel.
It gets broken down into one simple formula.
S=vt
Now thinking about this, we're summarizing trillions and trillions of individual parts in one simple formula.
Should I discard it because its simple?
Should the scientist that devised this formula be discredited because of the lack of calculating of the individual particles?
Why would I believe any scientist that supports such nonsense?

We don't need to understand the complexities, all we need to understand is the input and output then that explains the overall system. It's control theory and is based on sound maths.

Lets look at all the ideologies, communism, facism, democracy, monarchies etc.
We combine them with various economic ideologies as well.
We debate them over and over trying to determine the best one.
None of them can work efficiently if there is a huge never ending hole sucking it all away.
That's the bottom line.

I also understand a lot of people don't like to compare the world to slavery. The reality is though, that's what we seem to have and like it or not that's where it seems we're heading.
You buy products as we all do from countries that actually do practice slavery in the form no one would disagree with.
Much of the time its hidden so us westerners don't get offended. Think of blood diamonds. No one wants to be reminded of it but people are dying to supprt this over inflated industry based on nothing more than vanity.
Looking at it from that context, what we have is a slave class system with multiple levels. Each exploiting the one below.

You say how can we be living in as slaves if I can get on a boat and leave?
Bit like asking someone that was a refugee how they can say they were living in a totalitarian state if they escaped it.
Oddly, I have had this thrown in my face so am familiar with it. "It couldn't have been that bad if you escaped".
One doesn't negate the other. Neither does you choosing to be an astronomer negate that you are a slave.
Slavery doesn't mean you have no choice in anything you do.
It means you are effectively required to earn for someone else with little regard for you other than basic up keep and that upkeep varies with your status. There were slaves with many privileges that other slaves didn't get. It doesn't mean they weren't slaves.

But I see your point. Many people see the term "slave" and shut off.
So lets find another word for it.
What word can we use for a group of people that work because of birthright obligation for another group that has no need to work because their birthright is to accept this work as their right?

I'll keep drumming in the fact that 1% own 50% of the wealth and that rate is rising.
Do the math. You know where it goes. There is no escaping it.
I'm looking to understand it and thus find a different solution.

I don't like what I see any more than you do.
But, the shoe fits.

BTW, I didn't respond to your initial post as I wanted. I loved the sarcasm and wit.
I should have mentioned that.

I'd just like to point out that just because a lot of Ayn Rand's claims and "solutions" to problems are crazy and absurd, doesn't mean that everything she has to say is wrong. She observed a lot of genuine problems and wrote about them. So, if what FZ is saying is similar to her in that sense, it doesn't matter, because I don't believe for a minute that he's suggesting we solve things in the manner she did.

Hell no. I can't think of anything worse than implementing her philosophy.
I do however thing her way of thinking is currently being implemented in a twisted kind of sense.

Ok, I am less tipsy this morning so let me get down what's been bugging me lately.

FZ, I know you've been under a lot of stress this past year with the restaurant and the boat and what not, and it's been effecting other things too. That said, there are a few things I don't really like when my friends start doing, and one of them is when they make the transition from sharing their opinions to preaching them. Preaching in a way where clearly their opinion is the only right one, with a touch of condescending attitude thrown in (we've known each other how long and you now decide to give basic modeling and physics lessons as if no one else here knows them?), and then dismissing others' opinions which are just as legitimate from their own lives when they've reached another conclusion different from yours.

The voting thing, for example- several people here explained why they think you're blowing things out of proportion, that voting is actually good in their experience on the local level or they unlike you like how society is set up. You are obviously allowed to still think your reasons are more important, but then a few days later you just dismissed everyone's concerns about potential issues you might be facing with an "I can't help everyone else is indoctrinated." That is not cool in my book, especially when in a group of friends you've known for years and know are intelligent souls capable of making their own opinions- I don't think I'd ever call anyone on FWIS an indoctrinated lemming.

And I mean Jesus Christ, you're trying to explain why it's good to step back from the world to a woman who has more experience than almost anyone. You don't see why I might find it a little bit patronizing that you're telling me I'm a lemming for actually finding things I rather enjoy in my daily work and what I'm doing with my life? I don't exactly wake up every day thinking "man, I really wish this new shirt I want to buy wouldn't just go in the coffers of the 1%!" or fret about how I'm living a life in shackles as I grade lab reports.

So ok, maybe I oughta just step back and not respond to your posts here until after y'all go off- I suspect you won't have this streak as much on the other side- and maybe I'm the only one who has had this feeling lately when reading what you have to say. But as I've said, I just don't like it when my friends start preaching to me as if I don't know what's up and they're the only ones who hold the holy keys to the kingdom of enlightenment, especially when they're friends whose thoughts I normally enjoy reading.

I re-read all of my posts on voting and the slavery/political ideas and while I didn't mean to sound preach or patronizing I can see how you might get that impression. It's not how I meant it but I apologize for upsetting you, it's the last thing I wanted to do.
While I'm at it, your first post where you addressed this where you mentioned I was sounding bitter made me change my posting style. At least in my mind to one that was more relaxed and humorous, I even added similes and lol regularly to try and convey I'm not being serious.
After re-reading some bits it sure could sound that I was actually throwing it back in your face. My comments about drinking pineapple juice so I'm not as bitter is what I'm referring to. From my pov I was basically poking fun at myself because you were right, I was sounding bitter. It could totally have been taken the wrong way by you or someone else so I figure I should clear it up.

I'll address your points hopefully so you can understand where I'm coming from and it wasn't intended to insult you or anyone else.

Rommie wrote:Ok, I am less tipsy this morning so let me get down what's been bugging me lately.

FZ, I know you've been under a lot of stress this past year with the restaurant and the boat and what not, and it's been effecting other things too. That said, there are a few things I don't really like when my friends start doing, and one of them is when they make the transition from sharing their opinions to preaching them. Preaching in a way where clearly their opinion is the only right one, with a touch of condescending attitude thrown in (we've known each other how long and you now decide to give basic modeling and physics lessons as if no one else here knows them?), and then dismissing others' opinions which are just as legitimate from their own lives when they've reached another conclusion different from yours.

There is a fine line between preaching and teaching. I define the former as repeating the same thing to those who have already converted and forcing those to convert that aren't of the same opinion. I don't think I crossed that line but everyone's opinion will vary on this. What I was doing was presenting an idea and defending my position.

r.e. the condescending attitude, when I post even if I address it to you I strive to post in a manner that reaches the greatest audience. This is a public forum and someone we don't know could be reading this as well and I have no clue what their level of education or understanding is so I target low. That's not any reflection on your education or experience. If for example we discussed this in pm or face to face I would be targeting my response to best suit you alone and it wouldn't have looked anything like what I posted here on fwis. It's my teaching background kicking in.
Without that understanding I can sure see why you thought I was condescending. If you re-read my posts with the pov that I'm addressing a question asked in very public setting then you'll see how everything was targeted for a broad understanding at a low common denominator. Even the concept of teaching how to teach is thrown in so someone can better relay the information to a third party hopefully without screwing it up.

Rommie wrote:The voting thing, for example- several people here explained why they think you're blowing things out of proportion, that voting is actually good in their experience on the local level or they unlike you like how society is set up. You are obviously allowed to still think your reasons are more important, but then a few days later you just dismissed everyone's concerns about potential issues you might be facing with an "I can't help everyone else is indoctrinated." That is not cool in my book, especially when in a group of friends you've known for years and know are intelligent souls capable of making their own opinions- I don't think I'd ever call anyone on FWIS an indoctrinated lemming.

Actually I disagree with you here. I didn't say, "I can't help everyone is indoctrinated", what I said was:

What broke my silence was the idea that somehow this reflected on my character and commitment to a country as well as implying I am irresponsible for doing so. These ideas are either born of ignorance or conditioning and a dependent on where you live. Most people in the US for example wouldn't have known not voting in Oz is illegal and that people have been jailed because of their refusal to vote. That's ignorance. The automatic decision to label it as irresponsible is conditioning and is a direct result of that ignorance.

I underlined the relevant part. Ignorance or conditioning. Ignorance is nothing to get offended over. Even conditioning as I explained above is based on ignorance. An American debating with Americans for decades on the issue of voting is conditioned to already have their mind made up. They have danced that dance before many times. This is nothing to get offended over since its normal behaviour and is actually quite beneficial many times. The problem is, I'm not an American and the voting system in Australia is not the same as the US thus their automatic response is conditioning through ignorance. When enough people that have the same mentality combine, an outsider may follow their lead without actually going through the motions. This becomes indoctrination. I've been a victim of it. Pretty sure we all have at some point. We all hate it when we find out that we're victim to it but by the same token its also how most teaching works.

The rest of your points, accusing people on FWIS being indoctrinated lemmings is not something I did or would do because of the insult value.
Hopefully that is pretty clear from my response.

Rommie wrote:And I mean Jesus Christ, you're trying to explain why it's good to step back from the world to a woman who has more experience than almost anyone. You don't see why I might find it a little bit patronizing that you're telling me I'm a lemming for actually finding things I rather enjoy in my daily work and what I'm doing with my life? I don't exactly wake up every day thinking "man, I really wish this new shirt I want to buy wouldn't just go in the coffers of the 1%!" or fret about how I'm living a life in shackles as I grade lab reports.

I'm not trying to tell you to step back from the world but I do remember encouraging you to go travel well before your first trip on your own. I also remember encouraging you in many of your adventures. I don't think I've ever not encouraged you to be who you want to be and the day I do is the day you and the wife need to have a chat about getting my brain scanned.
Also I'm not telling you you are a lemming. What I'm saying is almost all of us are caught in a debt cycle which few will escape from and if we do it's not going to translate to our offspring. There is a class of people however that have no debt cycle. I'm pointing out that difference as its quite significant in the way the world operates.
I appreciate that many people disagree with me but when 1% own 50% of the world that is a significant influence in the running of the world.

Rommie wrote:So ok, maybe I oughta just step back and not respond to your posts here until after y'all go off

Hell no!
One of the things I love about my wife is that she will call me on something if she thinks I'm wrong or out of line.
I would have no less in my friends either.
I want you to call me out. Hell, maybe that's why my posts have gotten weird. No one seems to give me a back hander and say, "WAKE UP IDIOT!"
I get the impression many think I'm like that weird uncle that no one wants to discuss.
So I'm probably behaving that way as a response. The question is which came first...my head might explode so I'll leave that one alone. lol
The thing I don't like is if people read/hear what I say, disagree and then either ignore it or just say I'm wrong and not explain a thing. As a result I go above and beyond to explain. It's a flaw I guess that results in walls of text and probably has little impact and is thus self defeating...shit, I'm doing it again!

Rommie wrote:- I suspect you won't have this streak as much on the other side- and maybe I'm the only one who has had this feeling lately when reading what you have to say. But as I've said, I just don't like it when my friends start preaching to me as if I don't know what's up and they're the only ones who hold the holy keys to the kingdom of enlightenment, especially when they're friends whose thoughts I normally enjoy reading.

I wish I had the keys to enlightenment. I wouldn't be in such a mess if I did!
I don't think I'm being preachy and certainly don't mean to be but I will address it as its obviously upsetting you and maybe others.
I will take this as a back hander and re-adjust.
Feel free to give me another if I don't come up to par.

Rommie wrote:maybe I'm the only one who has had this feeling lately when reading what you have to say.

Well... no. You aren't. I haven't really said anything since I didn't want to come across as attacking FZ (and I still don't want to do that) and because I know he likes to let off steam here. Figured I'd give him a bit of space to vent.

But since you asked... yeah, Rommie. I've felt the same way.

Me three. Honestly this stuff has been making me want to post here less.

Gullible Jones wrote:Me three. Honestly this stuff has been making me want to post here less.

All the times we've stuck it out when you've posted inflammatory things, and the first time FZ goes a little over the edge and needs his friends to stand by him, this is your response?! I'll take Rommie's or TSC's way any day. I'm really shocked.

Well, I did try talking some sense earlier. Guess I'm not very good at it.

Sorry.

Not sure what else to say.

How bad are things? I feel like there's something here I'm missing.

Sooooo .....

How about those Dutch speed skaters, eh?

Really have to stop reading FWIS when I'm in the middle of being pissed off by the outside world. Tends to make me over react.

No seriously, it's alright. What I said above was pretty douchey.

SciFi Chick wrote:

Gullible Jones wrote:Me three. Honestly this stuff has been making me want to post here less.

All the times we've stuck it out when you've posted inflammatory things, and the first time FZ goes a little over the edge and needs his friends to stand by him, this is your response?! I'll take Rommie's or TSC's way any day. I'm really shocked.

I haven't gone over the edge in a while. Pretty sure it was a month ago when the water was much warmer than it is now.

FZR1KG wrote:

SciFi Chick wrote:

Gullible Jones wrote:Me three. Honestly this stuff has been making me want to post here less.

All the times we've stuck it out when you've posted inflammatory things, and the first time FZ goes a little over the edge and needs his friends to stand by him, this is your response?! I'll take Rommie's or TSC's way any day. I'm really shocked.

I haven't gone over the edge in a while. Pretty sure it was a month ago when the water was much warmer than it is now.

You went over the edge and stayed there a couple months ago. Just sayin'.