Who would you join?

[Velociryx]

The customer is always right.

Capitalism is based entirely on the exploitation of the people.

Both of these statements cannot be true. If one is true, then the other must be false. Least that's the way I look at it.

I disagree that capitalism is dictatorial in its nature. Monopolistic Capitalism is dictatorial in its nature, as monopolies represent the absence of choice (and thus, I find myself in agreement with the notion that Morgan is a dictator of sorts, given that Morgan Industries is a monopoly).

However, even in a monopolistic capitalist society, I see more freedom of choice and opportunity than would exist in many, if not most of the other factions (certainly more than say, The Hive, Spartans, or Believers).

The recent discussions here have made me tend slightly more strongly to my Gaian leanings, but I still have a soft spot in my heart for good ol' Morgie....

The only proof I have to offer at present that capitalism is not dictatorial in nature (having just spend 12 hours on a creative rampage for Candle'Bre has left my brain somewhat jellified) is my own personal experience.

Nobody's putting a gun to my head to work at the bank I'm employed at.

I could walk in tomorrow, clean out my desk, and go find something else to do.

I have the freedom and the choice to move where I want, buy what I want, live how I want, and seek employment (or not) as I will.

If that's the hallmark of a dictatorship, then by all means, sign me up!

Dictatorships are all about control. Restriction of personal freedoms.

I see no evidence of that from my perspective.

-=Vel=-

[Sikander]

Originally posted by waab
Yeap we got rich because of the WWII and so did the USA. But you are missing that our army is guit large in % of population. We have no country behind us, we stand alone.

Actually WWII cost us a bundle, but we made it back right afterward because we were the only major industrial economy which wasn't damaged / destroyed in the war. There was a lot of pent up demand for just about everything after 15 years of depression and war, and the U.S. made a pile of money in the 20 years after the war.

How large is your regular army? I was under the impression that Sweden relied on well-trained reserves for most of it's combat power.

Originally posted by waab
Yes the EU is totaly pointless for us in Sweden, actuly our BNP is so large that we are in % the largest giver in money to the EU.

Perhaps you can turn your political connections in the EU into a security arrangement where you can cut your army a bit.

Originally posted by waab
The thing is this in the late 1980 and then begining of 1990, we started to sell out factories which have been making money to the goverment for a long period. Now we need to get that money from taxes instead. And then the capitalist starts to scream, first they want our factories and then when we need to use taxes to get money the get angry.

Mayby my life has been safe for so long that I can't help loving socialism, but I say like this. I rather pay 60% in tax and know that the goverment will help me. I am not one of them screaming about high taxes and then later screams about that the hospitals doesn't get enough money.

By the way, do you all belive in that it is okay to make money on sick persons and I don't mean doctors and nurses, I mean stockholders. Myself think that it is distgusting.

I tend to be a smaller government Libertarian. I pay probably about 40-45% of my income in taxes of various sorts. It's too much. I would rather keep the government away from as much as I can, and make decisions myself. Perhaps in a small country like Sweden with it's homogenous population it's easier to trust your fellow citizens to be reasonable. Here government money is just not worth the effort. They make you jump through hoops, make you wait, change the rules, go on vacation, run out of money etc.

I had to work full-time in order to attend college because the government scholarship, grant and loan programs I was entitled to were all broke from paying the baby boomers to dodge the Vietnam draft. Here there are wild fluctuations in what different generations receive from the rest. For instance the greediest generation of all time is the GI generation (Tom Brokaw calls them "The Greatest Generation"). They were on the dole from the time of the depression right up to the present day. They controlled the government of the U.S. from shortly after WWII until Bush Sr.'s administration, and they voted Democrat all the way. A quick look at the programs they passed will show that at every turn they increased the benefits that their generation would receive, and dumped the bill on those who followed. One of the few things they were willing to pay (with borrowed money mind you) for was a college education for their children, which is really just more of the same when you think about it.

My generation (among others) is picking up the tab for this madness, which means that we have lower wages, higher taxes, and had to defer our dreams like education, owning a home, having children etc. until we could afford it. I am not in favor of income redistribution via the government in anywhere near the scale of Sweden. There are too many ignorant and corrupt people for me to give away my labor and feel confident that it is not just being stolen. I'll take care of myself as I have always done since I was 16 years old. I am even in a position to take care of my family. I don't want the government to take away that security by raising my taxes and making us rely on what's left. I don't understand how people feel more secure when more and more of them couldn't make it on their own if / when the government fails them.

As for making money in medicine, I think it's possible without creating a conflict of interest that seriously threatens patient care. It takes professional people who are indoctrinated to hold the patient in the utmost regard. I work in a not-for-profit hospital. We aren't out to make money, but we interact with all of the major players in the U.S. healthcare system. Honestly as much as people want to blame business for the high cost of healthcare (and it's quite reasonable to do so!), the government is responsible for an immense amount of pain in comparison to the paltry amount it puts into the system. At least the private sector pays us enough that we aren't taking a loss on ever patient like we are with government insured patients. We never turn away any patient, regardless of their ability to pay. We collect about 50 cents for every dollar we bill because of this. And people say that we don't have socialized medicine! Fortunately our city is wealthy and can afford this sort of largesse. This is not always the case in the U.S., especially in the larger cities.

[Jethro83]

Originally posted by Velociryx
The customer is always right.

Capitalism is based entirely on the exploitation of the people.

Both of these statements cannot be true. If one is true, then the other must be false. Least that's the way I look at it.

I say "The customer is always right." is the one that's false. With the increased aggression in the field of advertising, people's minds are warped into thinking they want something they never really did. The people sporting these malleable minds look to me like they're being ruthlessly exploited by the conglomerates.

I disagree that capitalism is dictatorial in its nature. Monopolistic Capitalism is dictatorial in its nature, as monopolies represent the absence of choice (and thus, I find myself in agreement with the notion that Morgan is a dictator of sorts, given that Morgan Industries is a monopoly).

And the subject of this thread is "Who would you join?". If Morgan's faction was a non-monopolistic faction, there'd be less of a problem (though it would still be a problem). But since his corporation is a monopoly, this presents greater problems.

However, even in a monopolistic capitalist society, I see more freedom of choice and opportunity than would exist in many, if not most of the other factions (certainly more than say, The Hive, Spartans, or Believers).

But are the lower classes represented sufficiently in parliament? The way I see it (and the way it actually is down here in Australia), only the wealthy can afford the elaborate political campaigns needed to persuade the sheep of society to let them into power. When one of the sheep decides to join parliament, his efforts are pretty much screwed up because of a lack of campaign funding. The Liberal party, and Labour (ironic name though) party could afford to post their message on commercial TV where the audiences were greater, while many other parties who might have done a better job couldn't even afford to appear on TV.

The recent discussions here have made me tend slightly more strongly to my Gaian leanings, but I still have a soft spot in my heart for good ol' Morgie....

The Gaians have the right idea. An economic and industrial model built to preserve the environment. But the planet's resources being perceived as nothing more than profit makes Morgan's beliefs somewhat repulsive to me.

The only proof I have to offer at present that capitalism is not dictatorial in nature (having just spend 12 hours on a creative rampage for Candle'Bre has left my brain somewhat jellified) is my own personal experience.

My personal experience is somewhat different. My parents could actually (just) afford to send me to a grammar school. There, I worked my butt off, tried my hardest, and still I don't make it to university, yet some of the jocks, not exactly the sharpest knives in the drawer made it through instead. I'm certain others also have different experiences to you and to me. There will never be agreement in this matter, if the basis of the argument is personal experience.

Nobody's putting a gun to my head to work at the bank I'm employed at.

Nobody was saying they did.

I could walk in tomorrow, clean out my desk, and go find something else to do.

You could if you wanted to, but there are people whose prospects aren't that great. They're going to need to cling on to their job with their dear life, else live in poverty. If my father just decided to walk out of the mine he works at, he wouldn't survive a month looking for something else. My mother got a university degree and did a good job working at an events management business. After her contract expired, she could not find a new job. She still can't.

I have the freedom and the choice to move where I want, buy what I want, live how I want, and seek employment (or not) as I will.

Again, not everyone has that kind of freedom. Not everyone has the prospects to get decent jobs, and as such not everyone can afford that kind of life.

Dictatorships are all about control. Restriction of personal freedoms.

I see no evidence of that from my perspective.

There are several conglomerates out there. But they are all out to get us. To arrest our intelligence long enough to take our money, and throw at us something we really didn't want in the first place. Originally, and until recently what I thought, adversiting was meant to make the public aware of the product. A quick summary of the product, and what it does. Nowadays though, its nothing more than mind control. Sometimes, even I am suckered into buying their crap, by whatever mind control techniques were being used in the TV commercial, even though I don't even want it. It Fortunately, I was strong enough to avoid succumbing to it. Sadly, there are those who aren't.

So I could consider it to be not a single dictatorship, but a number of dictatorships squabbling over the one area. The one population. That is my perspective.

And I concede that Morgan's people, even drones (and mind you there's quite a few there with the -5 Police rating of Free Market) are better off than those living in The Hive, or even Spartan society. What I would say though, is that I'd rather join Lal, or Dierdre, or even Zak when the Unity is breaking up, and the crew are partitioning.

[waab]

Originally posted by Sikander

Actually WWII cost us a bundle, but we made it back right afterward because we were the only major industrial economy which wasn't damaged / destroyed in the war. There was a lot of pent up demand for just about everything after 15 years of depression and war, and the U.S. made a pile of money in the 20 years after the war.

And we in sweden didn't make money after the WWII, we didn't just lick Nazi ass. I must say that I think we (sweden) has much to answer to, even the USA did get a allied with Sovjet. But we no, we went on screaming about how bad Sovjet was, we even gave Göring a thanks for something...

Originally posted by Sikander
How large is your regular army? I was under the impression that Sweden relied on well-trained reserves for most of it's combat power.

Jepp is is true, but they need to be trained and under that time it cost money, our enemy has always been the Sovjet so we have always around every body at age 19/20 in the army. Now later on this has changed. I am not going in and my brother didn't do it either. But my dad went in and everybody else. We are socialist in Sweden but our main enemy was Sovjet. Gothenburg our most importent city, because of our need of imported oil, has no defence at all, because it is on the east cost.

Originally posted by Sikander

Perhaps you can turn your political connections in the EU into a security arrangement where you can cut your army a bit.

No way we are neutral, and that has keeping us from war in 200 years.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Xian
i agree with the negative comments about yang and the comparisons to stalin, but also the negative comments about morgan. The idea that you caould always move up is ridiculus. Capitalism IS BASED ENTIRELEY ON THE EXPLOITATION OF PEOPLE. if everyone cound be an exploiter there would be no one to exploit. Ive never believed in the idea that ANYONE is naturally smarter than anyone else, that is elititst propaganda.

Do you really believe that no one is naturally smarter than anyone else? I have an unbelievably large body of evidence to the contrary.

As for capitalism being based entirely on the exploitation of people, you have it wrong. Capitalism is based upon the exploitation of capital. Feudal lords exploited their people (slaves really) long before anyone developed a systematic means of making capital perform at anywhere near it's potential. The evils of exploitation which were prominent at the dawn of the self-aware capitalism were merely an extension of the system of feudal slavery that had prevailed previously. It's hard to imagine how a society which claimed the lion's share of the wealth, property, education and political power for the noble classes could change any more rapidly than it did. Capitalism was one of the forces driving these changes rather than hindering them, by increasing the productivity of the economy rather than simply redistributing that production. This allowed the free classes to aquire capital and with it educations for their children etc. It also allowed centralized Royal power to eclipse the power of the Nobility which was making life dangerous and difficult for King and Merchant alike.

Capitalism in a nutshell is about renting your tools to someone else so that they can get to work sooner and more effectively than if they had to purchase those tools themselves. In other words, someone who is established enough to purchase two sets of tools does so, and then rents his second set of tools to a (probably) younger person who hasn't produced enough yet to buy his own tools. The older (richer) person makes some money (to keep himself alive later in life perhaps), and the younger (poorer) person increases the value of his own labor immediately rather than waiting until he can do so with his own capital. Every time you buy a facility on Chiron you are taking advantage of capitalism, where the excess capital (useless just sitting there) is turned into a useful productivity enhancer. The exploitation you are talking about is simply someone spending 5$ advanced on credit in order to make 10$. One of the ten dollars is the profit of the capitalist, five are returned as repayment of the loan, and four are pocketed by the guy who set the whole chain in motion.

Originally posted by Xian
AND HOW CAN YOU BE AGAINST THE HIVES DICATATORSHIP and then support the morgans? A CEO IS A DICTATOR. Remember that the vast majority (even in the "land of opportunity" ) DO NOT live under the rule of their governmen nearly as long as UNDER THE RULE OF THEIR BOSS (or central planner, or whatever the name for it is). therefore, its absurd to denounce the hive or spartans or beleivers and not denounce the morgans.

Socialism means the extension of democracy to the workplace... thats all. Capitalism means fascism/dictatorship in the workplace. State socialism (marxism) means dictatorship EVERYWHERE.

A CEO of a corporation is not a dictator by design, though some of them may be so de facto. The CEO is selected by the board of directors. The board of directors are chosen by the shareholders of the corporation who have votes in proportion to their stake in the company. Thus rather than one man, one vote, it's more like one dollar, one vote. Unlike geographical political entities however no one has to be a part of a corporation's domain. Every employee, customer and shareholder deals with the corporation because they choose to.

Of course in the game every faction (except the Gaian's perhaps) is a caricature of what they represent, and in the game Morgan is a monopolist. Thus your criticism of Morgan has a great deal more validity than any blanket criticism of corporate culture (itself widely varied) at large.

The advantage of having smaller units of organization (ie corporations vs the state) is that they are more agile and efficient. A worker in a capitalist economy thus has a choice of which groups he wishes to associate himself with, and these corporations have a great deal more flexibility to deal with any opportunities which may arise. Every workplace has a hierarchical structure whether it is a socialist factory or a mom and pop grocery, or a mega-corporation. You do not escape that condition simply because you live under a different system. In a capitalist system you have many more choices of which hierarchy you belong to. You also tend to be better paid because your organization is usually more efficient. You also have the opportunity to not only rise to the top of your organization through merit, but to create your own organization. To me this seems to engender much more freedom than having all of your industries controlled by the government, democratic or not. In a socialist system it is a certainty that whatever decisions are made at the level which will effect your day to day work life are going to be carried out by functionaries who are far removed from the political process.

[Maniac]

Btw, thanks Vel and Sikander, I understand your point about money being created. A more elaborate reply will follow when I have an easier exam to study and after I've read all the new posts, which will take many study breaks...

[Blake]

I think many are being overly critical of Morgan and comparing the Morganites too much with our current socitities.

Firstly, some people seem to have a gross mis-understanding of monopoly. Monopoly basically means "One provider" [of a good or service]. In a state run economy monopolies are entirely rampant, because the state is a monopoly, or gives corporations monopolistic powers, because these corporations have been simply granted the monopolistic powers, and have no fear of competition they have even more potential of exploiting their positition. (altough such coporations are generally still partitally state controlled unlike a Monopoly which got to it's place in the market through hard work...)

Monopolies arent always bad, sometimes it makes perfect economic sense to have a monopoly, say in the case of a power grid.

The main thing Morgan does differentely is emphasise building up capital, when the Gaians are dancing naked through the trees, the University are occupied with their high minded scientific theories and the Spartans are polishing their sidearms the Morganites are busily building stuff (capital) to improve their lot on planet. This pretty much sums it up. Morganites build.

The Morgan Monopoly refers to the fact Morgan emphaises trades, "Our products are simply so good no-one feels the need to compete" (or however it goes). It's not that Morgan drives the other factions out of business, he is simply providing a usful service which is better than others can provide. This isn't evil, in fact it gives citizens of other factions more choices, instead of buying from the State Monopoly they can buy Morgans alternative goods.

Except in the Economic victory the Morganites do not take pro-active measures to prevent other factions trading, in fact they encourage it. (Trading with the Morganites is beneficial for both sides)

Thats my take anyway. The reason I would be reluctant to join the Morganites is they might be too busy building up non-essential capital (luxury), which might make them more vunerable to mindworms and factions which take exception to (or are jealous of) the Morganites relative luxury.
(If I looked out the unity window and saw a world with little fungus I'd hop in the Morgan pod, a world with lots of fungus the Spartan or Gaian pod.)

[Anodyne]

[Jethro83]

Here is something to note about Morgan. The following is his psych profile (from the official SMAC site), as well as a few points in my opinion about the important points (which are in bold)

Psych Profile from Contractor Database:
Industrialist

Powerful and charismatic individual with very high self-confidence. Relishes life and regards his life as a series of transactions; anything, any interaction, can be shaped if the proper currency (money, love, threat of pain, affection, etc) can be brought to the table.

How shallow can you get? Though Miriam lacks intellectual integrity a lot of the time, one of the few things she has to say, that I agree on is that "The Morgans fear what may not be purchased. For a trader cannot comprehend a thing that is priceless."

Scratches the surface of how pathetically materialistic Morgan is.

Does not like to lose.

Need I say anything? Sure its in human nature to prefer winning to losing, but if this shortfall is mentioned in a psych profile, obviously losing turns into a bigger issue than that for Morgan. Losing in this case would probably mean being beaten in terms of market share by another business. He despises losing market share, and so tries to monopolize.

Long series of successful business dealings has reinforced both ego and transactional worldview.

So he's become so sure of himself that he thinks he can buy anything. How shallow. Again, I refer to the already mentioned Miriam blurb. Can he buy unconditional sentiment? I don't think so.

Soft on ethics...;"let the market decide."

So Zak isn't the only unethical one. Sure Zak may conduct weird experiments on people, but if it benefits science, it benefits more people than not, since it gets us that much closer to complete comprehension of what is. Many more diseases cured, aversion of pain and suffering, all the fruits of the University's work. Morgan's unethical business practices will only benefit him and his board of directors. Even if there is some degree of benefit to the rest of society, in maintenance in the areas of public works, in providing food and water, and entertainment (since he would be building Rec. Commons and Holo. Theatres in his bases). But is there any benefits, aside from those material things that go into the rest of society? Do those material things cure diseases? Do those material things map out the entire human genetic code? No way!

Pride in work and deep desire to see the Unity depart for worlds uncharted ("the last hope," he called it) should assure work will be completed roughly as contracted.

"Wow. We killed Earth. Let's go rape another planet of its resources."

The motives he has for seeing the Unity mission as a success is to be able to exploit the untapped resources of another planet, since people like him, his predecessors already sucked Earth dry.

He said himself "Resources exist to be consumed." Does water exist only for the sole purpose of providing humans with something to drink? Do trees exist only for the sole purpose of providing building materials and fuel for fire? Do sheep and cattle exist only for providing meat, milk and wool to humans? I don't think so.

Note: If this company is used, be careful that auditors of Morgan Industries work have no contact with Morgan Industries or its agents. Bribery of U.N. officials is a distinct possibility with this subject.

(Anjeli Bole transferred from the Unity Project Team to a position in private industry before this entire report could be filed. The above fragments were found in her touchscreen during post-launch cleanup.)

This profile only touches the surface of Morgan's dark side. Obviously, he bribed the psychologist out of the Unity Project Team before she could do a complete and thorough profile that would reveal things he wouldn't want the public to know. As Commissioner Pravin Lal said, "Beware of he who would deny you access to information. For in his heart, he dreams himself your master."

Though he seemingly favours a somewhat democratic society, and I can see based on the arguments of the pro-capitalist group that it doesn't appear to be a dictatorial system, I still believe that he has a more sinister agenda on the cards. A transition "from entrepeneur to emperor." that will only solidify his control of the main sources of energy, for "He who controls the source of energy controls Planet."

Sounds to me like he does seek control, and power.

[Frankychan]

LordAzreal's post is on the money,

Ok, Yang's megalomania is right out there for everyone to see, but Morgan, IMHO, is MUCH worse than Yang because at least Yang is honest.

Morgan hides his thirst for planetary conquest under the guise of "free market economy" and "corporate democracy".

I'm just surprised that the Believers don't have a single vote....Santiago has 6 and even Yang has 3.

I think Firaxis did an excellent job with the Believers! If gamers hate their ideology that much, they succeeded.

[Andemagne]

Spartans or University.
voted for Spartans.

[Comstr]

Lets See,

Zarkov means I have the l33test Computers avilable to play SMAC. Problem is all the processing power is being used to discover the Human Genome Prjoect.

Diedre means free sex. Problem is you don't need that if you have SMAC.

Morgon means you have the money to but SMAC on Ebay. Problem is it's 50 bucks...per turn.

Santigo means you play SMAC as part of school. Problem is you have to win the game in under 25 years or they shoot you for being an under-archiver (and no builder or hyrbird players allowed either!)

Yang means you can't play multiplayer because you might pick up "free" thoughts from the other players. AND you need acess to the net. Nahha.

Miriam means you're computers are so old they can't run SMAC in the 1st place.



THEREFORE, Lal it is! And, for an added bonus, it being a UN style Beuracracy, you have time to play SMAC at work on your laptop at the 8 hour commitee meetings! Peacekeepers win, hands down!

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Comstr
Lets See,

Zarkov means I have the l33test Computers avilable to play SMAC. Problem is all the processing power is being used to discover the Human Genome Prjoect.

Diedre means free sex. Problem is you don't need that if you have SMAC.

Morgon means you have the money to but SMAC on Ebay. Problem is it's 50 bucks...per turn.

Santigo means you play SMAC as part of school. Problem is you have to win the game in under 25 years or they shoot you for being an under-archiver (and no builder or hyrbird players allowed either!)

Yang means you can't play multiplayer because you might pick up "free" thoughts from the other players. AND you need acess to the net. Nahha.

Miriam means you're computers are so old they can't run SMAC in the 1st place.



THEREFORE, Lal it is! And, for an added bonus, it being a UN style Beuracracy, you have time to play SMAC at work on your laptop at the 8 hour commitee meetings! Peacekeepers win, hands down!

Good point.

University it is, because you could probably convince Zakharov to give you a computer so that you could research "Gaming and Mind Control"

[waab]

Yes you have a good point the question is, do you really need to play a game which you are a part of?

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by waab
Yes you have a good point the question is, do you really need to play a game which you are a part of?

But of course! If you don't do that, then you can never get the pleasure of killing your enemies.....or your friends.