Does anyone else yearn for a society based on inequality?

[DaShi]

Actually, I can think of several ways to get Tyra to spend an evening with me.

Really, Hera. It's a stupid argument.

[DaShi]

Why 10 million?

Too low? That's what I thought too. Alright, 100 million.

[DaShi]

Why 10 million? To clarify when I wrote this:



I was arguing against this:



Not the specific example of the Confederacy. The plantation economy as it was in the old South would not have survived the right of slaves to emigrate unmolested.

However tens of thousands of people would have remained in willing slavery and some of their children would also choose slavery instead of moving to other countries.

Geez, can't you get your thoughts together before you post?

Who are these people?

[DaShi]

Geez Hera, I can hear you thinking about this from civilization.

[Heraclitus]

Think in terms of freedom of association. I don't have the right to spend a evening chatting up Tyra Banks if she doesn't want my company, but I certainly have the right to deny her my company even if she wishes it very badly.

I see I need to be more explicit. People and cultures differ. Sucky countries are mostly sucky because they are inhabited by people who suck at building countries that don't suck.

What is wrong about people wanting to keep the fruits of the society they built for themselves and their children instead of sharing it with everyone?

Whether the reason is genetic, cultural or astrological is irrelevant as long as the suckiness persists for years and generations after the plucking them from their old society and putting them in a new one the argument stand.



Imagine a society A where 6 in 10 people defect in the prisoner's dilemma and society B where 9 in 10 do so. Which society (lets leave the irrationality aside) is better off as a whole? And say people notice this.

Is it really that unfair that people in society A to limit the number of people who can come over from society B?

[giblets]

Think in terms of freedom of association. I don't have the right to spend a evening chatting up Tyra Banks if she doesn't want my company, but I certainly have the right to deny her my company even if she wishes it very badly.

Is this a metaphor for countries? If Spain doesn't want to associate with Portugal, it doesn't have to?

Or are you saying that a country is like a giant clubhouse? If someone else walks into my country, I'm somehow affected even if I never see them? Why do I have a right to complain about something that doesn't affect me?

[DaShi]

I see I need to be more explicit. People and cultures differ. Sucky countries are mostly sucky because they are inhabited by people who suck at building a country that doesn't suck. Whether the reason is genetic, cultural or astrological is irrelevant as long as the suckiness persists for years and generations after the plucking them from their old society and putting them in a new one the argument stand.

Yeah, there's no real evidence to support any of this nonsense. Why do you post this crap as if they are facts? Plus, this is still different from your last argument. Can't you keep your train of thought?

[DaShi]

Is this a metaphor for countries? If Spain doesn't want to associate with Portugal, it doesn't have to?

Or are you saying that a country is like a giant clubhouse? If someone else walks into my country, I'm somehow affected even if I never see them? Why do I have a right to complain about something that doesn't affect me?

Who knows what he's talking about? All he knows is that he hates darkies but is too stupid to understand why let alone explain it to anyone else.

[DaShi]

Last night I had a dream that I was taking care of six children. Three of them were smart, brave, and responsible. The other three were drooling idiots. Anyway, for some reason the three smart ones got killed, probably doing something brave, leaving me alone with the idiots. Eventually, I break down from the loss of the other three children. The three idiots come over and hug me to comfort me and I think, they may be idiots, but they are my idiots.

Anyway, the point of this story is: Hera, someday someone will love you too. And you'll be his or her idiot.

[Heraclitus]

Or are you saying that a country is like a giant clubhouse? If someone else walks into my country, I'm somehow affected even if I never see them? Why do I have a right to complain about something that doesn't affect me?

Does your tax rate affect you? Does the inequality of income of a society affect you? Does the language predominantly spoken affect you? Does the rate of violent crime? What about health concerns? Depression rates? Levels of social trust?

Suppose people from club A are used to cleaning up after themselves and people from club B rely exclusively on the cleaning lady.
A person or two from club A joining club B are sure to eventually start conforming to the rules and cease to litter. However if enough people from club B come over many of them will start to complain and argue that a cleaning lady is a better way to handle this issue and that the membership fee should be increased to cover this. Eventually there are enough of them to outvote you.

There is nothing really wrong with using a cleaning lady or just using informal shaming for everyone to clean after themselves. Sure one might be marginally "better" depending on size and other factors. But would it be so wrong for disgruntled club members from B leaving it and starting C while limiting the number of new members that can join from A or B?

You don't need to actually meet a person in a club for them to affect you. I don't really care who gets the clubhouse, what I care about is the ability of people to choose the kind of club (and the rules of the club) one gets to live under.

[Heraclitus]

Yeah, there's no real evidence to support any of this nonsense.

Yes there is. For example children of Black doctors and lawyers have on average lower IQs than children of Korean janitors. Regression towards the mean shows that different peoples regress to different means. Also while scores may go up or down, unless when the tests are made easier, despite the massive investments and endless educational crusades the gaps have remained nearly constant for the last few decades.





It doesn't matter if this is genetic or not, the approaches tried so far have clearly failed. What is wrong with countries waiting until someone figures out a solution before importing a under-performing population?

Why do you post this crap as if they are facts? Plus, this is still different from your last argument. Can't you keep your train of thought?

It's the same train of thought.

If I was better looking or more charming or wealthier Tyra Banks may well have desired my company.

Freedom of association is important because people aren't interchangeable. The second post was me pointing out that the same (aren't completely interchangeable) is true of populations in certain respects.

[Heraclitus]

Who knows what he's talking about? All he knows is that he hates darkies but is too stupid to understand why let alone explain it to anyone else.

I don't hate "darkies". What is your problem?

[DaShi]

Stupid crap that doesn't even make sense.

You don't need to actually meet a person in a club for them to affect you. I don't really care who gets the clubhouse, what I care about is the ability of people to choose the kind of club (and the rules of the club) one gets to live under.

But as the population rises, there are going to be more and more people who aren't happy with the way the system is. The whole point of society is trying to find the best way of resolving this dilemma. This pretty basic stuff that you are ignorant of.

[DaShi]

I see I need to be more explicit. People and cultures differ. Sucky countries are mostly sucky because they are inhabited by people who suck at building countries that don't suck.

What is wrong about people wanting to keep the fruits of the society they built for themselves and their children instead of sharing it with everyone?

Whether the reason is genetic, cultural or astrological is irrelevant as long as the suckiness persists for years and generations after the plucking them from their old society and putting them in a new one the argument stand.



Imagine a society A where 6 in 10 people defect in the prisoner's dilemma and society B where 9 in 10 do so. Which society (lets leave the irrationality aside) is better off as a whole? And say people notice this.

Is it really that unfair that people in society A to limit the number of people who can come over from society B?

Wow, you are thick.

[giblets]

Does your tax rate affect you? Does the inequality of income of a society affect you? Does the language predominantly spoken affect you? Does the rate of violent crime? What about health concerns? Depression rates? Levels of social trust?

Suppose people from club A are used to cleaning up after themselves and people from club B rely exclusively on the cleaning lady.
A person or two from club A joining club B are sure to eventually start conforming to the rules and cease to litter. However if enough people from club B come over many of them will start to complain and argue that a cleaning lady is a better way to handle this issue and that the membership fee should be increased to cover this. Eventually there are enough of them to outvote you.

There is nothing really wrong with using a cleaning lady or just using informal shaming for everyone to clean after themselves. Sure one might be marginally "better" depending on size and other factors. But would it be so wrong for disgruntled club members from B leaving it and starting C while limiting the number of new members that can join from A or B?

You don't need to actually meet a person in a club for them to affect you. I don't really care who gets the clubhouse, what I care about is the ability of people to choose the kind of club (and the rules of the club) one gets to live under.

So you're suggesting that any group of people can secede from a country for any reason? If the world disintegrates into tens of thousands of microstates, what mechanism will keep peace between them?