|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
Sam, I bet you'd always choose the "eudaimonic" future society in your Alpha Centauri runs 
|
is there an option in that game for fascist technocracy and ecological catastrophe?
|
On January 09 2014 13:08 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 12:53 IgnE wrote:On January 09 2014 09:06 Danglars wrote:On January 09 2014 07:51 farvacola wrote:
It surprises me not at all that Danglars is unable to see the problem in how income is so heavily affected by work over the already daily allotment. That we are one of the worlds most overworked nations is nothing to be proud of. Yes, we most certainly must ban people from working longer hours and very specific spans because it is discriminatory towards women. We most certainly should implement a mandatory daily quota and ban every ounce of pay beyond it--make it illegal. Only then can we say we are in a post-glass-ceiling world. I'm sure, as you are clearly interested in reducing the gender pay gap, that you read the paper with alarm. My local feminists had not previously informed me either that the "incentive to disproportionately reward individuals who labored long hours and worked particular hours" was a critical influence in depressing women's wages the gender wage gap. The article does not go far enough in exploring government solutions towards equality in this area. This oversight may soon put Claudia Goldin in the ranks of the Paglia's. In Danglar's world, more work is always good, and those willing to work the most should be reward the most. If you are a woman who wants to raise a family and simply can't work as much as men, so be it. What Danglars fails to realize is that the only reason men can do so much productive work is that women are the ones doing all the reproductive work. Reproductive work is more than the work of simply reproducing the species, it involves taking care of the home, cooking, cleaning, providing emotional support, listening, cherishing, raising kids, or otherwise the "work" of living. Business owners and managers reflect the societal values that elevate productive work while denigrating reproductive work, as reproductive work does not get any financial compensation. Danglars makes this about "feminism" and women rather than seeing the more fundamental points that 1) reproductive work is the hidden work that allows society function despite not being valued, so paying a certain class of people to 60 or 80 hours a week of productive work relies upon an unpaid segment of the population that takes care of those ambitious workers by doing their reproductive labor for them, and 2) women, socially, are shunted into this uncompensated labor role more than men. You want to know why birth rates are declining in modern, westernized countries? You want to know why "family values," that the right so loves to talk about in America are deteriorating? The answer is not birth control and rap music, in that order. You are overvaluing productive labor at the expense of reproductive labor. You are forcing people to choose between more work and building families and rich personal lives. But for you it's okay because it makes the owner richer. Profits continue to soar for the capitalist class, but at least in Danglar's world all is ok, because those who work more get paid more. The first thing that comes to mind is, "So what are you going to do about it, IgnE?" This great biological conspiracy to keep the gender wage gap afloat, what are you going to do about it? Women will find it hard to breastfeed and earn 6 figures besides. The jobs involved in reproduction (I'm looking past all the conflation between reproductive work and sensible division of labor) doesn't cause the emotional support to suddenly cause dollars to rain down from heaven. I mean, let me offer you a tissue at this great biological injustice, but I can hardly find it relevant. I'm talking about Jonny's article--individuals rewarded at greater rates than the simple extra hours they put in. Incentivize workers that can do it to do it, and stay with the company, and we have a great contributor to the gap. Now, you're scurrying for the rabbit hole to bring up declining birth rates, underappreciated housework, and all these evil evils that are evil because ... working the overtime is causing compensation several times longer? Point your finger at God (sorry, evolutionary impartiality) for making women to bear children. Don't project the other factors (besides willingness to work long hours/odd hours) as some failure of wage labor; they aren't.
I think you are missing the point. The biology of the situation is peripheral to the failure of wage labor. I assumed you would consider declining birth rates and the disintegration of the family bad things. Maybe you don't. You are free to clarify, but your histrionic responses to what you interpret as feminism on my side are off the mark as usual.
|
On January 09 2014 13:45 sam!zdat wrote:
is there an option in that game for fascist technocracy and ecological catastrophe?
Fuck yeah! Try Cybernetic Conciousness (edit: expansion faction) with the following social engineering choices:
Politics: Police State
Economy: Free Market
Values: Knowledge
Future Society: Cybernetic
Edit 2: Free Market is BRUTAL in AC... Planet gets pissed and sends mind worms to kill you XD
|
On January 09 2014 14:03 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 13:08 Danglars wrote:On January 09 2014 12:53 IgnE wrote:On January 09 2014 09:06 Danglars wrote:On January 09 2014 07:51 farvacola wrote:
It surprises me not at all that Danglars is unable to see the problem in how income is so heavily affected by work over the already daily allotment. That we are one of the worlds most overworked nations is nothing to be proud of. Yes, we most certainly must ban people from working longer hours and very specific spans because it is discriminatory towards women. We most certainly should implement a mandatory daily quota and ban every ounce of pay beyond it--make it illegal. Only then can we say we are in a post-glass-ceiling world. I'm sure, as you are clearly interested in reducing the gender pay gap, that you read the paper with alarm. My local feminists had not previously informed me either that the "incentive to disproportionately reward individuals who labored long hours and worked particular hours" was a critical influence in depressing women's wages the gender wage gap. The article does not go far enough in exploring government solutions towards equality in this area. This oversight may soon put Claudia Goldin in the ranks of the Paglia's. In Danglar's world, more work is always good, and those willing to work the most should be reward the most. If you are a woman who wants to raise a family and simply can't work as much as men, so be it. What Danglars fails to realize is that the only reason men can do so much productive work is that women are the ones doing all the reproductive work. Reproductive work is more than the work of simply reproducing the species, it involves taking care of the home, cooking, cleaning, providing emotional support, listening, cherishing, raising kids, or otherwise the "work" of living. Business owners and managers reflect the societal values that elevate productive work while denigrating reproductive work, as reproductive work does not get any financial compensation. Danglars makes this about "feminism" and women rather than seeing the more fundamental points that 1) reproductive work is the hidden work that allows society function despite not being valued, so paying a certain class of people to 60 or 80 hours a week of productive work relies upon an unpaid segment of the population that takes care of those ambitious workers by doing their reproductive labor for them, and 2) women, socially, are shunted into this uncompensated labor role more than men. You want to know why birth rates are declining in modern, westernized countries? You want to know why "family values," that the right so loves to talk about in America are deteriorating? The answer is not birth control and rap music, in that order. You are overvaluing productive labor at the expense of reproductive labor. You are forcing people to choose between more work and building families and rich personal lives. But for you it's okay because it makes the owner richer. Profits continue to soar for the capitalist class, but at least in Danglar's world all is ok, because those who work more get paid more. The first thing that comes to mind is, "So what are you going to do about it, IgnE?" This great biological conspiracy to keep the gender wage gap afloat, what are you going to do about it? Women will find it hard to breastfeed and earn 6 figures besides. The jobs involved in reproduction (I'm looking past all the conflation between reproductive work and sensible division of labor) doesn't cause the emotional support to suddenly cause dollars to rain down from heaven. I mean, let me offer you a tissue at this great biological injustice, but I can hardly find it relevant. I'm talking about Jonny's article--individuals rewarded at greater rates than the simple extra hours they put in. Incentivize workers that can do it to do it, and stay with the company, and we have a great contributor to the gap. Now, you're scurrying for the rabbit hole to bring up declining birth rates, underappreciated housework, and all these evil evils that are evil because ... working the overtime is causing compensation several times longer? Point your finger at God (sorry, evolutionary impartiality) for making women to bear children. Don't project the other factors (besides willingness to work long hours/odd hours) as some failure of wage labor; they aren't. I think you are missing the point. The biology of the situation is peripheral to the failure of wage labor. I assumed you would consider declining birth rates and the disintegration of the family bad things. Maybe you don't. You are free to clarify, but your histrionic responses to what you interpret as feminism on my side are off the mark as usual. You were the one that lectured on the unpaid practices of society. If you had a point to mentioning all the things mothers, housewives, and women who share some housework, you failed to make it. I don't suggest that wage labor is the end-all be-all of society. I simultaneously fail to see any relevancy whatsoever to the article at hand. You typed all that out, so I assume you saw some kind of relevance to disproportional wage compensation. Sharing it with all of us is what you failed to do.
Joe Employee earns proportionally more for the extra 2 hrs he works a day, and now I must worry about declining birth rates and families? Oh my. These women are really getting back at the men for the gender pay gap!
On January 09 2014 14:06 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 13:45 sam!zdat wrote:
is there an option in that game for fascist technocracy and ecological catastrophe? Fuck yeah! Try Cybernetic Conciousness (edit: expansion faction) with the following social engineering choices: Politics: Police State Economy: Free Market Values: Knowledge Future Society: Cybernetic Edit 2: Free Market is BRUTAL in AC... Planet gets pissed and sends mind worms to kill you XD Sometimes, I think mainstream environmentalism sees the world in the same way. Mother Gaia is displeased at free markets, mining, and industrial production so sends mind worms climate change as karmic reprisals.
I gotta assume the Morgan Industries faction is a nod to J.P. Morgan, morganization, etc. Those quotes, man! Both poking fun at its critics and giving a nod to the economical underpinnings of today's society.
|
On January 09 2014 16:35 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 14:03 IgnE wrote:On January 09 2014 13:08 Danglars wrote:On January 09 2014 12:53 IgnE wrote:On January 09 2014 09:06 Danglars wrote:On January 09 2014 07:51 farvacola wrote:
It surprises me not at all that Danglars is unable to see the problem in how income is so heavily affected by work over the already daily allotment. That we are one of the worlds most overworked nations is nothing to be proud of. Yes, we most certainly must ban people from working longer hours and very specific spans because it is discriminatory towards women. We most certainly should implement a mandatory daily quota and ban every ounce of pay beyond it--make it illegal. Only then can we say we are in a post-glass-ceiling world. I'm sure, as you are clearly interested in reducing the gender pay gap, that you read the paper with alarm. My local feminists had not previously informed me either that the "incentive to disproportionately reward individuals who labored long hours and worked particular hours" was a critical influence in depressing women's wages the gender wage gap. The article does not go far enough in exploring government solutions towards equality in this area. This oversight may soon put Claudia Goldin in the ranks of the Paglia's. In Danglar's world, more work is always good, and those willing to work the most should be reward the most. If you are a woman who wants to raise a family and simply can't work as much as men, so be it. What Danglars fails to realize is that the only reason men can do so much productive work is that women are the ones doing all the reproductive work. Reproductive work is more than the work of simply reproducing the species, it involves taking care of the home, cooking, cleaning, providing emotional support, listening, cherishing, raising kids, or otherwise the "work" of living. Business owners and managers reflect the societal values that elevate productive work while denigrating reproductive work, as reproductive work does not get any financial compensation. Danglars makes this about "feminism" and women rather than seeing the more fundamental points that 1) reproductive work is the hidden work that allows society function despite not being valued, so paying a certain class of people to 60 or 80 hours a week of productive work relies upon an unpaid segment of the population that takes care of those ambitious workers by doing their reproductive labor for them, and 2) women, socially, are shunted into this uncompensated labor role more than men. You want to know why birth rates are declining in modern, westernized countries? You want to know why "family values," that the right so loves to talk about in America are deteriorating? The answer is not birth control and rap music, in that order. You are overvaluing productive labor at the expense of reproductive labor. You are forcing people to choose between more work and building families and rich personal lives. But for you it's okay because it makes the owner richer. Profits continue to soar for the capitalist class, but at least in Danglar's world all is ok, because those who work more get paid more. The first thing that comes to mind is, "So what are you going to do about it, IgnE?" This great biological conspiracy to keep the gender wage gap afloat, what are you going to do about it? Women will find it hard to breastfeed and earn 6 figures besides. The jobs involved in reproduction (I'm looking past all the conflation between reproductive work and sensible division of labor) doesn't cause the emotional support to suddenly cause dollars to rain down from heaven. I mean, let me offer you a tissue at this great biological injustice, but I can hardly find it relevant. I'm talking about Jonny's article--individuals rewarded at greater rates than the simple extra hours they put in. Incentivize workers that can do it to do it, and stay with the company, and we have a great contributor to the gap. Now, you're scurrying for the rabbit hole to bring up declining birth rates, underappreciated housework, and all these evil evils that are evil because ... working the overtime is causing compensation several times longer? Point your finger at God (sorry, evolutionary impartiality) for making women to bear children. Don't project the other factors (besides willingness to work long hours/odd hours) as some failure of wage labor; they aren't. I think you are missing the point. The biology of the situation is peripheral to the failure of wage labor. I assumed you would consider declining birth rates and the disintegration of the family bad things. Maybe you don't. You are free to clarify, but your histrionic responses to what you interpret as feminism on my side are off the mark as usual. You were the one that lectured on the unpaid practices of society. If you had a point to mentioning all the things mothers, housewives, and women who share some housework, you failed to make it. I don't suggest that wage labor is the end-all be-all of society. I simultaneously fail to see any relevancy whatsoever to the article at hand. You typed all that out, so I assume you saw some kind of relevance to disproportional wage compensation. Sharing it with all of us is what you failed to do. Joe Employee earns proportionally more for the extra 2 hrs he works a day, and now I must worry about declining birth rates and families? Oh my. These women are really getting back at the men for the gender pay gap! Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 14:06 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On January 09 2014 13:45 sam!zdat wrote:
is there an option in that game for fascist technocracy and ecological catastrophe? Fuck yeah! Try Cybernetic Conciousness (edit: expansion faction) with the following social engineering choices: Politics: Police State Economy: Free Market Values: Knowledge Future Society: Cybernetic Edit 2: Free Market is BRUTAL in AC... Planet gets pissed and sends mind worms to kill you XD Sometimes, I think mainstream environmentalism sees the world in the same way. Mother Gaia is displeased at free markets, mining, and industrial production so sends mind worms climate change as karmic reprisals. I gotta assume the Morgan Industries faction is a nod to J.P. Morgan, morganization, etc. Those quotes, man! Both poking fun at its critics and giving a nod to the economical underpinnings of today's society.
Men can perform most forms of reproductive labor just as well as women. It's about division of labor and the oppression of wage labor. It just so happens that most cultures hand most of the reproductive labor to women. The point is that when you incentivize productive labor by encouraging overtime pay to those who are willing to sacrifice their lives to the gristmill of wage slavery, you are paying a premium for their labor, by forcing their reproductive labor to performed by someone else or ignored completely to the detriment of the laborer. Then you end up with a society in which the population growth is negative, old people are put in nursing homes that are paid for by their overtime-working children who would rather trade wages than time to take care of them, children are left to their own devices or raised by apathetic wage slave nannies, and families disintegrate because no one has learned to value reproductive labor activities that help knit the family together.
If you are going to stick within the grossly unjust capitalist paradigm, how about instead of overtime based on a grossly stupid hourly schedule we at least hire enough people and pay them all a fair enough wage based on their work product. Then maybe we can try to align our economic values with some of our most cherished cultural values.
Jonny also just pointed to the fact that Joe Employee earns a more than proportional amount of money for the extra 2-6 hours he works every day.
|
On January 09 2014 14:06 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 13:45 sam!zdat wrote:
is there an option in that game for fascist technocracy and ecological catastrophe? Fuck yeah! Try Cybernetic Conciousness (edit: expansion faction) with the following social engineering choices: Politics: Police State Economy: Free Market Values: Knowledge Future Society: Cybernetic Edit 2: Free Market is BRUTAL in AC... Planet gets pissed and sends mind worms to kill you XD
a free market where every individual is regulated is the same as a regulated market. freudian slip!
|
On January 09 2014 16:57 nunez wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 14:06 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On January 09 2014 13:45 sam!zdat wrote:
is there an option in that game for fascist technocracy and ecological catastrophe? Fuck yeah! Try Cybernetic Conciousness (edit: expansion faction) with the following social engineering choices: Politics: Police State Economy: Free Market Values: Knowledge Future Society: Cybernetic Edit 2: Free Market is BRUTAL in AC... Planet gets pissed and sends mind worms to kill you XD a free market where every individual is regulated is the same as a regulated market. freudian slip!
Let alone that "Values: Knowledge" just doesn't fit into the "Police State" + "Free Market" which run into an entirely diffrent direction?
|
On January 09 2014 18:34 Velr wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 16:57 nunez wrote:On January 09 2014 14:06 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On January 09 2014 13:45 sam!zdat wrote:
is there an option in that game for fascist technocracy and ecological catastrophe? Fuck yeah! Try Cybernetic Conciousness (edit: expansion faction) with the following social engineering choices: Politics: Police State Economy: Free Market Values: Knowledge Future Society: Cybernetic Edit 2: Free Market is BRUTAL in AC... Planet gets pissed and sends mind worms to kill you XD a free market where every individual is regulated is the same as a regulated market. freudian slip! Let alone that "Values: Knowledge" just doesn't fit into the "Police State" + "Free Market" which run into an entirely diffrent direction?
Quite the contrary it fit perfectly. Who needs a democracy if you have the "knowledge" to know the best course of action - granted you need the knowledge, so you need the police state, to control citizen and assure yourself that they do what is right. Both free market and police state have the same core, they are implemented in the name of the "people", as the best way to "protect them" / "make them happy", and they both place theory before the necessity of practice, "knowledge" (as in theorical knowledge) before reality.
|
On January 09 2014 16:56 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 16:35 Danglars wrote:On January 09 2014 14:03 IgnE wrote:On January 09 2014 13:08 Danglars wrote:On January 09 2014 12:53 IgnE wrote:On January 09 2014 09:06 Danglars wrote:On January 09 2014 07:51 farvacola wrote:
It surprises me not at all that Danglars is unable to see the problem in how income is so heavily affected by work over the already daily allotment. That we are one of the worlds most overworked nations is nothing to be proud of. Yes, we most certainly must ban people from working longer hours and very specific spans because it is discriminatory towards women. We most certainly should implement a mandatory daily quota and ban every ounce of pay beyond it--make it illegal. Only then can we say we are in a post-glass-ceiling world. I'm sure, as you are clearly interested in reducing the gender pay gap, that you read the paper with alarm. My local feminists had not previously informed me either that the "incentive to disproportionately reward individuals who labored long hours and worked particular hours" was a critical influence in depressing women's wages the gender wage gap. The article does not go far enough in exploring government solutions towards equality in this area. This oversight may soon put Claudia Goldin in the ranks of the Paglia's. In Danglar's world, more work is always good, and those willing to work the most should be reward the most. If you are a woman who wants to raise a family and simply can't work as much as men, so be it. What Danglars fails to realize is that the only reason men can do so much productive work is that women are the ones doing all the reproductive work. Reproductive work is more than the work of simply reproducing the species, it involves taking care of the home, cooking, cleaning, providing emotional support, listening, cherishing, raising kids, or otherwise the "work" of living. Business owners and managers reflect the societal values that elevate productive work while denigrating reproductive work, as reproductive work does not get any financial compensation. Danglars makes this about "feminism" and women rather than seeing the more fundamental points that 1) reproductive work is the hidden work that allows society function despite not being valued, so paying a certain class of people to 60 or 80 hours a week of productive work relies upon an unpaid segment of the population that takes care of those ambitious workers by doing their reproductive labor for them, and 2) women, socially, are shunted into this uncompensated labor role more than men. You want to know why birth rates are declining in modern, westernized countries? You want to know why "family values," that the right so loves to talk about in America are deteriorating? The answer is not birth control and rap music, in that order. You are overvaluing productive labor at the expense of reproductive labor. You are forcing people to choose between more work and building families and rich personal lives. But for you it's okay because it makes the owner richer. Profits continue to soar for the capitalist class, but at least in Danglar's world all is ok, because those who work more get paid more. The first thing that comes to mind is, "So what are you going to do about it, IgnE?" This great biological conspiracy to keep the gender wage gap afloat, what are you going to do about it? Women will find it hard to breastfeed and earn 6 figures besides. The jobs involved in reproduction (I'm looking past all the conflation between reproductive work and sensible division of labor) doesn't cause the emotional support to suddenly cause dollars to rain down from heaven. I mean, let me offer you a tissue at this great biological injustice, but I can hardly find it relevant. I'm talking about Jonny's article--individuals rewarded at greater rates than the simple extra hours they put in. Incentivize workers that can do it to do it, and stay with the company, and we have a great contributor to the gap. Now, you're scurrying for the rabbit hole to bring up declining birth rates, underappreciated housework, and all these evil evils that are evil because ... working the overtime is causing compensation several times longer? Point your finger at God (sorry, evolutionary impartiality) for making women to bear children. Don't project the other factors (besides willingness to work long hours/odd hours) as some failure of wage labor; they aren't. I think you are missing the point. The biology of the situation is peripheral to the failure of wage labor. I assumed you would consider declining birth rates and the disintegration of the family bad things. Maybe you don't. You are free to clarify, but your histrionic responses to what you interpret as feminism on my side are off the mark as usual. You were the one that lectured on the unpaid practices of society. If you had a point to mentioning all the things mothers, housewives, and women who share some housework, you failed to make it. I don't suggest that wage labor is the end-all be-all of society. I simultaneously fail to see any relevancy whatsoever to the article at hand. You typed all that out, so I assume you saw some kind of relevance to disproportional wage compensation. Sharing it with all of us is what you failed to do. Joe Employee earns proportionally more for the extra 2 hrs he works a day, and now I must worry about declining birth rates and families? Oh my. These women are really getting back at the men for the gender pay gap! On January 09 2014 14:06 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On January 09 2014 13:45 sam!zdat wrote:
is there an option in that game for fascist technocracy and ecological catastrophe? Fuck yeah! Try Cybernetic Conciousness (edit: expansion faction) with the following social engineering choices: Politics: Police State Economy: Free Market Values: Knowledge Future Society: Cybernetic Edit 2: Free Market is BRUTAL in AC... Planet gets pissed and sends mind worms to kill you XD Sometimes, I think mainstream environmentalism sees the world in the same way. Mother Gaia is displeased at free markets, mining, and industrial production so sends mind worms climate change as karmic reprisals. I gotta assume the Morgan Industries faction is a nod to J.P. Morgan, morganization, etc. Those quotes, man! Both poking fun at its critics and giving a nod to the economical underpinnings of today's society. Men can perform most forms of reproductive labor just as well as women. It's about division of labor and the oppression of wage labor. It just so happens that most cultures hand most of the reproductive labor to women. The point is that when you incentivize productive labor by encouraging overtime pay to those who are willing to sacrifice their lives to the gristmill of wage slavery, you are paying a premium for their labor, by forcing their reproductive labor to performed by someone else or ignored completely to the detriment of the laborer. Then you end up with a society in which the population growth is negative, old people are put in nursing homes that are paid for by their overtime-working children who would rather trade wages than time to take care of them, children are left to their own devices or raised by apathetic wage slave nannies, and families disintegrate because no one has learned to value reproductive labor activities that help knit the family together. If you are going to stick within the grossly unjust capitalist paradigm, how about instead of overtime based on a grossly stupid hourly schedule we at least hire enough people and pay them all a fair enough wage based on their work product. Then maybe we can try to align our economic values with some of our most cherished cultural values. Jonny also just pointed to the fact that Joe Employee earns a more than proportional amount of money for the extra 2-6 hours he works every day. I understand you a little better now.
I don't know how much of a role the state has in correcting alleged oppressions, but I'll let it rest with a few comments. I would look more towards the societal or cultural desire for a certain lifestyle that drives the push for wage advancement. Nature vs nurture on household tasks, reproductive labor perhaps in some instances ... how much is the expectation that the woman keeps the house vs. the woman's preference in her own right.
The way organizations are built by societies to govern and police themselves are fraught with injustices simply because these are men and women who are doing it. I see the capitalist system, or aspects of systems that take their roots in capitalism, bear the brunt of this charge ... gross injustice. Simultaneously, the corrective actions proscribed by the most vocal opponents of injustices such as you describe look to be rife with unintended consequences equal or greater than the situation being corrected. Flatten wages and curb entrepreneurship, dumb down the skilled, create perverse incentives for the ascribing of the "correct wage" by those least connected with the industry (and indeed experts failing to predict the demand and availability). The very living wage proponents ensuring rises in unemployment for jobs that are stepping stones up for most, but now with half those stones removed.
I'd like to hear of the more just societies and how they're doing on growth of opportunity, unemployment, and birth rates after implementing policies different than free market, individualistic ones. The best news stories I hear from European countries are of the birth rates of their immigrant populations (and difficulties of assimilation) and some European countries with extremely low birth rates compared to other OECD countries. Furthermore, what kind of societies are we that riddle future generations with trillions in debt and ask for more births? Heck, if we talk about family division of labor, the extreme tilting towards out-of-wedlock births is a worrisome topic as well.
|
Norway28739 Posts
Norway is one of the few european countries where birth rates (even without factoring in immigrants) have been pretty high - at least compared to other western countries. Granted it has dropped the past 2 years (to 1.87 if I understood it correctly) but it's too early to say whether that represents a new trend or is just an anomaly. This is mostly attributed to very generous programs for parental leave - 56 weeks paid at 86% of previous salary - (of which 12 weeks has to be taken by the father), and well developed childcare services.
|
On January 09 2014 18:50 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 18:34 Velr wrote:On January 09 2014 16:57 nunez wrote:On January 09 2014 14:06 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On January 09 2014 13:45 sam!zdat wrote:
is there an option in that game for fascist technocracy and ecological catastrophe? Fuck yeah! Try Cybernetic Conciousness (edit: expansion faction) with the following social engineering choices: Politics: Police State Economy: Free Market Values: Knowledge Future Society: Cybernetic Edit 2: Free Market is BRUTAL in AC... Planet gets pissed and sends mind worms to kill you XD a free market where every individual is regulated is the same as a regulated market. freudian slip! Let alone that "Values: Knowledge" just doesn't fit into the "Police State" + "Free Market" which run into an entirely diffrent direction? Quite the contrary it fit perfectly. Who needs a democracy if you have the "knowledge" to know the best course of action - granted you need the knowledge, so you need the police state, to control citizen and assure yourself that they do what is right. Both free market and police state have the same core, they are implemented in the name of the "people", as the best way to "protect them" / "make them happy", and they both place theory before the necessity of practice, "knowledge" (as in theorical knowledge) before reality.
If i think of a culture which values "knowledge" above all else i think of a culture with many academics, scientists and creative minds that work more for "selffulfillment" and "progress" than for profit.
I really don't see how you can make the bridge from a culture that values knowledge (and with that the ways of gaining and improving it) above all to a free market or/and police state which tend to destroy/ignore creative/interesting yet not profitable or "valuable" improvements ...
If at all a hardcore fascist state rivaling it's neighbours would be more fitting than "free market" because that state would actually pump money like mad into new technologies to get an edge and, contrary to the free market, would actually want the alltogether BEST results, not just the most profitable ones...
|
On January 09 2014 22:54 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Norway is one of the few european countries where birth rates (even without factoring in immigrants) have been pretty high - at least compared to other western countries. Granted it has dropped the past 2 years (to 1.87 if I understood it correctly) but it's too early to say whether that represents a new trend or is just an anomaly. This is mostly attributed to very generous programs for parental leave - 56 weeks paid at 86% of previous salary - (of which 12 weeks has to be taken by the father), and well developed childcare services.
Don't forget France!
|
On January 09 2014 22:56 Velr wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 18:50 WhiteDog wrote:On January 09 2014 18:34 Velr wrote:On January 09 2014 16:57 nunez wrote:On January 09 2014 14:06 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On January 09 2014 13:45 sam!zdat wrote:
is there an option in that game for fascist technocracy and ecological catastrophe? Fuck yeah! Try Cybernetic Conciousness (edit: expansion faction) with the following social engineering choices: Politics: Police State Economy: Free Market Values: Knowledge Future Society: Cybernetic Edit 2: Free Market is BRUTAL in AC... Planet gets pissed and sends mind worms to kill you XD a free market where every individual is regulated is the same as a regulated market. freudian slip! Let alone that "Values: Knowledge" just doesn't fit into the "Police State" + "Free Market" which run into an entirely diffrent direction? Quite the contrary it fit perfectly. Who needs a democracy if you have the "knowledge" to know the best course of action - granted you need the knowledge, so you need the police state, to control citizen and assure yourself that they do what is right. Both free market and police state have the same core, they are implemented in the name of the "people", as the best way to "protect them" / "make them happy", and they both place theory before the necessity of practice, "knowledge" (as in theorical knowledge) before reality. If i think of a culture which values "knowledge" above all else i think of a culture with many academics, scientists and creative minds that work more for "selffulfillment" and "progress" than for profit. I really don't see how you can make the bridge from a culture that values knowledge (and with that the ways of gaining and improving it) above all to a free market or/and police state which tend to destroy creative/interesting yet not profitable or "valuable" ... If at all a hardcore fascist state rivaling it's neighbours would be more fitting than "free market" because that state would actually pump money like mad into new technologies to get an edge and, contrary to the free market, would actually want the alltogether BEST results, not just the most profitable ones...
And who do you think push for free market ? Academics, scientists and "creative minds". All scientist are imperialists by nature : they value their science - a box - and its perspective on reality. Reality is, by opposition, plural and complex. Put an economist in power, he will think, based on his theory, that a free market will eventually fix all political problems.
I guess it depends on what you call "knowledge", but if you look at our society, we value science, rationality and knowledge like tools to resolve all our problems (even tools that could permit us to go beyond our natural "limitation", with the idea of transhumanism for exemple).
On January 09 2014 22:59 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 22:54 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Norway is one of the few european countries where birth rates (even without factoring in immigrants) have been pretty high - at least compared to other western countries. Granted it has dropped the past 2 years (to 1.87 if I understood it correctly) but it's too early to say whether that represents a new trend or is just an anomaly. This is mostly attributed to very generous programs for parental leave - 56 weeks paid at 86% of previous salary - (of which 12 weeks has to be taken by the father), and well developed childcare services. Don't forget France!
Yes we have a total fertility rate at 1.97, way above most european countries (Germany is at 1.36). It's the same situation as Drone is describing : generous programs for parental leave. What's interesting is that there is almost no differences between "french" women and women who came from the immigration.
|
On January 09 2014 23:07 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 22:56 Velr wrote:On January 09 2014 18:50 WhiteDog wrote:On January 09 2014 18:34 Velr wrote:On January 09 2014 16:57 nunez wrote:On January 09 2014 14:06 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On January 09 2014 13:45 sam!zdat wrote:
is there an option in that game for fascist technocracy and ecological catastrophe? Fuck yeah! Try Cybernetic Conciousness (edit: expansion faction) with the following social engineering choices: Politics: Police State Economy: Free Market Values: Knowledge Future Society: Cybernetic Edit 2: Free Market is BRUTAL in AC... Planet gets pissed and sends mind worms to kill you XD a free market where every individual is regulated is the same as a regulated market. freudian slip! Let alone that "Values: Knowledge" just doesn't fit into the "Police State" + "Free Market" which run into an entirely diffrent direction? Quite the contrary it fit perfectly. Who needs a democracy if you have the "knowledge" to know the best course of action - granted you need the knowledge, so you need the police state, to control citizen and assure yourself that they do what is right. Both free market and police state have the same core, they are implemented in the name of the "people", as the best way to "protect them" / "make them happy", and they both place theory before the necessity of practice, "knowledge" (as in theorical knowledge) before reality. If i think of a culture which values "knowledge" above all else i think of a culture with many academics, scientists and creative minds that work more for "selffulfillment" and "progress" than for profit. I really don't see how you can make the bridge from a culture that values knowledge (and with that the ways of gaining and improving it) above all to a free market or/and police state which tend to destroy creative/interesting yet not profitable or "valuable" ... If at all a hardcore fascist state rivaling it's neighbours would be more fitting than "free market" because that state would actually pump money like mad into new technologies to get an edge and, contrary to the free market, would actually want the alltogether BEST results, not just the most profitable ones... And who do you think push for free market ? Academics, scientists and "creative minds". All scientist are imperialists by nature : they value their science - a box - and its perspective on reality. Reality is, by opposition, plural and complex. Put an economist in power, he will think, based on his theory, that a free market will eventually fix all political problems. I guess it depends on what you call "knowledge", but if you look at our society, we value science, rationality and knowledge like tools to resolve all our problems (even tools that could permit us to go beyond our natural "limitation", with the idea of transhumanism for exemple).
I disagree with this entirely. What you say may have been true in the 19th century, but I doubt you'll find that many scientists who feel empowered with a mission to solve humanity's problems (especially politics) with science. Free markets are as much a hindrance (increased time wasted finding funding sources) as a boost (improved communication) for research. Ignoring reality as a scientist is also dangerous for the scientific mind.
I won't speak for economists, though.
|
On January 09 2014 23:42 scFoX wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 23:07 WhiteDog wrote:On January 09 2014 22:56 Velr wrote:On January 09 2014 18:50 WhiteDog wrote:On January 09 2014 18:34 Velr wrote:On January 09 2014 16:57 nunez wrote:On January 09 2014 14:06 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On January 09 2014 13:45 sam!zdat wrote:
is there an option in that game for fascist technocracy and ecological catastrophe? Fuck yeah! Try Cybernetic Conciousness (edit: expansion faction) with the following social engineering choices: Politics: Police State Economy: Free Market Values: Knowledge Future Society: Cybernetic Edit 2: Free Market is BRUTAL in AC... Planet gets pissed and sends mind worms to kill you XD a free market where every individual is regulated is the same as a regulated market. freudian slip! Let alone that "Values: Knowledge" just doesn't fit into the "Police State" + "Free Market" which run into an entirely diffrent direction? Quite the contrary it fit perfectly. Who needs a democracy if you have the "knowledge" to know the best course of action - granted you need the knowledge, so you need the police state, to control citizen and assure yourself that they do what is right. Both free market and police state have the same core, they are implemented in the name of the "people", as the best way to "protect them" / "make them happy", and they both place theory before the necessity of practice, "knowledge" (as in theorical knowledge) before reality. If i think of a culture which values "knowledge" above all else i think of a culture with many academics, scientists and creative minds that work more for "selffulfillment" and "progress" than for profit. I really don't see how you can make the bridge from a culture that values knowledge (and with that the ways of gaining and improving it) above all to a free market or/and police state which tend to destroy creative/interesting yet not profitable or "valuable" ... If at all a hardcore fascist state rivaling it's neighbours would be more fitting than "free market" because that state would actually pump money like mad into new technologies to get an edge and, contrary to the free market, would actually want the alltogether BEST results, not just the most profitable ones... And who do you think push for free market ? Academics, scientists and "creative minds". All scientist are imperialists by nature : they value their science - a box - and its perspective on reality. Reality is, by opposition, plural and complex. Put an economist in power, he will think, based on his theory, that a free market will eventually fix all political problems. I guess it depends on what you call "knowledge", but if you look at our society, we value science, rationality and knowledge like tools to resolve all our problems (even tools that could permit us to go beyond our natural "limitation", with the idea of transhumanism for exemple). I disagree with this entirely. What you say may have been true in the 19th century, but I doubt you'll find that many scientists who feel empowered with a mission to solve humanity's problems (especially politics) with science. Free markets are as much a hindrance (increased time wasted finding funding sources) as a boost (improved communication) for research. Ignoring reality as a scientist is also dangerous for the scientific mind. I won't speak for economists, though.
You mean free market in research. Yeah I agree for that part, but the idea that a society that value knowledge would eventually go towards free market is sound : since economic theory tend to defend free market as their dominant paradigm, and since a society that value knowledge value expertise in specific field, they would tend to defend the idea of free market everywhere for every body. And if physicists disagree with that, well their expertise is irrelevant so who cares.
If you wanna look at different science, they all have the same trend but differently, as I said they are all imperialist by nature, it doesn't mean they all have the same vision on things : I mean that everything that touch their field of expertise in any way is directly taken as an "object" and reduced to the dimension that fit the dominant paradigm. I'm not sure I'm clear on this but well.
It was actually less true during the 19th century, even with positivism, mainly because technic was not as developped as today.
|
On January 09 2014 23:47 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 23:42 scFoX wrote:On January 09 2014 23:07 WhiteDog wrote:On January 09 2014 22:56 Velr wrote:On January 09 2014 18:50 WhiteDog wrote:On January 09 2014 18:34 Velr wrote:On January 09 2014 16:57 nunez wrote:On January 09 2014 14:06 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On January 09 2014 13:45 sam!zdat wrote:
is there an option in that game for fascist technocracy and ecological catastrophe? Fuck yeah! Try Cybernetic Conciousness (edit: expansion faction) with the following social engineering choices: Politics: Police State Economy: Free Market Values: Knowledge Future Society: Cybernetic Edit 2: Free Market is BRUTAL in AC... Planet gets pissed and sends mind worms to kill you XD a free market where every individual is regulated is the same as a regulated market. freudian slip! Let alone that "Values: Knowledge" just doesn't fit into the "Police State" + "Free Market" which run into an entirely diffrent direction? Quite the contrary it fit perfectly. Who needs a democracy if you have the "knowledge" to know the best course of action - granted you need the knowledge, so you need the police state, to control citizen and assure yourself that they do what is right. Both free market and police state have the same core, they are implemented in the name of the "people", as the best way to "protect them" / "make them happy", and they both place theory before the necessity of practice, "knowledge" (as in theorical knowledge) before reality. If i think of a culture which values "knowledge" above all else i think of a culture with many academics, scientists and creative minds that work more for "selffulfillment" and "progress" than for profit. I really don't see how you can make the bridge from a culture that values knowledge (and with that the ways of gaining and improving it) above all to a free market or/and police state which tend to destroy creative/interesting yet not profitable or "valuable" ... If at all a hardcore fascist state rivaling it's neighbours would be more fitting than "free market" because that state would actually pump money like mad into new technologies to get an edge and, contrary to the free market, would actually want the alltogether BEST results, not just the most profitable ones... And who do you think push for free market ? Academics, scientists and "creative minds". All scientist are imperialists by nature : they value their science - a box - and its perspective on reality. Reality is, by opposition, plural and complex. Put an economist in power, he will think, based on his theory, that a free market will eventually fix all political problems. I guess it depends on what you call "knowledge", but if you look at our society, we value science, rationality and knowledge like tools to resolve all our problems (even tools that could permit us to go beyond our natural "limitation", with the idea of transhumanism for exemple). I disagree with this entirely. What you say may have been true in the 19th century, but I doubt you'll find that many scientists who feel empowered with a mission to solve humanity's problems (especially politics) with science. Free markets are as much a hindrance (increased time wasted finding funding sources) as a boost (improved communication) for research. Ignoring reality as a scientist is also dangerous for the scientific mind. I won't speak for economists, though. You mean free market in research. Yeah I agree for that part, but the idea that a society that value knowledge would eventually go towards free market is sound : since economic theory tend to defend free market as their dominant paradigm, and since a society that value knowledge value expertise in specific field, they would tend to defend the idea of free market everywhere for every body. And if physicists disagree with that, well their expertise is irrelevant so who cares. If you wanna look at different science, they all have the same trend but differently, as I said they are all imperialist by nature, it doesn't mean they all have the same vision on things : I mean that everything that touch their field of expertise in any way is directly taken as an "object" and reduced to the dimension that fit the dominant paradigm. I'm not sure I'm clear on this but well. It was actually less true during the 19th century, even with positivism, mainly because technic was not as developped as today.
As a physicist myself, you wound me. :p
I think you should just have replaced "scientist" with "technocrat" or possibly "expert"; then I wouldn't have said anything. I guess soft sciences like economics and sociology have that problem ("imperialism"), but only because they can so easily be polluted by ideology. In that case, what they are doing is no longer science.
For the 19th century comment, many people believed then that science would be "solved" in a matter of decades, even though this wasn't the case in hindsight, so my point still stands.
|
On January 09 2014 14:06 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 13:45 sam!zdat wrote:
is there an option in that game for fascist technocracy and ecological catastrophe? Fuck yeah! Try Cybernetic Conciousness (edit: expansion faction) with the following social engineering choices: Politics: Police State Economy: Free Market Values: Knowledge Future Society: Cybernetic Edit 2: Free Market is BRUTAL in AC... Planet gets pissed and sends mind worms to kill you XD
In SMAC, Sam is the planet kid guy. He looks cute and he says that he is good and nice but he just wants to put mind worms in your brain.
Give me Morgan or even Yang any day.
|
On January 10 2014 00:35 scFoX wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 23:47 WhiteDog wrote:On January 09 2014 23:42 scFoX wrote:On January 09 2014 23:07 WhiteDog wrote:On January 09 2014 22:56 Velr wrote:On January 09 2014 18:50 WhiteDog wrote:On January 09 2014 18:34 Velr wrote:On January 09 2014 16:57 nunez wrote:On January 09 2014 14:06 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On January 09 2014 13:45 sam!zdat wrote:
is there an option in that game for fascist technocracy and ecological catastrophe? Fuck yeah! Try Cybernetic Conciousness (edit: expansion faction) with the following social engineering choices: Politics: Police State Economy: Free Market Values: Knowledge Future Society: Cybernetic Edit 2: Free Market is BRUTAL in AC... Planet gets pissed and sends mind worms to kill you XD a free market where every individual is regulated is the same as a regulated market. freudian slip! Let alone that "Values: Knowledge" just doesn't fit into the "Police State" + "Free Market" which run into an entirely diffrent direction? Quite the contrary it fit perfectly. Who needs a democracy if you have the "knowledge" to know the best course of action - granted you need the knowledge, so you need the police state, to control citizen and assure yourself that they do what is right. Both free market and police state have the same core, they are implemented in the name of the "people", as the best way to "protect them" / "make them happy", and they both place theory before the necessity of practice, "knowledge" (as in theorical knowledge) before reality. If i think of a culture which values "knowledge" above all else i think of a culture with many academics, scientists and creative minds that work more for "selffulfillment" and "progress" than for profit. I really don't see how you can make the bridge from a culture that values knowledge (and with that the ways of gaining and improving it) above all to a free market or/and police state which tend to destroy creative/interesting yet not profitable or "valuable" ... If at all a hardcore fascist state rivaling it's neighbours would be more fitting than "free market" because that state would actually pump money like mad into new technologies to get an edge and, contrary to the free market, would actually want the alltogether BEST results, not just the most profitable ones... And who do you think push for free market ? Academics, scientists and "creative minds". All scientist are imperialists by nature : they value their science - a box - and its perspective on reality. Reality is, by opposition, plural and complex. Put an economist in power, he will think, based on his theory, that a free market will eventually fix all political problems. I guess it depends on what you call "knowledge", but if you look at our society, we value science, rationality and knowledge like tools to resolve all our problems (even tools that could permit us to go beyond our natural "limitation", with the idea of transhumanism for exemple). I disagree with this entirely. What you say may have been true in the 19th century, but I doubt you'll find that many scientists who feel empowered with a mission to solve humanity's problems (especially politics) with science. Free markets are as much a hindrance (increased time wasted finding funding sources) as a boost (improved communication) for research. Ignoring reality as a scientist is also dangerous for the scientific mind. I won't speak for economists, though. You mean free market in research. Yeah I agree for that part, but the idea that a society that value knowledge would eventually go towards free market is sound : since economic theory tend to defend free market as their dominant paradigm, and since a society that value knowledge value expertise in specific field, they would tend to defend the idea of free market everywhere for every body. And if physicists disagree with that, well their expertise is irrelevant so who cares. If you wanna look at different science, they all have the same trend but differently, as I said they are all imperialist by nature, it doesn't mean they all have the same vision on things : I mean that everything that touch their field of expertise in any way is directly taken as an "object" and reduced to the dimension that fit the dominant paradigm. I'm not sure I'm clear on this but well. It was actually less true during the 19th century, even with positivism, mainly because technic was not as developped as today. As a physicist myself, you wound me. :p I think you should just have replaced "scientist" with "technocrat" or possibly "expert"; then I wouldn't have said anything. I guess soft sciences like economics and sociology have that problem ("imperialism"), but only because they can so easily be polluted by ideology. In that case, what they are doing is no longer science. For the 19th century comment, many people believed then that science would be "solved" in a matter of decades, even though this wasn't the case in hindsight, so my point still stands.
Hard science have the same problem in various topic, look at the recent trend of neurologists and cognitivists who invade sociology, often time defending the idea that society can't explain behavior, only our "genes", pheromones and whatnot.
It's true that "pure" science (what science should be) is not like that, it's only right for "science without epistemology". Epistemology, as a basis for all sciences, define the objects and the limits of each disciplines. But in todays world, nobody cares about epistemology aside from true scientists, who work in labs or in institutes and never talk before a public.
|
On January 09 2014 16:56 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2014 16:35 Danglars wrote:On January 09 2014 14:03 IgnE wrote:On January 09 2014 13:08 Danglars wrote:On January 09 2014 12:53 IgnE wrote:On January 09 2014 09:06 Danglars wrote:On January 09 2014 07:51 farvacola wrote:
It surprises me not at all that Danglars is unable to see the problem in how income is so heavily affected by work over the already daily allotment. That we are one of the worlds most overworked nations is nothing to be proud of. Yes, we most certainly must ban people from working longer hours and very specific spans because it is discriminatory towards women. We most certainly should implement a mandatory daily quota and ban every ounce of pay beyond it--make it illegal. Only then can we say we are in a post-glass-ceiling world. I'm sure, as you are clearly interested in reducing the gender pay gap, that you read the paper with alarm. My local feminists had not previously informed me either that the "incentive to disproportionately reward individuals who labored long hours and worked particular hours" was a critical influence in depressing women's wages the gender wage gap. The article does not go far enough in exploring government solutions towards equality in this area. This oversight may soon put Claudia Goldin in the ranks of the Paglia's. In Danglar's world, more work is always good, and those willing to work the most should be reward the most. If you are a woman who wants to raise a family and simply can't work as much as men, so be it. What Danglars fails to realize is that the only reason men can do so much productive work is that women are the ones doing all the reproductive work. Reproductive work is more than the work of simply reproducing the species, it involves taking care of the home, cooking, cleaning, providing emotional support, listening, cherishing, raising kids, or otherwise the "work" of living. Business owners and managers reflect the societal values that elevate productive work while denigrating reproductive work, as reproductive work does not get any financial compensation. Danglars makes this about "feminism" and women rather than seeing the more fundamental points that 1) reproductive work is the hidden work that allows society function despite not being valued, so paying a certain class of people to 60 or 80 hours a week of productive work relies upon an unpaid segment of the population that takes care of those ambitious workers by doing their reproductive labor for them, and 2) women, socially, are shunted into this uncompensated labor role more than men. You want to know why birth rates are declining in modern, westernized countries? You want to know why "family values," that the right so loves to talk about in America are deteriorating? The answer is not birth control and rap music, in that order. You are overvaluing productive labor at the expense of reproductive labor. You are forcing people to choose between more work and building families and rich personal lives. But for you it's okay because it makes the owner richer. Profits continue to soar for the capitalist class, but at least in Danglar's world all is ok, because those who work more get paid more. The first thing that comes to mind is, "So what are you going to do about it, IgnE?" This great biological conspiracy to keep the gender wage gap afloat, what are you going to do about it? Women will find it hard to breastfeed and earn 6 figures besides. The jobs involved in reproduction (I'm looking past all the conflation between reproductive work and sensible division of labor) doesn't cause the emotional support to suddenly cause dollars to rain down from heaven. I mean, let me offer you a tissue at this great biological injustice, but I can hardly find it relevant. I'm talking about Jonny's article--individuals rewarded at greater rates than the simple extra hours they put in. Incentivize workers that can do it to do it, and stay with the company, and we have a great contributor to the gap. Now, you're scurrying for the rabbit hole to bring up declining birth rates, underappreciated housework, and all these evil evils that are evil because ... working the overtime is causing compensation several times longer? Point your finger at God (sorry, evolutionary impartiality) for making women to bear children. Don't project the other factors (besides willingness to work long hours/odd hours) as some failure of wage labor; they aren't. I think you are missing the point. The biology of the situation is peripheral to the failure of wage labor. I assumed you would consider declining birth rates and the disintegration of the family bad things. Maybe you don't. You are free to clarify, but your histrionic responses to what you interpret as feminism on my side are off the mark as usual. You were the one that lectured on the unpaid practices of society. If you had a point to mentioning all the things mothers, housewives, and women who share some housework, you failed to make it. I don't suggest that wage labor is the end-all be-all of society. I simultaneously fail to see any relevancy whatsoever to the article at hand. You typed all that out, so I assume you saw some kind of relevance to disproportional wage compensation. Sharing it with all of us is what you failed to do. Joe Employee earns proportionally more for the extra 2 hrs he works a day, and now I must worry about declining birth rates and families? Oh my. These women are really getting back at the men for the gender pay gap! On January 09 2014 14:06 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On January 09 2014 13:45 sam!zdat wrote:
is there an option in that game for fascist technocracy and ecological catastrophe? Fuck yeah! Try Cybernetic Conciousness (edit: expansion faction) with the following social engineering choices: Politics: Police State Economy: Free Market Values: Knowledge Future Society: Cybernetic Edit 2: Free Market is BRUTAL in AC... Planet gets pissed and sends mind worms to kill you XD Sometimes, I think mainstream environmentalism sees the world in the same way. Mother Gaia is displeased at free markets, mining, and industrial production so sends mind worms climate change as karmic reprisals. I gotta assume the Morgan Industries faction is a nod to J.P. Morgan, morganization, etc. Those quotes, man! Both poking fun at its critics and giving a nod to the economical underpinnings of today's society. Men can perform most forms of reproductive labor just as well as women. It's about division of labor and the oppression of wage labor. It just so happens that most cultures hand most of the reproductive labor to women. The point is that when you incentivize productive labor by encouraging overtime pay to those who are willing to sacrifice their lives to the gristmill of wage slavery, you are paying a premium for their labor, by forcing their reproductive labor to performed by someone else or ignored completely to the detriment of the laborer. Then you end up with a society in which the population growth is negative, old people are put in nursing homes that are paid for by their overtime-working children who would rather trade wages than time to take care of them, children are left to their own devices or raised by apathetic wage slave nannies, and families disintegrate because no one has learned to value reproductive labor activities that help knit the family together. If you are going to stick within the grossly unjust capitalist paradigm, how about instead of overtime based on a grossly stupid hourly schedule we at least hire enough people and pay them all a fair enough wage based on their work product. Then maybe we can try to align our economic values with some of our most cherished cultural values.
Jonny also just pointed to the fact that Joe Employee earns a more than proportional amount of money for the extra 2-6 hours he works every day.
Depends what Joe Employee does. Some are linear, some non-linear and work tends to be moving in the direction of more becoming linear as technology and standardization become more prevalent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
