Why do humans enjoy being serfs?

A group for members of all religions, or no religion at all, to talk about religion

  1. Fenix Rising

    Fenix Rising Fapstronaut

    1,713
    2,695
    143
    Taxation is only one of possible solutions. Governments could tax the wealthy capital owners and redistribute income to workers, but that is not the direction societies are moving in. Workers need to own capital rather than rely on government income redistribution policies. Oxford study estimates, about 47% of total employment in developed world is at risk of computerization in next three decades.
    As companies substitute machines and computers for human activity, workers need to own part of the capital stock that substitutes for them to benefit from these new “robot” technologies. Workers could own shares of the firm, hold stock options, or be paid in part from the profits. Without ownership stakes, workers will become serfs working on behalf of the robots’ overlords. This way workers would also get influence on company's policy.

    As for the markets go, I would strictly implement Volcker Rule, building separation between investment banking and classic banks. Let Deutsche Banks, Goldman Sachses etc of the world play only with investors money not ordinary people's deposits, so they won't be too big to fail if they become insolvent. Of course that will never happen as nearly every legislator is on their payroll in one way or another.
     
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2018
    Max Fisher likes this.
  2. Max Fisher

    Max Fisher Fapstronaut

    @HoplessCase101, now you are making good sense (or I'm starting to understand you better). More ownership, freedom, self determination is great! The world would be a great place if workers owned more capital. All of what you said about workers is capable in a free market. Capital = ownership. Ownership = choices. Freedom and private property are needed for both to exist.

    As long as all this awesome cooperation and sharing isn't coerced, but rather entered into voluntarily I'm all for it. Remember I want more freedom not less. Free markets are big enough to include profit sharing and co-ops.

    I do still think taxation is theft. Even if it's put to good use. The ends can't be used to justify the means.
     
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2018
  3. Fenix Rising

    Fenix Rising Fapstronaut

    1,713
    2,695
    143
    I don't agree. My country has 38 % average income taxation and I gladly pay it. I get quite good "free" education, reasonably good "free" health system, solid public infrastructure and one of the lowest crime rates in EU. I don't want to own Mercedes knowing that my neighbor doesn't have enough to cover basic human needs.
     
    Max Fisher likes this.
  4. Max Fisher

    Max Fisher Fapstronaut

    Then don't buy a Mercedes and give your income away freely to whoever you like. But what you are saying when you advocate taxation is the removal of wealth from a person by threat of force, this is taxation.

    If you choose to not see yourself as a victim and pay it willingly it doesn't negate the fact that if you didn't pay it you'd be imprisoned or have it taken from you. Again, there is absolutely nothing wrong with coopporation, sharing or even redistribution of your wealth when it's done voluntarily. However you redistributing my wealth for me, through threat of force seems not cool, even if you have good intentions. Why not do what we are doing now? Communicate and advocate your position. Convince me to donate to your charity, is this not capable of achieving the same thing?
     
  5. Fenix Rising

    Fenix Rising Fapstronaut

    1,713
    2,695
    143
    No, because that would be charity. I don't want to give nor receive it. As a member of society I have agreed to certain entitlements and obligations, call it a social contract between me and a state, if you will. If I don't want to play by collectively implemented rules of the game, I can migrate to other country. I have a free choice.
     
  6. Max Fisher

    Max Fisher Fapstronaut

    I'm sorry you feel this way.

    Or take to the streets after a collapse and protest for a change towards less taxes, more individual liberty and freer markets? Assuming the government let's me have freedom of speech right?
     
  7. Moon Shot

    Moon Shot Fapstronaut

    940
    19,292
    143
    Look bro, I don't have any problem. But other people may have. It isn't a simple question at all. Please don't think that you've nothing to be blamed for. There is nothing wrong with your question. But your wording... is it the only way to ask your doubts? Do you seriously believe that there is nothing offensive in your title? At all? Are you here to ask a question or make a statement?

    SMH, I never said don't ask your question. I only requested you, humbly, to dial down the intensity of the words. Please try and understand.

    Thank you.
     
    Castielle and Max Fisher like this.
  8. Max Fisher

    Max Fisher Fapstronaut

    Since this started in the relm of religion and moved into a discourse on the legitimacy of the state. I thought I'd post this last thought from a religious thinker. I enjoyed it.

    St. Augustine, City of God, Book IV, Chapter 4:


    Remove justice, then, what are kingdoms but great robberies? For what are robberies themselves, but little kingdoms? The band itself is made up of men; it is ruled by the authority of a prince, it is knit together by the pact of the confederacy; the booty is divided by the law agreed on. If, by the admittance of abandoned men, this evil increases to such a degree that it holds places, fixes abodes, takes possession of cities, and subdues peoples, it assumes the more plainly the name of a kingdom, because the reality is now manifestly conferred on it, not by the removal of covetousness, but by the addition of impunity. Indeed, that was an apt and true reply which was given to Alexander the Great by a pirate who had been seized. For when that king had asked the man what he meant by keeping hostile possession of the sea, he answered with bold pride, ‘What do you mean by seizing the whole earth; but because I do it with a petty ship, I am called a robber, while you who does it with a great fleet are styled emperor.’
     
  9. Brokenman123

    Brokenman123 Fapstronaut

    725
    7,714
    123
    It's been said that not accepting Jesus' sacrifice would be like trampling on His blood but what if someone genuinely wanted to go to hell to suffer for their sins and they didn't want to be let off the hook? Wouldn't that person be doing the moral thing by owning up to their mistakes and accepting responsibility for their actions?
     
    Max Fisher likes this.
  10. Max Fisher

    Max Fisher Fapstronaut

    LOL! This reminds me of the "Isn't the devil actually a good guy if he's punishing all the bad people?"

    I'm not sure I really have an answer for you, but it's an amusing question. So in your paradigm, your motivation is to suffer for your sins? But you felt that one lifetime of pain, toiling for your existence, growing old, witnessing the horrors in this world because of sin was not enough you wanted to spend eternity suffering as well? Would this be more moral? I'm not sure, for you, it sounds like swallowing your pride, humbling yourself and accepting the love of God is harder then eternity in hell...Also it's an interesting perspective because most non-believers believe it's too harsh a punishment for even the most heinous earthly crimes and call the whole concept absurd.

    At the end of the day accepting God's love and Christ's sacrifice is the highest good not how much punishment you are willing to endure.
     
  11. Brokenman123

    Brokenman123 Fapstronaut

    725
    7,714
    123
    It doesn't necessarily have to be pride but rather self hate and plus, looking at Jesus' sacrifice can actually makes one feel more guilty not more loved. And another thing: the entire concept of unconditional love is kinda messed up when you take into account God loving people like Hitler no matter what they do and stuff.
     
  12. Castielle

    Castielle Fapstronaut

    @Brokenman123 one thing I've noticed in your responses is that you seem conflicted on your own views, to be honest. You seem to simultaneously believe that God is mean and cruel, but then you also seem to believe that we humans don't deserve His grace. You can't really have it both ways. If we don't deserve His grace, then we deserve punishment. But when He punishes us, you think He's cruel. It seems to me that nothing anyone can say about God is going to please you in your current state of mind.
     
    Roady and Max Fisher like this.
  13. Brokenman123

    Brokenman123 Fapstronaut

    725
    7,714
    123
    I guess I kinda do believe both things at the same time. If I were to be honest with myself, then yes, I believe that I personally do deserve punishment for bad acts that I've done but with regards to certain other people I don't believe they deserve punishment at least not eternal punishment anyway eg. innocent babies... It seems according to the Bible people are bad and condemned just for being born even babies who haven't done anything wrong... just by being born a human you're already condemned and that's kinda unfair. I also find it kinda unfair that God punished the entire human race for the actions of two people... If you're going to dish out punishment for a crime or sin or anything worthy of punishment then dish it out on the people who actually committed the acts not the entire human race. But anyway if you don't like what I have to say and find the convo to be a waste of time you don't have to read my responses but I'll still continue conversing with the other guy if he lets me.
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2018
  14. Brokenman123

    Brokenman123 Fapstronaut

    725
    7,714
    123
    I don't understand what you're getting at with not wanting people to get punished for their sins when I specifically asked a question about it being moral to own up to your own sins and take responsibility for your own actions:
     
  15. Castielle

    Castielle Fapstronaut

    Innocent babies do not suffer eternal punishment. That's just not true. They have no state of mind to either accept or reject Jesus as their Savior. If I believed God sent babies to hell, I wouldn't be a Christian.

    It's not just "being born a human," it's making the conscious choice to sin. Every single one of us has done that. We have all lied or cheated or stolen or lusted, etc. Innocent babies have not made any of those conscious decisions, which is why I do not believe God would condemn them to hell. That would, indeed, be cruel and unfair.

    I don't really know how to respond to that, aside from to say that there is a lot you don't understand about that story. Honestly, I don't know how to explain it any differently, but I know that they way you're describing it is not accurate. I would encourage you to learn from people who are smarter than me about that one.

    Yes, you did, but you've also said many contradictory things throughout this conversation. I don't have the time and patience to go find them all and quote them, but my point is that you seem to, at one point, think that humans are super messed up and need to own up to their actions and deserve punishment, but then in the next breathe you say that God is cruel for punishing us. I'm just saying you can't have it both ways. The balance between justice and grace is incredibly delicate, and I believe God accomplishes it perfectly, in a way that we often can't even understand, because we don't have the full picture.
     
    Roady likes this.
  16. Max Fisher

    Max Fisher Fapstronaut

    This is exactly the point, and Catholics do it all the time. There is even a rosary dedicated to Christ's suffering through the eyes of Mary called 7 Dolores. Feeling guilty over sin is the first step towards repentance and is often referred to as God "convicting your heart".

    The point of grace isnt that it is unconditional per se. I mean baptism is a requirement of salvation. There are conditions, but those conditions are unearned. That's what makes it grace. If Hilter repents (after baptism) or is baptized (assuming he isnt) he can be restored and/or brought into God's family. That's why we baptize babies too, they can receive grace and don't need to do anything to earn it.

    I sure will.
     
  17. Brokenman123

    Brokenman123 Fapstronaut

    725
    7,714
    123
    Wait a minute do you guys think that it's OK that God still loves Hitler or Stalin after all that they did? I mean there has to come a point where you have to hate your enemies.
    And with regards to the Fall of Man I'm pretty sure what basically happened was that God cursed all of humanity for the sins of Adam and Eve but if I have described it inaccurately I wouldn't mind hearing what actually happened if anyone is able to explain it.
     
  18. Max Fisher

    Max Fisher Fapstronaut

    If they repent...sure. To claim anything less undervalues the sacrifice Jesus made. Not to joke too much, but Jesus didn't die for spilled milk. He died to forgive even the worst sins on the largest scale. Everyone's sins, even the sins yet to be committed. One sacrifice to save them all...as long as we accept his grace and cooperate with it to be sanctified. The bible only describes one sin that cannot be forgiven (from yesterday's gospel at mass in fact) - sins against the Holy Spirit.

    You didn't. That's correct.
     
  19. Brokenman123

    Brokenman123 Fapstronaut

    725
    7,714
    123
    Right and that's why I think it's unfair... everyone who has ever lived is suffering for the sins that two people committed... The two people that committed the sins should suffer for their own sins not everyone else.

    I just can't fathom how God could love a mass murderer like Hitler and still want a relationship with Him after all He's done... That's just mind boggling... He loves Hitler so much that He's died for Him and wants to have a relationship with him... a mass murderer... wow. So is it wrong to hate Hitler? I mean the guy did some very despicable things... Surely it wouldn't be sinful to hate him? The God of the Old Testament Himself even hated people so why is it wrong for humans to hate people?
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2018
  20. Max Fisher

    Max Fisher Fapstronaut

    If you think this, it's obvious why you would simultaneously reject that one man could bear the weight of sin and atone for everyone. This has no easy answer and you are smart to question it. In the same way we were condemned unfairly, we were also forgiven unfairly. Interesting. Im ok letting God be the judge in both cases, because I believe he loves me and is good. Without knowing Him or his character, you will struggle to find faith. Please test him and continue to ask questions, I think he will lead you, he's a good Shepard.
     
    Castielle likes this.

Share This Page