[quote]lixy wrote:
rainjack wrote:
lixy wrote:
orion wrote:
lixy wrote:
dhickey wrote:
More consumption = better quality of life.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is the myth Evil feeds upon.
This Ladies and Gentleman is the fucking truth and only narrowed mindedness regarding what can be a consumer good prolongues this nonsense.
Only after some basic needs are met are we free to pursue what could be called “spiritual goals”. And by investing time and money to pursue them, we also “consume”.
And ascete living on a stick forgoes all earthly pleasures to purify his soul. That however is also an individual preference that costs him other opportunities, it is “consumption” , nothing else.
Plus a totally unrelated gem I found yesterday:
The opposite of the “Liberals” were the “Serviles” when it came to the Spanish discussion whether to have a constitution or not, which is where the “liberals” (old meaning), got their names from-
They, at least, knew what options there were.
Trade free or serve.
Don’t be obtuse.
Quality of life doesn’t increase linearly with consumption. There is a threshold at which it start to decrease dramatically. In many respects, pollution, obesity and other ills are directly related to overconsumption.
Free trade is a good idea. Not argument there. What I’m preaching here is that people act like they got some sense and stop thinking that more is necessarily better (which Dhickey’s post implies).
And while we’re on the subject, where do you stand on the movement of people (as opposed to wealth and merchandise)? Because everytime I have this argument with some down-with-the-barriers type of person, I get the dogs-at-the-border nationalistic speech as well. I’m curious about your position.
Influx of people is not a marketable asset like merchandise and money.
Only if you can buy and sell these people on an open market will they be the same as merchandise.
Isn’t that what the job market is about?
Think about it: Jobs are constantly being relocated to countries where people are willing to work for cheaper. That’s a consequence of not allowing people to move around freely. If you liberalized that, jobs would stay where they are and taxes would be paid to your state instead of an Asian or African one.
I personally find the idea that “things” are freer than people revolting.[/quote]
The classic libertarian answer is that yes, people should be free to move to where ever they want to.
However, we do not live in a libertarian world.
However much I detest a system like Sweden´s, the Swedes seem to like it. How long would it take for their systems to break down if they allowed everybody to come?
Then, there is the issue of language, culture and all the related problems. When money talks it is understood everywhere, this is not true for people. Goods can be manufactured and shipped including a badly translated manual, but they never bring any ideas with then that are alien to the culture they are shipped to.
Free trade at least allows people that would kill each other when they had to live side by side to co-operate peacefully.
That is a lot.