Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9
903 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 85
Inactive user


  Reply # 1479303 26-Jan-2016 19:30
Send private message

What in the heck is this woman talking about? She lives in blenheim but clearly has no clue about it.

 

Shes making it out to be a bloody scumville where there is poor areas like in south auckland. I havent seen any poverty down here at all.

 

It makes me very mad people like her. There are people who legit need a benefit and she is complaining that shes only slightly better off!

 

 


gzt

9929 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1493


  Reply # 1479305 26-Jan-2016 19:39
Send private message

I didn't get that from the article. Where does it say that?

903 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 85
Inactive user


  Reply # 1479308 26-Jan-2016 19:45
Send private message

gzt: I didn't get that from the article. Where does it say that?

 

She said she is only $34 better off each week and asked if it was actually worth working.


1220 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 58


  Reply # 1479312 26-Jan-2016 20:02
Send private message

The math doesn't add up to me?

$580/week on the benefit. Only $34/week better off working, so pay must be $614.

Yet 29 hours at $21.90... is $635 gross, or $501 if student loan is taken out?

gzt

9929 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1493


  Reply # 1479319 26-Jan-2016 20:11
Send private message

ludez:

What in the heck is this woman talking about? She lives in blenheim but clearly has no clue about it.


Shes making it out to be a bloody scumville where there is poor areas like in south auckland. I havent seen any poverty down here at all.


It makes me very mad people like her. There are people who legit need a benefit and she is complaining that shes only slightly better off!


 


ludez:

gzt: I didn't get that from the article. Where does it say that?


She said she is only $34 better off each week and asked if it was actually worth working.


Yeah I meant the bit where you claim she is making out it is 'scumville'.

903 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 85
Inactive user


  Reply # 1479325 26-Jan-2016 20:20
Send private message

Oh no it wasnt directly quoting her about that. It's just the way she was wording stuff like it's low paying work and the rich get richer etc. i skim read as it got my abit mad


703 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 67

Trusted

  Reply # 1479460 26-Jan-2016 23:17
2 people support this post
Send private message

 

Brendan:

 

 

 

The last thing I thought I would ever see on Geekzone was this level of elitist medieval drivel. I wont even bother going into the myriad practical, political, or historical reasons your wet dream will never work as I do not believe for one second you would understand any of it. I am simply registering my incredulity.

 

 


Do please explain why you think people ought not to contribute in return for being supported. My IQ is 141 so I am fairly confident I will understand it as long as you do not use big words.

 

 

 

 

If your IQ really was 141, you would realize I would not be caught out by such a poor attempt to re-frame my argument.

 

 


703 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 67

Trusted

  Reply # 1479462 26-Jan-2016 23:26
Send private message

sir1963:

 

 

 

Given the rise of automation , globalisation etc there are actually going to be MORE people unemployed long term, not just low paid manual jobs, but some of reasonable skill and increasing.

 

 

That has always annoyed me also. I have reached a point now that I no longer believe they do NOT know of the impending job-pocolypse but are doing a classic politician manouver I call stick-your-head-in-the-sand.

 

Just as annoying however is the mantra I always hear in any of these debates from the neo-liberals: "new jobs will materialise out of thin air JUST BECAUSE!"... I have never heard a satisfactory explanation of how or why, but I HAVE heard a lot of FAITH-based arguments extrapolated from historical precedents - it starts to sound very sermon-y very quickly.

 

The truth is that there will be less 'jobs', just as you say. We have lots of unemployment all over the world, even in rich countries, even with high levels of education. Pretending it's the people's fault is stupid and destructive and serves only to exclude such a commentor from being taken seriously.

 

 

 

 

We need to start looking past the wage economy and start deciding what/how the "startrek" economy is going to look like.

 

There will be a LOT of resistance from those at the top, because they enjoy the power and privilege that wealth gives them.

 

...

 

Too often the word "responsibility" is used when what is meant is "blame".

 

The "trickle down theory" of economics has failed

 

Lower taxes has meant even more money has shifted from the poor to the rich. Howard Hughes and others managed to become billionaires even when paying substantially higher taxes, so that was never an impediment to people becoming rich.

 

 

Could not have said it better myself.

 

 

 

 


1543 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 381


  Reply # 1479463 26-Jan-2016 23:27
One person supports this post
Send private message

Geektastic:

 

Brendan:

 

Geektastic:

 

 

 

I'll bet anyone would find work PDQ if it was that or starve.

 

One thing I think they could do is actually have the modern equivalent of the Victorian Poor House, where those requiring benefit are 'employed' to do, make, fix or whatever in government controlled facilities. If society is going to pay people instead of them earning, it seems logical to me that there is plenty of useful work that could be done in return.

 

For example, many elderly people perhaps cannot clean their own windows due to reduced mobility or perhaps cannot afford a window cleaner. Some unemployed people could be put together for a few hours of training, transported by minibus and go and clean said windows for a few hours per day. It would also help maintain a 'working frame of mind'.

 

Obviously they can't all clean windows but there are plenty of other bits of useful work that they could be doing.

 

 

The last thing I thought I would ever see on Geekzone was this level of elitist medieval drivel. I wont even bother going into the myriad practical, political, or historical reasons your wet dream will never work as I do not believe for one second you would understand any of it. I am simply registering my incredulity.

 

 


Do please explain why you think people ought not to contribute in return for being supported. My IQ is 141 so I am fairly confident I will understand it as long as you do not use big words.

 

Because we are all equal but some are more equal than others


703 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 67

Trusted

  Reply # 1479469 26-Jan-2016 23:37
One person supports this post
Send private message

frankv:

 

Geektastic:

 

 

 

The fundamental issue to be faced is that there are or will be too many people for the available work.

 

 

Depends on your definition of 'work', I guess.

 

I recall that some years ago, the number of 'information workers' exceeded the number of 'industrial' workers (in the same way that in the Industrial Revolution the number of 'industrial' workers exceeded the number of 'agricultural' workers). So now most people's work does not directly produce any physical product. Instead, they work with information, essentially managing and optimising those that do produce stuff. I see no reason why that kind of work wouldn't continue to be useful.

 

 

I'm sure it will be valuable for some time yet. It just wont be done by PEOPLE. It'll be done by machines, far more quickly and accurately and tirelessly than any group of humans could. And it'll be CHEAP.

 

It's not about too many people for too few jobs. Well, it is, but that is ignoring the real question: HOW do you distribute the wealth of our civilization in a fair way that achieves maximum benefit for maximum people?

 

It's quite the optimisation problem...

 

What I can tell you is that what we are doing NOW is not it. It is not even a part of it. It bears no likeness to a working system.

 

Indeed, I think you could argue that our current world economy more closely approximates a complex MULTI NODE FAILURE MODE rather than a working economic system. It is fault intolerant, buggy and prone to hacking. If it was an OS, we'd call it Windows.


3282 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 208

Trusted

Reply # 1479471 26-Jan-2016 23:40
6 people support this post
Send private message

Geektastic: Do please explain why you think people ought not to contribute in return for being supported. My IQ is 141 so I am fairly confident I will understand it as long as you do not use big words.

 

You know it's on when someone pulls out their Mensa membership card like it actually means something! Nice one, have a gold star!


11470 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3679

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1479674 27-Jan-2016 10:12
Send private message

bazzer:

 

Geektastic: Do please explain why you think people ought not to contribute in return for being supported. My IQ is 141 so I am fairly confident I will understand it as long as you do not use big words.

 

You know it's on when someone pulls out their Mensa membership card like it actually means something! Nice one, have a gold star!

 

 

 

 

I wouldn't get in, the required score is 150.






11470 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3679

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1479679 27-Jan-2016 10:18
Send private message

Interesting to read today that in Denmark, which I presume most people would class as socially progressive, they require benefit claimants to sell any assets they own above a certain limit before they can get benefits.






11470 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3679

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1479695 27-Jan-2016 10:26
2 people support this post
Send private message

Brendan:

 

frankv:

 

Geektastic:

 

 

 

The fundamental issue to be faced is that there are or will be too many people for the available work.

 

 

Depends on your definition of 'work', I guess.

 

I recall that some years ago, the number of 'information workers' exceeded the number of 'industrial' workers (in the same way that in the Industrial Revolution the number of 'industrial' workers exceeded the number of 'agricultural' workers). So now most people's work does not directly produce any physical product. Instead, they work with information, essentially managing and optimising those that do produce stuff. I see no reason why that kind of work wouldn't continue to be useful.

 

 

I'm sure it will be valuable for some time yet. It just wont be done by PEOPLE. It'll be done by machines, far more quickly and accurately and tirelessly than any group of humans could. And it'll be CHEAP.

 

It's not about too many people for too few jobs. Well, it is, but that is ignoring the real question: HOW do you distribute the wealth of our civilization in a fair way that achieves maximum benefit for maximum people?

 

It's quite the optimisation problem...

 

What I can tell you is that what we are doing NOW is not it. It is not even a part of it. It bears no likeness to a working system.

 

Indeed, I think you could argue that our current world economy more closely approximates a complex MULTI NODE FAILURE MODE rather than a working economic system. It is fault intolerant, buggy and prone to hacking. If it was an OS, we'd call it Windows.

 

 

 

 

Why do you need to distribute it fairly? I don't understand this need for fairness at all. Some people do better than other people. That's called life. Roman Abramovich has more money than a small country. Bill Gates has twice the entire annual tax take of NZ. I don't regard that as 'unfair' - it merely 'is'.

 

They are very lucky but I feel no need nor see any particular reason to force them to give their money to other people. Making everyone equally poor strikes me as a bad idea. Yes, some are more equal than others and personally I am fine with that. It's been that way since time immemorial. It will always be that way I suspect, in some form or another.






703 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 67

Trusted

  Reply # 1479750 27-Jan-2016 11:59
One person supports this post
Send private message

 

 

Geektastic:

 

 

 

Why do you need to distribute it fairly?

 

 

 

 

It provides a more stable society. It prevents disease and crime. It promotes achievement and progress.

 

 

I don't understand this need for fairness at all.

 

 

That is a lacking that is very evident.

 

I suggest you read up on some scientific papers, perhaps start with an experiment called "the prisoner's dilemma", it's a classic of Game Theory. It will explain in a simplified manner the benefits of co-operation vs competition. 

 

Some people do better than other people. That's called life. Roman Abramovich has more money than a small country. Bill Gates has twice the entire annual tax take of NZ. I don't regard that as 'unfair' - it merely 'is'.

 

Declaring a situation as 'merely is' is an appeal to the status quo; it is, in effect a declaration of defeat and a plea to avoid examination.

 

Not only is it unfair, it's destructive.

 

They are very lucky but I feel no need nor see any particular reason to force them to give their money to other people.

 

I am glad you understand their wealth to be factored by luck.

 

I DO see a reason to force them to share their good luck. Why should everyone else tolerate them otherwise? Some vauge notion of property rights?

 

Making everyone equally poor strikes me as a bad idea.

 

Except it makes everyone equally rich.

 

It's not like it's some idea that's never been tested Marcus. It's already being done, and the results are in: a far healthier, more productive world is the result.

 

Yes, some are more equal than others and personally I am fine with that. It's been that way since time immemorial. It will always be that way I suspect, in some form or another.

 

The aristocrats in France during the French Revolution though the same way.

 

The 'less equal' responded by inventing the Guillotine. Is there a lesson in that for you at all?

 

Progress for humanity seems to be slow, but punctuated by short bursts of violence - largely involving the removal of a ruling elite wealth structure. 

 

 


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central launches
Posted 10-Jul-2018 10:40


Spark completes first milestone in voice platform upgrade
Posted 10-Jul-2018 09:36


Microsoft ices heated developers
Posted 6-Jul-2018 20:16


PB Technologies charged for its extended warranties and warned for bait advertising
Posted 3-Jul-2018 15:45


Almost 20,000 people claim credits from Spark
Posted 29-Jun-2018 10:40


Cove sells NZ's first insurance policy via chatbot
Posted 25-Jun-2018 10:04


N4L helping TAKA Trust bridge the digital divide for Lower Hutt students
Posted 18-Jun-2018 13:08


Winners Announced for 2018 CIO Awards
Posted 18-Jun-2018 13:03


Logitech Rally sets new standard for USB-connected video conference cameras
Posted 18-Jun-2018 09:27


Russell Stanners steps down as Vodafone NZ CEO
Posted 12-Jun-2018 09:13


Intergen recognised as 2018 Microsoft Country Partner of the Year for New Zealand
Posted 12-Jun-2018 08:00


Finalists Announced For Microsoft NZ Partner Awards
Posted 6-Jun-2018 15:12


Vocus Group and Vodafone announce joint venture to accelerate fibre innovation
Posted 5-Jun-2018 10:52


Kogan.com to launch Kogan Mobile in New Zealand
Posted 4-Jun-2018 14:34


Enable doubles fibre broadband speeds for its most popular wholesale service in Christchurch
Posted 2-Jun-2018 20:07



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.