laserbrn
Well-Known Member
Don't worry about it, we all do it and I don't take it personally. I too apologize if I've offended you during this discussion.
But you are missing the point. It's not on an individual level.
Let's say there are 1000 people just for the sake of argument. In order to feed, cloth, provide transportation, healthcare and education for those 1000 people we need:
25 doctors
200 teachers
300 food related workers -service and agriculture/farming
3 trash collectors
4 electricians
6 Engineers
25 Bus drivers
14 mechanics
25 nurses
200 Factory workers to produce the goods we all need.
Of course this is all hypothetical and I couldn't come up with all of the people that would be needed, but nonetheless it's here.
There are a total of 1000 people and 802 jobs that need to be filled in order for the society to function properly. We can assume that the remaining 198 people are elderly or underage and cannot work.
Who dictates who does what? Particulary without leaders. If 50 people should want to be doctors, that will surely create a shortage somewhere else. Overages in some areas and underrages in others will surely cause problems and that mess has to get sorted out or the society will fail and people will go without healthcare, or trash collection, or food, or some other essential service.
In a free market example of this theoritical situation a doctor would be paid highly because it takes a lot of work to become a qualified doctor and very few people are willing to go through all of that. But the motivation to make more money will drive more people there. If there are too many doctors the pay would be cut and it wouldn't be as appealing a profession and more people would be likely to choose another profession. If there was at the same time a shortage of factory workers, the pay for factory workers would go up. It's simple supply and demand. What about when 30 people decide (a small percentage relative to our country) decide that they don't want to do anything seeing as how they will be looked after by the remaining citizens? They would rather go play golf or ride a bike or something.
My question to you (that you haven't given a clear answer for) is Who is going to decide who does what? Because on a larger scale it only gets uglier and more messy. More jobs and more people, who facilitates this mess? In every collectivist example in history the answer has been "Whoever has the biggest gun". It's easy to see why anyone who has studied history would say "what is your solution to this fundamental problem". If you don't have one, your solution is invalid and as long as we end up @ "Whoever has the biggest gun" you'll meet opposition from anyone that wants the ability to freely express themselves and fulfill their own destinies.
You may hate capitalism and claim that it's an unfair system and that it's rigged somehow for the rich, but the fact is that every single day people who born with every opportunity in the world, blow it and every day people born with nothing achieve great things. Surely you can see why "Cooperation and Love" is not a reasonable response? Not when the other side of the coin is "whoever has the biggest gun".
