Income inequality, market economics and oligarchs.

mmm....shiney! said:
Basically:

Negative rights are those that can be defined as "The right from..." eg "I have a right to freedom from aggression".

Positive rights are those that can be defined as "The right to..." eg "I have a right to an education".

Probably the easiest way to see the difference is the second relies on the presence of others giving you something, whereas the first relies on the absence of something. Obligation v inaction. :)
Click to expand...

For more details essentially everything in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is a negative right while the majority of what's in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Right (ICESCR) are positive rights that use government force to redistribute outcomes. The stark difference between the two is telling simply by the fact that they exist separately with China failing to ratify the ICCPR while the USA has failed to ratify the ICESCR (but there's so many other UN docs that this may be largely moot).
 
Shaddam IV said:
Based on that then I would say that human rights are just a concept rather than any kind of natural law and can be arbitrarily granted and taken away by whoever has the gun.
Click to expand...

Generally yes.

Natural law appeals to some higher entity or concept for its legitimacy. This may be something like God, or moral standards, purpose etc. It exists regardless of our current human condition or experience. It exists even if it is extinguished by whoever has the gun, or protected by whoever has the gun.
 
mmm....shiney! said:
Generally yes.

Natural law appeals to some higher entity or concept for its legitimacy. This may be something like God, or moral standards, purpose etc. It exists regardless of our current human condition or experience. It exists even if it is extinguished by whoever has the gun, or protected by whoever has the gun.
Click to expand...

Yep. Natural or negative rights are those that can (or simply do) exist universally. Positive rights cannot, by definition, exist universally in all circumstances (hence, I personally refuse to think of them as "rights" rather than as aspirations).

For example, everybody in the world can have the natural right to the inalienable ownership of their person but not everybody in the world can have the positive right to adequate medical care, housing, food, education, etc without some large caveats or forced servitude of at least some portion of the population.

As I have posted before over the years, this whole thing is the IS/OUGHT/REALITY trichotomy.
 
And even though Might Makes Reality, it is not a case of Might Makes Right. People like renovator tend to dislike thinking about what Ought to be because of the reality of Might makes the rules, while I tend to like thinking about what Ought to be and how to use Might to make better rules that better reflect what Ought to be. This is not a sledge at reno, just more a statement of our relative socio-political interests.
 
bordsilver said:
And even though Might Makes Reality, it is not a case of Might Makes Right. People like renovator tend to dislike thinking about what Ought to be because of the reality of Might makes the rules, while I tend to like thinking about what Ought to be and how to use Might to make better rules that better reflect what Ought to be. This is not a sledge at reno, just more a statement of our relative socio-political interests.
Click to expand...
Youve got it all wrong its not that i dislike thinking ...i think a lot just not about pie in the sky shit like you & shiney.
its all good we need dreamers that fight the status quo & try/fight for change i just cbf anymore the only things i feel like fighting for cant /wont be changed while we are a nation of sheeple....nothing i can do while the plebs wont do anything else but whinge & whine or just accept it .
I started on a crusade of anti establishment /rights/fairness early in my life & wasted too many hours banging on about most the stuff you & shiney go on about & realised it was futile.
Until we get a senate half full politicians with a brain & all on the same page [which btw i dont think will happen in my lifetime]there is very little anyone can do unfortunately
 
renovator said:
Youve got it all wrong its not that i dislike thinking ...i think a lot just not about pie in the sky shit like you & shiney.
its all good we need dreamers that fight the status quo & try/fight for change i just cbf anymore the only things i feel like fighting for cant /wont be changed while we are a nation of sheeple....nothing i can do while the plebs wont do anything else but whinge & whine or just accept it .
I started on a crusade of anti establishment /rights/fairness early in my life & wasted too many hours banging on about most the stuff you & shiney go on about & realised it was futile.
Until we get a senate half full politicians with a brain & all on the same page [which btw i dont think will happen in my lifetime]there is very little anyone can do unfortunately
Click to expand...
:) Okay I'll tweak my generalisation to be that you dislike thinking about fighting for what could (ought) be in the face of today's reality. Although I am still not disillusioned (yet) my approach and tolerance have changed after the many conversations on here with people like yourself. As I said, the generalisation was not intended as a sledge, just a difference.
 
mmm....shiney! said:
You sound like you’re whinging
Click to expand...
dont get me started il never stop. Theres so much to whinge about . it wont change anything & theres nothing proactive i can do unless i become a politician & that isnt going to happen & even if i did i would be outnumbered by the majority. So you & bordy can carry the torch ...have fun let me know when you have made a difference :cool:
 
renovator said:
dont get me started il never stop. Theres so much to whinge about . it wont change anything & theres nothing proactive i can do unless i become a politician & that isnt going to happen & even if i did i would be outnumbered by the majority. So you & bordy can carry the torch ...have fun let me know when you have made a difference :cool:
Click to expand...

Making a difference every day of my life.

I've been raising awareness and implementing my beliefs in my daily life. Unlikely to change the world overnight, but every little bit helps.

You see, libertarians are optimists. ;)
 
The problem here in the US when the issue of income inequality and such comes up, is that those on the left think everyone should have equality in every way: income, lifestyle, home, school, etc. That is not what the US is about. It is about equal opportunities and rights - not equal results.

The way the physical world was created (by whomever) there can never be no poor, no sick, no bad, etc. The world is binary and you can't have good without bad and bad without good. Think the yin yang theory/symbol. Good and bad may be subjective but I am talking opposites such has having money and being poor, being healthy and being sick, etc.

That doesn't mean as societies we shouldn't strive to help the unfortunate. The problem is, those pushing agendas want to get the haves to believe they are evil and the have nots are automatically good and benevolent, and the haves are thus evil if they don't give their shit away to those who don't try and are lazy in many cases.

The laws on the books in the US can't get any more fair for minorities and other such groups. Some groups in past years have gotten stuff for being a minority, which is obviously racist and wrong because it does exactly what they say they are trying to prevent.

Some "groups" will probably always be unsuccessful and nothing will change that. That may violate the "logic" that some like to follow but all you have to do is look around the world and observe.

If you observe the current US trend, they are constantly criticizing white people to I suppose try and raise up others. Instead they should help the less successful resolve their long term negative issues, instead of ignoring them and blaming others for them.

PS The leftist anti white stuff all magically appeared after Trump won. Anyone notice that? I guess when Obummer was in office all the evil white people didn't exist (they actually voted in Obummer in reality).
 
Last edited:
The political left politicians despise the poor, despise immigrants. Whether it’s the Democrats in America along with their pet media outlets like CNN or the Australian Greens and their pet ABC they are all wealthy inner city sleaze bag Post Modernists who live as far away from the poor suburbs as possible. They are the worst kind of politician imaginable - They want as many people as possible living in an innesacapable welfare underclass to provide them with a permanent voting base. They want as many “refugees” as possible to move in on welfare for the same reason. The urban latte set that run the Greens and the ABC would never be seen dead in a poor suburb for any other reason than a media opportunity and they would not tolerate any poor refugee living anywhere near them.

They are even worse that Trump or Abbott who are at least honest about their goals and motivations. The democrats, Greens, Labour and the other far left Marxist parties are as power hungry as any other degenerate politicians but they are doubly bad because they actually want to create the largest permanently poor underclass they possibly can for them to feed from and rule over forever. They know that once someone is trapped in poverty they will almost never get out and that suits the Socialists just fine.
 
Why the World Needs Optimists

by Sophie Caldecott

Optimism (noun): hopefulness and confidence about the future or the success of something (synonyms: hopefulness, hope, confidence, good cheer, cheerfulness, positive attitude)

---

This is a love letter to the optimists of the world; the beautiful souls who are brave enough to choose to work for the best possible outcome despite terrible circumstances, to look outside of themselves and find meaning and beauty in the world in spite of potentially devastating heartbreak and loss.

Dear optimists, I believe that the world desperately needs more people like you, but it doesn’t always realise it. All too often, optimism and optimists are misunderstood. All too often, you’ll raise your hopeful offering to the world, only to be met with disdain and derision. In a world where cynicism is often confused with wisdom, assuming a world-weary attitude is the safer path; choosing a hopeful, optimistic outlook leaves your heart wide open and vulnerable to those who want to scorn you for standing out. It takes strength and courage to be optimistic.

Optimists are often accused of being naïve, unaware of evil, of living a sheltered and blessed kind of life. Optimism is often seen as a luxury that not everyone can afford. But in its truest form, optimism doesn’t mean always being happy, and it certainly doesn’t mean turning a blind eye to bad things. It’s not something you’re necessarily born with, or into, either. It’s a choice, and sometimes a daily battle, to stay open and receptive and keep looking outwards, to keep engaging proactively with the world instead of retreating inwards and strengthening the hard, protective walls you’ve built to try and shelter yourself from your fears.

I think A. J. Liebling was right when he said that “cynicism is often the shame-faced product of inexperience.” Some of the most famous optimists of the world are the very people who have endured the worst that life has to offer, living in Nazi concentration camps or in hiding and terror, like Viktor Frankl and Anne Frank. People who have achieved great and world-changing things, like Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King Jr., more often than not achieved what they did precisely because they had a dream, a sense of hope spurring them on to take action.

As Anne Frank said, “It's really a wonder that I haven't dropped all my ideals, because they seem so absurd and impossible to carry out. Yet I keep them, because in spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart.” Or, as Nelson Mandela put it, “Part of being optimistic is keeping one's head pointed toward the sun, one's feet moving forward. There were many dark moments when my faith in humanity was sorely tested, but I would not and could not give myself up to despair. That way lays defeat and death.”

In Man’s Search for Meaning Viktor Frankl described how you could tell when a prisoner in the concentration camp was about to die, saying that the characteristic that united them was total despair and loss of hope: “The prisoner who had lost faith in the future—his future—was doomed… he let himself decline and became subject to mental and physical decay… He simply gave up.”

In other words, the world needs you, dear optimists, because your outlook is a powerful life-giving, world-changing force for good. Frankl’s theory of “tragic optimism” explains that optimism comes from the Latin word, optimum, which means “the best”. Through his experiences in concentration camps, Frankl became convinced of “the human capacity to creatively turn life’s negative aspects into something positive or constructive”, even in the face of great tragedy and horror.

We may not be able to change how we feel, and we certainly can’t force ourselves to be happy, but we don’t have to because that’s not what true optimism is about. What we can do, is to choose to change what we focus on, little by little, day by day. We look to you, courageous optimists of the world, to inspire us to find the #heitermoments in our every-day lives.
Click to expand...

http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/article/why-world-needs-optimists
 
its one thing to be optimistic another to be dilusional & thinking you can change things that will not be changed . The indoctrination & brainwashing of the majority is a sad thing.
Whatever happened to the free thinkers ? this site is a prime example you & bordy are the only vocal ones theres many here but they say very little like myself .Its definitely not apathy its more reality imo . sometimes i miss auspm.....sometimes lol
 
renovator said:
its one thing to be optimistic another to be dilusional & thinking you can change things that will not be changed . The indoctrination & brainwashing of the majority is a sad thing.
Whatever happened to the free thinkers ? this site is a prime example you & bordy are the only vocal ones theres many here but they say very little like myself .Its definitely not apathy its more reality imo . sometimes i miss auspm.....sometimes lol
Click to expand...

There's quite a few free thinkers, but most of them probably say "I'll just let shiney! post. He can't seem to shut up anyway."

Yep, auspm's views are sorely missed. Sometimes.

Caldecott said:
Optimists are often accused of being naïve, unaware of evil, of living a sheltered and blessed kind of life. Optimism is often seen as a luxury that not everyone can afford. But in its truest form, optimism doesn’t mean always being happy, and it certainly doesn’t mean turning a blind eye to bad things. It’s not something you’re necessarily born with, or into, either. It’s a choice, and sometimes a daily battle, to stay open and receptive and keep looking outwards, to keep engaging proactively with the world instead of retreating inwards and strengthening the hard, protective walls you’ve built to try and shelter yourself from your fears.
Click to expand...

Not saying you've got fears, just that cynicism is often a barrier erected to protect us. Don't know if you're on FB at all, we are through our business, but the number of middle-aged and older men posting about their disaffection with politics is astounding. It's a worry actually. Disaffected and cynical. Most of the women seem to whinge about customer service or making comments about how beautiful their friendsfamily looks - its' as if they're incapable of making any other comment.
 
Back OT, we need to make a distinction between "nominal" wages and "real" wages. Nominal income is the amount we are paid, real income is the value in purchasing power of our income. A universal income would raise an individual's nominal income but it would have no effect on their real income. Raising the nominal income of members of society does little to enhance wealth as it is our real incomes that determine our capacity to enhance our wealth. In fact, we can even experience declines in our nominal wages and still enhance our wealth as long as our productivity is growing. This is because productivity increases drive the cost of goods lower as cost savings are passed on to consumers by manufacturers in order to have a competitive advantage over others.
 
mmm....shiney! said:
1."I'll just let shiney! post. He can't seem to shut up anyway."


2.the number of middle-aged and older men posting about their disaffection with politics is astounding. It's a worry actually. Disaffected and cynical. ...


3.Most of the women seem to whinge about customer service or making comments about how beautiful their friendsfamily look
Click to expand...

1.yep fair observation . Go hard you old cnut :p

2.
Obviously have taken the time to watch question time in parliament or watched the smokescreen on the MSM.the country is falling to pieces but make gay marriage the headline story or like today barnaby joice has a new missus thats pregnant . well fk me he is not gay & has a new squeeze but its headlines what a joke

3.no comment
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top