General / Off-Topic Manchester City, a team of players at more than a billion euros.

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Patrick subscribes to a philosophy that allows him (indeed, gives him power) to control every aspect of how society should be modeled right down to what you think, say and how you spend your money. For anyone who sees how often I argue with him (and a few others who more or less share the same world viewpoint), this dark doctrine lays at the core of my fundamental disagreement; for better or worse, I believe that men and women should be free.

I have absolutely no pretension or arrogance to say how society should be.

I give my opinion and denounce certain absurdities.

Of course men and women must be free! But the problem with your way of seeing things (climate, ultra liberal economy ...) is that they are prisoners and generally dissatisfied.

This is called social fracture in many countries. Increasing source of inequality and abuse of power by the most powerful.

As more and more people are saying and especially elites on the problems of climate, the economy, work etc ... it becomes urgent to rethink our way of life.

Know that an astronaut from ESA or NASA earns between 5000 and 12000 euros per month.

A relatively coherent point of balance here.

Just like the salary of a president of the republic of a country like France, who earns about 15000 euros per month.

Here is the real common sense. The true value of things (Although I think these people should win double).

Allowt me say that the fact that you are not shocked that people earn millions of euros each month or even each year, whatever their field of activity, says a lot about your state of mind.
 
Last edited:
Brides commonly pay ridiculous sums for a dress that they wear only ONCE in their entire lives.

For the anecdote, the Pronuptia group, leader of wedding dresses in France and in several European countries, has just been placed in judicial liquidation.

There is less and less marriage (in France). 298000 in 2000 and 228000 in 2017.

Now, many people make simple marriages in the intimacy of the family and without these disguises of princess dresses.

:D

142892
 
For the anecdote, the Pronuptia group, leader of wedding dresses in France and in several European countries, has just been placed in judicial liquidation.

There is less and less marriage (in France). 298000 in 2000 and 228000 in 2017.

Now, many people make simple marriages in the intimacy of the family and without these disguises of princess dresses.

:D

View attachment 142892
Indeed. My husband and I eloped some thirty odd years ago. Our wedding dinner was at Wendy's, a fast food joint. That's all I can remember. Oh yeah, my mother didn't speak to me for a year.😁
 
This is called social fracture in many countries. Increasing source of inequality and abuse of power by the most powerful.

I reject the idea that it's freedom that leads to such inequality.

the Pronuptia group, leader of wedding dresses in France and in several European countries, has just been placed in judicial liquidation.

Probably should have diversified into cosplay costumes or sporting goods or something.

There is less and less marriage (in France).

Marriage is pretty silly, especially the civil/legal aspects of it. Everything from who can marry whom, to how many people can be included, to the largely baseless presumption that children do better in 'traditional' families, amount to more layers of bias, more barriers to equality, and more irrational restrictions on personal liberties.

If someone has religious rites they feel are important, or personal ties to tradition, that's one thing, but I'm continually irked by the state claiming to have any right to define such things.

I'm legally married, which occurred several years after my real marriage (which I thought was completely redundant already, but my wife wanted some degree of formality to our relationship), purely for financial reasons. The state says I need a license to affirm that my choice of partner fits their ideal for society, and since my relationship happened to fall within their arbitrary criteria and we'd be giving them less money, I reluctantly agreed to make it legal. No wedding though, that would have been a bridge too far.


If you've been recently, do they still have good fries?
 
I reject the idea that it's freedom that leads to such inequality.



Probably should have diversified into cosplay costumes or sporting goods or something.



Marriage is pretty silly, especially the civil/legal aspects of it. Everything from who can marry whom, to how many people can be included, to the largely baseless presumption that children do better in 'traditional' families, amount to more layers of bias, more barriers to equality, and more irrational restrictions on personal liberties.

If someone has religious rites they feel are important, or personal ties to tradition, that's one thing, but I'm continually irked by the state claiming to have any right to define such things.

I'm legally married, which occurred several years after my real marriage (which I thought was completely redundant already, but my wife wanted some degree of formality to our relationship), purely for financial reasons. The state says I need a license to affirm that my choice of partner fits their ideal for society, and since my relationship happened to fall within their arbitrary criteria and we'd be giving them less money, I reluctantly agreed to make it legal. No wedding though, that would have been a bridge too far.



If you've been recently, do they still have good fries?
How kind of you to throw your wife a bone. She sounds like a really lucky lady.
 
People are entitled to their stupidity. Free market isn't really a thing any more; even ostensibly capitalist economies have mountains of regulation, and much of it isn't for public benefit.

A con implies fraud. A true free market requires informed choice.

The only baseball game I've ever been able to sit through starred half the cast of Platoon.

The problem with that stupidity is that people on or near the bottom of the heap (such as myself) get left further and further and further behind. The gap between rich and poor is appalling in so called 1st world nations which are supposed to be bastions of fairness. But as long as people want the latest Iphone 2 hours after the last was released alls well eh?

Informed choice requires freedom of thought, something a lot of people don't have.

I'll concur that baseball is stupid (like cricket) ;)
 
You want to know who should be getting paid more? Us roofing and seamless gutter contractors. And plumbers, for obvious reasons.

I don't think anyone should get paid more, just that the uber rich get paid less. Yes I know it's pie in the sky Socialism, but it's what I believe in. I've said it before, a lot of the worlds problems would be solved or less severe if money was distributed more fairly. I also know that capitalisms hold on the world is so severe it's impossible to shift.
 
Patrick,
Please. They are NOT morons. Everyone has the right to make their lives more exciting and meaningful. It's not for us to judge. Life can be pure drudgery. Having a game to look forward to, going out with one's mates afterwards and the visceral feeling that one is part of a greater family is obviously priceless to football fans.

People pay astronomical sums to see Operas. The Bayreuth Festival started by Wagner has a many years' long waiting list for tickets. People pay thousands of euros to fly from all over the world to see those operas. Brides commonly pay ridiculous sums for a dress that they wear only ONCE in their entire lives.

And if queried as to whether or not their money was well spent, they would almost unanimously say, "Of course! and I would do it again if I could."

The core problem is that people look outside of themselves for inner contentment.

Here's to self analysis!
:)

You could do all that ....for a LOT less. in a fair world...which none of us live in.
 
I don't think anyone should get paid more, just that the uber rich get paid less. Yes I know it's pie in the sky Socialism, but it's what I believe in. I've said it before, a lot of the worlds problems would be solved or less severe if money was distributed more fairly. I also know that capitalisms hold on the world is so severe it's impossible to shift.
Actually, that strikes me as terribly naive. Personally, I think wealth redistribution along the lines you are promoting leads to great evil. Go read Atlas Shrugged and we'll continue the conversation, brother:)
 
Patrick subscribes to a philosophy that allows him (indeed, gives him power) to control every aspect of how society should be modeled right down to what you think, say and how you spend your money. For anyone who sees how often I argue with him (and a few others who more or less share the same world viewpoint), this dark doctrine lays at the core of my fundamental disagreement; for better or worse, I believe that men and women should be free.

Free? By being slaves to the almighty dollar (pound/euro etc) ? That's not freedom Jason.
 
Actually, that strikes me as terribly naive. Personally, I think wealth redistribution along the lines you are promoting leads to great evil. Go read Atlas Shrugged and we'll continue the conversation, brother:)

Of course it's naive, because it's fair....I don't think humanity is capable of being that fair (which is why I have a low opinion of most of mankind). Doesn't mean I can't say how I'd like things to be and complain about how unfair life is for many people.

That does not look like a book I'd enjoy reading, it's largly irrelevant though because it's fiction. All sorts of dystopian societies are explored in fiction. Thing is we live in a dystopian world right now!!!
 
Free? By being slaves to the almighty dollar (pound/euro etc) ? That's not freedom Jason.
Sorry, but you're going to have to build that out a bit more. How does that make someone a "slave?" People need to eat and have shelter and other basic necessities, where do you propose these things come from if not from their own efforts?
 
Of course it's naive, because it's fair....I don't think humanity is capable of being that fair (which is why I have a low opinion of most of mankind). Doesn't mean I can't say how I'd like things to be and complain about how unfair life is for many people.

That does not look like a book I'd enjoy reading, it's largly irrelevant though because it's fiction. All sorts of dystopian societies are explored in fiction. Thing is we live in a dystopian world right now!!!
No, if you expect someone to work on your behalf that's where the real slavery lies.

Edit: that book is as fundamentally important as the Christian Bible to anyone who wants to get ahead in finances.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, but you're going to have to build that out a bit more. How does that make someone a "slave?" People need to eat and have shelter and other basic necessities, where do you propose these things come from if not from their own efforts?

Because the working class have for generations upon generation done the crappy jobs for measly wages just to exist, it's not freedom when it's a need for survival. And as the rich get richer the poor have less and less and less. When you have no choice....it's no longer freedom.

I guess the only system that makes any sort of sense to me is Roddenberry's in Star Trek. I have no idea how to go about it, or how to steer mankind onto that course, but it's a world I'd like to live in.
 
No, if you expect someone to work on your behalf that's where the real slavery lies.

Edit: that book is as fundamentally important as the Christian Bible to anyone who wants to get ahead in finances.

Yes and millions of people working on the behalf of the rich...slaves.

Sounds like it's one sided to me from the reviews, just because you agree with it doesn't mean it's right. :)

Thing is right now for a lot of people life is a struggle, even in the so called 1st world, and if the 1st world can't get it right what hope does the 3rd world have?
 
Because the working class have for generations upon generation done the crappy jobs for measly wages just to exist, it's not freedom when it's a need for survival. And as the rich get richer the poor have less and less and less. When you have no choice....it's no longer freedom.

I guess the only system that makes any sort of sense to me is Roddenberry's in Star Trek. I have no idea how to go about it, or how to steer mankind onto that course, but it's a world I'd like to live in.
While I strenuously disagree with you, I recognize that you have a kind heart, so please don't take my disagreements personally.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom