Greatest thread to human civilization : capitalist greed - Stephen Hawkin

[HereWeGoAgain]

“If machines produce everything we need, the outcome will depend on how things are distributed.” Hawking continued, “Everyone can enjoy a life of luxurious leisure if the machine-produced wealth is shared, or most people can end up miserably poor if the machine-owners successfully lobby against wealth redistribution. So far, the trend seems to be toward the second option, with technology driving ever-increasing inequality."

We have been warned.

Stephen Hawking Warns About The Greatest Threat To Humanity | Zero Hedge

I think poor spelling skills is a bigger thread....er..threat.

 

[Rustic]

The most corrupt lobbyists are the "green" energy folks.

They never have to provide results... Because "green" or renewable energy is unreliable, incomplete, inconsistent, not thought out and really, really expensive.

 

[Andylusion]

He's right. Centuries ago this time period was envisioned to be a time of lesuire, and it could be so much nicer for us, but instead of creating beautiful gardens I had to spend my time paying the banks for the land.

we are being seriously wroughted and for No reason other than idiot greed box's need for status.

its really something I was always frustrated about. Why all the drudgery?
I know work is good but does it have to be soul destroying? No, it doesn't.

Don't buy thinks you can't pay for. I owe no one anything. I don't have a car note on my car. Because I bought it with cash. I don't own a credit card.

Does this mean I don't have all the crap that most people do? Sure. But I also can walk off the job, and not worry about money. Not because I have millions of dollars.... I don't. But because I have no bills. No bank loans, no pay-as-you-go crap, no leases. Nothing.

You are stuck paying the bank, because you bought something you likely couldn't afford. Will that destroy your soul? Yeah. Stop it.

Either sell everything you have, and work a second job, until the note to the bank is paid off, or sell the land, and then spend your time saving money to buy land with cash later.

The only other option is, keep doing what you are doing, and keep getting what you are getting. Remember, you can blame anyone but yourself for the situation you are in.

 

[CultureCitizen]

It doesn't matter. He's rich telling others to not be rich and yes I'm sure it has improved the quality of his pathetic life.

He is not telling the rich have to stop being rich , rather , that they should share their capital goods.

 

[Andylusion]

It doesn't matter. He's rich telling others to not be rich and yes I'm sure it has improved the quality of his pathetic life.

He is not telling the rich have to stop being rich , rather , that they should share their capital goods.

A: why? You suck air, therefore you deserve what I've earned?
B: They do already. Nearly all of the charity in this country, wouldn't happen without the rich. Billions in charity every year, and the vast majority is all due to the rich.

 

[Andylusion]

This entire thread is a joke to me, because Stephen Hawking himself wouldn't exist following his plan.

If people were not able to make money building machines, like the ones that keep him alive, and able to talk with others, then none of those machines would exist.

Hawking would be buried right now, if not for capitalism, and "machine-owners" not having their wealth redistributed.

 

[CultureCitizen]

It doesn't matter. He's rich telling others to not be rich and yes I'm sure it has improved the quality of his pathetic life.

He is not telling the rich have to stop being rich , rather , that they should share their capital goods.

A: why? You suck air, therefore you deserve what I've earned?
B: They do already. Nearly all of the charity in this country, wouldn't happen without the rich. Billions in charity every year, and the vast majority is all due to the rich.

A) In the long run : because of the cyclic model of the economy.
But anyway ... yea, that's why I donate to an orphanage, crash course and the unicef.

B) I don't think so. By this time it's almost sure crowdfunding has become more important for charity than donations from rich people.

3.2 Trillion by 2020 , that would make it the equivalent of the third largest economy .
Economic Value of Crowdfunding - Fundable

 

[Rustic]

Redistribution is petty envy nothing more.

 

[bedowin62]

It doesn't matter. He's rich telling others to not be rich and yes I'm sure it has improved the quality of his pathetic life.

He is not telling the rich have to stop being rich , rather , that they should share their capital goods.

A: why? You suck air, therefore you deserve what I've earned?
B: They do already. Nearly all of the charity in this country, wouldn't happen without the rich. Billions in charity every year, and the vast majority is all due to the rich.

A) In the long run : because of the cyclic model of the economy.
B) I don't think so. By this time it's almost sure crowdfunding has become more important for charity than donations from rich people.

i'll remember crowd-funding is key tomorrow morning when i'm listening to public radio on the way to work and they pause to say their programming is made possible by grants from very familiar, WASP-sounding capitalist names.

 

[Conservative65]

It doesn't matter. He's rich telling others to not be rich and yes I'm sure it has improved the quality of his pathetic life.

He is not telling the rich have to stop being rich , rather , that they should share their capital goods.

Sharing involves a voluntary action by the giver. When one person with the authority to do so tells another person to "share", it's called a mandate and the concept of sharing is gone.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Redistribution is petty envy nothing more.

What if a rich person advocates for redistribution ? How would you call that ?

Stephen Hawkin is not exactly poor.

 

[Rustic]

Redistribution is petty envy nothing more.

What if a rich person advocates for redistribution ? How would you call that ?

Stephen Hawkin is not exactly poor.

Petty guilt... Driven by petty envy.
Robin Hood has never worked in history.

 

[CultureCitizen]

It doesn't matter. He's rich telling others to not be rich and yes I'm sure it has improved the quality of his pathetic life.

He is not telling the rich have to stop being rich , rather , that they should share their capital goods.

Sharing involves a voluntary action by the giver. When one person with the authority to do so tells another person to "share", it's called a mandate and the concept of sharing is gone.

SH is not telling how such redistribution should be achieved. He is merely saying the machines should be shared ( somehow ). Do you donate to some cause?

 

[Conservative65]

It doesn't matter. He's rich telling others to not be rich and yes I'm sure it has improved the quality of his pathetic life.

He is not telling the rich have to stop being rich , rather , that they should share their capital goods.

Sharing involves a voluntary action by the giver. When one person with the authority to do so tells another person to "share", it's called a mandate and the concept of sharing is gone.

SH is not telling how such redistribution should be achieved. He is merely saying the machines should be shared ( somehow ). Do you donate to some cause?

The problem comes in when those who have things don't "share" voluntarily to the level those who demand they share think they should. I've challenged many bleeding heart Liberals that if they support certain causes why don't they voluntarily support them. Many times, the response is that people don't do what they should so the government has to nudge them to do the right thing.

Redistribution, by it's nature, involves someone with authority making it happen. If someone gives to another because they choose to do so, it's not redistribution, it's sharing. The end result may be the same but the mindset behind it isn't.

I don't to many causes in time and/or money. Difference is I do it to those of MY choosing not to those someone else said I should choose. That's the problem with bleeding heart Liberals. They have determined certain things should be done and because people don't do it to a level they think it should be done, they go about seeing it mandated.

I don't have a problem sharing. Even if the amount I would give is the same as the government would take, the problem lies with someone else thinking it's their place to determine to whom and at what level I should give. If a person needed $10 to buy food and I bought them $10 worth of food, no problem. If I said no I have a problem with those being told no going about getting the the government to force me to do it because they didn't like the answer of no.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Redistribution is petty envy nothing more.

What if a rich person advocates for redistribution ? How would you call that ?

Stephen Hawkin is not exactly poor.

Petty guilt... Driven by petty envy.
Robin Hood has never worked in history.

No , but the greatest recent philantropists have worked :

The 50 Philanthropists Who Have Given Away The Most Money

 

[g5000]

“If machines produce everything we need, the outcome will depend on how things are distributed.” Hawking continued, “Everyone can enjoy a life of luxurious leisure if the machine-produced wealth is shared, or most people can end up miserably poor if the machine-owners successfully lobby against wealth redistribution. So far, the trend seems to be toward the second option, with technology driving ever-increasing inequality."

We have been warned.

Stephen Hawking Warns About The Greatest Threat To Humanity | Zero Hedge

Argument from Authority logical fallacy.

If I want to know about black holes, I will consult Hawking and trust just about everything he has to say about them.

His authority on political matters, though, is no weightier than yours or mine.

 

[Rustic]

Redistribution is petty envy nothing more.

What if a rich person advocates for redistribution ? How would you call that ?

Stephen Hawkin is not exactly poor.

Petty guilt... Driven by petty envy.
Robin Hood has never worked in history.

No , but the greatest recent philantropists have worked :

The 50 Philanthropists Who Have Given Away The Most Money

That maybe true, but here's the rub... Forced redistribution by the federal government can never be the right way.

 

[The Rabbi]

It doesn't matter. He's rich telling others to not be rich and yes I'm sure it has improved the quality of his pathetic life.

He is not telling the rich have to stop being rich , rather , that they should share their capital goods.

Wh should they do that? What exactly are "capital goods"? They need to share their industrial lathes?

 

[The Rabbi]

Redistribution is petty envy nothing more.

What if a rich person advocates for redistribution ? How would you call that ?

Stephen Hawkin is not exactly poor.

Plenty of rich people do exactly that. Liz Warren for one.

 

[The Rabbi]

It doesn't matter. He's rich telling others to not be rich and yes I'm sure it has improved the quality of his pathetic life.

He is not telling the rich have to stop being rich , rather , that they should share their capital goods.

Sharing involves a voluntary action by the giver. When one person with the authority to do so tells another person to "share", it's called a mandate and the concept of sharing is gone.

SH is not telling how such redistribution should be achieved. He is merely saying the machines should be shared ( somehow ). Do you donate to some cause?

What does that even mean?