Greatest thread to human civilization : capitalist greed - Stephen Hawkin

[bedowin62]

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?

Doesn't the Bible teach that money is the root of all evil?

It teaches the love of money is the root of all evil.

Money is a tool.

Another example of a la carte Conservatives treating the Bible as a smorgasbord.

Another example of a lefty being corrected then not being man enough to admit it.

I've always known the irrelevant distinction:

ANOTHER Simple Question For You Teabagger Simpletons | Page 2 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Take a pill, Poindexter.

it's not an irrelvant distinction you idiot. first of all that is an oxymoron. the bible says the love of money. like handguns you idiot money by itself isnt evil. if it is give up yours

 

[Conservative65]

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?

Doesn't the Bible teach that money is the root of all evil?

It teaches the love of money is the root of all evil.

Money is a tool.

Another example of a la carte Conservatives treating the Bible as a smorgasbord.

Another example of a lefty being corrected then not being man enough to admit it.

I've always known the irrelevant distinction:

ANOTHER Simple Question For You Teabagger Simpletons | Page 2 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Take a pill, Poindexter.

It's only irrelevant to you because you were shown to be wrong.

 

[Misty]

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.

"so much nicer for us". Are you advocating that those who have succeeded be forced to give up more of it so those who chose to buy land have it paid for by someone else?

Nope, I'm advocating that we hang all Usurers. So the opposite of what you are claiming.

I'm advocating that life should not be one wit harder than it has to be, given all the labour saving devices we've invented.

You can go first. Ever gotten interest on a savings account? You're a usurer.

lol, don't you ever tire of being wrong (or getting caught lying)?

The bank not the depositor sets the rate Rabbi, even a dolt like you should know that.

The bank has to set rates according to federal policies and the Feds rates.

 

[CultureCitizen]

“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

So we've been warned about the greatest "thread"? Ok, thanks.

What a bunch of liberal drivel. Capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty and has created more prosperity and societal growth than any other system in human history.

China is a good example of a country that used to follow all the economic policies that our liberals advocate but that has ditched them and become far wealthier as a result.

Context man, context . Take into account the context.
Was overpopulation a threat to mankind 100 years ago ? No.
Is overpopulation a threat to mankid today.Yes, it is.
Conversely , full automation and capitalism combined pose a threat to humanity.

 

[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

You do realize that UNICEF has been, and many claim still is, horribly corrupt and wasteful? In some cases (not all), only 14% of UNICEF funds make it to end recipients.

You'd do more good giving $10 to a drunk on the street.

I do not have anything against crowd funding fundamentally.

But that whole thing is built on fuzzy math, and questionable assumptions. Any trend can be assumed forever, but trends, are just that. You can't assume anything.

If you think crowd funding is going to over take the donations by the rich, which build entire wings to hospitals, and half of major universities... nah. Wishful thinking.

Yes , indeed Unicef is wastefull, that's why they are the institution which gets the smallest fraction of my donations.
Both the orphanage and Crash Course get more money , as I am able to directly look at the results.

 

[bedowin62]

“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

So we've been warned about the greatest "thread"? Ok, thanks.

What a bunch of liberal drivel. Capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty and has created more prosperity and societal growth than any other system in human history.

China is a good example of a country that used to follow all the economic policies that our liberals advocate but that has ditched them and become far wealthier as a result.

Context man, context . Take into account the context.
Was overpopulation a threat to mankind 100 years ago ? No.
Is overpopulation a threat to mankid today.Yes, it is.
Conversely , full automation and capitalism combined pose a threat to humanity.

wow!!

i can apply that same logic to a whole shitload of things the LEFT still thinks is necessary

context man, context!

 

[NYcarbineer]

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?

Doesn't the Bible teach that money is the root of all evil?

It teaches the love of money is the root of all evil.

Money is a tool.

Another example of a la carte Conservatives treating the Bible as a smorgasbord.

Another example of a lefty being corrected then not being man enough to admit it.

I've always known the irrelevant distinction:

ANOTHER Simple Question For You Teabagger Simpletons | Page 2 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Take a pill, Poindexter.

It's only irrelevant to you because you were shown to be wrong.

How was I shown to be wrong?

 

[Iceweasel]

Context man, context . Take into account the context.
Was overpopulation a threat to mankind 100 years ago ? No.
Is overpopulation a threat to mankid today.Yes, it is.
Conversely , full automation and capitalism combined pose a threat to humanity.

That doesn't compute. First, there will never be full automation, you must make a living sitting on your ass like Hawking. Robots aren't going to build houses, do home repair, fix appliances, repair autos, etc. Secondly, capitalism is the only thing that can feed, house and clothe us. And I heard the overpopulation crap 40 years ago.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Humans are capable of committing every imaginable wrong for the sake of satisfying their greed.

 

[CultureCitizen]

“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

So we've been warned about the greatest "thread"? Ok, thanks.

What a bunch of liberal drivel. Capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty and has created more prosperity and societal growth than any other system in human history.

China is a good example of a country that used to follow all the economic policies that our liberals advocate but that has ditched them and become far wealthier as a result.

Context man, context . Take into account the context.
Was overpopulation a threat to mankind 100 years ago ? No.
Is overpopulation a threat to mankid today.Yes, it is.
Conversely , full automation and capitalism combined pose a threat to humanity.

wow!!

i can apply that same logic to a whole shitload of things the LEFT still thinks is necessary

context man, context!

Well give it a try . But for SH statement the context is this :
Economy works in a cycle : housholds provide labour, businesses have land and capital and provide goods in exchange for labour. In a world where automation can perform most of the tasks labour demand will drop drastically driving wages down ( according to my calculations as low as $250 per month). This is still far in the future : some 30 years at least.

 

[Conservative65]

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?

It teaches the love of money is the root of all evil.

Money is a tool.

Another example of a la carte Conservatives treating the Bible as a smorgasbord.

Another example of a lefty being corrected then not being man enough to admit it.

I've always known the irrelevant distinction:

ANOTHER Simple Question For You Teabagger Simpletons | Page 2 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Take a pill, Poindexter.

It's only irrelevant to you because you were shown to be wrong.

How was I shown to be wrong?

You stated "Doesn't the Bible say money is the root of all evil?" While it had a question mark, it was stated in a way as so it really wasn't a question but a claim made to appear as one.

When pointed out that the Bible says the love of money . . , you said something that makes a big difference is irrelevant. You were wrong.

 

[The Rabbi]

“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

So we've been warned about the greatest "thread"? Ok, thanks.

What a bunch of liberal drivel. Capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty and has created more prosperity and societal growth than any other system in human history.

China is a good example of a country that used to follow all the economic policies that our liberals advocate but that has ditched them and become far wealthier as a result.

Context man, context . Take into account the context.
Was overpopulation a threat to mankind 100 years ago ? No.
Is overpopulation a threat to mankid today.Yes, it is.
Conversely , full automation and capitalism combined pose a threat to humanity.

LOL! No, it isnt. And btw Malthus predicted overpopulation would be a threat, yeah over 100 years ago. He was wrong then and that view is wrong now In fact the opposite is the problem.

 

[Iceweasel]

Humans are capable of committing every imaginable wrong for the sake of satisfying their greed.

Including taking your neighbor's money and spending it on your social wet dream.

 

[2aguy]

“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

Someone so intelligent but with so little wisdom…..

 

[CultureCitizen]

Context man, context . Take into account the context.
Was overpopulation a threat to mankind 100 years ago ? No.
Is overpopulation a threat to mankid today.Yes, it is.
Conversely , full automation and capitalism combined pose a threat to humanity.

That doesn't compute. First, there will never be full automation, you must make a living sitting on your ass like Hawking. Robots aren't going to build houses, do home repair, fix appliances, repair autos, etc. Secondly, capitalism is the only thing that can feed, house and clothe us. And I heard the overpopulation crap 40 years ago.

Weasel,
Robots are already building houses and doing farm jobs, diagnosing patients , playing chess, driving cars and trucks, cooking food, working as travel agents , veterinarial assistants and that's with processors which only have abount 0.01% of the human brain capacity.

IBM Watson: 10 New Jobs For Cognitive Computing - InformationWeek

 

[Iceweasel]

Context man, context . Take into account the context.
Was overpopulation a threat to mankind 100 years ago ? No.
Is overpopulation a threat to mankid today.Yes, it is.
Conversely , full automation and capitalism combined pose a threat to humanity.

That doesn't compute. First, there will never be full automation, you must make a living sitting on your ass like Hawking. Robots aren't going to build houses, do home repair, fix appliances, repair autos, etc. Secondly, capitalism is the only thing that can feed, house and clothe us. And I heard the overpopulation crap 40 years ago.

Weasel,
Robots are already building houses and doing farm jobs, diagnosing patients , playing chess, driving cars and trucks, cooking food, working as travel agents , veterinarial assistants and that's with processors which only have abount 0.01% of the human brain capacity.

IBM Watson: 10 New Jobs For Cognitive Computing - InformationWeek

Which robots are building houses? They do exist but you missed the point.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Context man, context . Take into account the context.
Was overpopulation a threat to mankind 100 years ago ? No.
Is overpopulation a threat to mankid today.Yes, it is.
Conversely , full automation and capitalism combined pose a threat to humanity.

That doesn't compute. First, there will never be full automation, you must make a living sitting on your ass like Hawking. Robots aren't going to build houses, do home repair, fix appliances, repair autos, etc. Secondly, capitalism is the only thing that can feed, house and clothe us. And I heard the overpopulation crap 40 years ago.

Weasel,
Robots are already building houses and doing farm jobs, diagnosing patients , playing chess, driving cars and trucks, cooking food, working as travel agents , veterinarial assistants and that's with processors which only have abount 0.01% of the human brain capacity.

IBM Watson: 10 New Jobs For Cognitive Computing - InformationWeek

Which robots are building houses? They do exist but you missed the point.

Hadrian , the bricklaying robot.
Brick-laying robot can build a full-sized house in two days

Good you heard about over population, it is a very big issue in some countries, specially in Bangladesh.
It became a critical issue in Easter Island which made their civilization collapse, thankfully most countries now have an average of 2.2 children per couple.
No , I think you miss the point. People are complaining about job loss due to offshoring and illegal immigration, and that's true, but only partially true.
For a time industrial production stagnated in the USA , but it has now surpased the pre 2008 levels, but guess what: the number of industrial imployments has not recovered.
For now the solution is to have people retool their skills.

 

[The Great Goose]

I'm advocating that life should not be one wit harder than it has to be, given all the labour saving devices we've invented.

Hire a maid, problem solved!

I don't have a problem with work. I have a problem with slavery. How will hiring a maid save me from slavery?

Slavery is having to work for a living? Who's supposed to pay your way? You can work part time if you want and live smaller. It's called choice.

Id prefer to pay a reasonable price for land, rather than pay as much as I can over a lifetime.

What's wrong with you wingnuts?

 

[CultureCitizen]

“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

So we've been warned about the greatest "thread"? Ok, thanks.

What a bunch of liberal drivel. Capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty and has created more prosperity and societal growth than any other system in human history.

China is a good example of a country that used to follow all the economic policies that our liberals advocate but that has ditched them and become far wealthier as a result.

Context man, context . Take into account the context.
Was overpopulation a threat to mankind 100 years ago ? No.
Is overpopulation a threat to mankid today.Yes, it is.
Conversely , full automation and capitalism combined pose a threat to humanity.

LOL! No, it isnt. And btw Malthus predicted overpopulation would be a threat, yeah over 100 years ago. He was wrong then and that view is wrong now In fact the opposite is the problem.

He was actually right. Easter Island and the Mayan civilization collapsed due to overpopulation .
A given territory can only sustain about 1,400 people per square kilometre, so an actuall worldwide collapse can only happen if such threshold is reached. In the mean time we can expect local collapses if countries surpass such limit.

 

[Wry Catcher]

“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

Idiots. It is amazing how some of the smartest people can be so dumb.
Capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than anything else. IT's benefits are literally without precedence.

Opportunity is what allows Capitalism to lift people out of poverty, exploitation by Capitalists creates income inequality and social unrest; it is why Capitalists need to be regulated by a government elected by the people.

Today, do to both Citizens United rulings, and the greed of the mass media, elected officials are purchased by the wealthy and govern for the wealthy.

Simple minds never take the long view, and Rabbi is one of the simplest minds around.

Hmm, capitalism creates social unrest? I dont think so. Compare socialist countries in Africa, the Middle East, and SOuth America to capitalist countries in Asia and your statement is, typically for you, dead wrong.
As for income inequality, do you think there are more equal incomes under feudalism? Or under Communism? Are people better off under those systems? Even socialism. Are people better off under socialism in Greece and Venezuela?

You're so thoroughly confused it's easy to understand why fools like you persist in your beliefs.

Apples (a system of governance) and Aardvarks (an economic system).

We live in a democratically elected Republic, which operates under a mixed economic system. Regulated Capitalism and our nation's form of Socialism.

That combination served us well until recently. Today our Democratic Republic is in grave danger from within; the New Right has rejected traditional American ethos by adopting a radical ideology from the past.

An ideology that is selfish, callous, dishonest and fraught with peril.

What's selfish about the person that actually earned something wanting to keep it. The selfishness comes from those that didn't earn it thinking that a portion of what another person earned belongs to them.

I have a substantial retirement, and I don't object to my taxes being used to provide for others in need. Why do you?

Income tax is returned to the states. See how:

SparkNotes: Federalism: Federalism in Practice

It is used to protect us from our enemies, human and microscopic; the latter in terms of food, water, air and soil - bacteria, virus and pollutants.