Unpopular Opinions You Hold

[David Guiza]

24 minutes ago, Buce said:

Vinyl?

 

I might be an old git, Alf, but I have never understood people who still play music on vinyl when there are much better modern alternatives.

I'm definitely a vinyl hipster. I just love the sound and nostalgia of a Bowie, Smiths, Velvet Underground etc LP. 

[the fox]

Just now, Buce said:

 

No, I don't believe in God because I have never seen any evidence to suggest that I should.

 

No offence here either, but your belief is purely an act of faith in a book that was allegedly written by a self-proclaimed prophet.

No need to go there, buce. I asked nicely.

 

[Alf Bentley]

29 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

There are varying degrees of trust and, of course, I give it to various people in most things. But I wouldn't trust anybody unconditionally in all circumstances, no.

 

 

That makes my point really - rarely isn't always.

 

 

Vinyl?

 

I might be an old git, Alf, but I have never understood people who still play music on vinyl when there are much better modern alternatives.

 

I'd prefer to place something close to unconditional trust in carefully selected people and be let down on rare occasions, rather than go through life trusting nobody but myself.

But then, the way you've explained it now, it doesn't sound as if your attitude is so very different to that - your initial comment sounded like a "zero trust in anyone" policy....not the case, clearly.

 

No, I mainly play CDs myself, though I still have a lot of old vinyl from days of youth. Haven't progressed beyond that, for the most part, as I like to have something to look at while listening - including lyrics, which I often can't decipher as an old git.

Though I can relate to John Peel's defence of vinyl against critics of its surface noise - that "life has surface noise".

[Buce]

Just now, the fox said:

No need to go there, buce. I asked nicely.

 

 

I replied nicely.

 

Is your belief more than an act of faith?

[Buce]

12 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I'd prefer to place something close to unconditional trust in carefully selected people and be let down on rare occasions, rather than go through life trusting nobody but myself.

But then, the way you've explained it now, it doesn't sound as if your attitude is so very different to that - your initial comment sounded like a "zero trust in anyone" policy....not the case, clearly.

 

 

Yeah, that's what I meant.

 

Quote

 

No, I mainly play CDs myself, though I still have a lot of old vinyl from days of youth. Haven't progressed beyond that, for the most part, as I like to have something to look at while listening - including lyrics, which I often can't decipher as an old git.

Though I can relate to John Peel's defence of vinyl against critics of its surface noise - that "life has surface noise".

 

I was reading Neil Young's autobiography recently (though tbh, it's so disjointed as to almost unreadable - he really needs to get back on the drugs) and he is in the process of developing an entirely new concept in music production that allows the listener to hear the music precisely as it was laid down.*

 

*Reading that back I'm not sure it makes any sense - I'll google it and get back to you.

 

Here you go, @Alf Bentley, though it appears the idea is now dead:

 

http://www.noise11.com/news/r-i-p-pono-neil-young-kills-off-his-digital-player-20170423

Edited 20 February 2018 by Buce

[the fox]

11 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

I replied nicely.

 

Is your belief more than an act of faith?

It is faith. I was talking about the "allegedly" part which is just another word for "me". i didn't say that you should believe, i just asked a question and was satisfied with the first part of your reply.

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, the fox said:

That's just a flawed argument. Might as well pay the guy who sold a hot cup of coffee to the man who just signed a 100 million pound deal the same because he provided a boost to his physical state. Or, just pay the guy who manifactures tires the same as the engineer who made the high-tech engine.

 

So, an hour of your working time is worth the same as a surgeon saving a life or a guy making a cure for cancer? 

 

Think it's a pillar of capitalism. Force people to provide better output and they will get a bigger stake. It creates a better product.

Just ask yourself, if you had two peoples selling apples, one has amazing apples and the other has old, semi-rotten ones, would you pay the same amount for both? And if you do, what will the guy how's selling those great apples say? "might as well sell rotten apples because it's the same profit anyways". And what does that leave you? whith a batch of bad apples because you didn't reward the guy with the better product.

 

 

It's not a flawed argument when you believe in the science of cause and effect.

 

That's exactly what I'm saying an hour of my life is worth the same as a surgeon or a cleaner. When you start down the road of saying that one person is more valuable in life than another then you're on a slippery slope. I would have thought that Islam taught every man is equal - most religions teach that even if they don't practice it. I applaud religions for trying to make moral and ethical stances for the better of humankind.

 

Capitalism only works for the rich. It's as flawed as most other ideas and more flawed than some.

 

When one person is of limited capability because of their genetics or social upbringing etc... it is only natural that they don't have the capacities of someone else. I don't believe that one should have a significantly better and happier life than the other because of these factors. You could call them God given capabilities but God would surely want them to be used for the common good not for personal gain don't you think?

 

Not sure when forcing people to do anything has been good or correct.

 

Why does one have old semi rotten apples?

 

Why would the guy who has amazing apples want to sell rotten apples? If you have the capability to help someone walk properly or see would you not bother because the profit was the same either way?

 

13 minutes ago, the fox said:

So, is that why you don't believe in god, buce? Is it because the world isn't all sunshine an rainbows? Shit happens. or is it your inability to trust anyone unconditionally other than yourself? if you don't mind me asking, mate.  just asking here, not trying to offend you or anything 

 

Don't know about Buce but here's my take. When I was a kid I was indoctrinated to believe in God and I did. As I got older, I looked at the world and questioned the existence of a God (or Gods). I didn't find any reason to believe there was one and I found many reasons to believe that either there isn't a God or that if there is, God really doesn't care about humans or what they do. I decided to live my life as I thought best (hopefully in a good and moral way) and let God, if there was one do whatever he does. Do you think that bowing to your God is going to benefit you in the afterlife? Do you think those that don't are damned? Do you think that your God would appreciate a capitalist mentality? just asking here, certainly not trying to offend.

[Buce]

4 minutes ago, the fox said:

It is faith. I was talking about the "allegedly" part which is just another word for "me". i didn't say that you should believe, i just asked a question and was satisfied with the first part of your reply.

2

 

No disrespect, foxy, but the problem here is down to English not being your first language:

 

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/allegedly

Edited 20 February 2018 by Buce

[the fox]

31 minutes ago, FIF said:

It's not a flawed argument when you believe in the science of cause and effect.

 

That's exactly what I'm saying an hour of my life is worth the same as a surgeon or a cleaner. When you start down the road of saying that one person is more valuable in life than another then you're on a slippery slope.

 

I would have thought that Islam taught every man is equal - most religions teach that even if they don't practice it. I applaud religions for trying to make moral and ethical stances for the better of humankind.

 

Capitalism only works for the rich. It's as flawed as most other ideas and more flawed than some.

 

When one person is of limited capability because of their genetics or social upbringing etc... it is only natural that they don't have the capacities of someone else. I don't believe that one should have a significantly better and happier life than the other because of these factors. You could call them God given capabilities but God would surely want them to be used for the common good not for personal gain don't you think?

 

Not sure when forcing people to do anything has been good or correct.

 

Why does one have old semi rotten apples?

 

Why would the guy who has amazing apples want to sell rotten apples? If you have the capability to help someone walk properly or see would you not bother because the profit was the same either way?

 

 

Don't know about Buce but here's my take. When I was a kid I was indoctrinated to believe in God and I did. As I got older, I looked at the world and questioned the existence of a God (or Gods). I didn't find any reason to believe there was one and I found many reasons to believe that either there isn't a God or that if there is, God really doesn't care about humans or what they do. I decided to live my life as I thought best (hopefully in a good and moral way) and let God, if there was one do whatever he does. Do you think that bowing to your God is going to benefit you in the afterlife? Do you think those that don't are damned? Do you think that your God would appreciate a capitalist mentality? just asking here, certainly not trying to offend.

but how would you protect your most valuable asset? would you want to provide the same circumstances for people with varying degrees of ability? this isn't a utopia, it's the real world; and the world is harsh. and islam also says "And O my people! Give full measure and weight in justice and reduce not the things that are due to the people, and do not commit mischief in the land, causing corruption". people are equal; their work is not.

 

capitalism is flawed, i'm not arguing against that, not at all.

 

the man sells rotten apples because you would pay the same price for them as you would the fresh ones, so why bother? it's cheaper and makes more profit (this is all a hypothetical scenario mind you)

 

not all people are kind, 90+% of people would rather stack food products in a shelf than do a 16 hour operation.

Edited 20 February 2018 by the fox

[Jon the Hat]

Capitalism does not only benefit the rich.  Ridiculous statement.  It might benefit the rich more than the poor, but it has undoubtedly improved life for almost the whole of mankind.

[the fox]

1 minute ago, Jon the Hat said:

Capitalism does not only benefit the rich.  Ridiculous statement.  It might benefit the rich more than the poor, but it has undoubtedly improved life for almost the whole of mankind.

While capitalism isn't the role-model for "fairness", it rewards initiatives and innovativeness. Plus, a lot of poor people became rich because of it.

 

Not everyone can be rich, if that's the case, there would be no one doing the dirty work because everyone is well off.

 the irony is, if you give everyone 100 million, the value of the currency will take a nosedive and, some people would do the dirty work for a high fee, which slowly but surly, will make the rich and poor class allover again  

[Buce]

21 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Capitalism does not only benefit the rich.  Ridiculous statement.  It might benefit the rich more than the poor, but it has undoubtedly improved life for almost the whole of mankind.

 

In what way is life improved from when we had a simpler existence?

 

When I see documentaries of remote tribes still living in the Stone Age, they seem perfectly content. It seems to me that contact with capitalism merely results in their unhappiness as their environment is destroyed in the name of profit.

[Izzy]

People would be much more content with life if they just accepted and lived by the Pareto Principle (80/20 rule)

 

https://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-pareto-principle-the-8020-rule/

 

It ain't necessarily fair, but it is what it is...

Edited 20 February 2018 by Izzy Muzzett

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, Buce said:

 

In what way is life improved from when we had a simpler existence?

 

When I see documentaries of remote tribes still living in the Stone Age, they seem perfectly content. It seems to me that contact with capitalism merely results in their unhappiness as their environment is destroyed in the name of profit.

They aren’t that happy when their babies die, or they get cholera, or they work all day on the fields but have nothing to show for it due to drought.  If Stone Age living is so great why isn’t everyone doing it?  When it is called poverty you want the taxes of capitalism to fix it?

[Buce]

Just now, Jon the Hat said:

They aren’t that happy when their babies die, or they get cholera, or they work all day on the fields but have nothing to show for it due to drought.  If Stone Age living is so great why isn’t everyone doing it?  When it is called poverty you want the taxes of capitalism to fix it?

 

I'm talking about hunter-gatherer tribes, which is how we all lived before capitalism and so-called civilisation came calling.

 

We don't know if humanity was happier then but we can extrapolate from those that still live that existence, and their troubles always seem to start once they come into contact with the modern world, when the capitalists want to make money chopping down their trees. It was the same when we contacted the indigenous peoples of the Americas, Australia and New Zealand. They had no need for capitalism and lived happily without it. The greed of capitalism destroyed them.

[FoxesDeb]

6 hours ago, shanetko said:

Sex is mostly shit and is definitely overrated.

Maybe try something other than anal 

[Colourmy]

I'm bowing out here because it seems I'm nearly alone in suggesting a UBI for all is flawed from the very first mention of it, nevermind attempting to put into practice. 

I just would like to know how this Utopian lifestyle is funded and how it would change a n'er do well into a do well?

[Parafox]

28 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

I'm talking about hunter-gatherer tribes, which is how we all lived before capitalism and so-called civilisation came calling.

 

We don't know if humanity was happier then but we can extrapolate from those that still live that existence, and their troubles always seem to start once they come into contact with the modern world, when the capitalists want to make money chopping down their trees. It was the same when we contacted the indigenous peoples of the Americas, Australia and New Zealand. They had no need for capitalism and lived happily without it. The greed of capitalism destroyed them.

I kind of agree with you but, isn't it odd how often you see kids in these remote villages wearing Arsenal, Barcelona, Man U. t shirts?

 

Or did they finish up in remotest Africa via clothes banks and charities?

 

That said, once exposed to the "riches and novelties" of the first world, so many remote tribes suddenly want the stuff they see or hear about others having. I mean, even the hovels of Calcutta, there are people living in tin and tarpaulin shacks that have a TV. Global spread of capitalism is almost inevitable and eventually, unless the first world wipes itself out, every human will want an iPhone or a KFC.

 

Although the latter might be more difficult to find.

Edited 20 February 2018 by Parafox

[Webbo]

I'd rather live to old age in a capitalist society than die young in some stone age society in a rain forest.

[Rogstanley]

10 minutes ago, Colourmy said:

I'm bowing out here because it seems I'm nearly alone in suggesting a UBI for all is flawed from the very first mention of it, nevermind attempting to put into practice. 

I just would like to know how this Utopian lifestyle is funded and how it would change a n'er do well into a do well?

Start with the £264bn spent on welfare, get the rest from increased tax.

[SpacedX]

7 hours ago, Wookie said:

No I didn’t, thanks for enlightening me

That's ok. If you are interested in learning more about the epicurean nuances of authentic Cantonese cuisine you might like to know that you can get prawn crackers and fortune cookies too. 

[Harry - LCFC]

3 hours ago, FIF said:

That's exactly what I'm saying an hour of my life is worth the same as a surgeon or a cleaner. When you start down the road of saying that one person is more valuable in life than another then you're on a slippery slope. I would have thought that Islam taught every man is equal - most religions teach that even if they don't practice it. I applaud religions for trying to make moral and ethical stances for the better of humankind.

A small but important correction here: By paying someone more for certain work what you're saying is that their labour is more valuable, not that their life is more valuable.

[LCFC BEAST]

Topical one for today;

 

Ronaldinho's goal vs Chelsea is overrated. Just a lucky to poke.

 

 

[Rogstanley]

46 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

They aren’t that happy when their babies die, or they get cholera, or they work all day on the fields but have nothing to show for it due to drought.  If Stone Age living is so great why isn’t everyone doing it?  When it is called poverty you want the taxes of capitalism to fix it?

There is a significant subculture of people living more simple alternative lifestyles. They obviously don’t get advertised much because they’re bad capitalists - very naughty - but I reckon a lot more people would do it if they had the balls to step out of line.

 

[Rogstanley]

40 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

I'm talking about hunter-gatherer tribes, which is how we all lived before capitalism and so-called civilisation came calling.

 

We don't know if humanity was happier then but we can extrapolate from those that still live that existence, and their troubles always seem to start once they come into contact with the modern world, when the capitalists want to make money chopping down their trees. It was the same when we contacted the indigenous peoples of the Americas, Australia and New Zealand. They had no need for capitalism and lived happily without it. The greed of capitalism destroyed them.

Another line of enquiry is the fact that suicide rates have increased as the world has got richer.

 

I believe it has also been demonstrated that income equality is a better predictor of happiness than per capita gdp in a nation.