Dairy farming is dying: After 40 years, I'm done

[Libertaurum]

If I make you a shit sandwich but tell you it's really pastrami on rye, are you just going to close your eyes and swallow it?

Because that's exactly what you're doing with such a foolishly misguided insistence that places like Cuba and Venezuela are "socialist" states.

Don't believe everything you're told, my friend.

The hallmark of socialism is an equitable distribution of wealth among everyone. It's definitely NOT a society where the wealthy elites fill their pockets and leave the scraps for the peasants - - which is precisely what happens in Cuba and Venezuela.

It's obviously you who believes the lies you've been told by socialist propagandists. Enjoy your "it all belongs to the people" sandwich.

You say the hallmark of socialism is "an equitable distribution of wealth among everyone"...
Equitable according to whom?
Some central planner that will decide for everyone and use the threat of violence to force everyone to comply?
That's your socialism.

The only way to "equitably" distribute wealth is to leave people alone and let each distribute his own wealth.
Any decision I make about what you should do with your money and then use the threat of violence to enforce upon you is a bad decision.
You can't "equitably" distribute other people's stuff. And neither can any government.

 

[Area51]

Yeah, look dreamer you really need to flesh that one out because in the world I know it simply will not work!

Its fantasy we are vehemently opposed to.

You don't live in a world where the SHTF, my friend. At least not yet.

 

[Area51]

It's obviously you who believes the lies you've been told by socialist propagandists. Enjoy your "it all belongs to the people" sandwich.

You say the hallmark of socialism is "an equitable distribution of wealth among everyone"...
Equitable according to whom?
Some central planner that will decide for everyone and use the threat of violence to force everyone to comply?
That's your socialism.

The only way to "equitably" distribute wealth is to leave people alone and let each distribute his own wealth.
Any decision I make about what you should do with your money and then use the threat of violence to enforce upon you is a bad decision.
You can't "equitably" distribute other people's stuff. And neither can any government.

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

As I explained earlier, in a true socialist society you can stick the government and big business was up your ass. Along with the "central planner" too.

Everything is owned and controlled by the people.

 

[Zed]

Everything is owned and controlled by the people.

via what mechanism?

 

[Zed]

You don't live in a world where the SHTF, my friend. At least not yet.

oh shit, you have not got kids yet, have you?

 

[Zed]

You don't live in a world where the SHTF, my friend. At least not yet.

LOL

I've got one word for you to remember for a proper SHTF situation.

WARLORDS!




Bitch.

 

[Libertaurum]

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

Screw that!
How about this...
Nobody forcefully takes from anybody.
Each decides for himself over his own property.

As I explained earlier, in a true socialist society you can stick the government and big business was up your ass. Along with the "central planner" too.

As I explained earlier, you're not describing socialism, you're describing adolescent fantasy.

Everything is owned and controlled by the people.

Youth... Wasted on the young.

Who manages this imaginary collective property? A mob? HOW is everything "controlled" by the people? As Zed said, (hehehe) via what mechanism?

And who keeps me from creating something and considering it my own, rather than the collective's?

 

[Area51]

LOL

I'vd got one word for you to remember for a proper SHTF situation.

WARLORDS!




Bitch.

I noticed you pluralized the word "warlords".

It's a small step, but I'm happy to see you're finally acknowledging the strength of numbers and a collective approach.

 

[Zed]

I noticed you pluralized the word "warlords".

Yep, you will have a gun up your hooter in the first round.

It's a small step, but I'm happy to see you're finally acknowledging the strength of numbers and a collective approach.

You're either a wanker or illiterate. I'm leaning toward wanker.

 

[Zed]

Screw that!
How about this...
Nobody forcefully takes from anybody.
Each decides for himself over his own property.

Yes.

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

Good old Karl, he really hated success didn't he?

I need a everything you can produce, OK?

 

[Area51]

Screw that!
How about this...
Nobody forcefully takes from anybody.
Each decides for himself over his own property.


As I explained earlier, you're not describing socialism, you're describing adolescent fantasy.


Youth... Wasted on the young.

Who manages this imaginary collective property? A mob? HOW is everything "controlled" by the people? As Zed said, (hehehe) viia what mechanism?

And who keeps me from creating something and considering it my own, rather than the collective's?

As I always encourage - - educate yourself, my friend.

Socialism distinguishes between private property and personal property. Productive resources would fall under the former while your home would fall under the latter.

The ideology is based on the concept that a small number of people should not be able to monopolize and control the productive resources for their own personal benefit.

Eliminating private ownership of the productive resources and having them owned instead by the people, means everyone would have a common interest in the prosperity of society as a whole.

Instead of funnelling "profits" to shareholders and wealthy elites, they'd be shared amongst the people. The focus shifts from self interest and trying to profit above all else, to that of a common good.

Example, if you create a cure for cancer you'd share it with everyone for the benefit of society as a whole rather than monopolizing it to profit for your own self interest.

 

[Libertaurum]

As I always encourage - - educate yourself, my friend.

Socialism distinguishes between private property and personal property. Productive resources would fall under the former while your home would fall under the latter.

The ideology is based on the concept that a small number of people should not be able to monopolize and control the productive resources for their own personal benefit.

Eliminating private ownership of the productive resources and having them owned instead by the people, means everyone would have a common interest in the prosperity of society as a whole.

Instead of funnelling "profits" to shareholders and wealthy elites, they'd be shared amongst the people. The focus shifts from self interest and trying to profit above all else, to that of a common good.

Example, if you create a cure for cancer you'd share it with everyone for the benefit of society as a whole rather than monopolizing it to profit for your own self interest.

Again... Screw that!

If I create "a cure for cancer", or anything else that is valuable to a lot of other people, where do you or ANY group get the right to force me to "share it with everyone for the benefit of society" if I don't choose to do so?

Also, you conveniently sidestepped the issue of HOW what you call productive property (which really comes down to each individual brain) is supposedly managed and controlled by "the people" without producing government as we know it.

 

[Scorpio]

exactly zed,

I asked for proof of this socialist nirvana, he provides none,
but goes on about surviving solo against animals to deflect,

still waiting for that historical context, as he was the one to tell us all to read a book

then for him to assume that 'survival' is all anyone cares about is just not true either,

for in that situation, my mission becomes eradication, and survival is of no consequence either way

 

[D-FENZ]

...Example, if you create a cure for cancer you'd share it with everyone for the benefit of society as a whole rather than monopolizing it to profit for your own self interest.

What you are forgetting is that with your utopia there is no incentive to produce anything. Sure, there's shit to confiscate and 'redistribute' at first, but the confiscation cures any further innovation. Look around. It's a death sentence.

And I looked all through my closets and effects. Didn't find a single thing produced in Sweden.

 

[Zed]

As I always encourage - - educate yourself, my friend.

Socialism distinguishes between private property and personal property. Productive resources would fall under the former while your home would fall under the latter.

The ideology is based on the concept that a small number of people should not be able to monopolize and control the productive resources for their own personal benefit.

Eliminating private ownership of the productive resources and having them owned instead by the people, means everyone would have a common interest in the prosperity of society as a whole.

Instead of funnelling "profits" to shareholders and wealthy elites, they'd be shared amongst the people. The focus shifts from self interest and trying to profit above all else, to that of a common good.

Example, if you create a cure for cancer you'd share it with everyone for the benefit of society as a whole rather than monopolizing it to profit for your own self interest.

Recipe for abject failure! Just add an egg and bake.

Seriously who'd take any risk on any enterprise? The device you are using would not have been developed under your model, nobody would take the risk, let alone have the resource to take the risk. Talk about half baked ideas! You've never tried to run a business have you? You've never risked anything ever, have you? Ever served on a committee? Talk about a cluster fuck... most are! We'd be stuck in the 1600's if the world was run your way. You sound like a pampered little shit that never had a scored soccer match. Grow up, compete, succeed... it's not so scary really, you just have to actually be good at something and get over the mediocre group hug thing. Nobody would excel, your world would be drab, grey, 1984 ish...

 

[Zed]

Didn't find a single thing produced in Sweden

Gotta love Ikea... oh wait, made in China!

 

[anywoundedduck]

Corporations are selling eggs and milk, under costs, in order to kill the family farmers.
I haven't paid 49 cents a dozen for eggs since 1958.

 

[GOLDZILLA]

 

[GOLDZILLA]

 

[Rusty Shackelford]

LOL... yeah, cause no one is going to abuse power. Or enforce any form of law etc. Can I have some of what ever it is you are on?

Look no further then orwells Animal Farm

 

[Area51]

Again... Screw that!

If I create "a cure for cancer", or anything else that is valuable to a lot of other people, where do you or ANY group get the right to force me to "share it with everyone for the benefit of society" if I don't choose to do so?

Also, you conveniently sidestepped the issue of HOW what you call productive property (which really comes down to each individual brain) is supposedly managed and controlled by "the people" without producing government as we know it.

If you'd prefer to profit off such a finding, then evidently your values and morals are focused on self interest and personal gain rather than the betterment of society as a whole.

Understandable, since that's how the education system teaches. It's also the manner in which big business and the wealthy elites operate.

You seem very preoccupied with "government" intervention. As I explained previously, fuck the government. It has ZERO role in a collective economy.

Companies will be managed and operate as they are today - - profits, however, would be distributed amongst the people rather than to shareholders.

 

[Area51]

Again... Screw that!

If I create "a cure for cancer", or anything else that is valuable to a lot of other people, where do you or ANY group get the right to force me to "share it with everyone for the benefit of society" if I don't choose to do so?

Also, you conveniently sidestepped the issue of HOW what you call productive property (which really comes down to each individual brain) is supposedly managed and controlled by "the people" without producing government as we know it.

If you'd prefer to profit off such a finding, then evidently your values and morals are focused on self interest and personal gain rather than the betterment of society as a whole.

Understandable, since that's how the education system teaches. It's also the manner in which big business and the wealthy elites operate.

You seem very preoccupied with "government" intervention. As I explained previously, fuck the government. It has ZERO role in a collective economy.

Companies will be managed and operate as they are today - - profits, however, would be distributed amongst the people rather than to shareholders.

 

[Area51]

exactly zed,

I asked for proof of this socialist nirvana, he provides none,
but goes on about surviving solo against animals to deflect,

still waiting for that historical context, as he was the one to tell us all to read a book

then for him to assume that 'survival' is all anyone cares about is just not true either,

for in that situation, my mission becomes eradication, and survival is of no consequence either way

What "proof" are you looking for, my friend?

As I've explained numerous times, socialism has never existed in the modern world - - so there's no country to look at as "proof" of the success/failure of socialism.

Please don't make the mistake of confusing Cuba or communist Russia as being "socialist" nations, as they most definitely were not.

 

[Libertaurum]

If you'd prefer to profit off such a finding, then evidently your values and morals are focused on self interest and personal gain rather than the betterment of society as a whole.

So your proposed socialist paradise depends on everyone buying into your socialist mumbo-jumbo? No wonder it's impracticable.
What would be done about those who are not convinced to take whatever they create and just "share it with everyone for the good of society"?

Understandable, since that's how the education system teaches. It's also the manner in which big business and the wealthy elites operate.

You really need to educate yourself, my friend. Start by reading "Human Action", by Ludwig von Mises.

You seem very preoccupied with "government" intervention. As I explained previously, fuck the government. It has ZERO role in a collective economy.

Companies will be managed and operate as they are today - - profits, however, would be distributed amongst the people rather than to shareholders.

Who would make sure those profits are distributed? Everyone?
See, no matter how you slice it, you end up with some being in charge of taking other people's property by force and then handing it out, which breeds corruption.

Besides, how would any new companies be founded? Nobody would be willing to sink their life-savings into a company only to see any possible profits "distributed amongst the people".

That's why socialist paradises like Cuba and Venezuela end up getting left behind, with no new investment, little production and a long line of people with plenty of "needs" looking for a handout. Socialism breeds dependence to the State.

 

[Area51]

Look no further then orwells Animal Farm

Factually incorrect, my friend.

Animal Farm described a totalitarian society - - NOT a socialist society.

The ruling class of pigs, representing the wealthy elites, would not exist under socialism. Nobody profits off the backs of others.

 

[brosil]

Dear Area51, Over in the Von Mises site library is a book called the History of American Socialisms . I suggest you download and read it.

 

[Scorpio]

socialism has never existed in the modern world

ahh yes, so this socialist nirvana has never existed, and yet somehow you propose this as the ultimate solution

I disagree completely as I factor in humans,

Achieving it would be a incredible achievement in theory,

but alas, as have all others prior, the theory gets tossed into the dustbin of history for only 1 reason, humans.

humans in their current and past existence, have zero proclivity to do as you say

 

[TAEZZAR]

Another area that has not been beaten to a pulp, is illegal gardening & illegal chickens.
IDK if it is Monsanto, ADM & other mega food producers, or just power hungry little Hitler's in city gov., that are behind this draconian effort, but we are slowly being denied the right to grow our own food. This is wrong at any level.

 

[Rusty Shackelford]

Factually incorrect, my friend.

Animal Farm described a totalitarian society - - NOT a socialist society.

The ruling class of pigs, representing the wealthy elites, would not exist under socialism. Nobody profits off the backs of others.

Go read again....it started as socialist and turned totalitarian...the abuse of power that zed referenced.

 

[Area51]

ahh yes, so this socialist nirvana has never existed, and yet somehow you propose this as the ultimate solution

I disagree completely as I factor in humans,

Achieving it would be a incredible achievement in theory,

but alas, as have all others prior, the theory gets tossed into the dustbin of history for only 1 reason, humans.

humans in their current and past existence, have zero proclivity to do as you say

No question it'll take a catastrophic event to change behaviour among people - - and that event would be a SHTF situation.

In ancient time, socialism existed for tens of thousands of years so it's definitely within human nature to live a collectivist lifestyle.

Starvation is a very powerful catalyst for change.

 

[Area51]

So your proposed socialist paradise depends on everyone buying into your socialist mumbo-jumbo? No wonder it's impracticable.
What would be done about those who are not convinced to take whatever they create and just "share it with everyone for the good of society"?



You really need to educate yourself, my friend. Start by reading "Human Action", by Ludwig von Mises.


Who would make sure those profits are distributed? Everyone?
See, no matter how you slice it, you end up with some being in charge of taking other people's property by force and then handing it out, which breeds corruption.

Besides, how would any new companies be founded? Nobody would be willing to sink their life-savings into a company only to see any possible profits "distributed amongst the people".

That's why socialist paradises like Cuba and Venezuela end up getting left behind, with no new investment, little production and a long line of people with plenty of "needs" looking for a handout. Socialism breeds dependence to the State.

When man discovered fire did he patent it and look to profit or did he share with others?

The world is so corrupt with greed and an obsession to accumulate zeroes on a computer screen that the idea of sharing such a discovery today is unthinkable.

But in a legit SHTF scenario when you're facing starvation and imminent death, you'll be more than happy to share your cure for cancer in exchange for a nourishing meal.

 

[Area51]

Another area that has not been beaten to a pulp, is illegal gardening & illegal chickens.
IDK if it is Monsanto, ADM & other mega food producers, or just power hungry little Hitler's in city gov., that are behind this draconian effort, but we are slowly being denied the right to grow our own food. This is wrong at any level.

Thank you for steering this discussion back on topic and away from the wannabe capitalists.

I've heard of backyard chicken coops being banned in the suburbs around here but that was more in response to neighbors complaining about the noise from roosters.

But I've never heard of backyard gardens being deemed illegal. What's the story behind that?

 

[ZZZZZ]

When man discovered fire did he patent it and look to profit or did he share with others?

The world is so corrupt with greed and an obsession to accumulate zeroes on a computer screen that the idea of sharing such a discovery today is unthinkable.

But in a legit SHTF scenario when you're facing starvation and imminent death, you'll be more than happy to share your cure for cancer in exchange for a nourishing meal.

Greed and corruption are dominant in government and politics, not commerce and capitalism.

There is no limit to the amount of the fruits of OUR labor that government will confiscate.
.
.

 

[Libertaurum]

When man discovered fire did he patent it and look to profit or did he share with others?

The world is so corrupt with greed and an obsession to accumulate zeroes on a computer screen that the idea of sharing such a discovery today is unthinkable.

But in a legit SHTF scenario when you're facing starvation and imminent death, you'll be more than happy to share your cure for cancer in exchange for a nourishing meal.

You contradict yourself.
You say in a SHTF scenario everyone would become socialist. BS.
Trading that cure or anything else in exchange for a "nourishing meal" would be pure capitalism so long as the exchange is voluntary.
Now, if you think that in a SHTF scenario people will be handing out free meals in exchange for nothing, just "for the benefit of society", then you're even more naive than I thought.

 

[Scorpio]

I've heard of backyard chicken coops being banned in the suburbs around here but that was more in response to neighbors complaining about the noise from roosters.

it isn't just the noise, it is because of people and how they treat nature,

many don't care for their chickens once they have them, ie all the dirty work, along with keeping the health of them up, etc.

it is a very real problem, and most cities have to govern to the stupid and lowest common denominator,

again a fault with the socialist nirvana theory

the very first question that must be asked and honestly answered is:

are humans all the same, with the same capabilities and the same ability at birth?

If not, then one must recognize that and allow for it, rather than trying to borg everyone

 

[itsamess]

No question it'll take a catastrophic event to change behaviour among people - - and that event would be a SHTF situation.

In ancient time, socialism existed for tens of thousands of years ...

If it was so great why did it stop. Might makes right, no humans wouldn't do that. Lazy folks, aggressive folks. The simpliest way for you to prove your model is show me an animal system that does the what you say, freebies for everybody. The rule of nature is survival of the fittest, meaning some don't make it. Symbiotic relationships that have been around since the dawn of time but they actually could be considered nature's capitalism since both parties exchange of their own free will and both benefit. Giving away free with no return jeopardizes that organism survival. All humans are not created equal so the non players would destroy your system in nothing flat as it has always been.

 

[Zed]

Corporations are selling eggs and milk, under costs, in order to kill the family farmers.
I haven't paid 49 cents a dozen for eggs since 1958.

True but they can't do scale, price and quality. These days I will pay up for quality food.

 

[Area51]

it isn't just the noise, it is because of people and how they treat nature,

many don't care for their chickens once they have them, ie all the dirty work, along with keeping the health of them up, etc.

it is a very real problem, and most cities have to govern to the stupid and lowest common denominator,

again a fault with the socialist nirvana theory

the very first question that must be asked and honestly answered is:

are humans all the same, with the same capabilities and the same ability at birth?

If not, then one must recognize that and allow for it, rather than trying to borg everyone

Of course not. Hence the mantra "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need".

The elderly man won't be able to do much compared to a man in the prime of his life - - but the elderly man also won't require as much as the man in the prime of his life with three kids to feed.

 

[Zed]

If it was so great why did it stop. Might makes right, no humans wouldn't do that. Lazy folks, aggressive folks. The simpliest way for you to prove your model is show me an animal system that does the what you say, freebies for everybody. The rule of nature is survival of the fittest, meaning some don't make it. Symbiotic relationships that have been around since the dawn of time but they actually could be considered nature's capitalism since both parties exchange of their own free will and both benefit. Giving away free with no return jeopardizes that organism survival. All humans are not created equal so the non players would destroy your system in nothing flat as it has always been.

Exactly, if it where in us we'd be living like bee's.... but, it's not and we don't. Best thing we have seen is the free market expansion period in the USA. Now it's got faults and grown some warts but nothing we can't fix IF we are willing to learn and kill all the sociopaths in politics!

 

[Libertaurum]

Of course not. Hence the mantra "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need".

The elderly man won't be able to do much compared to a man in the prime of his life - - but the elderly man also won't require as much as the man in the prime of his life with three kids to feed.

Mantra shmantra. Neither you nor any group have any right to take anything from anyone, regardless of their ability or anyone else's needs.