Frenemies of TalkRational:
Nontheist Nexus |  Rants'n'Raves |  Secular Cafe |  Council of Ex-Muslims |  The Skeptical Zone |  rationalia |  Rational Skepticism |  Atheists Today | 
TalkRational  

FAQ Rules Staff List Calendar RSS
Go Back   TalkRational > Discussion > Politics and Current Affairs

Politics and Current Affairs For political discussions and mudwrestling

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-05-2011, 03:38 PM   #1366816  /  #276
fleet-footed Urban Youth
CHO-CO-LAY-TOH
RnR/TR Official Historian
 
fleet-footed Urban Youth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 39,097
fleet-footed Urban Youth
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkepticTank View Post
Yeah, there have been a few posts referencing re-education camps. I haven't seen daft address that little nicety.
if daft actually understands marxism and is consistent, this is not something to be addressed, per se, it is simply one way to address the threat posed by the elite of the current bourgeois dictatorship (i.e., parliamentary or republican democracy) and its retainers under the future proletarian dictatorship (democratic central planning and worker's councils i guess??). the only thing to address is how effective it is as a means of suppressing reactionary bourgeois counter-revolution
__________________
SEE YOU IN THE MOSH'SH PIT
fleet-footed Urban Youth is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 03:40 PM   #1366820  /  #277
fleet-footed Urban Youth
CHO-CO-LAY-TOH
RnR/TR Official Historian
 
fleet-footed Urban Youth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 39,097
fleet-footed Urban Youth
Default

btw the constant threat of revolutionary terror is in fact the only way to win concessions from any ruling class, cheers.
__________________
SEE YOU IN THE MOSH'SH PIT
fleet-footed Urban Youth is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 03:43 PM   #1366826  /  #278
Rathpig
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 21,632
Rathpig
Default

Like it or not, Anastasia must be murdered and anyone else opposing the holy gospel of the one true Marx.
Rathpig is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 03:45 PM   #1366830  /  #279
fleet-footed Urban Youth
CHO-CO-LAY-TOH
RnR/TR Official Historian
 
fleet-footed Urban Youth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 39,097
fleet-footed Urban Youth
Default

"when every cop is a criminal..."
__________________
SEE YOU IN THE MOSH'SH PIT
fleet-footed Urban Youth is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 05:58 PM   #1366969  /  #280
daft punk
has left the building
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,421
daft punk
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fleet-footed Urban Youth View Post

how is putting food in one place for people to travel to, pick up, and take home to cook less sustainable than putting food in one place where it is cooked and people travel to it to eat?

neither one serves sustainability better than the other. what would serve sustainability is transportation backed by renewable or at least abundant energy that doesn't pollute, local agriculture where shipping and rail transport isn't viable, and farming methods that don't degrade the topsoil so it becomes a dead sponge for synthetic fertilizers. we do this and we can have supermarkets and restaurants without issue.
Well they would be dotted around all over so the average family could get to on in a 5 minute walk. Obviously most people take the car to the supermarket. So yeah it would save car journeys.

Its more sustainable because the food isn't flown from another country, processed, packaged, placed in a supermarket, and so on. Instead it is grown by local farmers and cooked fresh each day.

It would be healthier, cheaper, and use less resources. I agree with what you say about green energy, local agriculture and sustainable farming. That is part of my plan. But why then send it to a factory to have all the vitamins sucked out, and then put it in a box and send it to sit on a supermarket shelf? Why not cook it fresh and sell it straight to the public at cost?

The other part of the reason is to save housework. Some women spend all their time doing it.

Obviously it would be rolled out in trials to see if it was what the public wanted and to see if it was a viable model.
daft punk is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 06:05 PM   #1366976  /  #281
SkepticTank
legitimately terrible
Amazon Race Champion, Deuces Solitaire Champion, Mahjong - Valley in the mountains Champion, Darts 501 Champion, Harbor Fishing Champion, Bloons Tower Defense Champion, Mario & Friends Tower Defense Champion, Donkey Kong Ice Adventure Champion, Flying Gonzo Champion Mod: C&T, TIH
 
SkepticTank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 19,238
SkepticTank
Default

You know how many stores you'd have to have in suburbia so "the average family could get to on[e] in a 5 minute walk"?

Yeah yeah, I'm sure one of your next Socialist reforms will be to eliminate urban sprawl, and pack everyone into denser living areas like high rise apartment buildings.
__________________
Singlehandedly outed the seer
SkepticTank is online now   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 06:13 PM   #1366985  /  #282
Patronus Potter
When in Rome...
Space Invaders Champion, Asteroids Champion
 
Patronus Potter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 11,745
Patronus Potter
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daft punk View Post
Its more sustainable because the food isn't flown from another country, processed, packaged, placed in a supermarket, and so on. Instead it is grown by local farmers and cooked fresh each day.

It would be healthier, cheaper, and use less resources. I agree with what you say about green energy, local agriculture and sustainable farming. That is part of my plan. But why then send it to a factory to have all the vitamins sucked out, and then put it in a box and send it to sit on a supermarket shelf? Why not cook it fresh and sell it straight to the public at cost?

The other part of the reason is to save housework. Some women spend all their time doing it.

Obviously it would be rolled out in trials to see if it was what the public wanted and to see if it was a viable model.
How much time have you spent thinking about this? Can you really not see any flaws in this plan?
Patronus Potter is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 06:14 PM   #1366987  /  #283
daft punk
has left the building
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,421
daft punk
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fleet-footed Urban Youth View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by daft punk View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleet-footed Urban Youth View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by daft punk View Post

Well being unemployed or underemployed is one of the main causes of destitution.
sure. in a capitalist economy. which is why the appeal to "create jobs" is only a leftist selling point if you have made your peace with capitalism, accepted it as a necessary evil. or maybe you're being very pragmatic, that as we currently list under capitalism, we must make do with it... but then, why talk about what socialism will do in capitalist terms?
I dont understand your point. Socialism would provide everyone with a job.
if your concerns are oriented towards "getting people jobs" and you're a leftist, it's because you are concerned about peoples' needs under capitalism. under socialism people certainly might all have jobs, but that isn't really the point; the point is that under socialism, everyone's' basic needs should be met and evenly distributed capital minimizes the amount of needed work. "you will have a job!" is not really a big deal in this list of goals, it's really a side-effect or means to a much more important end. only under capitalism is making sure as many people as possible are employed an important policy goal, because only under capitalism should "having a job" as we currently understand it (i.e., typically as a subordinate employee of a private firm, with little agency, making someone else rich) be necessary for survival. under socialism, "minimal work evenly distributed using the productivity gains of automation with democratic organization" is the goal, the important progressive element that makes it superior to capitalism. what people are doing as "jobs" in this system is not the "selling point," so to speak.

tl;dr "everyone can have a job" is only an important selling point for policies in a system where "having a job" is how you survive economically, and ideally, socialism should not be such a system.
well yeah I think I understand what you mean but you have to say things the workers understand and want. What the unemployed want is jobs, preferably decent ones. This is their number 1 priority. We would guarantee them jobs. They dont want a free ride and they wouldnt get one. We oppose all job losses, and say we would replace any redundancies by creating new jobs.

Yes in the smallprint we also drop the bombshell that we would eliminate useless jobs, cut the working week, and involve all workers in the running of the company.

But our slogan to reach the masses is 'jobs for all', not 'eliminate work', as the latter requires explanation.

Also, according to the paper I put a link for, by the Marxist economist, for the system to work you need more slack than the Russians had, ie you do actually have deliberate overcapacity, which might include some people not working some of the time, but on full pay of course, as reserve labour. The Russians ran a taut system which made innovation difficult to implement.

I used to argue with my old bosses about running a ludicrously overstretched system actually. Just in time, just too late more like.
daft punk is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 06:21 PM   #1367003  /  #284
daft punk
has left the building
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,421
daft punk
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fleet-footed Urban Youth View Post

if you're pitching any kind of socialism, you're pitching an idea founded upon democratic workers' control of the means of production. in "capitalist terms" this resolves to "employee-owned firms." you were talking earlier about workers electing managers and voting on organizational policy; in what socialist organizational scheme would this activity be divorced from the means of production being owned and operated by those workers?

eta: also, i did say that it "wasn't your idea," and however you conceive of "democratic workplaces," i am sure you do not see this as divorced from workers owning productive capital in common and sharing its fruits according to democratic decision making.
Marxism is not syndicalism. The working class owns communally all the industries taken into public ownership, they do not part of each firm individually like cooperatives. They elect managers but they do not part own just the company they work for, they do not get a share of its profits directly.

Besides, as I said, the board of directors of say, electricity, would include people from the government and the public as well as workers from the electricity industry.

You sound like you think the electric workers would share any profits made by their industry, if I understand you right. That is not socialism and would not work. It would pit workers against each other.

The working class as a whole owns the industry as a whole.
daft punk is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 06:27 PM   #1367011  /  #285
daft punk
has left the building
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,421
daft punk
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fleet-footed Urban Youth View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by daft punk View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleet-footed Urban Youth View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by el guapo View Post
see my previous post. if at these companies, workers share in the profits, then i believe it. if not, i'll need to see examples to believe it.
already replied, i guess it just never crossed my mind that anyone could conceive of workplace democracy without employee ownership, especially not someone who espouses a philosophy of workers owning the means of production
They own it as a whole, they do not own their individual companies! When did any Marxist say that?
what were you talking about when you were going on about "electing managers" etc? i understand that employee ownership of firms is a syndicalist and not a marxist idea, and i was being imprecise when i associated your ideas with syndicalism. i know you aren't a syndicalist, but i was addressing the concept that el guapo seemed to have in mind. the point remains sound overall. both syndicalist socialism and marxism should share, in common, the idea that workers are voting on what to do with things that they own, whether this is as a worker-owned "firm" or collectively administered by a democratic central government. i am pretty sure you understood that overall concept, even if you did not have the same model in mind that guapo seemed to have been thinking of.
see above post.

But dont make it either worker owned or government administered.

The workers would not own their respective companies. But they would elect managers and they would elect a THIRD of the board, the other two thirds being government and consumer representatives.

The decision making would also probably include the two boards mentioned in the paper on innovation, it sounds like a good idea. One focussing on R%D and the other focussing on implementation. It's very well thought out.
daft punk is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 06:46 PM   #1367041  /  #286
daft punk
has left the building
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,421
daft punk
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkepticTank View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by daft punk View Post
When have socialists gone to war?
Let me guess. China and the Soviet Union were never "true" socialists?
Oh dear. Let me take you back, to a few months ago when I joined...

see this

In that link is a formal debate I did. You can ignore what the other bloke wrote. It's not really a back and forth, more like an article in 5 sections. Its not long but quite thorough, it explains in detail, with sources:

1. Why the revolution happened in Russia

2. Why it degenerated to Stalinism

3. That it was never socialist

4. That its degeneration was not a refutation of Marxism, but was consistent with it.

5. That Stalin evolved to an ANTI-SOCIALIST. He tried to sabotage every revolution in the world after 1927.

6. Stalin wanted to be America's ally after WW2 and he tried to stop revolutions, but failed, so Truman lost patience and started the cold war so he could intervene in Greece, where Stalin was failing in his attempts to STOP the Greek CP trying to take power.

China - Stalin fucked up the first revolution in 1927 out of stupidity, it ended in disaster. By the second one he had long become an anti-socialist. He tried to get Mao to disband his army and merge with the capitalist KMT, who had previously massacred communists! Mao was a nationailst/Stalinist and he wanted an end to foreign domination and to give land to the peasants. He wasnt thinking of trying to implement socialism, that would be completely alien to Stalinist thinking. But like Stalin he was forced to collectivise to remove the threat from the capitalist class. The Chinese capitalist class were incapable of a useful collaboration. He did actually try a Stalinist-style class collaboration but it failed. Lots more on this at the same link. I spent a long time writing it, several days, unfortunately nobody from this site has read it so they all think I am crazy, but the evidence is all there, or at least enough to get started.

If you want something immediate and concrete, look at the French government immediately after the war under General Franco. The CP leaders were ministers in a capitalist government! And they tried to hold back Ho Chi Minh! (France was the main colonial power in Vietnam actually. The war there again started as a national liberation war, and again the capitalists had collaborated with hated foreign rulers and were not wanted by the masses.)
daft punk is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 06:50 PM   #1367045  /  #287
daft punk
has left the building
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,421
daft punk
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkepticTank View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by daft punk View Post
No recession, no wars, once the capitalists had given up fighting back.
Good luck with that.

What do you do about the greedy fuckers like me who bust their ass at their state job and in return receive the same as the lazy fuckers who don't do anything and completely leech off society? In your system, that class of people will be the new oppressed worker. And we'll rise up and revolt against our statist masters who are unfairly redistributing the frutis of our labors unjustly.
Im sure I have covered all these points. No, that wont happen, hopefully. You will berate the lazy ones until they pull their weight, and then everything will be fair, production will increase and then the working week can be shorter.
daft punk is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 06:54 PM   #1367049  /  #288
madmardigan
I can handle this Eurotrash
 
madmardigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: nakatomi plaza
Posts: 10,081
madmardigan
Default

and what if the lazy ones tell you to fuck off?
__________________
madmardigan is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 06:55 PM   #1367050  /  #289
ksen
Unsullied
Admin; Master of Coin
 
ksen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Eden
Posts: 37,844
ksen
Default

You cut their chocolate ration.
__________________
". . . organized greed always defeats disorganized democracy" - Matt Taibbi
ksen is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 06:55 PM   #1367051  /  #290
Preno
TRIGGER WARNING
Resident Overlord
 
Preno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 10,970
Preno
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daft punk View Post
You will berate the lazy ones until they pull their weight, and then everything will be fair
and then they lived happily ever after, the end
Preno is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 07:01 PM   #1367058  /  #291
daft punk
has left the building
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,421
daft punk
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I_pity_the_fool View Post
Quote:
if you're pitching any kind of socialism, you're pitching an idea founded upon democratic workers' control of the means of production. in "capitalist terms" this resolves to "employee-owned firms."
dp seems to be big on central planning. How do you reconcile that with workers deciding themselves what ingredients there biscuits will contain?
biscuit ingredients would be centrally planned unless it was a small private firm not yet nationalised.
daft punk is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 07:04 PM   #1367062  /  #292
daft punk
has left the building
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,421
daft punk
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathpig View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkepticTank View Post
And we'll rise up and revolt
Doubtful, the first thing the new boss does is outlaw dissent.
All -isms depend on tyranny to a greater or lesser extent. Socialism couldn't exist without the strongest form of tyranny because it proposes the most radical form of restructure.

Welcome to the Gulag, Mr. Enemy of the Revolution.
rubbish, socialism is democratic, far more democratic than capitalism. Even in Lenins Russia, which never made it as far as socialism, they had democracy
daft punk is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 07:05 PM   #1367065  /  #293
daft punk
has left the building
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,421
daft punk
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkepticTank View Post
Yeah, there have been a few posts referencing re-education camps. I haven't seen daft address that little nicety.
hopefully there wont be any need for them
daft punk is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 07:07 PM   #1367068  /  #294
madmardigan
I can handle this Eurotrash
 
madmardigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: nakatomi plaza
Posts: 10,081
madmardigan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daft punk View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkepticTank View Post
Yeah, there have been a few posts referencing re-education camps. I haven't seen daft address that little nicety.
hopefully there wont be any need for them
well what happens when the "berating" doesn't work?
__________________
madmardigan is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 07:17 PM   #1367082  /  #295
Bilirubin
YOU HEINOUS TOOL
Bejeweled 2 Champion Adjunct
 
Bilirubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: SOME GODDAMNED METEOR FLYING AT LIGHT SPEED
Posts: 27,800
Bilirubin
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Preno View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by daft punk View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preno View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by daft punk View Post
There would be no waiters in socialism
lol jesus christ
Whats so hard about self service? I dont know how community restaurants would work exactly, but Im sure they wouldnt have waiters.
What the hell does socialism have to do with self-service at a restaurant?
Socialism is starting to sound more and more like an English pub.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksen View Post
Also, if you guys think I've been way out of line you can recall me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by the BEST elf View Post
i've always hated "well recall me then" as the only meaningful thing that can be done when a mod does stupid shit. it should not be an all or nothing proposition.
Bilirubin is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 07:22 PM   #1367092  /  #296
daft punk
has left the building
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,421
daft punk
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fleet-footed Urban Youth View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathpig View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkepticTank View Post
And we'll rise up and revolt
Doubtful, the first thing the new boss does is outlaw dissent.
All -isms depend on tyranny to a greater or lesser extent. Socialism couldn't exist without the strongest form of tyranny because it proposes the most radical form of restructure.

Welcome to the Gulag, Mr. Enemy of the Revolution.
not really sure how any marxist could deny this, it's kinda built into the ideology

Quote:
Originally Posted by Engels in "On Authority"
Why do the anti-authoritarians not confine themselves to crying out against political authority, the state? All Socialists are agreed that the political state, and with it political authority, will disappear as a result of the coming social revolution, that is, that public functions will lose their political character and will be transformed into the simple administrative functions of watching over the true interests of society. But the anti-authoritarians demand that the political state be abolished at one stroke, even before the social conditions that gave birth to it have been destroyed. They demand that the first act of the social revolution shall be the abolition of authority. Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannon authoritarian means, if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if it had not made use of this authority of the armed people against the bourgeois? Should we not, on the contrary, reproach it for not having used it freely enough?
Well of course there is that, but dont forget that was 150 years ago and there wasnt much democracy to start with. The capitalists might try a coup, the trick is to win over the rank and file of the army.

The Paris Commune was the first proper revolution, a vindication of Marx and Engels predictions. But is happened in a situation of war, more or less, with increasing poverty and hunger, and the city briefly occupied by the Germans.

Obviously Chile is an example of how not to do it though, and at that stage the socialists were correctly calling for the arming of the workers.
daft punk is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 07:24 PM   #1367094  /  #297
sanshou
freedom axis
Mod: A&E
 
sanshou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 47,193
sanshou
Default

i seriously hate you more than justin bieber right now
__________________
a man creates. a parasite asks, "where is my share?"
sanshou is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 07:26 PM   #1367096  /  #298
daft punk
has left the building
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,421
daft punk
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fleet-footed Urban Youth View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkepticTank View Post
Yeah, there have been a few posts referencing re-education camps. I haven't seen daft address that little nicety.
if daft actually understands marxism and is consistent, this is not something to be addressed, per se, it is simply one way to address the threat posed by the elite of the current bourgeois dictatorship (i.e., parliamentary or republican democracy) and its retainers under the future proletarian dictatorship (democratic central planning and worker's councils i guess??). the only thing to address is how effective it is as a means of suppressing reactionary bourgeois counter-revolution
Of course I understand that the capitalists WILL fight back, at least in some countries, they will try to in all cases to some extent or other. In Russian 200,000 foreign troops aided the whites.

But we now live in a world which is mainly urban, educated, working class, and so the working class has it a lot easier. As long as the army is mostly on board.
daft punk is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 07:27 PM   #1367099  /  #299
fleet-footed Urban Youth
CHO-CO-LAY-TOH
RnR/TR Official Historian
 
fleet-footed Urban Youth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 39,097
fleet-footed Urban Youth
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daft punk View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleet-footed Urban Youth View Post

how is putting food in one place for people to travel to, pick up, and take home to cook less sustainable than putting food in one place where it is cooked and people travel to it to eat?

neither one serves sustainability better than the other. what would serve sustainability is transportation backed by renewable or at least abundant energy that doesn't pollute, local agriculture where shipping and rail transport isn't viable, and farming methods that don't degrade the topsoil so it becomes a dead sponge for synthetic fertilizers. we do this and we can have supermarkets and restaurants without issue.
Well they would be dotted around all over so the average family could get to on in a 5 minute walk. Obviously most people take the car to the supermarket. So yeah it would save car journeys.
how does the food get to these "dotted" locales? whatever answer you choose, food for home cooking could be transported to "dotted" marts the same way.

Quote:
Its more sustainable because the food isn't flown from another country, processed, packaged, placed in a supermarket, and so on. Instead it is grown by local farmers and cooked fresh each day.
none of this has anything to do with whether you're cooking at home or easting at a community cafeteria or w/e. food can be "grown by local farmers and cooked fresh each day" at home.

Quote:
It would be healthier, cheaper, and use less resources. I agree with what you say about green energy, local agriculture and sustainable farming. That is part of my plan. But why then send it to a factory to have all the vitamins sucked out, and then put it in a box and send it to sit on a supermarket shelf? Why not cook it fresh and sell it straight to the public at cost?
why is the choice between all that factory/boxing/shelf shit and a community cafeteria? we can do away with the factory/boxing/shelf shit and still cook at home.

Quote:
The other part of the reason is to save housework. Some women spend all their time doing it.
why would community cafeterias necessarily have an equal gender division of work, and not homes?
__________________
SEE YOU IN THE MOSH'SH PIT
fleet-footed Urban Youth is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Old 04-05-2011, 07:28 PM   #1367106  /  #300
daft punk
has left the building
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,421
daft punk
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkepticTank View Post
You know how many stores you'd have to have in suburbia so "the average family could get to on[e] in a 5 minute walk"?

Yeah yeah, I'm sure one of your next Socialist reforms will be to eliminate urban sprawl, and pack everyone into denser living areas like high rise apartment buildings.
Well, maybe not everyone in a 5 minute walk, but hopefully most people in a reasonable walk anyway. Where I live there must be 25 restaurants and takeaways within a 10 minute walk. And I qualify as suburbia.
daft punk is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom
Reply

  TalkRational > Discussion > Politics and Current Affairs

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2008 - 2014, TalkRational.org