added in dark blue
quote=labelwench;92969
That wealth, resources and opportunity are not equally accessible, we seem to view similarly.
Yes
That persons desire different experience of their personal journey does pose a difficulty in defining a "level playing field."
Not if one confers equal potential to all.
A fixed one World salary would accomplish this.
If we were all given a battery - some would place it in an ipod, others in powered secateurs -
some into portable DVD players.
We maximize the options by conferring the same potential to all.
The poor may be able to dream of becoming rich in this current rotten system -
- but it doesn't happen for the very vast majority.
Remove the delusion and replace it with a very real better; the plan will begin to work when people see that there are billions of people working for each other.
Imagine how nice it'd be if we all worked for each other -
- imagine the number of video games we'd have to play,
the amount of music available to listen to,
the number of sculpted gardens we could visit (and take cuttings from) ... ...
(personal empowerment
- an end to experts (after all))
We would feel happy that there are so many people on the planet - because we'd benefit from others' exploits
- rather than the present situation where any benefit realised
co$t$
more than it's worth -
- and where the lack of space makes most wish that it'd be for the best if 99% of the population could be wiped offa' the face of the planet
such that whoever is left
could
breathe.
The world owes none of us a living,
The justification which people with money use to maintain the status quo
- often one finds this type of argument descending into citing 'the rules of the jungle'
- we are no longer animals though -
- we're trying to educate ourselves away from the laws of the jungle.
The jungle knows competition -
man knows only collaboration.
We're no longer animals
- no longer physical level constructs
- cannot tolerate people who prevent us from getting over physical world concerns -
- where one wage for all stops all of the nonsense.
Why can't we tolerate the rich?
Because all people are enmeshed within a one world system or species -
we can't simply exist by black boxing the rich -
- their wealth exerts an effect outside of their immediate sphere of influence and pervades the life of all other people regardless.
Much like good cannot exist without evil -
- the rich require poor for self-definition.
yet we seemingly inherit a "will to survive", even in the face of adversity.
The tendency to evolve to complexity is the only trick which energy has to wield.
Our will to survive is our human experiential perspective over our own 'build'
- our own construction 'atop the Second Law of Thermodynamics -
- our own expression of the energetic component which gives rise to structure -
- all structures
- structure representing the commonality between all things in our coherent Universe of action.
(A function of nerve, recognition, the 'lock and key' model of enzyme-substrate
- always structure)
A humane or enlightened society should, in my opinion, work toward caretaking our common resource, the planet earth, and ensuring that each person and creature receives the birthright of access to the resources needed to survive, and, it is hoped, thrive and experience the happiness of it's kind.
A fixed salary to all (conferring the same potential to all people) will achieve exactly this.
From my observations, no matter how equal the starting point, and the sustaining environment, equality is an ideal, as unattainable as perfection in a breed standard for a dog, a horse or a rose.
Equality has multiple meanings -
- all human beings have a head
(note - not a mind)
- this is an equality.
A discussion of equality will require that we tread carefully -
explaining our words at each stage of the discussion.
We'd all like to see maximal permissible variability
- this can be achieved by ensuring that all people are afforded the exact same quantitative pluripotency (the same freedom to choose).
A fixed salary to all (conferring the same potential to all people) will achieve exactly this.
Although the ideal is aknowledged to be unattainable, it is a mutually observed value because it grants us a common denominator to work with, as no two human (or creature) perspectives can ever be exactly the same.
We're not striving to generate a population of clones
- this is not the definition of equality which we're striving for
- that'd be dull -
- we're seeking fun -
where fun is achieved when there's most to do
(to occupy our minds)
- is best achieved on a population level when we're afforded the same potential to mobilize the human creativity which we all
~by definition~
of being human
share.
A fixed salary to all (conferring the same potential to all people) will achieve exactly this.
Two objects cannot occupy the same space at the same time.
- this is not the definition of equality which we're striving towards -
we're not seeking perfect clonal behaviour within the exact same sector of time-space -
- even if it were possible -
what'd be the point.
Evolution requires a scaleable structure which
(with each additional level or abstraction layer)
results
in an exponential increase in the potential energy stored within the structure.
This geometric evolutionary tendency and this tendency alone explains away all aspects of the reality within which we inhabit.
All we require is a a pattern of evolution of energy -
when that energy exceeds the carrying capacity of a sector of time:space -
- and from this geometric progression (by order) -
- and this progression alone -
- we can regenerate our entire reality.
~*~
Apologies haven't time to proof-read this post
- need to go out -
- will pick up the post from here in an hour or so ... ... ...
Even without a universal definition for the terms "space" and "time", that seems to explain our individuality.


LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote

