England headed for A Caliphate

[Loren Pechtel]

So retirement isn't possible?

Your system basically enforces living paycheck to paycheck. Maybe you do it that way but you shouldn't force everyone else to.

Nope. The total amount of wealth isn’t changing. A social safety net would still be possible. An eventual societal sea change could result in giving a fuck about the other guy.
There are many other interesting side effects one can ponder from this BLATANTLY, OBVIOUSLY, IMPOSSIBLE FANTASY proposition.

You could still have a social safety net but there's nothing to be gained from not spending your whole paycheck. Thus everyone will live paycheck to paycheck.

And of course it's impossible--doesn't mean you can't examine the consequences.

Note what happened here: those of us on the economic right immediately saw what it would do to economic incentives. It would not do what it says on the label. Real world, you can't just change one thing and expect everything else to not react.

 

[Elixir]

there's nothing to be gained from not spending your whole paycheck

WHAT paycheck? It’s just as likely YOU paying you as anyone else. You better get useful and get bargaining.
If you want anything, that is. The jungle awaits if you don’t.
If you got tons of cash in the last swap, good luck spending it.

It’s just a thought experiment, Loren.
In your dystopian version, everyone starves or dies of over-engorgement, because they assume they won’t be able to keep their food long enough to eat it, nobody wants to produce any and most people murder each other for it.
Come to think of it, that’s basically where we are now.

Back to the thought experiment -
I would expect that if such a system was instituted globally, assuming people adopting a long view, it would not take many swaps for wealth to become quite evenly distributed throughout the population. Early on, whoever inherits a billionaire’s portfolio SHOULD be encouraged to “blow it all”. I.e. dump it all back into the economy so that other people (like, a million of them) can have a million in their portfolio. The more that happens, the better the odds of you getting a “good draw” next time.

 

[laughing dog]

You're being a good frog.

Wow. I've seen estimates that about 30% of Nevada's population are white christian nationalists. Are you being a good frog as well?

No, I don't go along with them.

Unless you arw doing something about ut, you’re froggin’ it.

 

[bilby]

I would thus expect an automated detection that he was prohibited.

Your expectations are not laws of nature, nor facts about reality.

Why would such a system exist for aircrew? Before this incident, what would have inspired the considerable expense and effort to bring aircrew (who travel internationally daily, often many times a day) into a system designed to manage passengers (who rarely travel internationally even weekly)?

Does that system even exist for passengers travelling to non-US destinations? You assume that everywhere has the same, or at least a very similar, approach to that taken by the US; And that aircrew face the same, or at least a very similar, approach to that taken for passengers. Both assumptions are highly implausible.

In the time since I wrote that we've

We? You and who else?

seen I guessed correctly. Israel caught a prohibited pilot on another flight--the manifest wasn't sent until the plane was in the air.

So - EITHER Israel changed their processes to prevent a recurrence of a serious issue; OR this is evidence that you were right all along.

Forgive me for thinking the former vastly more likely.

And people blame Israel because the plane had to dump fuel and turn around.

Which people? Are they people whose opinions we should care about? Are they anyone you or I know personally? Or are they as mythical as the "we" who saw that you guessed correctly?

 

[bilby]

These are not mariners in distress, these are people that intentionally marooned themselves at sea.

So you keep baselessly asserting.

Which do you see as plausible:

Assylum seekers attempt to cross the Channel with the intent of landing on the English coast, but due to incompetence, lack of preparation, and their use of unseaworthy vessels, they get into trouble and need rescuing; Or

Assylum seekers attempt to cross the Channel with the intent of sinking part-way, hoping to force the RNLI, who they hope will notice their distress and be able to act, to rescue them before they drown?

Do you really think it is reasonable to assume that people deliberately try to kill themselves in the hope that getting rescued will a) happen, and b) save them the effort of rowing the last few miles?

It's an absurd idea that arises only from your crazy belief that these people are evil incarnate.

Asylum seekers in vessels towed out to sea so they can claim to be in peril and rescued.

They are not intending to kill themselves, it's coordinated with the rescuers.

And I don't believe they are evil incarnate. Most are fine. The problem is when Islam and the west come into conflict they'll side with Islam.

I don't know how much you follow what's going on in the US, but consider the MAGAs. Same basic problem: most are not evil themselves, but will choose their tribe, not being willing to believe it to be doing evil.

Do you ever read your own posts, and think "could this also apply to me?"?

 

[Emily Lake]

God forbid you might ever indulge in a thought experiment.

The point of a thought experiment is to actually think about what would happen.

Thought experiments are 99% thought and 1% experiment.

Dude (and I'm saying that deliberately) maybe do some as you would call "Yank research" and check up on Project 2025. Your thought experiment isn't as theoretical as you'd prefer.

I find it interesting how many people point to Project 2025, done independently of any actual party (even though it's definitely closely associated), but are perfectly content to ignore the DSA's actual published party platform and just hand-wave it away.

 

[Emily Lake]

In a very few years at current rates the non-English > English.

Non-English names are already the majority, by your figures. 'Jones' and 'Williams' are Welsh names.

But wait - how are Muslim, Sikh, or Hindu indicative of non-English status? These are religions, not nationalities.

The idea that there are no English Sikhs, no English Hindus, or no English Muslims is nonsensical. You might as well divide names into 'English' vs 'Catholic' or 'Jewish'.

Your analysis is absurd.

I suppose it depends on whether you assume those english-by-citizenship surnames indicate cultural assimilation or not.

 

[Emily Lake]

I think you are looking at what the result of communism was and ignoring all the steps that led to it. Liberalism led to economic liberalism which led to horrific standards for workers in Europe in the 19'th century. You'd hardly, from this, conclude that the point of liberalism is to make workers suffer?

I'm skipping a whole bunch, admittedly. But I think you're making a very fundamental error in your thinking.

Standards for workers in Europe in the 19th century are horrific... compared to what, exactly? Compared to today in first world country, definitely. Compared to the state of peasants across the board in the 17th century, not so much.

Liberalism is better than Feudalism in terms of quality of life. Communism is worse.

 

[Emily Lake]

But you know what makes him really un-American? He is resisting the finance bro vulture capitalism of pirate equity.

Good!

Also, I'm 100% going to adopt "pirate equity".

 

[Emily Lake]

Who do you think is more welcome?

Indeed. Thing is, that’s the wrong question. It’s shortsighted.
Who will have the better long term effect, is a better question.
Is an urgent need of the billionaire class to have plenty of people on the edge of starvation, desperate to serve them for a crust.

Pretty sure that the countries that have billionaires have a much lower portion of people on the edge of starvation than those that don't.