220 réponses à ce sujet

[TheMarshal]

We're talking about humanity in general. Charles Saracino, Ethan Jeong, Udina, Harkin, Rear Admiral Mikhailovich, etc. etc. And if you don't think there's at least one high-ranking Alliance official who's Cerberus, you're kidding yourself.

Modifié par TheMarshal, 29 juin 2011 - 03:20 .

[HTTP 404]

TheMarshal wrote...

We're talking about humanity in general. Charles Saracino, Ethan Jeong, Udina, Harkin, Rear Admiral Mikhailovich, etc. etc. And you're kidding yourself if you don't think that there's not at least one high-ranking Alliance officer who's Cerberus.

what about Anderson, Kahoku, and hackett?

[Brand New]

The basis of the argument is to cause a state of emergency. Can you imagine the rate of crime? It would skyrocket if the world was going to end. People would go insane. No take that and put it on a galactic level.

The universe is going to be purged soon, who cares if jail is a year when you can commit terrible crimes and get away with them likely until after the universe is purged.

[The Twilight God]

FluffyScarf wrote...

Turtle-bat-dinosaur monsters.

Wrong! Turians are clearly raptor-turtle-cat-cockroach people.

[TheMarshal]

HTTP 404 wrote...

TheMarshal wrote...

We're talking about humanity in general. Charles Saracino, Ethan Jeong, Udina, Harkin, Rear Admiral Mikhailovich, etc. etc. And you're kidding yourself if you don't think that there's not at least one high-ranking Alliance officer who's Cerberus.

what about Anderson, Kahoku, and hackett?

For all of Anderson's talk, the only thing he did to truly help Shepard out was getting the Normandy lockdown lifted.  Hackett put Shepard in a situation that at the very least had him/her going into hostile territory, and was fully prepared to let him/her take the blame for such an operation.  I don't know much about Kahoku, other than he died at Cerberus' hands.

[Zubie]

Hackett kept the Alliance off Shepard's back when they wanted to arrest him/her.

Also, Shepard has always had a good relationship with Hackett. I highly doubt he would throw him to the dogs. At least, not intentionally. I suspect he knew of the importance of the mission and went to the most reliable person he knew of.

[mauro2222]

SandTrout wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

Emm, "There will always be poverty as long as what everybody wants adds up to more than there is" problem, education.

There's a whole science dedicated to understanding this. It's called
"economics" and you should check it out before declaring that poverty
can be ended if only people would listen to you.

I dont know if I should laugh or something xD. I am omnipotent, listen to me mortals, ´cause the truth only comes from my mouth. Please mortal, explain the relation of what I wrote with that thing.

What you wrote stated that there is a way for poverty to be eradicated even though the entire concept of poverty is a state which is held relative to others within your society.

In modern western civilization, 'poverty' includes people whos living conditions are better than the middle class 100 years ago, let alone 1000 years ago. They are still considered as living in poverty because their living standards are significantly less than the generally accepted standard for that society.

Therefor, the only way to get rid of poverty is to make sure that everyone has the same stuff as everyone else. The practice of this concept is called 'Communism'. When it has been tried, communism has, at best, resulted economic stagnation, and, at worst, the most corrupt and brutal regimes in existence and economic collapse.

All economies that to not attempt enforced economic equality (and some that do) result in non-equal distribution of wealth, with many people not having everything that they want. This is historically the healthiest form of economy, with even those that fall bellow the poverty line typically having better living conditions than communist based economies of similar circumstance.

What you are expressing, by claiming that poverty is not eliminated because of a fear of change and lack of education, has been proven largely invalid by history, especially considering the most prosperous and educated nations in history typically still had a small portion of their population which could be considered as living in poverty at the time.

Note that poverty is not good thing in and of itself, but rather, the act of attempting to eliminate poverty across the board typically is more destructive than allowing a certain ammount of poverty to persist.

With the total elimination of money in our society, correct education, and the use of REAL technology, all of this will be gone, it isnt going to be Utopia, but better? yes.

Note that poverty is not good thing in and of itself, but
rather, the act of attempting to eliminate poverty across the board
typically is more destructive than allowing a certain ammount of poverty
to persist.

So let's have wars, and genocide because it easier than feed 1000000 people.
I clearly dont understand why people see two sides only, or it is communism, or capitalism.
Capitalism is a total fail, communism is better, but is not the best. So i kept with resource based economy.

You cannot have a communist country and the rest of the world is capitalist, and you cannot have a capitalist country when the rest of the world is communist. Is simple logic, communism is a menace to rich people, while capitalism is always a menace to the 3/4 of the worlds population.

They are both flawled, when you have a government, a state, police, or whatever institution that has more power than any citizen, the system is a total fail.

Our planet has all the resources to mantain the current population and more, but is funny to see that more than half of that population doesn't even have for eat. And those who have more paper, instead of helping others, they concentrate in consuming things they don't need. Our society is twisted at such level that we are tought that we learn to have a job, when the human mind learns to survive, that is the real human nature, will to learn, jobs are the means to improve our abilities, but how do you expect to see someone improving his aspects when he is jailed to a no sense work because he barely has something to feed his family. In order to survive we "need" things, but nowadays is "we want things", we are nothing more than numbers.

[SandTrout]

TheMarshal wrote...

Those two things that I listed are mistakes in the reasoning of the person that I was talking to earlier had. They are false, as I went on to discuss.

If he went from Special Forces levels of motivation to Anti-Human in the time frame of ME1 and 2, then Shepard is insane.

As for the OP's motivations, you are again falsely assuming that these feelings of disdain for one's own government/people have always been present. And I again suggest that it is not the case at all. We've seen very little in the way of selfless acts from either the Alliance or humanity in general. Save for a scant few instances, all we've seen in both games is greed, torture, revenge, deceit, xenophobia and the like. And you're telling me that a people who waste their abilities on such horrible things are worth pledging your undying loyalty to?

Actually, the greed, torture, revenge, deceit, xenophobia is much more visable within most of the other species and the council, or can be atributed to Cerberus, which is a separate organization in itself. Regardless of all this, the fact that he advocates the destruction of his own species is sick in and of itself, regardless of how long he has held these beliefs. As I have stated, he is only calling for the destruction of the Alliance and Humanity. He is not supporting anything, even some ideal of what the Human government should be. I reiterate that this kind of self-destructive thinking is a sign of mental illness.

Let me rephrase: why should I lift a finger for people who have repeatedly used me to do their dirty work and then disown me as soon as it's expedient to do so?

Because that's what special forces is, and members of SF know this going in.

As for humanity: no I don't think they're worth saving because of the way the story is written. It feels like everyone but Shepard and co. is a jerk, a fool, or helpless. I the player don't get a sense that these characters are worth fighting for. We need more Kate Bowmans and fewer Delans.

Who the hell is Delan? I couldn't even find that name in the Wiki other than a hanar merchant. Besides the point, really, though. There are plenty of examples of well-meaning, competent humans in the series, even if you seem to focus on the bad ones that we run into frequently because we seek them out.

You cannot seriously expect every human you meet to be as willing to enter a firefight with armed pirates as Shepard. Hell, the crappy humans that you run into in the course of your duties that you didn't actively seek out because they're bad people can be counted on one hand, and most of them are debatable: Udina, Harkin, the Obnoxious Reporter, TIM, and maybe the Terra Firma activist. Meanwhile, you have people like Anderson, Emily Wong, Ashley, Kaiden, Presly, Hacket, Kate Bowman, Chawkwas, Joker, and a number of other people you run into along the way, most of which you do not actively seek out.

[mauro2222]

Wolfborn Son wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

Emm, "There will always be poverty as long as what everybody wants adds up to more than there is" problem, education.

OOC: All the education in the world doesn't stop an ***hole from being an ***hole, and so-long as we have them in this world we will always have poverty, injustice, and war.  Exploitation happens because people are immoral, not poorly informed.   Do you think the Bernie Madoffs of the world will really change their tune the moment they hear about the wonders of socailism?

IC: The Alliance hasn't done anything to deal with poverty.  Nor has any other system.

e people are ****ed up already, I was talking of future generations. You cannot change someone thoughts if that person makes a resistance to the change.

[MajorStranger]

Anyone remember private Roycewicz. He was a NPC in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare. Not that important, he was scripted to die in an stairs ambush, but could be saved if you reacted fast enough.

If you think like a casual gamer, it's just a couple of pixel and algorithm. But if you think like a soldier (like the game intended you to) He's a young marine with a mother and a father back home, hoping to see him back safe. He's got hope, fear and hobby like everyone. And fate decided that if you aren't there to watch his back he'll die, and everything he used to be shall be gone. This is a situation where you can see what you are truly made of. You can just let the sprite die then kill the enemy, or you can kill the enemy, endangering yourself in the process of saving him. You don't get an in-game reward for it (you do get an achievement but that's not the point here) But instead you see him staying alive.

Ever since that game every I did my best to save as much ally npc as possible. It's not about your own survival, it's about keeping our humanity.

This is why I took 10 minutes deciding which one to save on Virmire, this is why I took my time to get all the protection and the loyality needed to get everyone back home safe during the suicide mission. And this is why I'll make sure to save as many people, human, salarian, elcor, drell, hanar, krogan, quarian, volus, turian, asari, vorcha, batarian and rachni. Not because I know those people, but because I have the power to change what could be 20 billions death into 2000. Every lifeform is important. Haven't you understood what the rachni genocide and the krogan genophage have done to the galaxy?

[mauro2222]

MajorStranger wrote...

Anyone remember private Roycewicz. He was a NPC in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare. Not that important, he was scripted to die in an stairs ambush, but could be saved if you reacted fast enough.

If you think like a casual gamer, it's just a couple of pixel and algorithm. But if you think like a soldier (like the game intended you to) He's a young marine with a mother and a father back home, hoping to see him back safe. He's got hope, fear and hobby like everyone. And fate decided that if you aren't there to watch his back he'll die, and everything he used to be shall be gone. This is a situation where you can see what you are truly made of. You can just let the sprite die then kill the enemy, or you can kill the enemy, endangering yourself in the process of saving him. You don't get an in-game reward for it (you do get an achievement but that's not the point here) But instead you see him staying alive.

Ever since that game every I did my best to save as much ally npc as possible. It's not about your own survival, it's about keeping our humanity.

This is why I took 10 minutes deciding which one to save on Virmire, this is why I took my time to get all the protection and the loyality needed to get everyone back home safe during the suicide mission. And this is why I'll make sure to save as many people, human, salarian, elcor, drell, hanar, krogan, quarian, volus, turian, asari, vorcha, batarian and rachni. Not because I know those people, but because I have the power to change what could be 20 billions death into 2000. Every lifeform is important. Haven't you understood what the rachni genocide and the krogan genophage have done to the galaxy?

I simply can't say nothing better than this.
You sir, are a human.

[mauro2222]

Making preferences over any kind of life form is wrong. If you have the power to save 10000 vorcha (nobody likes vorcha, or batarians xD), but your family will die, and then you choose your family, you are selfish at a very extreme level. Every life is sacred, every life worth any sacrifice.

Modifié par mauro2222, 29 juin 2011 - 04:00 .

[Zubie]

MajorStranger wrote...

Anyone remember private Roycewicz. He was a NPC in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare. Not that important, he was scripted to die in an stairs ambush, but could be saved if you reacted fast enough.

If you think like a casual gamer, it's just a couple of pixel and algorithm. But if you think like a soldier (like the game intended you to) He's a young marine with a mother and a father back home, hoping to see him back safe. He's got hope, fear and hobby like everyone. And fate decided that if you aren't there to watch his back he'll die, and everything he used to be shall be gone. This is a situation where you can see what you are truly made of. You can just let the sprite die then kill the enemy, or you can kill the enemy, endangering yourself in the process of saving him. You don't get an in-game reward for it (you do get an achievement but that's not the point here) But instead you see him staying alive.

Ever since that game every I did my best to save as much ally npc as possible. It's not about your own survival, it's about keeping our humanity.

This is why I took 10 minutes deciding which one to save on Virmire, this is why I took my time to get all the protection and the loyality needed to get everyone back home safe during the suicide mission. And this is why I'll make sure to save as many people, human, salarian, elcor, drell, hanar, krogan, quarian, volus, turian, asari, vorcha, batarian and rachni. Not because I know those people, but because I have the power to change what could be 20 billions death into 2000. Every lifeform is important. Haven't you understood what the rachni genocide and the krogan genophage have done to the galaxy?

Nice post.

I play my games pretty much the same way.

[mauro2222]

easygame88 wrote...

MajorStranger wrote...

Anyone remember private Roycewicz. He was a NPC in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare. Not that important, he was scripted to die in an stairs ambush, but could be saved if you reacted fast enough.

If you think like a casual gamer, it's just a couple of pixel and algorithm. But if you think like a soldier (like the game intended you to) He's a young marine with a mother and a father back home, hoping to see him back safe. He's got hope, fear and hobby like everyone. And fate decided that if you aren't there to watch his back he'll die, and everything he used to be shall be gone. This is a situation where you can see what you are truly made of. You can just let the sprite die then kill the enemy, or you can kill the enemy, endangering yourself in the process of saving him. You don't get an in-game reward for it (you do get an achievement but that's not the point here) But instead you see him staying alive.

Ever since that game every I did my best to save as much ally npc as possible. It's not about your own survival, it's about keeping our humanity.

This is why I took 10 minutes deciding which one to save on Virmire, this is why I took my time to get all the protection and the loyality needed to get everyone back home safe during the suicide mission. And this is why I'll make sure to save as many people, human, salarian, elcor, drell, hanar, krogan, quarian, volus, turian, asari, vorcha, batarian and rachni. Not because I know those people, but because I have the power to change what could be 20 billions death into 2000. Every lifeform is important. Haven't you understood what the rachni genocide and the krogan genophage have done to the galaxy?

Nice post.

I play my games pretty much the same way.

Me too, I cant make renegade actions when life is forgiveable. All my shepards are paragon Thats why I saved Shiala, the colonist, and so on.

[SandTrout]

With the total elimination of money in our society, correct education, and the use of REAL technology, all of this will be gone, it isnt going to be Utopia, but better? yes.

You apparently do not understand what money actually represents, think that the Russian and Chinese reeducation camps are a good thing, and that technology created for the purpose of profit is not 'real'. Here's some hints: Money is representative of 'stuff', and is typically earned by providing something of value for someone else; the elimination of money will not equalize how much stuff people have. China and Russia are far less educated on the average than Americans and Western Europeans. No technology was ever invented without the purpose of someone gaining from it.

So let's have wars, and genocide because it easier than feed 1000000 people.
I clearly dont understand why people see two sides only, or it is communism, or capitalism.
Capitalism is a total fail, communism is better, but is not the best. So i kept with resource based economy.

Well, you seem to understand the economic nature of war, but I fail to see how communism prevents that somehow. As for there being only two sides: I never mentioned captialism, I only pointed out the numerous flaws of communism that have been proven historically to fail everywhere they have been tried. History says that you're wrong considering that capitalist countries are the most powerful and prosperous, while most communist countries have failed to keep up, with the only notable exception being China, which has implemented capitalist policies in many areas.

You cannot have a communist country and the rest of the world is capitalist, and you cannot have a capitalist country when the rest of the world is communist. Is simple logic, communism is a menace to rich people, while capitalism is always a menace to the 3/4 of the worlds population.

Communism has proven to be a menace to 99% of those under it, historically. Capitalist populations, however, are 'menaced' by higher standards of living than 99% of communist populations.

Our planet has all the resources to mantain the current population and more, but is funny to see that more than half of that population doesn't even have for eat.

And guess what kinds of countries that half that are starving (which is an erroneous number) are living in. Here's a hint, not capitalist. To be fair, though, that's mainly b/c China has such a large population. A large portion of the starving do not live under either a capitalist or communist system, they live under subsistence agriculture and are usually in areas where there is no effective government, or an extremely oppressive and corrupt one.

And those who have more paper, instead of helping others, they concentrate in consuming things they don't need. Our society is twisted at such level that we are tought that we learn to have a job, when the human mind learns to survive, that is the real human nature, will to learn, jobs are the means to improve our abilities, but how do you expect to see someone improving his aspects when he is jailed to a no sense work because he barely has something to feed his family. In order to survive we "need" things, but nowadays is "we want things", we are nothing more than numbers.

Guess what, we have all those nice things that we want but don't need because we trade the value of our labor for them. Money just makes it easier to do so. People do not work as hard without incentive. All that extra stuff we have is our incentive to work harder and create more value to trade for that stuff.

Those people that are starving are not starving because I worked hard, saved my money, and bought a plasma TV, they are starving because their societies are so goddamn screwed up that they cannot keep what little that they do manage to produce.

[SandTrout]

mauro2222 wrote...

Making preferences over any kind of life form is wrong. If you have the power to save 10000 vorcha (nobody likes vorcha, or batarians xD), but your family will die, and then you choose your family, you are selfish at a very extreme level. Every life is sacred, every life worth any sacrifice.

The funny thing is that you think your 'selflessness' is actually productive. It is not. You expect people to give away everything they have to people based on need, even though they recieve nothing in return. Yet, if ones possessions are given away because someone else needed them, why would anyone work to create that stuff? You can just ask for it because you need it. There is no incentive to excell, there is no reward for being good at what you do, there is only punishment for being valuable, because you must provide more to people who need it.

Meanwhile, those people who are in 'need' contribute no value to the economy, and simply act as consuming parasites upon those who are capable and willing to create something of value. Therefor, you are placing a greater burden on those on whom you depend to provide your 'needs', while offering nothing in return for the value which you have stolen from them. Money is not just something that magically gets your stuff. Money that you earn is representative of value which you have input into the economy. Money that you receive as alms is representative of someone else's value, which you are using to support yourself. This is the fundamental nature of a parasite when one accepts money without earning it through trade.

[rapscallioness]

Wow..@J..just..wow. But okay, okay. Let me step back from the emotion of it and the way your OP makes me want to puke. (and note @sandtrout.you don't have to be in the military to find this OP repugnant).

@jtav it's not really the Alliance bashing..it's the humanity not worth saving, and the actively looking for a chance to destroy Earth that makes me want to puke. But I read another of your posts and you were talking about the way humanity is written in ME..makes you wanna puke, basically. What I gather is that you didn't find any of the human characterizations in ME sympathetic. You couldn't feel any empathy.

I did feel empathy tho with some of the human characters. Nef's mom; the colonists that did Not get taken by the Collector's, but their children were taken, their friends, their families; Ferros ppl. I thought ME did a pretty good job writing the characters for ME. Humans and aliens. Some were honorable, some were corrupt; some were optimists and some were jaded....that's the way it is.

And see I also don't think Hackett set up Shepard. He asked her to go in there because he was trying to save a friend without starting a major war with the Batarians. If the Allaince went , or an Alliance affiliate stormed in there, the Batarians would have an excuse to get into the war they wanted. But then next thing you know, it's massive genocide and a star system is destroyed! Hackett wanted this on the sly, get in, get out....now there's almost no avoiding a full scale war. I can imagine him shouting, "wtf!?!" But then I don't think he took into account that Kenson might be indoctrinated. I'm surprised Shepard didn't think of that. She's knows more about these Reapers than anybody.

And after everything that went down in Arrival, there are gonna be consequences. There's gonna be some explaining to do, in a real way. It doesn't look good at all. Shep. seems to be working for Cerberus; genocide; exploding star systems.....if they hadn't brought Shep. in for trial, I woulda been really disappointed with the writing because BS they're not gonna bring her in after That.

Hackett explained in a straightforward way what he wanted- a covert operation. (one that I was fully expecting to accomplish until I realized I was being railroaded into committing genocide by ME. ..:/)

Yes, there are definitely some ODB's in the Alliance. Shake 'em up-shake 'em out, but don't destroy the Earth....just...nooooo...no. You're the hero.

[rapscallioness]

Hey sandtrout and mauro, can we stop with this? I'm trying to get away from this crap. Can I please enjoy some ME escapism without this insidious political cancer?

[SandTrout]

rapscallioness wrote...

Hey sandtrout and mauro, can we stop with this? I'm trying to get away from this crap. Can I please enjoy some ME escapism without this insidious political cancer?

Sorry, my bad. It's just that the mindset of the OP is something I find highly offensive, and feel the urge to correct, and ended up getting tied into explaining economics.

You are correct. The communism vs. captialism thing really is getting off topic.

Sorry for the de-rail, it kind of snowballed on me.

[rapscallioness]

thank you, sand trout. i understand passions run deep. although sometimes I feel like I'm dealing with the same questions and debates within the ME stories...lol.

Anyway, it's about time for me to get off of here. until next time everyone

[mauro2222]

SandTrout wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

Making preferences over any kind of life form is wrong. If you have the power to save 10000 vorcha (nobody likes vorcha, or batarians xD), but your family will die, and then you choose your family, you are selfish at a very extreme level. Every life is sacred, every life worth any sacrifice.

The funny thing is that you think your 'selflessness' is actually productive. It is not. You expect people to give away everything they have to people based on need, even though they recieve nothing in return. Yet, if ones possessions are given away because someone else needed them, why would anyone work to create that stuff? You can just ask for it because you need it. There is no incentive to excell, there is no reward for being good at what you do, there is only punishment for being valuable, because you must provide more to people who need it.

Meanwhile, those people who are in 'need' contribute no value to the economy, and simply act as consuming parasites upon those who are capable and willing to create something of value. Therefor, you are placing a greater burden on those on whom you depend to provide your 'needs', while offering nothing in return for the value which you have stolen from them. Money is not just something that magically gets your stuff. Money that you earn is representative of value which you have input into the economy. Money that you receive as alms is representative of someone else's value, which you are using to support yourself. This is the fundamental nature of a parasite when one accepts money without earning it through trade.

You are the living proof of how twisted this consumist society is. I always speak from a world were there is no money, people learn to live, not learn to work, when people learn to live they learn to help others because others will help you, its called cooperation and this is the best possible scenario of humanity itself. What is something of value for you? some people dont work for money or retribution, they work because they like to do it. Some people are bakers because they like the smell of hot bread in the morning.

[mauro2222]

SandTrout wrote...

With the total elimination of money in our society, correct education, and the use of REAL technology, all of this will be gone, it isnt going to be Utopia, but better? yes.

You apparently do not understand what money actually represents, think that the Russian and Chinese reeducation camps are a good thing, and that technology created for the purpose of profit is not 'real'. Here's some hints: Money is representative of 'stuff', and is typically earned by providing something of value for someone else; the elimination of money will not equalize how much stuff people have. China and Russia are far less educated on the average than Americans and Western Europeans. No technology was ever invented without the purpose of someone gaining from it.

So let's have wars, and genocide because it easier than feed 1000000 people.
I clearly dont understand why people see two sides only, or it is communism, or capitalism.
Capitalism is a total fail, communism is better, but is not the best. So i kept with resource based economy.

Well, you seem to understand the economic nature of war, but I fail to see how communism prevents that somehow. As for there being only two sides: I never mentioned captialism, I only pointed out the numerous flaws of communism that have been proven historically to fail everywhere they have been tried. History says that you're wrong considering that capitalist countries are the most powerful and prosperous, while most communist countries have failed to keep up, with the only notable exception being China, which has implemented capitalist policies in many areas.

You cannot have a communist country and the rest of the world is capitalist, and you cannot have a capitalist country when the rest of the world is communist. Is simple logic, communism is a menace to rich people, while capitalism is always a menace to the 3/4 of the worlds population.

Communism has proven to be a menace to 99% of those under it, historically. Capitalist populations, however, are 'menaced' by higher standards of living than 99% of communist populations.

Our planet has all the resources to mantain the current population and more, but is funny to see that more than half of that population doesn't even have for eat.

And guess what kinds of countries that half that are starving (which is an erroneous number) are living in. Here's a hint, not capitalist. To be fair, though, that's mainly b/c China has such a large population. A large portion of the starving do not live under either a capitalist or communist system, they live under subsistence agriculture and are usually in areas where there is no effective government, or an extremely oppressive and corrupt one.

And those who have more paper, instead of helping others, they concentrate in consuming things they don't need. Our society is twisted at such level that we are tought that we learn to have a job, when the human mind learns to survive, that is the real human nature, will to learn, jobs are the means to improve our abilities, but how do you expect to see someone improving his aspects when he is jailed to a no sense work because he barely has something to feed his family. In order to survive we "need" things, but nowadays is "we want things", we are nothing more than numbers.

Guess what, we have all those nice things that we want but don't need because we trade the value of our labor for them. Money just makes it easier to do so. People do not work as hard without incentive. All that extra stuff we have is our incentive to work harder and create more value to trade for that stuff.

Those people that are starving are not starving because I worked hard, saved my money, and bought a plasma TV, they are starving because their societies are so goddamn screwed up that they cannot keep what little that they do manage to produce.

God, you took all my points of view and you deformed them in such no sense way. Of course money is an incentive, but is not the correct one, you prefer to have a nice car instead of feeding people because you "worked hard", and you blame their goverments, so you are free of guilty as a collaborator of this genocide. My country is not a farm, and is capitalistic, and guess what? people die of starvation . You written so much things with little base, that instead of contradicting me, you enforced my critics with your thoughts.

[mauro2222]

And by the way, real communism was never applied in human history.

[SandTrout]

mauro2222 wrote...

You are the living proof of how twisted this consumist society is. I always speak from a world were there is no money, people learn to live, not learn to work, when people learn to live they learn to help others because others will help you, its called cooperation and this is the best possible scenario of humanity itself. What is something of value for you? some people dont work for money or retribution, they work because they like to do it. Some people are bakers because they like the smell of hot bread in the morning.

/twitch

[mauro2222]

You prefer a doctor who works for money and he sees you like numbers?, or you prefer a doctor that sees you like a patient and all the retribution he wants is your smile and the feel that he saved one life.