• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The element of fairness within the society

L

Lionsun6

New member
Joined
Nov 13, 2017
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The human society today is slowly leading the world toward destruction. This is mainly due to the various “value stealing” activities conducted by humanity, which end up causing a lot of unfairness and damages within the world, yet only benefiting those who either win the “value stealing” game or who are the accomplices who helped the value stealers in winning the game.

This has put the world and the human society in a vicious cycle of profit and loss, where you either gain profits or you make a loss, losing all the benefits that you could have in life, and for the wildlife that are not able to speak up for themselves, they can only be at the mercy of the “value stealers” and its community.

When there profits, there will always be losses, just like light and shadow. The only reason why the loser didn’t feel they have make a loss is because they lack the information to understand that they have make a loss.

“Value stealing” activities use the insertion of “fake values” in order to gain an unfair advantages in all transactions and interactions. And it is make possible because majority of the people do not really understand what is of “true values” and what is of “fake values”. And also viewing and determine the “true values” not by the perspective of each individuals but by the perspective of the society as a whole.

From the perspective of the society, “true values” are resources, ideas and labour that either supply to the “need” and “wants” of the society or help the society to achieve civilisation advancement. As for “fake values”, they are lies and illusions that help the values stealers to gain an unfair advantage over others, yet in actual fact these “fake values” hold no worth to the society as all. These “fake values” only help the value stealers to gain an unfair amount of wealth, while disappearing into emptiness once the owner or the society realised that there is no worth at all in these “fake values”.

However, understanding this logic can be difficult. As the people has been conditioned by the society to believe that “value stealing” is essentials for a progressive society, and as for the value stealers, they would not want to give up on their “value stealing” activities when they are prospering from it, even though it is at the expenses of others.

In order to prevent self-destruction of the human society, the human society has to transform itself from a predatory society to society which operated through the fair exchange of “true values” between individuals, countries and within the society and the world.

The Purification Social Order, is a social order that aim to build a society that ensure fairness to all. This fairness would be included for all living things, human and the wildlife. As the social order believe that it is only through fairness, then can all “value stealing” activities be eliminated, resulting only the pure cultivation of “true values” within the society, benefiting every living things.

A society that is true, just and pure is what that is needed in order for the society to be a better place and in order to achieve civilisation advancement.
If the human society do not transfer itself out of the predatory society, then destruction along with all living things in the world will be the ending that awaits us.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk_IVZjCFeE

Short comic of the purification social order
 
Lionsun6 said:
The human society today is slowly leading the world toward destruction. This is mainly due to the various “value stealing” activities conducted by humanity, which end up causing a lot of unfairness and damages within the world, yet only benefiting those who either win the “value stealing” game or who are the accomplices who helped the value stealers in winning the game.

This has put the world and the human society in a vicious cycle of profit and loss, where you either gain profits or you make a loss, losing all the benefits that you could have in life, and for the wildlife that are not able to speak up for themselves, they can only be at the mercy of the “value stealers” and its community.

When there profits, there will always be losses, just like light and shadow. The only reason why the loser didn’t feel they have make a loss is because they lack the information to understand that they have make a loss.

“Value stealing” activities use the insertion of “fake values” in order to gain an unfair advantages in all transactions and interactions. And it is make possible because majority of the people do not really understand what is of “true values” and what is of “fake values”. And also viewing and determine the “true values” not by the perspective of each individuals but by the perspective of the society as a whole.

From the perspective of the society, “true values” are resources, ideas and labour that either supply to the “need” and “wants” of the society or help the society to achieve civilisation advancement. As for “fake values”, they are lies and illusions that help the values stealers to gain an unfair advantage over others, yet in actual fact these “fake values” hold no worth to the society as all. These “fake values” only help the value stealers to gain an unfair amount of wealth, while disappearing into emptiness once the owner or the society realised that there is no worth at all in these “fake values”.

However, understanding this logic can be difficult. As the people has been conditioned by the society to believe that “value stealing” is essentials for a progressive society, and as for the value stealers, they would not want to give up on their “value stealing” activities when they are prospering from it, even though it is at the expenses of others.

In order to prevent self-destruction of the human society, the human society has to transform itself from a predatory society to society which operated through the fair exchange of “true values” between individuals, countries and within the society and the world.

The Purification Social Order, is a social order that aim to build a society that ensure fairness to all. This fairness would be included for all living things, human and the wildlife. As the social order believe that it is only through fairness, then can all “value stealing” activities be eliminated, resulting only the pure cultivation of “true values” within the society, benefiting every living things.

A society that is true, just and pure is what that is needed in order for the society to be a better place and in order to achieve civilisation advancement.
If the human society do not transfer itself out of the predatory society, then destruction along with all living things in the world will be the ending that awaits us.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk_IVZjCFeE

Short comic of the purification social order
Click to expand...

In the time it took you to write that, I had to work to put food on my family's table.

You clearly have more than me.

Now... give me some.
 
The point here is not who has more and who has less, and if who is to give to who.

It is about in the society, are individuals able to exchange their ideas, labour fairly? And if the wildlife are being treated fairly and given enough living space and resourse to survive.
Giving you things just because you have less, will be unfair to me, as you have not given me anything in exchange for my money.

Instead you should wonder if you are being treated fairly by the society for the work you done? Or has the worth of your work, being stolden from you in order to paid for the profit for the company, bankers and investors? If your life opportunities has also been taken from you by the society in order to generate more profit. And if the saving in your bank account has worth lesser due to inflation.

When there profit, there will be losses. And those who are to bear the losses are either, 1) the workers, 2) the comsumers , 3) the wildlife or 4) the future generation.

The reasoning that he had more, so he should give me or the society more money will not solve the problem in the society, neither will it reduce the widening of incomes. It is fairness that can solve the problem.

If there is fairness and you have worked your fair share for the society, then you be able to put food on your family's table and also have more time to spend with them. And would not be asking other to give you more. Is it because that you have feel unfairness in life that why you asked others you give you things for free?

If there is fairness and you have worked your fair share for the society, yet still find it hard to put food on your family's table, then it can only mean that earth do not have enough resources to support all life.
 
Lionsun6 said:
The point here is not who has more and who has less, and if who is to give to who.

It is about in the society, are individuals able to exchange their ideas, labour fairly? And if the wildlife are being treated fairly and given enough living space and resourse to survive.
Giving you things just because you have less, will be unfair to me, as you have not given me anything in exchange for my money.

Instead you should wonder if you are being treated fairly by the society for the work you done? Or has the worth of your work, being stolden from you in order to paid for the profit for the company, bankers and investors? If your life opportunities has also been taken from you by the society in order to generate more profit. And if the saving in your bank account has worth lesser due to inflation.

When there profit, there will be losses. And those who are to bear the losses are either, 1) the workers, 2) the comsumers , 3) the wildlife or 4) the future generation.

The reasoning that he had more, so he should give me or the society more money will not solve the problem in the society, neither will it reduce the widening of incomes. It is fairness that can solve the problem.

If there is fairness and you have worked your fair share for the society, then you be able to put food on your family's table and also have more time to spend with them. And would not be asking other to give you more. Is it because that you have feel unfairness in life that why you asked others you give you things for free?

If there is fairness and you have worked your fair share for the society, yet still find it hard to put food on your family's table, then it can only mean that earth do not have enough resources to support all life.
Click to expand...

Your entire premise is 100% wrong.

Society has been progressing from the Stone Age onward, and the progresses is by survival of the fittest. The weak, those who are not as creative and motivated, and those who do not put out extra effort to raise themselves above the fray, have always been weeded out. And what is the effect? Stronger survivors who go on to breed an even stronger populace.

It's nice, and it's human nature to help others, but when you start believing those others are entitled to being helped, you've actually started destroying the network that keeps societies strong and progressing.

Every person on this earth must understand that they were not born beholden to anyone else, and that no one was born beholden to them.

If you can't grasp that concept, you're part of the problem not the solution.
 
This spam thread is designed to "value steal" from your hard earned efforts in order to transfer it to a book maker. That book maker, who appears unable to see that hiring a worker proficient in English has value, instead uses technology to "value steal". To combat this blatant "value stealing" attempt aided by technology I, as a mere worker, am pointing this out at no cost.
 
Last edited:
HowardBThiname said:
Your entire premise is 100% wrong.

Society has been progressing from the Stone Age onward, and the progresses is by survival of the fittest. The weak, those who are not as creative and motivated, and those who do not put out extra effort to raise themselves above the fray, have always been weeded out. And what is the effect? Stronger survivors who go on to breed an even stronger populace.

It's nice, and it's human nature to help others, but when you start believing those others are entitled to being helped, you've actually started destroying the network that keeps societies strong and progressing.

Every person on this earth must understand that they were not born beholden to anyone else, and that no one was born beholden to them.

If you can't grasp that concept, you're part of the problem not the solution.
Click to expand...

One of the problems with "fairness" is fairness is a subjective concept. For example, if we gave the poor people from a famine ridden country, each a large bag of rice and a large bag of dried beans, each month, they would be thrilled for the god send. If you tried to offer that to a poor American, they would be up in arms, claiming that is not fair. Their definition of fairness goes beyond avoiding starvation. It requires a lot more bells and whistles. Their definition of fairness may include, but not be limited to, free comprehensive health care and the internet, TV and cell phone combo.

If we used the more expensive standard of fairness, for all people, this means the need for higher taxes, since many of the bells and whistles go beyond normal sentiments of charity. Some of the poor working class, who help others in genuine need, may not even have these things, so they may not be able to give. The need for higher taxes, to offset the loss of charity, due to all the bells and whistles, means the greedy industrialist, who needs X amount of profit to feel fairness, will now have to exploit nature even more, to make up for the impact of higher taxes.

Maybe we need an objective measure of fairness, that applies to all humans, that is not excessive, requiring a furthering of natural resource exploitation, by the greedy being overtaxed. One standard of fairness is connected to the needs of emergency situations. In this cases, basic resources are needed, and you will often get plenty of volunteers to help offset costs. If there is a flood, neighbors will help neighbors. People will come from other states to help and well as give to the needed charities. Sufficient food and shelter is provided, until they can resume self sufficiency.

When you start adding all the bells and whistles, the volunteers start to thin out, because the costs go beyond the normal perception of the needs of charity, all the way to the need to have bureaucrats, spending other people's money, to get votes. This adds waste and loss, which requires even more exploitation of natural resources to compensate.

In terms of fairness, people will feel charitable up to a certain definition of fairness. After that you need drag them as they kick and scream. This requires big government with tax bayonets and laws, to force them to march forward. We need to find the sweet spot for fairness that encourages charity and does not require a forced march led by self serving politicians.
 
wellwisher said:
One of the problems with "fairness" is fairness is a subjective concept. For example, if we gave the poor people from a famine ridden country, each a large bag of rice and a large bag of dried beans, each month, they would be thrilled for the god send. If you tried to offer that to a poor American, they would be up in arms, claiming that is not fair. Their definition of fairness goes beyond avoiding starvation. It requires a lot more bells and whistles. Their definition of fairness may include, but not be limited to, free comprehensive health care and the internet, TV and cell phone combo.

If we used the more expensive standard of fairness, for all people, this means the need for higher taxes, since many of the bells and whistles go beyond normal sentiments of charity. Some of the poor working class, who help others in genuine need, may not even have these things, so they may not be able to give. The need for higher taxes, to offset the loss of charity, due to all the bells and whistles, means the greedy industrialist, who needs X amount of profit to feel fairness, will now have to exploit nature even more, to make up for the impact of higher taxes.

Maybe we need an objective measure of fairness, that applies to all humans, that is not excessive, requiring a furthering of natural resource exploitation, by the greedy being overtaxed. One standard of fairness is connected to the needs of emergency situations. In this cases, basic resources are needed, and you will often get plenty of volunteers to help offset costs. If there is a flood, neighbors will help neighbors. People will come from other states to help and well as give to the needed charities. Sufficient food and shelter is provided, until they can resume self sufficiency.

When you start adding all the bells and whistles, the volunteers start to thin out, because the costs go beyond the normal perception of the needs of charity, all the way to the need to have bureaucrats, spending other people's money, to get votes. This adds waste and loss, which requires even more exploitation of natural resources to compensate.

In terms of fairness, people will feel charitable up to a certain definition of fairness. After that you need drag them as they kick and scream. This requires big government with tax bayonets and laws, to force them to march forward. We need to find the sweet spot for fairness that encourages charity and does not require a forced march led by self serving politicians.
Click to expand...

Agree, meanings are subjective and the real challenge is streamlining what they mean without stifling individual thought.
 
Lionsun6 said:
The point here is not who has more and who has less, and if who is to give to who.

It is about in the society, are individuals able to exchange their ideas, labour fairly? And if the wildlife are being treated fairly and given enough living space and resourse to survive.
Giving you things just because you have less, will be unfair to me, as you have not given me anything in exchange for my money.

Instead you should wonder if you are being treated fairly by the society for the work you done? Or has the worth of your work, being stolden from you in order to paid for the profit for the company, bankers and investors? If your life opportunities has also been taken from you by the society in order to generate more profit. And if the saving in your bank account has worth lesser due to inflation.

When there profit, there will be losses. And those who are to bear the losses are either, 1) the workers, 2) the comsumers , 3) the wildlife or 4) the future generation.

The reasoning that he had more, so he should give me or the society more money will not solve the problem in the society, neither will it reduce the widening of incomes. It is fairness that can solve the problem.

If there is fairness and you have worked your fair share for the society, then you be able to put food on your family's table and also have more time to spend with them. And would not be asking other to give you more. Is it because that you have feel unfairness in life that why you asked others you give you things for free?

If there is fairness and you have worked your fair share for the society, yet still find it hard to put food on your family's table, then it can only mean that earth do not have enough resources to support all life.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but it's not fair that you have all that extra time to formulate and articulate your thoughts like this. Just look at how many more words you are able to put down than me!

That is UNFAIR! I demand you share your income with me, seeing as how you have so much that you are able to luxuriate so blatantly. Coming down here to rub our poor, poor faces in your wealth of time? The nerve.
 
I think people has the tendency to look and judge the world from the lens pointed on the past. And I think people closed in a ideology box lack perspectives.

It is not in Alaska where citizens receive their shares from the oil revenue? Yet they don't call themselves liberals or socialists but conservative capitalists.

Norway does kind the same but for those who has no income and call it welfare. But for everyone else Norway invest the oil money buying assets all over the world. They have the biggest sovereignty wealth found in the world (worth more than 1 trillion). Money enough to give a universal income for everyone in the country (Just like Alaska, but Alaska don't invest the money before give the dividends share for its citizens).

Denmark does something similar. Their government invest in stocks of Danish startups firms that develop innovation and technology, and it is very profitable for the Government. Now who's the money? It is everybody money since the investment is made with taxpayer money. Is it socialism or capitalism? The answer doesn't matter. What matter is that works.

It means that it is possible to people receive money from government without transfer money from a taxpayer direct to a poor man pocket.

If you stop to think about, there is nothing more socialist than the financial market.

If governments use taxpayer money, money from oil and others sources to invest in their own companies or worldwide, perhaps people won't have to worry about have their jobs replaced by technology or unemployment caused by economic crises.

...though I barely know about the subject.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom