Do you believe in cooperation?

Post Reply New Topic

Good sir, any rational, intelligent person could figure that out. Too bad a lot less of those exist in life than you might think!

erm...anyone want to relate to my example of the 2 friends?

I refer you, yet again, to why I voted as I did.

As for your friends, why was "To hell with them all, and whats in it for me" left out of the poll?

One does consider you, the other does not.

I do use people, and I pay as I go. cooperation is a debt exchange, with a sliding scale of values.

Sleeping over does not put gas in the tank.

The good part of communism is millions killed. They did not keep up with their debt exchange.

To hell with them all works, for some make good offers for my time. Now I only deal where I at least break even.

It is values again, you like having a friend, a place to stay, and doing things in the city. What you spend on gas is cheaper than a hotel. It works for you. The other does not work for you.

A win win exchange is not cooperation, it is exchange.

A farmers cooperative works when they pool their buying power, but they are equals, and the sellers of feed and seed get less.

Cooperation between equals works, but unequal, some win, some lose.

It can work, but only if you have Siberia.

Natasha, "I do not fear being sent to Siberia, Boris, No?, Natasha, No, I fear what they will do to me before sending me to Siberia. Boris, Ehehe!" From the great Rocky and Bullwinkle.

My belief in cooperation is limited to reaching my goals. Coercion and bribery also work.

I will give you exchange, as I'm a heavy believer in supply/demand, but part of me thinks you have something wrong there.

It almost sounds like you're implying you're willing to stomp on other people to get what you want, and that's dishonest, immoral, and incredibly irrational.

Um....no, millions being killed under Communism wasn't good, considering you'd be killed if you were found to have over $100.

Basically, they had lots of gullible folks from around the world making massive donations to them, assuring them that there was a utopia there...of course not being crazy enough to actually reveal said "utopia", as it was anything but.

And how could one honestly keep up with debt exchange in said system if you're killed for having more money than everybody else? Someone obviously needs to foot the bill for a failure of a system, and knocking off those who can afford it doesn't help those bills getting paid.

With me, I trade value for value. In fact, with my business, I'm the one who handles the state & federal stuff, takes the pictures of the merchandise, writes the descriptions for it, and sends out emails to our customers. I'm also the visionary on board. My partner keeps the website maintained--keeps it all nice and pretty--handles a lot of the math involved in regard to what we have to spend, sends the money from our sales to our bank account, and orders the merchandise from our vendor. And seeing as my partner is the graphics design expert, he puts a lot of work into how nice our website looks.

You don't know all the facts. Benefit fraud/abuse of public funds is a problem in the UK but our government tackles the problem in the wrong way; instead of going after the seasoned con-artists, who are much harder to catch, it tries to coerce vulnerable people into saying they are more capable than they are and then throws them on unemployment benefit. The British government is the one 'taking advantage', not me.



For the record, I am not jealous of Aspies who do well for themselves. I am genuinely happy for them and wish them every success. I even try to help them where I can:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt108923.html

Last edited by EnglishInvader on 11 Oct 2009, 4:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.

I would have to say the better set-up is the one with the friend who gets rides from you and you get a place to stay in the city from her. It's a fine sharing of resources. I'm all for cooperation. In general, I think it's the most efficient use of resources plus it bonds people together. Win-win. Of course there are people who will take unfair advantage and use resources without ever sharing resources of their own. But looking at the bigger picture, far more is accomplished with cooperation. And if anthropologists are to be believed, literally everything is accomplished with cooperation. As a species we have very little going for us physically. We are slow,almost blind, almost deaf, can't fly, can barely swim, exposed to the elements by our lack of fur or scales or tough hide, physically weak. It's a wonder we are alive at all. Really, the only reason we survive as a species is because cooperative acts outnumber competitive acts in the grand sum of things. Groups compete (war) and individuals within groups compete with other individuals, but overall we manage to keep each other alive despite significant physical disadvantages compared to other animals because our brains are hardwired to coordinate our efforts with others. Aspies too- even though there is a common theme of alienation and isolation.

I voted maybe because I am not sure.

Co-operation is the principle upon which human societies are built. Co-operation for common defense, co-operation for securing food and shelter and co-operation for trade and specialization of labor.

ruveyn

Then why is it that there's so little cooperation on a more individual basis, such as the example I gave?

Another example: this acquaintance/friend of mine, whom I've known for almost 10 years didn't even reply to my email where I commented that my mom had just died. I didn't take offense, she doesn't owe me anything. I coped with it, with the loneliness and the disappointment. However, needless to say, I won't spend the 10 seconds of my life necessary to reply to her the week her mother dies. It's not a problem, she'll deal with it fine, I know. But...wouldn't it be nicer if 2 acquaintances/friends were a tiny bit there for each other in such a circumstance? After all, there's no fear that we'll have to reply to an email with condolences every week, since we don't have more than 1 mother each, so no risk of having a mother dying every week. Same about my operation - she didn't visit me at the hospital and I was there for 10 days. Before that, she had been in hospital and had totally refused for me to come visit/help/drive her there and/or back. I find most people around me to be like her, non-believers in cooperation... And for me, cooperation is what I crave the most from human/social interaction...

My mother isn't so well these days. She has liver and kidney failure and is on about 14 different medications for various ailments that I don't understand. Despite her faults, she has always been there for me and I don't know what I'll do without her.

I recently watched a film called Sicko. It's a documentary about the health service in the US and how everyone has to pay for their treatment. My mother wouldn't even get health insurance because she would be too much of a liability. If she were an American, she would probably be dead by now.

I would be interested to hear how many American Aspies who said cooperation would be a good thing also feel that the US should have government subsidised health care. According to the film, not all Americans like the idea of paying for someone else's life-saving operation if they don't need any treatment themselves.

Actually, when I refer to people who are cooperating resisting those who take advantage of the situation, I'm referring to anyone taking advantage, whether that's a member of the general public or a lawmaker. People who work together have got to police themselves so that nobody can take advantage of the situation at others' expense; otherwise it simply won't work. That includes the people in charge taking advantage, and includes when the people in charge have promised more than they have the resources to give and figure they've got to find people they can safely stiff so there'll be enough to go around to the rest.

I am willing to do what I have to, to keep what I have.

As Thomas Jefferson said, "Enlightened self interest is the only basis for free men to deal with each other."

I have no self interest in the mass of humanity, or in government. The Enlightened part says doing something about it is needed.

Every year some 120,000,000 die, and a few more are born. About 2% each way. I had nothing to do with it, that is just the background.

Between are some six billion who I have never met. Government is some Socialist plot that says I must help or surpress the world. They do it for me for a fee.

To be able to do anything I have to overcome being bled by government for the good of all, and then see to my own existance.

That I can only do in my very small local world. Self Interest must come first, for I already gave at the office. Altogether I have to produce twice my own needs, for half is taken. To do that I must avoid situations where I lose my time and effort on unequal exchanges.

Most people I meet think I should also share what I have with them. I don't.

What I do offer is me being productive. Like you, my customers come because my effort gets them the best deal on what they want. That takes my labor, brain, capital, and living and making it grow takes profits.

Along the way I produce work for others, I use art work, web sites, have parts made, buy supplies. If it gets larger I will also have employees. Business is a cooperative venture based on a fair exchange, people are Socialist who think their existance gives them rights to my property.

I could do a lot more if I was not supporting the government. I could support a real person, if I could find one.

There are several very different cultures. Business is for mutual benefit or I go somewhere else.

Government is where useless people want to be paid for not doing their job, or they will have you thrown in jail, and take everything you have.

The rest run around thinking up new needs, which not only should I be taxed for, but I should also donate to their cause.

My cause is life would be better without them, so I am a recluse, for they have taken over the world.

Next they will want me to do something about those poor government people who face falling taxes, the unemployed, fifteen million and rising, the homeless, who lost their $500,000 house, who all have a much greater need for my assets than I do.

"To hell with them all."

Atlas Shrugged is playing out in this world. When the cost of production is burdened by layers and layers of demand without return, it is cost effective to quit.

As Ibn Khaldun said in 1300, "Money and talent will move toward freedom."

All governments that have taxed the people more than a third have fallen.

All paper money has become worthless.

There is a time to just walk away.

I do not believe in cooperation that is not entered into freely.

then I pretty much fully agree with you, but that's not what you said before at all.

I don't worry, though, about government's burdens as they are simply scams that the masses buy into, willingly.

for every bad law made, there exists a massive loophole I could likely either drive a mach truck thru or possibly even start a brand new civilization. Why so? Bad laws are usually made by very irrational people who aren't thinking things thru to begin with.

One major thing I've learned now is about the golden rule: whoever has the gold makes the rules. I don't care if it's a Democracy, a Republic, a Communist empire, a Socialist system, whathaveyou...it all comes down to the clams. I don't care what this or that politician claims to back; you don't like what he says, then take away his funding, and watch how fast he changes his tune.

And those "little people" who put these officials into power? They're being fully represented whether or not they want to admit it. Ok, so they can't seem to manage their money? Well, why don't they just let a "responsible" politician do it..y'know, one that can relate to them? I mean...wouldn't it only make sense to have someone who can totally relate to you so well handle the responsibilities you bombed to begin with?

so as the classic line goes "this politician doesn't represent me! he's just a bloodthirsty, disgusting scuzzbag who'd sell out his own constituents at the drop of a hat"

my response "so you're saying he represents you to a 'T'...."

So again, that's why I agree with you...I just wish you'd said everything you just did before....

I guess you don't know about the British politicans who bought second homes with public money, furnished these homes with public money and then sold them on at a considerable profit and kept the proceeds. You would be amazed at the amount of people in high paying public service jobs who use public funds to pay for services they can easily afford themselves; they use public money to pay their utility bills, TV licence, cable/satellite/digital and when they need to travel, they use public money to stay in expensive hotels. By your reasoning, it's okay for them to exploit the poor and needy to make up for the shortfall.

Last edited by EnglishInvader on 12 Oct 2009, 3:31 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Absolutely! It is a must.