I hear so many tales about what another has produced in their life, and often I ask myself what is it that they have actually produced.

Some say that their children is their greatest achievement, but I am loath to admire anybody who attempts to live their aims through their children; I think that is a magnanimous copout.

I have to wonder what is actually being produced.

As one of many many examples, let's look at the Greeks, who arbitrarily consider themselves the birthplace of democracy.  They produce frikin' olives and sweet FA else! Is it any wonder that their economy is stuffed? They are village nice people. They produce nothing of worth to the world.
As has been shown, the dick heads can't even comply with the democracy that they want themselves to be renowned for. Now they are broke, and good riddance!

So, what is the difference between a net positive or a net negative worth to the world in terms of production?

Personally, I don't give a crap. I think it's all but a poker game. Most of you work my aims now and I aim to produce something of intrinsic value.i

Quote:

They produce frikin' olives

And we produce iron ore & coal which no one wants anymore -
at least they don't want to pay a good price.

Are we any better?

If a country can sustain themselves, with some exporting or importing as required, as it used to be like in the past before that stupid EU began, then things would have gone along nicely.....I believe the Greeks are going back to sustaining themselves again, with their old ways, according to the still existing older folk to assist how to survive.

As for Oz producing anything, how can we if we don't support it and buy cheap imports instead.

It upsets me to see how the orange trees were pulled out (in the Mildura area for example) all because of imports from the USA.

And then, there were our friends that had this lemon orchard, and as prices crashed with lemons at that time, they pulled their orchard out because of the amount of effort and time to care for them all for very little return for maybe .10c a lemon if lucky.

And now? Now lemons are scarce I hear as the latest, and worth about $2 each!

I am so glad I have my two lemon trees, at least I can have a lemon anytime, just go and pick it.

So what are we producing, beef to export? I hear our beef is much sought after.

I watched a show on the ABC yesterday about how the INCAs did it... built that amazing city..500 years ago..

bloody amazing.. the engineer who was overseeing it said.. no way could it be built today...

it wouldnt happen....one thing I didnt learn was how long it took... but I tell you what it puts us to shame they built something completely self sufficient with their bare hands.

all we do is whinge about whats in it for us..if we can pay as little for something that someone else does .. all the better..

cods wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 8:59am:

I watched a show on the ABC yesterday about how the INCAs did it... built that amazing city..500 years ago.. bloody amazing.. the engineer who was overseeing it said.. no way could it be built today... it wouldnt happen....one thing I didnt learn was how long it took... but I tell you what it puts us to shame they built something completely self sufficient with their bare hands. all we do is whinge about whats in it for us..if we can pay as little for something that someone else does .. all the better..

I watched that too! About the Incas building Machu Picchu over a 100 year span before they fled.
And the way our scientists of today were scanning how the water system was able to give everyone 70 litres of water a day at that time, free flowing water supplied on a mountain top, was so amazing how the Incas were clever, and very much in tune with nature.
And thinking, how in this day and age, would we be able to do same?

Sophia wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 9:12am:

cods wrote on Jan 18th, 2016 at 8:59am: I watched a show on the ABC yesterday about how the INCAs did it... built that amazing city..500 years ago.. bloody amazing.. the engineer who was overseeing it said.. no way could it be built today... it wouldnt happen....one thing I didnt learn was how long it took... but I tell you what it puts us to shame they built something completely self sufficient with their bare hands. all we do is whinge about whats in it for us..if we can pay as little for something that someone else does .. all the better.. I watched that too! About the Incas building Machu Picchu over a 100 year span before they fled. And the way our scientists of today were scanning how the water system was able to give everyone 70 litres of water a day at that time, free flowing water supplied on a mountain top, was so amazing how the Incas were clever, and very much in tune with nature. And thinking, how in this day and age, would we be able to do same?

you know all we can do is look on in amazement I did enjoy it...and its great we have machines now that can help us understand.....but its still a feat we cannot produce....funny how we can put a man on the moon......yet we could never build walls like that that have stood for 500 years....stuck on the side of a mountain...and the way all the blocks stuck together so no water could leak out...massive..

I think Amadd has raised an interesting, if vitriolic, question. The point to be clarified is just which human endeavours are intrinsically valuable. I suppose you could say anything that provides for necessity. Whether necessity is nothing more than food and shelter is also an open question. I am at my most serene when producing something either material or intellectual. The species will have to reproduce, but I am not sure if the having of children is intrinsically valuable. It is an accepted reality of our existence and I think a different subject.

issuevoter wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 2:20pm:

I think Amadd has raised an interesting, if vitriolic, question. The point to be clarified is just which human endeavours are intrinsically valuable. I suppose you could say anything that provides for necessity. Whether necessity is nothing more than food and shelter is also an open question. I am at my most serene when producing something either material or intellectual. The species will have to reproduce, but I am not sure if the having of children is intrinsically valuable. It is an accepted reality of our existence and I think a different subject.

Probably the production  and raising of children is the most important thing that can be done for the good of the society of tomorrow.

Your point is valid, in that , once the need for food, shelter, safety and sex are satisfied, we then move up Maslows hierachy and seek love, good relationships, a sense of community and a sense of contribution.

I sincerely believe that this is where capitalism will head.
A sort of "back to the future"

People will lose interest in cheap chinese made junk and want really beautiful things (and probably less of them ) to fill their houses.
This will lead to a more fulfilling work life for many workers as they move from being a cog producing massive ammounts of "junk" to being a "master craftsman" intimately involved in the production of things unique and that they can be proud of.

So we should see a better type of capitalism (driven by consumers) if consumers will start to think more sensibly about what gives them joy.

You can see this already in the food market.
It would have to be more rewarding to "produce" a top quality meal beautifully displayed on a plate then to be a maccas employee flipping yet another burger.
Its a win for the worker, its a win for the diner and its a win for small business over the multi nationals.

All available, as soon as the consumer develops a taste for more worth while things

Isn't value a bit like beauty, you know, in the eye of the beholder?

After all, a capitalist will put a monetary value on almost everything... Yet, there are many who see NO value at all in the dollar valuing of items.

They say that you can't buy happiness - therefore, what "value" does one place on being happy...

Producing children guarantees some future for our species, well at least until our species messes up the environment (how much have we devalued that...?) until survival is not an option - then it won't much matter what you produce.

I think also that another pertinent question here might be, why? Why must everybody produce some worth? Also, by "worth" what exactly do you mean? Isn't simply living a life of some intrinsic worth?

issuevoter wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 2:20pm:

I think Amadd has raised an interesting, if vitriolic, question. The point to be clarified is just which human endeavours are intrinsically valuable. I suppose you could say anything that provides for necessity. Whether necessity is nothing more than food and shelter is also an open question. I am at my most serene when producing something either material or intellectual. The species will have to reproduce, but I am not sure if the having of children is intrinsically valuable. It is an accepted reality of our existence and I think a different subject.

the INCAs had the answe all those years ago.. [500]...food and water... all we need is food and water...plus the odd goat or alpacas or llamas...

they did it brilliantly... all with their hands....

issuevoter wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 2:20pm:

The point to be clarified is just which human endeavours are intrinsically valuable.

only one ..... survival. Everything else is irrelevant. If you didn't have a successful career, would that change anything for anyone other than you? If Howard never existed, would we really be worse off as humans? if mother theresa had been a hooker instead of a saint, would the world be different? In the end, only one thing really matters, that is survival as a species.

John Smith wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 5:08pm:

issuevoter wrote on Jan 18th, 2016 at 2:20pm: The point to be clarified is just which human endeavours are intrinsically valuable. only one ..... survival. Everything else is irrelevant. If you didn't have a successful career, would that change anything for anyone other than you? If Howard never existed, would we really be worse off as humans? if mother theresa had been a hooker instead of a saint, would the world be different? In the end, only one thing really matters, that is survival as a species.

I couldn't care less if Karnal got up the duff from her Paki husband. That's how much I care about survival of the species. Personal and our families  survival is number one for most people even if they won't admit it. Nothing else really matters. If you are dead then career means nothing.

No children, no future. I get that. I think we all get that. But some people have brought forth some pretty terrible progeny, so there is at least a caveat to be considered as far as value is concerned.

Intrinsic worth is probably a subjective concept. I think if you indulge in utilitarianism you need to offset what I call unwholesome materials with ingenious execution, and sense of proportion.

When it comes to physical objects, I like Shaker philosophy, although I don't share their motivation. Their approach to an object is that it has no front, back or underneath when it comes to value. You walk around one of their buildings or turn over a piece of furniture and the same attention to detail has been used on all facets. Its simply not worth doing if it is not worth doing one's best.

These objects were for their own use, but to work at something wholesome was to glorify their God. You were actually working within God, and God has no front or back. Now I don't go in for all that malarkey, I can revere the Universe without a Daddy to approve of me, but I do like the general approach, and I think it is a philosophy were intrinsic value is a matter of commitment.

issuevoter wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 5:25pm:

No children, no future. I get that. I think we all get that. But some people have brought forth some pretty terrible progeny, so there is at least a caveat to be considered as far as value is concerned. Intrinsic worth is probably a subjective concept. I think if you indulge in utilitarianism you need to offset what I call unwholesome materials with ingenious execution, and sense of proportion. When it comes to physical objects, I like Shaker philosophy, although I don't share their motivation. Their approach to an object is that it has no front, back or underneath when it comes to value. You walk around one of their buildings or turn over a piece of furniture and the same attention to detail has been used on all facets. Its simply not worth doing if it is not worth doing one's best. These objects were for their own use, but to work at something wholesome was to glorify their God. You were actually working within God, and God has no front or back. Now I don't go in for all that malarkey, I can revere the Universe without a Daddy to approve of me, but I do like the general approach, and I think it is a philosophy were intrinsic value is a matter of commitment.

You can have no kids and have a great life. Many people do it.  I doubt people think about survival of the species when they go about their daily lives. Staying alive is all that matters I believe.

double plus good wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 5:31pm:

issuevoter wrote on Jan 18th, 2016 at 5:25pm: No children, no future. I get that. I think we all get that. But some people have brought forth some pretty terrible progeny, so there is at least a caveat to be considered as far as value is concerned. Intrinsic worth is probably a subjective concept. I think if you indulge in utilitarianism you need to offset what I call unwholesome materials with ingenious execution, and sense of proportion. When it comes to physical objects, I like Shaker philosophy, although I don't share their motivation. Their approach to an object is that it has no front, back or underneath when it comes to value. You walk around one of their buildings or turn over a piece of furniture and the same attention to detail has been used on all facets. Its simply not worth doing if it is not worth doing one's best. These objects were for their own use, but to work at something wholesome was to glorify their God. You were actually working within God, and God has no front or back. Now I don't go in for all that malarkey, I can revere the Universe without a Daddy to approve of me, but I do like the general approach, and I think it is a philosophy were intrinsic value is a matter of commitment. You can have no kids and have a great life. Many people do it.  I doubt people think about survival of the species when they go about their daily lives. Staying alive is all that matters I believe.

If you are saying that Amadd's desire to do something with intrinsic value is something he is already doing by merely surviving, then I think we a talking about two different things.

Bobby. wrote on Jan 18^th, 2016 at 5:57am:

Quote: They produce frikin' olives And we produce iron ore & coal which no one wants anymore - at least they don't want to pay a good price. Are we any better?

Yes, for the mere fact that we are not Greek  ;)

Just joking, I was just using the Greeks and their addiction to welfare as an isolated example. It's not about Greece per se.

I'm a bit surprised that some of the comments show that they know more about the point I was trying to make than I do.

Yes, of course art is of great value. It's a bit sad that most of the buildings created these days don't have much flare to them.
I sometimes wonder where the value is in putting a person through the education system and using all of those resources only to churn out an uncreative clone. That's not always the case, but often it seems that way.