From: Alex Maurin <[address removed]>
To: [address removed]
Sent: Friday, August 31,[masked]:59 PM
Subject: Re: [furries-290] A Few Ambitions
On Fri, 31 Aug[masked]:39:40 -0400
Amaroq <[address removed]> wrote:
> From: Alex Maurin <[address removed]>
> To: [address removed]
> Sent: Thursday, August 30,[masked]:07 AM
> Subject: Re: [furries-290] A Few Ambitions
> On Thu, 30 Aug[masked]:11:09 -0400
> Amaroq <[address removed]> wrote:
> >Utilitarianism is a form of hedonism when balanced by scientific
> >enlightenment. Unfortunately, Utilitarianism seems to be a scientific
> >ideal that no actual human could ever obey. We'll see.
> I'm more about individualism than utilitarianism. :P
> >This depends on the drug. Not all drugs are bad, nor are all drugs
> >necessarily harmful to you, or even against your actual self
> >What you are saying is, "what you want isn't necessarily what you
> >Turning the precept of "Let the people decide for themselves" around,
> >who determines that something someone wants ISN'T what they need? Why
> >NOT allow the market to supply drugs to those who want them?
> I don't focus on what they need, but rather what's good for them. And
> reality decides that. You can look objectively at reality and human
> nature and judge your desires against facts to decide whether your
> desires are good for you or bad for you. If all you desire is your
> next shot of heroine, then that's obviously
objectively bad for you.
> If what you desire is the accomplishment of a great dream, such as
> being an astronaut, an actor, an architect, you can take an objective
> look at that and conclude that this dream will be good for you to
> follow. IE, it will lead to you living a good life. Living well.
> Hedonism is pursuing what you happen to already desire, which may or
> may not be good for you. Enlightened self-interest is pursuing what
> you rationally think is the best life for you. The former takes
> what-happens-to-please-you as the standard and leads to suffering.
> The latter takes your life, your whole life, over its whole duration,
> as the standard and leads to true happiness.
> >I should also note that I'm not truly a fan of dictatorships, because
> >finding a good dictator is, as you said, impossible.
> It isn't
about finding a good dictator. Dictatorship in and of itself
> is incompatible with human nature. In order for people to thrive in a
> society, each and every individual needs the guarantee that the
> others will leave them free to pursue their own life. The mere
> existence of a dictator over them renders that guarantee null and
> void. If it's sometimes okay to make people do or pay for what you
> wish, against their will, then nobody is free. What guarantee will
> anyone have that you won't come up with more reasons to make them do
> what you want? We humans need freedom to thrive, and there needs to
> be a principled defense of freedom. We need to live by the idea that
> our rights are inalienable, and so are everyone else's. (Freedom from
> the initiation of force. Not "freedom" to be given things or
> "freedom" from the law of cause and effect. Freedom to act to the
benefit of their lives, not "freedom" to do whatever they want to
> anyone else, etc. The kind of freedom the founding fathers intended.)
> The claim that human nature isn't good enough for a dictatorship is
> like writing a piece of software that doesn't run and then
> complaining that the computer isn't good enough to run your program.
> The problem isn't the computer, it's the program. You didn't take the
> computer's nature into account when you wrote it. The problem with
> totalitarian social systems isn't human nature. It's that those
> systems didn't take human nature into account when they were
> designed. The best, most practical, and most moral system to ever
> exist is Capitalism. Because it's the system that gives everyone the
> guarantee that they can live their lives as they see fit, so long as
> they take cause and effect into account and are willing to enact
> causes required to get the effect they want. It's the system designed
> to work with human nature, and it has allowed us to do wonderful
> things throughout our history. Look around you. Everything you take
> for granted depended on people being free to invent and produce those
> things. But that's only a secondary reason why Capitalism is good.
> The primary reason is that it allows everyone to pursue their own
> happiness. Mundanes and furries alike. Do you think in a totalitarian
> dictatorship, our country would be prosperous enough for us to enjoy
> furry conventions or spend resources on fursuits? Do you think we'd
> even be allowed to live if a dictator concerned with the collective
> "greater good" found out we were indulging in those things for our
> own individual pleasure, when that effort and resources could go
> toward the greater good instead? You think
we're persecuted in a
> semi-free society. Can you imagine what it would be like for us under
> a dictatorship?
Pretty much like it's getting now?
> And even if we get a furry dictator over a society of furries... I
> hate to pick on KayFox again. But I'm gonna quote her message again.
> "You indicated you want to come here, to our home, and divide this
> community up even more. I will have none of that. Leading the
> community should be about bringing people together, not about moving
> them apart."
> When you take the whole as your standard of value rather than the
> individual, dissension is a threat, because disagreement can break
> the whole into parts. One of the things that's already been noted
> about the fandom is that it can be very cliquey. People gravitate
> together into a group or apart into separate groups based on
agreements or disagreements. KayFox has good intentions. But you can
> easily see where it could lead if we got a dictator with those very
> same intentions. What we have now is much better. Where people CAN go
> their own separate way if they disagree.
> Sorry for being long-winded. I have this way of making every subject
> I talk about into a big, moving speech. :P I have a passion for
> ideas. I find it irresistible to debate against ideas I think are bad
> and fight for ideas I think are good. I've been studying Ayn Rand's
> philosophy, Objectivism for the past few years. So anyone familiar
> with that can see where I'm getting some of the ideas I've been
> putting forth in this thread. I almost hate to say that name though.
> Because when I argue the ideas themselves, people judge them on their
> own merit. But the instant I say "Ayn Rand" or "Objectivism", it
quickly devolves into hate-mongering. But up until now, have I not
> been arguing very logically, for very positive and uplifting ideas?
> These are the kinds of ideas that I think can save the world from the
> path of destruction that we're currently on.
i'm not actually familiar with objectivism, although i have heard of it.
sorry if i'm really terse right now, i'm very tired. i just had a very
> ~Amaroq Wolf
> > ---------------
> > ~Amaroq Wolf
> > ________________________________
> > From: Alex Maurin <[address removed]>
> > To: [address removed]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 29,[masked]:11
> > Subject: Re: [furries-290] A Few Ambitions
> > I would tend to agree, Amaroq, that there's nothing wrong with what
> > my dad calls "Enlightened Self-Interest."
> > It means that although you recognize that all humans ultimately act
> > in their own self interest 99.8% of the time or whatever, you can
> > delay gratification, and IF you are patient enough to invest
> > wisely, etc, you can actually improve the quality of life for many
> > people by "You scratch my back, I scratch yours" type of deals.
> > Business, and by extension, corporations, are not evil by
> > definition, unless you're an agorist, who believes that chartering
> > with a government automatically makes you evil as an extension of
> > that government.
> > No, Although direct electronic democracy can
theoretically be a good
> > thing, really, what we need is a GOOD dictator. The problem is "How
> > do we find a GOOD dictator?" which leads to "How do we ensure the
> > good dictator is actually a well-intentioned and competent person?"
> > I'm hoping that a dictatorship that's informed by up to the
> > millisecond news and information using a digital infrastructure for
> > feedback on decision-making and clear representation by every
> > significant group of society, we could build a REALLY EPIC
> > Space-Faring society and culture which really would colonize the
> > stars.
> > Enlightened self-interest is not bad, only myopic ignorant greed is
> > bad, where you ignorantly destroy your capital for short-term gains
> > when and kill the goose that lays the golden egg, along with every
> > cash cow. It's
> > No, what you do is collar the cash cows and gold-laying gooses,
> > treat them nicely, but give them cell phones, insurance policies,
> > and gps-tracking collars, and make them feel supremely safe and
> > content to be in your household. Make them never want to leave.
> > This is the smart thing to do.
> > I do not know if I will ever make the kind of money that would be
> > required to pay SpaceX to deliver the colonization equipment to the
> > moon, but I'm damned if I'm not going to try. It's TOO COOL not to!
> > Arx Ferae here on Earth, though, will probably start off as just a
> > Furry Village within the Seattle metropolitan area. Start out as a
> > collection of buildings, and eventually "colonize" an entire skyline
> > condo building over
time. Thing is, if I can make enough money, I
> > could help people pay off their mortgages, which would enable them
> > to do other things.
> > We'll see.
> > Actuary science is a pretty good career, but to make the truly big
> > bucks, I need to see if I can't break into investment banking.
> > Investment banking is buying and selling stocks and bonds, mutual
> > funds and the like, raising capital for corporations, and the buying
> > out and merging of corporations.
> > Since the Glass Steagall Banking Act of 1933 was repealed in 1999,
> > you can be ALL THREE: an insurance corporation, retail bank, and
> > investment bank all in one, thus concentrating the wealth as much as
> > possible
> > So long as you are wise, responsible, and judicious with the money
> saved, concentrating the wealth in a single place like this is
> > theoretically a good thing, in that you can then make bigger deals
> > and give better rates to your clients.
> > A cooperative bank is a good idea, and I'll certainly look into it,
> > but I'm also looking at a hybrid system as well, where it's one
> > third consumer's cooperative, one third worker's cooperative, and
> > one third traditional joint-stock corporation.
> > We'll see.
> > I have not decided exactly what I want to do, but I'm considering
> > the concept of a geek/hacker and furry-oriented credit union that
> > eventually expands into a hybrid cooperative bank.
> > It would make more money than game middleware, as much fun as that
> > would be. No, why not reach for the stars?
> > So basically, my TENTATIVE plan is to become a financial actuary, do
> > that for about 10 years, build up money, then found a credit union
> > oriented around artists, geeks/hackers, and furries, make that my
> > niche to start out with, maybe even partner with DeviantArt or
> > Electronic Frontier Foundation? Along the next 10 years, I'd
> > eventually mutate the credit union into a hybrid semi-cooperative
> > bank and insurance corporation.
> > If I follow this plan, I would specialize in pet insurance,
> > mortgages and loans for housing cooperatives, and merges and
> > acquisitions related to cooperatives of any kind. I need a niche if
> > I am to survive financially.
> > So, we'll see how I'm going to make the money in order to reach for
> > the
stars, but even if I DONT end up being capable of colonizing the
> > moon, I can still do a LOT of good, strengthening our culture and
> > society here on Earth doing my utter best to try.
> > On Wed, 29 Aug[masked]:56:56 -0400
> > Amaroq <[address removed]> wrote:
> > > There's something I want to say here that would probably be more
> > > fitting as a response to the previous topic. But it would be
> > > negative if I brought it up there, and positive if I brought it up
> > > here, so I choose to do it here.
> > >
> > > Someone said that greed is one of the things that will destroy the
> > > human race. But THIS is what greed really is. Just wanting
> > > something for yourself. Having an
ambition and following it. If
> > > you remove all of the negatives that people always package in
> > > with that concept, greed is really a good thing. Greed brought us
> > > every innovation we have, and lifted our standard of living from
> > > the point where we were dying in our teens and twenties to the
> > > point where we can relax on over 100 degree days due to air
> > > conditioning, electricity, and we have this amazing system called
> > > the internet, and computers that we're using to instantly talk to
> > > each other right now. Etc etc etc etc etc.
> > >
> > > People wanting something for themselves and working for it is what
> > > lifted us up. Not what will destroy us. Whether it's Henry Ford
> > > inventing the assembly line, or his employees working on it.
> > > Everyone who wants
something and works for it not only lifts
> > > themselves, but lifts society up as a secondary consequence. So
> > > dream big, and if you really think you can do it, pursue those
> > > dreams. Who knows. You might be the, or one of the, people who
> > > does finally bring the rest of us to the moon someday.
> > >
> > >
> > > (It's not in a bank's greedy self-interest to lend to people who
> > > can't pay it back. Because if the person doesn't pay it back, the
> > > bank loses money. It's traditionally the bank's own ass on the
> > > line when they lend, which means they have to be careful about
> > > who they lend it to. But government guaranteed loans, the
> > > existence of the Fed, and other interventions in the economy,
> > > made it so the banks didn't have to worry about going under
> > > they made bad loans. Essentially, some goody two-shoes said "It's
> > > greedy and evil that banks won't lend to people who can't afford
> > > it", implemented a government policy that makes it so banks
> > > can/have to lend to those who can't afford it, and now we're
> > > blaming the banks instead of the government, where the blame
> > > really lies.)
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------
> > > ~Amaroq Wolf
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Keeko <[address removed]>
> > > To: [address removed]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August
> > > Subject: Re: [furries-290] A Few Ambitions
> > >
> > >
> > > I like the idea. XD It's not a bad thing to have such lofty
> > > goals, I totally want to see moon colonies happen, and I wish you
> > > the best of luck! On Aug 28,[masked]:04 PM, "Alex Maurin"
> > > <[address removed]> wrote:
> > >
> > > And now for something completely different:
> > > >
> > > >http://www.spacex.com/falcon_heavy.php
> > > >
> > > >What do you guys think about the idea of a lunar colony complete
> > > >with hotels and condos?
> > > >
> > > >Would you consider moving to the moon?
> > >
> > > >The colonies would probably be underground and pressurized, and
> > > >the industry would largely the mining of titanium and exotic
> > > >metals, and maybe even helium-3.
> > > >
> > > >Although helium-3 is theoretical, the titanium export would bring
> > > >in the money necessary to build in enough manufacturing equipment
> > > >and planetary support to construct additional pylons-- i mean
> > > >factories on the moon, and allow us to build entire cities with
> > > >multiple mining operations across the lunar surface.
> > > >
> > > >Something I'm going to shoot for with my degree in mathematics is
> > > >to attempt building up enough capital to found a lunar colony.
> > > >
> > > >Yes, I know it's highly ambitious, but I
have an actual shot at
> > > >doing it.
> > > >
> > > >With a degree in mathematics, i can balance between finance and
> > > >actuary science, and astrophysics and aeronautics.
> > > >
> > > >This way, i can make the money necessary to get the funding i
> > > >need to actually put together a business plan to colonize the
> > > >moon.
> > > >
> > > >I can see it now: low gravity bouncing fursuiters parading in a
> > > >space hotel on the moon.. x3
> > --
> > Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to
> > everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
> > http://www.meetup.com/furlife/
This message was sent by Alex Maurin
> > ([address removed]) from Furlife. To learn more about Alex Maurin,
> > visit his/her member profile:
> > http://www.meetup.com/furlife/members/60089702/
Set my mailing list
> > to email me
> > As they are sent
> > http://www.meetup.com/furlife/list_prefs/?pref=1
> > In one daily email
> > http://www.meetup.com/furlife/list_prefs/?pref=2
> > Don't send me mailing list messages
> > http://www.meetup.com/furlife/list_prefs/?pref=0
> > Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York[masked] |
> > [address removed]
> Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to
> everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by Alex Maurin
> ([address removed]) from Furlife. To learn more about Alex Maurin,
> visit his/her member profile:
Set my mailing list
> to email me
> As they are sent
> In one daily email
> Don't send me mailing list messages
> Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York[masked] |
> [address removed]
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])http://www.meetup.com/furlife/
This message was sent by Alex Maurin ([address removed]) from Furlife.
To learn more about Alex Maurin, visit his/her member profile: http://www.meetup.com/furlife/members/60089702/
Set my mailing list to email me
As they are senthttp://www.meetup.com/furlife/list_prefs/?pref=1
In one daily emailhttp://www.meetup.com/furlife/list_prefs/?pref=2
Don't send me mailing list messageshttp://www.meetup.com/furlife/list_prefs/?pref=0
Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York[masked] | [address removed]