Good job JAB and Pardus! Looks like the "against" team is running scared :-"
Thought Piece: "Spaceship" vs. "Lifeboat"
- Thread starter Marauder06
- Start date
Nah, just have lives. I have my retort done in my head, I'll have it typed out by tomorrow.
Reed
Reed
Mine's in progress... work has gotten in the way.
All right, let’s do this, let’s punch some virtual faces.
First of all @pardus , and @JAB , disaster response is a BS example for the question. The concept of spaceship earth is really about creating standing systems on a Global level. For example, a global transportation net, a global energy grid and a global food distribution chain. Do I think there is enough resources globally to do this? Yes. Do I think the US has a role as a world role model? Yes. Do I think that creating a global community is possible? Sadly, since I would love to see the world create interstellar starships so that I can fight hostile aliens while wearing power armor before I retire (and bang hot alien green chicks), I do NOT think it is possible. Why, the resources are there, so why not? Because of human F*cking nature. The mish-mash of corruption, greed, and alien ideologies would turn any such effort into a global tower of Babel very quickly. The examples of this are legion, do your own googling.
Where most “lifeboat” proponents get it wrong, is that they advocate for international relationships based on short term gain and influence. This has bit us in the butt multiple times. I propose that there are two types of nations for us to cooperate or aid. One is countries that has goals, ideals, and culture SIMILAR to ours. Helping Nations that have opposite goals and culture to ours for short term influence (PAKISTAN, I’m looking at you!) or natural resources (Saudi, you are on the list) does not provide us with long term return for our $$, no mater how we justify it. The other type of nation are the “failed” nations. An example of why this is important, I work for the VA in a Homeless prevention/rapid rehousing program. When I first started I was excited, helping my fellow combat Vet’s through rough times (See nation example type 1) that had earned support through their support of the country. I quickly discovered that this was not the majority of my clients. Most of my clients were chaptered out, drug users, dealers, sex offenders, wife beaters and scam artists. Scum. So how am I able to go to work and advocate for these clients? It is not for the clients per se, but that this population eats up over 90% of the regions emergency and social services available. By housing them, I free up EMT’s and firefighters and police and emergency food grants for the type Veterans that I DO care about. Failed nations are very much the same way on the global scale. We help, to free up other nations resources to take care of there own populations, and to prevent safe haven to the worst forms of human predators.
“But Reed, are you not saying then that the US needs to help the impoverished, the starving, and the ill peoples of the world?” No, there are plenty of starving impoverished people in China, India, Pakistan, etc, that I am not advocating for. These countries have the resources to contain the global impact that their poor and starving create.
That’s it for now. Let’s go get beer.
Reed
First of all @pardus , and @JAB , disaster response is a BS example for the question. The concept of spaceship earth is really about creating standing systems on a Global level. For example, a global transportation net, a global energy grid and a global food distribution chain. Do I think there is enough resources globally to do this? Yes. Do I think the US has a role as a world role model? Yes. Do I think that creating a global community is possible? Sadly, since I would love to see the world create interstellar starships so that I can fight hostile aliens while wearing power armor before I retire (and bang hot alien green chicks), I do NOT think it is possible. Why, the resources are there, so why not? Because of human F*cking nature. The mish-mash of corruption, greed, and alien ideologies would turn any such effort into a global tower of Babel very quickly. The examples of this are legion, do your own googling.
Where most “lifeboat” proponents get it wrong, is that they advocate for international relationships based on short term gain and influence. This has bit us in the butt multiple times. I propose that there are two types of nations for us to cooperate or aid. One is countries that has goals, ideals, and culture SIMILAR to ours. Helping Nations that have opposite goals and culture to ours for short term influence (PAKISTAN, I’m looking at you!) or natural resources (Saudi, you are on the list) does not provide us with long term return for our $$, no mater how we justify it. The other type of nation are the “failed” nations. An example of why this is important, I work for the VA in a Homeless prevention/rapid rehousing program. When I first started I was excited, helping my fellow combat Vet’s through rough times (See nation example type 1) that had earned support through their support of the country. I quickly discovered that this was not the majority of my clients. Most of my clients were chaptered out, drug users, dealers, sex offenders, wife beaters and scam artists. Scum. So how am I able to go to work and advocate for these clients? It is not for the clients per se, but that this population eats up over 90% of the regions emergency and social services available. By housing them, I free up EMT’s and firefighters and police and emergency food grants for the type Veterans that I DO care about. Failed nations are very much the same way on the global scale. We help, to free up other nations resources to take care of there own populations, and to prevent safe haven to the worst forms of human predators.
“But Reed, are you not saying then that the US needs to help the impoverished, the starving, and the ill peoples of the world?” No, there are plenty of starving impoverished people in China, India, Pakistan, etc, that I am not advocating for. These countries have the resources to contain the global impact that their poor and starving create.
That’s it for now. Let’s go get beer.
Reed
Some good thoughts so far. Tomorrow we'll open it up for general comments.
7 days and no response from the rest, and with Reed's post, I declare Pardus and myself awesome, and the rest of you....well, back to your one-liners around the forum. 
Do I get to tear my original position apart now?
Do I get to tear my original position apart now?
Yes, participants (such that there were) and anyone else who wants feel free to post whatever you like about this topic.
I'm still waiting for my beer.....
Reed
Reed
Okay two old sayings that I have personally found to be true no matter what geographical toilet bowl I found myself visiting.
“You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t force the horse to drink”
“Give a man a fish and you will feed him for a day, teach that man how to fish and you will feed him for life”
The Spaceship Earth concept although noble in theory, is flawed in the aspects that in order for the ship to function, everyone needs to willing be pushed into a hierarchy system of global government. Someone would have to make the call for which of the haves, will be giving to the have-not’s. Each independent nation would have to willingly give up their sovereign control to a “global gov” and do so with the trust and good faith that not only that the global gov will make the right decisions, but also that the lobbying nations will not become greedy and or ask for more than their fair share, etc.
Looking at the United States federal gov as an example of “centralized control” over the 50 different states. We can see that historically, a one government option is not always optimal for redistribution of resources, aid and or finances. We can see this with states like California, that have indebted themselves so much, that they require federal financial assistance. Or we can look at how during Katrina, Louisiana was completely devastated, where other states such as Mississippi and Alabama, were not effected as much, but received assistance sooner than Louisiana (mainly b/c their state governments requested federal aid sooner/hints the lobbying comments). Also we can look at the constant deviation of laws and or policies that heavily affect some states (economically), while other states benefit and or prosper from the same laws/policy. But the overall point is that the United States still has not gotten it right yet.
The life-boat concept although more logical in theory, leaves a morality question of when and who gets to make such decisions. When discussing the theory of picking and choosing what nations (peoples) have more to offer and or might offer more promising return for the investment, we fail to address the humanity of these decisions. For a business model, it makes perfect sense to not invest in everything, but to only invest in areas where you will gain the most return for your investment. However, we are not talking about business profits; we are talking about human life and the quality of those lives. Can we rightfully pick and choose who gets to eat, who gets proper medical care, etc? Well if it as a nation offering assistance or aid, yes we can. However, on a global scale, where someone is heading the ship, or say a group of large nations are setting a counsel to make these decisions, you now have to be able to quantify fairness and reasoning, otherwise the groups not being properly supported (perceived or actual), will than go against the system in place. This is what we are commonly seeing around the world today.
From a personal standpoint, I do not like either concept, nor do I like the theory of “required to act”. Do I think we as the worlds super power, have a moral obligation to help other nations in need, to provide aid and our knowledge/leadership to the nations who need and want it? Absolutely, without a doubt, it is a moral obligation. However, as a united nation of states, I believe we must take care of our own, before offering assistance of any kind to other nations. We must stabilize our own life-boat/spaceship, before we start showing/helping others get their boat/ship in order. Once we have stabilized our own, we than must make our ability and understanding to do so, readily available to those who need/want the same from us. However, we should never do so at the risk of becoming less stable in our own boat/ship.
Lastly, we have to understand the human factor in all of this, going back to the old sayings that remain true to this very modern day. We can only help those who are willing to be helped, and when we help them, we cannot turn that help into a dependency, but an empowerment. We can show them the way, we can give them the tools and knowledge, but at the end of the day, they must be willing to put it all to work.
Any-who, good discussion, I’ve enjoyed it @pardus and @reed11b…
“You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t force the horse to drink”
“Give a man a fish and you will feed him for a day, teach that man how to fish and you will feed him for life”
The Spaceship Earth concept although noble in theory, is flawed in the aspects that in order for the ship to function, everyone needs to willing be pushed into a hierarchy system of global government. Someone would have to make the call for which of the haves, will be giving to the have-not’s. Each independent nation would have to willingly give up their sovereign control to a “global gov” and do so with the trust and good faith that not only that the global gov will make the right decisions, but also that the lobbying nations will not become greedy and or ask for more than their fair share, etc.
Looking at the United States federal gov as an example of “centralized control” over the 50 different states. We can see that historically, a one government option is not always optimal for redistribution of resources, aid and or finances. We can see this with states like California, that have indebted themselves so much, that they require federal financial assistance. Or we can look at how during Katrina, Louisiana was completely devastated, where other states such as Mississippi and Alabama, were not effected as much, but received assistance sooner than Louisiana (mainly b/c their state governments requested federal aid sooner/hints the lobbying comments). Also we can look at the constant deviation of laws and or policies that heavily affect some states (economically), while other states benefit and or prosper from the same laws/policy. But the overall point is that the United States still has not gotten it right yet.
The life-boat concept although more logical in theory, leaves a morality question of when and who gets to make such decisions. When discussing the theory of picking and choosing what nations (peoples) have more to offer and or might offer more promising return for the investment, we fail to address the humanity of these decisions. For a business model, it makes perfect sense to not invest in everything, but to only invest in areas where you will gain the most return for your investment. However, we are not talking about business profits; we are talking about human life and the quality of those lives. Can we rightfully pick and choose who gets to eat, who gets proper medical care, etc? Well if it as a nation offering assistance or aid, yes we can. However, on a global scale, where someone is heading the ship, or say a group of large nations are setting a counsel to make these decisions, you now have to be able to quantify fairness and reasoning, otherwise the groups not being properly supported (perceived or actual), will than go against the system in place. This is what we are commonly seeing around the world today.
From a personal standpoint, I do not like either concept, nor do I like the theory of “required to act”. Do I think we as the worlds super power, have a moral obligation to help other nations in need, to provide aid and our knowledge/leadership to the nations who need and want it? Absolutely, without a doubt, it is a moral obligation. However, as a united nation of states, I believe we must take care of our own, before offering assistance of any kind to other nations. We must stabilize our own life-boat/spaceship, before we start showing/helping others get their boat/ship in order. Once we have stabilized our own, we than must make our ability and understanding to do so, readily available to those who need/want the same from us. However, we should never do so at the risk of becoming less stable in our own boat/ship.
Lastly, we have to understand the human factor in all of this, going back to the old sayings that remain true to this very modern day. We can only help those who are willing to be helped, and when we help them, we cannot turn that help into a dependency, but an empowerment. We can show them the way, we can give them the tools and knowledge, but at the end of the day, they must be willing to put it all to work.
Any-who, good discussion, I’ve enjoyed it @pardus and @reed11b…
dirtmover
Verified Military
Sorry I wasn't able to post earlier due to a black out and being on mission...get ready to eat your hearts out. 
To help out countries in times of need is cool and earns us brownie points. We did it for Paris when they had that massive blackout during one of the hottest summers for them. We helped out with the landslide/ flood that happened in Pakistan, there are so many numerous times that we have helped out when disaters have happened. Other than Canada very few countries have sent us help during an "act of God". We currently have our own problems with the economy, health care reform and many other issues. We could use a portion of the the 42BILLION dollars in international aid to actually fund healthcare reform and not take more money out of the pockets of our citizen.
When do we call it quits on supporting other nations....is it when we are have no money for our own citizens and the US fall. Last time I checked we are not the only country that has money when will the rest of the international commnuity step up and provide equal support. I will tell you this as long as the US is willing to provide the bulk of aid they won't.
Real support has to include teaching and mentoring these countries on how to support themselves. As long as we keep giving them food and aid they will keep reporducing which then requires more aid to support the new people which there government can't support with out our help.
We owe it to our citizens to take care of them not neglect them in favor of other countries
To help out countries in times of need is cool and earns us brownie points. We did it for Paris when they had that massive blackout during one of the hottest summers for them. We helped out with the landslide/ flood that happened in Pakistan, there are so many numerous times that we have helped out when disaters have happened. Other than Canada very few countries have sent us help during an "act of God". We currently have our own problems with the economy, health care reform and many other issues. We could use a portion of the the 42BILLION dollars in international aid to actually fund healthcare reform and not take more money out of the pockets of our citizen.
When do we call it quits on supporting other nations....is it when we are have no money for our own citizens and the US fall. Last time I checked we are not the only country that has money when will the rest of the international commnuity step up and provide equal support. I will tell you this as long as the US is willing to provide the bulk of aid they won't.
Real support has to include teaching and mentoring these countries on how to support themselves. As long as we keep giving them food and aid they will keep reporducing which then requires more aid to support the new people which there government can't support with out our help.
We owe it to our citizens to take care of them not neglect them in favor of other countries
mac21
Verified Military
Sorry for such a late response. But better late than never.
My argument is the United States should do more.
Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These are three things that every American is entitled to. Extend these rights to every citizen of Earth like they were Americans and see what can happen.
In this case, I'm going to put less responsibility on the government and put it more on the people that expect so much from that same government. The Gun Control Thread is a great example of what I mean. Too many people expect the government to do what the constituent wants, without the individual letting anyone know. But the community here writes letters and gets their word out.
The United States can do more by getting more individuals to do more. Volunteer to pack supplies to send to refugees. Send letters to Congressmen. Fund raise for respective charities and follow up to ensure the money is going in the right direction.
Sometimes people have to actually do something in order to see what they want get done.
I tried to keep it short and sweet, but hopefully not too short.
My argument is the United States should do more.
Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These are three things that every American is entitled to. Extend these rights to every citizen of Earth like they were Americans and see what can happen.
In this case, I'm going to put less responsibility on the government and put it more on the people that expect so much from that same government. The Gun Control Thread is a great example of what I mean. Too many people expect the government to do what the constituent wants, without the individual letting anyone know. But the community here writes letters and gets their word out.
The United States can do more by getting more individuals to do more. Volunteer to pack supplies to send to refugees. Send letters to Congressmen. Fund raise for respective charities and follow up to ensure the money is going in the right direction.
Sometimes people have to actually do something in order to see what they want get done.
I tried to keep it short and sweet, but hopefully not too short.
Until the US gets its own house in order, it should be focused on maintaining the external status quo, and spending the time and money on fixing its own economic, social and poverty woes. We are exporting cash, jobs, and technology to other countries, but getting terrorists and illegal immigrants in return for the most part. We have bolstered the economies and governments of other countries since the end of WWI, first in support of communist/socialist governments, and now for terrorist states... We are currently financing our own destruction and calling it humanitarian aid... How much of the money and how many of the resources we send to disaster stricken areas, 3rd world countries, and war torn areas do you think actually ends up in the hands of the needy? Corrupt governments and gangs pilfer the greatest majority of the aid and cash... and use it to finance genocides, jihads, and terrorism... and want more... and get it.
We need to police, and protect, and fix ourselves before we bankrupt this country helping others. The political capital is too highly priced to endanger our sovereignty and freedoms to hand cash and resources and jobs and healthcare to the ungrateful, jealous and anti American states that keep requesting our help to survive their own internal coups... el Salvador? Cameroon? Liberia? Nigeria? Chad? Pakistan? Kashmir? Sri Lanka? Brunei? Kampuchea? Laos? Lagos? any of those ring bells? What about Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan? Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia?
How many friends do we have in those areas... who got the money, who got the food, who got the aid?
The PURSUIT of happiness for others should not be financed nor given to them by the citizens of the US, it should be fought for by the individuals of those soverign nations, with assistance from the US if requested, and paid back in some fashion... Not the currently free lunch we are handing out with no political, economic, or military return.
Yes, you could say I am a hard hearted jingoistic isolationist bastard with no compassion... not 100% true but close... I hate the lack of ambition caused by entitlements here at home, and it galls me further to know that we are using that same methodology to try to bolster public opinion overseas... our government is buying opinion and votes here at home... and buying opinion (or attempting to, and failing) overseas...
why aren't the other 1st World countries giving as much a percentage of their GDP's as America? Why is the private donation percentage from the US higher than the Public donation of many other 1st World Nations?... It's time for the countries we have helped (since WWI) to pay that back to others what we gave them...
We need to police, and protect, and fix ourselves before we bankrupt this country helping others. The political capital is too highly priced to endanger our sovereignty and freedoms to hand cash and resources and jobs and healthcare to the ungrateful, jealous and anti American states that keep requesting our help to survive their own internal coups... el Salvador? Cameroon? Liberia? Nigeria? Chad? Pakistan? Kashmir? Sri Lanka? Brunei? Kampuchea? Laos? Lagos? any of those ring bells? What about Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan? Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia?
How many friends do we have in those areas... who got the money, who got the food, who got the aid?
The PURSUIT of happiness for others should not be financed nor given to them by the citizens of the US, it should be fought for by the individuals of those soverign nations, with assistance from the US if requested, and paid back in some fashion... Not the currently free lunch we are handing out with no political, economic, or military return.
Yes, you could say I am a hard hearted jingoistic isolationist bastard with no compassion... not 100% true but close... I hate the lack of ambition caused by entitlements here at home, and it galls me further to know that we are using that same methodology to try to bolster public opinion overseas... our government is buying opinion and votes here at home... and buying opinion (or attempting to, and failing) overseas...
why aren't the other 1st World countries giving as much a percentage of their GDP's as America? Why is the private donation percentage from the US higher than the Public donation of many other 1st World Nations?... It's time for the countries we have helped (since WWI) to pay that back to others what we gave them...
I apologize for the lateness of my response, life got in the way.
Similar threads
