Are our Moral Standards in Society Degrading?

[LilSaihah]

1. No.

2. Yes.

i'm genuinely curious as to how these government officials would eat without food

[NineSpine]

i'm genuinely curious as to how these government officials would eat without food

I should be more specific. I'm talking about market economies. You don't need market economies to have those things.

[Spectral]

So explain to me why every single major economic success of the 20th century is a large-government nation, while the small-government nations universally wallow in poverty.

It isn't a strawman to say economies are products of governments. it's a fact.

The UAE has a very low spending government. So does Qatar. So does Kuwait.

So, all you need is a shitload of carbon energy and maybe some slave labor!

[Dreamless]

This has always struck me as a poor line of argument. If someone honestly thinks that governments are inherently inefficient, wouldn't we reasonably expect them to be against government involvement?

Governments are inherently inefficient. Their purpose is not to maximise efficiency, however.

This leads to people exploiting inherent inefficiency to elect obstructionists.

[NineSpine]

Governments are inherently inefficient. Their purpose is not to maximise efficiency, however.

This leads to people exploiting inherent inefficiency to elect obstructionists.

I don't think that's necessarily true overall. It really depends on the issue. For example, government police forces are way more efficient at keeping a nation secure than private police would be.

[DeltrusDisc]

Given your last thread you created about "simple life vs Complicated life" - it sounds like you're just having a down-turn in your opinion. I'm going to respond to the last thread - and I hope it gives you a bit of light.

Long and short - don't believe the movie "God Bless America" (judging by how you speak, it sounds like it). The main protagonist could've solved every one of his problems by doing one thing - shutting his TV off.

As Groucho Marx once observed: "I found TV very educational. When somebody turns one on, I go into the other room and read a book".

While that is true - the movie still needed to be made. They needed to make a point about current American culture, and I think you know as well as I, that this society is more likely to get it from an extreme movie like that than a quiet one - shame the movie didn't get as many viewings as it should have. Maybe too many didn't want to educate themselves...

[Spectral]

Governments are inherently inefficient.

I think this is wrong. There's plenty of examples where government is the most efficient possible solution; sometimes that's a result of it being the best of a bunch of bad options, but it is what it is.

This leads to people exploiting inherent inefficiency to elect obstructionists.

I don't see the exploitation. I'm not appalled by people voting for what they think is correct.

[NineSpine]

I think this is wrong. There's plenty of examples where government is the most efficient possible solution; sometimes that's a result of it being the best of a bunch of bad options, but it is what it is.



I don't see the exploitation. I'm not appalled by people voting for what they think is correct.

It's a problem when people vote based on hatred and ignorance.

[Mormolyce]

How has a thread about moral standards deteriorated into a discussion about tax?

i'm genuinely curious as to how these government officials would eat without food

I dunno, ask Mugabe.

[Spectral]

It's a problem when people vote based on hatred and ignorance.

I see no reason, based on this thread and previous experience, to think that this describes GreatOak. Someone disagreeing with me doesn't mean they're hateful or ignorant. People can be wrong while being informed and reasonable.

[KingHorse]

Productivity has been steadily increasing. At some point at the end of the '70s/early '80s, the CEOs and such decided to stop rewarding employees for the increased productivity and profits, and just kept their wages stagnant while the CEOs and shareholders reaped almost all of the rewards.

You see "CEOs and such decided to stop rewarding employees for the increased productivity and profits" while I see the proliferation of machines replacing people for much production. CEO's and the board they answer to aren't obliged to increase pay for workers, they are supposed to increase profit. They increase profit by lowering cost (replacing people with robots on production lines for example). Why should the workers be paid more while the need for them is decreasing?

[ewhenn]

I think Marilyn Manson said it best:

Pseudo-morals work real well On the talk shows for the weak.
Selective judgement good-guy badges don't mean a **** to me.

[cubby]

Personally I think they are. To me it seems like moral standards were much higher in the past. Our ideas grow evermore provocative and degrading. Is it really a good thing to cast away traditional values?

And now I can finally understand why old people complain about the youths of today...

They aren't degrading - they are just changing, morphing to the changing times. People that are older typically think that the morals of modern society are degrading because they aren't what they once were for that person.

Change is never good or bad, it's just new.

[Adam Jensen]

I'm so sick of the "punishing success" bullshit. I'm only moderately successful by any measure, yet I'm able to go out and blow $2,500 on a computer on a whim today. I don't feel "punished", I feel pretty damned fortunate. I paid about $17,000 in state and federal income tax this year, but I don't feel "punished" at all. If I was making more money, I don't think I'd suddenly start feeling punished. Punished with what, exactly? The ability to buy nicer and nicer shit? That seems good.

Indeed, even with paying higher taxes, the rich receive an amazingly good quality of life that the lower and middle classes can only dream to achieve. This is why I feel no sympathy for them and this is why I don't understand how they can see it as a "punishment" when they're still rich.

[vindicatorx]

Personally I think they are. To me it seems like moral standards were much higher in the past. Our ideas grow evermore provocative and degrading. Is it really a good thing to cast away traditional values?

And now I can finally understand why old people complain about the youths of today...

look up what was ok during Roman Times.
Moral standards are fine we are finally getting that stick out of our collective asses. When people talk about moral standings what I find they mean is making a big deal out of what a certain group think is wrong and imposing their will on the rest of us. It's still bad enough we still have religious nutbags imposing what they think is right on the rest of us.

[shimerra]

You see "CEOs and such decided to stop rewarding employees for the increased productivity and profits" while I see the proliferation of machines replacing people for much production. CEO's and the board they answer to aren't obliged to increase pay for workers, they are supposed to increase profit. They increase profit by lowering cost (replacing people with robots on production lines for example). Why should the workers be paid more while the need for them is decreasing?

You see that during a time period where we had extremely low unemployment, some of the highest worker productivity levels, but at the same time the only way Americans were able to impact their standard of living was because of a historic shift of women becoming co-income earners while real income stagnated for the majority of Americans. The same world and time period in which the average CEO salary has gone up hundreds of times. Guess they just magically became more productive than other employees! Funny thing about the CEO and the board, they are usually pretty friendly with each other. You are correct though, productivity increases are a major threat to American jobs far more so than the Chinese and a few other factors. The need for them isn't strictly decreasing though, structural unemployment and all that jazz. In fact with America's population distribution we're going to soon run into an issue like Japan, not enough young people to replacing retiring workers. There's actually quite a few shortages in certain professions, not just the obvious doctors.

The 401k? Exists solely for the purpose of saving company's money but hasn't improved retirement outcomes, just exposed workers to the volatility of the market. Hell I can't recall the name of the CEO( but there was a Coke executive who if you attributed every single penny of growth to him and his leadership, certainly baring exceptional circumstances I think most of us can agree this is never the case, was still overpaid much of it deftly dodging large chunks of taxes through vehicles you or I could never hope to take advantage of. So yes the theory is that CEOs increase profits by reducing costs, and in a perfect world that would be the way it ends up. Folks like the CostCo CEO seem to be the exception rather than the rule though.


To actually address the thread question: No. Morality has by and large always been a somewhat ambiguously shaped thing. I like to recall the Penn and Teller Bullshit episode on Manners about this one. Family values groups and all kinda of people bemoan this and that but the perceived moral degradation is usually more a case of them being butt hurt about times changing.

[LilSaihah]

I dunno, ask Mugabe.

...foreign aid? legit dunno.

[Powerogue]

Are they changing? That much is obvious.

Degrading requires them to be held to a standard, though. Who sets the standard?

[SenSayNyu]

“Times are bad. Children no longer obey their parents, and everyone is writing a book.”

― Marcus Tullius Cicero

However, maybe it's my age, but I remember that 20 years ago people were much more friendly and open.

[mvaliz]

No, I'd rather say they are improving, quite a bit to be honest.

But, some people just resent change, particularly the elderly.

Yup yup - personally I detest my generation (those who are now in their early 40s)

I believe the generation following me is even worse (Whom I call the "First-person shooter generation")

HOWEVER! The generation following them? THEM I like and have a LOT of faith in! (This generation I refer to as the "Anime/Brony generation")

There's an old addage I love, it goes something like this:

Sarah hated that her mother stayed home while her father worked. She felt that was sexist and wrong, and vowed that when she grew up she'd be a working Mom - just to prove to her children that there's no difference.

Sarah finally grows up, gets a full-time career, marries and now has a daughter - Mary.

Mary hated that both her parents were never home and constantly worked - and she was raised mostly by day-care and nannies. She felt that was wrong for a child to not grow up with their parents, and vowed that when she grew up she'd be a stay-at-home Mom - just to prove to her children that being at home for your children makes a difference.

It's a constant cycle. The more despicable the previous generation is, I believe the next generation says "Pfftt! I'm not going to be like THEM" and they do something differently. ^_^

And my favorite line I love: "Things do change, just not all at once. You can't be the butterfly who's wings beat in one country causes the hurricane. They just say that to keep the butterflies happy. Although, over the millions of years, the billions of butterflies - they have to influence the weather somehow."