W.P. Baldwin

Jasper, GA, United States

Someone is shy

W.P. hasn't completed a profile. Should we look for some other people?

Comments & conversations

Noface
W.P. Baldwin
Posted about 3 years ago
How has enduring some extreme hardship profoundly impacted your life?
Scott, isn't that something. What are the odds of that. And I am sorry that I didn't have a good answer to number 3. I have been contemplating that very problem for a number of years. In a democracy the people will not vote themselves into an environment that would require more sacrifice from themselves, only from others. Anyway, I wish you well and thanks for the back and forth, W.P. Baldwin
Noface
W.P. Baldwin
Posted about 3 years ago
How has enduring some extreme hardship profoundly impacted your life?
Scott, you make a good point. When a sector of the economy becomes more industrialized the authority to manage that sector falls into the hands of a select and, or ambitious few, along with the money of course. This power gives them access to the world stage in which they can jump from one country to another as resources run out. Therefore, going off of your fish idea, they are more liable to overuse and abuse. This industrialization concept parallels the topic of helping people. They have industrialized compassion. Now people do not have to directly help their fellow man, they only have to give money to a charity and, or pay their taxes to help people; basically the people do not have to get their hands dirty anymore. This creates a disconnect between the giver (payer) and the recipient (or taker) and any amount of accountability on both sides. I believe industrializing compassion has distorted the real meaning of what compassion is. 1) I do not believe government can have wisdom. The power they can achieve intoxicates even the strongest of individuals, ultimately corrupting the system. Market forces can have a greater wisdom, but there are many variables; like the type of government that is in place. 2) In most cases, property owners are going to take better care of their property than if the property is collectively owned. 3) This is the most difficult. To encourage people to embrace hardships goes against human nature. In most cases, people will do what comes easiest. The people will have to be immersed in the difficulty through a natural order of events; an event where they realize that they had been their own worst enemy all along. Thank you, W.P. Baldwin P.S. I was born at Ennis and lived at Melrose until I was eight.
Noface
W.P. Baldwin
Posted about 3 years ago
Should potential parents, in an enlightened and advanced society, be licensed to have children?
Totalitarianism and cheating are always going to be a part of society. To think otherwise would be unrealistic. A better question would have been, "Can there ever be an enlightened society where evil will never lurk within its shadows?" Then you could of had a discussion about the possibilities of this ever happening. By the way, another poster made the best point that in the utopia of an enlightened society there would be no need for licensing requirements, which is what your question was about, "Should potential parents, in an enlightened and advanced society, be licensed to have children?" I am sorry that we could not have discussed my point that to license someone there must be someone setting the standards of licensing. Your point that nobody is giving the licenses means that there will not be any licenses issued. Have a good day.
Noface
W.P. Baldwin
Posted about 3 years ago
Should potential parents, in an enlightened and advanced society, be licensed to have children?
The only universal rule is a parent should teach their child how to take care of themselves without purposely stepping on the throat of another. How they accomplish this is where the disputes start. The only human right we have as adults is the OPPORTUNITY to freely take care of ourselves and our families as long as this does not DIRECTLY infringe upon another's right to do the same. Again, this is disputed because the weak side of human nature wants to get as much as it can for doing as little as possible.
Noface
W.P. Baldwin
Posted about 3 years ago
Should potential parents, in an enlightened and advanced society, be licensed to have children?
@ R H You said, "And where does the question mention that 'someone' would decide who gets to procreate?" and "Regarding the concept of a license, it is merely that you have demonstrated ability to perform the task desired, with full knowledge of how it's done successfully and the repurcussions if those methods are not used." I still argue someone with authority must decide the standards by which a lisence is issued. You said, "No one 'chooses' who gets a drivers license, medical license, real estate license, insurance license, teaching license, or any other kind of license." Well, if you do not abide by the standards decided upon you then lose the license. Many times the standards are B.S.. You said, "The society is protected because you've been trained and demonstrated ability." Again, people are killed every day by licensed drivers and doctors, cheated by real estate agents and insurance agents and get horrible educations by licensed teachers. I am a "licensed" builder and I will guarantee you I have seen as many incompetent builders that are licensed as there are competent builders who are not licensed. You said, "Could we say it's human nature to kill at will, to take what we want when we want, for men to demand sex from a woman, to pee on the sidewalk? I could go 'deeper' but I'm too tired." to deflect from having a discussion. Human nature is good, evil and everything in between. This is why your idea will not work. People will always find a way around the "law", whether they break it or know the right person. To the context of an enlightened and advanced society. With the type of discussion you and I just had do you really believe that either one of us is capable of being part of it? TedTalks is a great place where knowledge can be shared openly. If a person does not want to take advantage of that and expand upon their knowledge, that is fine; there always will be a need for people in the bottom eighty percent. Sincerely, W.P. Baldwin
Noface
W.P. Baldwin
Posted about 3 years ago
How has enduring some extreme hardship profoundly impacted your life?
Scott, for me hardships and suffering have made me a better person, that is, once I embraced the hardship. This is a great subject, because the underlying topic starts to get at the heart of where I believe a society goes wrong and destroys itself. Innately we want to reduce suffering, first and foremost our own. Secondly we reduce the suffering of our kids and family members, then we move on to reducing the suffering of strangers. This creates a society where policies are implemented and charities are created under the pretense of alleviating suffering. However, in many cases they ultimately only postpone or extend suffering and create a dependency that is destructive to the human spirit. You nailed it when you said, "Furthermore, the more you're willing to endure and suffer, the better the result." This is why I believe we must be careful how we help others, because we can easily deny them the opportunity to experience the euphoria of overcoming their own obstacles; though I do believe in helping GUIDE people through their difficulties. It seems to be much easier to just do it for them (Of which I think is very selfish.) instead of taking the time to teach them how. (Which requires more energy and dedication.) Thanks for the topic, W.P. Baldwin
Noface
W.P. Baldwin
Posted about 3 years ago
Should potential parents, in an enlightened and advanced society, be licensed to have children?
@ R H When I mentioned to look deeper meant for you to study human nature. Human nature is inclined to resist anything imposed. All ideas, good and bad, are great to aid in advancing humanity, however if an idea must be imposed instead of accepted does not substantiate the idea. We cannot alienate others to advance an idea, though as humans we occassionally will, no matter how hard we try not to. Look at an idea from this perspective. How can I market my idea so that it educates others without sounding rightious or contemptuous. I miss wrote when I said embraced. Rather, I should have said accepted. (Their acceptance is based on what they are told and believe the law is for.) There are many ways that central design over procreation are destructive. One way it could destroy would be those in power would get the "bright idea" as to whom they want to "breed" based upon their standards. Those standards are at the descretion of those in power. Are those standards based on race, IQ, work ethic, hygeine, physical characteristics or whatever inclination? Think your ideas through. Good Luck, W.P. Baldwin
Noface
W.P. Baldwin
Posted about 3 years ago
Should potential parents, in an enlightened and advanced society, be licensed to have children?
RH, What do you think the parenting standards should be? I did not even realize that the perfect method or system of parenting had been invented yet. Every method that has been promoted, so far, has had unforeseen consequences. Has the thought ever occured to you that there are too many different types of people, cultures, (sub-cultures) and so on for there to ever be a realistic standard of licensing? Good luck figuring it out, but I would suggest you look a lot deeper before you continue this conversation, because what you suggest is more than dangerous. It would destroy the society that embraces it. W.P. Baldwin
Noface
W.P. Baldwin
Posted about 3 years ago
The world struggles with debt, and economists see dollar signs, what do think is the solution to the problem at hand.
Bob, you are exactly right about the "perceived" needs. The industrialization of compassion and security has run rampant. The reason I believe it has gotten out of control is because the federal government (PRINTED MONEY) funds way too much of what localities should be paying for themselves (LOCALITIES CANNOT PRINT MONEY). If the locality can afford it that is fine (LOCAL TAXES that the people approve), otherwise they don't have the "service" at all. We cannot mix socialistic collective policies in a capitalist system and expect it to work even reasonably well. It is much harder to prove you have a good product when people are paying for it with their own money which they had to work hard for. W.P. Baldwin