Gap between rich and poor rising faster in Canada

[CPCFTW]

They are NOT "unowned". They are commonly held.

Stealing commonly held resources is "parasitism".

You didn't create the resource. You have the right (or acquired a public license) to look for the resource, but your right or license only entitles you to sell the resources on behalf of the people, returning the money to the common coffers, minus expenses and a reasonable living/profit.

If I 'find' your car that you lost in a parking lot, is it mine?

Wtf are you going on about? You honestly think you have as much claim to gold mined in the Yukon or lumber harvested in BC as you do your own car that you purchased?

The only "claim" you have to those resources is the social services provided by the taxes paid by the company who purchased the rights to search for AND SELL any resources on the land.

Stakeholders:

Canada govt - sells right to the land to highest bidder. Taxes any profits generated by the bidder through the exploitation of the land and also taxes any employees who work the land.

Company - invest capital to explore the land and extract any valuable resources. Anticipates earning a return on capital which is enough to entice them to accept the risk of not profiting.

Employee - gets paid wages for their labour in extracting the resource.

You - gets whatever the fuck the government decides to spend the land sale and tax revenue on. Likely sweet pensions for the secretaries and other 9 to 430ers of obscure federal departments, plus some bribes to Quebec.

You are absolutely delusional if you think you should have any more claim to natural resources then that, or that your fantasy is in any way a more efficient way to extract resources. I'm sorry Jacee, but no one is going to buy land, dig a new well of water for you, and let you drink from it for free. You don't have some sort of noble right to resources for being born.. Talk about parasitic.

[Bob]

Downloading music without compensating the musicians, songwriters, producers etc. is taking away their capacity to benefit financially from their work, in other words the proceeds for their labour. As for the claim it's OK because the musician allegedly gets some free advertising... If it ever crosses my mind to go steal a car, I'll try the "But Your Honour, this is actually benefiting the owner and the manufacturer from th car because I am giving them free advertisement every time I drive the car I have taken". Let,s see how far that would lead me.

Why are you so verbose? Keep it simple - downloading media such as movies, television shows, and music without paying for them is theft. Pure and simple.

[jacee]

The difference between say oil that is below the surface and my lost car is no one already owns the oil. I already own my car. When an individual or an organization goes out and makes use of that which was formerly unowned, they get it. This is the origin of private property. The government's claim to all as of yet unclaimed resources is invalid. You cannot just say "I own this" and be taken seriously. This is just another excuse for people to profit off of other's hard work. If you did nothing to contribute to a resource being used to satisfy the demands of consumers you should have no claim on the profit. Why is it that everyone thinks they can mooch off other people and their labour? If you want wealth go out and create it, don't steal from those who do.

The land and resources of Canada are not "unowned". They belong to us all collectively. You can't just go and claim private ownership.

[dre]

Why are you so verbose? Keep it simple - downloading media such as movies, television shows, and music without paying for them is theft. Pure and simple.

Actually its more like posession of stolen property based on current laws.

[Bob]

There is nothing parasitic about downloading music, for example. No one is hurt by this action. Actually this is symbiotic behaviour because the musician in question benefits from free advertising when you play the music you downloaded. On the other hand when you steal the proceeds of someone else's labour, you are doing EXACTLY what a parasite does - feeding off the host.

This is really, really, really stupid.

[Argus]

Besides... the people who make the latest widget and then patent it, they are just as much stealing ideas as the guy who wants to copy their work. Take the example of an author. Did they invent the concept of plot? Of character development? Did they invent English? No. They saw what other people did and borrowed what worked. That's how we progress. Why would we want to retard this progress by saying you can't copy other people? Why should someone else not be able to do to this guy what he did to the greats who proceeded him?

Much innovation occurs because someone had a good idea, worked hard at developing it, and produced a product, or a work which no one had thought of before.

What you wish to do is remove all reward for those who do this. You want to instead allow others, who didn't have that idea, who didn't work hard to develop it, to profit from someone else's work and imagination. This will pretty much remove any reason for anyone to spend their time, money and effort at developing new products or producing new drugs, new art, new stories or movies or music. It would result in a dull, static society much like the Soviet Union, where there was no reward for hard work or innovation.

Under your system, Apple would never have become a huge company, nor would Microsoft. As soon as they came out with their operating systems a dozen companies would have simply copied them, comma for comma, instruction for instruction, and resold them under their own names. And all the other high tech startups which began with a few guys working 18hr days in their garages to come out with a new product would never have occurred, because the moment they announced their new system or product big companies would have copied them and resold them so that the guys in the garage realized very little profit. People would stop bothering, and we never would have had Silicon Valley, and all the innovation which came from there.

[Argus]

There is nothing parasitic about downloading music, for example. No one is hurt by this action.

The more free music people download the less music will be produced because the musicians won't be able to make any money off it. Instead they'll go find other jobs which pay better.

[Argus]

When was the last time a businessman robbed you to keep his operation going? Oh, that's right, never.

Are you joking? Businessmen have robbed and exploited and defrauded suppliers, customers and competitors since business was invented.

[Guest Derek L]

We take control and nationalise their companies.

Think Petróleos de Venezuela S.A but on a much larger scale.

Save your rich threats about how bad it would be if the rich were to follow their wealth cause it'd never happen. They couldn't handle leaving.

So you advocate theft then? Would you consider the standard of living in Venezuela an upgrade over what we presently have in Canada?

As for not being able to handle leaving………..Well, as in the link I posted, that’s not the case in the United Kingdom…….The rich are leaving and taking middle class jobs with them……. Personally, my wife and I (and many of our friends) would likely leave also………Though not super wealthy, the services provided by the dentists, the engineers, the doctors, the architects, the investment bankers, the lawyers, the developers etc would be sorely missed once gone………Case in point, South Africa’s brain drain after Apartheid ended…….or the brain drain felt here in the medical field, with Doctors and nurses going south….

It’s not a fantasy, like what you purport, but fact…….It happens…….The wealth and services provided by “people like me” are in more of demand in this global economy than bus drivers and the person that installs car seats in the Ford assembly line………Ask yourself, how many Canadian factory jobs are now being done by people in the third world? Also, do you go to a third world country for a medical check-up or to have your teeth cleaned?

[jacee]

Wtf are you going on about? You honestly think you have as much claim to gold mined in the Yukon or lumber harvested in BC as you do your own car that you purchased?

The only "claim" you have to those resources is the social services provided by the taxes paid by the company who purchased the rights to search for AND SELL any resources on the land.

Stakeholders:

Canada govt - sells right to the land to highest bidder. Taxes any profits generated by the bidder through the exploitation of the land and also taxes any employees who work the land.

Company - invest capital to explore the land and extract any valuable resources. Anticipates earning a return on capital which is enough to entice them to accept the risk of not profiting.

Employee - gets paid wages for their labour in extracting the resource.

You - gets whatever the fuck the government decides to spend the land sale and tax revenue on. Likely sweet pensions for the secretaries and other 9 to 430ers of obscure federal departments, plus some bribes to Quebec.

You are absolutely delusional if you think you should have any more claim to natural resources then that, or that your fantasy is in any way a more efficient way to extract resources. I'm sorry Jacee, but no one is going to buy land, dig a new well of water for you, and let you drink from it for free. You don't have some sort of noble right to resources for being born.. Talk about parasitic.

Strawman.

I never said free. You get your costs and a reasonable living/profit.

You only 'own' the resources as a member of the public collective, no more no less than each other.

And that's a fact.

Move on maybe?

Edited September 18, 2011 by jacee

[Guest Derek L]

Strawman.

I never said free. You get your costs and a reasonable living/profit.

You only 'own' the resources as a member of the public collective, no more no less than each other.

And that's a fact.

Move on maybe?

Who defines what is reasonable?

[Zachary Young]

Tons of people do copy Microsoft's work - line for line, comma for comma - and pay them nothing. You can download pirated copies of Windows 7. Lots of people do so. Hasn't seemed to hurt their bottom line any.

Intellectual Property is a scam. Why should I subsidize a super rich industrial conglomerate? If they cannot compete on the free market they don't deserve my money any more than anyone else. The fact is the internet has rendered record companies obsolete. Their business model is going the way of the dodo. Because we don't need them any more. Are musicians going to stop writing songs because record companies don't make billions any more? Hardly. First of all, how much of the money in a record sale goes to the artist themselves? Practically nothing. 5% maybe. Everything else goes to paying for advertising, packaging, marketing, ceo's salaries, the guy who stocks the shelves etc. etc. Well we don't need any of that any more. We can just copy the data and distribute it via our computers.

So am I robbing from someone when I copy a CD that an artist created - even if it is expressly against their wishes? No, absolutely not. The fact that you wrote a song doesn't mean you can dictate to me what I can do with my property, namely my computer. It's not theft to reproduce something using your own materials. Theft is taking something that someone else owns, and claiming it as your own. I am not taking anything from anyone. I am copying data. The artist doesn't own my money, he is entitled to the sale of an album. If I choose to buy his album that is fine. But if someone else can reproduce his work and sell it at a better price than he can, then that is all the better for consumers, that is the magic of the market place. It's capitalism in action. Market competition making things better for the consumer.

Of course artists are going to continue to write songs and books, even without intellectual property. Of course the utilitarian side of things is irrelevant from the more important moral side of things, but a lot of artists consider their work a form of self expression first, and a commercial enterprise second. And the ones who write their songs solely to make a buck, the britney spears and n'syncs of this world, well, if they never write another song I'm sure we won't miss them much. Teenage girls will find something else to shriek too, I'm sure.

There is nothing I respect more than the institution that is private property. It is responsible for everything that is great in our society. But just because something is called property does not make it property. Just because something is called theft, does not make it theft. You cannot own ideas or recipes. Intellectual property is just another form of monopoly, granted by the government, to the detriment of the consumer. Big pharma and the record companies don't need a subsidy from me - they're rich enough already.

[Zachary Young]

Are you joking? Businessmen have robbed and exploited and defrauded suppliers, customers and competitors since business was invented.

Businessmen do sometimes rob. The government always robs. There's a huge difference.

[Smallc]

Tons of people do copy Microsoft's work - line for line, comma for comma - and pay them nothing. You can download pirated copies of Windows 7. Lots of people do so. Hasn't seemed to hurt their bottom line any.

How can you possibly even say that? If they hadn't stole the product, then they would have had to pay for it.

[Zachary Young]

Did Microsoft go bankrupt or something while I wasn't looking? AFAIK they are still thriving, that's how I can say that. Now, if you were really concerned about Microsoft you would join me in saying they - like all corporations - should be exempt from all forms of taxation by the CDN government. I'm sure they would appreciate that more than having the government crack down on the oh-so-dreadful internet pirates.

Yarrrr.

[Argus]

We take control and nationalise their companies.

Think Petróleos de Venezuela S.A but on a much larger scale.

Save your rich threats about how bad it would be if the rich were to follow their wealth cause it'd never happen. They couldn't handle leaving.

Venezuela survives, barely, on its oil, but even that is being badly run. Having the government nationalize industries and take over running an economy is a near guarantee of economic catastrophe which has played out again and again and again every time some fool dictator attempts it. Why the communist types never get that is beyond me.

[Argus]

Simply because it is the government doing something does not change the reality of what they are doing. Taxation is theft. It is the government, without my consent, taking my property. That is the exact definition of theft. By what tortorous logic can you redefine theft in such a manner that taxation does not fit the bill?

Think of this as a club. You either pay club membership, or you leave. We have no walls. You're free to pick up and leave. But as long as you're here, in this club's territory, you pay your dues like all the other members of the club. Why? Because without everyone paying dues we can't heat the place. For that matter, we can't pay the mortgage or have electricity. We can't have nice chairs and rugs and tables, and we can't pay the staff. What you want to do is be a member of the club, take advantage of all the amenities the club offers, but then you're outraged at the thought of paying membership dues. Well, grow up. Nothing is free. It costs us money to run the club. You either share in the payment or get out.

[Smallc]

Did Microsoft go bankrupt or something while I wasn't looking? AFAIK they are still thriving, that's how I can say that.

But are they realizing their full profit potential?

Now, if you were really concerned about Microsoft you would join me in saying they - like all corporations - should be exempt from all forms of taxation by the CDN government.

Unlike you, I;m concerned with society. Canada needs a stable revenue stream, and that means having a variety of taxes on a variety of the economy.

[Smallc]

/

Edited September 18, 2011 by Smallc

[Zachary Young]

Angus : Yes, I suppose I could run away from the thugs extorting me. But that's not my preferred method of dealing with bullies - and what about all their other hapless victims? Am I to just let this evil gang attack innocents because I am too cowardly to do anything?

I've got a better solution. Revolution.

The thing about a club is membership is voluntary. I'd like to revoke mine, thank you very much.

Edited September 18, 2011 by Zachary Young

[Argus]

Why do people invent new things? No shortage of reasons. Could be a tinkerer who simply enjoys the challenge. Or a business that has a great idea and thinks they can make money with it.

But you don't want him to be able to make money from it. You want other people to be able to take his invention for free and give him nothing.

It's not wrong to look at what other people are doing and say "oh hey, that's a good idea". You can own things. You cannot own ideas.

You don't seem to understand what copying means. Someone at some point came up with the idea for the first laptop. Well, lots of others started doing the same. Likewise, someone came out with the tablet, and it was successful, and now everyone is doing it. Same for smartphones. No, you can't patent an IDEA. But the actual working mechanisms and software systems of a particular tablet or smart phone or laptop are not ideas, they're complex working systems designed, tested and perfected by a large group of people at great expense over a long period of time.

I have an idea for a book about a war in outer space. Fine. Lots of people have had similar ideas and written a number of stories about it. You can't patent an idea. But when I write the story, the actual dialogue and specific plot and wording is mine, worked at by me over a long period of time. That is not an IDEA. Star Wars is not unique in its broad theme. Anyone can write a similar movie. But they can't use the same characters, the same dialogue, and the exact same plot. Its writing and plot and dialogue are products of effort and work and belong to the writer.

[Argus]

Why would someone rob them of their hard work and talent when someone else would just rob them of their

scanning and re-selling someone else's song or book under their own name and put it under their own name? Their wouldn't be any profit in that?

Pretty obvious. It takes a long time to write a book. You invest months or years of your life in it. To make that economically viable you need a large number of sales. But it takes minutes to copy someone else's file and put it out for sale as yours. So you can do lots of them, put out ten new books a day. You might not make a lot, but hey, it hasn't taken you any time, so it's till more than worthwhile.

[Argus]

They are NOT "unowned". They are commonly held.

Sure. But he's the guy who has the well, he dug. So it is his. You, of course, are free to dig your own well to this 'common resource', though not on his land, of course.

[Zachary Young]

There is simply no need for intellectual property. What it comes down to is people cannot compete on the free market, so they lobby for government protection. That is not how capitalism works. You either put up, or shut up, don't go whining to the government for help just because someone else can serve the consumers needs better than you can. The market doesn't care who got there first, and neither should we. All that matters is who can produce the best product at the lowest price for the consumer. But the established business interests don't like that. They love being able to milk the public for everything they can, and so they make laws to prevent competition. Without IP & copywrite the record industry and the book industry would collapse, because they would be completely replaced by the internet and data copying. It's already happening anyway. New technology makes old, inefficient business models obsolete. You luddites can fight it if you please, but it's too late.

We pirates won this war already. Go ahead, pay $20 an album if you want. I don't care if you give your hard earned dollars to the record company. I have thousands of movies and albums, all entirely at no cost to myself. Studios in hollywood spend millions making films and I get them at zero cost. You want to pay full sticker price? Be my guest.

[Argus]

Did Microsoft go bankrupt or something while I wasn't looking? AFAIK they are still thriving, that's how I can say that.

Microsoft is thriving because of the honest people who pay for the things Microsoft pays. However, those honest people wind up paying higher to make up for the number of thieves who simply copy and steal the software.

The cost of things like this is dependent on the number of sales. The more they sell, the more the costs of development are shared out, and thus the lower the price can be. If 'tons of people' are stealing hte product without any payment then the rest have to pay higher fees to make up for that.

Now, if you were really concerned about Microsoft you would join me in saying they - like all corporations - should be exempt from all forms of taxation by the CDN government. I'm sure they would appreciate that more than having the government crack down on the oh-so-dreadful internet pirates.

No, they wouldn't appreciate it, because the taxes are what provide the infrastructure for the continuing survival of this society. And without that society there's nobody there to buy their software.