Would this help at all?

deleriumtremens

What would be the economic effects if after a person loses their job we execute them. This is a serious question about what would happen if we artificially create full employment.

Any orphans are put into a state orphanage, 30 children to one state-employed carer...the person getting the job of carer being selected from a hat containing the names of 100 newly unemployed people. The rest are quietly done away with.
Also, the fear of losing ones job would increase productivity to a level only possible when the threat of executon exists.

I know there are some problems with this plan but I cant quite get my head around them eg. does the spending/tax ratio change, cost of executions and dealing with bodies, nobody wanting to invest here yada yada yada.
The more I think about it economics is complicated!

Seriously, ignoring the human side of this plan, is it crazy?

eVeNtInE

This post has been deleted.

Hagar

Great idea! You're fired. There's a firing squad and a wall over there waiting on you.

Saibh

deleriumtremens wrote: »

What would be the economic effects if after a person loses their job we execute them. This is a serious question about what would happen if we artificially create full employment.

Any orphans are put into a state orphanage, 30 children to one state-employed carer...the person getting the job of carer being selected from a hat containing the names of 100 newly unemployed people. The rest are quietly done away with.
Also, the fear of losing ones job would increase productivity to a level only possible when the threat of executon exists.

I know there are some problems with this plan but I cant quite get my head around them eg. does the spending/tax ratio change, cost of executions and dealing with bodies, nobody wanting to invest here yada yada yada.
The more I think about it economics is complicated!

Seriously, ignoring the human side of this plan, is it crazy?

Yes

Collie D

eVeNtInE wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Im sure the authorities will recapture him soon.

javaboy

Soylent green ftw!

Ruu_Old

Eh why don't we just make some tasty dish from the body instead of execution? *munches on Soylent Green..mmm mmm mmm*

edit: beaten to it.

Queen-Mise

Well I think we have just found the local boards wino, in the DT's and maybe a little bit delusional also :D

Sharpshooter

deleriumtremens wrote: »

What would be the economic effects if after a person loses their job we execute them. This is a serious question about what would happen if we artificially create full employment.

Do you have a job,OP?

deleriumtremens

I should add, the rule where you get killed if you lose your job only applies when :
a) a person is finished college and in a full time job after college and then loses their jobs. They are killed the next day. The country dosent need more people on the scrapheap of people looking for good jobs.

b) a person reaches the age of 20 and is without a job.

c) anybody who retires is given a medal of sentimental (but not monetary) value and then shot at the break of dawn.

Also, a system should be put in place in college wherby only the top 30% of achievers in the course are allowed survive. Exams should be made rediculously difficult to nsure their is such scope that not everybody can attain full marks. Needless to say, courses that provide no use to society should be axed, current students of these courses being, yes you guessed it, killed.

deleriumtremens

Sharpshooter wrote: »

Do you have a job,OP?

No, but if the any government officials tried to hunt me down I'd quickly hang myself.

Saibh

deleriumtremens wrote: »

I should add, the rule where you get killed if you lose your job only applies when :
a) a person is finished college and in a full time job after college and then loses their jobs. They are killed the next day. The country dosent need more people on the scrapheap of people looking for good jobs.

b) a person reaches the age of 20 and is without a job.

c) anybody who retires is given a medal of sentimental (but not monetary) value and then shot at the break of dawn.

Also, a system should be put in place in college wherby only the top 30% of achievers in the course are allowed survive. Exams should be made rediculously difficult to nsure their is such scope that not everybody can attain full marks. Needless to say, courses that provide no use to society should be axed, current students of these courses being, yes you guessed it, killed.

You will be first to go - spelling is a big part of the test

mikemac

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVfvYiWcA-E

Hey, I'm not one for posting youtube links but this suits the OP perfectly.

People jump off cliffs to create jobs, lol
Whoops Acopolyse, film from 1986

deleriumtremens

Saibh wrote: »

You will be first to go - spelling is a big part of the test

I'll agree with you that my spelling is quite bad, but spelling isn't one of the rules.
As for food made from the bodies of those killed, yes why not. Sure the people left alive will be so miserable with their lives that I dont think being forced to eat their own grandfather would trouble them.

Setun

Can't we just nuke an Eminem concert and be done with it?

Ghost Train

I think RTE could produce an average to poor quality tv show based around the selection process and subsequent terminations.

Sharpshooter

deleriumtremens wrote: »

I should add, the rule where you get killed if you lose your job only applies when :
a) a person is finished college and in a full time job after college and then loses their jobs. They are killed the next day. The country dosent need more people on the scrapheap of people looking for good jobs.

b) a person reaches the age of 20 and is without a job.

c) anybody who retires is given a medal of sentimental (but not monetary) value and then shot at the break of dawn.

Also, a system should be put in place in college wherby only the top 30% of achievers in the course are allowed survive. Exams should be made rediculously difficult to nsure their is such scope that not everybody can attain full marks. Needless to say, courses that provide no use to society should be axed, current students of these courses being, yes you guessed it, killed.

Adolf?

deleriumtremens

deleriumtremens wrote: »

I'll agree with you that my spelling is quite bad, but spelling isn't one of the rules.
As for food made from the bodies of those killed, yes why not. Sure the people left alive will be so miserable with their lives that I dont think being forced to eat their own grandfather would trouble them.

How much Ketamine have you taken?

jester77

I dunno OP, what happens when the executioner gets fired?

deleriumtremens

jester77 wrote: »

I dunno OP, what happens when the executioner gets fired?

Aha. Legislation would be brought in to ensure that, unless things get really bad thais would never happen.

I have an alternative plan if ye are ready to listen:
Every person in the country is surgically binded to another person by the somach. Each is allowed keep their own heart,lungs (but not kidneys...reduces need for costly fluid intake athough it does slowly destroy them) but, to ensure that nobody opposes the plan, the brain of one of the people is removed and the remaining brain shared equally between the two indivduals. Obviously women would only be binded to women and men to men. This halves the number of jobs needed, reduces the need for spending by governments on individuals, reduces the practicality of making children and, due to reduced costs, accomidates for the increased employment of healthcare staff to deal with the myriad of health problems likely to develop as a result of messing around with nature like this.
And because I came up with these plans, I'm not affected.

Saibh

deleriumtremens wrote: »

I have an alternative plan if ye are ready to listen:
Every person in the country is surgically binded to another person by the somach/ Each is allowed keep their own heart and lungs but, to ensure nobody opposes the plan, the brain of one of the people is removed and the remaining brain shared equally between the two indivduals. Obviously women would only be binded to women and vice versa for men. This halves the number of jobs needed, reduces the spending by governments on individuals, reduces the practicality od making children and, due to reduced costs, accomidates for the increased employment of healthcare staff to deal with the myriad of health problems likely to develop as a result of messing around with nature like this.

This is even worse:eek:

If I was you, I keep those ideas to yourself

deleriumtremens

Saibh wrote: »

This is even worse:eek:

If I was you, I keep those ideas to yourself

The beauty is that when the brain tissue is transplanted into the other persons empty skull, following treatment with loads of anti rejection drugs it will eventually grow into a full sized brain (maybe).

Queen-Mise

Daddio wrote: »

Can't we just nuke an Eminem concert and be done with it?

Do we have a bit of musical hierarchy here. I wonder would i get banned from the Jazz & Blues forum, for saying that Eminem is a very fine artist :P:P

deadhead13

This definitely gets my "Thread I wish I never entered" award.

Queen-Mise

deleriumtremens wrote: »

The beauty is that when the brain tissue is transplanted into the other persons empty skull, following treatment with loads of anti rejection drugs it will eventually grow into a full sized brain (maybe).

Absolutely brilliant ideas here. have you developed any way of culling the brains of stupid people. It would be very workable, you could have one person who has some common sense, linked with someone who is a bit stupid, get rid of the stupid person's brain. And wah hay you have improved the world.
i'm not sure though about sharing organs & stuff though.

deleriumtremens

queen-mise wrote: »

Absolutely brilliant ideas here. have you developed any way of culling the brains of stupid people. It would be very workable, you could have one person who has some common sense, linked with someone who is a bit stupid, get rid of the stupid person's brain. And wah hay you have improved the world.
i'm not sure though about sharing organs & stuff though.

Oh yes, I forgot to mention. Before deciding which brain we would keep, each half of the pair would be required to sit a rigorous series of examinations, the winners brain being selected to be used between the pair and the person who at first owned said brain being, philosophically and ethically speaking, allowed to live.

deleriumtremens

deadhead13 wrote: »

This definitely gets my "Thread I wish I never entered" award.

Just because my ideas make me a beloved and justice seeking maverick shouldnt put you off wanting to read about them!

Sharpshooter

deadhead13 wrote: »

This definitely gets my "Thread I wish I never entered" award.

Glances at username.
Aptly put.

Queen-Mise

deleriumtremens wrote: »

Oh yes, I forgot to mention. Before deciding which brain we would keep, each half of the pair would be required to sit a rigorous series of examinations, the winners brain being selected to be used between the pair and the person who at first owned said brain being, philosophically and ethically speaking, allowed to live.

Ok to bring this to the realms of the ridiculous, as it hasn't quite gotten there yet. What would you do with somebody like Gazza, absolutely brilliant footballer, but a complete raving lunatic and alcoholic.

JDLK

The point of economics is to maintain and improve the lives of people through the growth and distribution of resources. To destroy lives in order to maintain economics would be paradoxical, negating its very purpose. If a person becomes unemployed it does not mean they are immediately devoid of their capacity to consume so by killing them you could be losing potential investment (spending) which they had in reserve savings.

In saying that many wars have been attributed to economic depressions- the Nazis gained power on the back of an economic slump and they killed millions.

xOxSinéadxOx

JDLK wrote: »

The point of economics is to maintain and improve the lives of people through the growth and distribution of resources. To destroy lives in order to maintain economics would be paradoxical, negating its very purpose. If a person becomes unemployed it does not mean they are immediately devoid of their capacity to consume so by killing them you could be losing potential investment (spending) which they had in reserve savings.

In saying that many wars have been attributed to economic depressions- the Nazis gained power on the back of an economic slump and they killed millions.

get out.

Queen-Mise

xOxSinéadxOx wrote: »

get out.

I am very impressed Sinead with your profound use of the English language to express your point so clearly and succinctly, whilst losing none of its potency. Truly you are an exemplary user of English language.

I think Delirium would have no problem in keeping your brain.

Senna

by your plan we would execute bertie, Fitzpatrick and Neary. Good plan.

Capt'n Midnight

A Modest Proposal

For Preventing The Children of Poor People in Ireland
From Being Aburden to Their Parents or Country, and
For Making Them Beneficial to The Public

By Jonathan Swift (1729)

I do therefore humbly offer it to public consideration that of the hundred and twenty thousand children already computed, twenty thousand may be reserved for breed, whereof only one-fourth part to be males; which is more than we allow to sheep, black cattle or swine; and my reason is, that these children are seldom the fruits of marriage, a circumstance not much regarded by our savages, therefore one male will be sufficient to serve four females. That the remaining hundred thousand may, at a year old, be offered in the sale to the persons of quality and fortune through the kingdom; always advising the mother to let them suck plentifully in the last month, so as to render them plump and fat for a good table. A child will make two dishes at an entertainment for friends; and when the family dines alone, the fore or hind quarter will make a reasonable dish, and seasoned with a little pepper or salt will be very good boiled on the fourth day, especially in winter.

impr0v

deleriumtremens wrote: »

I should add, the rule where you get killed if you lose your job only applies when :
a) a person is finished college and in a full time job after college and then loses their jobs. They are killed the next day. The country dosent need more people on the scrapheap of people looking for good jobs.

b) a person reaches the age of 20 and is without a job.

c) anybody who retires is given a medal of sentimental (but not monetary) value and then shot at the break of dawn.

Also, a system should be put in place in college wherby only the top 30% of achievers in the course are allowed survive. Exams should be made rediculously difficult to nsure their is such scope that not everybody can attain full marks. Needless to say, courses that provide no use to society should be axed, current students of these courses being, yes you guessed it, killed.

I think that, on balance, it's a well conceived and ambitious plan. I have one gripe however, and it's hidden in the fine print of point (c).

I think that the medal of sentimental value is contrary to the spirit of the scheme and is too much of a concession to those pinko liberals who would seek to shout down the plan to protect themselves. It's an incentive to fail and the inevitable few who deliberately seek to have themselves fired solely to attain a medal would skew the results of the program. Without good reporting, and an ability to constantly monitor the cost vs benefit ratios, we are lost.

I also think that it's naive to describe it as not being of monetary value. It will of course cost the government some money to produce the said medal, whatever form it takes, and to establish and staff a body to administer the awarding of the medals. Ergo, it has a monetary cost to the body of workers still in gainful employment.

In short, drop the medal of sentimental value and I'll instantly subscribe to your newsletter.

The guy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91kdwxFsthI

I thought we went there.

The Mad Hatter

Daddio wrote: »

Can't we just nuke an Eminem concert and be done with it?

Hey, those people don't work because they're too young for full-time employment. It's the Aslan concerts you want to go for.

queen-mise wrote: »

Ok to bring this to the realms of the ridiculous, as it hasn't quite gotten there yet. What would you do with somebody like Gazza, absolutely brilliant footballer, but a complete raving lunatic and alcoholic.

Well, it's obvious we shoot him. Seriously, what are you thinking of?

phasers

Wait... Soylent Green is people!?

galwayrush

phasers wrote: »

Wait... Soylent Green is people!?

Yes, the cause and solution to unemployement and hunger.:p

Setun

queen-mise wrote: »

Do we have a bit of musical hierarchy here. I wonder would i get banned from the Jazz & Blues forum, for saying that Eminem is a very fine artist :P:P

You'd get banned for trolling. :pac:

javaboy

Daddio wrote: »

You'd get banned for trolling. :pac:

Eminem's music is just a natural progression from scat singing imo. Really rap and jazz should be merged.

deleriumtremens

impr0v wrote: »

I think that, on balance, it's a well conceived and ambitious plan. I have one gripe however, and it's hidden in the fine print of point (c).

I think that the medal of sentimental value is contrary to the spirit of the scheme and is too much of a concession to those pinko liberals who would seek to shout down the plan to protect themselves. It's an incentive to fail and the inevitable few who deliberately seek to have themselves fired solely to attain a medal would skew the results of the program. Without good reporting, and an ability to constantly monitor the cost vs benefit ratios, we are lost.

I also think that it's naive to describe it as not being of monetary value. It will of course cost the government some money to produce the said medal, whatever form it takes, and to establish and staff a body to administer the awarding of the medals. Ergo, it has a monetary cost to the body of workers still in gainful employment.

In short, drop the medal of sentimental value and I'll instantly subscribe to your newsletter.

This post made me think. Yes, you are correct. The medal shouldnt be given as it is too much of an incentive to retire in spite of the firing squad. I am sure we can all agree that the main objective of not killing off anyone over 60 regardless of employment status is that we want to squeeze every last ATP molcule's worth of energy out of them. In this recession EVERY ATP counts.

Sam Vimes

deleriumtremens wrote: »

Also, a system should be put in place in college wherby only the top 30% of achievers in the course are allowed survive. Exams should be made rediculously difficult to nsure their is such scope that not everybody can attain full marks. Needless to say, courses that provide no use to society should be axed, current students of these courses being, yes you guessed it, killed.

or instead of just having hard exams we could do something like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-T7yPJVvXw

deleriumtremens

Sam Vimes wrote: »

or instead of just having hard exams we could do something like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-T7yPJVvXw

I must download that film at some point sir, thank you!!!

elpresdentde

deleriumtremens wrote: »

What would be the economic effects if after a person loses their job we execute them. This is a serious question about what would happen if we artificially create full employment.

Any orphans are put into a state orphanage, 30 children to one state-employed carer...the person getting the job of carer being selected from a hat containing the names of 100 newly unemployed people. The rest are quietly done away with.
Also, the fear of losing ones job would increase productivity to a level only possible when the threat of executon exists.

I know there are some problems with this plan but I cant quite get my head around them eg. does the spending/tax ratio change, cost of executions and dealing with bodies, nobody wanting to invest here yada yada yada.
The more I think about it economics is complicated!

Seriously, ignoring the human side of this plan, is it crazy?

if you executed all the unemployed lets say 400.000 and pensioners, sick, disabled lets say a total of million now ...........bang their gone.

then you don't have to feed,clothe,heal 1 million people. which means that a
lot of tesco staff hse people etc are no longer required because demands drops. ................bang. which means that consumer demand drops which mean a rise in unemployment. which means .........bang

which means demand drops which means.?

elpresdentde

deleriumtremens wrote: »

This post made me think. Yes, you are correct. The medal shouldnt be given as it is too much of an incentive to retire in spite of the firing squad. I am sure we can all agree that the main objective of not killing off anyone over 60 regardless of employment status is that we want to squeeze every last ATP molcule's worth of energy out of them. In this recession EVERY ATP counts.

yes much wisdom

nobody likes tucking into their soilent green and getting a peice of medal stuck in their teeth.

Setun

javaboy wrote: »

Eminem's music is just a natural progression from scat singing imo. Really rap and jazz should be merged.

/weeps

Seriously though, Madvillain does a damn good job of keeping rap nice and jazzy.