It used to be between the choice of buying a pencil or not to buy one. We were happy with being able to write with a pencil if not ink. As the society evolves and the tehcnology advances, we got the option of using H, B, HB, HHB, HBB, HHBB pencils. It was a nice idea. More options, fullfilling specific people needs. Then we got the mechanical pencil. Then with or without rubber for a comfy hold. Then there's the plastic catridge or a metal catridge or better durability. Then we can choose red, blue yellow, mofo. Then there's stalemate, pencilvania, penpenpen or pen brands....

If this a good thing? We used to enjoy to our heart's content with the unique pencil on the market but now that we have more options to satusfy our specific needs, is this better?

Choices?
I choose stripper

Also, what are you rambling about?

If this a good thing? We used to enjoy to our heart's content with the unique pencil on the market but now that we have more options to satusfy our specific needs, is this better?

People who think, that diversity is forming need, rather than need is forming diversity is taking too much for granted.

That's why it's better to not waste too much time to think about crap like that and just accept the pleasant fact, live in a world with many specific medical treatments for specific conditions, as a bland example.

Effectiveness is not just needed to maintain some sort of standard, or any gross virtual concept.

It's needed so less people die, suffer and get harmed for sad and pointless reasons.
Being romantic and being dramatic for a self-serving reason, is also being selfishly irrational as well as unworthy to be considered.

Ok, i'm talking about material. Not medical needs about either get poked by a giant needle to save ur ass or not get one.

I'm asking your opinion. Does having more choices neccessarily means good? For yourself and for the society.

I'm asking your opinion. Does having more choices neccessarily means good? For yourself and for the society.

The pencils you talked about are the same ones, those doctors use for writing down their studies, in different colours and different strength.
Those pencils are used by the same engineers, that designed the first NMR on their sketchboards, that made the first industrial milking machines, that calculated how to build a bridge the right way as well as the house you life in, things, that humans strived for in over and over more sophisticated ways, struggling with quite an energy to achieve things to make life peaceful, fearless, long and enjoyable.

It is ok, that you lost the bigger picture and the reasons, but it also shows of that you aren't as smart as you thought you where when you made the thread:
Obviously those products are wanted and needed by someone, or they would end up in the trash; People don't usually risk all they have and stand for as a person, to make useless trash, they tend to try to make a living.

If you don't get it: You don't have to, as long as you trust me that what sounds like a good idea to you, is the reason, why many people preferred to gamble their files, over getting out of communist Russia.

On your question: No.
OMFG, that was hard to come by:
Pointless things are pointless, useful things are useful and people use the most useful things they can get and know of; Things that are created to have no use, are rarely used and no one cares about them.
This should be understandable even for the challenged beyond us.

The fact that we have many different choices - some of them perhaps inconsequential in the grand scheme - is a sign of prosperity, and yes, a good thing.

And I think it's a mistake to imagine that advances and variety in the medical sector is too much different then having more choices in pencils. Everything in a market is connected. One sector cannot do good while all others suffer. If the medical industry is making great advances and doing good business, and it follows that the market overall is doing well, as is other industries. We have more pencils because we can afford to, which is a very good thing.


It is wholly bad to live your life only aiming at "what you need." If you followed that down to the end of it's road, you would end up living as a caveman on uncooked food - because, really, unless you want to live long and happy prosperous, you don't need anything else. Just a cave over your head, dirty water and raw meat.

EDIT: As usuall, Ronin summed things up better then I did.

Well you guys think it's a good think because it does research and gives more chance for whatever medical advancement.

What I'm trying to talk about is does it really make people happier to have much more choices than we had? I dont think by having more choices will make the population happier ( which I have no means to relate this to medical needs since I'm not even talking about that. )


I'm here to ask for opinions and look what I got. Someone insulting me by assumign I thought I was Einstein for asking opinions. Than another claim that I did not think of the bigger picture because of it. This is getting interesting.

EDIT - The reason that I want to hear more opinion is cuz my friend showed me a video about THIS specific subject that people are less satisfied becuz of having more options than it used to be on www.TED.com

Mods, lock this thread up, no more mood to even read any kind of opinion.

Buddy, I was not accusing you of anything. But by the way you formed your opening post, I was under the impression that you were simply asking if having more choices was a "good thing," which both me and Ronin answered - yes.

And now, in response to your new post, I also answer yes.

Having more choice is a sign that a country, or region, or whatever, is doing well. Prospering. The fact that new choices arise in the market - new products, better quality products, specialized products, etc - means that the overall standard of living is rising. And while a high standard of living is not always a prerequisite for happiness, it certainly helps. A higher standard of living means better and cheaper food, medical, and luxuries, all of which contribute to a person's overall happiness. It does not guarantee that every single person will be happy, but it does give everyone a better chance at it.

EDIT: As usuall, Ronin summed things up better then I did.

Too much flattery;
Your first sentence is important to the subject and I failed to add it as I assumed it a premise. (which I now do not have regret, as I didn't have it as pregnantly formulated in my head.)

That's why combined viewpoints always are richer than just one opinion and I usually look down on my posts comparing to others, because I always pick up several aspects mine lacked.

On topic:
I at times think about how much less distraction there was for the generation before our present youth:
Distraction from the "most important" things that is as for example my education for getting a mechanical engineer:
All the time wasted on different things would fall away and be used to get much better and study the much more really relevant things I might pass on, because I am researching some random news event, or how the Japanese economy performance was altered by their insignificant lack of innovative in their boring governmental rochades.

I wouldn't find the idea of that too tempting:
First, I am proceeding my education and not loosing focus.
Secondly, I am enjoying myself.
Third, I am probably a worse engineer, but a more complete and flexible person and this is at times more important than being a pure embodiment of some dust collecting ancient knowledge, not only at leisure but also professionally.

This means:
Choices are good, if you know the score;
Your instinct will keep you from getting to tangled up in them.

@the emotional component: People are bound to find something to be worried about. If there is no important issue, they will switch over to less important ones. Besides being unhappy with their crappy pen, they might end up being unhappy with choosing between 2 pens that are both great.
I doubt the significance of such studies though, because people ultimately are being dominated in their personal level of worries by their personal history. That's why the results are only working out in one generation in some areas; mostly where they did not have to deal with the same amount of luxury in their childhood as they are confronted with in adulthood, which creates psychological stress.

Stress in all beings (humans, animals, plants, all show it) is the reaction to outside forces that try to impose a change. It's there because of the change, not because one of the 2 states is preferable.

I'm here to ask for opinions and look what I got. Someone insulting me by assumign I thought I was Einstein for asking opinions. Than another claim that I did not think of the bigger picture because of it. This is getting interesting.

You are easily insulted. Brace yourself, i am calling you a fag now for ruining the fun and not even putting up with a little resistance.
2 people of a diffrent opinion? What a threat, I'd better surrender...
With the amounts of misunderstandings going down in written conversations, you could at least try to fake one of those or something.
(I didn't see it as such a big deal, geez...)

Well i beleive variety is good, on some cases, it doesn't force you to choose only kind of thing.

idno what you're writing Ronin (its too long) but i know it is helpful lol
though sometimes i dont understand (damn my limited vocabulary)

Wow this thread is actually interesting.

I'd also like to say yes. Ok so we'll get off the subject of pencils and move to something more extravagent such as a BMW versus a Honda Accord. Now while both cars are very functionable and probably get roughly the same miles to the gallon, etc. There is some prestige followed with the name BMW which came from society. The variety in the availability of automobiles (as well as other industries) has lead to the labeling of brands as "better" than others. In it's simplest form, if you wanted a BMW, because it costs more, you'd have to work more. Not only does this encourage a more driving workforce (no pun intended) but competition. Both are very important to capitalism. It's not even the physical part of owning a BMW over an accord, it's the knowing that by owning a certain item, you have actually advanced in society in the eyes of some people.

Notice that I said capitalism. Obviously something like competition would not be very useful in a totalitarian government. Compete with the government and well... you're ----ed. And a driving work force in a dictatorship isn't very useful as there's really no incentive for doing more work.

Many of these choices are useless and superficial. Of course, if you ask me '' is there anything wrong about it'' I would have to say no. Cause there isn't. Only the fact that it's waste of time and ressources which we could've used for other things.

It's not even the physical part of owning a BMW over an accord, it's the knowing that by owning a certain item, you have actually advanced in society in the eyes of some people.

Before you say that, drive both.

I am not kidding.

@ Mr. First

There are a lot of reasons that people pick one brand over another (For instance, great quality isn't the only reason people buy Honda's motorcycles. Quite a few people will pay the much higher price simply because it's an American-made product.). Whatever the reason though, competition is a good thing, and one of the main reasons [free market] Capitalism works. When two companies compete for the consumer's favor, no matter which one gets the sale, the consumer always wins, for many reasons (Of which I don't see the point of going into right now). When the government favors businesses (Almost inevitably creating a monopoly), competition becomes less important. The companies stop competing for the consumer, and start competing for government favor, which always ends up with a lesser product at usually higher prices.

So yeah, not really disagreeing with you, just expanding a bit.

@ Fuxey

If people like one brand over another, and prefer to buy that brand, how is having both of them on the market a waste of resources? Instead of having 100% Honda's, with no competition (Which I already demonstrated is a bad thing), we have 50% Honda's and 50% Suzuki's; or 60% Honda's and 40% Suzuki's. Ultimately the same amount of resources, but with two people fighting to keep the prices down.

You also assume that time and resources are finite things, which is an untrue statement. The universe is, as far as we know it, infinite. Even if we run out of resources on the earth (Which I seriously doubt will happen within any of our lifetimes), there is a whole universe of possibilities out there. And that doesn't even take into account the benefits of future technologies, which may make many of our "dwindling" resources obsolete anyway.

People who think, that diversity is forming need, rather than need is forming diversity is taking too much for granted.


I am not sure that this is the case to be honest. I know you used a medical example with this, but looking at just products overall, I don't think it is as clear cut as this.

For instance, looking at the pencil example, people don't wake up and say 'damn i need to get a pilot mechanical pencil today'. They realize that they need a pencil and then that's where advertising kicks in. All those products are not needed as a pencil is a pencil in the end.

I guess what I am trying to say is that it is 50/50 thing where people tell us what we need (advertising) vs people demanding what they need.

All in all, there are good and bad.

The good, is that you have competition, but the bad is that you get cheap ass products.

Back in the day, if you wanted to say buy a table and chairs, you may have needed to spend a hefty dollar on one. But what did you get? Possibly a nice hand crafted set with excellent quality and materials. The beauty of it is that you spend more to begin with, but that table gets passed down through generations.
But now? You go to ikea and get a factory made piece of crap for $20. Chances are it will be in the garbage or in a yard sale in a year or two. Sure they had 80 different $20 table, but they are all equally crappy.

Too many products mean too many pieces of crap they just end up in the trash. In the long run, people end up spending more, and get less.

This doesn't go for all products of course, but I'd be the majority of you know what I am talkin about with this cheap walmart crap. Disposable products..... not the best idea.

@ Fuxey

If people like one brand over another, and prefer to buy that brand, how is having both of them on the market a waste of resources? Instead of having 100% Honda's, with no competition (Which I already demonstrated is a bad thing), we have 50% Honda's and 50% Suzuki's; or 60% Honda's and 40% Suzuki's. Ultimately the same amount of resources, but with two people fighting to keep the prices down.

You also assume that time and resources are finite things, which is an untrue statement. The universe is, as far as we know it, infinite. Even if we run out of resources on the earth (Which I seriously doubt will happen within any of our lifetimes), there is a whole universe of possibilities out there. And that doesn't even take into account the benefits of future technologies, whicductih may make many of our "dwindling" resources obsolete anyway.

Am I talking about the market? I am talking about how much stuff there are and it isn't necessary. Take the pencils as an example, or brand clothes VS non-brand clothes. They are never gonna sell it all. In the last couple of years we hear about how thousands of companies close down cause people simply don't need that much and many people can't even afford it.

You can talk about the universe and shit to all the hungry Africans who are gonna suffer more and more because of this food crysis. We have to think now, not before and not after. People are starving more and more everyday. If we keep produce more and more this will lead to a bigger warmin, which eventualy will result in bigger starvation.

Companies produce and produce but they never told us that the production eventualy would starve people. This is what we have to tell people. And by staying pacific against those companies then you are a part of the problem. Of course, that's your own decission if it is so.

Am I talking about the market? I am talking about how much stuff there are and it isn't necessary. Take the pencils as an example, or brand clothes VS non-brand clothes. They are never gonna sell it all. In the last couple of years we hear about how thousands of companies close down cause people simply don't need that much and many people can't even afford it.

You can talk about the universe and shit to all the hungry Africans who are gonna suffer more and more because of this food crysis. We have to think now, not before and not after. People are starving more and more everyday. If we keep produce more and more this will lead to a bigger warmin, which eventualy will result in bigger starvation.

Companies produce and produce but they never told us that the production eventualy would starve people. This is what we have to tell people. And by staying pacific against those companies then you are a part of the problem. Of course, that's your own decission if it is so.

Just because we don't "need" many different kinds of pencils does not mean that such diversity is a bad thing. It means that we have moved beyond need and can now afford to provide to specialty products. People who "just need a pencil" can go to the dollar store and get a pack of them. People who want higher quality pencils, or charcoal pencils, or any kind of pencils, can easily get them. This is the cause of having a good, (mostly) free market and economy.

Africa is not poor and destitute because western countries are successful. You are under the wrong idea of the worldly "pie" of prosperity, that if one man gets a bigger piece that means another man gets a small one. This idea is bullshit. Your pie is the product of what you accomplish in this world. Whether it is big or small is a direct correlation of whether or not you are productive. Yes, it is far harder to get a "bigger pie" in Africa then in the U.S. (Or pretty much anywhere in the west), but that is not because American companies are producing all of the pie and leaving them none. It is because Africa is a shit country with a shit government with no market or infrastructure to speak of.

If you want Africans to not be starving anymore, then start spreading some good ideas over there (Specifically, Minarchist Democracy and free market Capitalism). A revolution, both politically and economically, over a short period of time or many years, is the only thing that will save that country. Hand-outs only worsen the problem, and blaming businesses for effects of which they are not causes only wastes time.

@ Phr0zen

The market dictates quality. Sure, back in the "old days" you had to buy high-quality furniture, and yeah, it lasted generations. But those who could not afford it either went without or dealt with things shittier then you find at Walmart. The fact is that people want something that they can afford. It is no secret that Walmart has crappy products, but they are hugely successful anyway. This is not because they somehow rid of the world of any products but their own - high quality stuff is available for an equally high price. But those who do not have the money for that can go to Walmart and spend 30 dollars on a perfectly workable desk, and spend the other hundred that they saved on food or luxuries for their families. If you find this a bad thing, then there is probably little I can do to change your mind.

@ Phr0zen

The market dictates quality. Sure, back in the "old days" you had to buy high-quality furniture, and yeah, it lasted generations. But those who could not afford it either went without or dealt with things shittier then you find at Walmart. The fact is that people want something that they can afford. It is no secret that Walmart has crappy products, but they are hugely successful anyway. This is not because they somehow rid of the world of any products but their own - high quality stuff is available for an equally high price. But those who do not have the money for that can go to Walmart and spend 30 dollars on a perfectly workable desk, and spend the other hundred that they saved on food or luxuries for their families. If you find this a bad thing, then there is probably little I can do to change your mind.

That's the thing... I don't know if it is a bad thing or not. Like you said, people can now afford things that couldn't before.

I guess I just think of the craftsmen and tradespeople that made such products. I bet they are slowly going extinct. Which of course means less good stuff and more crap.

Ah well. It is what it is.

@Phr0zen:
Even though this thread is sooo yesterday, lol:

You got exactly what I meant:
You might never have had a selection of different pencils, 4 sizes of triangles, 8 curve-lineals and 2 regular ones.

You might as well never have done a technical drawing; This is not for art, this is for example for the machine that is absolutely needed for medical mass production.
Also needed are cars, to get those people who work on it to their job everyday, instead of walking for 3 hours every morning, like people who lived 150 years ago mostly did.
There are also shops needed for them to buy food and all the diffrent things that are mainly made up to keep us alive.

Like air-conditioning in a BMW, that in oposition to many other brands actually works; call it a useless feature, that noone actually needs and I call you an idiot.

Ever played settlers II?
The product-tree has only one focus: producing arms, and expanding your area.

In real life, there is just one goal: people want to stay alive and they want to live peacefully (and not be bored, but that one is grossly overrated in influence, because the mental condition of being bored is interconnected with peaceful and healthy life).

If you think, music is not needed in fact, you are just as dumb, as those guys, who think that music is the single most important thing in life; It's a form of communication, it's positively influencing our lives, as it can help us to relax or to get pumped up at times and it's surely a part of a healthy world for us.
No music would drive most of us nuts and that's surely not fit to make us live longer.

What I wanted to say, to conclude this with some kind of assertion:
If you think something is useless, because you don't know what to do with it and that must apply to anyone else, you are acting like a retard.
That's why the
we don't need variety of goods people fail as hard as the
we don't need art
we don't need transportation
we don't need cloths
we don't need medicine
we don't need science
we don't need archaeology/history classes
we don't need religion
we don't need tradition
crowds.

They might say I don't need and no one would mind, but including all the rest of the world into a "we" knowingly against their wish, is bollox ;
If you once need a car to get to work, buy one that you want, or a random one if you realy don't care, but leave those who don't share your opinion alone, or you will place representatives in that side of the house that once might have the good idea, that your car was entirely "wrong" and replace it with a uni-cycle.

Id rather keep my 15 kinds of soft-drinks; OMFG 15, can't make choice... lawl.


It's not for checking out options, for enhancing the dialogue and before there is even any kind of certain opposition to it. Talk is merely hot air, so it's not the biggest thing, at times a biggie still.
I just wouldn't say that someone is a part of that kind of people, if he openly questions the rest of the world, to explain myself more clearly I hope.

We have no clue what you just said. I'm not really sure if you are for or against the issue.

He's in favour for the variety. I agree 100% with Ronin on this one.