|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
posted April 20, 2009 02:13 AM |
|
|
Quote:
But why wouldyou impose that on others? Why take away the means of procuring money from other people? Why take away their economic freedom?
Because this can be abused. Look, I am not "stopping" people from donating or doing whatever they want with their money, but rather WHAT THEY CAN DO with that money.
For starters, I'm sure no one would let them to, say, build a nuke. This is point 1 why 100% capitalism is utter failure (mind you I know no one advocates it, so don't take it wrong!).
Quote:
You make it sound as if advertising is a bad thing...
Because it is.
Quote:
Obviously this is so - otherwise, why would people be willing to pay David Beckham more than they pay doctors/surgeons?
Why would politicians lie too, while we're at it?
Quote:
There is no such thing as "economic power".
Are you joking me? 
If it's not "power", then what must I do to, let's say, stop some, you know, corporate dude to exploit something?
Two ways:
1) Call Batman and stop him with force
2) Use money
Both lead to "power", in a way...
Quote:
As Ludwig von Mises wrote in Socialism
You forget one think though, that a junkie community will have a lot more demand for drugs than a sober community.
Quote:
You don't understand. People are choosing to pay him that much. Why do you want to restrict voluntary exchange? It's not like they're taking anything from you.
Hahaha!
No they are not taking anything "from me", but like you said, whatever that means. And we got back to the "property" argument. See why you ask circular questions?
And your reasoning is deeply flawed mvass.
People didn't stop any dictator from coming to power, so in effect they 'chose' him right? as well, or at least couldn't do anything about it. That's different because he was oppressing them (again, whatever that means) right? Economic power is pretty oppressive as well.
Someone is born in a socialism society and goes well with it... Then after 50 years, let's say, said person buys off the whole freaking planet as his property due to capitalism flaws. Then, the following people will have the opportunities that the dude had when he was born completely absent. They can't go to a 'public' school, since everything is owned by that dude, so in effect, he could just as well request them to slave off for a piece of bread or launch them in space! Kinda oppressive, don't you think?
We are fortunate that capitalism is not embedded in all of human nature. Even crackers/hackers have done far more to the software world (as in, developing different algorithms, or robust alternatives) than the corporate world. (it's not a coincidence that usually crackers/hackers are deeply intelligent, go figure...  ) -- I mean, if you placed your average office worker against a program to crack it, and compare it to a cracker's time (assuming he can even crack it in the first place...) see why capitalism damages it all.
You can even look at 'legal' activities, like Open Source Software as well. Before you say they 'are not as good as commercial ones' must I remind you that the investment is tens of orders of magnitude lower? If you think it that way, you can realize how much capitalism 'wastes' here.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 03:07 AM |
|
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 03:30 AM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 03:34, 20 Apr 2009.
|
Quote:
Wrong as usual.
Thanks for the insightful comment 
EDIT: Ah I know! Compare NS1 with NS2, and see what capitalism did to NS2 and why it is 'dead', 'buggy' and why it has such a poor perception from the community. The former was based on the PEOPLE and PLAYING it obviously (since it was free, what else there is to it?), the latter was based on money. Well initially, it's why it fell, here's me hoping they adopt a less capitalistic viewpoint and improve the damn game.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 03:46 AM |
|
|
Is NS2 really that much less active? I haven't played it in a while.
No, the reason I stopped playing had nothing to do with money. It was just because it required too much micromanagment, plus my GDP would fluctuate completely randomly. Also, my form of government wouldn't change from Inoffensive Centrist Democracy.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 04:01 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Is NS2 really that much less active? I haven't played it in a while.
I was talking about the amount of complaints and how "dead" it is (just look at the forum!) compared to NS1. And some even pay for Ambassador status -- so in their eyes it ought to be better (I can't blame them)
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 04:08 AM |
|
|
NS2 was an experiment. And it doesn't appear to be doing too well. That's okay. Capitalists can afford to experiment.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 11:02 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Doom:
No, I'm suggesting that you realize that it has nothing to do with you and doesn't affect you in any way. His success has nothing to do with your lack thereof.
True, so other things you guys discuss here are also stuff we have no affect on. 
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 03:50 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 15:51, 20 Apr 2009.
|
@Wolfsburg
Quote:
I also dont believe they operate under malice, but they operate with the intend of making more profit. And that kind of narrowminded mentality brings us to an interesting scenario: a society advanced enough to extract monoclonal antibodies from patients with multiple myeloma and use them to threat a wide array of rheumatological diseases cannot come up with an efficient way of using odd shaped potatoes.
Well I don't think it's so much an issue of "can't" as "don't want to spend the resources to". Furthermore, at the risk of opening up a whole separate can of worms, I'll point out that the health care system is not any more noble and suffers the same "potato effect". For example, how many gazillions of dollars are spent by pharmaceutical companies to develop drugs to cure baldness or relieve mild allergy symptoms, while other, lethal diseases that affect only a small number of people (or large numbers of people in 3rd world countries) receive no effort at all? It's not that we can't come up with a new drug to cure leishmaniasis - it's that it isn't profitable to do so. There are even numerous cases where major pharma companies have discontinued the manufacture of effective drugs, even though people still need them, just because it's not profitable to keep making them.
It's sort of the same problem as we're talking about in potatoes. If you got enough engineers together, they could probably devise some machine to make use of oddly shaped potatoes. But that would require a large investment of resources. There's also no guaruntee that the french fries made from such potatoes would have the right characteristics for companies purchasing french fries (proper dimension, say). There might be other companies interested in purchasing potato products other than french fries, but again this would require the development of new processing machines, training people on how to use them, dealing with regulatory agencies, etc., etc. That's a big investment just to help out the farmers.
That said:
Quote:
Sounds to me more like an excuse to constrain the potato production when its abundant in the market (everyone is harvesting in potato season), and thus mantaining its cost high. Again, leaving the burden on top of the farmers shoulders. Not to mention the concept of waste, which I consider very unpleasant, for it opens a whole new subject of discussion.
Please note that I'm not defending every aspect of the system. Nevertheless, I think it's improper to characterize the potato processor as being malicious. I don't believe he is out to purposely hurt the potato manufacturer. It is a case of the two entities having different interests. Well, that's not really true. Both parties have the same interest (to turn a profit). However, they have different means of maximizing their returns. It is in the interest of the potato farmer to maximize his profit by selling ALL of his potatoes. It is in the interest of the processer to maximize his profit by purchasing the most valuable potatoes.
Unfortunately, that's the way the system works - each element proceeds via the path of lowest energy available (i.e., maximizing gains with the least amount of energetic or monetary input). It's also a symbiotic relationship of sorts - the processor needs the potato farmers to supply the potatoes, but the farmer needs the processor for distribution and to mediate large quantity transactions. But, as it turns out, the processor holds more power because there are generally many fewer processors than farmers, and so the processor has the advantage of dictating most of the rules, which is why it appears that the farmers are being exploited. If a given farmer decides the rules are unfair, what choices are open to him? Well, he could refuse to sell his potatoes to the processor, but what would that accomplish? The processor will just go to other farmers, who I'm sure will be more than eager to pick up the slack. Of course, the best thing the farmers could do to impact the rules of the relationship is to ban together and to agree to sell no more potatoes to the processor unless the processor changes the rules (this is the way that unions work, essentially). But that would require a lot organization, which requires energy, as well as a great deal of risk, which the farmers, either as individuals or as a group, may not be willing to take. There are other ways the rules can be changed (such as, another processor coming along - competition!), but it's not necessary to go into them.
Quote:
You can be sure Im not arguing to turn you against capitalism (what a pretensious effort would that be). All of my efforts are normally intended to make people see that capitalism as we know it is a flawed system as well. And certainly not a viable tool to adjust humanity's status quo.
I have no illusions that capitalism is a perfect system. I've already pointed above some serious problems with it. As I think I've stated on numerous occasions in this thread, ANY socioeconomic system is at best metastable, and there is no perfect system. Nevertheless, I happen to believe that, when you add up all the problems with capitalism, and add up all the problems of socialism, the former has less than the latter. I also believe that something somewhere in the middle is probably the best choice (but closer to the capitalist end of the spectrum). Meaning that there needs to be some, perhaps even minimal, degree of regulation, particularly of certain economical sectors.
Quote:
I have quite a load of another interesting experiences, like back then when I worked with malnurished children in Peru, or in emergency stations in "war-zones" within Rio, or my perspectives on the agro-slums sorrounding my city. But I would much happier hear a bit of your own life-experiences for a change.
Meh, my life's boring. 
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 05:33 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Nevertheless, I happen to believe that, when you add up all the problems with capitalism, and add up all the problems of socialism, the former has less than the latter. I also believe that something somewhere in the middle is probably the best choice (but closer to the capitalist end of the spectrum). Meaning that there needs to be some, perhaps even minimal, degree of regulation, particularly of certain economical sectors.
Others believe differently, though.
And, frankly, with one sixth of the world populatoion starving and the rest slowly overheating while resources are burned like there's no tomorrow *I* happen to believe that capitalism would have had to be fettered tightly from the start. That hasn't been done of course, and what we see now, the unlimited wealth on one hand and the terrible poverty on the other, isn't really something to be proud of. It's not a working system either.
And if real existing socialism had a problem with corruption - doesn anyone think capitalism is better in that respect? Seriously? Doesn't everybody and everything have a price in capitalism?
____________
"Nobody dies a virgin ... Life f*cks us all." - Kurt Cobain
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 05:42 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Others believe differently, though.
Gee, thanks, Sherlock. I wasn't aware that belief was subjective. Thanks for the enlightenment.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 07:00 PM |
|
|
The problem is, that I don't see any foundation for your belief, which it makes it more like a faith than a belief.
You yourself mentioned the health system. Isn't that a perfect example for all the bad things in capitalism?
You'd think that the money pumped into something would have a direct influence on that something - a direct proportionality -, but that doesn't seem to be the case which in itself is proof that something is massively wrong with the way "health" is organized in capitalism and/or capitalism as such.
However, the problem is that sanity doesn't pay - from the profit point of view, which is most important one, ILLNESS AND SICKNESS pays. Treatment pays. Cures don't, because cures SOLVE problems.
Did anyone notice how every little pain or even a feeling of uncomfortableness nowadays is reason to act, even though it is rather normal to have a pain once in a while - just ask a grown-up woman.
However, that has to be treated, of course. Take this pill or that, no one needs to suffer.
In any case, think about how you'd feel if your car garage would get money for diagnosis and treatment of your car problems NO MATTER THE RESULT OF THEIR WORK, just depending on what they did.
Now, this thread's issue isn't health - but I think it's pretty obvious that even a well-meaning person will have no problem seeing a lot of possible pitfalls, risks and dangerous cliffs in a system that involves a direct proportionality between sickness of people and profits.
____________
"Nobody dies a virgin ... Life f*cks us all." - Kurt Cobain
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 07:10 PM |
|
|
Quote:
The problem is, that I don't see any foundation for your belief,
I couldn't care less whether you see a foundation for my beliefs.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 07:31 PM |
|
|
Don't take it personally, father
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 08:11 PM |
|
|
Quote:
NS2 was an experiment. And it doesn't appear to be doing too well. That's okay. Capitalists can afford to experiment.
NS1 was made PRIMARILY for the game itself.
You're probably going to say: "of course capitalists *care* for the customers, cause it increases profit" right?
But here's what I'm saying: Per TOTAL, NS1 made no money out of it (well it's funded by ads but that goes to server maintenance and costs; NS2 has ads too btw), while NS2 even though it is a LOT LESS stable, and more buggy, and "dead" as some put it in the forum, and not reliable, has made more money.
But this is the inefficiency when capitalism is one of your goals.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 08:11 PM |
|
|
@Father
We probably agree, politically, on more than you think. Our economic philosophies clearly differ, but I suspect that on most social issues we share the same opinions.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 09:58 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
The problem is, that I don't see any foundation for your belief,
I couldn't care less whether you see a foundation for my beliefs.
Spoken like a real capitalist: "I couldn't care less."
I'd just thought, the big scientist would come up with a little more than a mere belief in something as worldly as economics, politics and social issues.
Ah, heck, what am I arguing. Just continue to care less, that is bound to be the right way, if only to shut up conscience.
____________
"Nobody dies a virgin ... Life f*cks us all." - Kurt Cobain
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 10:36 PM |
|
|
TheDeath:
Quote:
But here's what I'm saying: Per TOTAL, NS1 made no money out of it (well it's funded by ads but that goes to server maintenance and costs; NS2 has ads too btw), while NS2 even though it is a LOT LESS stable, and more buggy, and "dead" as some put it in the forum, and not reliable, has made more money.
You just contradicted yourself. First you're saying that it's doing poorly, and then you say that it's making money - so, obviously, somebody likes it.
JJ:
Of course the current health care system is flawed. But more government isn't the answer.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 10:42 PM |
|
|
@Mvass
Sorry I must have missed it, but what is this NS1 and NS2 you keep talking about?
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 10:59 PM |
|
|
Quote:
JJ:
Of course the current health care system is flawed. But more government isn't the answer.
Why would anyone believe such a claim?
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 20, 2009 11:03 PM |
|
|
Corribus:
NS = NationStates. It's a simple online nation simulator game.
JJ:
Because the government is inherently inefficient, but the current system (and, indeed, the very concept of insurance) is flawed.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
