I think Tesla was motivated by money, but lets for argument sake assume he wasn't. How do you manage to acquire all the tools necessary to conduct such experiments in a non capitalist society? You'd have to have such a surplus of goods that you're willing to give away valuable metals and tools to teenagers and young adults to f*** with, potentially killing them in the process.
Do you honestly think any communist system would have allowed Tesla conduct his research? Tesla was able to do so much research because he worked his ass off and used the profits of his manual labour to invest in materials that he then sold for a profit, and used said profit to scale up both his businesses and his research.
I've seen government labs, hell even the Russians did great things with a socialized science industry, they always have a goal in mind and do not fund anything that doesn't meet their goal. It's hard to do it any other way without getting ripped off by a******s pretending to do research.
The free market is the best mechanism we have to distinguish legitimately useful research and production, without it you're trusting a limited amount of individuals to basically predict the future, and if they fail to, millions will die due to the lack of potential innovations that could made their deaths preventable.
Tesla was not motivated by wealth. He died broke and was far more interested in research than marketing/making monkey. He could have been the richest man on Earth if that was his main desire but it wasn't.
Yuri Gagarin was the first man in Space; you admit non-Capitalist countries are capable of technological feats so idk what you're getting at? Look at China's technology which has made severe advances in biotech, computing, and space while supplying the entire world. They're on pace to best the US in Artificial Intelligence; how could they do all this without a free market?
The free market limits the amount of educated people in the world. There will always be the exploited and the exploitative, that's a fundamental principle of Capitalism. The more educated professionals there are, the more advancements there will be.
Tesla was not motivated by wealth. He died broke and was far more interested in research than marketing/making monkey. He could have been the richest man on Earth if that was his main desire but it wasn't.
Yuri Gagarin was the first man in Space; you admit non-Capitalist countries are capable of technological feats so idk what you're getting at? Look at China's technology which has made severe advances in biotech, computing, and space while supplying the entire world. They're on pace to best the US in Artificial Intelligence; how could they do all this without a free market?
The free market limits the amount of educated people in the world. There will always be the exploited and the exploitative, that's a fundamental principle of Capitalism. The more educated professionals there are, the more advancements there will be.
You clearly didn't read my post because I invalidated your Tesla and Russian argument already. Tesla clearly wanted wanted to research, my argument is that he wouldn't have been able to without the free market. Russians went to space because it was their only goal and they got to control every scientist in their country to study it, they at the same time failed to keep up in most industries actually important to the average individual such as medicine, transportation and agriculture because of this centralized control of research.
China is the freest market on earth, the only government interventions tend to be corporate subsidies and grants and occasional small military/political requests. They don't even have socialized high school, yet anyone is allowed to start their own business with little to no red tape.
Want to brew beer in your car and sell it to the local gas station? Go ahead, no permits or paperwork required! Welcome to China, the "communist" country. China is the farthest thing from communism ever seen in the history of mankind, just because a government occasionally takes authoritarian control of companies so large they influence the globe, doesn't in any way mean they've "seized the means of production" nor have they "prohibited the exchange of money to commodities back into money for profit", and they're real f***ing far from abolishing capital entirely. They use communism as a guise to practice authoritarian capitalism.
Knew this cliched argument was coming.
Medicinal advances couldn't exist under socialism? Why? Because they have before.
The profit motive of the health care industry doesn't help create better health products, common decency and federal funding should didctate that. Cuba has the best doctors in the world, it's one of their main exports even.
And where's the major benefit gained by globalization? Many conservatives don't even believe in "free market" globalism because it outsources labor to the cheapest bidder.
Most people who were born into this system so they think it's all that can exist because it's all they've ever known.
American life expectancy has gone DOWN recently, wonder why
The vast majority of medical advances have come from capitalistic societies. I’m not arguing about whether Cuba has good doctors, I’m talking about what has caused progress for society as a whole in the long term. The medical aspect isn’t the only factor anyways. There is infrastructure, transportation and so many other technologies that have spawned from competitive free markets.
You call my argument cliche when you post like a clone of every other ktt life section socialist
i think the level of organisation needed to restructure/change society would only be achievable through revolution - people dont want to sacrifice comfort to have to pick up sticks and take a risk by trusting a new system
the current system would have to be bad enough for people to take that risk - capitalism provides the majority what they want/need, and so most are happy
i rate op so much for putting his thoughts to paper
Don’t. He hasn’t been able to actually defend anything he believes or answer any questions or counter arguments in 14 pages after being pressed by like 10 diff people
Don’t. He hasn’t been able to actually defend anything he believes or answer any questions or counter arguments in 14 pages after being pressed by like 10 diff people
oh lol i havent read the thread
You clearly didn't read my post because I invalidated your Tesla and Russian argument already. Tesla clearly wanted wanted to research, my argument is that he wouldn't have been able to without the free market. Russians went to space because it was their only goal and they got to control every scientist in their country to study it, they at the same time failed to keep up in most industries actually important to the average individual such as medicine, transportation and agriculture because of this centralized control of research.
China is the freest market on earth, the only government interventions tend to be corporate subsidies and grants and occasional small military/political requests. They don't even have socialized high school, yet anyone is allowed to start their own business with little to no red tape.
Want to brew beer in your car and sell it to the local gas station? Go ahead, no permits or paperwork required! Welcome to China, the "communist" country. China is the farthest thing from communism ever seen in the history of mankind, just because a government occasionally takes authoritarian control of companies so large they influence the globe, doesn't in any way mean they've "seized the means of production" nor have they "prohibited the exchange of money to commodities back into money for profit", and they're real f***ing far from abolishing capital entirely. They use communism as a guise to practice authoritarian capitalism.
Tesla was not motivated by wealth. He died broke and was far more interested in research than marketing/making monkey. He could have been the richest man on Earth if that was his main desire but it wasn't.
Yuri Gagarin was the first man in Space; you admit non-Capitalist countries are capable of technological feats so idk what you're getting at? Look at China's technology which has made severe advances in biotech, computing, and space while supplying the entire world. They're on pace to best the US in Artificial Intelligence; how could they do all this without a free market?
The free market limits the amount of educated people in the world. There will always be the exploited and the exploitative, that's a fundamental principle of Capitalism. The more educated professionals there are, the more advancements there will be.
USSR won the space race because they had a 30 year head start due to our strategies in WWII. we had focused more on developing bombers, whereas russia didn't have the technical capabilities to do so, so they focused on rockets and they peaked with the R-7. once we caught up with NASA (which took a very short time), they never recovered onto our level. just look at how bad the N1 failed compared to the rocketdyne F1 lmao.
china owes their success to deng xiaoping, who (through the means of an awful dictatorship) gave china a cocaine bump of capitalism after mao's great leap forward policies. they're essentially a heavily authoritarian state capitalist society, not really a socialist one.
The vast majority of medical advances have come from capitalistic societies. I’m not arguing about whether Cuba has good doctors, I’m talking about what has caused progress for society as a whole in the long term. The medical aspect isn’t the only factor anyways. There is infrastructure, transportation and so many other technologies that have spawned from competitive free markets.
You call my argument cliche when you post like a clone of every other ktt life section socialist
Everything you've mentioned can be and has been acheived in other systems besides capitalism. So yeah you should be talking about Cuba's healthcare system and Russia's modernization of infrastructure. Why ignore it? Cause it doesn't fit your argument?
Free market is the biggest oxymoron ever lmao. Not gonna waste my time arguing with a libertarian
USSR won the space race because they had a 30 year head start due to our strategies in WWII. we had focused more on developing bombers, whereas russia didn't have the technical capabilities to do so, so they focused on rockets and they peaked with the R-7. once we caught up with NASA (which took a very short time), they never recovered onto our level. just look at how bad the N1 failed compared to the rocketdyne F1 lmao.
china owes their success to deng xiaoping, who (through the means of an awful dictatorship) gave china a cocaine bump of capitalism after mao's great leap forward policies. they're essentially a heavily authoritarian state capitalist society, not really a socialist one.
i stay wheezing when socialists bring up china as some point of leftist pride lmao just straight up poser s*** at that point
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_property_law
https://fortune.com/2015/07/22/china-global-500-government-owned/amp/
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/01/why-do-chinese-billionaires-keep-ending-up-in-prison/272633/
2007 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_Law_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China
"Many in the Chinese legal community feared that creating a single law to cover both state property and private property would facilitate privatization and asset stripping of state-owned enterprises."
"Legal scholars, notably Gong Xiantian of Peking University, argued that it violated the constitutional characterization of the PRC as a socialist state."
Solid point though, that's probably one of the only socialist/communist practices they kept after the 60s-80s.
It's hard to call it a socialist or communist state when you're allowed to start a factory in your basement with no government approval and profit millions, you need more government approval in USA than China to participate in the free market.
Just because the government owns a bunch of s*** doesn't make it socialist, that's just authoritarian. It's a socialist approach to land ownership, but as long as the means of production are privatized it doesn't do anything but increase inequality.
Everything you've mentioned can be and has been acheived in other systems besides capitalism. So yeah you should be talking about Cuba's healthcare system and Russia's modernization of infrastructure. Why ignore it? Cause it doesn't fit your argument?
Free market is the biggest oxymoron ever lmao. Not gonna waste my time arguing with a libertarian
Yet I’m sure you ignore countries like South Korea and Japan that have benefited immeasurably from capitalism in the past 60 years and have a more modern infrastructure and higher quality of life then both the countries you mentioned
i rate op so much for putting his thoughts to paper
Actual discussion itt has been a lotta shambles
Fr bro look at some of the exchanges OP has had with us throughout this thread he’s literally twitter woke and that’s it zero brain power
I’m talking about guys like you, not OP
Capitalism and the free market accelerates technological advancement and in turn increases the overall quality of life for society. Most of the things you take for granted and use in your daily life are a result of capitalism in some form. We would be hundreds of years behind if it wasn’t for these systems
Look up the taker thunderbolt
Kanye is taking care of this dont worry Synop
@Synopsis
Whatd I say
"lets replace capitalism with socialism"
"but what about x"
"they'll figure it out"
that's the gist of this thread
No, its not
So you have no solution? Ayt gotcha
I'm not nostradamus buddy
I'm not nostradamus buddy
Fair. Jussayin pointing out a flaw with a solution you're not even sure of how to implement does not exactly inspire confidence in your POV. But I hear you.
Fair. Jussayin pointing out a flaw with a solution you're not even sure of how to implement does not exactly inspire confidence in your POV. But I hear you.
I'm just saying it could happen through multiple avenues. I just think its important to have a vision for what it might look like after a revolution occurs