Staredit Network > Forums > Lite Discussion > Topic: Sick of capitalism
Sick of capitalism
Oct 10 2010, 4:12 am
By: payne  

Oct 12 2010, 4:24 am Vrael Post #21



Quote from Centreri
Vrael, everyone knows about socialist inefficiencies. I was pointing out capitalist ones. Don't start spouting bullshit. My point was that socialism allows for a single stream of research, while capitalism makes several companies independently develop the same thing. Plus, wtf is a socialist company?
My point is that you shouldn't put forth the idea that a socialist society would cost half as much as fact. It's speculation, not fact. A socialist society might even choose to have two groups compete, making two or more streams of research anyway. So stop spouting bullshit.

Quote from Centreri
Stop claiming that socialism is... what, four times less efficient than capitalism? Under Stalin, socialist policies led to rapid industrialization (from, I believe, 12th largest economy after the civil war to 3rd prior to WWII). In the same time period, all the magical capitalist economies achieved significantly less. In thirty years under Stalin, the USSR industrialized, electrified, fought off the Nazis, rebuilt a quarter of its infrastructure, and at least kept pace with the US scientifically (Sputnik, nuclear power). After Stalin, things went downhill (not to whitewash his crimes; the great terror was horrible); but during that period, the USSR managed to do what no capitalist country I know of could. If it was so monstrously inefficient as you claim at using its resources, how could the USSR have kept pace with the US for so long (not to mention catching up in the first place)?
I didn't claim. I speculated, and I made it quite clear that I was speculating, not claiming.
Quote from Vrael
It's impossible to say for certain,
Quote from Vrael
Of course, we're both speculating,
As for the actual efficiency of Stalin's regime, I don't deny that when you put it that way it seems pretty good. The U.S. was very socialist during WWII as well, and the FDR recovery plan created thousands of jobs which really helped the U.S. recovery after the great depression. There is a time and place for socialism, but I think as a long term solution capitalism is the way to go, and from a moral standpoint I much prefer it as well. Maybe I just have problems with authority, who knows.

Quote from Centreri
Do you agree that some collectivism is good
Absolutely. Complete capitalism would lead to a society just as bad as complete socialism, instead of the state imposing terrible things on people, other people would be imposing terrible things on people, with one difference: the state is justified in doing it because it is the highest directive of the society, whereas the capitalist evil people have no bearing for justification besides "might is right."



None.

Oct 12 2010, 4:25 am Aristocrat Post #22



US is not hybrid. We are not socialist; the government owns very little.

Centreri, let me reiterate this: Socialism is efficient for the state. It is, however, terrible for the people.



None.

Oct 12 2010, 4:27 am Vrael Post #23



Quote from payne
I've read this many times in the thread: how comes USA is an hybrid society?
Canada is as well. Welfare, Medical care, any form of taxation, your military, any sort of regulation limiting business practices, ect, are all forms of socialism within a capitalist society. If there are any countries without some form of socialism within their government structure, I don't know of them. At least not since like, the 1800's.

Edit:
The U.S. is definitely a hybrid society. If our structure was purely capitalistic, we would not have any of what I just mentioned in response to payne. Also, our government owns a shitload of stuff. The bailout alone a few years ago means the government owns something like 60% of our automobile industry. And Aristocrat, just saying "socialism is good for the state not for the people" without any sort of justification or explanation is hardly helpful to the discussion.



None.

Oct 12 2010, 4:36 am Centreri Post #24

Relatively ancient and inactive

Vrael, I never put forth the idea that socialism is twice as efficient. We both know that I generally acknowledge that socialism is significantly less efficient than capitalism because capitalism provides more incentive. I was simply noting that though socialism suffers from these inefficiencies, capitalism isn't without its own; overlapping research, priorities being sales rather than happiness (addictive products, etc), and so on.

I don't think I have any more bones to pick; what I don't agree with now is mostly a matter of opinion.

The one thing I like about the possibilities of socialism, apart from its ability to focus on certain problems, stems from the simple fact that I don't consider all the perks that capitalism brings - ipods, home computers, $5 shirts, etc - as essential for happiness. People don't need new cars every five years, new music players, new phones, etc. Those things have (in my experience) a very marginal effect on human happiness. Thus, the way I see it, a well-run, focused socialist government can be better. It can deal more effectively with problems like, again, global warming, it can focus research, and it can provide a good level of happiness. Even as it neared the end, the USSR had personal computers and cars available to citizens - and this in a country where I believe 30% of the entire country's annual budget was spent on arms, and which barely traded with the rest of the world. Bring that number down, bring in a system of checks and balances, and it could've been a very nice place.

Vrael's right about what he said in the above post; I believe all government is collectivistic, actually. Aristocrat, when I spend so much arguing about this with Vrael, what could lead you think that I'd accept your word for it?



None.

Oct 12 2010, 4:43 am payne Post #25

:payne:

Quote from Vrael
Quote from payne
I've read this many times in the thread: how comes USA is an hybrid society?
Canada is as well. Welfare, Medical care, any form of taxation, your military, any sort of regulation limiting business practices, ect, are all forms of socialism within a capitalist society. If there are any countries without some form of socialism within their government structure, I don't know of them. At least not since like, the 1800's.
Makes total sense. I hadn't seen it that way. Thanks! :)
All I can say is that our current form of socialism really sucks: in French, we call it "regressive". This means that the rates are equal for everybody, instead of depending on the actual income of the individuals.
Well, most of the rates are in fact "semi-regressive", in the sense that the really poor class don't need to pay them.
The only "semi-progressive" thing we have around here are the "tax brackets", which are becoming more and more regressive since the amount of brackets is keeps getting reduced.

I'm not sure "tax brackets" is the right word in English, though. Here, it simply means that people having a salary between 15,000 and 25,000$ pays 15% to the government while someone between 25,000 and 75,00 pays 25% (arbitrary numbers!).
20 years ago, we had 16 brackets. Now we're at 3... the biggest starting at 76,000$, which is fucking ridiculous! And what does our government do instead of adding a new bracket for the richest people? They introduce more regressive taxes on things such as education and health care... GOOD JOB! :facepalm:

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Oct 12 2010, 4:53 am by payne.



None.

Oct 12 2010, 6:15 am Jack Post #26

>be faceless void >mfw I have no face

Quote
This means that the rates are equal for everybody, instead of depending on the actual income of the individuals.
This is a good thing. Tax brackets are bad. They're basically punishing richness, and trying to make everyone equal regardless or amount of work, risk-taking, skill level, and education or entrepreneurship.



Red classic.

"In short, their absurdities are so extreme that it is painful even to quote them."

Oct 12 2010, 6:32 am payne Post #27

:payne:

I still don't understand why tax-brackets aren't based on a linear equation or a simple pourcentage...
It has been calculated that with 10 more tax brackets, Quebec would increase its income by 2G$... so imagine with an infinite amount of tax brackets (being a linear equation)!



None.

Oct 28 2010, 1:56 am payne Post #28

:payne:

Well, it looks like I've discovered what I was searching for!
"Eco-communities", those are communes that have a huge accent on ecology. There are quite a lot a bit everywhere on Earth, though you must know where to search! :><:
I've found maybe 3 or 4 here in Quebec, and I have found a person who's actually creating a new one... so I'm joining this person! :awesome:

Collectivism and autarky, I'm coming!

I'll finish my studies, and directly set 100% of my time on this project.
However, I don't think I'll stay there my whole life... it wouldn't be very pertinent. :/ I think I'll stay for something like 2 years in there.
We're going to build our houses, raise our own animals, and manage our own agriculture site.
Of course, we'll have to stay minimally in contact with the society. For example, if a string of one of our guitars brakes, we're kinda fucked because we aren't self-sufficient for this kind of things. ;o



None.

Options
  Back to forum
Please log in to reply to this topic or to report it.
Members in this topic: None.
[06:06 am]
NudeRaider -- KrayZee
KrayZee shouted: Voyager7456 Somehow I misread your shout. "Glad I can entertain you in Nude" as if you sent a racy photo, video or something.
nah, he just made a comment that had us laughing very hard.
[06:02 am]
NudeRaider -- Zoan
Zoan shouted: sraw531 you can’t move buildings afaik
yes you can.
[2019-10-16. : 10:03 pm]
Dem0n -- no
[2019-10-16. : 8:26 pm]
GGmano -- Is here a forum only for temple siege?
[2019-10-16. : 4:20 pm]
KrayZee -- Voyager7456
Voyager7456 shouted: Glad I can entertain you Nude
Somehow I misread your shout. "Glad I can entertain you in Nude" as if you sent a racy photo, video or something.
[2019-10-16. : 2:26 pm]
martosss -- Moose
Moose shouted: martosss IIRC, the plan was to go 64-bit only eventually so they're interested in differences between the versions
well I might have found 1 bug for them to fix - some maps load on 32 bit, but not on 64 bit game version
[2019-10-16. : 2:19 pm]
Zoan -- sraw531
sraw531 shouted: I'm pretty sure you would move the building away at some point. When you do so, you can give it to someone else. I was thinking nexi because its possible you could encourage the computer to expand to a specific spot
you can’t move buildings afaik
[2019-10-16. : 10:10 am]
Moose -- martosss
martosss shouted: jjf28 OK, I have 1 more question - are you using 32 bit SC:R or 64 bit ? In game settings there's an option to switch to 32, is it checked? I just tried hosting the map with 64-bit SC:R and it failed... I ticked the option to use 32 bit SC:R => it worked and map was hosted. So I guess the issue still exists for 64 bit SC:R ? I also tried calling a friend and he couldn't see the map when he entered the lobby. Weird, I might have to report this to Blizzard?
IIRC, the plan was to go 64-bit only eventually so they're interested in differences between the versions
[2019-10-16. : 5:27 am]
O)FaRTy1billion[MM] -- or a magic box :(
[2019-10-16. : 3:31 am]
martosss -- FaRTy1billion
FaRTy1billion shouted: how about 5 minerals
you can't even get a scarab with those!
Please log in to shout.


Members Online: Roy, Dem0n