Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Top-level
Homem-Povo :v_com:

@AlexanderKingsbury @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom bypasses are bypasses and will only do so much, I'm not defending neoliberalism, far from me. Just saying it doesn't take away the features of capitalism that identify it. I said fewer regulations, but I'm not here to educate anyone on classic liberalism, neoliberalism and ordoliberalism, all of those are based on letting people who profit from other people's labour decide what is produced and to whom. Capitalism has never and will never end misery, and that should suffice for people to reject it.

15 comments
AKingsbury

@Homempovo @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom

Capitalism is an economic system, not a god. Asking for it to "end misery" is pointless, as it would be to ask ANY economic system to "end misery".

Homem-Povo :v_com: replied to AKingsbury

@AlexanderKingsbury @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom not at all, that's the point, although I'm talking strictly about economic misery, not existential suffering, if that's what you mean.

Misery as in not having access to housing, healthcare, education and food could already have been extinguished with what we actually produce nowadays. Shortage is fabricated as a side effect of the offer and demand that governs the economy (which is run by the owners of the means of production). Excess production is wasted while people are hungry to keep prices up and profit possible, and the same thing goes for unoccupied houses, which become assets while people live in the streets.

@AlexanderKingsbury @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom not at all, that's the point, although I'm talking strictly about economic misery, not existential suffering, if that's what you mean.

Misery as in not having access to housing, healthcare, education and food could already have been extinguished with what we actually produce nowadays. Shortage is fabricated as a side effect of the offer and demand that governs the economy (which is run by the owners of the means of production). Excess production is...

AKingsbury replied to Homem-Povo

@Homempovo @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom

That's not the point. Capitalism simply says that taking a certain approach optimizes the distribution of scarce resources. WE decide what "optimum" means. And one of the great things is that we can come to different answers but still work together to achieve those disparate goals.

Homem-Povo :v_com: replied to AKingsbury

@AlexanderKingsbury @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom but that's not how capitalism work. Resources are not scarce, they are already taken when we're born, and the owners and their heirs are the only ones to decide what to do with it. We only get to decide, through our representatives in government, how much tax to charge and what to do with the taxes collected. Simple as that.

AKingsbury replied to Homem-Povo

@Homempovo @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom

Of course resources are scarce. That's an entering premise of an economy even existing. If resources were not scarce, we would need no mechanism by which to allocate them; we would need no economy.

Homem-Povo :v_com: replied to AKingsbury

@AlexanderKingsbury @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom

A flawed system can always be built over flawed premises.

"There are currently 28 vacant homes for every one person experiencing homelessness in the U.S." — unitedwaynca.org/blog/vacant-h

AKingsbury replied to Homem-Povo

@Homempovo @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom

Look, I'm sorry, but this isn't just ECON 101 stuff. This is first day of ECON 101 stuff. Heck, this is basic common sense stuff.

Just because you can point to A resource that you regard as plentiful (in a specific area) does not change that resources are scarce. People all have about as much air as they want to breath; that doesn't mean that there is enough of everything for everyone to have as much as they want.

Homem-Povo :v_com: replied to AKingsbury

@AlexanderKingsbury @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom well if by scarce you mean finite, ok, you can't always get what you want, but by not scarce I mean everyone could get what they need, and excuse me if I just quoted The Rolling Stones right now 😂

AKingsbury replied to Homem-Povo

@Homempovo @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom

No, by scare I do not mean finite. By scarce I mean scarce.

AKingsbury replied to Homem-Povo

@Homempovo @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom

Look, I'm sorry, but you just don't seem to be grasping the basic idea here.

Maybe a specific example will work. Do you understand that titanium is a resource?

Homem-Povo :v_com: replied to Homem-Povo

@AlexanderKingsbury @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom That's an excellent example, thank you. Can we all decide to prioritize the medical use of titanium so that treatments are more affordable, or is it up to the owners of the mines and that's why we get titanium watches and cellphones instead?

AKingsbury replied to Homem-Povo

@Homempovo @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom

Okay. Do you understand that it's better than steel for a lot of applications? Let's stay specific; it would be WAY better for most car components that are currently made from steel to be made from titanium. It's lighter, which means better fuel efficiency, and it's far more resistant to corrosion. Does that make sense?

Go Up