We can innovate and design bold new technologies without exploitative CEOs sucking up all the wealth we are producing. This was proven time and time again in the USSR which produced rapid developments in technology and even beat the United States into space. In fact there will be more innovation, not less, once this much better arrangement is achieved.

It could, but it could also lead to more fulfilling or rewarding jobs. Personally, I'd rather build a robot to clean toilets than clean toilets.

I don't think capitalism does that. Before long everything except perhaps writing poetry will be better done by robots and no one will need you. When no one needs you, you are effed if you're not seated when the music stops and in this game there are 7 billion people playing and maybe ten million chairs.

8 billion people on this planet want to eat and live a life that will be better than the life they currently have today. This will repeat itself tomorrow, and the day after that infinitely.

Capitalism fuels that demand. Communism doesn't.

Hot damn now that sounds efficient!

WAT IN THE MOTHER **** ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT

Probably 90% of the occupations we have today were inconceivable to people 200 years ago. So while it's inconceivable to me today what people will be doing with themselves in the future due to continued technological advancement, I don't see why the same trend won't continue.

Why it's almost like somebody could PLAN at least part of the ECONOMY to solve these problems!

Driving an UBER while simultaneously making DoorDash deliveries and setting up your dog walking gig on NextDoor.com in a vain attempt to repay your student loans, make your car payment and keep it running well enough to satisfy the capitalists who are very careful not to be construed as your employer and maybe getting by if you add in carvertise.com would indeed have been inconceivable 200 years ago.

Also, most jobs are https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bull****_Jobs.

No Einbert, you don't understand. Laika only orbited the Earth because a bunch of companies like SpaceDogInc and DogzNSpace existed and their COMPETITION spurred on INNOVATION.

RIP COSMONAUT

this is now the



appreciation thread

I'm not sure what your point is, but so did I. Then Amazon came along and offered a faster, cheaper, more reliable and more robust service, and I started using them instead. You're free to use whatever company you want for whatever reason you want, but the apparent lack of understanding for why people like Amazon just makes you seem out of touch with reality and is certainly not helpful for winning friends to your cause.

I too remember how the USSR won the cold war through their economic and technological superiority.

I too recall how the majority of innovations over the last two centuries have come from socialist countries.

Hey Alex, what OS does most of the web run on these days?

When I order something from https://www.sweetwater.com they put candy in the box (SWEETwater get it lol) so I find this claim less than compelling.

Tom,

Surpluses due to network effects are already shared among all participants. Neither message boards nor Facebook has raised prices on you as a result of their success. In your example, assuming the site continues charging $5, C D and E will receive $5 of surplus value each, and 2+2 will have an extra $5 in revenue. Seems fair all around.

Similarly, consumers have gained quite a bit of value from 90% of their friends being on Facebook compared to 10%, and from Amazon successfully developing mass-distribution centers all over the country.

Wait, more important than candy,


is that I don't know where you're getting this from. If Bezos transferred all his warehouse employees 5 shares of AMZN tomorrow for doing such a swell job and because sharing is nice, what does that have to do with you and Mrs. .Alex. and .Alex. Jr. and whomever else liking Amazon as a service?

This is the original post that I referenced. Not using a service and then attributing people's appreciation for the company to hero worship of the owner. It's like the Musk thing where you guys assume some kind of hard-on for the dude when in reality we just love the idea of electric cars and space travel.

There being many other awesome, successful companies that deliver products is a pretty good argument for Amazon not needing to be dismantled no?

Hey Alex, it's Linux, Linux is what most of the internet runs on and it was created by a socialist!

Huh?

I get the minimal wage increase but that's because I believe that job market had been so slack for so long that it's an actual problem and raising the minimum wage can help with. I don't feel like high capital gains taxes has been a problem for investors and so lowering them isn't going to unlock a lot of gains.

My reason is simply to increase productivity in low-wage sectors. It's that or the beatings will continue....

It's a call back to a question Alex ignored.

I got that. It's the socialist claim I'm questioning. He's from Finland and now a U.S. citizen, not that the latter is relevant.

Finland is mostly socialist and produced Linus, I'm giving them credit for his politics. His giving it away as well as the FOSS movement in general is always going to be a counter argument to people not doing hard things without a profit motive.