Kuribo64
Views: 7,900,572 Home | Forums | Uploader | Wiki | Object databases | IRC
Rules/FAQ | Memberlist | Calendar | Stats | Online users | Last posts | Search
01-16-18 10:19 PM
Guest:

0 users reading "Every technology exists thanks to capitalism" | 1 bot

Main - Serious discussion - "Every technology exists thanks to capitalism" New reply


StapleButter
Posted on 07-25-17 03:49 AM Link | #85140
4500-3300 BCE: wheel invented
1600-1700: capitalism invented


So, can we say that the wheel exists thanks to capitalism? Maybe they had time travel technology which allowed them to go invent the wheel under capitalism.

But then, they would need capitalism to get time travel working. Chicken and egg problem.


Actually, not only does technological advance not need capitalism, but it gets in the way. Innovation only happens when it has a potential to be profitable. Which is why we have no vaccine for AIDS.



Fuck. I feel like tearing down some of the arguments that are typically pulled to discredit opposition to capitalism. Anyone wanna join me?

____________________
NSMBHD - Kafuka - Jul

what do you use to measure bolts? a boltmeter

Anthe
Posted on 07-25-17 11:21 AM Link | #85145
"Capitalism" will save masses of people of tinnitus. It's a widespread problem, so it'll be profitable to do research and find a treatment.

I would argue though that profit definitely gets people working.

____________________
[image]

StapleButter
Posted on 07-25-17 11:42 AM Link | #85146
Posted by Anthe
I would argue though that profit definitely gets people working.

It does, because if they don't work, they don't get money, which means they're not allowed to live.

The base idea of rewarding work is legit. But the part where your paycheck is proportional to how 'good' the work you provide is, is flawed.

For example, cashiers, bus drivers or janitors get shitty wages, but professional soccer players make millions. Our society can't function without the former -- we'd be unable to buy shit at a store, have no public transport and drown under trash. The latter merely distract people and are entirely dispensable.

Also, why do we work, initially? To produce what our society needs. But in creating a system where the only way to survive is to sell your workforce, we end up warping the reality such that people work not for serving their society but for their own survival. Their money is the main, or only, thing they care about.

And then they tell you that "humans are greedy and selfish by nature".

____________________
NSMBHD - Kafuka - Jul

what do you use to measure bolts? a boltmeter

GalacticPirate
Posted on 07-25-17 11:44 AM (rev. 3 of 07-25-17 11:48 AM) Link | #85147
Actually, Ancient Greece and Rome were already capitalist societies ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Also, I cannot imagine a society functioning without money.

RicBent
Posted on 07-25-17 11:57 AM Link | #85149

Grece and the roman empire were never capitalist societies.

They depended on slavery and the society was never leaded by a class of investors but by aristocratic landowners.

Capitalism began in the Middle Ages.

____________________
GitHub - YouTube - NSMBHD

StapleButter
Posted on 07-25-17 12:01 PM Link | #85150
Posted by StarTrekVoyager
Actually, Ancient Greece and Rome were already capitalist societies ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Actually, it depends on what you consider to be capitalism. I'll grant you that this is a vague thing, one could say that any form of trade is capitalism.

However, capitalism is more commonly used to refer to the current system which relies on constant accumulation of profit.

Posted by StarTrekVoyager
Also, I cannot imagine a society functioning without money.

It's hard to imagine things that are radically different from what we're used to.

Anyway, in a simple world, you could fix Derpo's toilet and Derpo would give you money, which you would give to Blargy in exchange of some of the food he produced, then Blargy would pay Derpo to fix his house roof. It's an oversimplified example but in this case, money is just rotating between people, and is dispensable.

The real world is more complex, but money has mostly the same function: you use it to buy what workers have produced, but you're also a worker.

So, while I don't know how far we'd go without any form of money, I think it's worth trying.

There's something like that at the Notre-Dame des Landes ZAD for example. It's not completely money-free, but shit they sell (food items, mostly) is at free prices, you can pay whatever you want or even take it for free.

Because, if someone ends up with no money for whatever reason, would you say that somehow they don't deserve to eat, or live? If people's worth was measured from how much money they have, Trump would be one of the best persons you can meet.

____________________
NSMBHD - Kafuka - Jul

what do you use to measure bolts? a boltmeter

GalacticPirate
Posted on 07-25-17 01:11 PM Link | #85151
But why would people work in that case?

StapleButter
Posted on 07-25-17 01:26 PM (rev. 2 of 07-25-17 01:27 PM) Link | #85152
Why would they not work? They need to keep food on the table (collectively) and more generally stay occupied.

In the case of the NDDL ZAD, there are more than enough things to do to keep everyone busy or atleast most of them.

____________________
NSMBHD - Kafuka - Jul

what do you use to measure bolts? a boltmeter

Swingball
Posted on 07-25-17 03:30 PM Link | #85154
What're your thoughts on this Basic Income idea, where you get paid just for living in that country?

I heard it actually motivates people to go do something meaningful.

It also works as a safety net if you're unemployed.

Are countries still test-running that BTW?

StapleButter
Posted on 07-30-17 03:24 PM Link | #85379
France already has something of that sort, which is called RSA (formerly RMI).


It's woefully unsufficient to live decently.

____________________
NSMBHD - Kafuka - Jul

what do you use to measure bolts? a boltmeter

Swingball
(post deleted) #85380

StapleButter
Posted on 08-21-17 03:17 PM Link | #86877
oh also


https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/6u3wff/why_communism/

and they don't mention ecological devastation

____________________
NSMBHD - Kafuka - Jul

what do you use to measure bolts? a boltmeter

JakoNintenCraft
Posted on 08-21-17 04:49 PM Link | #86887
Posted by StapleButter
oh also


https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/6u3wff/why_communism/

and they don't mention ecological devastation

I don't get why everyone bashes capitalism if they aren't going to do something about it. If capitalism really sucks as much as you put it, then propose an alternative that will have the most chance of working.

So far there are no solutions to solve the proposed problem. Every government system we have tried has messed up in some way or another. Take an example in the form of communism.

This system of government is at its core to keep everyone at the same social class: by everyone having the same quality of life with the same social status, no one is relatively more poor or rich or more or less powerful than their neighbor; seems decent enough at first, but it falls into issues fast.
For one, SOMEONE has to lead the country if it's to survive, thus already putting someone into a higher state of power than everyone else.
Secondly, if you have the same amount of money/standard of living as someone else that has less responsibility/a worse job than you, then there is no incentive to work. Take the instance of a doctor and a restaurant server. If the server gets the same amount of money as the doctor, then the server will never try to seek a better job if it means they still get the same reward as what they currently do.

Point being, we use capitalism because it (so far) has worked out the best for us.

____________________
Irony is the spice of life.

You're inside a simulation, of a simulation, inside a simulation, of a simulation, inside the Matrix, inside a taco, inside a taco, within a Taco Bell, that's inside a KFC, within a mall, that's INSIDE YOUR BRAIN!; inside another giant simulation!


StapleButter
Posted on 08-21-17 05:06 PM Link | #86892
Can we say global warming is "the best for us"? And that's only the tip of the iceberg.


There is experimentation going on in many places to create society without capitalism. There is no definite answer, no easy solution, but there is work.


Also, the whole idea that some jobs are somehow better than others is flawed.

Cashier, bus drivers, garbage collectors, etc... have shitty pays and jobs we call shitty, but our society couldn't function well without them.

Professional soccer players are paid millions to basically distract the people and advertise some big brands in the process. Would you say they are useful enough to justify all the money?

____________________
NSMBHD - Kafuka - Jul

what do you use to measure bolts? a boltmeter

natnew
Posted on 08-21-17 06:46 PM Link | #86908
I feel like the current capitalist system needs some heavy reform, but it's possible to fix it.

It's pretty stable, at least, which is a plus.

But again, it's going to need some reform.

____________________
http://natnew32.proboards.com/index.cgi


[image][image][image][image][image]

[image][image][image]

JakoNintenCraft
Posted on 08-22-17 03:13 PM Link | #86975
Posted by StapleButter
Can we say global warming is "the best for us"? And that's only the tip of the iceberg.


There is experimentation going on in many places to create society without capitalism. There is no definite answer, no easy solution, but there is work.


Also, the whole idea that some jobs are somehow better than others is flawed.

Cashier, bus drivers, garbage collectors, etc... have shitty pays and jobs we call shitty, but our society couldn't function well without them.

Professional soccer players are paid millions to basically distract the people and advertise some big brands in the process. Would you say they are useful enough to justify all the money?

About people saying that some jobs are better than others... it is definitely flawed in some ways, but its basis is legit. Let's take that same example of the doctor and the restaurant server. The doctor spends years or maybe decades being educated in his practice to help in medicine, and as such people will be more willing to spend money on said expertise to use it. Compare that to the server, who is (most of the time) uneducated and (most of the time) has little experience in his/her job. Since this is so, he/she are paid very little to do their work, and due to his/her lack of experience and schooling, they are dispensable: if he/she were to force higher wages they'll just be replaced for someone who doesn't complain since he/she has much less to offer than, say, the doctor.

When a person works so much to gain knowledge like in schooling or apprenticeship, he/she is given more money/kept in higher social esteem due to people knowing he/she has more to offer than the server in your local restaurant. It's a principle that states hard work/more education gives a person more to give to society (makes them more useful) and as such, warrants the opportunity for more pay/better living due to them being able to give more to society.

Point being you can't have equal-benefit jobs without devaluing the idea of hard work giving opportunities for a better life.

____________________
Irony is the spice of life.

You're inside a simulation, of a simulation, inside a simulation, of a simulation, inside the Matrix, inside a taco, inside a taco, within a Taco Bell, that's inside a KFC, within a mall, that's INSIDE YOUR BRAIN!; inside another giant simulation!


RanAS
Posted on 08-22-17 04:03 PM Link | #86976
I made this post before the post above, so this is probably going to look a bit discontinuous, sorry.

Not every job needs the same amount of effort put into it. I'll say that some essential jobs are definitely undervalued in today's society while other more trivial ones are incredibly overvalued, but having the exact same thing for everyone doesn't work. However, the inequality you presented is definitely there as well.

I believe most of that comes from superficiality, like valuing people because they appear on sports, or make songs that everyone knows about, or because of their popularity or social status, rather than because they're important to society or to the development of technology, etc.

Cashiers probably don't get "valued" as much because each of those individuals only participates in a small percentage of each customer's life, probably so little to be called negligible, probably so little they might not even consider them as an actual human being in certain ways. Depending on the place they work at, there can't be anything other than superficiality, since one person might need to serve dozens or hundreds of people daily. This works the other way around too, how many places different places would a person need to go on their usual life to buy stuff from? Probably many.

The entire group of cashiers are very important to the integrity of the vast majorities of commercial business out there, though, since all of them going on strike would make quite a lot of trouble everywhere. This can apply to other jobs as well. You can argue automation as a means of solving this problem, but that also has it's own problems as well such as, how would economy as we currently have it even work at that point?

My point is, maybe realizing how we value things in our lives and be able to critically think about them would help with this entire issue, even if by a little bit. Being aware of the fact we often take for granted the work of others and don't consider how their lives must be, that could be a good step to finally get people to work for something better. But currently...it's probably not going to happen soon.

also this is post 100 wooo
"I forgot what I was going to say."

Baby Luigi
Posted on 09-15-17 03:10 PM Link | #88432
idk, the Soviets had FAR better space technology than the US, considering they launched satellites earlier than we did and explored further before we were even there; at the time, they were around a decade ahead of technology than NASA, and they eventually fell behind because of crap the government did like getting involved in foreign countries they have no business in (sound familiar, US?). Hell, after the collapse of the USSR, they spearheaded the development of the International Space Station. It's a bit ignorant to claim that all technologies exist thanks to capitalism. It just sounds like US propaganda to me.

Hell, I think the Space Race and other technologies developed in competition (especially the Internet) was one of the best things to come out of the Cold War.


Main - Serious discussion - "Every technology exists thanks to capitalism" New reply

Page rendered in 0.028 seconds. (2048KB of memory used)
MySQL - queries: 29, rows: 228/228, time: 0.015 seconds.
[powered by Acmlm] Acmlmboard 2.064 (2017-11-20)
© 2005-2008 Acmlm, Xkeeper, blackhole89 et al.