Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?
Comments
-
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it. Probably shorter periods for copyrights and patents.
Of course, a healthy tax structure is in place. -
I'm pretty sure that just went over everyone's head on this bored.OZONE said:
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it. Probably shorter periods for copyrights and patents.
Of course, a healthy tax structure is in place. -
Pretty sure the bored rolled their eyes at the idiot2001400ex said:
I'm pretty sure that just went over everyone's head on this bored.OZONE said:
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it. Probably shorter periods for copyrights and patents.
Of course, a healthy tax structure is in place. -
A hybrid system is almost certainly the future. Some sort of Frankenstein's monster version of a capitalist economy and a socialist welfare state.
I don't see people and/or corporations giving up their property without a fight and at the same time the natural evolution of technology is going to erode a lot of jobs.
Maybe we will have essential breakthroughs in food production and energy storage that will save the day, but I still don't see how you deal with an exploding population and no jobs without some sort of basic handout system to simply keep people alive. Unless letting them slowly starve and die by the millions is acceptable, of course.
It's a lot of mouths to feed.
#SoylentGreenIsPeople -
We've had breakthroughs in food production and the libtards are apeshit pissed.PurpleReign said:A hybrid system is almost certainly the future. Some sort of Frankenstein's monster version of a capitalist economy and a socialist welfare state.
I don't see people and/or corporations giving up their property without a fight and at the same time the natural evolution of technology is going to erode a lot of jobs.
Maybe we will have essential breakthroughs in food production and energy storage that will save the day, but I still don't see how you deal with an exploding population and no jobs without some sort of basic handout system to simply keep people alive. Unless letting them slowly starve and die by the millions is acceptable, of course.
It's a lot of mouths to feed.
#SoylentGreenIsPeople
-
Obviously not good enough breakthroughs, I meant game changers.
-
You just made my point.RaceBannon said:
Pretty sure the bored rolled their eyes at the idiot2001400ex said:
I'm pretty sure that just went over everyone's head on this bored.OZONE said:
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it. Probably shorter periods for copyrights and patents.
Of course, a healthy tax structure is in place. -
OZONE said:
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it.
Huh? Please show an example where a liberal is opposed to food production breakthroughs. Of course, if your definition of "breakthrough" is a food production economy that requires oil for everything from fertilizers to pesticides... and poisons are allowed through the food chain... then your argument has failed before it began.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
We've had breakthroughs in food production and the libtards are apeshit pissed.PurpleReign said:A hybrid system is almost certainly the future. Some sort of Frankenstein's monster version of a capitalist economy and a socialist welfare state.
I don't see people and/or corporations giving up their property without a fight and at the same time the natural evolution of technology is going to erode a lot of jobs.
Maybe we will have essential breakthroughs in food production and energy storage that will save the day, but I still don't see how you deal with an exploding population and no jobs without some sort of basic handout system to simply keep people alive. Unless letting them slowly starve and die by the millions is acceptable, of course.
It's a lot of mouths to feed.
#SoylentGreenIsPeople -
I like indefinable philosophical social goals that give an emotional warm and fuzzy.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
too bad governments trying to reduce poverty have gone Owen 122001400ex said:I think it's more that as countries become more wealthy, they try to reduce poverty. It's a natural progression of society. Similar to women's rights, as society becomes more educated, women gain more prominence.
-
We could just grow all the food we can with hand sewn heirloom seeds and tell the rest of the world... and much of America...to fuck off when it doesn't go around.OZONE said:OZONE said:
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it.
Huh? Please show an example where a liberal is opposed to food production breakthroughs. Of course, if your definition of "breakthrough" is a food production economy that requires oil for everything from fertilizers to pesticides... and poisons are allowed through the food chain... then your argument has failed before it began.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
We've had breakthroughs in food production and the libtards are apeshit pissed.PurpleReign said:A hybrid system is almost certainly the future. Some sort of Frankenstein's monster version of a capitalist economy and a socialist welfare state.
I don't see people and/or corporations giving up their property without a fight and at the same time the natural evolution of technology is going to erode a lot of jobs.
Maybe we will have essential breakthroughs in food production and energy storage that will save the day, but I still don't see how you deal with an exploding population and no jobs without some sort of basic handout system to simply keep people alive. Unless letting them slowly starve and die by the millions is acceptable, of course.
It's a lot of mouths to feed.
#SoylentGreenIsPeople
