Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?
Comments
-
You mean like how private enterprise mines and oil wells are on BLM and USFS properties and pay royalties to the government for the riches they extract?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. -
Similar to that yes, but applied more broadly (as I mentioned in my lumber example), and the oil companies would be charged higher rents and their CEOs would be imprisoned if they spilled any oil. And lots of taxes.PurpleThrobber said:
You mean like how private enterprise mines and oil wells are on BLM and USFS properties and pay royalties to the government for the riches they extract?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: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
You've proven my point.
My God you're an idiot. But we knew that.
Think man. -
Great substance to your point. Fits in with your track record.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said: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
You've proven my point.
My God you're an idiot. But we knew that.
Think man. -
Hey, the Creep still gets (not gives) anal on the side, even though Mrs. Creep has always, does, and will likely always, say, "Not there. I don't do that" when he tries to slip one in.PurpleJ said:
Women's rights have done so much for this cuntry. A real sign of an educated, classy society where we can't say anything that offends anyone or go outside without bubble wrap.2001400ex 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.
So, really, I don't give no fuck about women's rights as long as I get what I want. -
Eh. Instead of reading the Cliffnotes of Das Kapital, The German Ideology, or A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, you should read the entirety of each book.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.
Then, and only then, can you throw around terms like "means of production" on a message bored on which I have taken up residence.
Axe the locals. I can throw down on this shit like a mother fucker. I took a shit last week that knows more about this topic than you do. Why do you think Damone left? Because I threw his ass outta here that's why.
Good job spelling "Weyerhaeuser" though; it is a tough one. I'm impressed. -
*wherehousercreepycoug said:
Eh. Instead of reading the Cliffnotes of Das Kapital, The German Ideology, or A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, you should read the entirety of each book.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.
Then, and only then, can you throw around terms like "means of production" on a message bored on which I have taken up residence.
Axe the locals. I can throw down on this shit like a mother fucker. I took a shit last week that knows more about this topic than you do. Why do you think Damone left? Because I threw his ass outta here that's why.
Good job spelling "Weyerhaeuser" though; it is a tough one. I'm impressed.
*Your welcome. -
PurpleThrobber said:
*whorehousercreepycoug said:
Eh. Instead of reading the Cliffnotes of Das Kapital, The German Ideology, or A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, you should read the entirety of each book.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.
Then, and only then, can you throw around terms like "means of production" on a message bored on which I have taken up residence.
Axe the locals. I can throw down on this shit like a mother fucker. I took a shit last week that knows more about this topic than you do. Why do you think Damone left? Because I threw his ass outta here that's why.
Good job spelling "Weyerhaeuser" though; it is a tough one. I'm impressed.
*Your welcome. -
The story of the railroads and the timber industry and the land of the great west in America is an interesting one. Today a lot of that land is housing developments built by whorehouser spin offs as well as other timber giants.
The people of this country have been paid several times for that initial investment of land and got the engine for the greatest economic engine in history. And Stanford University.
And still some who lived off the fat of that land want to whine and bitch and complain. go figure -
I like to be the 5th vote that buries a poast, that's what I like to do.2001400ex 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.
You must have been dropped on your head as a child. It's the only explanation.
