Search results

Sure, but I just want to get everyone to get on the page at least that neither Capitalism or Socialism is inherently "BAD" or "GOOD," but, as always, relies on implementation.

If the monopoly is owned by the public as opposed to select individuals, I suppose I'd prefer the former, especially if most of the public is its customer and would be incentivizing towards maintaining a standard of product quality.

I will play along with this thought experiment. I don't think the idea is complete. Who pays everybody? Where do they make their money? Wouldn't capitalism still exist, in that people would give their income to others in exchange for goods?

Healthy competition is important yes. But the endgoal of any capitalist enterprise is to beat the competition until you control all production. The endgame of capitalism for individual companies is to create a monopoly. We long ago decided that wasn't ok, and created regulations to make sure...

Agreed; neither conceptually lives in a vacuum. A balance of both concepts is necessary, and they are not mutually exclusive.

Hm, not that I enthusiastically endorse Vanzandt's POV, but I will rebut on his side that thousands of years ago, they didn't have nearly the knowledge of existence or population that we have. They couldn't even imagine the concept of "peak oil." Hypothetically, unless population growth is...

The second question is a common question of UBI. Wages still work the same way, and like a minimum wage, a UBI would put upward pressure on all wages. You'd get somebody to do any of those jobs provided the additional income was worth it. Just like now; if the price is right, most people will...

Sure, they're not static, but they have inertia. Arguably we want to make upward class mobility more fluid. How can we do that?

Who's buying the producer's products? Killing all the customers is bad for business. They've also got their own .22s, I'm assuming.

Considering that nobody in any economic system curls up and dies willingly, yes. They're more likely to do what any group of impoverished does; collaborate to work for survival outside of a system, which may involve riots, crime, and violence.

Curious questions still: Do y'all think there is a threshold of labor that should enable a certain standard of living? Should a 40 hour workweek guarantee a certain standard of commodity purchasing power? Is there any threshold? We have regulations because we would like workers' compensation...

I'd assume the non-producers may not be that simple to eradicate if the premise is that there are many more non-producers than there are producers.

Quite simply, what other option is there in a hypothetical society where job and worker parity will forever be out of balance due to automation? Also, an insidious assumption that those who collect benefits would contribute nothing. Does welfare tempt you to do nothing? Probably not. You...

I don't think there is a free market solution to the downward pressures of capitalism on quality of living. I don't think anybody here is disillusioned enough to believe that labor scales linearly or appropriately with compensation. But, in the interest of the question, a company won't pay you...

More than may, I think a Universal Basic Income will become completely necessary once we hit peak automation. I haven't conceptualized a free market concept that would work. Then again, I am biased towards Socialism but always like to give the market a conceptual swing at a solution.

Only answer I can see is the eventuality of a Universal Basic Income.

What are the hive mind's thoughts on: Growing automation, especially regarding motor vehicles. Universal Basic Income?

Have you considered an aftermarket GPU liquid coolant system? 4 Monitors is broad. 4 Monitors...at what resolution? Also, if you're willing to spend what seems like a decent amount of money...a new motherboard isn't that expensive.

I don't know, is it? The fact that the individual mandate socializes the costs and risks doesn't make it not insurance.

That sounds like an interesting line from an autobiography. What's the story on that? In any case, I still don't think it makes an easy case for stop gunners being the boogieman if we consider every other player in the market wants a slice of the same pie. Surely, stop gunners also end up...