The general definition of capitalism, for me, is an individual or group of individuals owning the means of production and producing with the intention of reaping maximum profit.
With such things as 3D printers production seems to be coming more and more into the hands of the people. Do you think capitalism can continue to exist without support through force if no longer controlling production?
One wonders if we may not be approaching the point of ultra-abundance of which Marx spoke. He envisioned the point of such great abundance that the State would not be required as all as all would have enough according to their needs. Kind of takes the shine off of capitalism if such a point could be reached. We are seeing it created artificially with the covid payments in the US where workers are being paid more to not work than to work. If we substitute abundance for the monopoly fiat monies being given out then capitalism would find the same dilemma... unmotivated workers.
It seems to me we are seeing something that could be termed post-capitalism. It still has a free market fringe of a centrally planned economy, like we see in China. One doesn't need central planning to run restraunts, hotel and taxis however high production industries like steel, energy and natural resources should be in the hands of the people not capitalists in my opinion.
Do you think capitalism can continue to exist without support through force if no longer controlling production?
I am totaly with you, that what passes for capitalism today could not be maintained if there was no threat of violence to support it. But unlike the marxist theory, I think better capitalism would flourish instead.
I totally buy the notion of having co-ops for restaurants, hotels, and taxies. I think that'd be a great alternative to pure capitalism. Not a replacement, but having them both simultaneously. I think they could co-exist. And if security was not provided by threat of violence, but funded voluntarily (with and without co-ops), I think we'd be better off.
3D printers is a great example. But there are still plenty of things that need to be researched and produced that cannot be made even with the best 3D printers. If those things are worth doing, they are worth investing, voluntarily.
We are not approaching ultra-abundance. Even if we had Star-Trek-style replicators, we would still encounter limitations like energy production and information theory. Even in a culture of ultra-abundance, we would still require innovators. And we still won't need a State for that, if we're smart.
I am not a statist, but I'm also not a socialist. I'm fine calling it post-capitalism as long as whatever follows is voluntary.
I don't know if you are aware of this book, it is a fictionalized version of this one. This one flows from the second.
What you have to ask yourself is why these economics are not taught in state run economic indoctrination centers.
The only option on the table seems to be the one I keep hearing from folks over and over.
Not once have I heard these ideas outside select areas of each country I have been in.
I figure that plays into the matrix of control design.
Don't teach the slaves to read.
The ones that do read can be distracted with whatever narrative publishers push.
That these books ever made it into print in the first place is telling of the importance of a free press and free flow of ideas.
Having read those, and more, I can't fathom why folks continue to put up with this crap as presented to them.
Sure, but what I mean is, let's say we currently live in a marxist society engaged in peaceful cooperation. Then, one day, I decided to start saving some of the resources I have in a secret stash and I also encourage others to do the same. Is this against peaceful cooperation?
I don't know much about marxism, haven't read him.
I came at communism through Bakunin and Kropotkin.
So, if you are asking if someone piles up a hundred cars in his secret stash, I'm sure that his neighbors might look askance at him, but he isn't hurting anybody, and when he dies the cars persist.
In an environment where you get what you ask for, when available, rather than a scarcity mindset, hoarding would be frowned upon, but not a serious issue.
You'll have to flesh that out a little if you want more. This short story makes an effective an-crap outline.
So that's interesting to me. He isn't hurting anybody by hoarding resources and this wealth would be released when he dies. It seems like his actions would be discouraged, even by calling it "hoarding" and frowning upon it, but otherwise, it's ok.
If he also has freedom of association and therefore decides to ramp up his store of wealth by creating contracts, building a secure facility, and hiring protection forces that he pays for from promissory notes secured by his stored resources, is that ok too?
Yes, but what is wrong in the general population that makes the fella defensive like that?
Nobody robs in a world where talent is the passage way to fulfillment, and nobody is denied based on its absence.
It is up to the system to find each his place, yes?
Proper management decrees it?
Why would you want to secede from a working federation?
One that lacks the impetus to control others.
I'm referring to the contrast between the two forms of capitalism that emerge. Form 1 is when you have a formal socialist economy and a secret capitalist economy that develops as result. Form 2 is when you have an overt capitalist economy.
Both emerge on their own. But the overt version is easier to track. The covert one is more difficult to track, and therefore undesirable. I'd rather just accept the overt one.
Wolf annoys me his just pays lip service to socialism but his benefited from the current hybrid crony capitalist system! He desperately screams Change but chants for bigger government and more intervention
But it’s nice to see what normies think and his got quite a following on YOuRube!
I’ve seen a lot of the gold bugs also mentioning BTC now and taking note and I think that’s all part of the plan! We created crypto fanatics, now winning over precious metal bugs
Wow, there are a lot of hoops to jump through for this. I did edit the post in Ecency, but I guess it must originate from Ecency. I think that's probably reasonable, but it'd be nice if Ecency would validate boosts before trying. Most of these are possible to detect before even trying, so the author can be told why it won't work.
You are right, we will add pre-check. We are still finalizing all product sync with new brand, so not much new features but bug fixes, this can be considered bug and we will reprioritize accordingly. Thank you!
The general definition of capitalism, for me, is an individual or group of individuals owning the means of production and producing with the intention of reaping maximum profit.
With such things as 3D printers production seems to be coming more and more into the hands of the people. Do you think capitalism can continue to exist without support through force if no longer controlling production?
One wonders if we may not be approaching the point of ultra-abundance of which Marx spoke. He envisioned the point of such great abundance that the State would not be required as all as all would have enough according to their needs. Kind of takes the shine off of capitalism if such a point could be reached. We are seeing it created artificially with the covid payments in the US where workers are being paid more to not work than to work. If we substitute abundance for the monopoly fiat monies being given out then capitalism would find the same dilemma... unmotivated workers.
It seems to me we are seeing something that could be termed post-capitalism. It still has a free market fringe of a centrally planned economy, like we see in China. One doesn't need central planning to run restraunts, hotel and taxis however high production industries like steel, energy and natural resources should be in the hands of the people not capitalists in my opinion.
I am totaly with you, that what passes for capitalism today could not be maintained if there was no threat of violence to support it. But unlike the marxist theory, I think better capitalism would flourish instead.
I totally buy the notion of having co-ops for restaurants, hotels, and taxies. I think that'd be a great alternative to pure capitalism. Not a replacement, but having them both simultaneously. I think they could co-exist. And if security was not provided by threat of violence, but funded voluntarily (with and without co-ops), I think we'd be better off.
3D printers is a great example. But there are still plenty of things that need to be researched and produced that cannot be made even with the best 3D printers. If those things are worth doing, they are worth investing, voluntarily.
We are not approaching ultra-abundance. Even if we had Star-Trek-style replicators, we would still encounter limitations like energy production and information theory. Even in a culture of ultra-abundance, we would still require innovators. And we still won't need a State for that, if we're smart.
I am not a statist, but I'm also not a socialist. I'm fine calling it post-capitalism as long as whatever follows is voluntary.
I don't know if you are aware of this book, it is a fictionalized version of this one.
This one flows from the second.
What you have to ask yourself is why these economics are not taught in state run economic indoctrination centers.
The only option on the table seems to be the one I keep hearing from folks over and over.
Not once have I heard these ideas outside select areas of each country I have been in.
I figure that plays into the matrix of control design.
Don't teach the slaves to read.
The ones that do read can be distracted with whatever narrative publishers push.
That these books ever made it into print in the first place is telling of the importance of a free press and free flow of ideas.
Having read those, and more, I can't fathom why folks continue to put up with this crap as presented to them.
As long as it's voluntary, I guess.
Absolutely, until lenin made marx famous by killing 20+million people in the ukraine for being anarchists, communism was about peaceful cooperation.
The historical record is very clear about the divisions, if you take the time to read them.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/franz-mehring-the-bakunin-marx-split-in-the-1st-international
Sure, but what I mean is, let's say we currently live in a marxist society engaged in peaceful cooperation. Then, one day, I decided to start saving some of the resources I have in a secret stash and I also encourage others to do the same. Is this against peaceful cooperation?
I don't know much about marxism, haven't read him.
I came at communism through Bakunin and Kropotkin.
So, if you are asking if someone piles up a hundred cars in his secret stash, I'm sure that his neighbors might look askance at him, but he isn't hurting anybody, and when he dies the cars persist.
In an environment where you get what you ask for, when available, rather than a scarcity mindset, hoarding would be frowned upon, but not a serious issue.
You'll have to flesh that out a little if you want more.
This short story makes an effective an-crap outline.
So that's interesting to me. He isn't hurting anybody by hoarding resources and this wealth would be released when he dies. It seems like his actions would be discouraged, even by calling it "hoarding" and frowning upon it, but otherwise, it's ok.
If he also has freedom of association and therefore decides to ramp up his store of wealth by creating contracts, building a secure facility, and hiring protection forces that he pays for from promissory notes secured by his stored resources, is that ok too?
Yes, but what is wrong in the general population that makes the fella defensive like that?
Nobody robs in a world where talent is the passage way to fulfillment, and nobody is denied based on its absence.
It is up to the system to find each his place, yes?
Proper management decrees it?
Why would you want to secede from a working federation?
One that lacks the impetus to control others.
At the end, there' something to track, would you like to explain it to me? thanks and regards
I'm referring to the contrast between the two forms of capitalism that emerge. Form 1 is when you have a formal socialist economy and a secret capitalist economy that develops as result. Form 2 is when you have an overt capitalist economy.
Both emerge on their own. But the overt version is easier to track. The covert one is more difficult to track, and therefore undesirable. I'd rather just accept the overt one.
Thanks :)
Wolf annoys me his just pays lip service to socialism but his benefited from the current hybrid crony capitalist system! He desperately screams Change but chants for bigger government and more intervention
But it’s nice to see what normies think and his got quite a following on YOuRube!
I’ve seen a lot of the gold bugs also mentioning BTC now and taking note and I think that’s all part of the plan! We created crypto fanatics, now winning over precious metal bugs
Richard can use BTC once it’s at a million lll
Wow, there are a lot of hoops to jump through for this. I did edit the post in Ecency, but I guess it must originate from Ecency. I think that's probably reasonable, but it'd be nice if Ecency would validate boosts before trying. Most of these are possible to detect before even trying, so the author can be told why it won't work.
You are right, we will add pre-check. We are still finalizing all product sync with new brand, so not much new features but bug fixes, this can be considered bug and we will reprioritize accordingly. Thank you!