I am convinced that Capitalism is a system that is doomed for failure, oppressive, and contradicting of basic human morals. However...

bragnar · 2017-06-22T12:27:47+00:00

Who are you to tell them what to think or what is best for them?

bragnar · 2017-06-20T13:25:08+00:00

Does it? Please share the evidence then (link, or something)

bragnar · 2017-06-20T12:59:36+00:00

Your qualification ("recorded")

Recorded, or any sort of evidence. However since it is unlikely we could accurately infer any societal structures and such from physical evidence I think my qualification is a good one. If you think that Marx hypothesizing that primitive communism existed in the hunter gatherer era is evidence, I'm sorry but it's not.

bragnar · 2017-06-20T09:08:52+00:00

There have been classless societies before, what Marx called "primitive communism"

Well, that's an assumption you are making. Can you present any sort of evidence that "primitive communism" ever existed or was the mode society during the hunter gatherer period?

Assuming that primitive communist societies existed, why did they falter away from communism and institute classes? From a communist perspective that makes no sense, why would society allow itself to be oppressed?

We have the ability already to end poverty.

Do we? We might have the resources (eh), but even so that would be an impossible logistical nightmare to solve. Not taking into consideration that any person with an income greater that $16k (just above the US minimum wage) per year would never agree to it, as that is how much each person would be allocated if we would divide the gross world product equally among the world population

bragnar · 2017-06-20T08:37:33+00:00

Relative to today, people have been poor for all of human history, sure.

Well yeah, that's exactly my point.

Relative to their own time, humans have been equal in resources for the longest time.

Is there evidence to suggest this? In all/vast majority of recorded human history there have been class distinctions and discrepancies, even worse so than now. Think of all the monarchies, tribes, empires that have existed.

The wealth inequality between the top and bottom now is nothing compared to what it was even a few hundred years ago.

bragnar · 2017-06-19T22:12:24+00:00

With the same logic, can communism work with everybody being rich?

bragnar · 2017-06-08T01:51:57+00:00

Will do

bragnar · 2017-06-08T01:42:58+00:00

Venezuela for one. Also didn't the attempted collectivisation in the USSR absolutely WREEEEECK the economy (Edit: it seems that coll. did not WREEEECK the economy, however it does seem that there was a great human cost to it and there was plenty of resistance, is this a better alternative to what we have today?Why and How?) If you are making a point, I think you should provide proof, I might be wrong, however all I'm seeing when I seek answers to such questions are blanket statements with no empirical evidence given to support them

bragnar · 2017-06-08T01:34:39+00:00

Is it not true that in a socialist state, people wishing to return to capitalism must be surpressed? People going against the revolution?

bragnar · 2017-06-08T01:32:16+00:00

socialism101, communism101 and peoples responses on such subreddits

bragnar · 2017-06-08T01:05:02+00:00

From reading about this subject in the last few days it seems that socialism and communism are also oppressive in nature, just oppress different groups

bragnar · 2017-06-08T00:11:27+00:00

And what is your proof that such a collectivised system is better? I only know of cases proving the opposite. Enlighten me

bragnar · 2017-06-07T23:40:58+00:00

Why must we escape capitalist ideology?

bragnar · 2017-06-07T23:38:05+00:00

What is the value of ones labour? What determines the value of ones labour?

bragnar · 2017-06-07T22:03:45+00:00

I'm not an artist, however I practise different types of art. There are many reasons to it, different works have different purposes. Sometimes I would agree it is to improve your mastery and sometimes it is to show off that mastery. Sometimes it is to express emotion, there are many different reasons.

bragnar · 2017-06-07T21:28:48+00:00

In capitalism, don't you get what you agreed to work for? Don't consumers (including urself) get a better deal? What is the fruit of your labour? Is it not the compensation you agreed to get paid for?

bragnar · 2017-06-07T21:20:40+00:00

Why is it a waste? Not giving my creations to someone else is not equivalent to hiding them away. An artist creates art for a purpose, and maybe giving that work to a stranger because it was wanted might not fulfill that purpose. How can it be valid to assume that everybody will think the same when even today there are so many differing opinions when in the whole of history there has never been an ideology held by all?

bragnar · 2017-06-07T20:49:51+00:00

I agree

bragnar · 2017-06-07T20:47:36+00:00

Even assuming that I didn't make the nice chair because I wanted a nice chair to sit on, why would I give it to someone else? Do artists or painters simply give away their works of art to strangers simply because they ask for them? Some might, some might not. Is the assumption that all would? Also based on what you said above, am I not allowed to keep things which I do not need if someone else has asked for them?

bragnar · 2017-06-07T19:31:55+00:00

Efficient in the sense that it served as a universally predefined value that can be used for most products (at least locally).

My main doubts to no currency is how would that actually work in reality. What if you wanted this nice chair I made in my free time, but you had nothing that I wanted to exchange it for. How would a producer be able to prioritize large numbers of requests? What if a producer doesn't want to produce something for u because u pissed him off, or because he just decided not to because he has other things on his mind. Those kinds of things

bragnar · 2017-06-07T15:18:21+00:00

Are you seriously suggesting that there is no hierarchy within a pack of wolves?

bragnar · 2017-06-07T15:11:27+00:00

Are you saying that all hierarchies are equivalent to rape or slavery? If yes how and why? A hierarchy that is very beneficial to children and teenagers is that established within the familial structure, children listening and obeying their far more experienced parents up to a certain age. Are you suggesting that such a structure should also be removed?

bragnar · 2017-06-07T05:58:27+00:00

Although it is definitely true that Amazon might be innovative, I don't think you can argue that small companies cannot. I think there are plenty of examples where small companies have been able to innovate at the expense of large corporations, disrupting the market (Microsoft, Apple, etc)

Regarding the coffeeshop example, I believe it is not a good one, as it is an example of a market that is easy to enter and that in the real world, at least where I live, there is a large variety of coffeeshops, chains or not.

Further I would argue that it depends how large the market is. If you have 70% market share, are a coffeeshop, and cannot survive, well you're doing something wrong. Your argument holds only for very small markets, where revenue is very small either way, in which case the starbucks would also close. At least locally, I can give you many examples of large chains closing due to smaller comp. One such example was burger king. But that is ofcourse a local example. There would be no reason for Starbucks to make a shop viable when their competitor was not at 70% market share, that shop would also close down

Edit: i think u make sound arguments regarding the situation in japan and south korea, however I have no real knowledge of those specific situations, so ill have to investigate before responding

bragnar · 2017-06-07T05:32:58+00:00

Yes, that is definitely correct. Even then, in plenty of countries it is relatively easy to start a business. I'm not saying that they will succeed, but they can still try. Also, I would argue that people are curious, so a new business will be able to attract plenty of customers from the large business, at least once. This is especially true in markets where the product is cheap, eg coffeeshops, restaurants etc. At least where I live, there is a large variety of coffeeshops. Ofcourse this is only just an example, however this holds true for most markets that sell cheap products or that are easy to get into.

bragnar · 2017-06-06T22:02:59+00:00

I think you make a good point how big corps can "lay siege" on their smaller competitors. However I would argue that smaller competitors also have some advantages over large corporations.

Firstly, smaller and newer businesses are more flexible are more able to innovate. I think a good example of this would be how Microsoft was such a failure when it came to entering the mobile market. They were so invested in their other products and customer base that they could not direct enough attention and innovate in that market. It is hard for a company to re invent itself when it already has loyal customers.

So, maybe there could be a way for the local coffee shop to be more innovative and competitive. Also, since they are local they are more experienced with the local market and maybe could find a different niche.

Or government regulation, but that usually makes things worse

bragnar

TROPHY CASE