Babylon and on - the new capitalism/communism thread

[Jack_www]

Originally posted by GePap
Where to start?

On the arguement of innovation:

Innovation is a result of human ingenuity and huma desire to know, our inquisitiveness and our ambitions. The rgeatest discoveries in human hisotry have been things like agriculture, Animal domestication, metalurgy, writing (and then printing), gunpowder and the basics of chemistry, so ofrth and so on, and none of these things were discovered thanks to either capitalism or commuism. The notion of vaccines did not come out of capitalism, neither did the steam engine nor the railroad nor a whole other set of things. So take say that it was capitalism that is responsbile for the invention of the internet is absurd. Capitalism isn't. It is responsible for the shape of the internet today, just as capitalism is not the reason for the invention of TV, but it is the reason for how it developed. No one here can possible argue that if edison had lived in Bellamy's world, he would not still have invented the things he invented, if only to be forever famous for having invented them. And you can;t becuase you can't claim to know how Edison thought the way he thought.

No one here claimed innovation is a direct result of capitalism. What we were talking about is the Communism tends to restrict innovation while capitalism rewards it and thus encourages it.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Jack_www
First off I dont think that their is any technology that we can come with that will put more people to work.

Someone agrees with me.

Originally posted by Jack_www
Thrid we need innovations and research to help cure deases such as AIDS, Cancer and other deadly deases. This would help all mankind.

I see no reason why the same scientists can't make the same progress under a new system.

Originally posted by Jack_www
Also why do you say that a Great Depression will come?

A loss of jobs will eventually cut deeply into consumer purchasing power.

Originally posted by Jack_www
And even if it does, we got out of it before and will again.

We really fell into recovery the last time. The politicians really had no idea what they were doing. If there was another war it would not create the same amount of jobs because of the new weapons and methods of production.

Originally posted by Jack_www
I dont know what economic classes you have taken but unemployment rate of about 4 to 5% is normal for a healthy economy.

So the economy was only healthy for short periods during the 60s and the 90s.

As Che mentioned there are actually many more unemployed people than the official unemployment rate lets on.

The question is 'at what point does the unemployment rate go up high enough to cause a collapse?' The rate didn't start at 25% during the Depression. That's where it ended up.

Originally posted by Jack_www
Most of this is due to the 9-11 attacks and many economists are saying that economy will rebound with a years time and the stock market is already starting to come back, but this is manly due to the low interest rates which forced many to invest in the shockmarket to make money off their savings.

I disagree. The unemployment rate is still high because of automation and foreign competition. We should have recovered long ago if it was due to 9-11.

Originally posted by Jack_www
How could communism though give people more jobs?

We could lower the work week? Or we could just forget about full employment as a goal.

[chequita guevara]

This thread is just a big, "where to start?" headache for me.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
No, you're just a hypocrite.

Please don't talk to me anymore. I get nothing of value from you.

[DinoDoc]

Kid: I'm sorry. The whole innovation = useless arguement from you sounds stupid, IMO. However, I was trying to get a better idea on how far this goes for you. Perhaps I should have tried to get a better idea why you believe it.

[Jack_www]

Originally posted by Kidicious

I see no reason why the same scientists can't make the same progress under a new system.

I look to communist countries to see it scientist would be able to make the same progress and what I see does not encourage me at all.

We really fell into recovery the last time. The politicians really had no idea what they were doing. If there was another war it would not create the same amount of jobs because of the new weapons and methods of production.

Well really the demand for goods, while in the case of WWII of weapons rose and thus bussiness expanded to meet that demand. Allthough using war to try to get out of depression is not the ideal solution. And you are right politicians could not end the depression. Really the only way you can do that is by trying to get the people who still have money to buy things and thus increase demand so that bussiness will expand to help the economy, since alot of it has to do with how people feel and react to high unempolyment rates and such.

Government is not the best at getting a lot of things done. Even under a communist government. Most people that hold some short of office are blinded by their political beliefs, and prusue solution to problems that are not based on the facts but what they think will work. Bussiness people though have to work in the real world and seek solutions to their problems that get results. I dont think any governmental system let alone communism would set asside politics and seek solutions that get results.

So the economy was only healthy for short periods during the 60s and the 90s.

Well US economy has done very well since the 1950's.

I disagree. The unemployment rate is still high because of automation and foreign competition. We should have recovered long ago if it was due to 9-11.

Before 9-11, the unemployment rate was arround 4.9%.
Then around the year 2000 the economy started to slow down, and then the terror attacks on 9-11 did not help things and reduce turrorism for a long time and caused a lot of damage to the US economy.

We could lower the work week? Or we could just forget about full employment as a goal.

Actually you are close to full employment with a unemployment rate of 4%.

Also the economic system we have now goes through cycles. There are times when the economy is going along very well and other times it is not so good. This period of recession will end and we will soon see anther period of groth at least in the US economy soon.

[chequita guevara]

Innovation isn't useless, Kid. I suggest you study some Marx. Innovation is the source of our ability to even have a socialist and communist society. Hell, we'll never move beyond socialism if we don't innovate new ways of production, such that there is more than enough for everyone and our work time is reduced to a bar minimum.

Innovation is a result of human curiousity, and curiousity is part and parcel of what it means to be human. Innovation is also part of human creativity, and this is an even bigger part of what makes us human.

If anything, without bosses telling us only to do things they're way, I expect people would be coming up with lots of new and better ways to do things.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Innovation isn't useless, Kid. I suggest you study some Marx.

I didn't day it was Che. Don't let them tell you what I'm saying. They haven't figured it out yet. I'm saying that automation is leading to the fall of capitalism. Maybe it wasn't exactly what Marx said, but I don't follow Marx by the book. I rely on the information that I get in the present that Marx didn't know about.

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Hell, we'll never move beyond socialism if we don't innovate new ways of production, such that there is more than enough for everyone and our work time is reduced to a bar minimum.

We already have the technology to provide for everyone.

[Jack_www]

Originally posted by Kidicious


I'm saying that automation is leading to the fall of capitalism.

Automation is leading to shift from a manufactoring based economy to a Survice based economy in the US and Europe. It also increase productivity which is a good thing.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Jack_www
I look to communist countries to see it scientist would be able to make the same progress and what I see does not encourage me at all.

More scientific breakthroughs came out of communist Russia than capitalist Spain. How come you never hear much about Slavadorea scientists? As far as scientific breakthroughs go, the issue is how resources are invested. The Russians make great strides in various heavily funded lines of research, and this should be no surprise, given that they were heavilly funded.

You can argue that by being less efficient with resources, a communist society will have less resources overall to invest in technological development and education and reasearch facilities. But saying that communism somehow inherently punishes innovation is not a very good argument. You can claim that a repressive political system and a corrupt one does so, and that is a fine argument, ands as we established before, one cant simply jpoin communism to a certain type of politics.

[Japher]

Jack, you are correct.

Automation increases production while decreasing over head. It sucks that less people are needed to make a product because of which, yet the product can now be made cheaper. Yet, what are all those old production workers going to do? Services... Those systems don't fix themselves. Yet, there are only so many production service jobs to go around, but people are buying the necessities of life for less so they are able to buy the comforts of life in higher quantities and/or qualities.. What does that mean... Services!

We already have the technology to provide for everyone

Obviously we don't, or we would be suppling for everyone. The trick is to have the technology to supply for everyone in the amounts and manner that they want it to be supplied, leading, thus, to contentment.

Automation advancing, products becoming cheaper, leading to an increase in the ability to acquire those creature comforts everyone wants yeilds to such a utopia (at least in theory). This is what is called the standard of living, something that has been increasing every decade, every century, and not because we have stopped advancing...

[Velociryx]

Sure we can, GePap....show me the communist country on the map that is not:

1) Ruled by a dictator
2) Oppressive
3) Spending a TON of its national reasources in tracking and limiting the mobility of its own population, limiting access to key technologies (in the 80's it was photocopiers, nowadays that would include cell phones, computers, faxes, etc)

Go ahead....point it out on the map....

-=Vel=-

[Imran Siddiqui]

Innovation is a result of human curiousity, and curiousity is part and parcel of what it means to be human. Innovation is also part of human creativity, and this is an even bigger part of what makes us human.

It is also a result of people wanting to do better for themselves (ie, more money). In fact, Edison once said the only reason he invented so much stuff was simply to make more money.

Capitalism offers a greater incentive for technology to flourish and depends on technology. The incentives in communism don't come close.

[Velociryx]

"Incentives" in communism.....the two words don't even go together. Here are some examples we've seen both on this thread, and in history:

* Do this before the Americans or your family will disappear and you will get a bullet in the head. Your body will never be found.

* Do this. It's for the good of the party. AFTER you do this, we will show our gratitude by sending you to Siberia anyway, because we can no longer trust you.

* Do this. We won't pay you for it, but....you know....it's for the good of the group.

Awesome, rockin' incentives, huh? JUST the kind of world I want to live in!

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

D'oh! I forgot, Imran....that's an invalid example. You can't use what Edison said as an example to prove your point, cos he's just an individual. I tried that, and the reds threw it out as not being evidence....

-=Vel=-