hackyhacky

8 ms·

241.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
> It was driven largely by people who wanted to make money off of their inventions. I am getting a little tired of repeating myself, but you're evidently confused so I'll indulge you. The opposition to capitalist as a monetary
242.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
That's very impressive. How did you write software without a computer?
243.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
> Musk creating wealth has taken nothing from me. How about you? That's exactly what he'd like you to believe. Where did that money come from? Did he just print it himself? > Musk creating wealth has taken nothing from me. H
244.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
And yet many in capitalist society lived and still live in abject poverty, despite the fact that there are enough resources so that no one should be left wanting. Nevertheless, you've somehow convinced yourself that those people either
245.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
> in any way that matters to allow me to act. I don't care how you act. That capitalism benefits the rich is not the subject of debate. This isn't /r/wallstreetbets What is at stake us that all value is created by lab
246.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
"I can win" is not a refutation of the claim that investment is gambling in any way that matters. The more relevant question is: does investment reward productivity (i.e. skill, strength, labor) or does it reward ownership (i.e. t
247.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
It evidently can be addressed here, as you yourself mentioned. No one has yet pointed out to me why my reading is "naive and frankly incorrect," so feel free to be the first.
248.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
> You don't understand the point of capitalism. It's not about making rich people richer. Making the rich richer isn't necessarily the point, but it is an unavoidable consequence. > Capitalism is about producing stuff.
249.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
Your argument amounts to billionaire apologism and has nothing to do with my comment. If a supermarket cannot be profitable in a small village, an investor isn't going to change that. The investor will invest in businesses that can b
250.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
This does nothing to support your point.
251.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
For all of your rah-rah capitalist boosterism, you failed to address the actual content of my argument, which is that the reason during the last 50 years that the China has had decreasing poverty, while the US has had increasing poverty, ha
252.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
Which is fine, except that one can't know in advance which companies will continue to be productive..that's why it's gambling.
253.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
This argument does not make any sense. I have no problem with the concept of money. Commerce always the exchange of good and services, including on a symbolic level: as you point out, affection, money, etc. "Money" is not the dist
254.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
> The people making profits are the ones providing food, shelter, and phones to you. I'm not worried about the guy making my sandwich at the corner deli. He's entitled to my money because he provides a valuable service. I am wo
255.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
Your comment does not address the (imho reasonable) criticism that the described system incentivizes gambling as the key to wealth, rather than labor. There are many problems with a gambling based economy, not least among them that over a l
256.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
That's commerce, not capitalism. Capitalism began when Thag declared that he owns all the dinosaurs, and anyone who hunts a dinosaur must pay him 10 percent of the meat as a tribute, or else he will stab them with his spear.
257.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
> Once people are given all the resources they want they are not motivated to work You are again straw manning an argument. I said nothing about giving people all resources with no work. In fact, I explicitly said the opposite: I want a
258.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
We didn't have any examples of states without a divinely appointed absolute monarch until we did. Things can change. And as a matter of fact, there are many examples of non capitalist societies.
259.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
> But "capitalism" in its historical and practical meaning means nothing other than commerce, i.e. the society based exchange, the system of production based on exchange Completely wrong. Many of my comments here distinguish co
260.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
> Risk : Reward, that's obvious, isn't it? I have known many relatives who bankrupted themselves trying to "own" stuff. I also know some who succeeded and are rich. Starting a business is very hard, try it In order to
261.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
> There are endless businesses you can start with little to no capital. Well, that's good news. I guess the cause of poverty must simply be laziness. That's convenient, because it allows me to demonize the lower economic classe
262.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
Please avoid straw man arguments. I didn't say that China didn't use capitalism: I said that it didn't use unfettered capitalism. Its capitalism is strongly tinged by its authoritarian rule with the explicit goal of reducin
263.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
Wow, talk about moving the goal posts. I was pointing out that capitalism has not always been the universal economic system, and now you're trying to make me explain why years of exploitative colonialism and corrupt authoritarianism ha
264.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
> They only started making things once they realized capitalism was better. Free commerce is not the same as capitalism. A country where production, wages, and ownership are decided centrally can hardly be said to be unfettered capitalis
265.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
> I won't waste any more of your time. Thanks!
266.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
> However, I doubt anyone else would instead want to live in current day North Korea or pre-1990 eastern bloc countries, or in East vs West Germany. An astute observation, if your knowledge of history begins and ends with the 20th centur
267.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
> You had a good comment until you wrote that. Don't lower your standards with stupid personal attacks. I apoligize for judging you based on the things that you write. > Unless you can change the human characteristic of greed, th
268.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
> But you struggling with rent is entirely your problem... Who said anything about struggling with rent? Sounds like you a grasping for a straw man. > I hope that India too can emulate this in my lifetime I, too, hope the best things
269.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
> It seems to me like your attitude is that "If I can't be rich, then no one should be rich." The problem with capitalism is not that some people get rich and some people don't. The problem is that of an unfair playi
270.
by hackyhacky 4mo ago
> There are so many other places where this sort of low-effort high-school edgelording fits in better than here. A good sign of low-effort edgelording is championing an obviously broken system by using a straw man to disparage the altern

More ›