the answer is socialism

Oh brother this thread again

Think you got it backwards

😭😭

last part is wrong

and why is that? lack of property rights gives no incentive for production or innovation

1. like synopsis said you have a misunderstanding of what "higher outcomes" for wealthy countries are contingent upon - the ceaseless exploitation of those on the periphery of capitalism, who actually make up the majority of the planet.

2. the only thing capitalism incentivizes is profit and growth. the risks associated with real innovation have historically been difficult for corporations to rationalize.

take the iPhone, which is often tossed out as a child of capitalism. all of its underlying infrastructure and components, from the internet (invented by DARPA) and the lithium battery (invented by dr goodenough from UT austin) arose through non-profit driven means.

i would even argue that it can be resistant to innovation- look at the patent wars waged by tech monopolies to lock out competitors. look at the way additive manufacturing exploded when certain early patents expired.

3. obviously i think the market has some role to play in innovation, especially as an engineer. but the truth is that its greatly limited by the profit motive, and the fact that big companies engage in a lot of R&D right now is because they've already accumulated tons of capital and can afford to take great risks.

EDIT - there is a lot of evidentiary debate over this stuff, and how things like intellectual property rights and federal spending on R&D relate to innovation. im glossing over it and sharing some big picture thoughts, feel free to look into that if you want numbers.

We can evolve past capitalism

this is a very thought out and good post

1. like synopsis said you have a misunderstanding of what "higher outcomes" for wealthy countries are contingent upon - the ceaseless exploitation of those on the periphery of capitalism, who actually make up the majority of the planet.

exploitative in what sense? within nations with liberalized markets people are able to legally purchase property, invest in any publicly traded stock and go into any industry they choose to. and on top of that, most returns go back to labor

even on a global scale, the number of people in extreme poverty was 1.9 billion in 1990. by 2007 it was 1.2 billion. in 2015 it was 734 million. in that same time frame life expectancy across the globe grew almost 10 years, which is unbelievable. we owe this to increasingly globalized markets. COVID-19 is disrupting that though.

2. the only thing capitalism incentivizes is profit and growth. the risks associated with real innovation have historically been difficult for corporations to rationalize. take the iPhone, which is often tossed out as a child of capitalism. all of its underlying infrastructure and components, from the internet (invented by DARPA) and the lithium battery (invented by dr goodenough from UT austin) arose through non-profit driven means. look at the way additive manufacturing exploded when certain early patents expired. i would even argue that it can be resistant to innovation- look at the patent wars waged by tech monopolies to lock out competitors.

i do think we need to reform our patent laws and make them significantly weaker (software being able to be patented for 20 years is dumb), but they do to an extent have their place, because they do create incentive to find new things to make. if you have an alternative i'm all ears.

also, U.S. government and the military isn't known for innovation. DARPA is an exception because they have a blank check and report to the SECDEF directly with no red tape at all and they're basically free of bureaucracy, which is unique for a government organization. they don't do research themselves, and none of their research grants are conditional meaning they hand them off to companies to port it over to markets. and if you're a DARPA program manager, chances are you're also employed full-time either in the private sector or academia.

that isn't to say government doesn't have it's place though. both private and public sector can co-exist and compliment each other, and they'll continue to do so.

3. obviously i think the market has some role to play in innovation, especially as an engineer. but the truth is that its greatly limited by the profit motive, and the fact that big companies engage in a lot of R&D right now is because they've already accumulated tons of capital and can afford to take great risks.

i work in tech and this is largely true. i will say though, R&D has reached a point where it's become profitable for a lot of companies. that, and internal investments along with employee stock compensations is why amazon doesn't pay federal income tax.

appreciate the evidenced post. a little busy to go point by point right now but ill get back to you in the night

nah im good

@kiorren what do u suggest?

bane of existence

damn u seen some albert einstein mfs up until now then, synop is not stupid, just angry, justifiably.

Bozo alert ^

explain why capitalism is good?

its fair and no one is forced to do anything etc

how is he justifiably angry?

it's not though

We all work together to create a surplus and have no ability to decide where it goes. We have people who are forced to work sixty hours a week just to feed their families.

How is that fair?

Capitalism inherently keeps most people down so that they can collect the surplus, yet we're given no choice on where the surplus goes or who gets it.

How is it not fair?
they chose their job and agreed on a wage. no one is forced to work.

Also what are you saying we all work together to create a surplus?

^ everyone just needs to block this individual

There are plenty of issues that were built to squeeze every last drop of an individuals essence out of them to turn a profit, most often under capitalism esp in the US...

Like take for example, people being evicted by their landlords during a pandemic, that s*** is just f***ed up in general regardless of economic philosophy or whatever,

but i think synop addresses a lot of those issues aggressively and its needed because s*** is literally destroying peoples lives if not killing them, for greed, for a check.

a lot of that s*** is motivated by just more and more money hoarding

the surplus is the profit, because the labor is valued as little as possible to go to the worker, instead of a larger amount of the money going to the worker who created the product or provided the service,

meanwhile u got boosie for president as your avi bruh that s*** is kinda funny but makes sense given the intellectual value of your posts