/lit/ - Literature

>LTV isn't true
>Rate of profit isn't falling
>Marx's doomsday predictions still haven't come true
>Class conflict isn't the engine of history
>Historical materialism isn't true
>Believed in phrenology

>>13526596
Very much so.
Here’s the alternative explained.

>>13526610
Jimmy "Abortion is Good but $12/hour is EVIL" Dore

>>13526610
>Cockbutt

every couple of days some retard makes a thread where he destroys marx with arguments like
>who will clean the toilets under socialism?
>how will we have mcdonalds under communism??
fuck off

>>13526606
Here >>13526489

>LTV
True and one of the most well evidenced laws in economies.

>Rate of profit isn't falling
Yes it is.

>Marx's doomsday predictions still haven't come true
Marx didn't make "doomsday predictions", he predicted that capitalism is fundamentally unstable and will always eventually go into crises (true) and there will be revolutions (true).

>Class conflict isn't the engine of history
Wrong, its demonstrably true.

>Historical materialism isn't true
Wrong, its demonstrably true and has never been refuted.

>Believed in phrenology
Doubt it.

>>13526617
Christian, please. Focus.

>>13526633
>>13526489
>True and one of the most well evidenced laws in economies.
LOL. Cockbutt did not prove it.
>Yes it is.
Nope. Most evidence showing it has faulty methodology or the wrong definition of profit.
>Wrong, its demonstrably true.
What about certain aristocratic classes going after eachother and starting a war?
>Wrong, its demonstrably true and has never been refuted.
Popper?
>Doubt it.
>It is now quite plain to me — as the shape of his head and the way his hair grows also testify — that he is descended from the negroes who accompanied Moses’ flight from Egypt (unless his mother or paternal grandmother interbred with a nigger). Now, this blend of Jewishness and Germanness, on the one hand, and basic negroid stock, on the other, must inevitably give rise to a peculiar product. The fellow’s importunity is also nigger-like.
Full letter: http://marx.libcom.org/works/1866/letters/66_08_07.htm

>he does incidentally confirm, by saying not that the Russians are Tartars rather than Slavs, etc., as the latter believes, but that on the surface-formation predominant in Russia the Slav has been tartarised and mongolised; likewise (he spent a long time in Africa) he shows that the common negro type is only a degeneration of a far higher one.
Full letter: https://marxists.anu.edu.au/archive/marx/works/1866/letters/66_08_07.htm

>>13526631
It's true though. No one wants to do the dirty jobs

>>13526648
What dirty jobs?

>>13526633
do not post in my thread, faggot

>If money is the bond binding me to human life, binding society to me, connecting me with nature and man, is not money the bond of all bonds? Can it not dissolve and bind all ties? Is it not, therefore, also the universal agent of separation? it is the coin that really separates as well as the real binding agent — the [...] [In the manuscript one word cannot be deciphered] chemical power of society.

>>13526647
cringe

>>13526693
holy commodity fetishism

>>13526670
being a garbage man or delivering mail. Everyone would just want to become a rock star or doing arts and crafts

>>13526746
Undesirable labor could be marginalized and made more efficient and palatable.
Nobody has to be first in line, but it's not such an imposition for most people to do some shitty work every once in a while. The difference between this and capitalism is that class is eliminated and the economic organization isn't inherently exploitative

>>13526746
There would be no "garbage men". Jobs like these would be rotated between locals, including "rock stars" and artists, so that no one has to spend 8 hours a day for 10 years just emptying garbage bins.

>>13526826
Lol good luck organizing that unless you have an ethnically and culturally homogeneous population

>>13526633
>thing you believe
Actually no
>thing you don't believe
Actually it's true
/lit/ is dead, and we have killed it.

>>13526852
thanks. now fuck off to /pol/. skin color is only a problem in your dumb nigger head, and culture will change as soon as the cancer in the form of capitalist relations of production gets removed.

food?
bad

>>13526617
That's why i'm always suspicious about those leftists of the Capital.

Abortion is Capitalist. Women need to be efficient tertiary sector workers. The production cannot be disrupted by pregnancies. Thus abortion is promoted by Capitalism. Women must be devoted toward the production, maximum efficiency, not their family and children.

>>13526596
lel

>>13526876
>blacks, whites, asians, etc. will just hold hands and sing forever once socialism rolls around
by all means go right ahead, just dob't screech when your utopia flops

>>13526852
Doesnt and wouldnt happen in those populations either

>>13526606
>Historical materialism isn't true
what did this retard mean by this ?

>>13526876
Funniest retardation I have read today. Thank you based thalidomide baby

>>13526935
not perfectly, but it's a lot easier to rally a homogeneous population around something. what do all of the ethnicities in the usa have that binds them? a desire to make money? lol ok

>>13526596
greed?
good

>>13526929
>blacks, whites, asians, etc. will just hold hands and sing forever once socialism rolls around
yes

>>13526826
Many dirty jobs require skill. By rotating duties you are undermining specialization and division of labor, resulting in an inefficient system.

Marxism is retarded. A social democratic system is ideal. Maintain free markets with strong public services. Use tax revenue to fund public investments like scientific research and infrastructure. Technological advance will steadily increase wealth as we approach a post-scarcity economy.

>>13526746
from each from his abilities, to each to their need
>what so like everyone gets to be a rockstar?

>>13526826
Marx never laid out the workings of communism because by definition it's impossible (material conditions are insufficient to support higher communist theories)

>>13527098
>Many dirty jobs require skill. By rotating duties you are undermining specialization and division of labor, resulting in an inefficient system.
Sure, well produce less useless garbage then. And after a couple decades of technological advancement we'll make up for the efficiency that was lost to making the daily lives of working people more pleasant.

>Marxism is retarded. A social democratic system is ideal. Maintain free markets with strong public services. Use tax revenue to fund public investments like scientific research and infrastructure.
Can't wait to see the faces of you naive middle-class cucks once the next crisis hits.

>>13527220
>he thinks tech is just going to keep advancing forever

>>13527234
was actually meant for >>13527098 I presume???

>>13527098
>let the public wellbeing be in the hands of politicians who can be bought out by private enterprises
Genius

>>13527220
Your computer was deemed useless garbage by the politburo. Submit your personal belongings to your local recycling center immediately.

Higher wages are used to improve worker's lives and incentivize difficult and dangerous work. Rotating duties for deep sea welders is only going to increase the chances of death and suffering.

Strong public services such as universal health care and unemployment insurance reduce the impact of the business cycle. Public investment in education, research and infrastructure increase wealth.

>>13527234
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/worlds-largest-nuclear-fusion-experiment-clears-milestone/

>>13527260
Approval voting, proportional representation, votes of no confidence are among a few electoral reforms that increase accountability and satisfaction with governance.

And if you think Marxists have solved the issue of politicians being co-opted, you need to study more history, friend.

>>13527005
cringe

>>13526876
>skin color is only a problem in your dumb nigger head
why is 4chan like this

>>13527460
>Your computer, etc.
haha well memed

>Higher wages are used to improve worker's lives and incentivize difficult and dangerous work
>Strong public services, etc.
>Public investment in education, research and infrastructure increase wealth.
The old "I'll fill my post with obvious shit everybody agrees with to make it seem like I'm making good counterarguments".

>Rotating duties for deep sea welders is only going to increase the chances of death and suffering.
And removing the profit motive from the factors that determine their working conditions is going to decrease those chances twofold.

Communism will either happen in the far future once some insane shit has pissed everyone off enough, or it will never happen. At the moment, the parasite is terminal, people base their idea of self on constructs of capital, the working class doesn't even want to return to immediate relations/working in a community, everyone fucking hates each other and wants their goddam cash and wants you to stay out of their hole in the ground. This continues until we see massive ecological collapse and everybody fucking dies or is forced into survival situations. Only thing that can shake off the demon. One can only hope all this suffering will one day amount to something.

>>13527630
I agree with this, it's tragic that capital won but it inarguably did and nothing is ever going to stir this generation's ADHD-medicated diabetic asses to change anything
If shit seriously and irrevocably goes sideways with a climate disaster then later generations may end up angry enough to make a difference, but everyone currently alive will go down as some of the most apathetic fucks of all time

>>13526606
Anglos out kindly.

>>13526606
>>13526647
>>13526648
>>13526746
>>13526852
>>13527460
Why is it that anti marxist arguments are so stupid?

>>13527630
>>13527761
>muh climate change
It’s amusing to see marxist cling on to this idea, as if they will be somehow venged and proven right in the future

>>13527460
>https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/worlds-largest-nuclear-fusion-experiment-clears-milestone/
is it man's destiny to blow himself up with his tech in the end?

>>13527622
Deng Xiaoping re-implemented the profit motive and China grew enormously, lifting millions out of poverty in one of the largest humanitarian improvements in history. If you think banning profit is going to work, study history.

The rest of your post is of little substance.

>>13527893
>implying I'm a marxist
I'm only saying that their 'revolution' is impossible without shit getting really bad, and even then what emerges from the chaos is anyone's guess. Will shit get that bad? I have no idea, but here's hoping yellowstone decides for us! At this point I'll take anything over starving in the rotting corpse of God, going mad listening to the chatter of insects and the pulsating heart of their queen!

>>13526617
No one says abortion is good. At most that it's amoral. Argue why it's bad. At what point is it bad?

>>13527914
Fusion reactors don't blow up, they fizzle out.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_power#Safety_and_the_environment

>>13527972
>Capitalism causes enormous economic growth
Another triviality that even Marx openly agreed with. What's the point of posting this? Is "sky is blue" your idea of a substantive reply?

>>13527978
The eschatological impulse is for losers.

>>13527460
>Approval voting, proportional representation, votes of no confidence are among a few electoral reforms that increase accountability and satisfaction with governance.
We must have proportional approval voting for sure.

>>13527893
I genuinely don't understand how somebody can possibly think that human progress will never hit the wall.
A population on a finite planet growing exponentially, constantly flirting with some kind of limit on its growth but just barely innovating its technology fast enough to make some stopgap and keep things expanding for another century or decade. You think this is going to go on forever?
If anything a Marxist's cyclical view of history as endless class struggle supports this, but you don't know a thing about that any more than you know about the climate, both are just something for Al Gore and people who read The New Yorker to talk about amongst themselves.

That's where I break from most other leftists. I love money, not the wealth for itself, but the anonymous mechanism of resource acquisition. It's perfectly suitable for those too shy and introverted to survive in a gift society. I would probably starve naked if I had to rely on my non-existing charisma to acquire resources through social relations.

>>13527995
You haven't posted much of anything besides banning profit, which would require a totalitarian state and result in significantly lower growth and standards of living. The obvious needs to be re-capitulated if you honestly hold these beliefs.

>>13527989
Very cool.

>ITER and later DEMO are envisioned to bring online the first commercial nuclear fusion energy reactor by 2050.
How much energy will ITER produce? Do you think fusion can become widespread on a mass scale?

>>13526596
Imagine actually believing in a reactionary theory that has literally already been disproven through practice.

>>13528048
>the creation science of economics
this would imply the LTV isn't a testable scientific theory

>>13528022
Population is flat or declining in the advanced world.

Deep sea and asteroid mining will increase the supply of minerals by orders of magnitude.

Fusion power can produce vast amounts of energy from the most common materials in the universe. It can even fuse nuclei to create heavier elements like gold.

Geoengineering can prevent a runaway greenhouse effect.

Curious how would online ordering work without money? What limits you?

>>13526633
>It is now quite plain to me — as the shape of his head and the way his hair grows also testify — that he is descended from the negroes who accompanied Moses’ flight from Egypt (unless his mother or paternal grandmother interbred with a nigger). Now, this blend of Jewishness and Germanness, on the one hand, and basic negroid stock, on the other, must inevitably give rise to a peculiar product. The fellow’s importunity is also nigger-like.

Wow I never knew Marx was so based

>>13528062
Carbon in the atmosphere increase?
Dyson going to invent a vacuum cleaner for that, is he?

>>13528062
>Population is flat or declining in the advanced world.
population is being replaced by brownies* FTFY
>asteroid mining
look at this fool
>deep sea mining
oh no
>fusion power
oh nonono
>create gold
ahahaaha
>geoengineering
AHAHAHAHA

>>13528057
This whole image actually doesn't do a great job at conveying the fallacies of socialism. It's funny though because poop.

>>13528048
>socialism is synonym to welfare system

>>13528080
Calcium carbonate aerosols reflect light and reduce temperatures even with increasing CO2 levels. They are also incredibly cheap, literally chalk dust, and could actually reverse global warming.

I am close to finishing Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell. What should I read next?

>>13526596
He's right in concept, but not in execution.

>>13528048
>People who agree with me are smart and people who disagree with me are dumb
Groundbreaking rhetoric
>>13528062
You can't mine an asteroid for food.
For the next thousand years or more we aren't going to have any place to grow a substantial amount of food other than right here on our distressingly finite Earth, and we are actively decreasing the amount of arable land here literally every day. The ocean is acidifying, third world farming practices are causing mass desertification, and first world farming practices are increasingly reliant on technology whose long-term effects we do not fully understand but lie somewhere on the axis between "not great" and "openly moving towards disaster."
A breakneck pace of technological development is great for increasing this year's tomato crop but a lot worse when we accidentally realize that in a generation the pesticides we put on the tomatoes gave us all thyroid cancer.
>But that's never happened!
None of it has ever happened. We don't know what kind of subtler long-term effects the new technology we depend on is going to have. We didn't know putting lead in gasoline would be a bad idea. Something as innocuous as aerosol sprays could very well have accidentally killed most life on Earth, and we literally only noticed on accident. A generation as dependent on antidepressants as ours is going to see the horrifying side effects of those too in the coming decades, just wait.
As the pace ramps up and these things get implemented faster because we need them to survive, the cracks for things to slip through expand.

>>13528112
So dump chalk into the air.
Is this the extent of your “geoengeering”? Floaties and paper towels to clean up the ocean.
Well call AOC so she can put that in the Green New Deal

>>13528120
Adam Smith, Karl Marx, Paul Cockshott. Keynes for flavoring. But keep in mind, money is worthless.

>>13526633
fuck you retarded butterfly

>>13528082
Population projected to cap around 11 billion barring radical advancements in medical technonlogy. Asteroid mining is backed by solid theory and already industrially relevant (DSI, planetary resources, NEO, etc..) will be economically viable in the near future. Never looked into deep sea mining. Fusion power is a meme but other renewables will see wide scale adoption as soon as they achieve cost parity. Geoeng ideas to combat climate change are taken seriously in the literature and there's some good ideas like cloud boats or aresol sprays though there's no monetary incentive to investigate much beyond theory. Basically you're scientifically illiterate

>>13528200
we'll see you foolish techno-optimist

>>13528033
>banning profit
It's not about "banning profit", but about abolishing the production of value. The fact that this entails abolition of surplus-value and therefore of profit is secondary.
>You haven't posted much of anything
Turns out that's all that is needed when one is responding to infantile /lit/ anti-communists.
>a totalitarian state
Sure, at first.
>significantly lower growth
Try: no "growth" at all. Growth is calculated in exchange-value, which is no longer possible once value is abolished--you should be able to figure out why.
>[lower] standards of living
For the bourgeoisie and pampered upper middle-class cucks, yes. For everyone else, no, especially after the recovery from the revolution has been completed.

>>13528067
Your consumption quota.

>>13528120
Stefan Molyneux

>>13528112
Take a step back and look at how silly this sounds.
Your answer to our activity dangerously altering the atmosphere is not to change that activity, but to dangerously alter the atmosphere in a way that would probably offset the original changes, hopefully. You have no idea what the long-term effects of filling the world's atmosphere with fucking chalk dust would be, but it would probably fix global warming, I guess. Maybe it would be toxic to pregnant women and make every newborn for the rest of human history anemic. Maybe it would overshoot by five degrees and kill every terrestrial non-insect. You don't know, and nobody ever will know until at least a century after we clap every eraser on Earth to implement it and we all collectively go "Ah damn, the chalk accidentally acidified the oceans and we seem to have killed all marine life. Better luck next time." It's asinine, and your technologist line of thinking will be the actual end of human life, whether in this century or in ten of them.
>>13528200
You continue to ignore food, and geoengineering being taken seriously by hypothetical geoengineers means nothing.

>>13528216
You'd be one too if you took the time to learn :) if you're interested in some introductory materials in a certain scientific discipline I'd be happy to recommend

>>13528257
:)

>>13528048
This was either made by someone who's retarded or trolling. Socialism according to socialists (according to a capitalist) is welfare capitalism that exists in every industrial country in the world. He conflates that in socialism according to capitalists with the USSR, which was not welfare capitalist but a centrally planned economy.
He also unironically cites trickle down economics as a reason to not tax corporations and the rich, as if their gains are always tied to a social good, when in reality what we get is a crumbling infrastructure with lead in the pipes.

>>13528245
so you trust scientists projections when it comes to pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, but not when it comes another chemical. The mechanism is pretty simple, particle matter reflects incident sunlight before it reaches the surface, preventing warming. You wouldn't have to wait a century, whatever particulate you end up choosing would fall within a few decades, you know cause gravity. Fair point on not knowing the effects of the particulate once it does land on the surface, though I find it hilarious that you choose acidifying the oceans as an example when talking about calcium carbonate, a base.

im not bothering to address your food point because you literally haven't made a cogent argument. Just some uncle ted parinoia about running out of arable land and pesticides, fallacious arguments that have been made since the 1980s

>>13528360
There is an enormous difference between scientists saying that human activity is measurably changing the climate in observable ways with a likely source and a handful of geoengineers saying "particulates cool things down, pump a shitload of particulates in there and don't worry about it having any secondary consequences at all." Your inability to comprehend this makes me think you must be an engineer yourself to be this much of a techno-utopian retard without a firm grasp of any broader scientific context, are you?
Casually brushing aside a particulate landing on every fucking inch of the planet as a simple footnote is either dishonest or stupid, I not sure which in your case. Yes calcium carbonate is a base, you genius you. Can we also fix ocean acidifiation by pouring bleach into the Pacific by the megaton? Bleach is a base, after all, and if something performs one function it never has unintended consequences farther down the line. If we accidentally overshoot it and end up too basic, we can squeeze every lemon on Earth into the Atlantic and hope for the best.

>>13528300
>He also unironically cites trickle down economics as a reason to not tax corporations and the rich, as if their gains are always tied to a social good, when in reality what we get is a crumbling infrastructure with lead in the pipes.
Yep, most people would be amazed at just how shitty our infrastructure is nowadays

t. contractor that does a lot of patching work for commercial property associations and owners

>>13528300
Trickle down economics is not an economics theory you retard

>>13528420
Not him but we could drink all the water because water vapor is a much stronger greenhouse gas than CO2 and much more abundant in the atmosphere so if we drink it all then problem solved

>>13528360
>im not bothering to address your food point because you literally haven't made a cogent argument. Just some uncle ted parinoia about running out of arable land and pesticides, fallacious arguments that have been made since the 1980s
None of that is fallacious, it is already fucking happening. Just because those kooky environmentalists have been talking about it for longer than either of us have been alive doesn't mean it's never going to matter.
>>13528452
Now this man is going places.

>>13526596
sex is better

>>13528420
Theres not an enourmous difference. The computational models that climate scientists are using are the same models geoengieers use. Careful attention is given to potential side effects, in fact in my estimation the majority of geoengineering research revolves around the question of unindented side effects. For instance, they actually bother to calculate the amount of particulate matter it would take to lower average global temperatures by 2 C, instead of just assuming it would be enough to cover every square inch of earth in dust.Just because your scientifically illiterate doesn't mean everyone else is. Why can't you expect that the people who study this sort of thing know far more about it than you do?

And no I would not recommend dumping hypchlorites into the ocean. The dolphins would be angrier than you are right now. I was just pointing out your ineptitude when making logically sound doomsday predictions.

And yeah I'm a chem eng. I design petroleum refineries for the evil oil business and make bank doing so. what do you do, barista at Starbucks?

>>13528554
Accept

>>13528554
>Theres not an enourmous difference. The computational models that climate scientists are using are the same models geoengieers use.
And here is where the bullshit comes through.
Modeling observational data and modeling predictive data of a completely untested method SHOULDN'T use the same models. You think saying they are is a mark of legitimacy, but it's the exact opposite.
You also cannot accurately model the outcome of something as complex as filling the entire atmosphere with chalk dust. You can model its effect on temperature, easily, that would take two hours in Python. You cannot use that model to say it wouldn't be lethal to some essential step in the global food chain and cause an ecological collapse. You haven't fucking read a single post I've made so far beyond autistic fact-checking because you're an engineer, incapable of parsing what somebody is trying to say on a more meaningful level.
>You're scientifically illiterate!
>You're a barista!
>I'm SMART!
I have a degree in physics. Have you ever heard of nonlinear dynamics? Do you know what happens when you change the initial conditions of a system as fundamentally complex as Earth's atmosphere?
The answer is no, you don't. Because you can't. You can only solve that kind of problem by simplifying it into a model stripped down to (what you think are) the relevant dimensions - temperature, opacity to different wavelengths of radiation, humidity - and attempt to solve those. Physicists learn this. Engineers do not, and only get the chewed-up results of physicists working like this, and it produces retards like you who think Earth is an ideal box on a frictionless ramp they can poke and prod with simple, predictable results.

>>13526596
it is. fuck money. fuck capitalists. fuck the cucks that support capitalists. fuck capitalism.

>>13526610
jimmy dore's face always makes me laugh who watches him anyway??

>>13528638
Nice LARP. Models are predictive, that's the point of making them. Historical data is used for tuning. Geoengineers use the same general circulation model that climate scientists use. They update it to account for differences between particulate matter and gasses, i.e. for particle composition, size distribution, optical properties, injection location, etc. but inputs concerning radiative forcing, transport phenomena, fluid dynamics, spatial and temporal resolution, circulation currents, atmospheric properties stay the same. They are tuned with data collected after volcanos erupt. The models are solved with the same mathematical methods and results are published alongside climate scientists in the same reputable journals of atmospheric science. Of course there is some uncertainty as is inherent with any modeling endeavor. But the range of uncertainty does not travel into ice age 2.0 territory. If you think something is missing from their analysis I suggest you write up your ideas, you'll be published instantly.

I understand on a "more meaningful level" your arguing in favor of a reactionary technophobic/primitivist view. Maybe that view is worth considering. Perhaps we are pushing the bounds of science and technology too for without knowing what we're doing and will one day pay the price. I'm open to hearing that argument, but I'm not going to miss out on an opportunity to jump on retarded rhetorical devices like
>an inert substance might be reactive
>a base could be an acid
Those are just fucking absurd contentions that no self respecting physicist would bother to entertain.

Judging by the high regard you hold for nonlinear differential equations, and your regurgitation of tired /sci/ engineering memes, I'm going to assume you're a physics undergrad that just finished his freshman year. Some advice: get out of physics. The field hasn't had a breakthrough since the 70s and STILL can't reconcile quantum with classic mechanics. If you continue down this path you're going to end up as a useless theoretician, serving drinks at Starbucks.

>>13529229
>Yes but this model is really really detailed!
You continue to completely ignore my point.
Even if it perfectly accounts for the effects an injection of particulates would have on the atmosphere (which it won't), such a model would have absolutely no capability to say a thing about the effects of what is effectively a pollutant that you're actively trying to spread over the entire planet.
It would effect plant growth, it would accumulate in animal tissue, it would change the rate of ice sheet melting, it would get into the soil of every biome, it would be in every lung on the planet every single day. No atmospheric model has a word to say about that, and the climate scientists you're trying push for so hard would agree with me. Some of these might not cause any problems, but if a single one does, you've created a doomsday scenario worse than the one you were trying to fix.
The point that has flown over your head in half a dozen posts is that refusing to change our own behavior and blindly following whatever stopgap solution we can find to alleviate the consequences of our actions is a terrible way to sustain ourselves and the planet. It cannot continue. Humanity in a hundred years will be like an aging boomer taking forty different medications a day, all to soothe the deadly side effects of each other, unsure which ones are which at this point, and dumbass "I fucking love science" engineers like yourself will be the coked-up doctor asking them how many more prescriptions they think they can afford to fix their erectile dysfunction.
>I bet you're a freshman
Like I said, I already got my degree and work in the field now. Nonlinear dynamics is graduate-level content, not just nonlinear PDEs. You don't know a goddamn thing about quantum mechanics, and you have no advice to give me.
I fucking hate engineers, and I fucking hate you.

>>13528120
A book recommendation would be nice

>>13528120
>Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell

please enlighten me what insights a reactionary like Sowell has to share about the US economy? he doesn't just praise it, does he? what are some of his criticisms?

stfu you dumb economy nerds I'll suck your cock

>>13528442
I'm aware. But it's a good insult to delusional right wingers who think unrestrained greed in all cases contributes to the public good, such as the guy who constructed that image. That's what the insult is designed to do by your opposition, and it paints the picture well.

>>13529628
The government is the worst of institutions to accomplish any of your non greed goals

>>13529593
It's hard to summarize that I think. The book was not really a critique or praise of any particular viewpoint but presents moreso a citizen's guide to economic processes. He is not hugely opinionated in his language. He does not critique capitalism. If he were to critique the US it would be the government's consistent tendency to write reactionary, short sighted policies that remain in place for far too long. He regards many socialist policies as idealistic but fundamentally fallacious in how they function in practice. He stresses for people to look at the practical effects and incentives created by policies, and not just the emotional rhetoric said around them. He is very, very practical in much of his language. I think it was an excellent introduction into economic fundamentals, not necessarily an argument for or against capitalism. I will likely continue reading stuff by Sowell, but I would like to read something by somebody in his opposition. Much of his points are targeted at what he believes are misconceptions of market processes and corporation functionality by the general population. I would like to read a comparable socialist alternative approach to economics. I'm generally too tiny brained to actually getting anything out of reading das kapital or something. I'll probably just make a thread if I don't get an answer.

>>13529337
>okay but what about these other doomsday scenarios
Its fucking calcium carbonate you retard. It's inert. You can eat it. It's used for soil remediation. It's already all over the biome. It's well characterized. The extent of any other side effect you'll pull out of your ass is or can be investigated. I know that's probably difficult for a physicist to understand considering the only thing you ever experiment with is a whiteboard. You theoretical types are absolutely retarded when it comes to anything outside of a classroom

>>13529706
It doesn't matter if it's fucking pixie dust, if you decide to put a particulate in the entire atmosphere in a significant enough concentrarion to affect global temperature there's going to be an unsuspected bump further down the goddamn line. I highly doubt anybody knows the effects of a lifetime of chalk dust in every breath you take, and they certainly don't know those effects on every other plant and animal under the sun.
Ask yourself: if we know what we are doing is harmful, and will eventually kill us, should we undergo massive irreversible geoengineering projects whose success we can't ensure and whose consequences we can't foresee, or should we just fix the fucking behavior that got us into the mess in the first place and learn how to live within our means?
Even if the calcium carbonate plan solved global warming and went off without a hitch, would we just redo it every ten years? How many of our problems will the entire world have to be re-engineered to fix? Something else will crop up with a more complicated solution, and one day our overcorrection will finally go wrong.

>>13529634
How many roads has dominos repaired again?
Just like one or two pot holes as a PR campaign wasn't it?
Waiting for the American infrastructure to go from a D+ to an A via the magic of free market enterprise any day now lad.

Butterfly does more damage to the positions he’s trying to defend. For the sake of Marx please never fucking post again.

>>13526610

You incessantly shill Cockshott despite understanding nothing about economics or computer science... I'm not sure if you're actually convinced and so self-deluded as to think you're legitimately well-informed on the topic or you just don't care and enjoy seeing people like me seethe at how stupid you behave

In any case, go dilate

>>13526905
How is abortion capitalist? Having children will lead to more production in the long run.

>>13529898
Especially if there's none of those pesky child labor laws.

>>13529898
You could pretty easily argue it as both pro- and anti-capitalist depending on your intentions
Anti since a society without abortion breeds more consumers, booming population to coincide with the necessary infinite growth of capitalism, etc
Pro since a society with abortion encourages young people to focus on their careers and consume hedonistically rather than settle down and start a family - I'm sure you could easily prove that people without kids buy more consumer goods and rent homes as opposed to buying

>>13529855
>let's give all the money to the government, that will solve all the greed
Okay

dick? good

>>13528241
Why is a socialist rec-ing Molymeme?

>>13529865
Any rightwinger or larping nazifags who start or otherwise pile into threads like these, do not come to learn anything. They don’t read, they only listen to other rightwingers and collect their stupid disinfo-graphs. There’s no damage being done for my lack of charismatic authority with them.
Soak your head

>>13529874
Do you want to understand a book? You read it. Why am I the only one who has to become a professor of economics if I want to raise the points of an actual professor of economics?

>>13529978
The deal is that government is supposed to do that. We pick out policymakers and they serve us.
But somehow they don’t understand the arrangement after a brief moment in office. It’s almost as if someone was using money to bribe them!

New plan. Stop using their money. Stop voting for them. Shoot the fascist thugs that the rich will hire to hunt us all down.
Okay?

>>13529978
Corporations don't build roads.
Governments can.
Keep seething at something every civilized country has realized.

>>13530080
governments hire private companies to build roads all the time dumb nibba

>>13530085
So you admit corporations need money from the government to build roads?
Feel free to point me to the corporate funded roads fren and then I'll start buying into your stupid chart.

>>13530103
>Corporations don't build roads.
>Governments can.

>(You)

Dilate

>>13530117
When a company paves a road they are being paid by.... the government! Taxes.
There’s not enough profit in it for them to foot the bill. They rather have a pocket full of tax dollars and a button that says “Job Creator” on their lapel

>>13530142
>There’s not enough profit in it for them to foot the bill.
yes there is
paving companies make absurd amounts of money from ya tax dollars, imagine the dough they'd make if they were the only entities capable of building roads and not just gubmint subcontractors

Marxists are some of the funniest people on the internet. As soon as you realize the majority of them are alt girls who chew concerta and vyvanse like skittles the ideology ceases to be threatening. The most "revolutionary" act these people commit is stealing from walmart. You'll all die consumers

>>13530149
>falls on floor laughing

G E T O U T

>>13530174
you little shlut :3

>>13530117
>if I nit pick your sentences I win!
That's been you this whole time.
You need the government to have anything resembling civilization. Stay mad and keep dreaming of your libertarian utopia.
And before you jump to it, no, I'm not a socialist. I just saw a dumb chart calling every country on earth socialist and I had to interject.
Now do your last weak attempt at a quip and I'll go on my day.

>>13530194
the """goverment""" can be a confederation of corporations in a local community
on a mass scale it's more difficult I'll admit

>>13526633

>>13528028
your aversion to social relations is caused by the increasing atomization of life. also, under a more leftist vision, the point would be you wouldn't have to rely on a way to make yourself valuable in an economic market to acquire basic resources we should all have to begin with

Money?
Good!