/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.993375]

Does the economy and capitalism reward things that develop humanity the most?

Are the richest the people who have made the most contribution before they die?

If I discovered a pill that people could swallow to cure all cancers, I would be the richest man to ever live, easy.

But, Hitler was incredibly wealthy, but didn't advance things one bit. Van Gogh died poor, crazy, lonely and by his own hand. His paintings sell for millions today.

Or is it just a blind machine sucking our time and effort to keep humanity back?

[Anonymous No.993389]

If you patented a cancer curing pill, you would be the richest person on earth. Especially if you make it a pill that has to be taken repeatedly and costs about 20$ per month.

Capitalism seems to be the only system so far that provides the incentives for people to increase efficiency and innovation.

So basically capitalism with a utilitarian approach with regards to social justice is stable, productive and fair.

[Anonymous No.993392]

>>993389
OP here. Compare Donald Trump and Bill Gates to my cancer example. What gives? Bank CEOs earn millions and farmers earn very little. It's madness.

[Anonymous No.993394]

>>993389
>So basically capitalism with a utilitarian approach with regards to social justice is stable, productive and fair.
>stable, productive and fair
Haha, oh wow!

[Anonymous No.993397]

and who enforces that fairness????

OBAMA!!!!!

[Anonymous No.993405]

the richest people in the world happen to sit on some kind of natural ressource and provide us with "ferrari"-stadiums, glamour sports clubs and tallest buildings. so they are not completely useless.

[Anonymous No.993408]

>>993405
forgot the pic

[Anonymous No.993409]

>>993405
They do it mostly for the tax returns. You don't get stinking rich by giving out free money.

[Anonymous No.993411]

>>993392
trump and gates are estate and software respectively.
Paygrade of CEOs in banking is so high, because the decisions of these people have such a huge impact on the profits of the bank. Hence the need to attract the best talent with the highest pay.

Peasants on the other end of the spectrum only contribute a small portion of the profitability of the whole farm.
Then, farmers only earn marginally less then it would cost to substitute them with robotics. As robotics get cheaper and cheaper so does their pay fall. Lastly, subsidies.

[Anonymous No.993417]

>>993405

>implying the poor to average give a shit about those

[Anonymous No.993418]

>>993411
>the need to attract the best talent
nigga plz, you still the believe that bullshit in 2010???

[Anonymous No.993421]

I think it'd be best if we just got machines to do everything as far as survival goes. Food, shelter, all of that taken care of by machines or as a sort of "tax" by society (everyone work the fields/help build houses so many hours a week, etc).

Everything else is optional. You want to do science? Go for it, you can use that money for video games or whatever.

It's a combination of socialism and libertarianism. Libertarianism in that the ingenious people will get more out of it by working hard, but socialist in that, as long as you contribute to society (via the "community service tax"), you'll have your needs taken care of.

Voila.

But we'd need to, you know, have a bunch of humanity die off for that to happen. Too many people and too many governments to try something like that right now.

[Anonymous No.993424]

>>993411
>Hence the need to attract the best talent with the highest pay.
Seems like the highest pay was not enough.

[Anonymous No.993425]

>>993392
Bank CEOs earn billions because they get bonuses based on profits. One would naïvely think bank CEOs make the banks huge profits so their pay is justified. In reality bank CEOs just use bad accounting and do stuff like ignore the risks, report loans as profits, et cetera to make it look like they are making profits, while they actually are losing money.

[Anonymous No.993426]

>>993394
most countries are slanted towards corporatism instead of capitalism. Problems of the political process influenced by money.

Think about it like this:
There are 100 sugarfarmers in Smallvania and 1 million tax payers. The farmers lobby for subsidies of a total of 1 million $ a year for at least 10 years. Their interest in this is 10 million $. Accordingly they would be willing to pay 9.9 million $ in lobbying efforts.
The 1 million tax-payers of course would like not to pay the subsidies. The problem is, they each have an interest of 1$ a year, or 10$ over 10 years.
Would you take to the streets for 1$ a year?

[Anonymous No.993434]

>>993418
Yes, that is the mechanism that drives up pay. The more one person influences, the higher his pay.
The financial crisis is completely unrelated to paylevels. The crisis was about faulty incentives, policy problems, financial magics nobody understood anymore etc. very complex.

[Anonymous No.993436]

>Hitler was incredibly wealthy, but didn't advance things one bit
lolwut? He saved both germany and USA from the Great Depression.

As for your farmers example, the reason farmers don't earn much is because ANYONE can be a farmer. It's the same reason Binmen, cleaners and cashiers get paid very little - they are completely interchangable. A bank CEO has specific skills that allow him or her to be a bank CEO. A Bank CEO could be a farmer, but a farmer couldn't be a bank CEO.
Capitalism isn't completely fair, but it's the fairest system we have at the minute.

[Anonymous No.993439]

>>993436
But the US isn't a capitalist nation.

Read:
>>993426

[Anonymous No.993441]

OP here. I ask these things because of a quote from Einstein: "Science is a wonderful thing if one does not have to earn one's living at it."
Why does the economy look down on pure science? Why does the stripper and the politician earn more than the discoverers of the secrets of the Universe?

Capitalism doesn't care about science, it cares about utility. Struggling scientists are the norm for science.

[Anonymous No.993449]

>>993436
I'm pretty sure Hitler didn't really advance things very much. I think he just liked to kill people.

[Anonymous No.993446]

>>993425
Thats one of the problems. Their pay is structured so they have more stake in the near future than in the long-term future. That made them chase short-term profits with high risk.
And they were able to set their own pay by influencing the board and using the financial accounting tricks like "stock average worth" and back-dating of options etc.

[Anonymous No.993450]

>>993436
>anyone can be a farmer

You don't have a clue what you're talking about

[Anonymous No.993452]

>>993450
>Argument presented
>NO UR WRONG CUZ UR DUMB

[Anonymous No.993454]

>>993441

>Why does the economy look down on pure science? Why does the stripper and the politician earn more than the discoverers of the secrets of the Universe?

Now tbh the overwhelming majority of the people will gladly pay for a stripper or for partisanship to a party........ That's not he fault of the system but rather of the people. Not everyone is interested in science.

[Anonymous No.993457]

>>993449
He was the first leader to order government buildings to be smoke-free.

Indeed, Nazi Germany was the first to force smoke-free policies in government buildings and other public areas.

[Anonymous No.993460]

>>993436
Best we have is an useless argument. Furthermore, it's not even true.

Also it's cute how you think people are employed because of their abilities or skills, and ignore how most people get hired because of connections.

[Anonymous No.993466]

>>>/g/10632887

[Anonymous No.993467]

>>993449
He was the Fuhrer for about 10 years before he started the holocaust/World War 2. He ended Germany's Great Depression, built the Auto-Bahn, invented the Beatle, and all in all helped Germany recover from the devastation they suffered after World War 1. World War 2 is also one of the only reasons America was able to recover from it's Depression.
So, yeah, he killed people, but he contributed morre good to the world than you or your entire family ever will.

[Anonymous No.993469]

>>993454
I think this is it. It's because humans don't know what's good for them. They buy cosmetic creams and snake oils because they are retarded. They don't how their lives will change. Scientists face an uphill struggle because the money just goes where the people want it to and those places are mostly stupid.

[Anonymous No.993474]

>>993460
Connections can give someone an edge up in getting a job placement, but it's not the only reason they get the job, and isn't even the main reason. Just because a doctor's father is a doctor, it doesn't mean he will be. He still needs the commitment, knowledge, and skills to be a doctor. Stop trying to justify why you're an unemployed loser.

[Anonymous No.993476]

As for your farmers example, the reason farmers don't earn much is because ANYONE can be a farmer. It's the same reason Binmen, cleaners and cashiers get paid very little - they are completely interchangable. A bank CEO has specific skills that allow him or her to be a bank CEO. A Bank CEO could be a farmer, but a farmer couldn't be a bank CEO.

Not true. The average person can be as good a farmer as much as a banker however few get the education necessary to pursue banking. And no not everyone can be a good farmer. It takes skill too. A handy man maybe (if physically fit which most of the inner city tough guys aren't) but a farming is a trade which one has to acquire through time.

[Anonymous No.993482]

>>993469

>just goes where the people want it to and those places are mostly stupid.

But what can one do if not educate them better?

You could always try /sci/land but I don't think that ill survive more than a generation (you know engineers are contagious).

[Anonymous No.993484]

>>993474
Actually all the jobs I have gotten are because I knew someone from the company that hired me. The skills didn't mean shit, ever. I know it's an anecdote, but there are some estimates that about 70% of the job positions are never on the open market and are taken without any formal assessment of skill.

[Anonymous No.993485]

>>993452
>>993450
Because of subsidies, more people became farmers than was efficient. That's why profits are way down.

>>993467
Yes he managed to get germany out of the depression by tooling it towards a war economy, spending way more than he could ever hope to repay. In the end, he had to go to war or face economic collapse. Get your history straight.

The thing that helped germany in the end was the marshal plan, which too helped america out of the depression. Whether the war in itself helped the US is at best disputed.

[Anonymous No.993487]

>>993476
How does that make my argument untrue? Few get the education necessary to pursue banking, so therefore few people can be bankers. because of this, there is a lower supply for a banker's position, and so he is pais more.

If a man is not in good enough physical shape to be a farmer, he can easily get into shape over the course of a few months, where as the education needed to be a banking CEO will take years. What I'm trying to say is that if you have a completely blank person, you can turn them into a farmer significantly faster than you can turn them into a banking CEO.

[Anonymous No.993489]

>>993484
then you entered into low-skill jobs or had the demanded skills. Your plus basically was that someone pledged their career on you being a good worker. It gave you an edge over competitors with the same or better skills without someone to speak for them

[Anonymous No.993494]

>>993484
Then you had an interchangable job. Did you know that there nare estimates that 100% of all jobs are given because the Illuminati control the Private sector? It's true there's sudies and everything.
What I'm saying that in GOOD jobs, you need skills. A doctor needs skills. A stock broker needs skills. A Lawyer needs skills. You cannot get these jobs through connections alone.

[Anonymous No.993502]

>>993494
Hate this fucking keyboard

[Anonymous No.993506]

>>993482

>education

Which is another thing in need of improvement which lacks funding due to the retards not recognizing what their taxes are going into.

Catch-22.

[Anonymous No.993505]

> Hitler didn't advance anything
I'm sure having the best industry in the world and racing for the bomb doesn't count for shit.

[Anonymous No.993509]

>A stock broker needs skills

[Anonymous No.993514]

None of you are getting the point. The point is whether the economy helps us all live better lives. Stop talking about employment opportunities, stock market crashes and so forth. Does capitalism make our life better?

[Anonymous No.993517]

>>993509
grownups are talking, go and play video games

[Anonymous No.993520]

>>993487

>fairest system
>no education

I fail to see how such a fair system will catch-22 the majority of the population to low level jobs because of a shitty education.

[Anonymous No.993523]

>>993514
better than the alternatives.

[Anonymous No.993527]

>>993514

>employment opportunities
>stock market crashes and so forth

Are the things one must analyze to get a hint of how much good an economic system is.

[Anonymous No.993529]

>>993505
Germany had one of the best industries before WW1 too. Then it got rebuilt, which is easy as the know-how and the culture are still intact even if the infrastructure isn't. Hitler took over and took the economy out of the system by war-tooling the industry.
His contributions are minimal except the obsessions with technology.

[Anonymous No.993532]

>>993517
right, because wearing tie and suit and calling yourself a stock broker is adult as fuck. those people are just gamblers betting on something else than horses or basketball but the contribution to society is pretty much the same.

[Anonymous No.993533]

>>993514
Capitalism doesn't do shit. Just look at China or Russia. Their people are still screwed over sideways.

We are successful because we have had a consistent and high quality education over the decades. Oh and we don't kill everyone trying to make the world a better place.

[Anonymous No.993537]

>>993523
This is an useless argument. Even if it was "the best" we could probably improve on it. Nevermind the whole field of cybernetics that has better constructs than capitalism.

[Anonymous No.993539]

>>993529
I'm sure all of that would have happened without Hitler. Except that it didn't.

[Anonymous No.993541]

>>993375

I don't know about you guys but whenever a related topic comes up to me the answers always seems to be education.

However I have no idea how to educate these retards to stand up for themselves and their children and ask for better education?!

[Anonymous No.993556]

>>993541
That's why we need to fund cognetics and neuroscience.

[Anonymous No.993557]

>>993541
You seem to think education is some sort of political movement. That's why you keep failing.

If you want to educate, you have to first know something. And then you teach it. It's not rocket science, though knowing it will help.

[Anonymous No.993559]

>>993537
cybernetics? now you are just talking out of your ass

>>993539
Woah, nice intentionally misreading that post. In short: Hitler got an amazing economy and changed it towards his goals. He did not build a great economy, it was there already.

[Anonymous No.993568]

>>993532
You have no idea what a stock broker is, past your knowledge of "American Psycho" and "Wall Street". Like I said, Grownups are talking.

[Anonymous No.993570]

>>993559
>cybernetics? now you are just talking out of your ass
You could start with managerial cybernetics, then tell me again, if I seem to be talking from my ass.

[Anonymous No.993580]

>>993559
> Hitler got an amazing economy
Honey, I'm going out to pick up a loaf of bread!

[Anonymous No.993590]

>>993570
alright, never heard of this before. Seems to be a fringe theory.
Next time, don't namedrop and explain instead.

[Anonymous No.993591]

>>993556
>fund

How?


>>993557

>implying I implied Education -> political movement

Mass education is a political movement. Public schools in US are shit. Most tax payers either aren't aware of this, they ignore it or they send their children to private institutions while still paying public education. Then you have the insanely high cost of undergrad the insanely retarded HS shit they teach at undergrad and the overwhelming majority taking from 5 to 6 years to finish a 3 to 4 year long course.

[Anonymous No.993600]

>>993591
Getting people angry about it won't suddenly make competent teachers. All it'll do is brew a shitstorm.

[Anonymous No.993603]

>>993590
Cybernetics is a study of complex systems, seems like you confused it with shit like computer-brain interfaces.
It's not a fringe theory by any means. Just because shit done in academia doesn't get immediately used in practise doesn't mean shit.

[Anonymous No.993614]

>>993580
The BNP grew on average by 3% from 1900 onwards. No increase when hitler came into power but decreases during WW1 and WW2. Hyperinflation kills stability, not necessarily growth.

[Anonymous No.993617]

>>993600

Well it's a start.

Also I find partisanship quite the enemy to the judgmental abilities of the populous. That needs to go too!

[Anonymous No.993633]

>>993568
yawn, ad hominem is so last decade. if stock brokers need expertise, how come most companies hire only people between 20 and 27 for these jobs.

[Anonymous No.993646]

>>993591
>Mass education is a political movement. Public schools in US are shit. Most tax payers either aren't aware of this, they ignore it or they send their children to private institutions while still paying public education. Then you have the insanely high cost of undergrad the insanely retarded HS shit they teach at undergrad and the overwhelming majority taking from 5 to 6 years to finish a 3 to 4 year long course.

>Public schools in US are shit.

Do elaborate. I'm not from Amerika.

[Anonymous No.993699]

Education IS a political problem you are forgetting that we are riding on the scientific advancements of the cold war scare. Then it was LEARN OR THE RUSKIS WILL BOMB YOU

[Anonymous No.993709]

>>993509

A trader certainly does if he is risking his own capital.

[Anonymous No.993717]

>>993709
>implying there have been any day traders for the last ten years.

[Anonymous No.993725]

>>993717
> implying day traders haven't been replaced by supercomputer traders making a hundred thousand transactions per hour to scrape up the 0.00000000013 cent change caused by an Intel rounding error.

[Anonymous No.993726]

>risking his own capital
fucking lold

[Anonymous No.994196]

>>993726

Just go hit youtube there's more than a dozen such freelancers bragging about their skillz

[Anonymous No.994212]

>>993717

Oh boy, there's more daytraders now than ever before especially those with less than 100k play money. Also forex daytrading is taking off like crazy with minilots all over the world.