Show newer

@volkris

Ita a property of governments. The fact that it is also a property of other things doesnt change that fact.

@dashrandom @avlcharlie @mapto

Interesting fact of the day: an opossum is thr only animal with an odd number of nipples. Well, other than my ex girlfriend crystal.

@niclas

Because if i were anywhere else id have a harder time reading the book

@sergeant @mjambon

@dashrandom @avlcharlie @mapto @volkris

No marx was right, capitalism and communism arent systems of governments, they are properties of a government. He didnt address those things because he wasnt creating a government he was defining a principle he felt governments should have.

Not all communist coubtries were totalitarian or dictatorships. Its just the ones that were elected in place by the people were always dismantled by those same people years later when everyone started starving. See bulgaria as an example of that.

@dashrandom

Communism, like capitalism, is often abused as a word. On its own it has nothing to do with marx. It simply means any system where the means and distribution of production are controlled by the government, and socialism is where onky the means of production is owned.

Marx just had a very specific view of a system of government which he felt included communism with other supporting principles to make it work. Its more appropriate to call his system marxism

@avlcharlie @mapto @volkris

@mjambon its not the same as weightlessness, its something else. Your inner ear and internal organs and everything still feels gravity. Its more like flying.

I wish i had a waterproof ereader. If i did i wouod put on my scuba tanks, go sit at the bottom of a pool and read a books for a few hours.

@chrism yea so i hear. Ill most do shore dives but have some boat and tech dives planned too.

@icedquinn @avlcharlie @mapto @volkris

I totally agree with you there. I woukd not describe the USA as an ideal capitalism, in part due to lack of enforcement on antitrust laws.

@LittleWytch poi t at the words "salary".. also notice it is dependant on work dont (distance traveled) and not time... so not at all a UBI.

@amerika @avlcharlie

I cant reply there and im not really sure why my statement was posted there, especially without citi g me as the source. So notnsure what to do with this.

@avlcharlie @mapto @volkris

Now that is a complicated question. But usually the main way its accomplished with what we call antitrust laws. When enforced (and the usa has enforced thrm but not as strongly as it should) they effectively make monopolies illegal.

Of course the other key is keeping corruption in check and money out of politics, which isnlikewise a difficult task to do, but critical to a healthy capitalism

@avlcharlie @mapto @volkris

Now that is a complicated question. But usually the main way its accomplished with what we call antitrust laws. When enforced (and the usa has enforced thrm but not as strongly as it should) they effectively make monopolies illegal.

Of course the other key is keeping corruption in check and money out of politics, which isnlikewise a difficult task to do, but critical to a healthy capitalism

@avlcharlie @mapto @volkris

That woukd be an oligarchy. And any government can be an oligarchy, including a capitlist country.

@mapto

On a re read i think i see now where you got it all wrong. You are assuming, incorrectly, that money and utility mean the same thing. They dont. Moneybis the resource, not the utility. Utility only exists when money is in motion. Utility is how much you can accomplish with the money, not the money itself.

@volkris @avlcharlie

@mapto

> Also, utility is not only contextual, but subjective.

Half-true.. the utility of a single transaction is subjective. But you are maximizing for the aggregate utility, that is objective.

> To someone a million dollars might be enough to secure a lifetime, to someone else it could be enough to buy a house, to a third person, it might mean buying some nice nice stuff to show off

That statement isnt describing utility.

@volkris @avlcharlie

@johnabs

I mean i have literally heard them say "why would an atheist be a good person if there is no god telling them what is good".. i never heard them say they can be good people but there is no reaason for it.

@cobratbq

@mapto

> Also, utility is not only contextual, but subjective.

Half-true.. the utility of a single transaction is subjective. But you are maximizing for the aggregate utility, that is objective.

> To someone a million dollars might be enough to secure a lifetime, to someone else it could be enough to buy a house, to a third person, it might mean buying some nice nice stuff to show off

That statement isnt describing utility.

@volkris @avlcharlie

Show older
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.