Ahh yes, taxes which have existed since the first and most basic state came into being – millennia before capitalism, even at its most primitive, was conceived of or practiced – are capitalist.
It’s kind of incredible how teenagers on the internet use the word “capitalism” the same way boomers on facebook use “communism.”
My bad, just meant to argue that taxes weren’t explicitly communist. I don’t have any strong feelings for or agains t communism yet, maybe I’ll look into it later. Just hate to see people use thr name of an economic system as a debate ender, although I suppose I did the same. Guess it’s just the debater in me wishing we could have actual structural arguments on thr internet instead of throwing slang words around.
Oh yes, an ideology defined by private ownership and small government intervention is also somehow responsible for the basis of government intervention - taxes.
They don’t actually believe in small government intervention at all - they want the goverment to enforce private property rights and then just tax a little back, below the profits from owning that property.
The big lie is that private property is natural, and thus its enforcement is small.
A government which only enforces private property rights is still significantly smaller than most alternatives.
Enforcement of private property rights is a part of virtually all governments, and then you pile all other stuff on top of that hence making the government bigger.
And ofc the taxes will be below the profits, no sane person would make any investments in anything if it was above the profits.
Edit: and to add, many hardcore capitalists, like minarchists, libertarians, or anarcho capitalists, propose that you don't even need a government to enforce private property rights. They'd rather solve that issue privately.
But I’m comparing against socialism, not against most capitalist countries. We don’t need to encourage investment where the factors of production are owned by the workers themselves.
The ancaps illustrate my point - it’s absolute monarchy that they falsely claim is anarchy.
I don't think I follow your reasoning tbh. What exactly are you comparing? You said that capitalists favour intervening governments, which is simply not true. Not in any general sense anyway.
Anarcho capitalism is probably as far into anarchy you can go. They want to completely abolish the state and enforce property rights privately.
Or are you saying that such a society will fall into some kind of feudalism? At the core of anarcho capitalism is the NAP which is not really compatible with feudalism. In feudalism you have a hierarchy not based on voluntarism, and that would therefore not be anarcho capitalist.
Do you imply that we need a strong state with a monopoly on violence to keep us in check, otherwise we would descend into chaos? Thats a pretty bleak and pessimistic view of mankind.
I’m comparing existing states to socialism - that’s shared ownership of the factors of production, not simply when the government does things.
Private property fails the NAP because it’s a person taking away natural resources from everyone else, without their consent, and reimbursing them for less than its value.
Anarcho-capitalism is fuedalism, not just something that will become feudalism in the future. The king is a “property owner enforcing his rights privately” with a lot of tenants. FYI other anarchists generally don’t consider ancaps to even be anarchist at all for this reason.
I agree that a monopoly on force is a bad idea. We’ve tried “vanguard states” already and they don’t actually wither away at all. I’d prefer to see housing cooperatives and (as yet nonexistent) p2p prediction markets fill the power vacuum left by land lords. I also generally agree with ancaps that neighborhoods ought to be protected by armed people who live there; my main disagreement is who rightfully owns that neighborhood in the first place.
I do agree to an extent. Anarcho capitalism is perhaps more of a theoretical idea rather than a practical social structure. And it is not possible to uphold the NAP in an absolute sense – it is inevitable to cause aggression in some ways, through e.g. pollution or whatever. And private ownership of natural resources is, let's say tricky.
I am not an anarcho capitalist myself, but I believe society and interactions should be voluntary. But it is difficult to find a practical social structure where that is possible. I am actually rather pessimistic about people tbh, and our track record shows how bad we are at getting along and leaving people be.
Pollution is why I mentioned p2p prediction markets! It’s an externalities problem, and any market-based solution to externalities requires the Coase Theorem - which in turn requires extremely low transaction costs.
Basically I think we should all buy climate insurance, and those insurers will have a strong incentive to pay for defense from polluters. But that sort of market will step on a few toes and needs to resist censorship. And it needs to be very very low friction.
My favorite proposed implementation is blockchain based - Bitcoin Hivemind. It’s a general purpose prediction market but I’d want to use it for pollution in particular.
Basically you can bet on whatever you want. Whatever it is, there’s someone betting against you. Most people want insurance against bad things - so they’d bet on rising sea levels, hurricanes, etc in their region. The insurers (those betting the bad thing won’t happen) now have an incentive to hedge their risks and bet on what causes those bad things (global CO2 levels).
So ultimately, buying insurance against your house going underwater would create an incentives for other users to do things to reduce pollution. How well this can actually work would depend on total transaction costs being very low, because there’d be several prediction markets between Caribbean hurricane insurance and the pollution prediction market for some factory in Ohio.
I hope that polluters rationally decide to cooperate peacefully, bet against pollution themselves, and then voluntarily reduce it. But if they don’t, then someone else can reduce their emissions and get paid anonymously. It’s the same mechanism as Jim Bell’s assassination politics, but I think killing the physical sources of pollution would be more productive than killing people.
Ah, I see. That is quite clever. And I like the idea of implementing it in non-centralised market. This could be an actual use case for those, instead of all those pictures of cats and monkeys.
This would have to scale quite significantly for those betting against climate change to be able to affect it. Like you say, corporations could cooperate and also gain some goodwill. And venture capitalists, or just any investor, could chip in.
I really like the idea of creating direct economic incentives for positive development, at the same time as you insure those that are harmed if it doesn't go so well. And this would also be global and have direct effects, and not sensitive to populist politicians and temporary government investments like climate politics tend to be today.
You claim to be a Solar Punk, maybe you should read desert
Your shitposting will not save you from climate catastrophe
Your government will fail you, I am sure it has recently asked to drill more oil, burn more coal, anything to forget the destruction.
Do you know that China has the largest reforestation program?
Do you know that China leads the world in wind and solar energy, as well as renewable energy technology investment?
Now you type at the computer spreading your foreign intelligence service propaganda, you joke about China, yet the western world is the most propagandized. While China is learning advanced science, mathematics, and technology, the United States of America is still struggling to understand their role in Slavery and Genocide. How sad you seek to project your insecurity on to a country with a government that is making strides towards a better world, while the west only wishes to continue it’s of the rampant exploitation of the earth’s climate and the global south.
I thought it was funny as hell, Xi does look like Winnie the Pooh, and watching Chinese tankies rage out about it makes us want to mock him some more. Oh and keep enjoying all that western money the CCP is still drunk off of after we stupidly bought all that cheap Chinesium shit.
(hope you were sitting down for that last one, but most of the West now regards Chinese export as garbage)
The thing is that there are a ton of people who’ve built honest careers on Youtube, mostly by catering to an adult niche. There is a near zero chance that I will suddenly find out that Torque Test Channel have, like, dark problems with kids. These people don’t have scandals. Maybe somebody takes an iffy ad dollar that’s a conflict of interest or something. The end.
But those are things your dad watches, they get a solid 100k views per average per upload and we both know that number is nothing on YouTube.
No, if you want to see serious numbers on YouTube and keep your average views above 1 mil per upload, you need children. You need 12-year-old eyeballs, ones that aren’t supposed to be watching you because you’re for older kids, the forbidden fruit.
If you want tween eyeballs, you need a shrieking fucking weirdo. You need a grown man who will act like the sort of 12-year-old boy that your 12-year-old boy would act like if he had power and people couldn’t tell him to calm the fuck down. They’ll be glued to that fuckin guy. Views and views for days while they live their fantasy of a world where mom can’t tell them no, and they can have stunning emotional fits about video games until they exhaust themselves.
Nothing else will do, is the problem. He can’t really be faking it, either, that’s just annoying, no, there’s got to be something wrong with him that children love to watch.
And so, over and over and over again, it turns out that the exhausting, obnoxious man who you loved as a child is fucked up, for real, once the years wear on, and you finally become an adult yourself, but this kook has had far too long to stew in his weird power trip, probably isolated from adult company because fuck being that guy’s entourage. He’s got too much money, so he can make stuff happen. He’s got no oversight. Even Jimmy Seville had to hide it from the help most of the time. This guy’s in a house alone to do as he pleases.
It’s a bad recipe, and it bakes shitty cakes.
Every once in a while the cube of fate rolls funny, and you get Jerma, who should be one of these guys but instead his audience appears to be grown transwomen and their friends, all of them deranged, poisoned by years on 4Chan and Tumblr, with Jerma at their mercy, so whenever that situation goes sideways we can probably put Yackety Sax over the footage and actually enjoy it. That trainwreck should be a real treat.
lemmyshitpost
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.