Capitalism will save this world

[OmegaOm]

We live in a world full of science and technology, in which hardly nobody understands anything about science and technology. This is a recipe that will soon blow up in our face.

A decades old paraphrase from Carl Sagon.

Since most people do not know anything about science, well in fact they think science is a conspiracy against them. How are they going to vote or argue against the bad things that science can bring in the hands of corrupt corporations. Like nuclear power, gene editing, global warming and such. We are facing this right now with CRISPR, an easy way to change genes that can wipe out a whole species.

Carl Sagan's goal was to try to start a path to get everybody in the world educated in science, so we can all make informed decisions about what we do to our world.

Since we live in a democratic society where all have votes if your over 18 (give or take). If most of these people do not know anything about science, you might as well have a bunch of children voting too.

 

[Walter]

one example of natural selection is when a butterfly has the colour that blends into a something like a tree which makes it harder to see for predators, while other butterflies are colourful and easily killed by their predators.

Then why are there so many colourful butterflies?

 

[Angstrom]

Then why are there so many colourful butterflies?

Because they attract mates with higher success.

If you’re really good at survival but no opposing sex wants to fuk you because you’re butt ugly. You’re not going to have good chance of reproduction

Its cruel but thats just how life is.

 

[Walter]

Because they attract mates with higher success.

If you’re really good at survival but no opposing sex wants to fuk you because you’re butt ugly. You’re not going to have good chance of reproduction

Its cruel but thats just how life is.

Then why all the ugly moths?

 

[Angstrom]

one example of natural selection is when a butterfly has the colour that blends into a something like a tree which makes it harder to see for predators, while other butterflies are colourful and easily killed by their predators.

Now you need to explain how this proves how I have no understanding of natural selection.

Then why all the ugly moths?

Because they are all ugly. Can’t see colour when you fuking in the night.

We live in a world full of science and technology, in which hardly nobody understands anything about science and technology. This is a recipe that will soon blow up in our face.

A decades old paraphrase from Carl Sagon.

Since most people do not know anything about science, well in fact they think science is a conspiracy against them. How are they going to vote or argue against the bad things that science can bring in the hands of corrupt corporations. Like nuclear power, gene editing, global warming and such. We are facing this right now with CRISPR, an easy way to change genes that can wipe out a whole species.

Carl Sagan's goal was to try to start a path to get everybody in the world educated in science, so we can all make informed decisions about what we do to our world.

Since we live in a democratic society where all have votes if your over 18 (give or take). If most of these people do not know anything about science, you might as well have a bunch of children voting too.

95% of the population doesn’t even have the mental drive to want to understand science. Its too much work. They rather have the government take care of them and stay blissfully innocent

 

[Corduroy]

i don't think it'll make itself obsolete. it's not designed as such. it's designed to grow and grow, similar to a cancer cell, until a cure is found or it kills the person.

It's from a bit of a thought experiment written by Karl Marx. It's called the Fragment on the Machine (Fragment meaning it's part of larger writing that I think was lost). It's basically imagining the implications of a perfect machine, one that could produce with little or no cost, maybe like the replicators on Star Trek. It's just a hypothetical, and taking theories of value, labour and production to the extreme, but if such technology existed any form of economy would be unnecessary and the only commodity that would exist is information.

What I thought you meant was that as capitalism cannibalizes its consumer base with lower wages and automation to reduce production costs and for increased profits, wealth would have to be redirected to consumers as a guaranteed minimum wage to keep people buying. But if you take the drive to reduce productions costs to the extreme and imagine the possibility of little to no production costs, such a scenario wouldn't even need consumer wealth as everything is practically free. So if the system was propped up long enough for technology to push costs to nothing, then the system becomes obsolete. It's hard to imagine how there's anything beyond a guaranteed minimum income in terms of capitalism survival methods.

 

[Angstrom]

It's from a bit of a thought experiment written by Karl Marx. It's called the Fragment on the Machine (Fragment meaning it's part of larger writing that I think was lost). It's basically imagining the implications of a perfect machine, one that could produce with little or no cost, maybe like the replicators on Star Trek. It's just a hypothetical, and taking theories of value, labour and production to the extreme, but if such technology existed any form of economy would be unnecessary and the only commodity that would exist is information.

What I thought you meant was that as capitalism cannibalizes its consumer base with lower wages and automation to reduce production costs and for increased profits, wealth would have to be redirected to consumers as a guaranteed minimum wage to keep people buying. But if you take the drive to reduce productions costs to the extreme and imagine the possibility of little to no production costs, such a scenario wouldn't even need consumer wealth as everything is practically free. So if the system was propped up long enough for technology to push costs to nothing, then the system becomes obsolete. It's hard to imagine how there's anything beyond a guaranteed minimum income in terms of capitalism survival methods.

Like Nature pushes life to evolve into something stronger. Capitalism pushes production in the same way. Until one day we produce a technology that reduces production cost to nearly nothing. Both work in the same way as Natures Natural selection. A process some snowflakes find extremely cruel.

I call it the Trump effect

Lol

 

[Walter]

Like Nature pushes life to evolve into something stronger. Capitalism pushes production in the same way. Until one day we produce a technology that reduces production cost to nearly nothing. Both work in the same way as Natures Natural selection. A process some snowflakes find extremely cruel.

I call it the Trump effect

Lol

I call it the free market effect.
The First Cellphone Went on Sale 30 Years Ago for $4,000

 

[Angstrom]

I call it the free market effect.
The First Cellphone Went on Sale 30 Years Ago for $4,000

Ya but Free Market effect isn’t provocative enough for forum discussion stimulus :roll:

 

[Walter]

Ya but Free Market effect isn’t provocative enough for forum discussion stimulus :roll:

The free market gets my brain stimulated, and this has been a particularly good year for brain stimulation considering what my stock portfolio has done.

 

[Angstrom]

The free market gets my brain stimulated, and this has been a particularly good year for brain stimulation considering what my stock portfolio has done.

Id be jealous but im not a communist

 

[Walter]

 

[Angstrom]

Capitalism is the best in the world!!! Communist is for losers

 

[Cliffy]

Hey Angst...

 

[Angstrom]

Hey Angst...

I bet they don’t produce them anymore. No one showed up to work to make them

 

[darkbeaver]

The free market and capitalism are not related, fools.

 

[DaSleeper]

 

[Walter]

The free market and capitalism are not related, fools.

Please explain the difference between the two.

 

[Angstrom]

 

[darkbeaver]

Please explain the difference between the two.

Certainly Mr Redthumb, the free market part supposes every transaction to be transparent and assumes equality of transacted items hard or intellectual, whereas the Capitalist market has devolved into purchased exceptions where market advantage depends not on qualities of value and durability as much as reduced taxation and purchased favouritism supported by the unobserved trickle down phenomenon, whichis widly viewed in honest academic circles as trickle back.

I have left out the scientific stuff so as not to tax you.

Can you read the signs in the background silly.