A Resource Based Economy

[deisik]

Aramco, no? It has not just a government-appointed management, it is actually managed by the royal family of the KSA with all their whimsies and fancies like gold cars and pans

Ok then its neither government nor corporate, it's royal property then, because it belongs to that kingdom?

To the royal family, to be precise. According to your logic, it should be even worse than if it were controlled just by government

No:

If the owner = government = 1 person, then it might be a different thing and it has more in common with aristocracy than capitalism.

If its owned only by 1 king, then it's more efficient because it is only influenced by 1 person, whereas if it were a government, it would be influenced by hundreds of politicians fighting for control over that enterprise.

Do you know how large is the KSA royal family? It is not just "hundreds of politicians fighting for control over that enterprise", it is literally thousands of princes permanently intriguing against each other behind the scenes...

As it has always been in royal families

[LightRider]

Are you kidding? Whoever owns the controlling stake of an enterprise (sometimes it is even below 50%) appoints its top management, be it state, a private investor or an investment group. There is no such thing as private management unless the management themselves have the controlling stake...

Whether this management is up to the task is another matter

I`m not going to debate the corporate structures because i`m not that familiar with it.

However if it's a government appointed CEO and director board, then it might not be as efficient than a private one, because it will be subject to international politics influence and other political decisions. They might decide to embargo 1 country from exports, politically, wheareas this would be a poor decision from economic point of view.

You're not familiar with a resource based economy but you've been trying to debate against it for a while now. Whence the double standard?

[deisik]

Are you kidding? Whoever owns the controlling stake of an enterprise (sometimes it is even below 50%) appoints its top management, be it state, a private investor or an investment group. There is no such thing as private management unless the management themselves have the controlling stake...

Whether this management is up to the task is another matter

I`m not going to debate the corporate structures because i`m not that familiar with it.

However if it's a government appointed CEO and director board, then it might not be as efficient than a private one, because it will be subject to international politics influence and other political decisions. They might decide to embargo 1 country from exports, politically, wheareas this would be a poor decision from economic point of view.

You're not familiar with a resource based economy but you've been trying to debate against it for a while now. Whence the double standard?

It is not a sort of double standard or an evidence of some elusive logic. It is no more than just a lack of critical thinking skills

[ngupowered]

RealBitcoin is probably a disciple of Stefan Molyneux's who also likes to state that voluntarism is part of capitalism, totally forgetting that all ventures must be undertaken for profit to qualify.

[deisik]

RealBitcoin is probably a disciple of Stefan Molyneux's who also likes to state that voluntarism is part of capitalism, totally forgetting that all ventures must be undertaken for profit to qualify.

I guess he didn't even finish school, let alone being someone's disciple

[RealBitcoin]

You're not familiar with a resource based economy but you've been trying to debate against it for a while now. Whence the double standard?

You have to prove first that a leftist economy wont become totalitarian, like every single leftist regime that has existed over the course of humanity.

Then we can debate the RBE. Because everything too good on paper turns out evil in reality.

[LightRider]

You're not familiar with a resource based economy but you've been trying to debate against it for a while now. Whence the double standard?

You have to prove first that a leftist economy wont become totalitarian, like every single leftist regime that has existed over the course of humanity.

Then we can debate the RBE. Because everything too good on paper turns out evil in reality.

Prove that capitalism won't cook us all to death first.

Proving negatives is fun.

[RealBitcoin]

Prove that capitalism won't cook us all to death first.

Proving negatives is fun.

Solar energy, geothermal, nuclear , wind, etc

Car emission rates have been declining  with new and more sophisticated models coming out, especially hybrid cars or electric cars.


Your turn, tell me how a leftist "utopia" wont become totalitarian, or violent.

Communists dont believe in private property, therefore they will steal from those that do, and theft to my knowledge always happens with force and violence.

[deisik]

Communists dont believe in private property, therefore they will steal from those that do, and theft to my knowledge always happens with force and violence.

Just an aside, you are obviously confusing theft with robbery. You may think the difference in meaning is minuscule (or irrelevant), but, for example, the judicial system (the judgment of which should be of particular interest to you) greatly distinguishes between them...

And there is a reason behind that

[RealBitcoin]

Communists dont believe in private property, therefore they will steal from those that do, and theft to my knowledge always happens with force and violence.

Just an aside, you are obviously confusing theft with robbery. You may think the difference in meaning is minuscule (or irrelevant), but, for example, the judicial system (the judgment of which should be of particular interest to you) greatly distinguishes between them...

And there is a reason behind that

It can be both. You can see shoplifting threads on reddit, full of leftists, which steal from poor small shop owners, ideologically driven. It's disgusting.

And then you have the leftist rioters who break windows and set the streets on fire. They are very violent.

So I'm not sure how the RBE people wont become violent once they gather enough supporters.

Communists and leftists are always violent, and will always commit atrocities.

[deisik]

Communists dont believe in private property, therefore they will steal from those that do, and theft to my knowledge always happens with force and violence.

Just an aside, you are obviously confusing theft with robbery. You may think the difference in meaning is minuscule (or irrelevant), but, for example, the judicial system (the judgment of which should be of particular interest to you) greatly distinguishes between them...

And there is a reason behind that

It can be both. You can see shoplifting threads on reddit, full of leftists, which steal from poor small shop owners, ideologically driven. It's disgusting

It may be disgusting or otherwise condemnable, but this doesn't make the difference between theft and robbery less pronounced. Theft, unlike robbery, doesn't involve use of force against an individual or threats of using force...

That's why the penalty for these criminal offenses is so much different

[ngupowered]

Communists and leftists are always violent, and will always commit atrocities.

This is the kind of retarded nonsense that actually puts RealBitcoin on the wrong side of the fence.

[LightRider]

Prove that capitalism won't cook us all to death first.

Proving negatives is fun.

Solar energy, geothermal, nuclear , wind, etc

Car emission rates have been declining  with new and more sophisticated models coming out, especially hybrid cars or electric cars.


Your turn, tell me how a leftist "utopia" wont become totalitarian, or violent.

Communists dont believe in private property, therefore they will steal from those that do, and theft to my knowledge always happens with force and violence.

That's not proof of anything, just a haphazard list of potential energy sources and car facts. A knowledgeable person would understand that energy production and transportation is merely a fraction of the climate change problem.

Try again.

[RealBitcoin]

That's not proof of anything, just a haphazard list of potential energy sources and car facts. A knowledgeable person would understand that energy production and transportation is merely a fraction of the climate change problem.

Try again.

So do you not think that the car manufacturers will make their cars more enviroment friendly as the time goes on?

I mean if there is a public demand to fix the climate change and to save the enviroment, do you think the manufacturers won't respond?

This is how the markets work, you have a demand, and then the market gives you a solution. The first manufacturers to make green cars will make the big profits so the profit incentive will follow.

The free market can resolve the problems if there is demand.


It's not the market's fault that people are dumb, they should have demanded eco-friendly stuff earlier, and then we would not have so much pollution.

Also just to remind you that the Soviets and other commies didn't give a fuck about the enviroment, only the free market does.

[deisik]

Also just to remind you that the Soviets and other commies didn't give a fuck about the enviroment, only the free market does.

Tell me more...



Huntington Beach in California ca. 1920

[RealBitcoin]

Huntington Beach in California ca. 1920

It was inneficient in the past, yes but the people demanded it.

In the 1800, people were literally dying in coal plants from the carbon gas poisoning, but they all needed a electricity.

People could have just used candles until more safe things come out, but thats not how technology works, they demanded the electricity at the cost of the workers lives, the first ones take the most risk and get the most reward.

Nobody gave a shit about those incidents, it was society's fault not the market.

Some people dies of lung cancer, some people got billionaires, it's luck.

[deisik]

Huntington Beach in California ca. 1920

It was inneficient in the past, yes but the people demanded it.

In the 1800, people were literally dying in coal plants from the carbon gas poisoning, but they all needed a electricity.

People could have just used candles until more safe things come out, but thats not how technology works, they demanded the electricity at the cost of the workers lives, the first ones take the most risk and get the most reward.

Nobody gave a shit about those incidents, it was society's fault not the market.

Some people dies of lung cancer, some people got billionaires, it's luck.

Lol, you are talking about free market as something existing separately and in isolation from all those people, when, in fact, it is no more than a handy generalization of the way people transact between themselves...

Either directly or through intermediaries like companies and corporations

[RealBitcoin]

Lol, you are talking about free market as something existing separately and in isolation from all those people, when, in fact, it is no more than a handy generalization of the way people transact between themselves...

Either directly or through intermediaries like companies and corporations

Because it does. The free market is an economic concept, a mechanism of interaction between people that create efficient solutions for different demands.

In the free market the ends justify the means. If humans are moral, then they will choose the means to justify the ends, if they are not, then it's a problem with society not the market.

You cannot compare apples to oranges.

[deisik]

Lol, you are talking about free market as something existing separately and in isolation from all those people, when, in fact, it is no more than a handy generalization of the way people transact between themselves...

Either directly or through intermediaries like companies and corporations

Because it does. The free market is an economic concept, a mechanism of interaction between people that create efficient solutions for different demands.

In the free market the ends justify the means. If humans are moral, then they will choose the means to justify the ends, if they are not, then it's a problem with society not the market.

You cannot compare apples to oranges.

Trite cliches used out of unthinking habit

[RealBitcoin]

Trite cliches used out of unthinking habit

I like how you criticize my arguments but never provide an explanation or a valid counterargument.

Einstein's equations are not evil because they resulted in the invention of nukes.

Just as economic theory of free markets are not evil because they result in bad products that the stupid humans demanded.