Solution to poverty - Socialism or Capitalism?

[TaunSew]

Solution to poverty  
If you mean end poverty, that's impossible

even today with great technology, poverty is still everywhere

The great solution to end poverty (for me) is everyone collaborate together

I doubt there was any if much poverty in the bronze age, unless you were a slave.  There were no zoning laws or property rights in the past, "might is right" is what established your property.

[1715037104]

1715037104

[1715037104]

1715037104

[1715037104]

1715037104

[1715037104]

1715037104

[byronbb]

"Solving the world's problems discussing them on an Internet forum possible or not?"

[u9y42]

"Solving the world's problems discussing them on an Internet forum possible or not?"

Hey, we could have the next great world leader here among us. But yes, unless the problem arises mostly by how people perceive the situation, you'd need more than talking about it on a forum.

Solution to poverty 
If you mean end poverty, that's impossible

even today with great technology, poverty is still everywhere

The great solution to end poverty (for me) is everyone collaborate together

I doubt there was any if much poverty in the bronze age, unless you were a slave.  There were no zoning laws or property rights in the past, "might is right" is what established your property.

So, almost everyone was poor/a slave, except for the kings and their friends? Might makes right seems like such a lousy way to structure society (not that we're very far from that at present).

[LostDutchman]

The absolute ignorance of history that abounds here is appalling.

[dalessi]

Capitalism is our only hope. The Freedom to struggle, fail, succeed, and prosper is what give people hope and the desire to struggle to succeed. Succeed for themselves and their families. In a planned society, their is no light at the end of the tunnel to struggle to get to. Look at Cuba, Russia, North Korea. They are all failed Government run societies.  If the government is going to punish people who want to build and struggle to succeed, people will stop trying.

Even China is slowly changing and allowing it's people to fight to grow and succeed.

China is now growing and will keep growing.

It is the Governments version of Capitalism, but Freedom is blooming in China, and I hope it will Bloom everywhere else.

The flowers in spring, are so beautiful.

[Barrett12]

It really does not depend on capitalism or Socialism. We all know that there are several people around the world, which are living poor lives. And part from that, there are several people too who have earned so much money and got out of poverty. If someone has potential then there is no need to look at government. Government can only give them freedom. 

[LostDutchman]

Capitalism is our only hope. The Freedom to struggle, fail, succeed, and prosper is what give people hope and the desire to struggle to succeed. Succeed for themselves and their families. In a planned society, their is no light at the end of the tunnel to struggle to get to. Look at Cuba, Russia, North Korea. They are all failed Government run societies.  If the government is going to punish people who want to build and struggle to succeed, people will stop trying.

Even China is slowly changing and allowing it's people to fight to grow and succeed.

China is now growing and will keep growing.

It is the Governments version of Capitalism, but Freedom is blooming in China, and I hope it will Bloom everywhere else.

The flowers in spring, are so beautiful.

And the Commie Bastige regime there will collapse as the result but it ain't going to be pretty when it happens.

[giveBTCpls]

Capitalism is our only hope. The Freedom to struggle, fail, succeed, and prosper is what give people hope and the desire to struggle to succeed. Succeed for themselves and their families. In a planned society, their is no light at the end of the tunnel to struggle to get to. Look at Cuba, Russia, North Korea. They are all failed Government run societies.  If the government is going to punish people who want to build and struggle to succeed, people will stop trying.

Even China is slowly changing and allowing it's people to fight to grow and succeed.

China is now growing and will keep growing.

It is the Governments version of Capitalism, but Freedom is blooming in China, and I hope it will Bloom everywhere else.

The flowers in spring, are so beautiful.

Freedom doesn't exist, we live in a deterministic reality so free market, freedom... all these terms are laughable. What we need is a Resource Based Economy where everyone has basic needs meet since day 1, to avoid robbery, depravation, and other bad behaviours triggered by bad enviornment which at the same time are triggered in bigger or small degree via genetics. Capitalism and communism are old as fuck and do not meet the realities of life. Struggling and failing and winning is just a chain of physical events given your genetics and your enviorment, no one has control of themselves at any degree. Because of this, it's the objectively correct thing to do that assumes this cold hard fact of life is to provide all human beings with their needs meet (see Maslow's pyramid). Other than that will lead us to chaos.

PD: Lol at freedom in China.

[giveBTCpls]

Solution to poverty  
If you mean end poverty, that's impossible

even today with great technology, poverty is still everywhere

The great solution to end poverty (for me) is everyone collaborate together

The technology and resources are there, objectively speaking, to end poverty. The problem is private property and people hoarding shit tons for their personal enjoyment. Why aren't we seeing non-polluting cars of higher efficiency? because the oil cartel is not interested in pushing the new technologies into the mainstream, and so on and so on.

[Nicolas Dorier]

Solution to poverty 
If you mean end poverty, that's impossible

even today with great technology, poverty is still everywhere

The great solution to end poverty (for me) is everyone collaborate together

The technology and resources are there, objectively speaking, to end poverty. The problem is private property and people hoarding shit tons for their personal enjoyment. Why aren't we seeing non-polluting cars of higher efficiency? because the oil cartel is not interested in pushing the new technologies into the mainstream, and so on and so on.

Technology and resources are not here to end poverty. Proof is that the poor today has more technology and resources than a king. (That depends on the country for sure)
Poverty is a moving line.

And yes, oil cartel can hold innovation for their own profit. But what prevent competitor to come, make the innovation, and kick their ass in this competitive game ? Not capital, not intelligence, but regulation.

People are pointing finger at big companies for holding the human advancement for their own profit and blame capitalism for that.
Forgetting that such monopoly and cartel is made possible by regulation keeping any competition out, backed by our governments. This is not capitalism.

[twiifm]

Solution to poverty 
If you mean end poverty, that's impossible

even today with great technology, poverty is still everywhere

The great solution to end poverty (for me) is everyone collaborate together

The technology and resources are there, objectively speaking, to end poverty. The problem is private property and people hoarding shit tons for their personal enjoyment. Why aren't we seeing non-polluting cars of higher efficiency? because the oil cartel is not interested in pushing the new technologies into the mainstream, and so on and so on.

Technology and resources are not here to end poverty. Proof is that the poor today has more technology and resources than a king. (That depends on the country for sure)
Poverty is a moving line.

And yes, oil cartel can hold innovation for their own profit. But what prevent competitor to come, make the innovation, and kick their ass in this competitive game ? Not capital, not intelligence, but regulation.

People are pointing finger at big companies for holding the human advancement for their own profit and blame capitalism for that.
Forgetting that such monopoly and cartel is made possible by regulation keeping any competition out, backed by our governments. This is not capitalism.

In USA regulations prevent monopolies.   Anti trust laws

[Nicolas Dorier]

In USA regulations prevent monopolies.   Anti trust laws

Ok, so tell me why I can't open my own pharmaceutical business and buying medicine that cost 5% the price of here from china, changing the packaging to sell it 10x that, exactly as the pharmaceutical industry is doing.

The anti trust law are only for big companies. If you have 5 big companies, they will use on anti trust law to attack the best one.
It is not meant to be used by the small entrepreneurs. It is used by the big one that help building the wall of legislation designed to prevent small one from coming.

You don't see laws that prevent competition as such, such laws will be publicly called "for the public good", they would not call them "Barrier of entrance" or "big business protection" laws.

[twiifm]

In USA regulations prevent monopolies.   Anti trust laws

Ok, so tell me why I can't open my own pharmaceutical business and buying medicine that cost 5% the price of here from china, changing the packaging to sell it 10x that, exactly as the pharmaceutical industry is doing.

The anti trust law are only for big companies. If you have 5 big companies, they will use on anti trust law to attack the best one.
It is not meant to be used by the small entrepreneurs. It is used by the big one that help building the wall of legislation designed to prevent small one from coming.

You don't see laws that prevent competition as such, such laws will be publicly called for the public good", they would not call them "Barrier of entrance" or "big business protection" laws.

If you area  scientist and invent a life saving drug you start company.  Raise investment money and go through the same approval process as anyone else.  There's tons of biotech companies out there.  Look on the stock market and you will see

If you are talking about FDA regulations, thats for consumer protection.

If you are talking about patents, those are to protect the inventor.

[Nicolas Dorier]

In USA regulations prevent monopolies.   Anti trust laws

Ok, so tell me why I can't open my own pharmaceutical business and buying medicine that cost 5% the price of here from china, changing the packaging to sell it 10x that, exactly as the pharmaceutical industry is doing.

The anti trust law are only for big companies. If you have 5 big companies, they will use on anti trust law to attack the best one.
It is not meant to be used by the small entrepreneurs. It is used by the big one that help building the wall of legislation designed to prevent small one from coming.

You don't see laws that prevent competition as such, such laws will be publicly called for the public good", they would not call them "Barrier of entrance" or "big business protection" laws.

That has nothing to do w regulations. 

If you area  scientist and invent a life saving drug you start company.  Raise investment money and go through the same approval process as anyone else.  There's tons of biotech companies out there.  Look on the stock market and you will see

If you are talking about FDA regulations, thats for consumer protection

So ones again, why can't I buy the same medicine from China they are doing, and sell it myself ?
The FDA can test them right ? Why don't they allow any business to re package trusted generic medicine from china, but allow the one with pockets deep enough, to buy the right to do it ?

Why is there such a price different just for a repackaging of medicine ? If not because the legislation keep out any new comer that would lower the margin.

There is countless law "for consumer protection" that are backed by nothing, but are just barrier of entry to protect against new comers.

Why can't I create my own money or own stock without buying the financial license that cost 200K to do so ?
Why only big business can get access to these funds ?

Try to build your own company, and you'll see all the pain in the ass they make. And if you succeed, you have to face the patent trolls.

Why do you need to pay a licence of 200K to drive a Taxi ? You named it to keep competition out.

[twiifm]

In USA regulations prevent monopolies.   Anti trust laws

Ok, so tell me why I can't open my own pharmaceutical business and buying medicine that cost 5% the price of here from china, changing the packaging to sell it 10x that, exactly as the pharmaceutical industry is doing.

The anti trust law are only for big companies. If you have 5 big companies, they will use on anti trust law to attack the best one.
It is not meant to be used by the small entrepreneurs. It is used by the big one that help building the wall of legislation designed to prevent small one from coming.

You don't see laws that prevent competition as such, such laws will be publicly called for the public good", they would not call them "Barrier of entrance" or "big business protection" laws.

That has nothing to do w regulations. 

If you area  scientist and invent a life saving drug you start company.  Raise investment money and go through the same approval process as anyone else.  There's tons of biotech companies out there.  Look on the stock market and you will see

If you are talking about FDA regulations, thats for consumer protection

So ones again, why can't I buy the same medicine from China they are doing, and sell it myself ?
The FDA can test them right ? Why don't they allow any business to re package trusted generic medicine from china, but allow the one with pockets deep enough, to buy the right to do it ?

Why is there such a price different just for a repackaging of medicine ? If not because the legislation keep out any new comer that would lower the margin.

There is countless law "for consumer protection" that are backed by nothing, but are just barrier of entry to protect against new comers.

Why can't I create my own money or own stock without buying the financial license that cost 200K to do so ?
Why only big business can get access to these funds ?

Try to build your own company, and you'll see all the pain in the ass they make. And if you succeed, you have to face the patent trolls.

Why do you need to pay a licence of 200K to drive a Taxi ? You named it to keep competition out.

You can re-sell generic drugs but good luck in trying to get it to market.  You are talking about generic over the counter where the patents have expired?  Walgreens or CVS does this

You can create your own stock.  Just incorporate and issue shares.  To start fund you need to gather investor money and get yourself accredited

You can be an Uber driver.  In NYC the yellow cab licenses are restricted though

IDK, I think you are just trying to be anti-regualtion for the sake of being punk.  Just think about why these regulations arise in the first place. 

[dalessi]

Freedom and Capitalism go hand in hand. There is no silver spoon for most people and there is not supposed to be. Look at Gates, Buffett and the other smart people around the free world. They all worked very hard and built great companies and societes.

They were free to succeed or fail.

The smartest people in Communist societies try hard to take their wealth, and their families away from oppression to a more free society. They leave the less fortunate, stuck in stagnate government controlled societies.

Those who learn will thrive, and those who do not will suffer.

China will thrive because it will embrace Capitalism, with some state controls.

Russia, North Korea and Cuba are doomed.

The real utility of Bitcoin is to help oppressed people flee oppression. To get their wealth, and their families to Freedom.

The border guards can strip you of everything they can find, but they can not get your Bitcoins that were created specifically for that purpose.

That is very powerful, and a direct threat to Communism, and all other oppressive regimes.

Bitcoin is one on the Free Worlds most powerful tools to fight against oppression!

[cbeast]

Q: What is the transition from Socialism to Communism?
A. Alcoholism

[Nicolas Dorier]

IDK, I think you are just trying to be anti-regualtion for the sake of being punk.  Just think about why these regulations arise in the first place.

I am not against any law. As long as it protects private property of individuals and companies.
I will never make a compromise on what I judge (not law), is a violation of my property. (be it physical, material, or intellectual)
Law is a tool we can use to protect against such violation. The definition of violation is in each of us, and not written in law, law is only a tool.

Law is not here to protect people, but to protect property from looter.

If you agree we judge any law against this criteria, let's make make a reality check.

If you are talking about patents, those are to protect the inventor.

I agree with the goal of trying to protect an intellectual property, here is my problems.

As an entrepreneur, how do you know you have not violated one of the 9999999 patents in existence ?
As an entrepreneur, if you protect yourself with a patent, you can't enforce it without having a team of lawyers that check violations full time.
And if you find a violation, you'll have to fight for it financially.

So, finally, where is the benefit of such patents ? Response : Big companies, Patent trolls, Lawyers.
As I said, law does not protect people but property violation. The patent does not protect the inventor but intellectual property.
A small entrepreneur can't afford it, this is one barrier of competition.

Now let's talk about Taxi,
Law, again, is protecting property. A material property called "taxi license".
Uber driver, for the taxi drivers of my country, is a violation of property. And they are right.
The effect ? Uber Taxi, and all car sharing services is regulated in my country. To the point of making them impossible to very difficult to operate.
So you want to be a taxi ? Give 200K and you can compete.
At whose fault ? It is not the taxi driver's fault. It is normal that their property is protected, they paid 200K for it after all.

The response is the sole existence of such license. It is interesting that in my country, the regional part is distributing it for free... to who ? To big taxi companies that then resell them 200K to taxis.
But hey, initially, the law was to "protect taxi drivers" whose margin would have suffered from the over supply of a job that does not require any qualification would induce.
The result is barrier of competition, again.

For the generic medecine, you are again citing Wallmart and CVS, and I was not speaking about the reseller.
I was talking about the manufacturer "Licensing of Drug Packaging Manufacturers".
They are the one that buy from china, remove the drug repackage them, apply 10x the price and resell it to wallmart, cvs etc...

The interesting thing, in France, is that the "social security" pay for the drugs "to protect the consumer" which become totally insensible to price.
Well... that mean that if you want to repackage your own as the big are doing, you'll need to get the approval which close competition again.

Without the social security, you would pay say 1$ for your medecine.
But luckily, now you are protected... The medecine cost 10$ but 9$ is refunded by the social security, paid by the tax payer... Where does these 9$ go ? Hint : Pharmaceutical industry.

Anti-Trust law ?
Come on, do you really think the entrepreneur can enforce it ? For whose is this tool ? Responses : big business, or a government weapon to put pressure on a company a little too big.
Go and fight, with 10K$ for the enforcement of this law, I'm waiting.

I refuse to call such system capitalism, and certainly not a free market.
Some market are free, software industry is relatively free, despite of patents. But we have skill related barrier of entrance, and thus do not suffer from oversupply.

[twiifm]

IDK, I think you are just trying to be anti-regualtion for the sake of being punk.  Just think about why these regulations arise in the first place.

I am not against any law. As long as it protects private property of individuals and companies.
I will never make a compromise on what I judge (not law), is a violation of my property. (be it physical, material, or intellectual)
Law is a tool we can use to protect against such violation. The definition of violation is in each of us, and not written in law, law is only a tool.

Law is not here to protect people, but to protect property from looter.

If you agree we judge any law against this criteria, let's make make a reality check.

If you are talking about patents, those are to protect the inventor.

I agree with the goal of trying to protect an intellectual property, here is my problems.

As an entrepreneur, how do you know you have not violated one of the 9999999 patents in existence ?
As an entrepreneur, if you protect yourself with a patent, you can't enforce it without having a team of lawyers that check violations full time.
And if you find a violation, you'll have to fight for it financially.

So, finally, where is the benefit of such patents ? Response : Big companies, Patent trolls, Lawyers.
As I said, law does not protect people but property violation. The patent does not protect the inventor but intellectual property.
A small entrepreneur can't afford it, this is one barrier of competition.

Now let's talk about Taxi,
Law, again, is protecting property. A material property called "taxi license".
Uber driver, for the taxi drivers of my country, is a violation of property. And they are right.
The effect ? Uber Taxi, and all car sharing services is regulated in my country. To the point of making them impossible to very difficult to operate.
So you want to be a taxi ? Give 200K and you can compete.
At whose fault ? It is not the taxi driver's fault. It is normal that their property is protected, they paid 200K for it after all.

The response is the sole existence of such license. It is interesting that in my country, the regional part is distributing it for free... to who ? To big taxi companies that then resell them 200K to taxis.
But hey, initially, the law was to "protect taxi drivers" whose margin would have suffered from the over supply of a job that does not require any qualification would induce.
The result is barrier of competition, again.

For the generic medecine, you are again citing Wallmart and CVS, and I was not speaking about the reseller.
I was talking about the manufacturer "Licensing of Drug Packaging Manufacturers".
They are the one that buy from china, remove the drug repackage them, apply 10x the price and resell it to wallmart, cvs etc...

The interesting thing, in France, is that the "social security" pay for the drugs "to protect the consumer" which become totally insensible to price.
Well... that mean that if you want to repackage your own as the big are doing, you'll need to get the approval which close competition again.

Without the social security, you would pay say 1$ for your medecine.
But luckily, now you are protected... The medecine cost 10$ but 9$ is refunded by the social security, paid by the tax payer... Where does these 9$ go ? Hint : Pharmaceutical industry.

Anti-Trust law ?
Come on, do you really think the entrepreneur can enforce it ? For whose is this tool ? Responses : big business, or a government weapon to put pressure on a company a little too big.
Go and fight, with 10K$ for the enforcement of this law, I'm waiting.

I refuse to call such system capitalism, and certainly not a free market.
Some market are free, software industry is relatively free, despite of patents. But we have skill related barrier of entrance, and thus do not suffer from oversupply.

I don't really understand what you want.  No regulations?

That's gonna be like 3rd world countries.  A free market requires regulations to make it free.  Sounds like a paradox,  but that's how it is.  Look at historical examples as well as current

[Nicolas Dorier]

I am not against law, since I believe in private property as fundamental, and that can't be enforced without violence without law. (and thus not a punk)
Government is the only one with the monopole of coercion on a territory, such thing is necessary to enforce law and thus protect private property.

What I am against is any government intervention in the market, since there is nothing to fix. I'll be glad you can point me out example of why it is necessary to have regulation of the market.

I am against any direct or indirect licensing meant to protect a small group of people from competition, (As the taxi example, and some other that are hidden behind the "public good" incantation)
And against any subsidize for dying industries,

Any compromise is not free market.