US Birth Rate

[hpslugga 4039]

3 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

I've been hearing from right wingers about the "issue" of the US birth rate declining and how this is some huge problem.  Is this just feeding into their replacement theory nonsense or is there some actual problem with population decline?

It’s mostly propaganda from the ownership class. They bitch about it for several reasons, none of which are good:

-They need more customers to buy their shit and to continue to top quarterly figures instead of actually innovating stuff.

-They need more employees, to whom they can pay increasingly shitty wages, and to increase overall productivity.

-Christianity is in a relative state of decline and they think by shoving morally repugnant policies down our throats that those numbers will bounce up again…all to curtail the rise of “nones” in the US and ultimately to beat back the rise of Islam globally.

-Politically their policy positions are as popular as crotch rot, so they figure a birth rate increase means GQP voter increase since the states most heavily affected by the overturn of Roe are the red ones (higher abortion rates than the blue ones generally speaking).

-Yeah there’s also the race angle that’s been alluded to, as well as the safety net “concern.”

To put it another way, if there’s a compelling reason to support an increase of birth rates, I’ve yet to see it. Always trust your skepticism when you see people advocating shit like that. It absolutely stinks of grift.

[Woodrow Call 494]

Ecosystems have carrying capacities, and more humans create increased burdens on that capacity. And as the population grows we do stupid things like building subdivisions in the desert, and that requires pulling water out of other ecosystems, which destabilizes watersheds.  

The United States is irrationally obsessed with growth, and it's growth capitalism that's destroying the planet. Human population growth is just another facet of this deeply flawed, and potentially fatal, philosophy. As Edward Abbey said, it's the ideology of the cancer cell. Grow, grow, grow until you destroy the host. 

[ChiTownDoc 21091]

15 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

It’s mostly propaganda from the ownership class. They bitch about it for several reasons, none of which are good:

-They need more customers to buy their shit and to continue to top quarterly figures instead of actually innovating stuff.

-They need more employees, to whom they can pay increasingly shitty wages, and to increase overall productivity.

-Christianity is in a relative state of decline and they think by shoving morally repugnant policies down our throats that those numbers will bounce up again…all to curtail the rise of “nones” in the US and ultimately to beat back the rise of Islam globally.

-Politically their policy positions are as popular as crotch rot, so they figure a birth rate increase means GQP voter increase since the states most heavily affected by the overturn of Roe are the red ones (higher abortion rates than the blue ones generally speaking).

-Yeah there’s also the race angle that’s been alluded to, as well as the safety net “concern.”

To put it another way, if there’s a compelling reason to support an increase of birth rates, I’ve yet to see it. Always trust your skepticism when you see people advocating shit like that. It absolutely stinks of grift.

 

[ChiTownDoc 21091]

1 hour ago, hpslugga said:

It’s mostly propaganda from the ownership class. They bitch about it for several reasons, none of which are good:

-They need more customers to buy their shit and to continue to top quarterly figures instead of actually innovating stuff.

-They need more employees, to whom they can pay increasingly shitty wages, and to increase overall productivity.

-Christianity is in a relative state of decline and they think by shoving morally repugnant policies down our throats that those numbers will bounce up again…all to curtail the rise of “nones” in the US and ultimately to beat back the rise of Islam globally.

-Politically their policy positions are as popular as crotch rot, so they figure a birth rate increase means GQP voter increase since the states most heavily affected by the overturn of Roe are the red ones (higher abortion rates than the blue ones generally speaking).

-Yeah there’s also the race angle that’s been alluded to, as well as the safety net “concern.”

To put it another way, if there’s a compelling reason to support an increase of birth rates, I’ve yet to see it. Always trust your skepticism when you see people advocating shit like that. It absolutely stinks of grift.

Edited July 9, 2022 by ChiTownDoc
Fucking shitty wifi

[BrickHorn 18176]

2 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

If you’re going to bitch about replacement theory bullshit, at least have 3 or more kids

Why the fuck would you encourage lunatics to breed? 

[ultimaton 2966]

2 hours ago, Pancho said:

Christ, this thread had some great dialogue.  Almost felt like we were at a bar having some beers having a meaningful discussion. 

 

 

 

 

Then…it got slorch’d. 

And we as a society have to own that.

[A-Tex Devil 2444]

41 minutes ago, formermav43 said:

Thomas Malthus was worried about it a couple of hundred years before you were born. Maybe those concerns were misplaced.

Ahhh… Malthus. The crux of any ridiculous disadvantage to an affirmative case in high school CX debate.  I believe the best DA ended in dehumanization, because THAT according to some twit I can’t recall.  

[David Dennison 18608]

2 minutes ago, ultimaton said:

And we as a society have to own that.

Anastasis to the white courtesy phone, please . . . Anastasis to the white courtesy phone.

[hookemATL 11596]

Every third baby should be eaten. Preferably by needy/hungry people. Solve the population crisis. Solve the hunger crisis. 
 

sorry third baby. Thems the brakes. 

[UpperWestside 6104]

I think that most of the reasons stated here that didn’t come from Qanon sites or Fox News have merit. The social safety net will collapse sooner rather than later and when that happens good luck to any country that  is standing on that bridge when it blows up.

[Biff Tannen 45477]

2 hours ago, Woodrow Call said:

The United States is irrationally obsessed with growth, and it's growth capitalism that's destroying the planet. Human population growth is just another facet of this deeply flawed, and potentially fatal, philosophy. As Edward Abbey said, it's the ideology of the cancer cell. Grow, grow, grow until you destroy the host. 

This is what I think and more or less why I started this thread.  Well said.  Edward Abbey is my spirit animal.

[GhostOfTomJoad 9302]

Non-breeder here. Just knew in my bones when I was barely a teenager that I never wanted to be a parent. And was lucky enough to find an amazing woman who shared the same sentiment.

We both had people over the years who tried to convince us otherwise, "try it, you might like it." As if having a child was like ordering a combo plate at Matt's El Rancho.

[Pancho 44358]

Just now, GhostOfTomJoad said:

Non-breeder here. Just knew in my bones when I was barely a teenager that I never wanted to be a parent. And was lucky enough to find an amazing woman who shared the same sentiment.

We both had people over the years who tried to convince us otherwise, "try it, you might like it." As if having a child was like ordering a combo plate at Matt's El Rancho.

“I’ll take the chicken enchiladas, side of pico, jumbo marg, and throw in the baby boy.”

 

Oh, and that’s to-go.”

[HenryJames 65868]

2 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Will it be bad for the machine? Sure, but fuck the machine. 

[HenryJames 65868]

DP

Edited July 9, 2022 by HenryJames

[Bullneck 18976]

5 hours ago, Upgrayedd said:

GDP growth with population decline is a challenge.

Yep.  Just ask Japan.

[elfenix 34168]

4 hours ago, F250 said:

I have 4 kids so I am making up for a couple of you that decided not to have any kids.

 

sugarbabies aren't kids.

[Bullneck 18976]

4 hours ago, slorch said:

Not an issue remotely belonging to one party.  We as a society own it.

You are wrong about that. 

Edited July 9, 2022 by Bullneck

[chainsaw 9831]

We could sustain more growth if we ever develop the will to let go of capitalism both as an ethos and as mode of production. Gene Roddenberry fleshed out a world giving us a glimpse of how that would look.

Due to the ethos of capitalism we have worldwide (well, excluding China) a positive reinforcement feedback loop that has artificially inflated the "value" placed on rugged individualism. Rugged individualism has many problems but when it comes to population/growth/sustainability one of the biggest problems is that it's an incredibly inefficient foundational principle for allocating limited resources.

Also artificially inflated is the "virtue" of greed. Businesses race to the bottom. So long as greed is an acceptable incentive, the public at large will very rarely benefit from market activity. Anyone who does business fairly or more ethically than the absolute bare minimum will not be in business very long. Competition in theory is supposed to hedge against the worst impulses of greed, and as we can see, that theoretical constraint is utterly toothless in practice. A particular business doing well, or even all businesses collectively doing well, has no direct positive impact on material conditions for the public at large because when greed is part of the equation all the benefits flow to the greedy.

The ethos of capitalism means our culture says "this is acceptable, greedy people should get everything" and, on the other side of the same coin, "be the rugged individual we expect you to be, don't expect a community or anyone else to care about you."

Our laws reflect that ethos. So now those short-signed, growth-killing inefficiencies are coded into our DNA. Those systems are firmly in place. "Deeply rooted" by now in the US and most of the developed and developing world.

As a mode of production, I won't go too much into details but I think the crypto and NFT crashes do a good job of illustrating how borked the concept of wealth hoarding is. Instead of making things, you're parking money somewhere and hoping it appreciates in value for reasons we don't know or care about and relevant to our current discussion does absolutely fuckall to support the growth of humanity.

How does stuff get made and available to the public? A small number of people forced by the system (into which the ethos of greed has been programmed) to be as exploitative as possible exploit something in the supply chain (land, ships, trains, factories, warehouses, offices, storefronts) and pay workers as little as possible.

The amount of things produced, and which things get produced, is not determined by what the public needs but rather what makes the most money. Because not everyone in this system will be able to afford what they need or what they anticipate needing, this mode of production is not a great fit for meeting the needs of the public.

Is it the best we can do, though? I don't think so. Technology is at a point where we could get energy, agriculture, transportation, and shelter handled for everyone, on a global scale, at a minimal cost, and sustain continued population growth on this planet. The only way this gets done is if we get serious about efficiency. Cut out all the middlemen, get rid of greed, and destigmatize the acceptance of benefits, help, and public services.

Anyway, "birth rate" discourse is like 95% dogwhistling the racist replacement theory. Birth rates are down because we're in late stage capitalism and people of babymaking age can barely afford rent much less home ownership.

[Biff Tannen 45477]

2 hours ago, Pancho said:

We both had people over the years who tried to convince us otherwise, "try it, you might like it." As if having a child was like ordering a combo plate at Matt's El Rancho.

I've had this happen too.  It's fucking disturbing.  

Edited July 9, 2022 by Biff Tannen

[Beau Vine 53965]

6 hours ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

It's mostly the former as the birth rate has declined since the 19th century for a variety of reasons. Some of the more recent factors are reduced teen pregnancy, financial stability/instability, and women having more educational opportunities among other things.

Gee, I wonder which of these thing the GOP will try to remedy?  It's a real fucking mystery.

[Underdog 28437]

Not sure about all the pearl clutching, one side wants sexually assaulted 10yo girls to have babies...  we good.  

Edited July 10, 2022 by Underdog

[Beau Vine 53965]

6 minutes ago, Underdog said:

Not sure about all the pearl clutching, one side wants sexually assaulted 10yo girls to have babies...  we good.  

Not an issue remotely belonging to one party.  We as a society own it.

[Judge Roybeanbag 11796]

Can only speak for my kids, they want to flee this state because of dipshits like Dan Patrick etc.   I don’t blame them.  Texas government has become a fucking saloon show of disease-ridden whores.  

[Js1 85056]

2 hours ago, Pancho said:

“I’ll take the chicken enchiladas, side of pico, jumbo marg, and throw in the baby boy.”

 

Oh, and that’s to-go.”

And then what??

[jimmyjazz 45513]

Why the hell would you go to Matt's El Rancho and not get a side of Bob?

[Anastasis 23375]

I am totally good with most of y'all never procreating. 

[Covri 6229]

8 hours ago, Pancho said:

Christ, this thread had some great dialogue.  Almost felt like we were at a bar having some beers having a meaningful discussion. 

 

 

 

 

Then…it got slorch’d. 

Worst poster on this site and that's saying something. 

 

6 hours ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Team no kids.  Can spoil my nieces and get my kids fix that way.  Living in the city it’s refreshing how rarely I see kids.  Sure I get shot at but my brother will make that trade if he’s being honest.  Parents really wanted to be grandparents so I’m grateful he did the heavy lifting there. 

Appreciate you not bringing in sooner babies into the world and instead spoiling you nieces and nephews unless of course they root for ou.

 

4 hours ago, GhostOfTomJoad said:

Non-breeder here. Just knew in my bones when I was barely a teenager that I never wanted to be a parent. And was lucky enough to find an amazing woman who shared the same sentiment.

We both had people over the years who tried to convince us otherwise, "try it, you might like it." As if having a child was like ordering a combo plate at Matt's El Rancho.

I was on the fence in my 20s, the wife never was, we had two kids in our mid 30s and I'd never change a thing. But it's a hard choice to make and we waited until we were comfortable financially and that made it easier. 

[Neonmoon 38127]

8 minutes ago, Covri said:

Worst poster on this site and that's saying something. 

There are many racist pieces of shit that are allowed to post on this website for unknown reasons. 

[Biff Tannen 45477]

1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

I am totally good with most of y'all never procreating. 

I wish you never had, but I guess that toothpaste is out of the tube.
 

Meh. We are the all screaming all dancing crap of the world.  

[troph 24548]

4 hours ago, chainsaw said:

We could sustain more growth if we ever develop the will to let go of capitalism both as an ethos and as mode of production. Gene Roddenberry fleshed out a world giving us a glimpse of how that would look.

Due to the ethos of capitalism we have worldwide (well, excluding China) a positive reinforcement feedback loop that has artificially inflated the "value" placed on rugged individualism. Rugged individualism has many problems but when it comes to population/growth/sustainability one of the biggest problems is that it's an incredibly inefficient foundational principle for allocating limited resources.

Also artificially inflated is the "virtue" of greed. Businesses race to the bottom. So long as greed is an acceptable incentive, the public at large will very rarely benefit from market activity. Anyone who does business fairly or more ethically than the absolute bare minimum will not be in business very long. Competition in theory is supposed to hedge against the worst impulses of greed, and as we can see, that theoretical constraint is utterly toothless in practice. A particular business doing well, or even all businesses collectively doing well, has no direct positive impact on material conditions for the public at large because when greed is part of the equation all the benefits flow to the greedy.

The ethos of capitalism means our culture says "this is acceptable, greedy people should get everything" and, on the other side of the same coin, "be the rugged individual we expect you to be, don't expect a community or anyone else to care about you."

Our laws reflect that ethos. So now those short-signed, growth-killing inefficiencies are coded into our DNA. Those systems are firmly in place. "Deeply rooted" by now in the US and most of the developed and developing world.

As a mode of production, I won't go too much into details but I think the crypto and NFT crashes do a good job of illustrating how borked the concept of wealth hoarding is. Instead of making things, you're parking money somewhere and hoping it appreciates in value for reasons we don't know or care about and relevant to our current discussion does absolutely fuckall to support the growth of humanity.

How does stuff get made and available to the public? A small number of people forced by the system (into which the ethos of greed has been programmed) to be as exploitative as possible exploit something in the supply chain (land, ships, trains, factories, warehouses, offices, storefronts) and pay workers as little as possible.

The amount of things produced, and which things get produced, is not determined by what the public needs but rather what makes the most money. Because not everyone in this system will be able to afford what they need or what they anticipate needing, this mode of production is not a great fit for meeting the needs of the public.

Is it the best we can do, though? I don't think so. Technology is at a point where we could get energy, agriculture, transportation, and shelter handled for everyone, on a global scale, at a minimal cost, and sustain continued population growth on this planet. The only way this gets done is if we get serious about efficiency. Cut out all the middlemen, get rid of greed, and destigmatize the acceptance of benefits, help, and public services.

Anyway, "birth rate" discourse is like 95% dogwhistling the racist replacement theory. Birth rates are down because we're in late stage capitalism and people of babymaking age can barely afford rent much less home ownership.

 If you really think all business is a race to the bottom and greed is the driving force then I suspect you’ve not run a business, had payroll accountability, managed a P&L from top to bottom or wondered how to attract more customers or employees.  I have. I help others do the same. Most want sustainable businesses that meet the needs of all stakeholders. Most owners don’t have cash to roll in like the wolf of Wall Street. They may have a retirement nest egg if they can sell later but that’s not what consumes them daily.  Capitalism has major flaws but it’s primary benefit is actually efficient innovation through fierce competition. If you had to compete in a market with competition you’d know that, there are nearly infinite examples of competition spuring major innovations to benefit humanity, including a different race to the bottom, the race to lower prices.  
 

capitalism - in some cases in combination with the will of government and society - created wind power, cheaper solar, nuclear power. it is creating alternatives to single use plastic, battery technology, recycling technology, carbon sequestration, other clean air technologies, more efficient building techniques, and without a profit motivation many innovative companies that produce ideas we all love and want for the betterment of the world would not exist.  And while extreme wealth is a problem, increase in wealth on a broad level lifts many countries out of a polutive squalor which allows growth and advancement which can result in a more efficient and cleaner way of living which improves lives and the planet. 
 

there is plenty wrong in this society and this world, hunger for power, the consumption appetite of humans, corruption, and yes under regulated capitalism and crony capitalism. 

however the answer isn’t what your selling.  The answer is a more well regulated market one where humans realize the planet is a stakeholder and human basic needs are stakeholders. That’s achievable once we obtain the will to include all stakeholders at the table, but if we eradicate the profit motive the hard work of innovation will cease. 

Edited July 10, 2022 by troph

[Anastasis 23375]

40 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I wish you never had

Clearly you judgement on such matters is compromised. 

[Anastasis 23375]

nvm.

Edited July 10, 2022 by Anastasis

[Da Fino 2719]

I believe it. The majority of my married friends don't want to have children, either because of their own traumatic childhood from less than stellar parents, or from seeing the future that awaits children today. My wife and I definitely want to have children, but we don't want them to grow up in Texas as is exists right now. But we couldn't imagine raising kids anywhere but Texas. 
 

Interesting to hear this point of view. Genuine curiosity, how old are you and your friends? Just age range.

[Da Fino 2719]

Not an issue remotely belonging to one party.  We as a society own it.

He’s got a point here.

Ok.  You don't have to own it.  Splashing water and calling it swimming doesn't make it swimming.  We differ on the solutions.

Nevermind.

[Voldemort86 2259]

12 hours ago, hpslugga said:

It’s mostly propaganda from the ownership class. They bitch about it for several reasons, none of which are good:

-They need more customers to buy their shit and to continue to top quarterly figures instead of actually innovating stuff.

-They need more employees, to whom they can pay increasingly shitty wages, and to increase overall productivity.

-Christianity is in a relative state of decline and they think by shoving morally repugnant policies down our throats that those numbers will bounce up again…all to curtail the rise of “nones” in the US and ultimately to beat back the rise of Islam globally.

-Politically their policy positions are as popular as crotch rot, so they figure a birth rate increase means GQP voter increase since the states most heavily affected by the overturn of Roe are the red ones (higher abortion rates than the blue ones generally speaking).

-Yeah there’s also the race angle that’s been alluded to, as well as the safety net “concern.”

To put it another way, if there’s a compelling reason to support an increase of birth rates, I’ve yet to see it. Always trust your skepticism when you see people advocating shit like that. It absolutely stinks of grift.

This is a good post.

 

my sister and her husband, along with several other people I know have all had success in getting better jobs recently. If you tried getting a job in 2009-2014 you would remember how bad it was. 
 

employers would get 1000’s of applications for jobs that didn’t pay well. Tons of millennials graduated from college and were told that they needed experience to get jobs by hiring managers, but how can you get experience without having a job?  It’s all bullshit. The hiring managers had the luxury of waiting for a perfect candidate that they didn’t have to train because the bush administration outsourced most of our jobs overseas and actually encouraged companies to do it by giving them tax breaks if they did it.

Boomers benefitted from advances in the healthcare system by enjoying an increased life expectancy. The downside of that is most boomers didn’t retire even when they hit 65 so we had a crappy work place situation with 8% unemployment and 15% of the population classified as under employed.

id never go back to that shit again. Please please no.

Edited July 10, 2022 by Voldemort86

[Captainant 27311]

6 hours ago, Da Fino said:

Interesting to hear this point of view. Genuine curiosity, how old are you and your friends? Just age range.

Early 30s, bunch of tech folks and teachers in my friends group 

[Biff Tannen 45477]

8 hours ago, troph said:

 If you really think all business is a race to the bottom and greed is the driving force then I suspect you’ve not run a business, had payroll accountability, managed a P&L from top to bottom or wondered how to attract more customers or employees.  I have. I help others do the same. Most want sustainable businesses that meet the needs of all stakeholders. Most owners don’t have cash to roll in like the wolf of Wall Street. They may have a retirement nest egg if they can sell later but that’s not what consumes them daily.  Capitalism has major flaws but it’s primary benefit is actually efficient innovation through fierce competition. If you had to compete in a market with competition you’d know that, there are nearly infinite examples of competition spuring major innovations to benefit humanity, including a different race to the bottom, the race to lower prices.  
 

capitalism - in some cases in combination with the will of government and society - created wind power, cheaper solar, nuclear power. it is creating alternatives to single use plastic, battery technology, recycling technology, carbon sequestration, other clean air technologies, more efficient building techniques, and without a profit motivation many innovative companies that produce ideas we all love and want for the betterment of the world would not exist.  And while extreme wealth is a problem, increase in wealth on a broad level lifts many countries out of a polutive squalor which allows growth and advancement which can result in a more efficient and cleaner way of living which improves lives and the planet. 
 

there is plenty wrong in this society and this world, hunger for power, the consumption appetite of humans, corruption, and yes under regulated capitalism and crony capitalism. 

however the answer isn’t what your selling.  The answer is a more well regulated market one where humans realize the planet is a stakeholder and human basic needs are stakeholders. That’s achievable once we obtain the will to include all stakeholders at the table, but if we eradicate the profit motive the hard work of innovation will cease. 

I agree with you in principle, but the problem is that we are now living through what happens when you not only don’t regulate capitalism, but let the foxes run the hen house. We are in the “let them eat cake” period and what comes next is not fun. 

[troph 24548]

32 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I agree with you in principle, but the problem is that we are now living through what happens when you not only don’t regulate capitalism, but let the foxes run the hen house. We are in the “let them eat cake” period and what comes next is not fun. 

Agreed but economic communism which is what he essentially proposed isn’t the answer for progress. Ironically we need what capitalism does best right now, innovate and create efficiencies at a rapid pace due to climate change.  Sadly we need the will to reign in the crony and corrupt part, regulate the crisis as needed and that probably is where we will fail because the innovation we need is occurring and may be occurring as fast as we need it.

[Goredho 17302]

If we don’t breed more morons, who is going to pump up the value of crypto again?

[Guest]

20 hours ago, Pancho said:

Christ, this thread had some great dialogue.  Almost felt like we were at a bar having some beers having a meaningful discussion. 

 

 

 

 

Then…it got slorch’d. 

Just pass over the partisan comments by others that aren't remotely relevant to the thread, but they support the cheerleading bullshit on this board.

But yeah.  It's slorch's fault.  Sorry/ not sorry to break the echoes.

 

It's hardly a dialogue when one side is welcome.

Edited July 10, 2022 by slorch

[Guest]

The topic itself shouldn't even be political...  but y'all find a fucking way to take it there.

[Fudge Nuggets 19118]

19 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Will it be bad for the machine? Sure, but fuck the machine. 

I was born to rage against it.

[chainsaw 9831]

2 hours ago, troph said:

Agreed but economic communism which is what he essentially proposed isn’t the answer for progress. Ironically we need what capitalism does best right now, innovate and create efficiencies at a rapid pace due to climate change.  Sadly we need the will to reign in the crony and corrupt part, regulate the crisis as needed and that probably is where we will fail because the innovation we need is occurring and may be occurring as fast as we need it.

This is a very good example of what I mean by the ethos of capitalism and how it's so deeply ingrained that people police their own ideas without even realizing it.

It's built on a weak assumption that people will not innovate or even perform labor unless there's an existential threat to their finances. The US was second to send a man to space. The USSR was first. How did the USSR accomplish that without capitalism?

China is run by a communist party, and while there's no shortage of valid criticisms against China, nobody would accuse it of being unproductive. As far as innovation goes, take a look at the scoreboard

https://www.statista.com/statistics/256845/ranking-of-the-10-countries-who-filed-the-most-international-patent-applications/

Granted, I'm sure there's a lot caveats with the chart and how the information was gathered, but none of them would do much to change the point I'm making, which is that you don't need capitalism to innovate, and there's no evidence that capitalism is actually the best for innovation.

People are simply conditioned to believe it, but it isn't necessarily true.

You seem to be in denial about whether markets are having a race to the bottom. Can you show me three markets where we actually have meaningful competition and the competition is unquestionably beneficial to the public?

[Sawbonz 27375]

7 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

How did the USSR accomplish that without capitalism

By literally starving millions of their people and forcing others to do jobs they didn’t want to do

[Judge Roybeanbag 11796]

6 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

By literally starving millions of their people and forcing others to do jobs they didn’t want to do

One could argue that a capitalist system does the same, it just makes the starving people feel better because the trickle down piss feels like rain. Especially when it’s 108 degrees, global warming doesn’t exist and ERCOT has your back.  

Edited July 10, 2022 by Judge Roybeanbag

[chainsaw 9831]

3 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

By literally starving millions of their people and forcing others to do jobs they didn’t want to do

 

I think Stalin was out of the picture by then, and I've seen no evidence of forced labor sending Yuri Gagarin to space.

[ChiTownDoc 21091]

16 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

This is a very good example of what I mean by the ethos of capitalism and how it's so deeply ingrained that people police their own ideas without even realizing it.

It's built on a weak assumption that people will not innovate or even perform labor unless there's an existential threat to their finances. The US was second to send a man to space. The USSR was first. How did the USSR accomplish that without capitalism?

China is run by a communist party, and while there's no shortage of valid criticisms against China, nobody would accuse it of being unproductive. As far as innovation goes, take a look at the scoreboard

https://www.statista.com/statistics/256845/ranking-of-the-10-countries-who-filed-the-most-international-patent-applications/

Granted, I'm sure there's a lot caveats with the chart and how the information was gathered, but none of them would do much to change the point I'm making, which is that you don't need capitalism to innovate, and there's no evidence that capitalism is actually the best for innovation.

People are simply conditioned to believe it, but it isn't necessarily true.

You seem to be in denial about whether markets are having a race to the bottom. Can you show me three markets where we actually have meaningful competition and the competition is unquestionably beneficial to the public?

lol.  Great examples.  Please move to China or Russia and report back.  

[ChiTownDoc 21091]

6 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

One could argue that a capitalist system does the same, it just makes the starving people feel better because the trickle down piss feels like rain.

Wife grew up in communism.  I grew up in a 75k house here, lower middle class at best.  Really I was poor but never thought of it that way.  I’ll let you guess who had it infinitely better.  She has no reason to lie about any of it.  
 

edit: we are definitely heading the wrong way though.  But to give Russia and China as examples is comical and horrific at the same time.  

Edited July 10, 2022 by ChiTownDoc

[Biff Tannen 45477]

I don't think anyone is arguing communism is better.  That's just dumb.  But the idea that capitalism is this amazing system, especially seeing where we are as a country right now, is also dumb.