Why you, and everyone else should be a 'communist'

[richi1173]

'Evil profits' are not responsible for technological progress. Science is largely responsible for technological progress - and many many scientists do not become wealthy for the extremely important work they do.

Progress happens despite the fact that people skim profits from the top to pad their pockets, not because of.

When looking at history, this is not true. Civilizations like Greece, Rome, and China did a lot of science, yet the technological progress that they made in all of their history is minimal compared to the last 200 years.

Science is the foundation, profits are the drive.

 

[TheAzov]

'Evil profits' are not responsible for technological progress. Science is largely responsible for technological progress - and many many scientists do not become wealthy for the extremely important work they do.

Progress happens despite the fact that people skim profits from the top to pad their pockets, not because of.

When looking at history, this is not true. Civilizations like Greece, Rome, and China did a lot of science, yet the technological progress that they made in all of their history is minimal compared to the last 200 years.

Science is the foundation, profits are the drive.

In other words, the best idea in the world won't go round unless some shyster can make a buck off of it.

 

[richi1173]

In other words, the best idea in the world won't go round unless some shyster can make a buck off of it.

Depends on what that idea is.

As for markets that have free entry and exit, the idea will go around through people making derivatives of the product. Take a look at the proliferation of MP3's since the introduction of the Ipod.

Either way, if it is an idea integral to society, you can have the government intervene in various sort of fashions in order to insure the wellbeing of society.

 

[obsidianavenger]

'Evil profits' are not responsible for technological progress. Science is largely responsible for technological progress - and many many scientists do not become wealthy for the extremely important work they do.

Progress happens despite the fact that people skim profits from the top to pad their pockets, not because of.

When looking at history, this is not true. Civilizations like Greece, Rome, and China did a lot of science, yet the technological progress that they made in all of their history is minimal compared to the last 200 years.

Science is the foundation, profits are the drive.

kind of random, but in my ancient civ class the professor basically said that rome didn't foster much technological progress because they had slaves to do everything for them. not sure if thats a widely accepted view in academia or not, but it made intuitive sense to me. instead of looking for more efficient ways to produce, they just bought/acquired more slaves to boost production.

additionally, Ozy, "profit" does not have to mean money, but it does have to mean some kind of personal achievement or reward- something the innovator wants for themselves. in many cases it is money; in many others it is prestige or power or any number of things. but a collectivist society severs accomplishment from personal gain on a fundamental level. no matter what the motivation, having pride in your accomplishments or accepting advance/rewards for them is considered selfish and contra the interests of wider society. this does drain the motivation for further achievement...