Is future totalitarian?

[Enkore]

Well that's a fundamental issue I have with socialism. As you say, it seems like it should basically be a free market where everyone wants to help each other. Maybe you can see where the problem is here - you need everyone to want to help each other.

Not true, maybe in couple hundred or thousand years when humanity manages to control their own greed will this be plausible.

There is no need to help each other out at all in what I'm proposing. Its simply replacing power of money with power of people and their knowledge. You will see companies competing just as much against each other, you'll just see more beneficial by-products where these companies will literally pay for top tier education from young age to population - to harvest knowledge capital later on to gain edge over competition. Same goes for food ,health etc. A sick, hungry, deprived population will not be beneficial to the economy. Same is true now but in current system people are too short sighted and only focused on short term $$$.

Its a society where companies are morally accountable to their employees and society as a whole.

I should add, I don't really understand this bit. Money is required to enable the exchange of goods and services.

Money will remain, all I mean by this is that today for example you say 'I'm a billionaire' and that is seen as having lots of capital. Tomorrow I want capital billionaires to say 'I have one million employees that are highly educated, motivated, healthy and loyal to the company - and we are able to innovate x2 than our competition' As a bi-product of that I am also a 'money' billionaire. Simply being money billionaire should stop meaning as much as it does today. You can be money billionaire and yet have zero capital. In this system there will also be much fever billionaires (money) because in competition of capital (people) you will have to disperse so much money that it will be extremely difficult to hoard it at the top and stay competitive against other companies

 

[R.P.L]

Not true, maybe in couple hundred or thousand years when humanity manages to control their own greed will this be plausible.

There is no need to help each other out at all in what I'm proposing. Its simply replacing power of money with power of people and their knowledge. You will see companies competing just as much against each other, you'll just see more beneficial by-products where these companies will literally pay for top tier education from young age to population - to harvest knowledge capital later on to gain edge over competition. Same goes for food ,health etc. A sick, hungry, deprived population will not be beneficial to the economy. Same is true now but in current system people are too short sighted and only focused on short term $$$.

Its a society where companies are morally accountable to their employees and society as a whole.



Money will remain, all I mean by this is that today for example you say 'I'm a billionaire' and that is seen as having lots of capital. Tomorrow I want capital billionaires to say 'I have one million employees that are highly educated, motivated, healthy and loyal to the company - and we are able to innovate x2 than our competition' As a bi-product of that I am also a 'money' billionaire.

Alright, well it's a nice idea but I still don't see it happening outside of Star Trek. As you point out, at the very least I highly doubt I'll live to see that day

 

[Enkore]

Alright, well it's a nice idea but I still don't see it happening outside of Star Trek. As you point out, at the very least I highly doubt I'll live to see that day

We already have parts of that implemented today. Free education, healthcare is exactly this. Companies pay taxes => government provides free education with that money + health => raise a population that smarter and healthier => said population goes to work and provides innovation => increase of capital in market.

If you have dumb population - you will never leave industrial or agrarian society and economy. If you have dumb and sick population. Well...

We're not that far away already. Hence why you see such a huge attack on 'socialism' lately. All we need is to force companies into investing more into their employees and create competition for 'employees'. We already have that for the high end professionals, we need to push it to everyone else. Because otherwise we will bleed the 'lower end' of any knowledge and health on top of it. Try working at Amazon in USA. Its a dead end in future for society and country as whole.

As always I said, it seems like the wealthy enjoy socialism while the poor are stuck with capitalism.

 

[R.P.L]

We already have parts of that implemented today. Free education, healthcare is exactly this. Companies pay taxes => government provides free education with that money + health => raise a population that smarter and healthier => said population goes to work and provides innovation => increase of capital in market.

We're not that far away already. Hence why you see such a huge attack on 'socialism' lately.

I have no issue with things like education and healthcare being nationalised. The free market generates value as free markets do best, and the state takes some of that to pay for the stuff that it should pay for. No problem with that, although of course the level of state ownership is a hotly contested subject. But you still need a 'capitalist' (meaning using currency) free market to generate the value. That's exactly where I think socialist ideals fall over - you need an incentive for people to be productive, and cash is the only one that most people find acceptable when push comes to shove. The fact that people accept that they should hand over a certain amount in taxes is so that they have a functional society around them.

 

[Enkore]

I have no issue with things like education and healthcare being nationalised. The free market generates value as free markets do best, and the state takes some of that to pay for the stuff that it should pay for. No problem with that, although of course the level of state ownership is a hotly contested subject. But you still need a 'capitalist' (meaning using currency) free market to generate the value. That's exactly where I think socialist ideals fall over - you need an incentive for people to be productive, and cash is the only one that most people find acceptable when push comes to shove. The fact that people accept that they should hand over a certain amount in taxes is so that they have a functional society around them.

Like I said, money will remain. I'm simply proposing fixing current screwed up capitalism. I want to create a place where people focus on their knowledge, skills (capital) and that will directly lead to ability to have money. In current system you have scientists making a penny with all that knowledge capital. Its simply not fair.

The existence of money slavery is also a key problem that allows companies to offer so little to their workers. We are an advanced society, why people have to literally slave away for basic food and roof on head is beyond me. Its part of problem. We'll always have lazy people who dont want anything. Provide them with absolute basic needs and it will open up so much work for everyone else at higher rate. The incentive to work 40 hours a week just to buy food and live in tiny room is stupid. Provide same for lets say 10 hours a week, leave motivation to learn and move up in world. Open up more places for others who want to. Let those who are fine with basic needs to be.

Anyone working 50-60 hours a week at Amazon with crap health insurance and days off will never be able to learn/move up in world (its possible yes I know). And they cant leave because they need to pay for food and shelter. Its slavery.

 

[R.P.L]

Like I said, money will remain. I'm simply proposing fixing current screwed up capitalism. I want to create a place where people focus on their knowledge, skills (capital) and that will directly lead to ability to have money. In current system you have scientists making a penny with all that knowledge capital. Its simply not fair.

The existence of money slavery is also a key problem that allows companies to offer so little to their workers. We are an advanced society, why people have to literally slave away for basic food and roof on head is beyond me. Its part of problem. We'll always have lazy people who dont want anything. Provide them with absolute basic needs and it will open up so much work for everyone else at higher rate. The incentive to work 40 hours a week just to buy food and live in tiny room is stupid. Provide same for lets say 10 hours a week, leave motivation to learn and move up in world. Open up more places for others who want to. Let those who are fine with basic needs to be.

Anyone working 50-60 hours a week at Amazon with crap health insurance and days off will never be able to learn/move up in world (its possible yes I know). And they cant leave because they need to pay for food and shelter. Its slavery.

Well it sounds like we're going round in circles. You say money will remain, but things will be valued differently. Who decides how stuff gets valued? Maybe you're right and in future everyone (or the majority at least) will simply see the error of their ways, and attribute more value to things that you think are valuable. Like I mentioned, the only other option is a gun to the head.

 

[adolf hamster]

as with all things different systems have their different advantages and disadvantages.

no system is perfect, every one has its disadvantages.

the biggest problem i can see with our current system is short-termism, no government wanting to seriously commit to anything that isn't going to yeild fruit soon enough to get them re-elected.

 

[FirebarUK]

If you like the -isms and -ocracies then it'll be technocracy + totalitarianism.

 

[StriderX]

The future is a cream cheese sandwich with a side of hot gravy.

 

[Quartz]

It is individualism exasperated by capitalist market ideology.

Capitalist market ideology is responsible for almost all the wealth we have today. Thanks to capitalism we are well on the way to conquering poverty. It'll take another century or so to get there.

If we do not adapt into a more 'socialist' society

No. We need a more capitalist society. Ask anyone over the age of 50 who grew up in Eastern Europe if they think more socialism is a good idea.

 

[Enkore]

Capitalist market ideology is responsible for almost all the wealth we have today. Thanks to capitalism we are well on the way to conquering poverty. It'll take another century or so to get there.



No. We need a more capitalist society. Ask anyone over the age of 50 who grew up in Eastern Europe if they think more socialism is a good idea.

Thats like assuming Democracy is bad by looking at Democratic republic of Korea.

 

[R.P.L]

I think that you could say the same about Communism - great in theory, awful in practice

It would be nice to think that "not allowing businesses to fail" was done for the good of Society at large - I suspect that in practice, all too often it is done to protect "wealth".

The big problem with "Socialism" is that it cannot cope with selfishness and greed.

I disagree - communism is terrible in theory as well. I'm not 100% sure about the motives behind saving big banks etc. I think it would be best to let them fail and the state reimburse the deposits to customers, and put in place measures to ensure less risky practices.

I agree with your last statement. That's what I've been trying to get at in my replies to this thread. If everyone decided to be nice and act with society's best interests in mind then it would be great, but I just don't see that happening.

 

[Enkore]

Y

Well it sounds like we're going round in circles. You say money will remain, but things will be valued differently. Who decides how stuff gets valued? Maybe you're right and in future everyone (or the majority at least) will simply see the error of their ways, and attribute more value to things that you think are valuable. Like I mentioned, the only other option is a gun to the head.

You dont decide, you just make it so companies have to pay more and provide more benefits.

Resulting in less pure profits and more in reinvestment into people to compete within market

 

[R.P.L]

Y



You dont decide, you just make it so companies have to pay more and provide more benefits.

Resulting in less pure profits and more in reinvestment into people to compete within market

Like I said, all sounds delightful.

Not gonna happen though

 

[Quartz]

That's what I've been trying to get at in my replies to this thread. If everyone decided to be nice and act with society's best interests in mind then it would be great, but I just don't see that happening.

Capitalism channels that greed for the service of good. Your pension fund invests your capital in a company and that company - you hope - gives you a positive return on your capital.

 

[mmj_uk]

The way things are going. The future is Idiocrazy.

Did you see that video of a school dance with the couples having their backs to one another? I'm convinced governments worldwide are testing how dumb and conformist their populaces are and they must be delighted with the results.

 

[mmj_uk]

If we do not adapt into a more 'socialist' society which puts well being of ALL people in the nation above short term individual goals. We are doomed to be one day taken over by totalitarian regimes like what China is. They are a lot more efficient in these events, through horror means.

Socialism is by its very nature totalitarian, the bigger government gets the less individual freedom people have.

We can easily combine democracy with being more socialist orientated, capitalism and short term goal individualism will possibly lead us to disaster. Where we will be over-taken or left vounrable to totalitarian regimes.

So you're saying we need to give up individual freedoms to prevent totalitarianism? contradiction much? the whole point of totalitarianism is it strips away peoples' individual freedoms and forces them into a collectivist system of doing whatever they're told by big brother, usually in the name of some "good" and "just" cause like for example saving the planet from global warming.

 

[mmj_uk]

Democracy isn't perfect either, it's why the USA is a Constitutional Republic where the people have INALIENABLE RIGHTS endowed on them by GOD, neither the government or Democratic decisions (tyranny of the masses) CAN TAKE THOSE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AWAY. (Although the Democrats are doing a good job trying).

This is a good video explaining things:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6bWeRuE2jg

 

[Enkore]

Democracy isn't perfect either, it's why the USA is a Constitutional Republic where the people have INALIENABLE RIGHTS endowed on them by GOD, neither the government or Democratic decisions (tyranny of the masses) CAN TAKE THOSE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AWAY. (Although the Democrats are doing a good job trying).

This is a good video explaining things:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6bWeRuE2jg

Didn't trump basically break whole U.S system where no one is supposed to be above law? On multiple counts.

I mean in UK cummings have been doing it for a while but no one being above law is not a founding principal of UK. Don't get me wrong, democrats are pretty bad. I just find it it rather hillarious that you think republicans or trump is any better.

We'll see how election goes, I think people forget that USA is not a democracy. If election goes sideways, people will be reminded that greatest democracy on earth is well... not a democracy.

 

[Roar87]

The well being of all people isn't best served by distributing resources evenly, society is best served by incentivising innovation and risk and rewarding people who are the most economically productive. You think Jeff Bezos having so much money is ridiculous I bet. Amazon employs directly 800,000 people, so that's a city of people who are housed and fed by Amazon directly. How ever, every companies employees that sell products on Amazon are indirectly employed by Amazon, their economic activity is enabled by the market place Amazon provides, every one of their designers, warehouse operatives, marketing teams, HR departments, executives, lorry drivers, the people gathering the raw materials; all of these people are indirectly employed by Amazon. The economic activity generated by Amazon is staggering, millions of people are more economically productive because of Amazon. Human beings alive today have never had existence so good and easy, even during a pandemic people are sat in their heated homes working on laptops having food and products delivered to their door which they have ordered online. Yet you have someone like @Enkore thinking he knows better, he thinks we need to dismantle this system because he isn't a millionaire. Maybe stop being jealous on an internet forum and do something with your life