A continuation of our discussion in the "The club has 53 members...." thread

khansaheb said:
And no INCENTIVE to advance.......
Click to expand...
How can you think that?! If you were someone making cars you have every incentive to make it well so it doesn't wear out any sooner than necessary. Why? So you don't have to build cars sooner than necessary. If you made replacement parts for cars you have no incentive to make other than the best possible part as your life is easier if you don't have to make many parts every day.
Anytime you can make life easier for yourself then you would. Advancement will go happen much faster than it does now.

What do you think about the fact that people today on average are sicker than ever when they go to the hospital--even though medicine has advanced over the last 20 years?

What do you have to say about elderly people who die in their apartment over the summer because they couldn't afford to run their air conditioner? I guess you'll say that they didn't prepare well.

Why are you so against everyone living a good life? You really believe that just a selected few should have a good life?

I'll keep staple happy by not using some choice words about how I feel about you.
 
Steven G said:
by not using some choice words about how I feel about you.
Click to expand...
I am happy that you kept it civil - just for your info - I can use "choice words" in seven languages - and capitalistic funded Google will teach you the meaning of those.
 
khansaheb said:
No - I'll say they have insensitive neighbors.
Click to expand...
Why do they need sensitive neighbors?
So you feel that if someone is born with a low IQ, since they probably can't start a business etc..., then they should have a life style less than others. Why do you feel that way?
87% of people have a good life? Can you define a good life? I assure you that when compared to what my life could be, my life sucks.
My enjoyment is helping out here!
 
Bruce said:
Shame on family members/caretakers!
Click to expand...
No, no! Shame on the US government for letting this happen! They have billions to spend on bombs while people in this country can't afford air conditioning to prevent dying.
 
Steven G said:
No, no! Shame on the US government for letting this happen! They have billions to spend on bombs while people in this country can't afford air conditioning to prevent dying.
Click to expand...
What percent of old-people in China-NK-Russia die of "freezing cold"? What percent of old people in Senegal-Ethiopia-SA die of extreme heat without A/C? All these countries spend more money (compared to GDP) in producing bombs/guns than USA.
 
khansaheb said:
What percent of old-people in China-NK-Russia die of "freezing cold"? What percent of old people in Senegal-Ethiopia-SA die of extreme heat without A/C? All these countries spend more money (compared to GDP) in producing bombs/guns than USA.
Click to expand...
..and that makes it ok.
 
Steven G said:
What do you think about the fact that people today on average are sicker than ever
Click to expand...
Really...

With the advancement of penicillin and other antibiotics? other vaccines.... ? ...... transplant surgery? high resolution Sonar & x-ray detection technology??
 
khansaheb said:
Really...

With the advancement of penicillin and other antibiotics? other vaccines.... ? ...... transplant surgery? high resolution Sonar & x-ray detection technology??
Click to expand...
Yes, because many people don't have health insurance and wait until the last possible moment before they go to the hospital. This is just so awful that it makes me sick just thinking about it.
 
Steven G said:
Yes, because many people don't have health insurance and wait until the last possible moment before they go to the hospital. This is just so awful that it makes me sick just thinking about it.
Click to expand...
I have medical insurance - medicare + private - yet I wait until the last possible moment before I go to see a doctor .....
 
OK, fine-but that is your decision. What about people who don't have health insurance and wait to the last moment to go to the hospital because they can't afford the bill that they will receive?
 
Steven G said:
How can you think that?! If you were someone making cars you have every incentive to make it well so it doesn't wear out any sooner than necessary. Why? So you don't have to build cars sooner than necessary. If you made replacement parts for cars you have no incentive to make other than the best possible part as your life is easier if you don't have to make many parts every day.
Anytime you can make life easier for yourself then you would. Advancement will go happen much faster than it does now.
Click to expand...
This does not make sense to me. The choice is not
A. crappy car with time T1 and material cost M1.
B. good car with time T2 and material cost M2.

Coming back to our graphs, you can plot a function of average car life given its cost. It will probably look like a log function. So, there are infinitely many combinations of cost inputs and car life outputs, not just the 2 options above. Do we agree?
Now, as the socialist car maker, what governs your choices?
A capitalist car maker produces different cars for many types of consumers. Various reviewers and customer feedback give us an idea of what car/parts life we can expect from the given model. We (capitalist consumers) find a balance between the expected utility and the price and make the decision what to buy.
How would this process work in your socialism? Note that empirical evidence shows that socialist/communist economies produce awful stuff and there is always not enough of it, so consumers take what's available - forget about the balance of utility and price. Here's my experience of shopping in Russia - you see a line, you better queue up first and then find out what the product is.
 
lev888 said:
Note that empirical evidence shows that socialist/communist economies produce awful stuff and there is always not enough of it
Click to expand...
Just came across this photo of a soviet rationing coupon. Translation:

INVITATION
to buy laundry detergent
4th quarter
1989
3rd quarter
1989

Still waiting for an explanation of how the "you'll own nothing and you'll be happy" formula actually motivates people to function. Without it, I'd wait with the implementation of Steven's version of socialism (aka communism).
 

Attachments

  • detergent.jpg
    detergent.jpg
    225 KB · Views: 3
lev888 said:
This does not make sense to me. The choice is not
A. crappy car with time T1 and material cost M1.
B. good car with time T2 and material cost M2.

Coming back to our graphs, you can plot a function of average car life given its cost. It will probably look like a log function. So, there are infinitely many combinations of cost inputs and car life outputs, not just the 2 options above. Do we agree?
Now, as the socialist car maker, what governs your choices?
A capitalist car maker produces different cars for many types of consumers. Various reviewers and customer feedback give us an idea of what car/parts life we can expect from the given model. We (capitalist consumers) find a balance between the expected utility and the price and make the decision what to buy.
How would this process work in your socialism? Note that empirical evidence shows that socialist/communist economies produce awful stuff and there is always not enough of it, so consumers take what's available - forget about the balance of utility and price. Here's my experience of shopping in Russia - you see a line, you better queue up first and then find out what the product is.
Click to expand...
What does cost have to do with this? There needs to be no costs. Everyone (who is willing to work) is equal!
 
Steven G said:
What does cost have to do with this? There needs to be no costs. Everyone (who is willing to work) is equal!
Click to expand...
There is always cost. You don't like money, fine, use labor hours. That's still cost involved in making a car. Better cars require more labor hours. My question is valid.
 
lev888 said:
There is always cost. You don't like money, fine, use labor hours. That's still cost involved in making a car. Better cars require more labor hours. My question is valid.
Click to expand...
Suppose, in theory, you can make a car that will last forever. Sure, you'll spend lots of labor time but will never have to build a car for the owner ever again. On the other hand, suppose that you build a car that doesn't last long at all. The labor time will be minimal but that owner will be back to buy another car very soon. The real scenario will be in the middle.

How would this process work in your socialism? Note that empirical evidence shows that socialist/communist economies produce awful stuff and there is always not enough of it, so consumers take what's available - forget about the balance of utility and price. Here's my experience of shopping in Russia - you see a line, you better queue up first and then find out what the product is.

In Russia who owned the factories? There has never been a socialist society, besides for socialism to work the whole world needs to be onboard.

As someone who helps out on this math help forum and an English help form (I think that is you but might be wrong) don't you wonder why students need help? Why do you think that we push students to the next topic even though that didn't master the previous topic?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top