3 ms·
Commenter in question has yet to articulate their points. You're already pushing "government funding startups quite heavily", which original comment never speci
by BlargMcLarg 4y ago
Commenter in question has yet to articulate their points. You're already pushing "government funding startups quite heavily", which original comment never specified, and "heavy" is still too vague to quantify. Even so, this doesn't answer why 2 wouldn't work. Unlike communism, there are clear incentives for individuals to provide merit and do better other than "hoping to see your hard work trickle back". Unlike modern day capitalism, your future isn't largely decided by your (lack of) inheritance. The only thing that holds is corruption, but really, you'd have an easier time listing things that don't get worse for the commoner when corrupted.
Nevertheless, the point isn't "this is Western Europe". The point is, you were already going off the deep end with a Soviet Union comparison, while 2 the way it is described is still a far cry from it. We don't need to choose between the extremes of capitalism and communism when there's something in the middle that can work out better, and we have yet to explore it. It's pretty evident unbridled capitalism isn't helping in several aspects either, even if it is holding together longer than Animal Farm.
Risk and income inequality still apply to society 2 as important factors.
- pclmulqdq 4y agoSorry, but you picked out the "government funded startups" line. How about the "no real classes" and "don't usually just live on investments"? Also, it is not true that inheritance defines your wealth in modern capitalism. Most billionaires and almost all millionaires are self made in the US (ie they don't come from billionaire or millionaire parents).