Achieving a surplus of food does not require capitalism, and never did.
-
-
Replying to @mediocre_danny @KEEMSTAR and
2. Capitalism is more productive. If it wasn't why would Chinese communists allow it in their country? Why take the risk?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simon_enefer @KEEMSTAR and
1. Capitalism is not inherently more productive, market-socialist orgs (co-ops) usually produce more per manhour 2. We produce too much as is, a focus on overproduction is unwarranted 3. It’s easier to control citizens & trade with capitalist countries when you’re capitalist
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mediocre_danny @KEEMSTAR and
1. Just not true. Socialist and Communist systems are always less productive. 2. I thought people were starving, needed food/resources? 3. Competition makes efficient! As an individual, company or nation. Apart from resources communist/socialist have nothing worth buying.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simon_enefer @KEEMSTAR and
1. Based on what? 2. Yes, they’re starving because they’re not ALLOWED to have the food that exists. We produce far, FAR more food than we could all possibly eat. 3. I’m still pretty sure that only works short-term, but market socialism is a thing
5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mediocre_danny @KEEMSTAR and
1. Based on what? History! Communist states are less productive and creative. In part this is because they are very bureaucratic and bureaucrats get their power from say NO not yes. You aren't rewarded for taking risks, so why take them. This is true of all bureaucracts.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simon_enefer @KEEMSTAR and
“Based on what? History!“ Yeah but like, what PART of history? Like, where are some numbers I can look at?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @OhNoIts2016 @KEEMSTAR and
Look at any history of production during WW2 or Cold War. As an economic system communism is awful as was National Socialism which brought private enterprise under state control, wasting resources and capacity. Even an organisational genius like Speer couldn't get it to work.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simon_enefer @KEEMSTAR and
The “National Socialists” literally invented privatization: https://daily.jstor.org/the-roots-of-privatization/ … They didn’t nationalize it all until they already were on the retreat. And they acted unilaterally, so even the nationalization stage can’t be deemed “socialist.”
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mediocre_danny @KEEMSTAR and
Wow. This just wrong. The Nazi party believed in autarky and wanted to rearm quickly. They did this through central planning. Watch TIKs - a youtuber- video on this. Very informative.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
You know how they got the funds to rearm? By selling off national industry. Privatizing. Early Franco was the avowed autarkist, Hitler only cared about economics as a means to war.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.