• Jackthelad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    32
    ·
    9 months ago

    Pros: It’s nice in theory.

    Cons: It will never work in practice because human nature is a thing.

    • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      9 months ago

      Maybe if we stop teaching our children that the most important thing in life is to have more stuff than your neighbors, it will stop being part of our nature.

    • bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      Cons: It will never work in practice because human nature is a thing.

      This exact reason is why capitalism will never work. Human nature will look to exploit.

    • boredtortoise@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Historically, human nature led naturally to socialist societies. It happened for thousands of years even before anyone named it socialism

    • aelwero@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      9 months ago

      It’s absolutely disturbing how avidly people seem to want to ignore that inconvenient truth…

      “The people will own the means of production”. Except it’s never once worked out that way.

      “Everyone will be happy to go to work, because it’s for the good of all”. Except it’s never once worked out that way.

      “Nobody will ever have to worry about basic needs”. Except it’s never once worked out that way.

      Socialism has historically consolidated both power and wealth just as reliably as capitalism has, and frankly, I don’t buy that the impetus behind the growing advocacy for socialism even is actually equality… I think it’s a desire to have more shit, with less effort required to get it (and that sounds sketchy, and I think people are generally averse to stating it openly due to this)

      I personally think the most likely means to achieve that is ironically the capitalist system we currently have, with a huge boost to the economy in the form of universal basic income.

      Give literally everyone $50k/yr. Period. Even musk, the zuck, bezos… Everyone… The people who don’t want to do jack can sit around and enjoy the product of labor that will inevitably be increasingly provided by automation, out of necessity. The dream of the 1960’s, of having robots do everything for us while we sit around at the park, will come to fruition finally, because while we’ve had the ability to do it, we’ve not had any means of paying our bills while sitting around. UBI would provide that, and “the capitalists” will have the incentive to automate because there will be less labor available.

      Of course, we’re talking about a massive spike in income tax here… But we’re also making the labor far more valuable, by way of rarity. Harder to find workers, so you pay them more, and even with the increased taxation, even a modest salary reflects economic advantage over a nonworker. The guy that used to make $50k/yr is only making $25k/yr if we slap a 50% tax on him, but he’s still putting $75k/yr in the bank, aint he?

      I think “socialism” is the wrong direction. 180° exactly in the wrong direction. Unless by “socialism” people are actually advocating the “advanced welfare” Nordic approach…

    • SirStumps@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      9 months ago

      Another pro is we can eat our neighbors when food becomes scarce. Or we can report them for owning a grain of wheat and have them murdered.