With all due respect, don't you get tired of being down modded for preaching relig.. politics on HN?
If you really can make a good argument for those theories, which shows them to be a serious alternative -- with proof that the failure modes won't kill millions of people -- put them on a web site and put up a link.
If you can do that, I promise to vote for it. (Also, you'll probably get the next Nobel for economics.)
I'm just commenting on a post about economics/politics. So don't SHOUT at me. Flag it or something if you can't cope with that post.
I perfectly conform with the HN system and guidelines and already have more 1000 karma points in around a month I'm actively contributing here. You contribute far less so don't teach me about HN.
Also you're very funny. How can I bring you proof that a theory (btw. which one exactly?) can do this or that in future? Time travel?
Last but not least, the current system is killing millions. 50k children dying daily so think twice before offending me and suggesting I somehow speak in favor of genocide.
>>How can I bring you proof that a theory (btw. which one exactly?) can do this or that
So you don't have an alternative, but are only complaining that the present system isn't perfect and countries do realpolitik?
>>the current system is killing millions. 50k children dying daily so think twice before offending me and suggesting I somehow speak in favor of genocide.
Which, counted as percentages, is arguably better than ever in history. And is getting better ever decade. [Historically, where I grew up, the child mortality was around 20-30%... and large families.]
As you wrote, you don't have an alternative, either.
I am all for attempts to try other economic systems, but not inside 10000 km of where I live. Continue writing your political faith then, if it is so important to preach...
">>How can I bring you proof that a theory (btw. which one exactly?) can do this or that
So you don't have an alternative, but are only complaining that the present system isn't perfect and countries do realpolitik?"
There are plenty of alternatives around, but I don't have to propose alternatives to be able to criticize something. This way you can shut up everybody, but "unfortunately" we have free speech. You don't post from Saudi Arabia or something, do you?
Now that you ask: Parecon is a whole system based on participation. It sounds quite feasible.
"As you wrote, you don't have an alternative, either."
See above.
"Which, counted as percentages, is arguably better than ever in history. And is getting better ever decade. [Historically, where I grew up, the child mortality was around 20-30%... and large families.]"
Again, that's due to medical and technological progress which does not depend on capitalism. It's the other why around: You have a better healthcare in Cuba than you have in the US that's why US citizens visit Cuba for surgery etc.
"I am all for attempts to try other economic systems, but not inside 10000 km of where I live. Continue writing your political faith then, if it is so important to preach..."
No, I didn't say there is no alternative and I didn't preach. You preach the gospel of realpolitik where there is no alternative. Are you a fatalist?
>>There are plenty of alternatives around, but I don't have to propose alternatives to be able to criticize something.
You can't list an example that has worked for a big population in an industrialized world -- and given them an open society.
It seems like complaints that someone should do something about cancer, because it isn't nice.
The problem is how -- just complaining that the world could be better is not really interesting (I expect better on HN).
>No, I didn't say there is no alternative and I didn't preach.
But on a direct question, you had no alternative.
You really seem emotionally involved and complain about the world system, which you would probably have to kill a large fraction of the world's population to change.
>Are you a fatalist?
Read what I said -- do tests of different organizational models but far from where I live, please. The failure modes are too scary.
[Edit: I am not joking, to run a society with an untested economic system and nudge it along seems like doing brain surgery on yourself. In addition, left wingers seem too much like a cult of true believers to be pragmatic, then you get a "strong man".]
If you really want to find my opinion, google for "democratic peace theory" and "resource curse".
The countries not opening up and embracing capitalism and good governance are the ones with problems. They are either oil countries ("free" money for the controlling junta) or poor dictatorships with high walls, big oceans and really poor population (Syria, North Korea, Cuba, etc). Modern monarchies, if you will.
For countries with capitalism and good governance, it is a question of time until their problems are solved.
>>that's due to medical and technological progress which does not depend on capitalism
Again, capitalistic models [Edit: added previous word] was needed for industrialization, afaik.
And the US health care system is even more fscked than my local European one. (Is health care the reason why Americans are fleeing to Cuba in droves?)
">>There are plenty of alternatives around, but I don't have to propose alternatives to be able to criticize something.
You can't list an example that has worked for a big population in an industrialized world -- and given them an open society."
Well, to use my car metaphor: You are just saying that because I can't show proof that electric cars have worked in a country on a large scale we can't build electric cars.
With this way of thinking we should abandon any attempt to of modernizing anything and only use proven things. new things can't work, they must be proven first but when we don't try we can't prove anything. Perfect Catch 22.
"It seems like complaints that someone should do something about cancer, because it isn't nice."
Your are saying that cancer is natural and we aren't allowed to do anything about it.
"The problem is how -- just complaining that the world could be better is not really interesting (I expect better on HN)."
which is a whole economic system based on participation and cooperation of everybody not just a few big players and you ignored it.
Also I don't complain, I just say that there are alternatives. You are only blocking any thought there might be of an alternative solution because in your opinion capitalism is either a natural law or God given but not made by man.
"But on a direct question, you had no alternative.
You really seem emotionally involved and complain about the world system, which you would probably have to kill a large fraction of the world's population to change."
Again, stop ignoring my suggestions. There are many alternatives. I offered you one, Parecon and you have chosen to ignore it but don't lie to me that there aren't any.
Also stop suggesting that there must be a kind of genocide involved in change. That's ridiculous.
">Are you a fatalist?
Read what I said -- do tests of different organizational models but far from where I live, please. The failure modes are too scary."
There are several organizational alternatives on a local level, the most popular throughout the world are parallel local currencies that don't allow capital accumulation. But you are right: You are plainly scared! You are afraid of anything that might mean a change. You're irrational. You won't even buy an electric car when 90% of the population will drive one.
US corporate capitalism and soviet state capitalism both installed industrialization by brute force but that has happened 80 or 100 years ago. The same model implemented in China and elsewhere would kill the planet.
Also studies show that capitalism is only good for a small percentage of a population both on in nation and on a global scale. Moreover capitalism just broke down this/last year, don't you see it? It's now completely financed by tax payers. How can you ignore that and tell me that capitalism works fine?
>>You are just saying that because I can't show proof that electric cars have worked in a country on a large scale we can't build electric cars.
You are suggesting a bit larger problem than electric cars, it is more like nuclear driven cars that would literally explode with Megatons if any of them crashed...
(No, that is not an exaggeration, considering the repeated number of mass murders/starvations of at least millions wherever these experiments have been done -- China, Soviet, North Korea, Kampuchea, etc.)
>I showed you one alternative, Parecon,
I asked specifically for: "You can't list an example that has worked for a big population in an industrialized world -- and given them an open society."
Your answer was not relevant. but you knew that -- there is just no example -- and you lack the integrity to admit that.
>You are afraid of anything that might mean a change.
First you are upset by my lack of humanity in not wanting to change the world economy -- and then you call me coward for not wanting to do experiments that traditionally kills tens of millions of people.
Not coherent. But you knew that.
BTW, your extraordinary claims lack references (e.g. "capitalism is only good for a small percentage of a population" is not how Eastern Europe tells it!).
But then, you prefer news stories to Wikipedia with its references -- so there might not be enough TV programs on the net...?
Never mind, since you couldn't answer a single of my points regarding hunger above -- and lacked the integrity to admit it -- I only skimmed this.
The only question is if you're trolling or fanatic. In either case, you're a waste of time.
With all due respect, don't you get tired of being down modded for preaching relig.. politics on HN?
If you really can make a good argument for those theories, which shows them to be a serious alternative -- with proof that the failure modes won't kill millions of people -- put them on a web site and put up a link.
If you can do that, I promise to vote for it. (Also, you'll probably get the next Nobel for economics.)
Edit: Added a ",".