Capitalism sucks! Socialism (Government planned economy) is the best system!

Author: Best.Korea

Posts

Total: 140
Topic's author
#121
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,608
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
There aren't even 270 million people in the US with driver's licenses.  Some things you read on the internet are just wrong
Some people own multiple vehicles, not all vehicles require driving license.

leading to the price being about the same.
Prices have consistently increased over time. The supply doesnt always follow the demand. If cost of production for raw materials is same, their price will likely stay same or increase over time.

 It's like your computer (which has an electric battery). 
Its nothing like my computer. Car battery is over 1000 times bigger than a computer battery, and battery for trucks and airplanes even bigger.

I think you have lost this exchange by saying the US population should use the energy levels of North Korea
No, I am pretty, sure that USA has lost this exchange.
Topic's author
#122
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,608
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
if that's really what you believe, then never go to DART again; you are using too much energy
But I am greedy.

#123
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Best.Korea
Some people own multiple vehicles, not all vehicles require driving license.
But it's impossible to drive multiple cars at once, and I don't know if your 2nd claim is correct.

Prices have consistently increased over time. 
Inflation

The supply doesnt always follow the demand.
Not always, but there has been a mistake in the car making industry that they are fixing as we speak.


Its nothing like my computer. Car battery is over 1000 times bigger than a computer battery, and battery for trucks and airplanes even bigger.
Well do you drive or take public transit?

But I am greedy.
So is everybody else!  Practice what you preach or change your speech!
Topic's author
#124
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,608
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
But it's impossible to drive multiple cars at once
Thats why they probably dont do it at once.

, and I don't know if your 2nd claim is correct.
There are 230 million driving licenses in USA, and 270 million vehicles.

Inflation
Yeah, so expect more inflation in the future.

Well do you drive or take public transit?
Sure, I dont drive, but I do use public transport from time to time.

So is everybody else!  Practice what you preach or change your speech!
One can do neither, so that is a false or.
#125
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Best.Korea
Thats why they probably dont do it at once.
Lets say there are 2 people; Person A and Person B.  They both drive 80 km a day.  Person A owns 1 vehicle; Person B owns 2.  Person A is getting all their driving done with their 1 vehicle; Person B splits it up.  I don't believe there is too much correlation between how much driving in total you perform vs the number of cars you own; but I believe there is a strong negative correlation between how much driving per vehicle vs the number of cars you own (assuming you own at least 1 car).

There are 230 million driving licenses in USA, and 270 million vehicles.
My family has 5 people with licenses and 3 cars.  A lot of families may be my family's size and only have 1 or 2 cars (or 0).

Yeah, so expect more inflation in the future.
Supply and demand adjusted for inflation (the stock market rises faster than the inflation rate on average).

Sure, I dont drive, but I do use public transport from time to time.
That public transit is powered either with gasoline or electricity.  So you use energy more than the average North Korean from the public transit you take.

So is everybody else!  Practice what you preach or change your speech!
One can do neither, so that is a false or.
Incorrect.  You can merely become pro energy consumption.
Topic's author
#126
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,608
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
Lets say there are 2 people; Person A and Person B.  They both drive 80 km a day.  Person A owns 1 vehicle; Person B owns 2.  Person A is getting all their driving done with their 1 vehicle; Person B splits it up.  I don't believe there is too much correlation between how much driving in total you perform vs the number of cars you own; but I believe there is a strong negative correlation between how much driving per vehicle vs the number of cars you own (assuming you own at least 1 car).
It makes your original claim about how much average car drives false, since your claim was about per car, not per person.

My family has 5 people with licenses and 3 cars.  A lot of families may be my family's size and only have 1 or 2 cars (or 0).
Sorry, but I prefer to trust sources rather than personal examples which may not apply generally.

Supply and demand adjusted for inflation (the stock market rises faster than the inflation rate on average).
Again, no one will sell all the stock market to help people buy cars.

Incorrect
If you are saying that its impossible to preach what you dont practice and not change your speech, then what are you accusing me of?
#127
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Best.Korea
It makes your original claim about how much average car drives false, since your claim was about per car, not per person.
So then per person would probably be a better metric.

# of licensr holders in the US: 230 million

# of km/licence holder/year: 20k

# of km driven/year in the US: 4.6 Trillion

Kilo Watts/km of an electric car: .2 KWh

KWH/year: 920 Billion KWH

Total US energy consumption/year: 4.05 Trillion KWH

This is about a 22% increase.

My family has 5 people with licenses and 3 cars.  A lot of families may be my family's size and only have 1 or 2 cars (or 0).
Sorry, but I prefer to trust sources rather than personal examples which may not apply generally.
Do you really think there are that many families with 5 people that have 8 cars to offset all the families with 3 cars?  It seem unrealistic.

Again, no one will sell all the stock market to help people buy cars.
People may sell some of their stock so they personally can buy a car.

If you are saying that its impossible to preach what you dont practice and not change your speech, then what are you accusing me of?
I was saying Incorrect when you said one can do neither.
Topic's author
#128
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,608
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
# of km/licence holder/year: 20k
Thats, again, for cars. The source which you are using is talking about cars alone. Not trucks or transport vans.

I was saying Incorrect when you said one can do neither
I said both claims can be false. Thats what it means when I say one can do "neither of those".

People may sell some of their stock so they personally can buy a car.
Yeah, "may".

175 days later

#129
befairbruh
befairbruh's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8
0
0
2
befairbruh's avatar
befairbruh
0
0
2
-->
@Best.Korea
i think you dont understand capitalism, your planned economy is a moneyless society, while capitalism works from work, the more useful you are the more capable of achieveing greatness you will be, besides chocolate isnt the only resource available the thing about something being scare is that people innevitably find an alternative, beyond that the capitalist society is made of striving and competitive therefore innovating people, while the communist one is made of lazy complacient people with no desire nor ambition, ask me wich is more human or wich one is more likely to thrive. i think its obvious. real life example in a capitalist thriving society where resources do run out because they do, humans would have just started farming planets, but only on a capitalist one where people compete to please others, and the one that pleases the most gets the most, only then where competition innevitably equals innovation.
Topic's author
#130
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,608
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@befairbruh
example in a capitalist thriving society where resources do run out because they do, humans would have just started farming planets
So you think that solution for running out of resources, which must happen, is to farm planets?

Some imagination you capitalists have!

This is what happens when people watch way too much Star Trek lol
#131
befairbruh
befairbruh's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8
0
0
2
befairbruh's avatar
befairbruh
0
0
2
-->
@Best.Korea
im saying that humans historically find new ways to thrive in any form or way they find possible, when america was discovered for example, when the burgoise was born after feudalism ended, the fact that you believe that humans are meant to be born and die on earth is not just sad but shows shows how much communism/socialism is only meant to  end, capitalism doesnt end because it cant its made out of the creation of wealth from current wealth. necessity of pushing through creates new forms to push through, do i explain myself? also in your example they run out of chocolate and thats it, in capitalism they just find something else not just because they can (free will wich communism does not posses) but because they have to.
Topic's author
#132
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,608
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@befairbruh
in capitalism they just find something else
Great. You think there is always something else on a planet with finite decreasing resources and growing human population.

I blame Star Trek for this. Its basically just fantasy land argument. Kinda like heaven.
#133
befairbruh
befairbruh's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8
0
0
2
befairbruh's avatar
befairbruh
0
0
2
-->
@Best.Korea
if somehow you think that the best argument is to diqualify me and take me for a fool or a lunatic for merely stating a fact you still havent disproved. then i need no more proof that you clearly have nothing to say. the clearest example and the most basic one too is that humans when they were hunter gatherers actually had to spread their resources in a much more balanced way because of how scare and finite they were yet there was a point when agriculture was discovered and we didnt had to care anymore does that make it clear, i know these are two very different examples but it seems that you still dont understand the fact that necesity creates motivation we mus prevail or we die.
#134
befairbruh
befairbruh's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8
0
0
2
befairbruh's avatar
befairbruh
0
0
2
-->
@Best.Korea
also is your solution to just die as a species??  because human population will keep growing and resources will keep ending even with your planned stuff, i said this before your society ends mine doesnt, besides lets say you make food last forever earth doesnt last forever so you just give up?? its a bit nihilistic
Topic's author
#135
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,608
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@befairbruh
Great. You think its a fact that there is always something else on a finite planet with finite decreasing resources and growing human population.

You also think that if humans found other resources once in a while, that they will always find other resources after they run out of those, on a finite planet with finite resources.

When people waste money everywhere and expect they will still manage somehow, those people usually end up failing economically.

But maybe its different with wasting resources, so go and waste resources to find out if its different than wasting money.
#136
befairbruh
befairbruh's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8
0
0
2
befairbruh's avatar
befairbruh
0
0
2
-->
@Best.Korea
i think that  the potential of human growth relys both on its freedom to grow and prosper voluntairly we could start devoloping geoingeneering one day and maybe even create our own solar systems, this is the power of capitalism and free market its not just finding something and ending it, today we see minerals as finite but tomorrow we might even be able to harvest them, as we do with food, we did it with animals at one point, also i am not saying that all humans do is find another resource to consume completely im saying that humanity finds an alternative to a necesity. and you still havent answered my question, does your society plan to die one way or another??
#137
befairbruh
befairbruh's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8
0
0
2
befairbruh's avatar
befairbruh
0
0
2
-->
@Best.Korea
When people waste money everywhere and expect they will still manage somehow, those people usually end up failing economically.
 what does this even mean?? do you know anything about market laws??

Topic's author
#138
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,608
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@befairbruh
Well, you still seem to think there are infinite resources on a finite planet with finite resources.

maybe even create our own solar systems
Even Star Trek didnt include such nonsense in its series, so I dont know which fantasy series are you getting all this from.
Topic's author
#139
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,608
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@befairbruh
what does this even mean
If you dont know what it means, then there is really no hope here. I might as well speak Chinese. Ching chang chong.

#140
befairbruh
befairbruh's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8
0
0
2
befairbruh's avatar
befairbruh
0
0
2
-->
@Best.Korea
will you answer my question?? what happens to society after a lapse of time, and also capitalism isnt just spending money you have a misconception of it it is creating wealth off current wealth and the market laws work just to please people in a competitive way its not just greedy pigs munching over each other, i honestly would like to keep this respectful there is no need to ridiculize anyone, if anything it just shows how little to nothing you have to say, because you have to basically follow my premise necessity creates innovation but youre clearly not a good capitalist because putting someone down for simply stating facts you havent disproved isnt innovating