What is the goal of capitalism?

[Cougarbear]

It's production for private capital accumulation or "profits". If it's not marketable or profitable, it's not produced, even if it's a needed product. Just because something isn't commercially viable doesn't render it worthless or useless. New and better technology may even be thrown in the basement and left there forever because it will disrupt the market or undermine a prior major investment in older, less effective technology. Human progress is undermined, on account of capitalist production prioritizing profits above the public good.

We're now stuck on fossil fuels, when we could've built modern, safe nuclear plants decades ago, switching to clean electric vehicles. We can even produce liquid fuel from nuclear plants, hence there's no need for the "black gold". The only reason we're still addicted to oil and gas is due to the private pursuit of profits.

I’ll agree that new and possibly better products may be squashed. But not because of capitalism. Capitalism allows for the free market of ideas, not socialism nor communism. However, the same thing exists that undermines the true goal of socialism as it does sometimes with capitalism, power and greed. These are human conditions. However, we would not be anywhere near where we are without capitalism. Capitalism requires a certain level of liberty and freedom that the U.S. brought into the world. Socialism requires top down human Government control that is never equal and when it’s fallen into communism, which it always has, the poor and other scapegoats have been genocidal murdered. Mao and Stalin come to mind.

 

[Mexicano]

There are political analysts who make a distinction between the state and government, asserting that government isn't necessarily a state. I disagree and believe there will always be a state, even in communism, although it will be much smaller than under socialism. As the individual consumer has more advanced technology, there will no longer be a need for a large state for the reasons I mentioned in earlier posts on this thread.



In the 1930s, during the Great Depression, our unemployment rate was at 23% and that had catastrophic effects on society. In the next twenty to thirty years it's estimated that advanced automation and artificial intelligence will take 60% of jobs. Some estimates are as high as 80% for both blue and white-collar jobs. Capitalism relies on wage labor, hence if technology replaces human workers, or a significant number of them, there won't be enough paying consumers to create a market worth investing in. With automation and artificial intelligence, society has to adopt a non-profit system of production that no longer relies on wages and paying consumers or markets.

The transition from capitalism to communism should ideally go through a process of socialism. The democratization and socialization of production. Unfortunately, since there's so much misinformation and a lack of understanding about socialism in America, that gradual transition from capitalism to communism, isn't going to take place. So what will occur is an era of extreme austerity and social unrest, where a significant % of the US population is unemployed and dependent upon a fixed government income. Eventually, the situation will become so unbearably unmanageable that most Americans will seek to establish a socialist government and economy, out of necessity. We might even plunge into a civil war.

It's not just the economy or the way we organize the production of goods and services, that has to change. We have to adopt new values, and relationships with one another and what we call "private property". Most of what people own today, under capitalism, will remain theirs as personal property. Their house, vehicles..etc. Labor will be organized differently, without wages or markets, nonetheless, everyone will have a high standard of living. Scarcity will be eliminated, with advanced automation and artificial intelligence, due to the fact that autonomous machines work 24/7. Robots don't rest.



Accounting has nothing to do with money in the later stages of socialism or in communism, but with the collection and parsing of data in the area of production and logistics. Powerful computers will tell us exactly what needs to be produced based on several data sets. Money as a transactional medium of exchange is no longer needed. Society for example will determine that if someone works a minimum of 20 hours weekly, they get a house, three gallons of milk weekly..etc, without money. They walk into the automated store with their "chip card":

Red Front, "accounting" is exactly about money, with some unit counting. Vendors are paid with money, sales and wages are recorded using money. Available funds are recorded as records in financial institutions.
The areas of logistics and production play a separate role in enterprises ( private or public).
Further down the road how many things can a person buy? You need an accounting unit , which is what money is.
You can only get rid of money in a post-scarcity society... we are still very far away from it.

View attachment 809552

​

And get whatever they have a right to get, which should be more than enough since society will have an abundance of goods and services to offer.



What "problem" is that?



What's that?




More innovation, due to no longer being constrained by markets or the need for money. We will now have artificial intelligence and other technologies which will increase the research and development of new technologies. The idea that the private sector is more innovative than the public or government is false:

​

Here are 20 significant technologies that were either directly created by the U.S. government or significantly benefitted from U.S. government funding:

1. Global Positioning System (GPS): The GPS system was developed and is maintained by the U.S. Department of Defense.
2. Internet: The development of the Internet was significantly funded by the U.S. government, particularly the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).
3. Touchscreen Technology: The U.S. government, through the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), funded the development of touchscreen technology.
4. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI): The National Institutes of Health funded significant research in this area.
5. Microchips: The U.S. Air Force and Navy significantly supported the development of microchips.
6. Email: The first network email was sent by Ray Tomlinson in 1971 on the ARPANET, a precursor to the Internet funded by DARPA.
7. The Human Genome Project: This was an international research effort to determine the sequence of the human genome and identify the genes that it contains. The project was funded by the U.S. government through the National Institutes of Health.
8. Weather Satellites: The first weather satellite, TIROS-1, was launched by NASA in 1960.
9. Duct Tape: Originally created by the Johnson and Johnson Permacel Division during WWII, under a contract with the U.S. government to create a waterproof sealing tape for ammunition boxes.
10. Nuclear Power: The development of nuclear power was heavily funded and researched by the U.S. government, especially during and after World War II.
11. Stealth Technology: This technology, used to make aircraft less detectable, was developed by DARPA and the U.S. Air Force.
12. Barcodes: The development of barcode technology was funded by the National Science Foundation.
13. 3D Printing: The National Science Foundation provided funding for the early stages of 3D printing technology.
14. Fracking Technology: The Department of Energy funded research that contributed to the development of modern hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, technology.
15. Lithium-Ion Batteries: Research funded by the U.S. Department of Energy helped develop the technology behind these batteries.
16. Satellites: The launch of the first U.S. artificial satellite, Explorer 1, was a collaboration between NASA and the U.S. Army.
17. Digital Cameras: The technology behind digital cameras was initially developed at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
18. The Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (ARPANET): This was an early packet-switching network and the first network to implement the TCP/IP protocol suite, both of which became the technical foundation of the modern Internet. It was funded by DARPA.
19. Advanced Multi-layer Integrated Circuits: The Apollo Guidance Computer, developed for NASA's Apollo program, pioneered the design of integrated circuits, which are now used in nearly all electronic devices.
20. Radio Astronomy: The U.S. Navy and National Science Foundation funded early research into radio astronomy, which is now a vital tool in the exploration of the universe.

Here is a compiled list of notable Soviet inventions and significant technological achievements:

1. First Nuclear Power Plants Connected to a Power Grid: The USSR was a pioneer in the development of nuclear power for civilian use.
2. Lasers: Soviet scientist Aleksandr Prokhorov shared the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1964 for his work developing laser technology.
3. Electroluminescent Lighting (ELD): Soviet engineers contributed significantly to the development and application of this technology.
4. First Mobile Phones: Soviet engineer Leonid Kupriyanovich developed early versions of mobile phones in the mid-20th century.
5. First Artificial Satellites: The launch of Sputnik 1 in 1957 marked the start of the space age.
6. First Space Probes: Soviet probes were the first to achieve a number of significant space exploration milestones.
7. First Manned Spaceflights: Cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin became the first human in space in 1961.
8. First Spacesuits: Soviet spacesuits were designed for the unique challenges of human space travel.
9. First Spacewalk: Alexei Leonov performed the first spacewalk in 1965.
10. First Spacecraft Docking in Space: The unmanned Cosmos 186 and Cosmos 188 performed the first docking in 1967.
11. First Space Station: The Salyut program, launched in 1971, was the world's first space station program.
12. First Work with Bacteriophages: The Soviet Union was a pioneer in the study of viruses that eat bacteria, also known as bacteriophages.
13. First Vaccines for Certain Diseases: The USSR contributed significantly to vaccine development.
14. AK-47: This globally recognized assault rifle was developed by the Soviet Union.
15. Lunokhod Program: The first unmanned lunar rover to land on the moon.
16. Tetris: This popular video game was created by a Soviet software engineer.
17. First Woman in Space: Cosmonaut Valentina Tereshkova was the first woman to fly to space.
18. Artificial Heart: The first artificial heart was implanted in a dog in the Soviet Union.
19. Buran Space Shuttle: The Soviet Union's space shuttle which had its maiden flight in 1988.
20. RPG-7: A portable, reusable, anti-tank rocket-propelled grenade launcher.
21. Synthetic Rubber: The USSR was the first to produce synthetic rubber on an industrial scale.
22. The RDS-1 ("Joe 1") Atomic Bomb: The first atomic bomb tested by the Soviet Union.
23. MiG Fighter Jets: The Soviet Union’s Mikoyan Design Bureau designed this series of fighter jets.
24. Tsar Bomba: The most powerful nuclear device ever detonated.
25. Fast Neutron Reactors: The USSR was a pioneer in the development of fast neutron reactors for electricity generation.
26. Plasma Propulsion in Spacecraft: The first successful demonstration of plasma propulsion in a spacecraft.
27. Mil V-12 (Mi-12), the Largest Helicopter Ever Built: A heavy-lift helicopter that set several world records.
28. Tupolev Tu-144: The world's first commercial supersonic transport aircraft (SST).
29. T-34 Tank: A technologically innovative design which had a profound effect on tank design.
30. The Mir Space Station: The USSR developed and launched this space station, which was continuously inhabited for nearly 10 years.
31. Soyuz Spacecraft Series: A reliable and long-serving spacecraft series.
32. RD-170: The Most Powerful Rocket Engine Ever Built: The RD-170 liquid-propellant rocket engine is the most powerful rocket engine ever built.

Whoever says that only the private sector can innovate or invent, doesn't know much about the history of science. Much of humanity's technology was funded by kings who commissioned the people of knowledge and the engineers of their day, to innovate and solve problems. It often takes the vast resources of government to innovate.



When automation and artificial intelligence become advanced enough, society is forced by necessity to adopt socialism, and discard capitalism. It might happen in twenty years or in sixty years, but eventually, people will realize that technology renders capitalism with its for-profit production, completely dysfunctional and obsolete. Eliminate wage labor with automation and artificial intelligence, and the market disappears due to a lack of paying consumers. Society is forced by necessity to adopt a non-profit system of production a.k.a. socialism/communism.

​

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Especially if you're being economically sanctioned, threatened, encircled, bombed, and invaded, by well-established capitalist powers, then it's more difficult to produce. Now due to advanced technology, producing goods and providing services is easier than ever.

Commie twats crumble when capitalists are mean to them.

So much for burying us, eh comrade?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Communism is the priority of the collective and public over the private, the need to put collective interests above personal ones. There was even such a slogan under socialism: "from each according to his ability, to each according to his work," while under communism there should have been a slogan: "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."

The commie slogan is, "we pretend to work, they pretend to pay us"

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Okay, I'll reformulate the phrase: under capitalism, the problem is to produce products cheaper and better than competitors. Capitalism is a constant competition between producers.

That's not a problem, it's a benefit.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It's production for private capital accumulation or "profits". If it's not marketable or profitable, it's not produced, even if it's a needed product. Just because something isn't commercially viable doesn't render it worthless or useless. New and better technology may even be thrown in the basement and left there forever because it will disrupt the market or undermine a prior major investment in older, less effective technology. Human progress is undermined, on account of capitalist production prioritizing profits above the public good.

We're now stuck on fossil fuels, when we could've built modern, safe nuclear plants decades ago, switching to clean electric vehicles. We can even produce liquid fuel from nuclear plants, hence there's no need for the "black gold". The only reason we're still addicted to oil and gas is due to the private pursuit of profits.

If it's not marketable or profitable, it's not produced, even if it's a needed product.

If it can't be marketed, or can't be sold for a profit, how do you know it's needed?

We're now stuck on fossil fuels, when we could've built modern, safe nuclear plants decades ago, switching to clean electric vehicles.

Nuclear is a green idiocy issue, not an oil profits issue.

 

[Red Front]

If it's not marketable or profitable, it's not produced, even if it's a needed product.

If it can't be marketed, or can't be sold for a profit, how do you know it's needed?

We're now stuck on fossil fuels, when we could've built modern, safe nuclear plants decades ago, switching to clean electric vehicles.

Nuclear is a green idiocy issue, not an oil profits issue.

There's indeed a complex relationship between the energy industry's profitability and its influence over policy. Historically, the fossil fuel industry has spent significant resources lobbying governments to protect its interests. According to a report by InfluenceMap, the five largest publicly-traded oil and gas companies spend about $115m a year lobbying to delay, control or block policies to tackle climate change.

​

An Investor Enquiry: How Much Big Oil Spends on Climate Lobbying

Research suggests ExxonMobil spent $27m and Shell $22m to obstruct climate legislation in 2015, with the American Petroleum Institute and two smaller trade associations spending a further $74m on behalf of the entire industry.

influencemap.org

Fossil Fuels

An independent think tank producing data-driven analysis on how business and finance are impacting the climate crisis

influencemap.org

Moreover, a study by Drexel University sociologist Robert J. Brulle estimated that between 2003 and 2010, donations from the fossil fuel industry accounted for 78 percent of the climate change denial movement's funding (Drexel University Study, 2013).

On the other hand, nuclear energy, while having its issues and critics, can provide a low-carbon alternative to fossil fuels. The World Nuclear Association points out that nuclear energy has struggled due to market distortions caused by fossil fuel subsidies, failure to recognize the external costs of carbon emissions, and societal risk perceptions (World Nuclear Association, 2021), which are grossly inflated and influenced by the lobbying of the fossil fuel industry.

Certain products and services, though not commercially viable or profitable, are essential for societal welfare. Here are some examples:

1. Orphan Drugs: These are pharmaceutical products aimed at rare diseases. The rarity of these conditions means that there's not a large market for these drugs, making them unprofitable to produce without government assistance. The Orphan Drug Act of 1983 in the US, for instance, provides incentives to encourage the development of these drugs (FDA Orphan Drug Act).
2. Public Transportation: Many public transportation systems are not profitable but are crucial for the functioning of urban areas and for providing mobility to citizens who may not have access to personal vehicles. They're usually subsidized by governments (American Public Transportation Association).
3. Public Libraries: They offer free access to books, internet, and other resources, fostering literacy and education. They're typically run by local governments and funded by taxpayers, yet are not "profitable" in a traditional business sense (American Library Association).
4. Basic Science Research: Fundamental research often doesn't have immediate commercial applications and can be costly, making it unattractive for private entities. Yet, such research often leads to groundbreaking discoveries. Government agencies like the National Science Foundation (NSF) in the US or European Research Council (ERC) in the EU typically fund this type of research (NSF Research Funding).
5. Emergency Services: Police, fire, and medical services are generally unprofitable due to the nature of their work, yet they are indispensable for public safety and order. They're typically funded by taxpayers.

"Richter cited Gilead Sciences’ treatments for hepatitis C, which achieved cure rates of more than 90 percent. The company’s U.S. sales for these hepatitis C treatments peaked at $12.5 billion in 2015, but have been falling ever since. Goldman estimates the U.S. sales for these treatments will be less than $4 billion this year, according to a table in the report.

“GILD is a case in point, where the success of its hepatitis C franchise has gradually exhausted the available pool of treatable patients,” the analyst wrote. “In the case of infectious diseases such as hepatitis C, curing existing patients also decreases the number of carriers able to transmit the virus to new patients, thus the incident pool also declines … Where an incident pool remains stable (eg, in cancer) the potential for a cure poses less risk to the sustainability of a franchise."

Goldman Sachs asks in biotech research report: 'Is curing patients a sustainable business model?'

Goldman Sachs warns sales from the most successful disease treatments are difficult to maintain.

www.cnbc.com

It's not profitable for capitalists to cure the disease, just to keep it stable and people alive with the disease as long as possible.

When What’s Good For The World Is Bad For Business | Current Affairs

www.currentaffairs.org

These examples underscore the point that commercial viability or profitability doesn't always align with societal need or the public good.

 

[Red Front]

Commie twats crumble when capitalists are mean to them.

So much for burying us, eh comrade?

Capitalism is going the way of the dodo.

 

[Red Front]

Red Front, "accounting" is exactly about money, with some unit counting. Vendors are paid with money, sales and wages are recorded using money. Available funds are recorded as records in financial institutions.
The areas of logistics and production play a separate role in enterprises ( private or public).
Further down the road how many things can a person buy? You need an accounting unit , which is what money is.
You can only get rid of money in a post-scarcity society... we are still very far away from it.

In response to your points, I'd like to point out that our current understanding of accounting is framed within the constraints of the capitalist economic system, which regards money as a universally recognized unit of account. However, envisioning an alternative socio-economic order, such as a communist society, necessitates a rethinking of our understanding of accounting. In this new society, accounting would prioritize the management of resources to meet societal needs over individual, private profits (capital accumulation). In a high-tech, automated society, logistics and resource management can function efficiently without the need for monetary transactions. Our "accounting" amounts to data acquisition and parsing/analysis (a function of logistics).

On the topic of automation and AI, I align with thinkers like Paul Mason, who argue that these advancements will completely disrupt the very foundation and structure of capitalism. With the digitization of goods and automation, we will observe a decline in the relevance of money, leading to a shift towards other forms of economic organization, like communism.

Contrary to your assertion that we are far from a post-scarcity society, I would contend that we are closer to it than you assert. The pace of technological advancement has been transformative, and there is significant potential for automation and AI to create an abundance in production (intelligent robots and AI work 24/7).

In terms of the transition from capitalism to socialism and eventually communism, my argument rests on Marx and Engels' theory of historical materialism. I maintain that the advent of AI and automation will dramatically hasten and pretty much ensure this transition, as wage labor's role decreases due to technological innovation.

NO WAGE LABOR (OR NOT ENOUGH OF IT) = NO PAYING CONSUMERS (OR NOT ENOUGH CUSTOMERS) = NO MARKET (NOT ENOUGH OF A MARKET WORTH INVESTING IN) = DEATH OF CAPITALISM = BIRTH OF HIGH-COMMUNISM.

Here are some resources you should consider studying:

• Marx, K. (1875) "Critique of the Gotha Programme".
• Mason, P. (2015) "PostCapitalism: A Guide to our Future".
• Ford, M. (2015) "Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future".
• Marx, K. & Engels, F. (1848) "The Communist Manifesto".

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

According to a report by InfluenceMap, the five largest publicly-traded oil and gas companies spend about $115m a year lobbying to delay, control or block policies to tackle climate change.

Any spending that slows or stops green idiocy is good spending.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

On the other hand, nuclear energy, while having its issues and critics, can provide a low-carbon alternative to fossil fuels. The World Nuclear Association points out that nuclear energy has struggled due to market distortions caused by fossil fuel subsidies, failure to recognize the external costs of carbon emissions, and societal risk perceptions

Green idiocy is at least 95% of the roadblocks to more nuclear power.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It's not profitable for capitalists to cure the disease, just to keep it stable and people alive with the disease as long as possible.

Where are the commie cures for cancer?

 

[Red Front]

Any spending that slows or stops green idiocy is good spending.

Not if it undermines transitioning to nuclear ASAP.

 

[Red Front]

Where are the commie cures for cancer?

Capitalism prefers long-term treatments to cures (keeping people sick and alive as long as possible). There aren't any communist or capitalist cures, there are just cures.

The USSR, or the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, contributed significantly to cancer research in various ways before its dissolution in 1991.

1. Medicine Development: Soviet scientists developed new treatments, including immunotherapy and radiosensitizers, to help patients fight cancer.
2. Radiation Oncology: The USSR was a pioneer in the field of radiation oncology, the use of radiation to treat cancer.
3. Basic Research: Soviet scientists also conducted extensive research on the basic biology of cancer, including how it spreads (metastasizes) and how it can be prevented.

As for the United States, it has made and continues to make extensive contributions to cancer research. Key mechanisms through which the US government supports cancer research include:

1. National Institutes of Health (NIH): This is the primary agency of the U.S. government responsible for biomedical and public health research. The National Cancer Institute (NCI), a part of NIH, is a world-leading institution for cancer research.
2. Funding: The U.S. government provides billions of dollars annually for cancer research. This funding goes to universities, research institutions, and sometimes private companies to conduct research and develop new treatments.
3. Clinical Trials: The U.S. government, via institutions like NIH and FDA, supports a wide array of clinical trials to test new treatments for safety and effectiveness.
4. Regulations and Approvals: Through the FDA, the U.S. government sets guidelines for and oversees the approval of new drugs and treatments, ensuring their safety and efficacy.

Capitalism poses significant barriers to finding a cure, particularly for diseases like cancer. Here are several reasons:

1. Profit-driven Focus: Under capitalism, pharmaceutical companies often prioritize research that promises significant financial returns, which might mean focusing on treatments for diseases that affect a large number of people, or affluent populations, rather than on conditions that are less common or that primarily affect poorer individuals or regions. This could potentially divert resources away from the discovery of cancer cures, particularly for less common or 'unprofitable' types of cancer.
2. High Drug Prices: Capitalist systems typically allow drug manufacturers to set extremely high prices for new drugs. These high costs can limit access to life-saving treatments, and this financial pressure can also discourage the pursuit of truly innovative and effective treatments.
3. Short-term Profit Over Long-term Cures: The profit incentive leads to a focus on developing treatments that manage diseases rather than cure them. A patient who requires ongoing treatment is often more profitable than a patient who is cured quickly. This aspect of capitalism slows the search for a permanent cure for cancer.
4. Limited Collaboration: Capitalism limits the collaboration and information sharing between research groups which is often critical for significant breakthroughs. Each company or lab may be working on a piece of the puzzle, but capitalism creates unnecessary barriers to putting those pieces together.
5. Patent Issues: Patents, which provide a temporary monopoly to capitalize on a new treatment, can impede other researchers from building upon the patented work, slowing progress toward a cure.
6. Neglected Research: Capitalism naturally causes "orphan diseases" (rare diseases or conditions that affect a small percentage of the population) to be neglected because they aren't profitable to treat. Given that cancer is a term for a broad range of diseases, some types of cancer may not receive the attention they need.

You often resort to death toll arguments in your cheap rhetoric against socialism, and conveniently forget to factor in the much high death toll of capitalism, caused by its insatiable pursuit of profits (private capital accumulation/hoarding).

 

[Red Front]

Green idiocy is at least 95% of the roadblocks to more nuclear power.

Present your case.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Not if it undermines transitioning to nuclear ASAP.

It's the greens who killed new nuclear, not big oil.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Capitalism prefers long-term treatments to cures (keeping people sick and alive as long as possible). There aren't any communist or capitalist cures, there are just cures.

The USSR, or the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, contributed significantly to cancer research in various ways before its dissolution in 1991.

1. Medicine Development: Soviet scientists developed new treatments, including immunotherapy and radiosensitizers, to help patients fight cancer.
2. Radiation Oncology: The USSR was a pioneer in the field of radiation oncology, the use of radiation to treat cancer.
3. Basic Research: Soviet scientists also conducted extensive research on the basic biology of cancer, including how it spreads (metastasizes) and how it can be prevented.

As for the United States, it has made and continues to make extensive contributions to cancer research. Key mechanisms through which the US government supports cancer research include:

1. National Institutes of Health (NIH): This is the primary agency of the U.S. government responsible for biomedical and public health research. The National Cancer Institute (NCI), a part of NIH, is a world-leading institution for cancer research.
2. Funding: The U.S. government provides billions of dollars annually for cancer research. This funding goes to universities, research institutions, and sometimes private companies to conduct research and develop new treatments.
3. Clinical Trials: The U.S. government, via institutions like NIH and FDA, supports a wide array of clinical trials to test new treatments for safety and effectiveness.
4. Regulations and Approvals: Through the FDA, the U.S. government sets guidelines for and oversees the approval of new drugs and treatments, ensuring their safety and efficacy.

Capitalism poses significant barriers to finding a cure, particularly for diseases like cancer. Here are several reasons:

1. Profit-driven Focus: Under capitalism, pharmaceutical companies often prioritize research that promises significant financial returns, which might mean focusing on treatments for diseases that affect a large number of people, or affluent populations, rather than on conditions that are less common or that primarily affect poorer individuals or regions. This could potentially divert resources away from the discovery of cancer cures, particularly for less common or 'unprofitable' types of cancer.
2. High Drug Prices: Capitalist systems typically allow drug manufacturers to set extremely high prices for new drugs. These high costs can limit access to life-saving treatments, and this financial pressure can also discourage the pursuit of truly innovative and effective treatments.
3. Short-term Profit Over Long-term Cures: The profit incentive leads to a focus on developing treatments that manage diseases rather than cure them. A patient who requires ongoing treatment is often more profitable than a patient who is cured quickly. This aspect of capitalism slows the search for a permanent cure for cancer.
4. Limited Collaboration: Capitalism limits the collaboration and information sharing between research groups which is often critical for significant breakthroughs. Each company or lab may be working on a piece of the puzzle, but capitalism creates unnecessary barriers to putting those pieces together.
5. Patent Issues: Patents, which provide a temporary monopoly to capitalize on a new treatment, can impede other researchers from building upon the patented work, slowing progress toward a cure.
6. Neglected Research: Capitalism naturally causes "orphan diseases" (rare diseases or conditions that affect a small percentage of the population) to be neglected because they aren't profitable to treat. Given that cancer is a term for a broad range of diseases, some types of cancer may not receive the attention they need.

You often resort to death toll arguments in your cheap rhetoric against socialism, and conveniently forget to factor in the much high death toll of capitalism, caused by its insatiable pursuit of profits (private capital accumulation/hoarding).

Capitalism prefers long-term treatments to cures

That's awful!

Where are the commie cures?

You often resort to death toll arguments in your cheap rhetoric against socialism, and conveniently forget to factor in the much high death toll of capitalism

You should list those capitalism death tolls again. Pick your 3 favorites so we can discuss.

 

[Red Front]

It's the greens who killed new nuclear, not big oil.

It's the fossil fuel industry that funds the conspiracy theorists against global warming and any industry that undermines its profits, including of course nuclear energy.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Present your case.

Show all the oil spending that's stopping new nuclear power.
Any anti-nuclear commercials funded by Exxon?

 

[Cougarbear]

Not if it undermines transitioning to nuclear ASAP.

I don't think you understand your own kind. Green energy people are not and have never been supporting of Nuclear energy.