"Another World is Possible" -- or is it? What's your view?

Capitalism is a very workable system that encourages innovation and general improvement for the many. Its weakness is that people are greedy and will work very hard to corrupt the system for their personal benefit far beyond what makes societal sense. Until you can regulate/control/eliminate greed and ambition every system will fail to produce the good outcomes we all would like to see.
You are giving capitalism way too much credit. Narz mentioned stuff like cola and junkfood. Is that innovation and general improvement for the many?
I am very certain that there has been research showing that the profit motive actually is bad for innovation.
And people are only able to get whatever corporations can provide, it's not like this is a good system that give people what they need.

Also, don't come here with the "people are greedy" card
 
Also, don't come here with the "people are greedy" card
I think most compulsive hoarding/trying to control life with money is not because "people are greedy" but because they are lonely/feel disconnected/feel unsafe.

You wouldn't say a man with a prostitute problem is "greedy" for sex. Most likely he's just lonely & disconnected, lost or never developed his ability to communicate with women & uses the one skill he has acquired (earning money) to try to fill that void. Some people probably do get addicted to prostitutes out of sexual greed/intense lust just as some people become hoarders or buy an 8-bedroom mansion because they love stuff/big houses but 99% its loneliness & the fact that our culture idolizes acquisition above all else (as opposed to Eskimo culture for one & many other cultures where excessive materialism & boasting was looked down upon).

Have a big house & lots of toys is a consolation prize for having an empty life.
 
I have no house and I have no sex life. Thanks for making me feel better!
 
Parents house!
 
Nothing wrong with that. Free rent, got your own room at least, right? Milk it as long as you can!
 
You are giving capitalism way too much credit. Narz mentioned stuff like cola and junkfood. Is that innovation and general improvement for the many?
FWIW, Karl Marx frequently spoke with approval of capitalism, saying it had dome more to progress humanity -electric lights and railways- in less than a century than 1000 years of feudalism had done. It may have been unsustainable and morally abhorrent to Marx, but he recognized the innovation it brought along with it.
 
nothing wrong with that. Free rent, got your own room at least, right? Milk it as long as you can!

but how will i ever make the sexings?????
 
Or the Germans could have allied with the British Commonwealth.
That was the plan.

As I've heard it, Hitler had great respect for imperial Brittain. The feeling wasn't mutual, though that might have been different if Chamerblain was still running things.

Still, Germany would have managed if they had delayed turning towards Russia. Russia could easily have waited; the Germans were always going to get as far as they did, with as much ease as they did.

but how will i ever make the sexings?????
Depends. In what context are you living in your parent's house? Late teens? Early twenties? Mid twenties?
 
None of those options.
 
Correct.
 
Someone in the thread covering the recent legaliation of same-sex marriages said they planned on marrying their fleshlight. If that wasn't you, you may want to follow their cue.

But plainly you would know by now that a car, a job and your own residence are critical factors.
 
Really? More and more people my age in the UK continue living at home.

I'm incapable of full time work and driving.
 
Still, Germany would have managed if they had delayed turning towards Russia. Russia could easily have waited; the Germans were always going to get as far as they did, with as much ease as they did.
Managed to defeat the British Commonwealth?
Not ever.
Germany was bankrupting itself paying Russia for resources. Indeed, one of the primary drivers for the timetable for Barbarossa was so Nazi Germany could skip out on paying Russia for the resources. I don't remember the exact numbers, Germany couldn't make those payments to Russia and maintain their army.

Even without Germany invading Russia, the British Commonwealth could have defeated both Germany and Japan -so long as Japan kept up its dream of conquering China. Japan was badly overstretched when it made the gamble for British Asia. When the British surrendered at Singapore, the Japanese artillery was down to less than ten rounds per gun. The road and transportation network in British Asia after they finished retreating back to India following the fall of Singapore was so bad that even if Japan possessed the resources sufficient to contemplate a full scale attack on India, it is doubtful they could have kept their troops properly supplied.

It is important to remember that at the beginning of WWII Britain was arguably the strongest country in the world with a colonial empire that covered a quarter of the globe and ruled 1/4-1/5 of the worlds population with an economic and trading network that had influence across the globe. Britain could simply afford to wait and let Japan, Italy, and Germany bleed themselves dry. It would have left all involved countries in ruins and caused millions more deaths, but it could have been done.
 
Managed to defeat the British Commonwealth?
Not ever.
Germany was bankrupting itself paying Russia for resources. Indeed, one of the primary drivers for the timetable for Barbarossa was so Nazi Germany could skip out on paying Russia for the resources. I don't remember the exact numbers, Germany couldn't make those payments to Russia and maintain their army.

Even without Germany invading Russia, the British Commonwealth could have defeated both Germany and Japan -so long as Japan kept up its dream of conquering China. Japan was badly overstretched when it made the gamble for British Asia. When the British surrendered at Singapore, the Japanese artillery was down to less than ten rounds per gun. The road and transportation network in British Asia after they finished retreating back to India following the fall of Singapore was so bad that even if Japan possessed the resources sufficient to contemplate a full scale attack on India, it is doubtful they could have kept their troops properly supplied.

It is important to remember that at the beginning of WWII Britain was arguably the strongest country in the world with a colonial empire that covered a quarter of the globe and ruled 1/4-1/5 of the worlds population with an economic and trading network that had influence across the globe. Britain could simply afford to wait and let Japan, Italy, and Germany bleed themselves dry. It would have left all involved countries in ruins and caused millions more deaths, but it could have been done.

Claiming that it could be done is debatable. Britain survived thanks to its colonies. Had the war dragged on longer those colonies and the soldiers from this areas may have grown mutinous. Perhaps not enough to destroy Britain on its own but coupled with Japanese and German determination and assuming no other foes. Maybe.
 
As usual attempts at discussing any whole or complex vision of the future turn inward and backward on the past, I think primarily because we understand we have little to no substantive control as individuals or even as a body politic over the direction our society is headed in.
 
Top Bottom