Amazing that the Internet was not the work of private enterprise, it was actually a government project for the military (DARPA). No profit it in it supposedly. How long has it been exactly that the corporations of the world have ridden on the back of public works?

And what funded the government? Taxes. From where? People making money. Do you think we'd have the Internet in a communistic society?

"Do you think we'd have the Internet in a communistic society?"

And what about in a communisticalist society, Frogboy?

"It's always ironic when someone sits back talking about the evils of capitalism on their personal computer that transmits their complaints all over the world via the Internet to milliosn of others who are also reading it on their personal computers."

I'd call it appropriate.

"Gees how pessimistic is that"
Yes terribly pessimistic to talk about the bad things that are actually happening in the world. Jeez Toblerone, way to bring down the whole mood of the place. Can we keep the real world out of it please?

"Being idealistic can be good in small doses but reality has a habit of catching up."

FishHead, Reality clearly hasn't caught up with you yet. One minute you claim Toblerone is a pessimist the next he's an idealist! Make up your mind!

As for the rest of the private schoolboy anecdotal arguments here, I don't think I could possibly argue against them better than Toblerone already has done

Firstly, sorry for the many grammatical errors in my previous post.

Secondly, I wan't just arguing against captitalism, I was arguing against the monetary system in general. Although I'm more pro socialist then captitalist I'm actually against both since both rely on money. Why is that people automatically think you're a communist if you don't like capitalism. It is isn't the opposite of capitalism, it's just another system. It seems Macarthyism is still alive and well because the people on this board seem a little scared of "reds under the bed".

Draginol's use of the word 'ironic' was very Alanis, don't you think, maybe a little too Alanis, yes I really do think.

What's ironic about your posts is that neither the Internet nor your computer as it is would exist in your hypothetical society. The Internet and most, if not all, forms of technology were either created for military conquest or for profit. Of course, you do base your hypothetical society on a foundation built by capitalism, right? It's ironic how everybody intends to build their anti-capitalist utopia with the tools of capitalism.
Who decides if somebody is doing their share for society? Would William Shakespeare, The Beatles, and Courtney Love be considered to be doing their fair shares?
Also, unless you end scarcity, there will always be war over resources.
I also can't help but wonder how luxuries would be allocated. If everybody was given the same amount of stuff, then I'd have no reason to work harder than the minimum requirement in the easiest job I could find. If everybody wasn't given the same amount of stuff, then it would be like capitalism, in which there are haves and have-nots, and greedy corruption would take form in the form of bartering (i.e. sex slaves for a a Maine lobster dinner or something rare).

Good for you, Champas - that shook them out of their reverie! (The woodwork squeaks ... )

It's always ironic when someone sits back talking about the evils of capitalism on their personal computer that transmits their complaints all over the world via the Internet to milliosn of others who are also reading it on their personal computers.

Absolutely right. Where are all the blog complaints about capitalism from the people WITHOUT personal computers? Hah! Answer me that.

Capitalism is built on enlightened self interest. Seems to work pretty well

No, actually Capitalism is built on self-interest, end of story. Enlightenment is an optional extra, just like self-regulation, corporate philanthropy and other such 'success' stories of the free market. And as for it working pretty well, I'm with 'The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy' on that one: 'Many men of course became extremely rich, but this was perfectly natural and nothing to be ashamed of because no one was really poor - at least no one worth speaking of.' (Douglas Adams)

Right, that's my two roubles worth. I like Russia so much I'm off to live there. (Or at least I would, if you damned Capitalists hadn't got your hands on it first.)

"Without the motivation of profit, most of what we have today would not exist."

Without slavery we would not have rock n roll. Without the French monarchy France would not have beautiful palaces. It was a terrible mistake getting rid of those systems, look at what they gave to the world! Vive la monarchie!

"Do you think we'd have the Internet in a communistic society?"

I can remember my life before I had the internet. Sometimes I'd just have these massive fits where I'd scream uncontrollably and end up in the foetal position. Doctors examined me but had no idea what was wrong with me or how to treat me. Then the internet came and all my problems were solved. I could just stare into the screen for a few hours and suddenly I felt fine. Thankyou internet! I don't know how I got by without you.

I don't know whether these things would exist in a communist society or a moneyless society or not. I'm sure a communist society or a non-monetary society or even a socialist capitalist society (you may recall my original argument was actually in favour of Australia's Centre-Right Labor Party) would have come up with the occasional invention that people would have used and enjoyed, whether it be the internet or some other toy. Then again, maybe no money would have turned us all into bludging zombies. We certainly don't get any of them under capitalism.

"I'd have no reason to work harder than the minimum requirement in the easiest job I could find."

Try a day in the Australian public service. Even try a day in any number of private enterprises. Observe your colleagues there. Observe their levels of motivation to keep working harder than the minimum requirement. And what about those checkout operators down at the local supermarket. Boy, the motivation to work harder and harder is really eveident there. Hooray for capitalism!

"It's ironic how everybody intends to build their anti-capitalist utopia with the tools of capitalism."

Yes I suppose they should blow the whole world up and start all over again. Capitalism was built on the foundations of what came before it and so on. That's how it works.

But look, my blog is not arguing in favour of communism or even the abolition of money. I have respect for those arguments, but my argument was simply about how we should treat money. I think the Liberal Party (and the Republican Party in the US) is living in a dreamworld if they think this is how economics works.

*hands you an eye* I may need that later, please look after it for me ;o)

is now X_o

I don't know whether these things would exist in a communist society or a moneyless society or not. I'm sure a communist society or a non-monetary society or even a socialist capitalist society (you may recall my original argument was actually in favour of Australia's Centre-Right Labor Party) would have come up with the occasional invention that people would have used and enjoyed, whether it be the internet or some other toy. Then again, maybe no money would have turned us all into bludging zombies. We certainly don't get any of them under capitalism.

I don't understand your last statement. We don't get any of what under capitalism?

Try a day in the Australian public service. Even try a day in any number of private enterprises. Observe your colleagues there. Observe their levels of motivation to keep working harder than the minimum requirement. And what about those checkout operators down at the local supermarket. Boy, the motivation to work harder and harder is really eveident there. Hooray for capitalism!

And these people climb the corporate ladder by applying minimal effort? Maybe I'm jaded by the fact that those I know that have worked hard have much better jobs now than they did before while those who only acted half-ass aren't anywhere near them.

Yes I suppose they should blow the whole world up and start all over again. Capitalism was built on the foundations of what came before it and so on. That's how it works.

Maybe I'm mistaken, but much of what we have now is the result of capitalism. So, an alternative society would not be able to start over and progress as capitalism has unless it piggybacks on the gifts of capitalism?

I think the Liberal Party (and the Republican Party in the US) is living in a dreamworld if they think this is how economics works.

How does it work? Vanstone has the best explanation that I've seen as to how things work. "If you're not making a profit, you're not employing people, you're not paying tax, THEY'RE not paying tax." Makes sense to me.

Vanstone has the best explanation that I've seen as to how things work.

Buu, I can only assume that this - like your recent posting about being willing to sell your vote for sex - is intended to be satirical. Otherwise we're ALL screwed.

Buu, I can only assume that this - like your recent posting about being willing to sell your vote for sex - is intended to be satirical. Otherwise we're ALL screwed.

It's not satirical. I don't see what's wrong with what she said. She also has the best explanation in that she has the only explanation here. Why hasn't anybody explained how it really works?

The only reason why people are able to even post this anti-capitalism content here in the first place is because of capitalism -- this site is a for profit venture after all.

Indeed. Another way that self-interest benefits others. Sure, self-interest sometimes only harms others, but I have a feeling that any other system or ideal has some negative side effects to them, even if the supporters refuse to think about them.

The only reason why people are able to even post this anti-capitalism content here in the first place is because of capitalism

Assuming (for the moment) that this is true ...
Capitalism is the predominant system. Some of us disagree with it. However, for the time being at least, we still have to live in the world the way it is. Therefore we have to use the means that are available to us to challenge the system, regardless of the origins of those means.

... but it ISN'T true!
That Capitalism is the predominant system in our world does not imply that it is necessarily the CAUSE of any other specific aspect of the way the world is. Nor does it imply that any other specific aspect of the world would necessarily NOT exist under an alternative system. Beware the political version of 'the Anthropic principle' - the belief that the end of Capitalism would NECESSARILY mean the spontaneous disappearance of - say - the Internet, meat pies or 'Australian Idol'. (Although that's an attractive prospect ...)

True, the Internet might still be able to function in an alternative system. Of course, we'll never know, as nobody ever develops another system enough to actually implement it, and I doubt anybody ever will.

The only reason why people are able to even post this anti-capitalism content here in the first place is because of capitalism -- this site is a for profit venture after all.

I always thought you did it for the love of the game and the possibility of maybe making a little back from premium memberships - I didn't realise you were already turning a profit from the banner ads.

I like capitalism because me and my family have always done well by it and likely will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Barring major and simultaneous collapse in the housing, stock, metals and derivatives markets (something that theoretically should be near-impossible) I will always have sufficient money to live on. That doesn't mean I think it's the only system which provides rapid technological advancement or improves the general quality of life. War and competition tend to drive tech advances (eg radio, rocketry, satellites, the internet etc), and certainly capitalism does encourage these phenomena to a large degree. But then again socialist countries also have an admirable/deplorable history of conflict, so capitalist countries can't claim to be the first in satellite technology, laser/knife based eye correction and a number of highly important mathematical fomulae.

I guess the point I'm trying (and likely failing) to make is that the benefits of capitalism for economic and technological growth should be tempered with the benefits socialism offers in stability and equality. Neither should allowed an open hand in the running of the state, but both should have a place. The iron shackles of communism should be avoided, but if we give the markets no chain at all they will fly beyond our reach, and there's no guarantee the rich will take anyone with them.