Questions for capitalists.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-11-2013, 05:01 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(02-11-2013 04:42 PM)frankksj Wrote:  @chas,

Quote: Check your fucking ideology at the door.

EXACTLY! That is exactly what I said. Don't base your opinions on emotion (and ideology). Base it on facts!

The last thing we disagreed on is if the patent system encourages or inhibits innovation. I started with academic research and empirical studies, and formed a conclusion based on them. No ideology involved. You started with your ideological assumption that 'government is good', and refused to even consider the facts and research.

In this current issue, @Revenant77x makes an absurd statement that 'corporations are accountable to themselves' while 'governments are accountable to people' (which I responded to), but even though the statement makes no sense, you still 'like' it because it suits your ideology.

We're debating if small governments with dispersed power are more or less prone to corruption than big governments with centralized, concentrated power. I start by reading Transparency International's report on corruption, get the facts, look for patterns in the data, and then form a conclusion. No ideology involved. You just ignore all that and stick with your ideology.

Unless you can show me that you actually did research to conclude that patents encourage innovation, and big, centralized governments are less corrupt, "Check your fucking ideology at the door".

Your references were not very compelling. The steam engine story is out of date with both technology and law.

The opinion that we do away with patents appears to be a minority opinion among economists. The open software people's opinion on the matter is immaterial. If they want to do communal software, have at it.
There is no other protection for intellectual property than copyright/patent law, and therefore judicial enforcement. What is to prevent Microsoft from deconstructing my software and using my invention? They've already done it to me on at least one occasion.

I have nowhere said that governments are not corrupt or susceptible to corruption. So are corporations. Please do not ascribe to me opinions I have not expressed.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2013, 05:01 PM
Questions for capitalists.
Frank.

1. Since corporations have a lot of influence and power over the economy and therefore the livelihoods of so many people, shouldn't they be elected by they people?

2. Since capitalists can work together and form corporations to strengthen their position can workers do the same and work together and form unions to strengthen their position?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2013, 05:17 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(02-11-2013 05:01 PM)Chas Wrote:  Your references were not very compelling.

Fine, what are your references, then? As far as I can tell, you don't have any. I reached a conclusion based on research and empirical studies. You reached a conclusion based on, well an ideology. And you're arguing my references are not compelling? You don't even have any references other than "because I said so." If you don't like the studies I refer to, find one respectable study that looked at empirical data and confirmed the modern patent system encourages innovation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2013, 05:23 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(02-11-2013 05:01 PM)I and I Wrote:  1. Since corporations have a lot of influence and power over the economy and therefore the livelihoods of so many people, shouldn't they be elected by they people?

YES. They already are! Vote 'yes' for a corporation by pulling out your credit card and giving them your money. The reason for me that I prefer to get products from corporations over governments is that with a government, I have to convince 51% that the product is no good, and without that, I am forced at gunpoint to buy the product against my will. With corporations, my vote counts. If I don't like them, I can boycott them. And if I expose all the horrible things the corporation does, I get congratulated, whereas if I expose all the horrible things the government does (like Snowden) I go to jail.

Quote:2. Since capitalists can work together and form corporations to strengthen their position can workers do the same and work together and form unions to strengthen their position?

Yes, of course. That provides checks and balances. Unions have their problems because they're treated like quasi-government entities. They're allowed to form monopolies and are legally immune from prosecution on anti-trust laws. So I don't like giving unions government powers, but I definitely feel that workers should be able to unite and bargain and demand better working conditions. 100%.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2013, 05:26 PM
Questions for capitalists.
Not buying something isn't the same as voting. I take it you are against a national voting system to elect corporate execs in or out of leadership positions?

And you are for unions correct?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2013, 05:32 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
Quote:Not buying something isn't the same as voting.

Sure it is. If everybody votes 'no', the corporation ceases to exist.

Quote:I take it you are against a national voting system to elect corporate execs in or out of leadership positions?

I am in favor of such a system. The people can boycott corporations whose execs they don't like, thus removing them from their leadership positions.

Quote:And you are for unions correct?

Like I said, everybody should be able to form any type of voluntary association they want, whether it's a union or a bridge club. I am only against giving unions super-human powers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2013, 05:37 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(02-11-2013 05:17 PM)frankksj Wrote:  
(02-11-2013 05:01 PM)Chas Wrote:  Your references were not very compelling.

Fine, what are your references, then? As far as I can tell, you don't have any. I reached a conclusion based on research and empirical studies. You reached a conclusion based on, well an ideology. And you're arguing my references are not compelling? You don't even have any references other than "because I said so." If you don't like the studies I refer to, find one respectable study that looked at empirical data and confirmed the modern patent system encourages innovation.

No, I reached my conclusion on evidence. Microsoft steals people's software. Sears steals people's tool designs. People steal.

One function of government is to provide protection to people.

Once again, I have already said there are problems with the current patent system. That doesn't mean we should do away with patents - it means we need to fix the system.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2013, 06:00 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(02-11-2013 05:37 PM)Chas Wrote:  Once again, I have already said there are problems with the current patent system. That doesn't mean we should do away with patents - it means we need to fix the system.

How do we do that? Considering that the Federal government can't even launch a health exchange website, do you really think they can properly implement something as complex and nuanced as a patent system that, in order to function, must be able to accurately separate genuine new inventions, from vague, broad concepts? If the US government had the skills to do it, why haven't they?

Remember Obama promised patent reform, and just like with all the other government programs, even the best intentions were ruined by special interests that took over and what we got with the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act of 2011 just makes the system WORSE. Now patents are not awarded to the first person to invent something, their awarded to the first person to FILE, even if somebody else already invented it! link. Trolls love it. Now they can see something new and breakthrough that YOU invented, and if you didn't rush to patent it, THEY can go to the patent office and get a patent on YOUR invention. I agree that patents sound good in principle, but every time the Federal government tries to fix the system they just make it worse. And considering that a lack of a patent system hasn't harmed innovation in the sectors that don't have it (like fashion), I think we'd all be much better off without this broken system, and I have zero faith the Federal government will ever fix it and make it right.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2013, 06:12 PM
Questions for capitalists.
Why should patents exist in the first place? I would like to hear a compelling argument for the reason patents should exist.

Should patents exist for any and everything? What about vaccines, medical equipment, and medicine that can save many lives, why should these be patented at all. Who cares if people copy and use medical inventions to save more lives.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2013, 06:20 PM
Questions for capitalists.
(02-11-2013 05:32 PM)frankksj Wrote:  
Quote:Not buying something isn't the same as voting.

Sure it is. If everybody votes 'no', the corporation ceases to exist.

Quote:I take it you are against a national voting system to elect corporate execs in or out of leadership positions?

I am in favor of such a system. The people can boycott corporations whose execs they don't like, thus removing them from their leadership positions.

Quote:And you are for unions correct?

Like I said, everybody should be able to form any type of voluntary association they want, whether it's a union or a bridge club. I am only against giving unions super-human powers.

So we agree that corporations and unions shouldn't have super human powers. What happens if unions (communism) or corporations (capitalism) has too much power and become corrupt. We should be able to vote these people out of leadership positions since they have a lot if influence over society correct?

Example: the decisions made by corporate execs in the 90s led to the crashing (still getting worse) economy. They have affected millions of lives yet are not held accountable by those people they affect. They are what you describe superhuman in their ability to affect so many people. If we are not able to vote people in or out of power that have a lot if power over the economy then that is a dictatorship.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: