In what way does communism incentivize technology? And how does communism incentivize reduced use of materials and the better use of said materials. Such as using thinner glass for eyeglasses, or the adaption of plastics for more varied uses? Is the solution a mixed economy or dual economy?
For example, Capitalism makes companies want to use less material because it's cheaper, and using better materials to sell a better product to market.
I don't advocate for Capitalism, but am curious how this works economically within Communism.
Maybe i'm just ignorant, but from what I've gathered the difference is that with Communism the work is done to meet basic needs and no more providing no profit or excess. Socialism work is done to turn a profit, then the profit is shared between the workers. Yes?
If i'm correct, then the question remains. How does communism incentivise technology and use materials more effectively if there is no need to produce beyond basic needs?
If i'm wrong, then please educate me on the difference.
Also, "> there is no difference between Socialism and Communism." I never said, nor implied this.
Nolan Cox
Well Capitalism is thought to drive innovation and efficiency, but I think it has that appearance because of cherrypicked examples.
Look at big pharma. CRISPR is a new technology that has the potential to treat genetic diseases in the near future. It was discovered by government funded, university scientists studying bacterial immune proteins. No company would ever invest money in something like that because it was studied for 15-20 purely off curiousity before it's potential was realized. Were it not for the government, numerous companies would have never invested in such technology.
Also look at insurance companies. They make the most money when they pay for the least amount of services. That by design means people will be denied the services they are paying that company for. That is inherently the opposite of efficiency IMO.
So what I am saying is that Capitalism is not inherently efficient. 1/3 of all food produced in this country is thrown away to create a scarcity the food service can profit off of.
But in the case of your eyeglasses example, look at what Communism actually is. It is the return of control/ownership of the means to produce those glasses to the people actually making them. In other words, transfer ownership and profit to the workers, not some disconnected board of directors. The exact same drive to produce better glasses for cheaper would exist in such a system, it simply means the people making the glasses would be the drivers of that drive, not decreed by some rich leader.
Aaron Clark
Communism is a form of socialism. Socialism is a sort of umbrella term, and there isn't a crazy strong consensus, things are still debated.
But one line of thinking is a transition from capitalism to state socialism, meaning government controls the means of production. The next step would be communism, of means of production is decentralized from government and given to the workers themselves. They are allowed to democratize the work place and determine how the company/factory/whatever move forward. They are directly rewarded through profit for their decisions.
Ryan Baker
Are you asking earnestly or are you a troll seeking to shit the discussion?
Chase Davis
Tehnological progress existed before the rise of capitalism and will exist after. As long as people have problems, you will find people trying t fix them. As long as unanswered questions persists, people will try to solve the riddles. The main difference is that scientists and engineers won't be hindered by the "Is it profitable?" filter which is today's science cancer.
Carson Mitchell
I'm not exactly sure how I can convince you, but I am asking from sincere curiosity.
I'm not sure where I can truly say I am at peace, economically speaking.
From what I've gathered,
Capitalism has areas of great progress in technology, but severely disadvantages its workers.
Socialism has similar, though lower, progress in technology and efficiency. The workers within socialism are treated fairly, and are better off. Socialism still has a market to sell to, even if the factories belong to the workers.
This is why I ask of Communism. How does Communism create better and more useful technologies? I am wondering of the working economic theory.
Colton Hughes
If you're sincere I will care to answer In communism there will not be incentives, things will be made because people needs them or because they full fill a function, the question you should ask is how capitalism rewards useful technology? because lots of stuff never get made because they're not profuitable or because there is not market and said market doesn't exist because there is no profit on it.
Jackson Sullivan
While we're on this topic, how do we fix the stemlord problem?
Eli Jackson
I understand the Capitalist pitfall of something not being profitable, but you stated that the market doesn't exist because there is no profit.
Isn't need and function still an incentive?
Doesn't profit, or expected profit, create a market? If there is a market for something there is demand. Isn't there demand because there is need?
I would imagine a better example to be a market left unfulfilled because it is not profitable.
Andrew Hall
Ding ding ding ding. Fucking spot on man. The biggest hinderence to scientific innovation.
Do you know how many potential cures and treatments for diseases are buried by big pharma because there simply isn't enough of a market for them?
Potential lives lost in the process, quality of human life be damned, so long as there is a profit margin to maintain.
Noah Diaz
No.
Socialism (State/Soviet Socialism) is USSR. Communism is the future post-scarcity economy (dumbed down explanation: "robots everywhere").
It was thought that you can't even have an economy, unless it's market economy. Now it got amended to "it's less efficient" if it's not market economy.
No.
Socialism (USSR) was more efficient when it came to technological progress. The problem was that practically all Socialist states (even DDR was mostly ruins post-WWII) were extremely poor and backwards, compared to rich Capitalist states.
For example, USSR in 1929 (before industrialization, but after most of GOELRO - electrification) had 30 times less electricity produced per capita than USA had (and 20 times less, if compared to England/Germany).
Kevin Wright
Making "humanities" (dunno how to call that in english)part of all cursuses rather than a thing on its own.
With capitalism, offer create need, more than the other way around.
Brody Miller
So, if that's socialism, then what is the economic system in the majority of Europe? Is that still capitalism?
Dominic Morales
Of course it is Capitalism. What else could it be?
Juan Reyes
A market does not need to be created because of expected profit. The real root for a market is a demand, and in our current society companies fight to corner a market by catering to that demand. Usually in a way that creates the most profit for the company.
But you do not need profit as a driver. In a communist system a company could simply be created to meet the demand by the government. You assume you absolutely need profit but that is because you have lived your entirely life under capitalism.
Matthew Diaz
A non economic incentive but you're thinking that profit is the only thing that drives people to do things. Autists write computer programs because coding is fun Artists make webcomics because making comics is fun without the hassle of a publishing house Cleaning ladies clean because the devil is a dust bunny.
The last thing is the best way to say it
Thomas Thomas
So you're saying demand is met by an individual, or group of individuals, own volition rather than a monetary reward? If that's the case, i'm beginning to understand that aspect.
I am still curious as to how materials are used more effectively.
Nolan Lopez
people with experience in such fields will come up with that, what do you think chemists do?
Gavin Taylor
...
Dominic Ward
Pharma isn't hiding cures. They are however wasting billions rearranging molecules so that they can squeeze more profit out of the same products by bypassing IP laws.
Sebastian Sullivan
No the difference is that in communism by definition you dont have currency (or a state, ironically).
In Socialism you can.
Mason Torres
Example, I work as a machinist. I work on the floor, I get material, I do the programming, everything. My foreman drill everyone to use as little material as possible, I understand why because there is only so much steel, aluminium, and copper in the world. There is no substitution for these materials.
If I used as much material as I wanted because there are no repercussions, what would urge me to conserve materials?
Ryan Ross
If there are no repercussion why conservate meterials on the first place? Maybe because its too wasteful
Isaac Watson
They're wasting even more on advertisment tbh.
John Ortiz
USSR (socialism) has proven that scientists without boundaries like profit are much more productive. We can expect the similar pattern even in communism. Materials, like every scarce thing, will always have some value. Product which takes less materials to produce is cheaper, because it takes less labor to acquire said material. And cheaper products are better because more people can obtain them.
Nolan Price
So, if a new or better process is found it is shared between everyone. Yes?
Parker Green
Sure, learning from each other is human nature
Alexander Myers
May I ask what a Technocrat is? Assuming it's building society around automation and technology?
Cameron Campbell
checked state socialism where government is made of experts instead of populists
Thomas Flores
This may surprise you OP but many scientists, especially in math, physics, statistics, or computer science, choose their fields over making more money on Wall Street or Silicon Valley, or working in the defense industry, or whatever. Computer scientists create free software all the time.
Socialism would create more free time for scientists to produce socially useful things instead of new advertising platforms (this is basically what the "tech" industry is) or financial products, because they would not have to engage in wage labor. Believe me, there are plenty of mathematicians and physicists on wall street who would quit their jobs tomorrow if they could get an 80k/year tenure track job in their field.
Despite the various shortcomings of the Soviet Union, you couldn't say Soviet science was inferior. Besides, plenty of products today were developed with state grants for R&D.
Levi Stewart
Technocracy is most definitely not Socialism.
And what this does this mean exactly? Direct democracy cannot elect experts, therefore we have to create oligarchic decision-making committee that will decide everything?
Leo Flores
What's the difference between that and Organic Centralism?
Parker Anderson
Basically, human ingenuity. Just look at open-sourced projects or Wikipedia.
That's not what I've heard from people who actually work for big pharma companies. Have personally talked to higher up staff scientists, people that run entire divisions of research.
It's not that they are intentionally hiding cures, its that they abandon potential treatments if they do not predict a big enough market/return on investment.
Maybe you disagree but I am going off what I have heard first hand.
Parker Gutierrez
I can attest to this personally. I choose science because it gives me the greatest platform to help people, to research medically relevant topics and attempt to cure diseases.
Despite it being ludicrously challenging and time-intensive, I would do it for free if my survival was guaranteed.
Jayden Lewis
How so? The means of production are publicly owned by the state which is public property. But yes, it's undemocratic.oligarchic decision-making committee is needed to achieve maximal efficiency.
If I understand organic centralism properly, it is organic centralism since members are assigned by a meritocratic system.
Gabriel Smith
I fucked up linking, see
Landon Collins
It's called Feudalism, not Socialism.
(State) Socialism implies direct democracy (peer review by the whole society).
