If everyone is given their "fair share" of the resources no matter what their ranking is...

I was speaking fondly of these people

Thought you were being sarcastic.

No I 100% think human ingenuity is basically curiosity and passion driven. I mean, beyond people scraping for basic survival. Every-time in history relative material abundance has been met we have seen a huge explosion in technology, when people are comfy, they think about building shit, and they build shit, because building shit is glorious and everybody knows cool shit helps everyone. Einstein wasn't in it for the cash, neither Tesla nor any of these people. They just loved to solve problems. Our society should be entirely geared around making people comfy so they build shit

…is this another subtle attempt at "socialism is when governments do stuff" meme? I'll bite anyway.

Principle is to give ownership of workplaces to those who actually work there, not a CEO sitting in his ivory tower. Not welfare and free benefits or absolute state control.

So we should make people unequal on purpose?

Under pure capitalist society, incentive to work is a slave-mentality where they have to get a job to live meanwhile the boss gains all the profit by selling the his labor higher than what he pays him.

Under socialism, incentive to work is based upon doing things you want. You don't work FOR somebody, you work WITH people. You work to improve yourself, to do things you want, not out of coercion, but to advance yourself. Those who don't work would find themselves to be in poor status, but they will always have the option to try again, unlike in capitalism where once you fuck up, you fuck up for good.

...

What if you want to sit in a room and play videogames all day?

Do you?

...

So much for the materialist left!

...

Not all of us are against material incentives
But yeah,
social status
Enjoying your work
Helping others
Fame
Your coworkers liking you more
Discovery if your a scientist or inventor

Recognition, awards (trophies, medals etc) and the satisfaction of contributing to the greater whole of society.

But humans are defined by what they own.

Ferrari, as many people know, is a sports car brand for the rich and famous.

If everyone gets a Ferrari, then whats the fucking point of a Ferrari?

Can you really not perceive of a dopamine addiction in other people?

Jesus christ. This is alienation in its purest form. I pity you.

The only thing socialists promise is enough to survive, the rest is earned.

Working to develop your talents and become a well rounded human being. Being good to others. Earning more than the bare minimum. Et cetera.

There never was one in the first place

its cheap honestly. I really couldn't give a shit we can easily afford it. have a little self respect tho fam. Under FALC would be obviously free addiction clinics of all kinds.

Indeed, do they own the means of production, or do they own nothing are a slave to them?

But seriously watch fightclub LMAO "the things you own start to own you"

Really only shallow people are defined by what they own, even rich people are defined more by relationships and accomplishments. You'll notice nobody celebrates bankers as heroes but firefighters are celebrated all the time etc.

To drive fucking fast? Jesus is your whole personality really that bound up in dick extensions? Seriously you would drop cash on a ferrarri not to here the engine roar and burn rubber but just to look swank? You are an empty, empty person.

...

Well does the drug addict want to be addicted?
If its an addiction it should be cured, not ignored.

Social status is defined by how many degenerates and subversives you are able to identify.

Indeed they are, under capitalism. That is why we seek to end it.
Exactly - this is commodity fetishism. Under capitalism, social relations between people turn into relations between commodities; and thus a Ferrari
becomes more prestigious than a "normal" car because it is associated with the rich and famous, even though it has no more real use value than another car.
There is none, our desire for a Ferrari is manufactured by our consumerist culture.

Not buying it. There wouldn't be a fetish for a brands (like a handbook looking like a Louis Vitton handbag would be as desirable as a handbag made by Louis Vitton) but I have to tell you that driving a sports car is a lot more fun than driving a beagle.

This is not entirely correct. While conspicuous consumption is absolutely a thing, the real underlying reason everyone wants a Ferrari or any other sports car is because they're absolutely fucking gorgeous and a blast to drive.

Yes, porkies love the damned things, but so does almost everyone else. It's not entirely a matter of consumerist brand-fetishism and conspicuous consumption - fun things are fun, and drop-dead-gorgeous Italian supercars are very goddamn fun.

I played forza, ferraris handle like shite.

...

Because a videogame is going to give you a complete, accurate picture of auto handling characteristics. I bet you were using a gamepad to do it, too. Don't be stupid.

The point I'm making is not that people would stop liking sports cars for their appearance, but they would stop preferring Ferraris specifically for their brand and perceived prestige.

We can agree on that.

Yes, agreed.