Goofle the way you talk about how it's supposed to work on paper is identical to what Marxists do. Who the **** cares about the theory when the application sucks?

Lol you completely missed my argument and went off road. I was trying to humor you afterward but I can only do so much. :P

It appears that you are (in your own words) "ignorant" when it comes to what's been going on in the last ten years in technology, biotech, etc. There's a lot happening and most people don't keep up with it, so that's not a criticism, just an observation. None of those advances are coming out of the government's pocket. They're coming out of companies like Google and universities partnering with free market money. If the public sector can't advance without rich capitalists funding serious ventures, then maybe that makes capitalism the least of all evils in this case as long as these ventures produce results.

I'm enjoying the discussion in any case. Carry on!

Good job, Ant.

It's funded through taxes, but that doesn't make it socialist. Socialism is a mode of production i.e. economic model in which the means of production (factories, large farms, mines, offices) are collectively owned. Goods and services are produced according to a common plan to meet society's needs, rather than to generate profit for a handful of property-owners (capitalists). Taxes don't have anything to do with this - taxes have existed since the dawn of civilization, that is, since the earliest class societies. The medieval feudal state and the church collected taxes from peasants, but that doesn't mean the king and the church were socialist.

:beer:

Ouch!

Let's look at my post that started all this.

Do I even mention the government in here or what they have or have not accomplished in the past? But that's pretty much the crux of your original response to me. Nothing you said contradicts or even addresses the content of these two sentences. The phrase I used "technologies in development" assumes we are talking in present tense, not past tense.

Taken on its own, I agree with your response. That's a solid track record for government in the past for key developments. But that's not the case today where the U.S. spends somewhere in the ballpark of 834 million dollars and has access to the best people...yet still takes over 6 months post-launch to get a Wordpress-based ACA website working properly. Think about that: 834 million-ish for a single website.

Anyway, I'm a little OCD sometimes...so don't mind it. :thumb:

The application of capitalism has been absolutely amazing and increased the quality of life substantially.

So, for you, price gouging is preferable to the government preventing price gouging?

Obviously.

Wow.

I hope everyone can see the obvious truth in that. Private property is a legal concept. Laws are enforced literally at gun point. Therefore capitalism cannot exist without oppression. Not even in theory.