#class-snuggle

my town has 30,000 people and only like 4 Tim Hortons and it honestly feels pretty weird

i just watched throne of blood its v good

yeah, I remember you post/rebloggin' a couple screenshots from it

class-snuggle answered your post: “what kurosawa movie should I watch later tonight? I have downloaded: ...”:

I've seen Ikiru and Yojimbo and they're both very good. Ikiru is very sad where Yojimbo is more fun though

hmmmm, decisions, decisions

Unfortunately, no matter how you look at it. environmental stewardship. Which I agree with, is not inherently economically kind. We view Capitalism as the source of our ills on this planet. Which a system based on ever increasing consumption and production is bound to do that anyways.

However, at it's root Communism is also a little lacking in the environmental department. Both Capitalism and Communism were devised when resource scarcity referred to production limitations and not the physical limits of our natural resources. It's no fault of their creators but of the times they lived in.

However, the argument that communism is the saviour of the environment is inherently flawed. In a capitalist system profit plays most of the part of motivator for action. However in a communist system resources devoted to innovation are lacking. As the basis of value is labour time. As such activities without guaranteed success or assured resources, research and development, can very easily be pushed aside in favour of reliable and proven technologies. That's not to say that all research and development immediately ceases under Communism. Merely that from an institutional perspective. Reliable and proven sources of value creation will always see more attention compared to less assured means of generating value.

This comes down to a simple problem. As the source of money, or goods, whatever terminology you want to apply to the concept of transferable value. is labour and the only way to increase the value in your society and as such raise the standard of living is an increase in the usable labour time in the society.

Thus the argument that communism will lead to lessened waste and improved sustainability is inherently true. As products and services which hold their usefulness and as such their value longer will be more valued than those that don't. A disposable product becomes a hindrance to a society. However, using the resources to develop renewable energy sources which are able to be produced with less resources and on a larger scale, and as such with less inherent labour time. Will seem like less of an advantage compared to producing another coal power plant.

Under a capitalist system the system is designed to "wate" a certain degree of capital, businesses fail and with them poor ideas. Communism is a far more strict pony. One must also consider that with innovation comes the risk of obsolescence. Under Capitalism this merely becomes valued less as demand decreases. However communism values a good based off the inherent labour time. So replacing a technology not only carries the cost to develop it. But also the cost to implement it. As the value added by the innovation must out weigh the cost of producing new goods to replace the now obsolete ones. We see that in this way innovation carries a higher risk than staying the course would.

When considering the environment obviously we would value the continued existence of the society. But one must keep in mind that research and innovation carries a far higher cost in a communist system.

One of the main advantages that capitalism will always have over communism, for good or not. Will be it's ability to handle potentially wasted value being used for research.