301–310 of 328 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> For some reason, communists suck at automobile making. Do you not think that embargoes have some degree of impact on this?
No I don't think so. Cars made by the Soviets sucked too. Even cars made by East Germany sucked. They made amazing spacecraft and terrible cars.
Now, you can argue they were a joint-venture with Fiat and not an entirely original idea (though the Soviets made improvements in ruggedness and ease of self-service), but whatever: cars made by the Soviets didn't suck.
--
[1] from Wikipedia:
> The rugged Lada was popular in Europe, Canada and South America for customers looking for more affordable alternatives to local brands, and sales of the new cars were extremely successful, reaching as far as New Zealand. In the West, their construction was frequently described as cheap and that inspired jokes at the car's expense; nonetheless, Lada "gained a reputation as a maker of solid, unpretentious and reliable cars for motorists who wanted to drive on a budget."
Wikipedia uses as reference Andy Thompson. Cars of the Soviet Union, Haynes Publishing, 2008.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>the accumulation of capital is what's truly exploitative When I think of "accumulation of capital" in modern society, semiconductor fabs are the ultimate example. I can't imagine disagreeing that the building of such factories encompasses most of the world via supply chains and most of the exploitation in it. But I feel like there's an ambiguity and I don't understand what is to be our goal. Should we not have "accu…
I think the means of production should be owned by the workers. In this case, this could either be through a coop (e.g. those factories are directly owned by the workers working in them, decisions are made democratically) or through a worker's state (the factories are owned by the state as a representation of the workers - this is what the USSR tried to do, but failed miserably at). I think any other scenario has peo…
I had a hard time understanding this, but I think I got it.
You are saying that if I work for, say, Xerox, I should own a portion of Xerox, because their capital belongs to me, because I use it to create value.
This is better, you are saying, than me owning an index fund that has a little of every company. Because if I do that, then I am exploiting all the workers in all the other companies.
As a self-contained system of belief, I guess it has a certain logic to it.
But if Xerox goes down the tubes then I don't want to lose my job and all my retirement savings!
I also think I see an inconsistency. If owning part of another company is exploiting their workers, then I should also be concerned that any form of ownership by workers at my company could involve exploitation.
Simply because we do different jobs using different amounts and types of capital. Averaging things out must be exploitation of workers by workers in the same way as owning mutual funds and such.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>If you develop type-2 diabetes, you may be able to cure it by not eating any sugar for a few weeks. Developing type-2 diabetes will be a process that happens over several decades. So which few weeks is it that I need to stop eating sugar? I need to know because I was going to make cookies. >there is never a good reason to give yourself type-2 diabetes I've taken medication that progressively leads to type 2 diabetes…
Medication that causes type-2 diabetes is news to me. Most people get type-2, or insulin resistance, as a consequence of damaging their liver, and soaking in excess uric acid. Maybe your medication is hepatotoxic? If you are partially insulin-resistant, maybe it takes extra insulin to get the needed effect? Robert Lustig has been curing fatty-liver-disease-induced type 2 diabetes in children by eliminating sugar from…
I believe in the ballpark of 5 to 6 million patients take this kind of medication in the US. If they all eventually got diabetes, it might be up to 15% of cases. However, not everybody lives long enough.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but since I have never been to London, I am curious about this western consumerist lifestyle. You're being coy, in not describing the things you find so tiresome. Before Brexit, I worked for a company that opened a branch near London, in order to access the European market. I didn't make it my overriding goal to go there, but I probably could've, and a co-worker went there and subsequently got married and stayed…
For Cuba to be fine, UK doesn't need to be bad. I do love the British way of life and the economic and social freedoms in the UK. My point is that, happiness and life satisfaction are not tied to the abundance of consumer goods. When you are sad you don't have to buy something, it's alright to have a few options and your happiness level doesn't need to change by your next purchase. You can experience that in Cuba.
I've been to NYC a couple of times.
Things I got there (in more than one trip):
a terrible pretzel from a street vendor (cold and *wet*)
a *fantastic* cup of coffee at a cafe where I was meeting someone
a bowl of lentil soup (surprisingly very cheap)
some chicken lo mein, about the same price and exactly the same generic dish as anywhere I've been in the US, except perfectly executed, really fresh and hot
a chicken souvlaki pita, one of the best, although the place (in Queens) smelled kinda like urine
This is the sad truth of places like Cuba or North Korea. Everything is forbidden to the point that eating is difficult. So people get corrupted and the guards, etc. just want their part. None of those things should be illegal. It is really annoying to see how a leader class kills people of hunger and make everything illegal so that now everyone is a criminal for trying to survive.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29827641.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know about DPRK but I have been to Cuba for a 2 weeks vacation, so I had time to go out of the default tourists spots. What I've seen is this: Those who have access to tourists or to the government are rich. Corruption is rampant as I've seen people bribing police right at the airport to have their things sorted out. The mainstream corruption in society revolves around casa particulars and taxis. Essentially,…
Quoted post unavailable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Quoted post unavailable.
This is the sad truth of places like Cuba or North Korea. Everything is forbidden to the point that eating is difficult. So people get corrupted and the guards, etc. just want their part. None of those things should be illegal. It is really annoying to see how a leader class kills people of hunger and make everything illegal so that now everyone is a criminal for trying to survive.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
[flagged]