Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Gagarin1961 t1_j8zf35d wrote

> Many of those things have been delayed for years or decades by interested groups in capitalism.

What do you think the workers is a fossil fuel company would do under a socialist economy?

> A form of socialism is probably the answer.

Just one?

“It’s capitalism” Is getting really ridiculous when you actually mean “It’s capitalism, market socialism, state socialism, etc.”

Kind of has a completely different meaning. It implies the problem is actually something shared between them.

> Workers would not demand growth at all cost if that growth came at the cut of their jobs.

Why would it come at the cost of their jobs? Demanding growth will secure their jobs and company.

>Look to the games industry’s recent success to see that doesn’t go the opposite way. All fantasy. You are all fantasy lol.

I don’t understand your point.

1

Iffykindofguy t1_j8zg09i wrote

I think they would invest in research and switch to green energy instead of spending 30 years lying to the public about it.

​

Your second point is literal nonsense.

​

I know you don't understand my point. Its clear you don't understand a lot of whats being said here. I gave you all the clues you need, I told you where to go for record profits and still workers getting the axe. You live in a fantasy.

​

Hope you have a good weekend.

1

Gagarin1961 t1_j8zgyhl wrote

> I think they would invest in research and switch to green energy instead of spending 30 years lying to the public about it.

Green energy doesn’t require nearly as many workers. Why would they vote for that?

They are the owners of the company. If the current owners wanted to lie, why wouldn’t they? They’re the owners too.

Workers aren’t “inherently better people” or something. They’re just like billionaires and billionaires are just like them.

> Your second point is literal nonsense.

How so?

> I know you don’t understand my point. Its clear you don’t understand a lot of whats being said here. I gave you all the clues you need, I told you where to go for record profits and still workers getting the axe. You live in a fantasy.

No, no I understand your overall point. It was that specific sentence that wasn’t communicated well enough. What were you trying to say about video game companies?

1

Iffykindofguy t1_j8zipnt wrote

We passed there being more jobs in "Green" energy than fossil fuels back in 2017 in the us.

​

GG you're just showing that you're not only constantly requiring assumptions for your arguments to be expressed, you're now just a flat-out liar.

1

Gagarin1961 t1_j8zl0gm wrote

> We passed there being more jobs in “Green” energy than fossil fuels back in 2017 in the us.

So capitalism is making change! That sounds much more than “nothing,” huh?

> GG you’re just showing that you’re not only constantly requiring assumptions for your arguments to be expressed you’re now just a flat-out liar.

You’re the one who said capitalism only focuses on growth and can’t address climate change.

So far it looks like capitalism can address climate change, and that the problem isn’t inherent in property rights.

1

Iffykindofguy t1_j8znmwq wrote

As already stated, those jobs are 30 years too late. Again, you're just so confused its hard to have a conversation so now I will say goodnight and mean it. Have a good one!

1