Pointless debate again against established science or facts

[fralegend015 (Shroudmaster)]

@zenzonegaming

You do realize that test rockets… fail… right? That’s why they’re tested…

They usually are expected to succeed (but you test them to make sure of it), if you expected them to fail then you wouldn’t do a test trial to begin with. Out of an estimated 100 minutes of flight time starship only managed 4 minutes.

@zenzonegaming

How is it shown time and time again?

American healthcare be like:

Oil companies be like:

Cigarette companies be like:

@zenzonegaming

Yes there is an ‘invisible hand of the market’. It’s quite plainly visible. When there are multiple groups offering services and employment there is choice.

One company offers refrigerators for 100$, the other offers refrigerators for 70$. Which one do you think people will buy?

The cheaper one, obviously.

And so since no one is willing to buy the more expensive refrigerators, the company making them will have to make a few choices.

1: Do nothing, sell nothing, and earn nothing.

2: Lower prices either enough to be similar to the competitor or lower than the competitor (usually by innovating a cheaper way to manufacture the refrigerator or transport it).

3: Make a higher quality product or innovate and provide a better refrigerator that no one else can provide.

And that is the service side, what about the employment side?

Well imagine that there was two companies that needed the exact same amount of employees to operate their refrigerator factory, and there are only just a few more available workers than either company would need.

One company offers 10$ an hour, the other offer 5$ an hour. Which would you choose to work for? (both companies have the same level of workplace hazards btw)

Well the one offering more money obviously. And so the company that offers 5$ an hour only has a few employees (and they would all be of low quality since the company offering higher wages could pick out the best on offer).

And so the company would be faced with a few decisions.

1: Do nothing, produce nothing, and earn nothing.

2: Offer employees more money or better working conditions.

3: Innovate so that you require less workers and can operate with your smaller workforce.

This assumes a very simplified reality. In the real world companies manipulate their clients to make them believe they are the best and most moral ones (even if they aren’t), in the real world companies that have no governmental controls create vertical monopolies in which they get to decide the prices and the clients have to accept it because there is no other companies that makes that product. Companies without any controls make horizontal monopolies in which they own a great portion of the stores in which products are sold, and if a rival company emergeces then they can just ban them from their stores and they will sell significantly less.

And all of this doesn’t even require a complete monopoly, even just a partial monopoly can cause a lot of damage.

@zenzonegaming

This is what competition does, it forces groups to offer a better deal, both to their customers and their workers.

This phrase contradicts itself… You say competition is better because it forces GROUPS to offer better deals, but for the formation of groups you need cooperation.

This phrase is also disproved by society and biology, society is literally based on cooperation, if every human were to compete with each other then we would never have the services of modern society.

Humans are even made of billions of cells cooperating with each other, yet you claim that cooperation is bad and competition is good.

@zenzonegaming

However the monarchies in continental Europe selfishly held on to power over their economies, and were thus able to restrict the industrial revolution, whether intentionally or not.

The irony… The irony that you don’t realize that capitalism creates pseudo-monarchies in which the sons of owners of big companies (that do have political power) inherit their companies.

@zenzonegaming

Over the last 200 years since the birth of widespread free market capitalism this has happened to global poverty rates:

Are you sure that is caused by capitalism and not industralization?

@zenzonegaming

This happened to global hunger rates:

This talks about undernourishment in developing countries not global, and those countries aren’t getting less hunger rates because of capitalism, but because of industralization.

@zenzonegaming

And this has happened to countries which try to control their economies:

Conveniently leaving out the fact that those countries were corrupt dictatorships which were prime examples of state capitalism. Oh, zenzone

@zenzonegaming

Oh, but that was simply an example of state capitalism of course

Don’t think that only because you say something that is true multiple times, it becomes any less true. Because it will remain the truth.

@zenzonegaming

Every time, without fail, has capitalism improved the lives of the people when it has been implemented.

American healthcare is one of the most privatized healthcares in the world, it also is one of the most expensives in the world, it also has the highest death rate of any developed country’s healthcare.

@zenzonegaming

Because even though hundreds of millions of people believed that these were indeed good and just societies and examples of a society free of capitalism right up until the bread lines and the gulags and the famines (after
Which it miraculously transformed into state capitalism) and in many cases the people that claim that they are true anti-capitalists praised these societies right up until the bread lines and the gulags and the famines I know that the next time we will succeed.

Zenzone when he learns that the policies of a country can change and that it isn’t an immutable being:

@zenzonegaming

Also saying that the soviets are responsible for modern space travel because they created the first space rockets would mean that the fascist Germans were actually responsible, since they originally created and funded modern rockets.
Or that the Chinese are responsible because they created the first rockets of any kind.

There is literally no technological innovation in spaceflight after the 1965. The technological principles used in soviet rockets in the 1965 and used in modern rockets are the same.

And in any case they would still be responsible for modern space travel.