ok so what you’re describing here is that …

• first of all, labor seems to be the constant in your worldview that everything revolves around. do you believe (or think that it’s possible / desirable) that we will eventually have a fully automated luxury society?
• if yes, how would you call such a system?

secondly, it seems to me that the point that “bourgeoisie” doesn’t work is a big problem to you. mind explaining why? is it because society desperately needs that 1% extra labor output? is it because of some “work is a moral must” mindset (quasi-religious)? is it for some other reason?

thirdly, it seems to me that you’re defining communism socialism as essentially our current society, just that CEOs don’t get huge bonuses and shareholders don’t skim company profit. so, in other words, our current world minus the stock market: every company has to emit zero profit (such that no shareholders gain from it) and all the money must instead be spent on the business itself: wages to workers and resource acquirements.

did i understand that correctly? would you add anything? do you think that this setup is already feasible in today’s legal framework through worker-owned businesses? (“co-ops” and what they’re called)

Put another way: no one should be obligated to participate in society, but then society should likewise have no obligations to the non-participants.

funnily enough, that is exactly what capitalism postulates. that those who don’t work, don’t deserve to eat. “useless eaters” and all that, my mother can (sadly) give you a long and stern lecture about that (she is very much what you would call a “conservative”).

capitalism re-formulates that by saying that you need money to buy food, but to get that money, you have to work. in other words, who doesn’t work, doesn’t get food. that’s why many people say it’s cruel and inhumane because it makes people suffer who don’t work. and that’s exactly why we have things such as social safety nets etc. where the state gives money to people sothat they can buy basic stuff with it if they are poor. because society at large revolts against the concept of “who doesn’t work, shouldn’t eat”. or at least that’s how it is in most (civilized) countries, except of course in america people don’t always see things that way.

funny :) but i came up with it independently

dude … pls put that behind a spoiler tag. that is a serious infohazard there

i do think that “voluntary” is a pretty clear term. would you still do it if it didn’t cost you anything, and it also didn’t get you any physical reward?

The tendency of the rate of profit to fall will soon mean that an industry will stop producing said commodity. It can’t anymore if it’s unprofitable. This is where the state has to step in and start subsidizing that industry or buying the commodity themself in order to articially inflate demand in order to keep that industry afloat. See e.g. the “butter mountains” of the EU.

ahem i just so happen to be very familiar with the whole concept of the tendency of rate of profit to fall (TRPF) and you’re misunderstanding it here. it turns to be unprofitable in the sense that the profit rate approaches zero (for example, exponentially), it does not go negative! companies continue to produce stuff as long as the profit is larger than zero, which it always stays. so they continue to produce stuff indefinitely, according to the model. even though they make less and less profit with it. no state subsidizing involved here.

this is maybe a subtlety here. something can converge towards zero while also always staying positive. check out this function:

what you’re describing is just capitalism with extra steps

i mean, i only asked whether you go to work voluntarily, and whether it could therefore be considered vegan.

uhh, yeah, travel takes a whole lot of resources, but you’d only need to transport very few elements around, like a seed of a tree. and when you land on a new planet, you have more resources to utilize and go on. so your image is too limited here.

Declining birth rates and house prices dropping are both things the media love to make out are terrible things.

and guess who own’s the media’s editorial circle?

it wasn’t that much better during the cold war

the thing that was better back then was the future. things were getting better. meanwhile now, for many people, the future looks worse.

they feel wet, but it’s typically some kind of silica gel (i think?) instead of water that they’re soaked with

going offline to live in a hut in the forest?

coz of the shitty ai blog/info sites

SEO existed before chatgpt

yeah we have the same in europe for e.g. potato salad (price has to be listed per box and per kg) but that doesn’t apply to toilet paper i think … not a food item.

cannot confirm. have used chatgpt many times to check my physics homework (after doing it myself first) and it was basically correct about 90% of the time.

these were not standard exercises (i think)

were before they started just writing a mini-python script for every calculation and executing that.

i’m still not-in-the-know and i prefer to keep it that way

heh i got that :)

yeah but do you go to work voluntarily? would you still do it if you didn’t need the money? if so, then yes, it is vegan.