“The government will own your toothbrush! (Everyday you push your train to work and back)” - US textbook

Well, take the wealth from the capitalists and give it to the State under the control of the Party.

I am in agreement but I wonder if the masses that you were originally talking about courting would be in favor of that. It’s not going to be considered a “moderate” solution.

IP eventually falls into the public domain under most laws these days. For copyright, it’s a certain number of years after the creator’s death depending on the country.

Cuba as an example follows international treaties on intellectual property so they still operate in a similar fashion to the rest of the world.

For their music industry: They have a national record label, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EGREM. It has a roster of artists that they manage. It has recording and music publishing facilities. It also manages live venues for performances.

Also how do you collectivize someone’s painting that they want to sell privately? How do you collectivize a portrait that someone commissioned? Do you just seize every piece of art ever created? That feels incredibly draconian and infeasible.

Firstly we have to distinguish between the intellectual property and a physical piece of art. Different laws cover the ownership of physical property vs the laws of intellectual property. Physical property is tangible and can be assigned a monetary equivalent value when trading it.

OP is referring to the intellectual property that an artist creates. Hence the bicycle analogy. Currently the laws on IP were developed in the context of a capitalist system. An artist with no other means of economic survival needed those laws to protect their work.

Under a socialist system, the economic pressures are released. The intellectual property is collectively owned by society. Artists will be able to collaborate and flourish without the additional issues of IP ownership. There can be still disputes over artistic works. BUT these can be governed and regulated by an democratically organized administration as fairly as it can.

In the case of a worker controlled company operating in a marketplace, there’s still the question of where the capital comes from to get equipment and scale upwards to create efficiency.

The point of revolution is to take that wealth from the capitalists. Unless you take that off them and use it yourself, the company can’t produce much stuff.

It’s even worse when those capitalists make you pay rent to use their wealth. They take their risk away and you’re paying them to operate.

For personal use, Github can automatically build and test your project using Github Actions. You get 2000 minutes / month free.

common cell phone spectrum radiation

Was it Tik Tok?

“Who wants the hours of two full time shitty jobs for the salary of one shitty job? DM your CV here!” - 🤡

In Australia, we had something called the Stolen Generation where mixed race indigenous Australians children were taken from their mothers and placed into foster care.

The idea being that Indigenous Australians were dying out for “unknown reasons”, so if they take those kids away from Indigenous families and “integrate” them with white Aussies, they will eventually breed and their descendants will get the brown tone wiped out and get something white enough to fit in to white Australia. This was a government practice all the way up until the 1970s.

The Oliver book has an indigenous foster child character who gets abducted.

Biden’s team? Do the Blue Jays give tips to the Yankees now?

Why is trade necessary? Is it because the commune would not be able to produce everything it needs and wants?

Correct. It’s wants would exceed what it can produce. It can trade the excess of what it produces for other goods and services.

What if it can cover all needs and good enough portion of the wants?

Self sufficiency is difficult at a commune level. Just access to healthcare is a need.

We can see this already in real world. Don’t even worry about the commune aspect. A less developed country has lower access to healthcare, education, etc. To develop they have to have something valuable to trade.

I think there IS a need to compete. You have to produce more than just subsistence. Without any goods to trade, this hypothetical third world commune will have very little economic growth.

Hence the need to be competitive with other producers in the marketplace (which could be private industry). If private industry can produce the same goods far cheaper than the commune then it’s tough for that commune to make money. No/low income means there can be very little industrial build up with no funding to invest in more infrastructure, equipment or resources.

This is why I mentioned political power. Government can support that industrialization process. e.g. directly providing funds, building infrastructure, creating laws that bring foreign capital. etc.

I see it as a step towards more communes however there’s no political change there at any level of government.

A “low key third world country” has to industrialize in some way to add value to their production and to get benefits of scale. Are these communes going to be able to compete with private industry who probably have access to greater funding and government protection?

The cranes are doing something though.

And you are speculating with a theory. And then calling me unreasonable for NOT buying it.

The fact China can’t have made a mistake, in your mind, is the issue.

Where did I ever say that?

I am talking about media doing crap articles. It’s speculation with some bad photos that don’t provide evidence of it. And they all parrot the same shit. You understand that journalism should be better that this ?

I’m done.

First: Fuck CNN. That sub looks nothing like the shadow. They don’t NAME any US officials. The Center for a New American Security is a fucking think tank. They use Maxar because it’s free and they are a bunch of losers.

Second: Get a map and find Wuhan.

Edit:

Got at least one downvote without an explanation. I assume it’s for bursting the bubble.

Okay. Explain YOUR bubble bursting logic. You say a nuclear sub MUST have been in Wuhan and the two photos are in Wuhan. I don’t agree at all. The two piers don’t look alike for a start. And who is really the source of that CNN image of a sub? A US think tank: professional bullshitters basically.

Your gotcha moment is no good. You’re the one in the bubble. It’s such a speculation and scramble to justify the propaganda that China made a boo-boo.

The media have to provide good evidence for a story. They have cried wolf so many times when it comes to China. Their record is dogshit. Unless they have solid evidence, I wouldn’t believe one word of theirs.

My faith in the human intellect is lost after news stories like this.

“Yo! See that shadow? There’s an invisible high tech tub of ice cream there. Go get it!”

Where’s the evidence that a nuclear submarine was there in the first place? Wuhan is not near the sea.

I think for boomer liberals, their memory is pretty hazy and the 60s was the end of racism. “We did it guys! Everyone can sit on the same bus seats.”

I think the nostalgia is also in the 2nd tv series as well. The Addams Family was the original series from the 60s.

It’s very common for reactionaries to seek to rewind the clock to a “better” time because the present has all these modernization problems. For the boomers, the 60s were better than today. For Gen X, maybe the 80s were better.

Both the 2nd and 3rd tv series are aimed at younger viewers or the young-at-heart: trying to convey the joy of youth.