Do say, what “incentive” do you see in this “free market”?
Because just FYI, an overwhelming majority of things that actually progressed humanity forward… We’re not done for capital. They weren’t done in the hopes of getting rich. True innovation, true progress comes not from the want of money or power or control, but by the want of knowledge. And the “free market” most definitely does not incentivise seeking knowledge - in fact said market heavily depends on keeping a big chunk of the population just smart enough to do the menial work they’re “needed for” by the ruling elite.
Denmark and Sweden are definitely examples of the direction we should be going, but that’s all - they’re the direction, not the end goal.
If your goal is to lead the race (for best quality of life), then 1st place is the goal. 1st place doesn’t slow down or they won’t be 1st for long. If a utopia is the finish line, but not for another half marathon, then focus on the next mile and/or the next position in the race. That’s how progress is made.
Except there’s no nation-wide drive to be “number one” - except for maybe the US but then again they use that to cover up how shite their QoL is.
Progress on a societal level is made once it happens on an individual level, and society recognises the worth of that progress. See e.g. bicycles, cars, telephone, radio, electricity in general, vaccines, or pasteurisation, or literally any advancement - a personal need (let that be for the thing, or for knowledge) drives the individual discovery, which then gets adopted by society.
In fact you can see contrary examples of the “free market” not innovating but keeping innovation away from people. Not just today, but look back e.g. at the various industry battles that resulted in not the better product but the better capitalist winning. Edison v Tesla - even though we use mostly Tesla’s work today, it’s credited to Edison. For example, Tesla always promoted AC, while Edison was a proponent of DC. Guess which we are using today overwhelmingly? Guess who got rich, and who died penniless?
The free market isn’t the source of innovation, it’s the stifler of it. Period.
Do say, what “incentive” do you see in this “free market”?
Because just FYI, an overwhelming majority of things that actually progressed humanity forward… We’re not done for capital. They weren’t done in the hopes of getting rich. True innovation, true progress comes not from the want of money or power or control, but by the want of knowledge. And the “free market” most definitely does not incentivise seeking knowledge - in fact said market heavily depends on keeping a big chunk of the population just smart enough to do the menial work they’re “needed for” by the ruling elite.
Denmark and Sweden are definitely examples of the direction we should be going, but that’s all - they’re the direction, not the end goal.
With the free market and a well designed tax system, we can exploit greed, let the ghouls work for us.
No, the free market will always find ways around taxation.
If your goal is to lead the race (for best quality of life), then 1st place is the goal. 1st place doesn’t slow down or they won’t be 1st for long. If a utopia is the finish line, but not for another half marathon, then focus on the next mile and/or the next position in the race. That’s how progress is made.
Except there’s no nation-wide drive to be “number one” - except for maybe the US but then again they use that to cover up how shite their QoL is.
Progress on a societal level is made once it happens on an individual level, and society recognises the worth of that progress. See e.g. bicycles, cars, telephone, radio, electricity in general, vaccines, or pasteurisation, or literally any advancement - a personal need (let that be for the thing, or for knowledge) drives the individual discovery, which then gets adopted by society.
In fact you can see contrary examples of the “free market” not innovating but keeping innovation away from people. Not just today, but look back e.g. at the various industry battles that resulted in not the better product but the better capitalist winning. Edison v Tesla - even though we use mostly Tesla’s work today, it’s credited to Edison. For example, Tesla always promoted AC, while Edison was a proponent of DC. Guess which we are using today overwhelmingly? Guess who got rich, and who died penniless?
The free market isn’t the source of innovation, it’s the stifler of it. Period.