27-02-2003 06:54									#121
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

"SNAP!"

CRACKLE POP!

	27-02-2003 07:13									#122
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Inventions aren't as important anymore anyway. We have enough inventions now for all the world to live comfortably.

I bet this was said in 1900 as well.

In 2100, someone would look at that statement as applying to the year 2000 and simply laugh.

Oh, and as for entrepenurs, communities don't tend to take many of the risks. Most people are risk averse, it is certain individuals that take risks in society.

	27-02-2003 08:32									#123
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by DuncanK Inventions aren't as important anymore anyway. We have enough inventions now for all the world to live comfortably.

"Everything that can be invented has been invented." -Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899.

	27-02-2003 08:34									#124
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Inventions? Commie's should stick to what they do best, telling other people how they should live. Inventions are for capitalists.

	27-02-2003 08:38									#125
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: Inventions aren't as important anymore anyway. We have enough inventions now for all the world to live comfortably. I bet this was said in 1900 as well. In 2100, someone would look at that statement as applying to the year 2000 and simply laugh. Oh, and as for entrepenurs, communities don't tend to take many of the risks. Most people are risk averse, it is certain individuals that take risks in society.

Yeah, thousands of people make bad risks every year in this country. That's a huge waste of resouces.

	27-02-2003 08:46									#126
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc "Everything that can be invented has been invented." -Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899.

Most of the 'inventions' made in this country are made by people who are paid to come up with these things and the risk is taken by a corporation where the risk is spread out among many people. Exactly why do you think that capitalism has a monopoly on ideas and inventions. The USSR had their fair share.

edit: I should have made this a response to Ned instead.

	27-02-2003 08:58									#127
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: Inventions aren't as important anymore anyway. We have enough inventions now for all the world to live comfortably. I bet this was said in 1900 as well. In 2100, someone would look at that statement as applying to the year 2000 and simply laugh.

I didn't say that there were no more inventions to come up with. There are always a bunch of new products coming out. It's amazing that marketing departments can keep coming out with new produtcts for us to buy. However, not much of it really changes our lives significantly. The point is that a lot of resources are devoted to producing diferent crap each year for us to spend money on. Those resources should be used to come up with real ideas to improve our lives or used to feed the masses.

	27-02-2003 09:34									#128
	Increase the size of your Attachments

"
Nah, why do you think we hate communist dictators more than the other dictators"

Communist dictators during the cold war tended to support the Soviet Union and support International Communism. Communism was a global ideology, right-wings thugs were just thugs who looked after their own personal interests.

"There is the exception of Cuba, which has done ok."

Only if you consider totaltarian states where you are not allowed to leave the country to be ok.

"That's one of the Big Lies invented by the US during the Cold War. Lenin never said or wrote such a thing."

Whether he said or not was immaterial, I used it to make a point. Marx talked about international revolution, it was the goal of communism to get the entire world to go communist. To this end, the Soviet Union started the Comintern.

"Next you have to ask yourself, would the Communist countries have been so paranoid if the West hadn't constanty been trying to destroy them. "

They still would likely have promoted communism. Communism was never an ideology meant to exist side by side in peace with capitalism. Anyway, much of the terror initally started with Lenin against Domestic Opponents, and then later with Stalin in power communism would have gone down the paranoid route no matter what. Moreover, if say during when the US was formed we came under severe monarchist attempts to destroy us, you wouldn't say it'd be ok to take our freedoms to combat it would you? In the same vein I doubt you think highly of measures that restrict our freedom today in the wake of terrorists attempts to destroy us. Nothing can excuse the totaltarian states that when up in the red part of the world during the cold war.

"
And all along, the followers of one of the leaders of the Russian Revolution were pointing out what had gone wrong. We call ourselves Trotskyists. You can flame the Communists all you want, but now days, us Trots are the main game in town "

Talk about your own brand of socialism all you want, but this thread was about the cold war policy, and the socialists we were facing off against then were an evil.

	27-02-2003 09:52									#129
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Ok then, to the question of whether yjr Cold War policy was evil or not.

The countries who had communist revolutions did so for two main reasons, Imperialism and capitalism. I think Imperialism is the more relevent to the topic here. Is defending your nation and other nations against Imperialism justified? Most people say yes. Is Imperialism justified? Most people say no. Since the USSR was fighting against Imperialism the policies which were designed to sabotage the achievement of this goal were unjustified and we could even say evil.

Was the USSR evil? Yes, but as I said before, the US was not fighting the USSR because they were evil. They were fighting them because the USSR was communist and the US was Imperialist.

	27-02-2003 10:02									#130
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Whose imperialism was the USSR fighting against but its own? I didn't see the USSR give up one inch of the Russian Empire.

	27-02-2003 10:19									#131
	Remove this text

quote: Yeah, thousands of people make bad risks every year in this country. That's a huge waste of resouces.

And the system ends up with successes that totally make up for the waste of bad risks, and then some.

quote: I didn't say that there were no more inventions to come up with. There are always a bunch of new products coming out. It's amazing that marketing departments can keep coming out with new produtcts for us to buy. However, not much of it really changes our lives significantly. The point is that a lot of resources are devoted to producing diferent crap each year for us to spend money on. Those resources should be used to come up with real ideas to improve our lives or used to feed the masses.

Who is to decide what 'improves our lives'? Hell, I think my George Foreman Grill improves my lives (and feeds the masses ).

And those Plasma TVs, TIVO, DVDs, etc. improve my life too.

Add all the inovations up and within 25 years the collective mass of them improve our lives significantly.

	27-02-2003 10:29									#132
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Imran,

The point is that improvements can be made in a communist system too. There is even the possibility of making improvements as great as the George Foreman Grill.

	27-02-2003 10:30									#133
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Ned,

The USSR was not fighting against itself. The question is whether the US was justified in fighting communism, not whether the USSR was Imperialist.

	27-02-2003 10:33									#134
	Re: Question about ethics of Cold War policy. Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by MrFun But I have a question -- is it/was it ever ethical or morally right for the United States to go to war against a country simply because the country is communist?

Actually this is the question we are trying to address.

	27-02-2003 10:35									#135
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: The point is that improvements can be made in a communist system too.

No, the point is that in ANY state run planned economic system, the rate of innovation is MUCH lower than a more free-market economy. Communists, such as Marx, will acknowledge capitalism is the BEST economy for innovation that has ever existed in history (of course they believe the trade-off is too much).

No other system in history has had the rate of innovation as the Capitalist West.

	27-02-2003 11:14									#136
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: The point is that improvements can be made in a communist system too. No, the point is that in ANY state run planned economic system, the rate of innovation is MUCH lower than a more free-market economy. Communists, such as Marx, will acknowledge capitalism is the BEST economy for innovation that has ever existed in history (of course they believe the trade-off is too much).

I'm not claiming that communists states can invent as many different kinds of consumer products. I think that if the US was communist right now the rate of innovation might very well be slower, but only by choice. Take the case were scientific achievement were a primary goal of the state. I argue that the rate of innovation would be at least as great as if it would with a mixed economy with the same goals and dedication. Just that those innovations would benefit society in a greater way under communism than with the mixed economy.

	27-02-2003 11:22									#137
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Why would those innovations better society in better way under communism?! Consumer goods are essential to the benefit of society! Capitalism requires technological progress, communism does not, so I fail to see how communism can even compare to capitalism. There is not as much incentive to innovate under a planned system.

Even if scientific achievement were the primary goal of the state, a planned economy would STILL fall behind. Look at the USSR, which pushed science. They were impressive in space technology and certain military technology but everything else was welll inferior to the innovations in the US, even though the US as well focused on military and space tech. The private sector made up the gap in the US, and it couldn't (because it didn't exist) in the USSR.

	27-02-2003 11:39									#138
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui Why would those innovations better society in better way under communism?! Consumer goods are essential to the benefit of society! Capitalism requires technological progress, communism does not, so I fail to see how communism can even compare to capitalism. There is not as much incentive to innovate under a planned system. Even if scientific achievement were the primary goal of the state, a planned economy would STILL fall behind. Look at the USSR, which pushed science. They were impressive in space technology and certain military technology but everything else was welll inferior to the innovations in the US, even though the US as well focused on military and space tech. The private sector made up the gap in the US, and it couldn't (because it didn't exist) in the USSR.

Imran would you rather the US launched the first satilite or invented color TV? Of course the launch of Sputnik was far greater for not just the USSR, but the whole world. Oh, and maybe you didn't know that the USSR was ahead of us in biotech. The military tech is the best tech to develope for society. Even in the US the military tech has given us all kinds of commercial applications.

Now you are also comparing the US to the USSR. This isn't fair. Compare the two in 1920. The US was way ahead in many regards, especially in education. It takes generations to make siginificant changes to your society. You just can't have a revolution and suddenly advance your society hundreds of years. When the USSR was coming out of feudalism the US had been a developed capitalist society for over a hundred years. Do you seriously want to compare these.

	27-02-2003 12:28									#139
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

The Soviet Union was years ahead in yet another way...

Belly up:
Soviet Union...once
US...never

	27-02-2003 20:11									#140
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui Communists, such as Marx, will acknowledge capitalism is the BEST economy for innovation that has ever existed in history (of course they believe the trade-off is too much).

You do have to remember, however, that when Marx wrote that, there were no communist states. Marx assumed that the rate of innovation would actually increase under socialism and communism, since R&D would have the financial backing of the whole people rather than just whomever you could convince that your product would make a profit. Without having to worry about survival, more people could devote their time to trying to invent or innovate new techonolgies, methods, etc.

It's not as if the USSR was completely backwards. They came up with some horrific stuff in the field of genetics as applied to germ warfare. Heck, the USA is hiring most of their former bioweapon people today. However, the problem with innovation and inventions from the USSR's point of view was that they were disruptive. As a bureaucrat, invetions mean work, and since you're a bureaucrat, the last thing you want is work, so inventions are bad.

	27-02-2003 22:57									#141
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Chegitz and Shi, thanks for your interesting contributions to this thread (seriously).

	27-02-2003 23:52									#142
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Duncan, I think you are mixing sceince and inventions together when they really should be kept separate.

Sure, communism can advance science at rates that equal or exceed the West. Scientific research is not about making money and is largely funded by the government in the West. Since we are comparing apples with apples here, government funding, communism can win this race simply by placing more emphasis on it. But the West can counter with its own spending if it feels the need. Look how fast we caught up in the space race.

Inventions on the other hand are of two varieties: research conducted by corporations to improve products and reduce costs, and those made by independent inventors that many times create whole new industries and technologies.

Think of the telephone, the plane, the telegraph. These are some of the inventions by individuals that transformed the world. In the West, the patent system and private capital brought these inventions to market. Nothing analogous exists in communist countries.

But given the very poor quality and high cost of production of communist consumer products, I would also suggest that there is very little R&D conducted in communist countries to improve products or reduce costs.

Why?

No competition.

Last edited by Ned on 28-02-2003 at 00:34

	28-02-2003 00:09									#143
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

It's not just the lack of competition, it's the counter-incentive. Inventions and innovations require retooling machines, changing lines of production, retraining workers. There's no incentive for a bureaucrat to go through all this trouble. If their systems were democatically run, then the people could demand changes as labor-saving or quality-of-life improvements.

BTW, the patent system isn't perfect. Look at the telephone. We give credit to Bell, but he wasn't the first person to invent it, just the first person to get to the patent office. Look at recent crap the paten office has put us through, such as the patent of Amazon's one click sales, as if that wasn't an obvious solution to everyone.

	28-02-2003 00:45									#144
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara It's not just the lack of competition, it's the counter-incentive. Inventions and innovations require retooling machines, changing lines of production, retraining workers. There's no incentive for a bureaucrat to go through all this trouble. If their systems were democatically run, then the people could demand changes as labor-saving or quality-of-life improvements. BTW, the patent system isn't perfect. Look at the telephone. We give credit to Bell, but he wasn't the first person to invent it, just the first person to get to the patent office. Look at recent crap the paten office has put us through, such as the patent of Amazon's one click sales, as if that wasn't an obvious solution to everyone.

No beef from me, Che, on the patent system. It constantly is in need of fixing. However, like democracy, it is better to have the US patent system with its defects than having no patent system at all. IMO, the US patent system it is among the best patent systems in the world, if not the best. A US patent is more valuable than any corresponding patent in any other country.

As to the double-click patent, whether it is valid or not cannot be determined until it is tested in court. However, I agree that the patent seems obvious if it only covers the simple concept of filling in the blanks with prestored data.

	28-02-2003 01:00									#145
	Support Apolyton

Ned,

Individual inventors just aren't that significant anymore. Most of the advances are now made by R&D departments. I think the last significant invention by individuals was the personal computer. I doubt if there will be anymore.

	28-02-2003 01:10									#146
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Dude, don't discout the Flobie just yet!

	28-02-2003 01:19									#147
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: If their systems were democatically run, then the people could demand changes as labor-saving or quality-of-life improvements.

I disagree. The people would not vote for labor saving devises because that would put a substantial number of workers out of business. This is why unions were against the dishwasher, because diswashers (ie, people that washed dishes) wouldn't have jobs.

quote: Individual inventors just aren't that significant anymore.

You haven't convinced anyone of this statement. The personal computer was invented merely 25 years ago. Since then you have individual inventors making MANY consumer goods. Think Ronco, think the Foreman Grill. Those are substantial too.

There is always a place for individual inventors as long as people have ideas.

Btw, in many R&D departments you have people that come up with ideas. It relies on individuals and their desire to reach for the stars. Of course this wanting might not always be seen by some as 'beneficial', but who says that Plasma TVs and DVDs aren't significant?

	28-02-2003 01:29									#148
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Production would not be a problem with communism folks. It's not really a problem right now. The problem right now is distribution. That problem would be solved with communism. We already have plenty of labor saving devises. We need to use the present technology to help the world now.

	28-02-2003 01:32									#149
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: If their systems were democatically run, then the people could demand changes as labor-saving or quality-of-life improvements. I disagree. The people would not vote for labor saving devises because that would put a substantial number of workers out of business. This is why unions were against the dishwasher, because diswashers (ie, people that washed dishes) wouldn't have jobs.

That's capitalism. In socialism it would be different. We wouldn't need less diswashers, just less time at work washing dishes. For them, it would be a labor-saving device not in the capitalist meaning but in the socialist meaning. So instead of having to work eight hours a day, we'd only have to work two or four hours.

In simpler terms, under socialism, labor saving devices reduce the amount of work we have to do, not the amount of workers needed.

	28-02-2003 02:09									#150
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: If their systems were democatically run, then the people could demand changes as labor-saving or quality-of-life improvements. Btw, in many R&D departments you have people that come up with ideas. It relies on individuals and their desire to reach for the stars. Of course this wanting might not always be seen by some as 'beneficial', but who says that Plasma TVs and DVDs aren't significant?

Imran, but wild geese in a corporate environment run into the same "bureaucatic" resistance to developing truly new products that Che, et al., have describe for planned economies. There are ten, nay, 1000 new ideas that are suppressed or ignored by capitalist corporations for every new product they introduce. The true innovation comes from independent inventors.