Capitalism and Its Beneficiaries, Rich People, Are the Spreaders of Coronavirus

[dann]

From Sweden:

Quote:

Det sades från början att inför covid är vi alla lika. Men det är tvärtom – inför covid visar sig olikheter och ojämlikhet än mer, säger professor Kristina Jakobsson.
Professor: ”Inför covid visar sig olikheter och ojämlikhet än mer” (DagensNyheter.se, July 1, 2020)

Translation:
In the beginning, they said that we are all equal when facing Covid-19. But on the contrary – Covid-19 makes differences and inequality even more apparent, says professor Kristina Jakobsson.
Professor: ”Covid-19 makes differences and inequality even more apparent”

[xjx388]

So I guess you aren’t going to suggest a solution?

[dann]

So I guess you have not even once had anything to say about the many examples of how capitalism and its beneficiaries, rich people, have been spreading the virus to the less fortunate.

[Mader Levap]

Originally Posted by dann

And due to capitalism, we also don't get rid of coronavirus any time soon.
Get over it?!

You don't offer any solutions, but you sure love to jump around and shriek while wildly waving hands.

Life is unfair. We can do better (there is a lot of things that can be done to make capitalism better and less abusive), but I am interested in realistic solutions, not far-left nuttery.

[dann]

No, I offer nothing but examples of how capitalism and its beneficiaries, rich people, spread the coronavirus. Many of you aren't interested in that at all, obviously.
Why don't you go to the things-that-can-be-done-to-make-capitalism-better-and-less-abusive thread instead?

[xjx388]

Originally Posted by dann

So I guess you have not even once had anything to say about the many examples of how capitalism and its beneficiaries, rich people, have been spreading the virus to the less fortunate.

A slightly more sophisticated rubber-glue retort.

I’ve had plenty to say on the topic. You don’t agree. Which is fine, but you offered a solution and I’d like to hear it. That’s where we are at now.

[dann]

Originally Posted by xjx388

A slightly more sophisticated rubber-glue retort.
I’ve had plenty to say on the topic. You don’t agree. Which is fine, but you offered a solution and I’d like to hear it. That’s where we are at now.

No, you haven't. You have ignored all the examples of capitalism and its beneficiaries, rich reople, spreading coronavirus. You haven't commented on the ways that they pick up the virus abroad and spread it to their own countries, buy up test kits, flee to tropical paradises in their yachts and private jets, while their tenants and workers are struggling with it more or less unprotected at meat plants, in slums and on public transport.

Instead, you have ignored the obvious difference between rich and poor with your absurd excuse that everybody is human, and that we are all responsible for the lack of PPE for workers at meat plants, in hospitals and in nursing homes because we eat meat and get sick! (Do you get any fan letters from vegans?!)

That's where you are now, and that's where you have been the whole time.
By the way, I've noticed how well you are coping with the virus in Texas.

Originally Posted by xjx388

Ah, and you have a big LED scoreboard with the R0 in real time in the center of Copenhagen or something? You can put whatever veneer on it that you like. The fact remains that Denmark is most certainly not doing better than Texas and it is more open than Texas. There is no doubt that Texas is opening way too early; it therefore follows that Denmark has opened way too early. So before you try and remove the splinter from our eye, perhaps you should focus on the plank in your Capitalist country's eye.
What does this "you are so fond" nonsense even mean? Like I said, the paragon of maturity. Where the hell did I do that? You are just making up a straw effigy of me and lightin' it up, ain't ya? Bless your heart.More straight up BS. Not surprising since this whole thread is just a forum for your BS argument that Capitalism Sucks the worst of all possible systems.

Coronavirus: Swift and dangerous turn in Texas cases, says governor (BBC, June 29, 2020)
Why Texas is seeing a coronavirus surge (BBC, July 2, 2020)
Real US death toll 'may be much higher' (BBC, July 2, 2020 - 7:17)
US cases reach new one-day high (BBC, July 2, 2020 - 5:45)

Business as unusual
Gov. Greg Abbott keeps businesses open despite surging coronavirus cases and rising deaths in Texas (TexasTribune, June 25, 2020)

Quote:

Local leaders have also voiced concerns about the testing capacity of large cities. In Travis County, Biscoe explained that because of the “rapidly increasing demand,” officials are rationing testing only for people with symptoms. The stress on the system is also making contact tracing efforts more difficult.
“In summary, the rapid increase in cases has outstripped our ability to track, measure, and mitigate the spread of the disease,” Biscoe wrote.
Texas city and county leaders ask Gov. Greg Abbott for authority to implement local stay-at-home orders (TexasTribune, June 29, 2020)

When you are dealing with a disease where 50 to 80 percent of cases are asymptomatic, rationing tests to those with symptoms doesn't make contact tracing more difficult. It makes contact tracing impossible!

And it actually saddens me how wrong you are. I take no joy at all from watching vulnerable Texans die, and it makes me even sadder to know how avoidable those deaths were a month or two ago and how unavoidable they are now ... thanks to businesses. Considering that capitalism is supposed to be the way to come up with the supply whenever there is a demand, it is grotesque to watch the way that the world's leading capitalist country is ******* it all up and getting progressively worse at coping with the pandemic every day.

[xjx388]

Originally Posted by dann

No, you haven't. You have ignored all the examples of capitalism and its beneficiaries, rich reople, spreading coronavirus. You haven't commented on the ways that they pick up the virus abroad and spread it to their own countries, buy up test kits, flee to tropical paradises in their yachts and private jets, while their tenants and workers are struggling with it more or less unprotected at meat plants, in slums and on public transport.

Instead, you have ignored the obvious difference between rich and poor with your absurd excuse that everybody is human, and that we are all responsible for the lack of PPE for workers at meat plants, in hospitals and in nursing homes because we eat meat and get sick! (Do you get any fan letters from vegans?!)

That's where you are now, and that's where you have been the whole time.
By the way, I've noticed how well you are coping with the virus in Texas.



Coronavirus: Swift and dangerous turn in Texas cases, says governor (BBC, June 29, 2020)
Why Texas is seeing a coronavirus surge (BBC, July 2, 2020)
Real US death toll 'may be much higher' (BBC, July 2, 2020 - 7:17)
US cases reach new one-day high (BBC, July 2, 2020 - 5:45)

Business as unusual
Gov. Greg Abbott keeps businesses open despite surging coronavirus cases and rising deaths in Texas (TexasTribune, June 25, 2020)




When you are dealing with a disease where 50 to 80 percent of cases are asymptomatic, rationing tests to those with symptoms doesn't make contact tracing more difficult. It makes contact tracing impossible!

And it actually saddens me how wrong you are. I take no joy at all from watching vulnerable Texans die, and it makes me even sadder to know how avoidable those deaths were a month or two ago and how unavoidable they are now ... thanks to businesses. Considering that capitalism is supposed to be the way to come up with the supply whenever there is a demand, it is grotesque to watch the way that the world's leading capitalist country is ******* it all up and getting progressively worse at coping with the pandemic every day.

You are so focused on blaming businesses, rich people and Capitalism -it’s your boogeyman/scapegoat. You can’t make an argument that, “if only the whole world was Communist/socialist/whatever-dann-believes-ist, coronavirus would have been stomped out by now,” because you know that’s ridiculous.

You keep repeating your mantra as if it explains everything. It doesn’t explain anything.

[dann]

You are the one who keeps repeating your what-aboutist mantra. So far, you haven't presented one single argument against the many examples I have presented you with of the ways that capitalism spreads the virus.
But since you insist, let's return to our old comparison from May of two similar-sized nations and see how it's going:

Originally Posted by dann

Originally Posted by Arcade22

I wonder if the Cuban people would prefer the economic deprivation of the UK to Cuban socialism. It's a shame that they live under a brutal corrupt dictatorship and are not allowed to decide for themselves, not that you seem to care about that.

(...)
And no, Cuba is not a brutal and corrupt dictatorship, and it's definitely less so than Sweden.
And since this is a thread about how capitalism and its beneficiaries, rich people, have spread the coronavirus:
May 21, 2020
Sweden: 3,871
Cuba: 7

Covid-19 deaths (Worldometers), July 4:
Sweden: per million 537; total: 5,420.
Cuba: per million 8; total: 86.

Or would you prefer a comparison with the USA?

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Notice what we hear about contact tracing!
In spite of their alleged intentions, they have already giving up on contact tracing again in many parts of Texas and Sweden.

[dann]

One more from Sweden:

Quote:

Nu är det juli och nya rapporter visar det många av oss visste redan i mars: det är områden med hög arbetslöshet, trångboddhet och ekonomisk utsatthet som drabbats värst av pandemin. (…) Djursholmsborna kan inte föreställa sig att de drabbade yrkesgrupperna är de som ser till att samhället, bokstavligt talat, går runt. De som kör buss, taxi och spårvagn. (…) Vi vet att svensksomalier löper större risk att dö i viruset, men det gör även sverigefinländare. Och de är inte nya i Sverige, de är bara fattigare mår sämre.
Sambandet mellan fattigdom och ohälsa har aldrig varit så tydligt.
Frågan är när våra politiker börjar prata om det viktigaste: hur skyddar vi vår arbetarklass?
Som att de döda har sig själva att skylla – Frågan är när våra politker börjar prata om de viktigaste: Hur skyddar vi vår arbetarklass? (Aftonbladet.se, July 3, 2020)

Translation:
Now it’s July, and new reports show what many of us knew as early as March: Areas with high unemployment, crowded living quarters and people who are hard put up financially are the ones that are hit the hardest. (…) People living in Djursholm (an affluent area with few immigrants) can’t imagine that the affected professions are the ones that literally make society go round. They drive busses, cabs and trams. (…) We know that Swedish-Somalians have a bigger risk of dying from the virus, but so do Swedish-Finns. And they aren’t newcomers to Sweden, they are just poorer and worse off.
The connection between poverty and bad health has never been more obvious.
The question is when our politicians begin to talk about what is most important: How do we protect our working class?
As if the dead have themselves to blame

[dann]

Quote:

“In Peru, Chile and parts of Colombia, although the lockdowns were strict, and national governments were aligned behind them, economic reality meant people couldn’t conform with them as the weeks and months went by.”
The disease was brought into many countries by middle- and upper-class people returning from holidays abroad in areas where the disease was already rampant.
Poverty then facilitated and fuelled the spread of the virus, and the poor are now bearing its brunt, while the wealthy can more easily afford to isolate themselves, and seek treatment when sick.
Poverty, not just populists, to blame for Covid-19's impact on Latin America (TheGuardian, July 5, 2020)

‘It's a tsunami’: Covid-19 plunges Latin America back into poverty and violence (TheGuardian, July 5, 2020)

Coronavirus turns Chile’s middle classes into new poor (JakartaPost, July 1, 2020)

[dann]

Nomiki Konst (June 30, 2020): CAPITALISM IS LITERALLY KILLING US

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

[Roboramma]

Originally Posted by 3point14

Everyone? Why? I mean, I can get kiwi fruit in december,t that's an upside. It comes from god knows where and the transport of it is responsible for carbon emissions worldwide, but I can get a kiwi fruit...

The carbon emissions associated with transport of food products isn't nearly as large as you seem to think.

Quote:

The guys that grow coffee or tea or chocolate or any number of other things would disagreewith you.

Would they? They get access to global markets and make more income than they otherwise would. Income that is lifting those people out of poverty. Given that their lives are made better by global trade, I don't see why they'd disagree with me.

Quote:

The many places where biological diversity has been knackered due to the effect of global trade would disagree with you.

This one is a little more complicated, but to put it simply: protection of the local environment requires wealth. When you don't have the capital to build basic infrastructure or for the poor to pay for it, people still need to heat their home and cook their food and they end up using charcoal instead of natural gas and electricity. One of those leads to major deforestation (and loss of biodiversity, not to mention health problems for the people involved), the other has a much smaller environmental impact. Not zero, but nothing is perfect, and increasing wealth will lead to availability of better solutions.

Quote:

Everyone? No, not everyone and I think that's a ludicrous suggestion.

Almost everyone. There are some losers, of course. When someone loses their job because it was outsourced, they do actually lose. But the losers are outnumbered by the winners, globally.

[dann]

Won't you please take your derails somewhere else?

[3point14]

Originally Posted by Roboramma

The carbon emissions associated with transport of food products isn't nearly as large as you seem to think.

Would they? They get access to global markets and make more income than they otherwise would. Income that is lifting those people out of poverty. Given that their lives are made better by global trade, I don't see why they'd disagree with me.

This one is a little more complicated, but to put it simply: protection of the local environment requires wealth. When you don't have the capital to build basic infrastructure or for the poor to pay for it, people still need to heat their home and cook their food and they end up using charcoal instead of natural gas and electricity. One of those leads to major deforestation (and loss of biodiversity, not to mention health problems for the people involved), the other has a much smaller environmental impact. Not zero, but nothing is perfect, and increasing wealth will lead to availability of better solutions.



Almost everyone. There are some losers, of course. When someone loses their job because it was outsourced, they do actually lose. But the losers are outnumbered by the winners, globally.

I think you're all sorts of wrong.

/derail.

[theprestige]

Yes. This thread is about capitalism, not globalization. Let's get back to the regularly scheduled correlation-causation fallacy.

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by dann

And due to capitalism, we also don't get rid of coronavirus any time soon.
Get over it?!

Due to capitalism? There's good incentive to develop a vaccine to sell it.

Do you think communism or any other economic system would've done a better job?

[dann]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Yes. This thread is about capitalism, not globalization. Let's get back to the regularly scheduled correlation-causation fallacy.

It has been shown several times in this thread that globalized capitalism spreads coronavirus in two ways:
1) The affluent bring it back to their countries from holidays abroad. It happened in this way in Europe, the USA and now in Latin America.
2) Once brought into a country, it infects the segments of the population that can't self-isolate because they can neither work from home nor take their private jets or yachts to Fiji or the Caribbean. On the contrary, their capitalist living, transport and working conditions (as meat-plant workers or as bus and taxi drivers) make it impossible for them to avoid the situations that spread the virus.
The latest example was yesterday.
So much for your theprestige's correlation-causation fallacy.

[dann]

Originally Posted by Belz...

Due to capitalism? There's good incentive to develop a vaccine to sell it.

Do you think communism or any other economic system would've done a better job?

Yes, obviously. It wouldn't have the incentive to spread the virus that capitalism has.

The only country that is struggling to create some kind of socialism is doing a hell of a lot better than capitalism in the battle against Covid-19 because it cares for its own citizens as well as for the poor and exploited citizens of the rest of the world.

In the meantime, the poster country of international capitalism is busy persuading its own citizens to die as cannon fodder on the battlefield of profit while at the same time trying to buy up anti-viral drugs and vaccine-manufacturing companies to make a buck while (in particular) poor people are dying - everywhere.
Can't pay? We'll take it away!

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by dann

It has been shown several times in this thread that globalized capitalism spreads coronavirus in two ways:
1) The affluent bring it back to their countries from holidays abroad. It happened in this way in Europe, the USA and now in Latin America.
2) Once brought into a country, it infects the segments of the population that can't self-isolate because they can neither work from home nor take their private jets or yachts to Fiji or the Caribbean. On the contrary, their capitalist living, transport and working conditions (as meat-plant workers or as bus and taxi drivers) make it impossible for them to avoid the situations that spread the virus.
The latest example was yesterday.
So much for your theprestige's correlation-causation fallacy.

Just because it's happening in a capitalist system doesn't mean it's caused by the capitalist system. Other systems also produce Haves and Have-Nots. It's unreasonable to suppose that some other system would not see the same dynamics play out.

Part of the problem with your argument is that you refuse to consider any alternative system for comparison, nor offer any remedy or alternate system.

[dann]

I just gave you one. That you prefer an imaginary one - "It's unreasonable to suppose that some other system would not see the same dynamics play out" - isn't really my problem. Dream on!

[Myriad]

Originally Posted by dann

I just gave you one. That you prefer an imaginary one - "It's unreasonable to suppose that some other system would not see the same dynamics play out" - isn't really my problem. Dream on!

I don't think any of this is your problem. Do you disagree? Is some part of what you're talking about your problem, and if so, what part, and in what way?

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by dann

I just gave you one. That you prefer an imaginary one - "It's unreasonable to suppose that some other system would not see the same dynamics play out" - isn't really my problem. Dream on!

Your problem is you keep blaming capitalism for a dynamic that would be in play under pretty much any economic or political system. This entire thread is based on you mistaking correlation for causation.

[dann]

Yes, that is what you keep repeating for no other reason whatsoever than that you don't like to see capitalism exposed for what it is. So you confront actual examples of capitalism's dynamics with your fantasy scenario of "pretty much any economic or political system" having the same flaws even though you can't really come up with any.

'Pretty much any economic or political system' doesn't have the same blatant disregard for workers' safety in a pandemic as capitalism.

And 'pretty much any economic or political system' doesn't encourage old people and workers to be cannon fodder and sacrifice their lives for the sake of business and go out there without any protection when a deadly virus is raging.

An army general telling his soldiers in an actual war that helmets and bullet-proof vests are for pussies would be court-martialed. In the U.S. 'war' on the virus it's business as usual.

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by dann

Yes, obviously. It wouldn't have the incentive to spread the virus that capitalism has.

What does that have to do with a vaccine?

Plus, what are you babbling about? An incentive to spread the vaccine? Are you confusing accidental and deliberate?

[dann]

What about it?

Quote:

It is worth noting that all children in Cuba are vaccinated against hepatitis B and meningococcal meningitis (BC), with vaccines developed in Cuba; the latter is the only interna- tionally marketed vaccine available for serogroup B menin- gococcus (See Original Article: Cuban Meningococcal BC Vaccine: Experiences & Contributions from 20 Years of Ap- plication).
(...)
“The conclusions of the report,” said Dr Guido, “note that the assessment also provided a learning experience for PAHO staff, and especially for those participating in the evaluation, since this vaccination program is exemplary in relation to other countries in the Third World, and also developed countries, because of its characteristics and its health impact.”
Cuba’s National Immunization Program (MediccReview, Fall 2007, Vol. 9, No. 1)

Quote:

As a result of its integrated vaccine strategy, Cuba has overcome many of the barriers to vaccine research and distribution in middle and low income countries. Thanks to the development of capacities and facilities to internalize the entire supply chain of vaccines, Cuba has been able to develop various vaccines and antibiotics at low cost while ensuring distribution of these life-saving advances throughout the country.
Research to Practice: Development and Distribution of the HiB Vaccine in Cuba
In 1999, the first commercial vaccine containing a synthetic carbohydrate antigen was developed in Cuba against Hib. This vaccine, Quimi-Hib® (Heber Biotech), exhibits several advantages over naturally-derived vaccines, such as:
· Lower production costs compared with conventional vaccines
· Controlled production of a homogeneous, single compound
· Minimal batch-to-batch variability during the manufacturing process
· Higher quality control standards compared with naturally-derived agents[iv]
In clinical trials, also conducted in Cuba, researchers found that the HiB vaccine provides protection to nearly 100 percent of immunized infants after primary vaccination and a second booster dose. Additionally, clinical trials showed the vaccine to be very safe[v].This lower-cost alternative provides access to the Hib vaccine for those who otherwise would not have been able to afford it.
Vaccine Research and Development in Cuba (Pan-American Heath Organization & World Health Organization)

Cuba is a vaccine developer, but I don't think that they are trying to develop their own vaccine against SARS-CoV-2. I don't know, but my guess is that they expect the Chinese to get there before they would be able to do so themselves since China started working on it at a very early stage of the pandemic and started testing a vaccine on humans in May. And since China tends to be pretty generous when it comes to breaking the U.S. blockade against Cuba, it would be a wonderful gesture if the Chinese made a SARS-CoV-2 available to (at least) Cuban health-care workers and people working in tourism before the USA develops a vaccine.

And in the meantime, the USA is busy trying to obstruct all Cuban efforts to fight the virus - in Cuba as well as abroad:

Quote:

In April, the Alibaba Foundation of China tried to donate masks, rapid diagnostic kits and ventilators to Cuba, but the airline contracted by Alibaba to transport those items to Cuba refused to take the goods because they were afraid the US would sanction them.
A ship recently arrived in Cuba with raw materials to produce medications but it decided not to unload because the bank involved in the transaction decided not to make the payment out of fear it would be sanctioned by the US government.
Cuba's two pandemics: The coronavirus and the US embargo. The Trump administration is trying to hinder Cuba's efforts to tackle the coronavirus emergency at home and abroad. (AlJazeera, June 21, 2020)

Cuba's health-care workers could actually be likened to soldiers in an international war against Covid-19. Unlike senior citizens and ordinary workers in the USA, who are expected to work without proper PPE, get infected and die for the sake of business.

Deaths per million
USA: 402
Cuba: 008
Lives saved abroad by Cuban health-care workers?
I have no idea.


By the way, you are obviously confusing two things: 1) an incentive to make money by selling drugs to the highest bidder and withholding it from those who can't pay and 2)

Originally Posted by Belz...

An incentive to spread the vaccine

But that's capitalism for you. It likes to pretend that it's there to serve humanity when in reality it is only there let people die when they can't pay, be in for food, for housing, for health care and everything else that keeps people alive.

Quote:

There are many ways to kill. You can stick a knife into someone's belly, take away someone's bread, not cure someone of a disease, put someone in a bad apartment, work someone to death, send someone off to war, etc. Only a few of those things are forbidden in our country
Bertolt Brecht

[3point14]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Just because it's happening in a capitalist system doesn't mean it's caused by the capitalist system. Other systems also produce Haves and Have-Nots. It's unreasonable to suppose that some other system would not see the same dynamics play out.

Part of the problem with your argument is that you refuse to consider any alternative system for comparison, nor offer any remedy or alternate system.

It's the 'global' bit not the 'Capitalism' bit that causes the spread.

Integreted international economies of any stripe that encouraged and required global movement would spread the virus.

How global other systems would be is another question.



Edit: Or what you said here - I really should read to the end of the thread before posting...

Originally Posted by theprestige

Your problem is you keep blaming capitalism for a dynamic that would be in play under pretty much any economic or political system. This entire thread is based on you mistaking correlation for causation.

[dann]

Originally Posted by 3point14

Integreted international economies of any stripe that encouraged and required global movement would spread the virus.

The "global movement" of commodities didn't spread the virus. The global movement of affluent tourists did. Hence the "Rich People" of the title of this thread. At this point, however, people working without proper PPE, people living in cramped conditions and people in subways get infected - in particular if they have been told by irresponsible jerks that masks won't help slow down the transmission of the virus.
You can buy whatever you want from Alibaba or Amazon without running a risk of getting infected. Unless the mailman coughs on you.

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by dann

By the way, you are obviously confusing two things:

And you are demonstrating that, as usual, "obviously" means "in my opinion".

Quote:

1) an incentive to make money by selling drugs to the highest bidder and withholding it from those who can't pay

That's the Hollywood version of capitalism, yes. In the real world, if most people can't afford your product, you're not going to make billions out of it.

Quote:

and 2)

I meant "Virus". Why do you think there's an incentive to spread the virus?

Quote:

But that's capitalism for you. It likes to pretend that it's there to serve humanity when in reality it is only there let people die when they can't pay, be in for food, for housing, for health care and everything else that keeps people alive.

Capitalism doesn't pretend anything. It's not a living thing. It's just a general concept for an economic system. Also, your description above isn't capitalism. It's an extreme form of capitalism that we tend to see mostly in fiction.

You need to step back into the real world.

[dann]

Originally Posted by Belz...

And you are demonstrating that, as usual, "obviously" means "in my opinion".

Yes, in your opinion, and as usual your opinion is wrong.

Quote:

That's the Hollywood version of capitalism, yes. In the real world, if most people can't afford your product, you're not going to make billions out of it.

And that is the reason why companies that produce and sell private jets, yachts and luxury cars are notoriously unable "to make billions out of it," isn't it?!
It is sometimes astonishing how totally wrong advocates of capitalism can be about the thing they advocate!

Quote:

I meant "Virus". Why do you think there's an incentive to spread the virus?

All you need to do is listen to a speech by Trump, the Republican governors or business owners to find out why they want to spread the virus: Trump thinks it will get him reelected if he can persuade his congregation that the virus isn't really there (and if it is anyway, that it isn't really dangerous), the governors for the exact same reason, and the business owners because they think that they will earn more by spreading the infection that by locking down and protecting their workers as well as their customers. It's for the same reason that they don't provide proper PPE for their workers: It's cheaper!

Quote:

Capitalism doesn't pretend anything. It's not a living thing. It's just a general concept for an economic system. Also, your description above isn't capitalism. It's an extreme form of capitalism that we tend to see mostly in fiction.

You need to step back into the real world.

My description of capitalism is of the one and only capitalism that exists in real life. Your imaginary capitalism, which exists only to provide people with what they need is the fiction, and it appears to be the kind of fiction that has swallowed you to the extent where you can no longer see reality.
You should really try the red pill the next time it's offered to you. I have provided you with several red-pill posts in this thread. You should try to read them sometime.

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by dann

Yes, in your opinion, and as usual your opinion is wrong.

Not in my opinion. There has not been a single case where someone here has used the word "obviously" in a way that indicates that it is objectively true and eminently evident. It's always a rhetorical trick to make one's opinion seem more justified, which is why you almost never see me use that word.

Quote:

And that is the reason why companies that produce and sell private jets, yachts and luxury cars are notoriously unable "to make billions out of it," isn't it?!

You really didn't think that one through, did you? First of all, we're talking about medecine; a completely different market from luxury vehicles. Unless you're planning on selling your vaccine to a rich person for their personal use for 70,000$ a pop or something, no, you're not going to make billions because there's just not enough rich people to purchase your product. Even reach people can't afford to spend, say, millions a day for medecine. The reason why private jets make a profit is that they are insanely expensive, but sold only once.

Quote:

It is sometimes astonishing how totally wrong advocates of capitalism can be about the thing they advocate!

You didn't even make an argument, so your victory dance is quite premature. Also, you seem to be using a very peculiar definition of "capitalism" that sounds more like "laissez-faire capitalism".

Quote:

All you need to do is listen to a speech by Trump, the Republican governors or business owners to find out why they want to spread the virus: Trump thinks it will get him reelected if he can persuade his congregation that the virus isn't really there (and if it is anyway, that it isn't really dangerous), the governors for the exact same reason

None of that has anything to do with capitalism. It's politics and ignorance.

Quote:

and the business owners because they think that they will earn more by spreading the infection that by locking down and protecting their workers as well as their customers.

If your argument here is that businesses don't want to have to spend money on measures to protect their employees and customers, you are correct. However this is so poorly worded that it shows an incredible bias against business owners. You're simply not thinking about this clearly.

In addition to that, the fact that businesses DO spend money on these measures despite not being forced to shows that your argument is completely wrong.

Quote:

My description of capitalism is of the one and only capitalism that exists in real life.

So you believe that capitalism has thoughts, then? You also believe that there is only one form of capitalism? There is no difference between the economic system of the US and that of Norway?

I don't think for a second that you really believe any of that.

Quote:

Your imaginary capitalism, which exists only to provide people with what they need is the fiction

Oh, good. Now you're down to lying. Where have I described such a system? You are ascribing opinions to me that I have never expressed. Perhaps this black-and-white mentality is not serving you very well.

Quote:

You should really try the red pill the next time it's offered to you. I have provided you with several red-pill posts in this thread. You should try to read them sometime.

Stop watching movies and using them as arguments.

[dann]

Originally Posted by Belz...

You really didn't think that one through, did you? First of all, we're talking about medecine; a completely different market from luxury vehicles. Unless you're planning on selling your vaccine to a rich person for their personal use for 70,000$ a pop or something, no, you're not going to make billions because there's just not enough rich people to purchase your product. Even reach people can't afford to spend, say, millions a day for medecine. The reason why private jets make a profit is that they are insanely expensive, but sold only once.

As usual, you are the one who didn't think it through:
1) You weren't talking about medicine. You were talking about capitalism, not the pharma industry, and its products.
2) Even if we restrict it to pharma, you are still wrong. Some "reach people" could actually afford to pay "millions a day for medecine".
3) At least you have now learned one of the conditions for making money by selling private jets. Now you need to move on to studying how pharma (big or small) makes money.
You could start here:
Medicine as a Luxury
'health care for billionaires'
Top 5 Most Luxurious Healthcare Centers On the Planet
Royale Hayat Hospital
You appear to be hopelessly ignorant of your favourite system of exploitation and the hilariously stupid things it offers people with money. Things like this, for instance:
Scottsdale cryonics facility, the home of Ted Williams' head, hopes frozen dead people will live again

The other side of the coin is this:
High insulin costs are killing Americans
Many People with Diabetes Can't Afford 'Good' Insulin. What Should They Know About Switching to the Cheaper Stuff?
But I guess you were ignorant of that, too. That medicine is just like any other business: When you can't afford the good stuff, you'll have to make do with the ****** stuff - or do completely without any at all.

Quote:

You didn't even make an argument, so your victory dance is quite premature. Also, you seem to be using a very peculiar definition of "capitalism" that sounds more like "laissez-faire capitalism".

Your inability to recognize an argument is not unexpected. That some states make up for some of the deficits of capitalism is not an argument for capitalism.

Quote:

None of that has anything to do with capitalism. It's politics and ignorance.

Yes, capitalist politics and ignorance. And ignorance is a euphemism for what is actually going on. It is not that Trump, governors and business owners are unaware that they are killing people. If they were, they wouldn't openly encourage senior citizens to sacrifice themselves for the economy and tell workers that they are soldiers in a war - a war to help business owners make a profit and help spread the virus.
Describing this attitude as ignorance is pure cynicism, but maybe you are ignorant of that too.

Quote:

If your argument here is that businesses don't want to have to spend money on measures to protect their employees and customers, you are correct. However this is so poorly worded that it shows an incredible bias against business owners. You're simply not thinking about this clearly.

OK, so you think that you have demonstrated superior intelligence by being able to understand my clear and simple message. Congratulations.

Quote:

In addition to that, the fact that businesses DO spend money on these measures despite not being forced to shows that your argument is completely wrong.

The obvious fact that businessmen don't shows that your argument is completely wrong. Otherwise, they wouldn't encourage their workers to be brave soldiers. If proper PPE was provided for the workers, courage wouldn't be needed.
The businessmen who do are usually mentioned on the pages that cater to lovers of perseverance porn.

Quote:

So you believe that capitalism has thoughts, then? You also believe that there is only one form of capitalism? There is no difference between the economic system of the US and that of Norway?

I don't think for a second that you really believe any of that.

There is only one form of capitalism as a mode of production. How individual states cope with that capitalism differs. And yes, capitalism has thought. The owners of capital do the thinking for it. They are what Marxists call character masks.

Quote:

Oh, good. Now you're down to lying. Where have I described such a system? You are ascribing opinions to me that I have never expressed. Perhaps this black-and-white mentality is not serving you very well.

Perhaps your imaginary capitalism isn't serving you very well. You know, your imaginary version of capitalism where

Quote:

if most people can't afford your product, you're not going to make billions out of it.

You don't seem to grasp the reality of capitalism: That capitalists make money by selling luxury items to rich people or inferior **** to the poor.
Noma makes money. And so does Arby's. And some people just have to get used to being hungry. Much like some diabetics who just have to get used to trying to take less insulin than they really need to be alright.

Quote:

Stop watching movies and using them as arguments.

What I watch is none of your business. Unlike you, I can distinguish between fiction and reality, and I don't use fiction as an argument. I use a movie allusion as a metaphor for your euphemistic portrait of capitalism, the one that you call the real world:

Quote:

In the real world, if most people can't afford your product, you're not going to make billions out of it.

And some people just have to get used to watching their loved ones die from Covid-19. Or not watching and knowing that they are dying alone because of the risks of infection.
That doesn't happen to billionaires in Fiji.

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by dann

As usual, you are the one who didn't think it through:

"No, you!" is always a terrible argument. I'll also note that you're the one who made this discussion personal, not I.

Quote:

1) You weren't talking about medicine. You were talking about capitalism, not the pharma industry, and its products.

Another lie. This entire thread is specifically about capitalist impacts on coronavirus' spread.

Quote:

2) Even if we restrict it to pharma, you are still wrong. Some "reach people" could actually afford to pay "millions a day for medecine".

So why isn't it happening, then?

Quote:

3) At least you have now learned one of the conditions for making money by selling private jets.

Get over yourself. It's not my fault if you changed the subject.

Quote:

You appear to be hopelessly ignorant of your favourite system of exploitation and the hilariously stupid things it offers people with money.

First of all, again you are lying about my opinions. Stop doing that. Second, ALL systems in history favour the rich. ALL of them.

Quote:

Many People with Diabetes Can't Afford 'Good' Insulin.

Canada has a capitalist system and yet diabetics have no issue getting insulin. Why is that?

Quote:

But I guess you were ignorant of that, too.

Are you done making this conversation personal? Once again: that you keep switching from one argument to another isn't anybody's fault but your own.

Quote:

Your inability to recognize an argument is not unexpected. That some states make up for some of the deficits of capitalism is not an argument for capitalism.

Of course it is. That they cover for the faults of capitalism but keep it nonetheless indicates that there are benefits to keeping it. But you continue to avoid giving alternatives because you're well aware that they are all worse.

Quote:

Yes, capitalist politics and ignorance.

No They have NOTHING to do with capitalism. Stop pretending like you agree with what you quote only to say the opposite. It's dishonest.

Quote:

OK, so you think that you have demonstrated superior intelligence by being able to understand my clear and simple message. Congratulations.

What the hell are you babbling about now? I'm telling you that your rhetoric is messy because you're not thinking straight. It has nothing to do with intelligence, mine or yours. jeez, stop projecting your insecurities onto me.

Quote:

The obvious fact that businessmen don't shows that your argument is completely wrong.

Not ALL of them. SOME of them. That's enough to prove you wrong. Stop being such a baby.

Quote:

There is only one form of capitalism as a mode of production.

Capitalism is not a mode of production. It's clear by now that you have no idea what you're talking about. But go ahead and "no, you!" me again.

Quote:

And yes, capitalism has thought. The owners of capital do the thinking for it.

Yes except no, then.

Quote:

Perhaps your imaginary capitalism isn't serving you very well.

YOUR imaginary capitalism. I said nothing of the sort. Capitalism has important flaws, but they can be mitigated in a number of ways, resulting in different implementations.

Quote:

You know, your imaginary version of capitalism where

That is not a description of capitalism, nor does it say what you claimed was my opinion of it. I'm asking you to retract your lie.

Quote:

You don't seem to grasp the reality of capitalism: That capitalists make money by selling luxury items to rich people or inferior **** to the poor.

You seem to think that this is somehow surprising or undesirable. Yeah, I can afford more stuff and more expensive stuff than some other people but less than others. So what?

Quote:

And some people just have to get used to being hungry.

Yeah, there are far fewer hungry people in communist utopias than in the US, right?

Quote:

What I watch is none of your business.

You're making it my business by arguing for a movie-based view of capitalism.

Quote:

Unlike you, I can distinguish between fiction and reality

Oh great! "No, you!" again! How original and convincing.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by dann

Yes, that is what you keep repeating for no other reason whatsoever than that you don't like to see capitalism exposed for what it is. So you confront actual examples of capitalism's dynamics with your fantasy scenario of "pretty much any economic or political system" having the same flaws even though you can't really come up with any.

'Pretty much any economic or political system' doesn't have the same blatant disregard for workers' safety in a pandemic as capitalism.

We don't really have another system to compare with during this pandemic, which is part of the problem with your thesis: No control that would actually make it possible to distinguish correlation from causation.

But we do know that the major competing system from the 20th century had a blatant disregard for worker safety, public health, and environmental protection - much worse than its capitalistic counterparts. For example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effect...g_the_Cold_War

The outcomes in communist Czechoslovakia were repeated throughout the Warsaw Pact countries.

China has a mixed economy, transitioning over several decades from communism to something more capitalistic. We know that China has a terrible track record regarding worker safety, public health, and environmental protection. We know that this extends far beyond recent capitalistic endeavors such as electronics manufacturing and assembly. And we know that the further back in time we look, the more communist the Chinese system, the worse the record.

So I think it's reasonable to assume that if we had another major economic system active in the world today, it would have similar problems with this pandemic, or else would have traded these problems for much worse problems. Therefore I think the problem you describe is more reasonably attributed to humans than it is to capitalism.

I think it's likely that if the Soviet Union were alive today, it would be better about not spreading the virus from the Soviet Haves to the Soviet Have-Nots, simply by virtue of communism producing fewer Haves than capitalism. But I think this would be more than offset by worse working conditions for the Have-Nots, worse environmental protections, and a policy of keeping the economy going "for the greater good" even at the cost of spreading the infection among the workforce to an even greater degree than us capitalists have done.

Seriously, look at the history of environmental pollution in the 20th century, compare capitalist systems with communist systems and see which one you hate more.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by dann

2) Even if we restrict it to pharma, you are still wrong. Some "reach people" could actually afford to pay "millions a day for medecine".

Of the top ten richest people in the world, Bill Gates has the most liquid assets, at $46.8 billion:

https://hbcumoney.com/2014/11/24/c-r...-cash-on-hand/

If he paid $2 million/day for Covid medicine, and spent his money on literally nothing else, he'd be fine for another 64 years. In reality he'd die of starvation within a couple weeks. More realistically, he'd die of untreated aging-related complications in a few years.

The next most liquid billionaire, Ernesto Bertarelli, only has about a quarter of Bill Gate's cash on hand. That's good for a mere 16 years' worth of medicine. Depending on how old he is and how healthy he is, he might actually live long enough to enjoy the full 16 years covid-free.

Do you think extracting this kind of money from these few billionaires is a realistic or practical business strategy for any drug manufacturer? Do you think any real-world drug manufacturer is interested in even trying to do something like this?

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Therefore I think the problem you describe is more reasonably attributed to humans than it is to capitalism.

I think that's true of a lot of criticisms of systems: they ignore the fact that humans are humans and pretend that the issue is with the system. That's how we got communism, in fact, and dann here doesn't even see that.

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Of the top ten richest people in the world, Bill Gates has the most liquid assets, at $46.8 billion:

https://hbcumoney.com/2014/11/24/c-r...-cash-on-hand/

If he paid $2 million/day for Covid medicine, and spent his money on literally nothing else, he'd be fine for another 64 years. In reality he'd die of starvation within a couple weeks. More realistically, he'd die of untreated aging-related complications in a few years.

The next most liquid billionaire, Ernesto Bertarelli, only has about a quarter of Bill Gate's cash on hand. That's good for a mere 16 years' worth of medicine. Depending on how old he is and how healthy he is, he might actually live long enough to enjoy the full 16 years covid-free.

Do you think extracting this kind of money from these few billionaires is a realistic or practical business strategy for any drug manufacturer? Do you think any real-world drug manufacturer is interested in even trying to do something like this?

According to dann, off-the-counter, cheap and effective medecine doesn't exist because capitalism only serves the "reach" (I can't believe he made such an issue out of a misspelling in a middle of an argument. That's really petty.).

[theprestige]

From what I can tell, Communist Russia actually did a much better job of serving its "reach" at the expense of its working class, than did its capitalist competitors. (I can. Isn't "the personal is political" a leftist meme?)

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by theprestige

(I can. Isn't "the personal is political" a leftist meme?)

Don't get me started with that one!

[dann]

Originally Posted by Belz...

"No, you!" is always a terrible argument. I'll also note that you're the one who made this discussion personal, not I.

I thought you just said that "No, you!" is a terrible argument.

Quote:

Another lie. This entire thread is specifically about capitalist impacts on coronavirus' spread.

Yes, it is, and yet people would rather talk about something else, as did you. At least you kept to capitalism if not to coronavirus. But if you prefer that one, I have already posted examples of billionaires buying tests that are (and to some extent: that are therefore) not available to people who aren't able to pay the price.

Quote:

So why isn't it happening, then?

For the same reason that you can't charge very different prices for the same product: If it's one that caters to the tastes of ordinary people, billionaires will buy it for the same price. Even if billionaires can afford to pay one million for a Mars bar, they won't because they can buy them for 40 cents. But if certain things are scarce, like tests, for instance, they can afford to pay a price that lets them have the thing that poor people who need it just as much can't.
You really should pay more attention to how capitalism works.

Quote:

Get over yourself. It's not my fault if you changed the subject.

It's not my fault that you continue to get it wrong.

Quote:

First of all, again you are lying about my opinions. Stop doing that. Second, ALL systems in history favour the rich. ALL of them.

If I had lied, you would be all over it. Stop lying about that. In other systems, wealth isn't accumulated as capital. That makes the difference. And no, I'll not continue to explain capitalism to you. Look it up!

Quote:

Canada has a capitalist system and yet diabetics have no issue getting insulin. Why is that?

I guess the state has intervened in its capitalist economy. And you really have to start looking up things on your own, for instance why the state intervened.

Quote:

Are you done making this conversation personal? Once again: that you keep switching from one argument to another isn't anybody's fault but your own.

That depends. If you continue to make it personal, so do I. You make many different faulty arguments, which means I have to start anew again and again. That's how argumentation works: I can't use the same arguments against all your wrong arguments. It takes a new on every time, except for the cases where you just repeat your old ones. That makes it a little easier.

Quote:

Of course it is. That they cover for the faults of capitalism but keep it nonetheless indicates that there are benefits to keeping it. But you continue to avoid giving alternatives because you're well aware that they are all worse.

Of course, there are benefits! Benefits for the state. That is what characterizes states in capitalism, the ones that you would call democracies. That you don't like the alternative I have presented is not avoidance on my part. That you don't read them is yours.

Quote:

No They have NOTHING to do with capitalism. Stop pretending like you agree with what you quote only to say the opposite. It's dishonest.

Yeah, right! When capitalists lie about the virus for the sake of their businesses and Trump lies about it for the sake of Wall Street and his reelection, it has nothing whatsoever to do with capitalism in your fairy-tale version of capitalism. You are as dishonest as you can possibly be.

Quote:

What the hell are you babbling about now? I'm telling you that your rhetoric is messy because you're not thinking straight. It has nothing to do with intelligence, mine or yours. jeez, stop projecting your insecurities onto me.

Childish nonsense.

Quote:

Not ALL of them. SOME of them. That's enough to prove you wrong. Stop being such a baby.

No, it's not, and I don't have the time to explain it to you all over again.

Quote:

Capitalism is not a mode of production. It's clear by now that you have no idea what you're talking about. But go ahead and "no, you!" me again.

No need. Keep on rambling. Capitalist mode of production

Quote:

Yes except no, then.

I didn't really expect you to grasp the meaning of the concept character mask.

Quote:

YOUR imaginary capitalism. I said nothing of the sort. Capitalism has important flaws, but they can be mitigated in a number of ways, resulting in different implementations.

Man, that is clever! So go on: Mitigate them, for all I care. Mitigate that people are forced to work in the middle of a pandemic without PPE, mitigate that they are forced to use public transport, and mitigate their cramped living quarters, and mitigate that they can't get tested because the billionaires bought the tests.

Quote:

That is not a description of capitalism, nor does it say what you claimed was my opinion of it. I'm asking you to retract your lie.

There is no lie to retract. I would ask you to retract your fantasy if I thought you didn't actually believe in it.

Quote:

You seem to think that this is somehow surprising or undesirable. Yeah, I can afford more stuff and more expensive stuff than some other people but less than others. So what?

No, that is not at all surprising, but yes, it is very undesirable that some people can only afford **** and some people can't even afford ****.

Quote:

Yeah, there are far fewer hungry people in communist utopias than in the US, right?

Having to read about your capitalist utopia is bad enough. Making up communist utopias doesn't make it any better. But making up stuff appears to be your level of argumentation.

Quote:

You're making it my business by arguing for a movie-based view of capitalism.

If I argued like you, I would begin to get hysterical at this point and ask you to retract your lies.

Quote:

Oh great! "No, you!" again! How original and convincing.

I gave up trying to convince you of anything a long time ago. Go back to Start of this post.