this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2025
350 points (96.3% liked)

Liberty Hub

371 readers
2 users here now

  1. No Discrimination, this includes usage of slurs or other language intended to promote bigotry
  2. No defending oppressive systems or organizations
  3. No uncivil or rude comments to other users
  4. Discussion, not debate. This community is exclusively for genuine logical debate, any comments using whataboutism or similar will be removed.
  5. No genocide denial or support for genocidal entities. Anyone that supports the mass murder of civilians will be banned.

These guidelines are meant to allow open discussion and ensure leftists and post-leftists can have a voice. If you are here to learn, then welcome! Just remember that if you're not a part of the left (Liberals don't count) then you are a visitor, please do not speak over our members.

Matrix server: https://matrix.to/#/#libertyhub:matrix.org

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
350
There is no future under Capitalism (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 3 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 24 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)
  1. Both can be done more sustainably
  2. Insurance is only needed under a capitalist society where healthcare is not considered a basic human right
  3. There is a difference between producing weapons for defense and producing weapons for profit
[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 weeks ago

Concerning insurance, it is my opinion that any system that conceives of insurance as a solution to societal ills is a bad system. The existence of insurance actually increases inequity. (I'm agreeing with you, but this has been on my mind a lot lately since the events in NYC.)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The difficulty with 3 is that to some extent you have to maintain constant production of weapons and munitions. Failing to do so means in the event of conflict there will be a serious lag between the need for more weapons and munitions and their availability. Retooling and re-training producers takes time.

Balancing that is walking a knifes edge no matter how you slice it. Ideally weapons would never be needed, but when they are it's uncertain how many will be needed, what type, etc...

Regardless of underlying economic system the production lines need to be ready to go but not take up to many resources. It's to an extent inevitable to overproduce during peaceful times.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago

Yes but theres a fine line between producing weapons for defense and mass producing weapons for foreign dictatorships to fuel their genocides