Sure, monopoly prices are divorced from real value.

I’m not sure what the standard use is. I mean that production is oriented around social needs as opposed to valorization.

Spoiler that shit. It’s long.

Thus, read their theory, study the conditions.

God has a chance to do the funniest thing ever. She doesn’t seem to care about so much stuff, it would be crazy if she showed up now.

Star Trek has an economic system, it’s not run “on science.” Star Trek is functionally fully automated luxury communism. Under capitalism we have the technology to have no scarcity, but that’s not profitable, so capitalists create scarcity by destroying excess product and not giving it to those in need. In Star Trek they have a duplicator thing so no one is in need and no one can make a profit. It is a communist utopia. If you want to see a rational society that implements policy for scientifically planned good look at China. Their ultimate goal is communism, but today for now their achievements include lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty, heavily subsidizing green technology allowing it to be cheap and accessible, and lifting people’s living standards so that the life expectancy is higher the wealthy western countries.

Fake numbers about a US enemy from harvard? Shouldn’t we be hearing about the 10% who didn’t like the government being punished if there actually is coercion?

Science has no goal. It cannot determine policy. It can tell you how certain policies may affect certain metrics, but it matters who decides what metrics matter ie. do we care if people have food, or if line go up.

Lovely, here's the source list from my project from last year:

https://www.mybib.com/b/1J6ko1 (too big to paste on here)

Yes, I used Xinhua, simply to learn about Xi's youth.

Unfortunately, It's a little outdated with the progress they've made in the last year. I didn't cite them, but there's also the "at what cost" meme articles saying China growing more forests and public transportation is a bad thing.

You may not believe it, but we know the Secretary of the Treasury does from her recent comments.

I don't deny any of that, but there's still a danger in idealizing Mexican settlerism. I'm curious your thoughts on this related podcast that I happened to listen to today.

I was thinking about that the other day, how it would make more sense within the confines of a binary patriarchal system if women were expected asked men out. This makes sense considering that most men would take most women, while women seem more likely to have “a type” or be offended by advances. This would also decrease predatory behavior. Of course, it’s not like that, because the current way gives men the agency.