• Bedandsofa [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    4 years ago

    Yes, some capitalist is still getting more money. M -> M’ holds true.

    If the government didn’t incentivize (not control) an unprofitable economic activity, it wouldn’t happen. But when they make that activity profitable, it does happen. Wow, seems like there’s a profit motive.

    This is also the same principle by which many western, capitalist governments incentivize private investment (New Market Tax Credits for example). Again, I have no idea what connection this has to socialism, working class power, or working class ownership of the means of production.

    ALSO NONE OF THIS IS THE ORIGINAL POLICY AT THE TOP OF THIS THREAD THAT YOU FALSELY CLAIMED CONSTITUTES NATIONALIZATION.

    You keep backtracking and shifting goal posts, and even then, none of what you’re talking about is nationalization. Literally all of these policies are attempting to influence private businesses without nationalizing private businesses. How intellectually bankrupt can you be?

    • KiaKaha [he/him]
      hexagon
      ·
      4 years ago

      Look at the usernames in the comment thread. I jumped in purely to discuss the effectiveness of the party-state in bending private industry to the Party’s goals.

      If you wanna call that nationalisation, socialism, etc, go for it.

      • Bedandsofa [he/him]
        ·
        4 years ago

        I definitely don’t want to call that socialism, because it’s
        the opposite. Also not nationalization, which is a straightforward concept that doesn’t apply here.

        I’m not going to celebrate the CPC’s selling out workers and defending capitalist relations to the point where the CPC is now itself captured.