Are you going to lay track on every street?
Not necessary. You can walk a few hundred meters to your end destination. It’s actually good for your health.
Not to mention, laying tons of tracks on streets for a light rail network is a thing that’s been around since before personalised cars.
76 comments as of now. This will be good
I’m stupid. I completely forgot that the worlders have enforced an authoritarian tankie censorship regime 😔
From a basic labor theory of value perspective, bitcoin requires labor to produce because mining it requires massive amounts of compute power. This computer power is supplied using GPUs and electricity, both of which require labor to produce.
If you use this calculator, and enter the values 67 TH/s (tera hashes per second, the rate at which you are mining), 2680 watts for electricity consumption rate, and 5 cents per kilo watt hour as prices, you will see
4.25 USD revenue per day 3.22 USD cost per day Profit rate = 32.0%
To make the values of the the hash rate and energy consumption rate realistic, I consulted the specs of the machine antminer S17, which is aparantly a machine used in the bitcoin mining world (I ain’t into crypto mining). The cost of electricty comes from Kazakhstan, which has cheap electricty and substantial mining operations.
So basically, at the current price of bitcoin can support a gross profit rate of 32% for the people who produce bitcoin, assuming you keep all the profit (no taxes, interest, rent), have no employees or maintainable costs. This is the price currently settled at based on the technological conditions and level of competition.
It is nothing too crazy of a price, and the rapid growth of price in bitcoin is due to how the currency was designed. Basically, once a certain number of bitcoin have been mined, the bitcoin generation rate per mined block halves. This forces an exponential rise in the difficulty of mining bitcoin, and therefore an exponential rise in its price.
Most probably, if bitcoin was designed to have a constant difficulty of producing, its price wouldn’t have increased at all.
I’ll bite. This is a genuinely new take I haven’t seen before, despite 3 years of the war. Would you mind explaining how exactly Russia is an American minion?
Biased, politicised science is real science. Not the platonic ideal you have in your head.
That didn’t feel like science so much as politics and I get why some would be against that.
Respectfully, this is a weak sauce excuse, and a completely unscientific attitude. Scientists do not establish arbitrary barriers between different fields.
These kinds of statements 99% of the time come from people who don’t even do science, and whose understanding of science consists of “take down data points, analyse data points, be neutral” (paraphrasing your comment).
In reality, scientific names are usually given to honor specific people. The idea that the community just gives names to people who discovered things is simply ignorant of history. There are literally cases of people purchasing name recognition. There are also cases of people being honored by having their name on a phenomena they didn’t even discover, or a unit they did not create (typical for units, which are standardised by committees and not named after people in the standardisation committee)
Rainy, damp, cloudy, windy weather is peak weather and beats a “nice sunny day” 80% of the time.
Ice cream is winter food and not summer food because of how fatty it is. Popsicles are summer food and not so appealing in the winter.
All countries should be making a 100% effort towards eliminating all meat (except that produced by subsistence farmers and the like) in their diets for the sake of the climate. Poverty is not an excuse because vegetarian diets use many many times less resources (which is why wealthy countries eat much more meat).
Large wealthy countries should provide free vitamin supplements worldwide to reduce diseases.
By that logic you could argue that no one should be able to get compensated for their skills in an open marketplace.
I mean, nationalising all industries and creating minimum/maximum wages is a fairly standard left-wing policy template.
What would a music phone look like? I’m not arguing, I’m genuinely asking what features are ‘camera phones’ lacking that could be installed into a ‘music phone’ (but not in a '‘camera phone’)?
Oh, I didn’t even realize this. Thanks.
A number of proposals have been kicked around for decades. There hasniot been the will to implement.
That’s the point. A dictatorship of the bourgeoise will not implement progressive policies unless you fight hard for them. They will however, in the absence of resistance, implement increasingly reactionary policies in a heartbeat.
The overarching goal of communism is for laborers to own the means of production instead of an owning/capitalist class.
No, the overarching goal of communism is to create a stateless, classless and moneyless society.
Employee owned businesses are the realization of communism within a capitalist society.
No. At best, you could say that coops are a proto-socialist element within a capitalist society. Firstly, I am using the term “socialist” as separate from “communist” here, and secondly, a proto-socialist element is a very different thing from an enclave of socialism within a capitalist world.
The simple problem is that capital is capital. A capital is a self-reproducing social relation that competes with other capitals in a sort of evolution by natural/sexual/artificial selection on the markets. The problem is capital itself, and the solution is to destroy capital. Creating a new type of capital that is less destructive, or one that operates under less destructive modes is fine for countries where development has not reached to the point that they can directly gun towards communism. However, for advanced, and especially late-stage capitalist economies, the task is not to pursue further development of market forces, because market forces have already matured. The task is to eliminate market forces (although this may take time).
Coops may give a more equal distribution of wealth amongst the workers, but the aim of the communists is to abolish wealth, because the very meaning of wealth is that a private individual gets to command the labor of others. That is the fundamental social relation that money embodies and facilitates. The only way to remove the power to exploit other people’s labor is to remove the ability to command labor. But if you cannot command labor, then money becomes worthless and your ownership of the coop doesn’t mean anything.
Are organizations focusing on this and I just don’t know about it?
Yes. A quick google search shows examples such as the international labor organisation
If not, what obstacles are there that would hinder this approach to increasing the share labor collective ownership?
Part of the fundamental problem is just that the bourgeois class is not stupid. They want exploitable workers and profits. If you deprive them of that, prepare to face their wrath as they abandon all pretenses of human rights or fairness or the sanctity of markets.
Oscar Jenkins, 33, was convicted in a Russian-controlled court in occupied eastern Ukraine on Friday of fighting in an armed conflict as a mercenary.
Mr Jenkins, a teacher from Melbourne, was captured last December in the Luhansk region.
Prosecutors said he arrived in Ukraine in February 2024, alleging he was paid between 600,000 and 800,000 rubles (£5,504 and £7,339) a month to take part in military operations against Russian troops.
The article seems to claim that this guy is a mercenary, but someone in the comments is claiming that this guy is not a mercenary because he is a member of the UAF’s foreign legion. I don’t know if there is any additional context here that I am missing.
It sure seems to love selling American military secrets to Russia though.
And so do Americans. Like your argument that the colony controls America is that the colony does bad shit to America. But what part of America doesn’t fuck over America on the regular?
so they could pay less taxes and due to a grievance about parliamentary representation
They did primarily because they wanted to expand their settler colonies further into native lands while the British government had tried restricting settler expansion.
The “free state” was never about preventing oppression of the citizens or launching an insurrection against the state. I don’t know where this bizzare view comes from, since the constitution literally defines treason against the state to be punishable by death.
I’m not sure what your point here is. Whether or not the occupation allows American military bases, or whether or not they can get away with sinking the USS liberty is moot. Because the occupation literally is an American (and partly european) operation. Claiming that the occupied zone controls America is like claiming that south Africa controlled Britain.
why would the US care about gaza
Petrodollars, settler colonialism and imperial control. Israel and the Gulf monarchies are the linchpin of the petrodollar, aka the American government’s ability to run a massive trade deficit over decades with minimal inflation, something no other country can do. This gives the American government unlimited spending power (for its military).
There is also the geopolitical aspect of dividing the middle east, figuratively and literally, as well as having a forward base there to put pressure on Europe, Russia and China.
Finally, a huge number of “israelis” are really just American settlers. From the standpoint of the American bourgeoise, having a settler colony with a racialised underclass is very profitable, as this underclass (the Palestinians) are easily exploited workers. Furthermore, the American firms can test weapons on Gaza and their partnership with companies in the occupation yield them economic benefits.
The west is literally commiting a genocide. They are mass disappearing people into the afterlife. Mind boggling that in 2025 we still have incredulous libs who believe in western exceptionalism.