Quote:
Originally Posted by leebase
How is "most developed countries are socialist" make anything I say about COMMUNISM weak?
And in the modern developed countries -- what segments of societies are creating the new products and innovations? Is it the parts that are "socialized" are the parts that remain free and capitalist?
Lee
|
We'll, your understanding of communism seems to be that it was a society where people were not compensated or paid. The problem was not a lack of productivity; there was plenty of productivity. The problem was inefficient use of resources and misallocations. Nineteenth century workers were very productive; they helped build the modern world (industrial revolution), yet most of them made below subsistence wages.
Almost all the basic research done for what makes up the modern world, biotechnology, computers, the internet, gps, radar, satelite, was provided by government funded institutions. Additionally, those most responsible for the innovations and products of the modern world are not the best compensated. Most scientists make a pittance. The average engineer makes about 70,000 dollars a year, and even the best paid engineers and programmers only make 2-300,000 a year. Good money, but not nearly close to what a professional athlete makes, or a hedge fund manager, or a wall street executive. Of course people want to be compensated for their work, but there is no a strong correlation between creative activity and compensation. In other words, people don't become scientists and engineers to get rich.
Back to the OP, I see no problem with high priced books. I do think there needs to be a balance between access and ownership. Culture is shared; it is not owned, contrary to the dogma of copyright warriors. No one originates anything in himself, and those on the side of access understand that. Our current copyright laws have become so skewed against access in favor of ownership that the debate has become trench warfare, two sides divided into those that believe in access, and those that believe in ownership. Neither side is wrong per se, but both are extreme.
We do have some balance between access and ownership, but I don't know if we have the right balance. After two or three years libraries can usually make copyrighted books available for a limited time in limited quantities; I think this is a fair trade off, and it is a reason why it is vital to continue to support libraries. There is also limits on the duration of copyrights, but currently those limits are too long and too uniform.