[Bill_Nye]

I think over the next century we will need China and India to get on board with making us a multi-planetary species. One of those two is communist. So how do we get communist buy-in on heading to mars, mining asteroids, and geoengineering our world to survive climate change? I think the advance communism can offer is to use surplus GDP to build starships and other capital intensive products to get ourselves off this rock. I think anarcho-capitalism is an alternative to communism that could work in the stars, where Trillionaires could use their wealth to pay for space projects and get hundreds of billions back into the economy with rare earth metals hidden away in asteroids. Instead of seeing China as a necessary adversary on the global stage we can move to seeing them as a "friendly" competitor that for example we can divide up the moon with. How do you see the grand arc of history unfolding over the next 100 years?

[Truth To Power]

I think over the next century we will need China and India to get on board with making us a multi-planetary species. One of those two is communist.

No, China has never been communist, and has not even been socialist for over 40 years.

So how do we get communist buy-in on heading to mars, mining asteroids, and geoengineering our world to survive climate change?

There are no communist countries, never have been, and likely never will be.

I think the advance communism can offer is to use surplus GDP to build starships and other capital intensive products to get ourselves off this rock.

Communism would reduce surplus GDP to near zero, and devote it to the military and police.

I think anarcho-capitalism is an alternative to communism that could work in the stars, where Trillionaires could use their wealth to pay for space projects and get hundreds of billions back into the economy with rare earth metals hidden away in asteroids.

Anarcho-capitalism is the same as feudalism, which cannot create trillionaires. Under feudalism, even kings are poor because the entire rent of land must be devoted to defending ownership of it.

Instead of seeing China as a necessary adversary on the global stage we can move to seeing them as a "friendly" competitor that for example we can divide up the moon with. How do you see the grand arc of history unfolding over the next 100 years?

By definition, no one can see past the Singularity. We just don't know when it will happen.

[Bill_Nye]

I don't believe in the Singularity. It's like Teilhard de Chardin's Omega Point.

[Truth To Power]

I don't believe in the Singularity. It's like Teilhard de Chardin's Omega Point.

What a bizarre analogy.

The Singularity is the point where AI becomes SAI (superhuman AI). We don't know when it will happen, but everything after that point is radically unpredictable.

[Red_Army]

Long rage space travel is impossible because of bone loss issues.

I love whatever the fuck Truth To Power's ideology is. Are kings poor because not capitalism? But you also don't like anarcho-capitalism, and have a Trotskyite conception of what makes a country communist. Hell yes brother! I love an original thinker. RIP Ixabert.

[wat0n]

TtP is just a georgist, it's not that original.

[Red_Army]

Ah, you're right. Not original, but a throwback. I've never met anyone who was a Georgist in real life, but have seen a few here. I totally forgot about them though.

[wat0n]

I don't blame you, it's a very specific ideology. And it can live with many other ideologies (liberalism, socialism, fascism) just fine.

[Red_Army]

It's cool to have an ideology that is just one quick solution to everything. We have economic rent now - it's all solved.

[Rich]

and have a Trotskyite conception of what makes a country communist. Hell yes brother! I love an original thinker. RIP Ixabert.

Was Trotsky's Trotsky's conception any differenet from Lenin's? Lenin it seems was more sccetical than Trotsky. Lenin didn't believe in Trotsky's permanent revolution. Lenin didn't beleive they had achieved the Dictatorship of the Proletariat let alone Communism. Lenin was more pluralistic than Trotsky. Trotsky bleivied in a total party dictatorship. His strange concerns about bureacratisation only seemed to arise after he was sidelined from the leadership.

Lenin believed in a dictatorship of the Marxist intelligentsia. Trotsky came round to this view in 1917.

[Truth To Power]

Long rage space travel is impossible because of bone loss issues.

Easily solved with centrifugal gravity, but that requires a significant size of spacecraft (also required for radiation shielding).

I love whatever the fuck Truth To Power's ideology is.

I call myself a geoist. Capitalism is private ownership of the means of production -- natural resources (which classical economics called, "land,") and producer goods ("capital"); socialism is collective ownership thereof; geoism is private ownership of the privately created means of production -- "capital" -- and equal individual rights to use and enjoy what no private interest ever created, and nature provided equally to all: the natural resources of the earth ("geo").

Are kings poor because not capitalism?

Because there is no government to stop violent conflict over land. It's the violence that makes everyone poor.

But you also don't like anarcho-capitalism,

Because there is no way to allocate exclusive tenure to land -- which is necessary to any economy above the hunter-gatherer and nomadic herding stages -- but by force. It is impossible. If that force is not wielded by and for the people, through a democratically accountable government, it will be wielded by thugs, whether they are private landholders (i.e., under anarcho-capitalism, better known as feudalism), government officials (the socialism of nominally "communist" countries like the USSR, Cuba, and Maoist China), or outright military despots (almost any settled economy of the ancient world).

and have a Trotskyite conception of what makes a country communist.

Communism is abolition of private property. No national government has yet taken that step, and I doubt any ever will.

Hell yes brother! I love an original thinker. RIP Ixabert.

<bows>

[Truth To Power]

TtP is just a georgist, it's not that original.

No. A georgist is a follower of Henry George and advocate of the Georgist Single Tax (often called a Land Value Tax or LVT). I agree with a lot of George's analysis, which no one has ever refuted, but differ with him on a few key points:

1. I see no reason not to use economically and socially beneficial Pigovian taxes in addition to the "single" tax on the unimproved value of land (i.e., repayment of the subsidy to private landholding). Pigovian taxes are bested suited to national governments, while location subsidy repayment (LSR) is best suited to junior governments.
2. George advocated issuance of debt- and interest-free fiat money by the national government, which I also advocate, but he did not understand the necessity of requiring private banks to hold 100% of their demand deposits as reserves in order to stabilize the financial system and stop them from increasing the money supply by lending.
3. George favored abolition of patents but retention of copyrights. I advocate abolishing both.
4. Henry George favored free trade unconditionally, on the grounds that it is in the interest of consumers; however, the governments of undemocratic countries often unjustly favor local export producers to the detriment of both competitors in other countries and their own populations. IMO national governments have an international responsibility to put economic pressure on governments that oppress their own people for the financial benefit of local export producers, and trade sanctions are one way to do that.
5. Most importantly, George did not understand that private ownership of land involves not one but two basic injustices: the tax-funded subsidy to landowners, which he proposed to remedy with the Single Tax, and the removal of people's liberty rights to use land, which must rightly be compensated. George ignored the latter; I have devised an original solution to it: just compensation to all resident citizens in the form of a universal individual exemption (UIE) from LSR.

[Truth To Power]

It's cool to have an ideology that is just one quick solution to everything. We have economic rent now - it's all solved.

Location subsidy repayment (LSR) is not a panacea. It only eliminates half of the most important injustice in modern capitalist economies: private ownership of land. The other half is eliminated by the UIE, but that still leaves numerous injustices such as the debt-money system and IP monopolies. See my response to watOn.