You're idea benefits society, and you get to live in the society you helped improve. So cure for cancer has a greater motive than cute dog clothes.

Having a great idea in a capitalist society doesn't necessarily mean that you expect to be rewarded for it, nor does it mean that in a socialist society.

You're condensing both philosophies too much.

>>2595199
You're referring to a capitalist society, right?

>>2595199
>>2595204
Is that enough though, without there being a personal benefit? People are greedy.

>>2595224
Define greed.

>>2595229
"Greed is the inordinate desire to possess wealth, goods, or objects of abstract value with the intention to keep it for one's self."

People want to have more than their peers, be better than them.

>>2595254
The definition you quoted and the explanation you gave after it are two different things.

According to the quoted definition, wanting anything that isn't food, water, or air is greed. I don't see how that's a social club-foot.

Wanting more sandwiches than your peer just to have them is certainly greed, but I don't understand how you're trying to use it in your argument.

>>2595270
Do you know what inordinate means? Because it looks like you don't.

>>2595273
agreed
>>2595270
Well, I think that if A works hard day and night and comes up with a great idea that B didn't think of, which makes the lives of A and B easier, A will want to get some recognition for it - A will want to earn more than B does.

>>2595254
>inordinate
>desire
first you should understand what those mean

>>2595276
>A will want to earn more than B does.
and when the fuck did this become a fact?

>>2595276
What does B have anything to do with A?

>>2595286
They're peers.

>>2595273
Inordinate is a subjective term.

You should read Ayn Rand she has really good ideas about this kind of stuff.

>>2595288
In what way?

Are they peers in terms of age? Do they live in the same neighborhood? Are they friends? Do they even know each other?

>>2595299
I suppose it could be any of these things. I just think that coming from the same background, same chances to innovate, the person who actually did the work and achieved would want greater rewards than everyone else who didn't, regardless of knowing the
person.

Innovation is not exactly the word, but socialist societies historically have been about fighting over political prestige. There is no innovation, only striving for hegemony.

As for Marx, in his ideal socialist society people are already so engrossed in their work they innovate and continue to produce willingly. The entire point of socialism is that it liberates the productive energies of human beings to invest in activity they desire rather than being forced by necessity to work dehumanizing jobs for capital.

De-abstractifying it, a guy digs ditches for a living. His neighbor works as a plumber. Considering the plumber's job requires more skill, why shouldn't he be paid more?

And, presuming he is not paid more, what is the incentive to be a plumber in the first place? There are most likely not enough people in the world who "love plumbing" that they would make a career out of it without financial incentive.

>>2595189

In the Soviet Union, citizens who did great things were rewarded with prizes such as "Hero of Soviet Labor" and given special privileges (the right to shop in special stores, free trolley rides, wear a big shiny medal everywhere, etc). Those in socially valuable jobs like doctors, engineers and such were payed much more than the typical proletarian and had special privileges of their own such as better living spaces, the right to own a car and take vacations on the Black Sea.

Basically, the same as being wealthy in a capitalist nation.

>>2595362
While that might be useful in a small-scale community sense, I'd be utterly pissed if I were, say, a billion-dollar investor for a cancer vaccine. I cure cancer, spending a billion dollars in the process, and all I get are a few throwaway privileges I could've bribed officials for at 1/100th the price?

Communist thinking really doesn't account very well for the sheer cost of innovation in capital terms.

>>2595384
>>2595362
the key word (which has been ignored) is compensation.

if the socialist society has a collective culture in which people care more about their society as a whole oppose to individual gain, motivation and strive for the better of the whole would still be alive just because they would identify themselves with the society as a whole and not them individually, pay would not really matter.

>>2595389
And where does this compensation come from?

>>2595355
>what is the incentive to be a plumber in the first place?

Loving a job is one motivation for doing it, but possessing ability for, lacking difficulty, and for the sake of work are others. By that I mean no one dreams of being a plumber, no, but if the government demanded people work and handed them a list of jobs to choose from, they might choose plumbing because they already know plumbing, find it an easy task so they can take it easy and have more free time, or because they prefer it to others on the list.

Of course, while collectivism ideals can function in this age by this manner, I believe it's best used in a (here comes the shitstorm) post-scarcity society, something Marx detailed in his writings.

Pretty simple, you learn to grow the fuck up and do your best for the sake of humanity. Until we learn how to do that, we are a joke of a species.

What the fuck is money in the grand scheme of things. Do you really want out fate to rest on insecurity and money?

>>2595402
i think humanity might be ready for a post-scarcity society and i this type of society a socialist society would be more proficient than a capitalist one with the cooperation of everyone.

>How can a socialist society mimic the effects of a profit motive?

The gentleman in the picture (whom i respect insofar as his will to act) found it expedient to mimic the effects by placing the barrel of a gun to the back of an individual's head and saying "work or I will fucking kill you"

>>2595565
i know he was awesome xD true visionary

>>2595580
Something to be said about revolutions away from capitalist overseers. At least they fired you when you did a shitty job.

>>2595207
Well, capitalist societies are trying to whore in on this idea of Big Society, but it originates and at least makes some sense in communist Cuba. There it means "If we all band together, we can improve our society for everyone", whereas how it's being used in the UK for example, it means more "Us rich people would like to have slaves, but we're not really allowed, so we figure if we stopped paying you poor people wages you could 'volunteer' or something".

>>2595384
The argument that compensation must be the maindriving force behind innovation, especially medical, is counter-intuitive. Not only does it encourage profitable products over beneficial ones, but it neglects the fact that we have numerous universities all over the world that do extensive research mostly for the pursuit of knowledge and betterment of mankind.

>>2595612
You should watch president eisenhowers fairwell address. He touches upon that issue in that grants for large scale advances are almost always derived from the military or federal government. Example: the recent developments in railgun tech vs. clean energy.

>>2595616

i love this address. profound stuff.

i don't think it nessicarily has to wait till post scarcity society. the capitalist paradigm takes advantages to humanity's flaws. Once everyone can be a good critical thinker then we can have this socialism.

>Modern industry has established the world-market, for which the discovery of America paved the way. This market has given an immense development to commerce, to navigation, to communication by land. This development has, in its turn, reacted on the extension of industry; and in proportion as industry, commerce, navigation, railways extended, in the same proportion the bourgeoisie developed, increased its capital, and pushed into the background every class handed down from the Middle Ages.
>The Communist Manifesto

Marx kinda sorta admired some things about capitalism. It's more obvious in Das Kapital.

>>2595630
Unfortunately, every "real" socialist society has ultimately succumbed to capitalism's flaws but without the support of its prevailing counterweights. Every society will always have men driven by the will to power, corruption, greed. No truly socialist state will ever succeed, although one with a modern european social net and a state capitalist bent will probably do pretty well.

I think the best counter example to your argument is Iceland. In 2004 they had the best conditions for an end of history socialist society. Excellent national resources, well managed fisheries, clean energy generation, a homogenous small peaceful population with no need for a military and a wonderful social net. And look what it took for their economy to come crashing down. A few bankers making the wrong greedy investments. And while to a point they have fixed this, they now have assholes like Alcoa and Halliburton plumbing their depths and fucking up their resources.

tl;DR, i admire your idealism, but you are wrong, although I would welcome an example to prove me wrong. I hope to hope there will be one soon.

On the contrary, scarcity drives the communist revolution:
>The modern laborer, on the contrary, instead of rising with the progress of industry, sinks deeper and deeper below the conditions of existence of his own class. He becomes a pauper, and pauperism develops more rapidly than population and wealth. And here it becomes evident, that the bourgeoisie is unfit any longer to be the ruling class in society, and to impose its conditions of existence upon society as an over-riding law. It is unfit to rule, because it is incompetent to assure an existence to its slave within his slavery, because it cannot help letting him sink into such a state that it has to feed him, instead of being fed by him. Society can no longer live under this bourgeoisie, in other words, its existence is no longer compatible with society.

>>2595642
"kinda sorta"? His admiration is pretty explicit.

>>2595675
Yeah, I was failing to be glib. :\