[-] void_star@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

Sadly this is true, but that’s the price for not participating in democracy

[-] void_star@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

How is a 30 minute video about the Soviet economy a valid answer to alternatives to landlordism in a capitalist market? At least give me a timestamp where they speak to this point.

[-] void_star@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

I didn’t say anywhere that regulation will make it work or make it better, I just meant that it will certainly not change without some form of regulation.

I’m also not claiming that capitalism is perfect or even good, all economic theories are idealized, I actually don’t think there is a magical system with a simple set of rules that will actually work. The real world is complicated and messy and has exceptions all over the place.

I think there probably is some mixture of free market and socialist ideas that do work, and most countries work like this today.

[-] void_star@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

I pick on all of Capitalism, I'm a Communist. Landlording just happens to be the topic at hand. At that matter, regulations and "fairness" will never fix Capitalism, just make its worst aspects more bearable until it collapses under itself.

Isn’t this an argument that could be applied against communism though? Communism is government regulation to enforce fairness, if it can’t fix capitalism, why would it work in a communist economy?

[-] void_star@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

You found it useful, ie renting allowed you to fulfill the Use-Value you needed, shelter. You appear to be using Subjective Value "Theory," ie the idea that Value is a hallucination different from person to person, which is of course wrong

I’m not using value in this way, I literally googled “ value in a market economy” because this is what I meant by value and I cut and pasted the common definition of this usage. There is no hallucination or subjectivity, I’m using value to objectively mean what people are actively paying for. If something exists in the market, and it is being exchanged for something in return, it has “value” by this definition.

[-] void_star@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

I’m not sure how you define value, but I’m using it to mean “the price or amount that someone is willing to pay in the market” this could be for a tangle thing, like the house itself, or a service, like renting it.

My point is that landlords successfully find willing persons to rent their house for some amount of money. Therefore there is by definition value because it’s happening, whether this is ethically OK or being rented for a fair amount is a separate argument.

When I was a university student I didn’t have enough capital to buy an apartment, but I found value in being able to rent one.

[-] void_star@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

If they don’t create value then they wouldn’t exist in a capitalist market. Their value is that they take the liability of homeownership.

[-] void_star@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

I agree, my terms aren’t perfect, but as you stated there isn’t really such a thing as an interface in c++, traditionally this is achieved via an abstract base class which is what I meant by using them interchangeably.

I know there are many things you can do in c++ to enforce an interface, but tying this back to the original comment that inheritance is objectively bad, I don’t think there’s any consensus that this is true. Abstract base classes (with no data members) and CRTP are both common use cases of inheritance in modern C++ codebases and are generally considered good design patterns.

[-] void_star@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Typically this is done with CRTP which does require inheritance. But I agree, you can do some meta programming or use concepts which can enforce interfaces in a different way. But back to the original comment that interfaces via inheritance are objectively bad, I don’t think there’s any consensus that this is true. And pure virtual interfaces and CRTP are both common use cases of inheritance in modern C++ codebases and are generally considered good design patterns.

[-] void_star@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Perhaps we have a terminology mismatch, I tend to use abstract class and interface interchangeably. I’m not sure it’s possible to define a class interface in c++ without using inheritance, what kind of interface are you referring to that doesn’t use inheritance?

[-] void_star@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago

I have not heard this consensus. Definitely inheritance where the base class holds data or multiple inheritance, but I thought abstract was still ok. Why is it bad?

[-] void_star@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago

Python has its quirks, but it’s much much cleaner than js or c++, not fair to drag it down with them imo

view more: next ›

void_star

joined 2 months ago