However, in reality if the governance sets the standard, they can have almost always the cheapest prices. Wide reach, built transportation systems and probably incentivized contracts.

Yes, and yes, but why are either of these a bad thing? Cheap, good quality food seems like a good thing to me.

Essentially everything that fucked up India with the British during ww2.

If the British provided cheap food, they could actually have avoided the Bengal famine. (Unless you mean some other fuckup I’m not aware of.)

Removed by mod

Whatever we did to pugs is definitely not cute. Or okay.

And more importantly it’s literally never worked.

If this is true, then the only solution is to have strict anti-monopoly laws that give newcomers a level playing field, and powerful and impartial regulators to enforce these.

But I’m not even sure that socialism has never worked. The USSR moved more people out of poverty than any other country from around 1920 to 1950, and since then that position has gone to China. The USSR also industrialised a backwards country despite two world wars, and sent the first satellite, man and woman to space. China now leads the world in reforestation, the production of solar panels, batteries and high-speed rail (well, any manufacturing in fact), and quantity of scientific research. So there are facets where ‘socialism’, however mangled and compromised, can excel. If socialist policies (not full-scale revolutionary communism) can be done by a democratic government, there is no reason to think that the benefits would be even greater.

Of course. The moment a government feels threatened, it will show you ‘the violence inherent in the system’.

Let’s be honest, that’s true in every country where the government has real power. The moment you’re an actual threat to those in power, you’ll get shut down.

That is actually how you’re supposed to set up security cameras. Each camera should itself be in another camera’s field of vision.

You can still beat that with masks and loose clothes, but it takes more planning and effort.

The fundamental problem with capitalism is that in most sectors, free competition is wasteful, and a monopoly or cartel is more efficient. So, in the absence of strong anti-monopoly laws - something anathema to capitalism - these sectors will end up dominated by one or a few players. And then they will vertically integrate, further shutting out any competitors.

Take carmaking. If we did not have tariffs, import regulations, subsidies for local manufacturing, etc. (all government interventions), BYD would have 90% of the world car market in a decade. They have the best batteries and the most efficient supply chain - the only constraint would be how quickly they can scale up manufacturing!

So either we accept some government regulations to protect capitalism from itself, or we nationalise the largest and most mature companies and run them for public welfare rather than profit. Social democracy, or socialism. These are the only ‘good’ ways out. The alternative is whatever horrors England had during the Industrial Revolution, and the collapse of our environment due to overexploitation.

I don’t know how much it costs to keep the majority of routes, subsidized as they are.

Passenger transport is subsidized by goods transport. And the more expensive classes aren’t as subsidized.

Maybe the vanity projects with high-ticket prices will help with that.

But previous ministers didn’t need to do all that! And most Vande Bharaths or whatever run with empty seats, while general compartments on normal trains are overcrowded. So there is a misallocation of resources.

I believe the bigger expenditure perennially has been on personnel

I don’t know if they are correctly allotting staff to various roles. After one recent accident, it was found that the safety section was understaffed. But in any case, staff can be reassigned, while an unnecessary infrastructure project cannot later be repurposed to do something necessary.

British-era stations count as historic too! CST, Chennai Central, etc. These are usually well-designed stone buildings that can last centuries. Instead we demolish them and build glass and steel monstrosities that start leaking and cracking within a year.

Not metro; local passenger / suburban trains. The pnes with five and ten rupee tickets.

Ownership of the means of production.

Right

The history of the model T from ford.

Yes, capitalism greatly expanded the scale and speed at which things could be produced. But how do you keep capitalism ‘real’ and prevent the issues you described in your first comment?

Yes, Gigguk tryinv to explain Fate chronology. I think it’s this one.

Being FOSS, and being usable and stable.

Android is still better than Windows.

It has a definition

Care to share it with the rest of the class?

Also, do you have any examples of this ‘real capitalism’? Or at least a plan to keep capitalism ‘real’?

Gee I wonder why a system that rewards people for being corrupt … oligarchs keeps producing corrupt … oligarchs?

The bias is real. China gets the best stuff despite us being their biggest market.

The current government isn’t focusing on the trains ordinary people need (local trains with lots of unreserved compartments), because these are subsidized and run at a loss. They are running IR like a private company, trying to build vanity projects and put out more luxury trains with surge pricing so they can make money. Also replacing historic stations with crimes against architecture.

Mamata Banerjee ran the rail ministry for five years without raising the ticket price by one rupee, and she’s, well, Mamata Banerjee. How come the current geniuses can’t do this?

Meanwhile, the russian website uses firstauthorYEAR.pdf

Common publishing industry L.