@Zircuits Yes, it is, but privatization isn't inherently capitalistic.

lol privitazation is inherently capitalist

So somehow giving ownership of the means of production isn't capitalist

*to private individuals

its literaly giving conscesions of state owned industries to capitalists

Privatization came tens thousands of years before capitalism, if a guy uses his factory to make something, that does not make it capitalism.

Capitalism is used for the sake of profit.

@Zircuits What are you confused on?

privitazation is made to increase capitalist profit

and no privitazation dident exist before capitalism

@Heitor That it is, but it is wrong to call privatization inherently capitalist, just because it is the preferred mode of production that capitalism uses.

Oh really? I guess the tribals managed all of their production with tribal officials, and the roman empire also owned all of their factories.

i mean the mode of production in rome is completely diferent

Was it?

yes

Tell me how.

it was slave society

private property woudent have developed fully as concept up untill the birth of modern interprise

that would be in the 1700s

Wrong, slaves were only used as manual labors, and were usually composed of prisoners, captured soldiers, and criminals.

They played a role in the economy still

Private property very much existed in rome since the founding of the city.

@Zircuits A small one at best.

im not sayin private property dident exist but the modern concept that is fully scemented today dident

we are of course talking about bussiness here and industry and state company and that sort of thing

@Heitor Well obviously the modern concept of it didn't, but privatization still exist regardless. Business did exist, it extended to traders, blacksmiths, mercanaries, construction, and shops.

*Extended but was not limited to

Infact carthage actually used mercanaries so much, that their empire went into crippling debt in using them against the romans.

tho privitazation still means the acumulation of profits under the hands of an individual so of course its inherently capitalist

@Heitor Wrong, capitalism is done for the sould purpose of collecting money, while in privatization, they only collect money in the process of using their services, not for the soul purpose of getting money.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/capitalism

>For profit

>using dictionary definitions

@Heitor That's some weak arguing right there, and you know it.

yes capitalism is made out of profit but profit dosent come out of nowhere

it obviously comes from the exchange of good and services

as well as exploitation of labour

Would you honestly expect me to take your word over a dictionary from an university that has existed since the roman empire?

@Heitor Sure profit does come from the exchange of goods, how does that factor into privatization bekng inherently capitalist?

@Firefly Look at who it is.

@Heitor basis of capitalism is not exchange. But the production of goods for the sake of the exchange. Exchange here is secondary.

@Firefly Not for the sake of exchange, but profit.