While you glorify the PRC, they've made a fatal mistake in their one-child policy.

i don't glorify the prc

We've discussed them before, and you claimed to prefer living under their system.

Thats coming to the west soon, dont worry about that

i said i might

Indeed, @Great Britain.

i levied more praise on the systems of fascist italy and the libyan arab jamahiriya

Also they will also set an age limit as to how long you will be able to live

Like 75 for example

Meanwhile, such systems are wholly inefficient, requiring the labor of everyone.

Indeed, GB.

China may be the first nation to kill off their aging population, because they have no way to provide for them in retirement.

"requiring the labor of everyone"?

There is no retirement for them, GB.

<:pot_of_kek:544849795433496586>

I mean as if they dont deserve respect and appreciation as an elder

Or as people the younger generations can look up to for guidance and inspiration.

@Great Britain
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIFWG8ea6HI

oh you're talking to him

China also has a huge problem in that the folks they are managing to get into the military are scrawnier and scrawnier.

They've had to lower their admission standards twice in the last ten years.

imagine thinking that growing the population to support the old ones is a viable long term approach

China also has a huge problem with the whole "out of sight, out of mind, don't raise a fuss" culture.

The West just has to hold the line, and China will collapse under its own weight.

Imagine thinking these people aren't entitled to self-ownership, freely able to save their entire lives, then demand goods and services for their support in retirement, creating an industry which would otherwise exist to care for them and employing people outside the purview of State economic planning.

will china collapse under its own weight before the west does?

Since you want to claim Capitalist so-called "commodification" is an evil, chew on that.

😉

commodification can be evil

i don't think it is necessarily

Sometimes it can be, yes. For example, when a guy buys the rights to a lifesaving medicine, then jacks up the price a hundredfold. This has happened, by the way.

This has been your daily reminder that there is nuance in all things.

Which wouldn't be possible without government interference to begin with.

Actually, without "government interference," it'd be easier.

It wouldn't, because the government is the one enforcing the patent renewals.

This has been your daily dose of libertarianism by a classical liberal.

Current government concerns with things like patents are just an extension of previous systems. Before modern economics, there were guilds. Before that, there was the simple fact that knowledge was difficult to transmit.

Guilds were even more vicious about their intellectual property than modern governments and corporations. They would and did kill to keep them secure.

The patent should be enforceable for the term until expiration by the original inventor, simply to cover the R&D, plus a little bit of profit off the top, which incentivizes them to produce anyway. Yet, we're willing to allow for a loophole - one which solely requires a regulatory agency's interference - where the original patent holder "sells" it to other companies they're associated with anyway, which automatically allows the patent to renew once again.

That was interesting

Don't get me wrong, I actually agree that patents should have inherent limits.