The motivation for working in Capitalism always exceeds the motivation for working in Communism. In our example, from 2 to 4 days of value more is gained from working in Capitalism vs working in Communism. In the group size of two: 3.5 - 1.5 = 2. In the infinite group size: 3.5 - (-0.5) = 4.
In Communism in the "large group" case, it’s more beneficial to relax than to work, which leads to a massive shortage of values. Capitalism does not have this issue, since its rewards are independent of group size.
For the studious, note the difference in equations for calculating the benefit of working over relaxing in the two systems:
Communism: (value created in a day's work) / (# of people) - (the extra cost of working)
Capitalism: (value created in a day's work) - (the extra cost of working)
The equations are very similar, except in Communism you only receive a fraction of the value you create. This is the source of why in larger groups it becomes more rewarding to relax rather than work.
it doesnt sound dumb to me. i guess its a cultural issue.
the capitalist propaganda leads to me believe that public institutions are typically less efficient than private ones as a result of incentive compatibility issues. not to say that incentive compatibility issues do not exist in capitalist structures.
Nah, it's nonsensical. Since you can't define a function space nor a mapping of outcomes to R^n, it's clear you don't understand, so I found a nice, very math averse (because it's from an economics course lol) explanation of why you're wrong:
on a completely different level, when i'm in a revolutionary mindset, i question the values of "efficiency" and "production" and the assumption that a system that incentivizes people to pour more of their life into keeping a bunch of arbitrary luxuries in existence and inventing more for their own ability to experience comfort and arbitrary luxuries, is actually a good thing
pandoras box got opened but just because everybody seemed prosperous in the process of opening it, is that proof that opening pandoras box was worth it?
I tried explaining that his conclusions are only true under the framework of capitalism and he ignored it. Instead, he just kept insisting sweatshops are good because they provide employment that wouldn't be there otherwise lmao
capitalism is basically the religion of pursuing arbitrary luxuries and all you have to do to get people into it is make them want those arbitrary luxuries or force them into needing to produce them to survive