"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it. Probably shorter periods for copyrights and patents.
Of course, a healthy tax structure is in place.
Your example of Weyerhaeuser is way off base. Because they own the land, and have for decades, they are highly interested in the health of that land, be it reforestation, logging practices, logging roads, etc. Put that land in the hands of the federal government, I guarantee they would not be the stewards that Weyerhaeuser or any other non-governmental organization would be, nor would the forests be anywhere near as productive as they are today.
As for copyrights and patents, lessening the effective time period lessens the incentive to pour money into R&D. Probably not a smart move.
Ozones tribal idiot leaders all but locked up BLM land in Oregon in the 90s Their grand plan was to just sit and let undergrowth run rampant in the forests leading to record amount of disease and fires. It doesn't matter what the Weyerhausers motivation for caring for the forests are. Grandpa Sankey can see that managing forests is healthier than locking them down.
Nice cherry picked factoid that means nothing.
The best lumber we've every seen came out of the unmanaged forrest over 100 years ago.
Weayerhoser is been managing those forests for 100 years since, and the lumber coming out of them is shit.
Probably because they cut down all the old growth as part of their "management process" and all that's left is 2nd and 3rd growth shit.
Looks fine for Weayerhoser's bottom line, but ask a craftsman that build's fine houses, and he will tell you the lumber they sell today is crap.
BTW, I've stayed the weekend at the Weayerhoser's former CFOs Chelan house (his daughter and my wife used to work together). I've had dinner with him (he is a Stanford alumni). He'll be the first to admit that their "management" is designed to optimize profit, not the forest quality or the quality of the lumber they produce.
