Reddit reviews CTA Digital 2-in-1 iPotty with Activity Seat for iPad

Best $20 I’ve ever spent

Das kann ich überbieten

Cause its basically an adult version on THIS.

Not quite as bad as this wonderful contraption
http://www.amazon.com/CTA-Digital-iPotty-Activity-Seat/dp/B00B3G8UGQ

Now I feel like a real shit, my 14 month old has an iPad! and a shiny new iPotty to go with it!

Sorry guys, but I win.

http://amzn.com/B00B3G8UGQ

Read the most helpful reviews for the iPotty: http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00B3G8UGQ/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1414846282&sr=8-1&pi=SX200_QL40

The first one is the best, but there are a few other good ones too.

You can have that one, just remember to buy your kid: http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00B3G8UGQ?pc_redir=1395650604&robot_redir=1

Clearly not far enough...

I don't really know a whole lot about socialism or communism, but I'm going to try to refute you just for fun.

1. Incentive
   
   So your first point claimed that people only clean their own house because they benefit from it, not because it benefits society as a whole (or some other reason). Moreover, you claim that no one really cares about cleanliness in public places, or at least no one wants to take responsibility for it.
   
   Because I'm not really sure if you are critiquing socialism or communism (as they go back and forth between the two in OP's video), I'll just defend both.
   
   In the case of socialism, your argument doesn't really apply: incentivization is a major part of socialism. In fact, it is essential to it. Under socialism, individuals are motivated to work because the more one works, the more one has access to resources. As Marx put it, to each according to his contribution.
   
   Under communism, cleanliness is not really an issue. Marx claims that communism can only arise under sufficiently advanced technological conditions. Thus, it isn't a stretch to claim that these conditions include the ability to keep public (or private) places clean with little to no work.
   
   Finally, it isn't true that the division of labor is eradicated under socialism. Remember, socialism is just like capitalism in terms of work conditions except one is rewarded for their work rather than some arbitrary wage drawn up by a CEO. In the case of communism, division of labor is outmoded because of sufficiently advanced technology.
   
   
2. Automation
   
   >"Automation" is this magic wand that nowadays is often waved over all the shortcomings of socialism to make them disappear
   
   This isn't really true. In some ways, socialism is the answer to technological shortcomings of capitalism. Whereas capitalist technological advancements can be driven by fads or trends, socialism promises a strict adherence to what is necessary. E.g. instead of encouraging engineers to develop a Digital 2-in-1 iPotty, they are encouraged to work only on stuff that matters (no, we don't need the iPotty). Given enough time of focused innovation, required labor would reduce, hastening the era of communism.
   
   >Ironically the degree of automation we are seeing today and on the horizon would never have occurred if Marx had his way.
   
   Just so you're clear, Marx never really morally criticized capitalism.. Marx merely remarked upon patterns he noticed in capitalism. Thus, Marx is more a historian than a revolutionary. Similarly, Marx never encouraged revolution. He only claimed that revolution is inevitable and that it is in the interest of the proletariat.
   
   
3. Regarding who will do the hard jobs
   
   Again, the hard jobs argument shouldn't even really be an argument, and I don't really think OP's video really made a good refutation of it. I kind of addressed this earlier: in socialism, incentivization functions in a nearly identical fashion as it does in capitalism, the only difference being that it more directly incentivizes work rather than finding a boss who will you screw you the least.
   
   Furthermore, the claim that work ethic today has decreased is unfounded (especially considering that you failed to provide any sources.) Even if your example of lazy rich kids is correct, this is just another strike against capitalism: under socialism, the economic chasm between rich and poor shrinks. Spoiled rich children is a symptom of the capitalist inclination for inequality.
   
   For communism, the hard jobs are not those of physical labor (since these are minimized by technological innovation) but of philosophical antinomies, I claim. People will have to wrestle with the fundamental absurdity of their existence, the inevitability of death (although maybe we can prevent this with advances in medicine), and the indifference of the universe. But that's neither here nor there.
   
   
4. Financial incentive as invention
   
   I've already addressed this a bunch of times.
   
   
5. "Stupidly efficient machines"
   
   Unfortunately, I know nothing about this, but I think I understand the point that OP was trying to make. Basically, because capitalism emphasizes selling commodities for the highest price while paying workers the least amount, we get these strange anomalies where companies will actually produce less in order to make a profit. Under socialism and communism, the focus shifts from exploiting the proletariat to maximizing production for the least labor. Only then do these weird capitalist idiosyncrasies disappear.
   
   
6. USSR and historical failures of communism:
   
   >They just were never able to get past the basic problem that summarizes most of the issues here: the economic calculation problem
   
   There is no evidence for this. In fact, there's no evidence for this being an observable issue in any economy, ever. Mises, the economist who came up with the economic calculation problem, himself claimed that "its statements and propositions are not derived from experience. They are, like those of logic and mathematics, a priori. They are not subject to verification or falsification on the ground of experience and facts." Essentially, the problem is a purely theoretical one and is unscientific because it cannot be tested. Thus, the "problem" only indicates inaccuracies in the neoclassical economic model.
   
   
7. "Just look at the progress we have made in capitalism alone."
   
   >the above statement... really does reflect the positive trend over time for our capitalist society to make things better for people at the bottom.
   
   If you honestly believe capitalism helps the lower class, you are sorely misinformed. Read this and this for some quick statistics. It's really, really well documented that capitalism causes excessive economic inequality.
   
   Your idea of implementing "capitalism-with-a-social-safety-net" is a step in the right direction. Access to food, medicine, homes, etc. should be available to everyone, if not for moral reasons then at least for economic reasons, as you yourself have suggested. But this doesn't solve the problem of inequality, it only allows it to persist, albeit in a less extreme state.
   
   >"under socialism the rich are poorer, but the poor are poorer too."
   
   Under capitalism, the poor still get poorer. The rich get richer, but this is hardly a benefit. I don't really see how your statement really motivates any member of the proletariat to embrace capitalism.
   
   
8. "Pressure" on the USSR from the outside:
   
   >The USSR was actively trying to incite communist revolutions throughout the world. They weren't an innocent bystander being bullied from the outside.
   
   Honestly, it doesn't matter who bullied who. The fact of the matter is that there was international (and intranational) conflict for Russia at the time. This muddied the waters, making it hard to establish a truly socialist regime without fear of domination from other countries. Like OP said, there were world wars going on at the time. Russia had to make sacrifices, and ultimately they regressed ideologically.
   
   
   People who actually know about socialism and communism, please correct where I am wrong. I only have a passing interest in Communism. I'm more of a Baudrillard fan than a Marx fan :)

http://www.amazon.com/CTA-Digital-iPotty-Activity-Seat/dp/B00B3G8UGQ

I tend to browse GeekWhack while on the toilet.

Yeah, a lot of the reviews suck because they are written by random people. The good ones get upvoted to the top. There is also something called "vine voices" or something like that, where if you write awesome reviews for stuff on amazon, they will send you free products to get some reviews going.

Sometimes reviews are funny though, check these ones out.

iPotty

3 wolf moon shirt

and last but certainly not least we have

Tuscan Whole Milk, 1 Gallon, 128 fl oz

Link...

Holy crap, I didn't even know that existed.

*edit: Holy. Shit.