Damn, I've been EPICLY DESTROYED by FACTS and LOGIC.
*dies*
Advertisement
by Torrocca » Mon Sep 09, 2019 7:33 pm
by Northern Davincia » Mon Sep 09, 2019 7:34 pm
Evil Dictators Happyland wrote:Northern Davincia wrote:I suppose, but economically the Marxist interpretation is false. The bourgeois generate value from risk-taking, which is why the total output of wealth now is greater than ever before.
Conventional thieves take risks every time they steal from others. If you take someone's wallet, for example, you risk being sent to prison.
And I'd like to point out here that GDP, even per-capita, isn't a very good metric for measuring economic success compared to things like HDI and quality of life. Money is worthless on its own, we should instead measure how that money is used to benefit people.
Conserative Morality wrote:"Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Hoppe."
by Torrocca » Mon Sep 09, 2019 7:35 pm
Northern Davincia wrote:Evil Dictators Happyland wrote:Conventional thieves take risks every time they steal from others. If you take someone's wallet, for example, you risk being sent to prison.
And I'd like to point out here that GDP, even per-capita, isn't a very good metric for measuring economic success compared to things like HDI and quality of life. Money is worthless on its own, we should instead measure how that money is used to benefit people.
But thieves still do not generate value. Quality of life directly correlates with economic freedom.
by Evil Dictators Happyland » Mon Sep 09, 2019 7:40 pm
Northern Davincia wrote:Evil Dictators Happyland wrote:Conventional thieves take risks every time they steal from others. If you take someone's wallet, for example, you risk being sent to prison.
And I'd like to point out here that GDP, even per-capita, isn't a very good metric for measuring economic success compared to things like HDI and quality of life. Money is worthless on its own, we should instead measure how that money is used to benefit people.
But thieves still do not generate value.
Northern Davincia wrote:Quality of life directly correlates with economic freedom.
by Kubra » Mon Sep 09, 2019 7:40 pm
they do not generate value, sure, but the thieves decisions are indistinguishable from any other form of economic decision. It's mere risk and reward, no?Northern Davincia wrote:Evil Dictators Happyland wrote:Conventional thieves take risks every time they steal from others. If you take someone's wallet, for example, you risk being sent to prison.
And I'd like to point out here that GDP, even per-capita, isn't a very good metric for measuring economic success compared to things like HDI and quality of life. Money is worthless on its own, we should instead measure how that money is used to benefit people.
But thieves still do not generate value. Quality of life directly correlates with economic freedom.
by Northern Davincia » Mon Sep 09, 2019 7:42 pm
Torrocca wrote:Northern Davincia wrote:But thieves still do not generate value. Quality of life directly correlates with economic freedom.
Neat, so when are you going to support the freedom inherent to economic democracy and social ownership of the means of production?
Conserative Morality wrote:"Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Hoppe."
by Evil Dictators Happyland » Mon Sep 09, 2019 7:47 pm
Northern Davincia wrote:Yes, communist states have a poor track record of keeping people fed. That, and the total lack of freedom would be soul-crushing.
by Northern Davincia » Mon Sep 09, 2019 8:02 pm
Evil Dictators Happyland wrote:Northern Davincia wrote:But thieves still do not generate value.
You say that like I ever claimed otherwise. The disagreement isn't about what a thief does, it's about whether or not indirect theft qualifies.Northern Davincia wrote:Quality of life directly correlates with economic freedom.
How long did it take you to dig up an article that agreed with you? I can only assume it took a while, since not only have I never heard of Boris Nikolaev, Wikipedia hasn't either. Maaaaybe try using sources that are well known enough that I can actually fact check them.
So here's a source you can fact check: https://www.numbeo.com/quality-of-life/ ... ountry.jsp
Evil Dictators Happyland wrote:Northern Davincia wrote:Yes, communist states have a poor track record of keeping people fed. That, and the total lack of freedom would be soul-crushing.
This despite the fact that the state is keeping you fed, I see.
Methinks that maybe even you have enough spine to not base your loyalty entirely on who puts food on your table.
Conserative Morality wrote:"Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Hoppe."
by Torrocca » Mon Sep 09, 2019 8:11 pm
Northern Davincia wrote:Torrocca wrote:
You were literally talking about being in financial ruin a few months ago. You'd be more fed receiving the full value of your labor, not a value assigned to you by some Capitalist fuckwit.
I'm being literal; my boss fed me when I couldn't afford food. He isn't a wealthy man by any means, but farm work is honest work (albeit still low in value).
Torrocca wrote:
Neat, so when are you going to support the freedom inherent to economic democracy and social ownership of the means of production?
When I'm convinced it would be economically successful, and provided it was achieved voluntarily.
by Northern Davincia » Mon Sep 09, 2019 8:35 pm
Torrocca wrote:Northern Davincia wrote:I'm being literal; my boss fed me when I couldn't afford food. He isn't a wealthy man by any means, but farm work is honest work (albeit still low in value).
So then your boss understands the struggles of poverty and the faults of Capitalism better than others, and you act like this was a Capitalist act?When I'm convinced it would be economically successful, and provided it was achieved voluntarily.
Money isn't everything, champ. And it's no measure of success to have a few rich fucks in society while everyone else is impoverished to some degree and has no real say in the ownership and use of the means of production.
Conserative Morality wrote:"Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Hoppe."
by Hanafuridake » Mon Sep 09, 2019 8:37 pm
Suriyanakhon's alt, finally found my old account's password李贽 wrote:There is nothing difficult about becoming a sage, and nothing false about transcending the world of appearances.
by Torrocca » Mon Sep 09, 2019 8:50 pm
Torrocca wrote:Northern Davincia wrote:I'm being literal; my boss fed me when I couldn't afford food. He isn't a wealthy man by any means, but farm work is honest work (albeit still low in value).
So then your boss understands the struggles of poverty and the faults of Capitalism better than others, and you act like this was a Capitalist act?When I'm convinced it would be economically successful, and provided it was achieved voluntarily.
Money isn't everything, champ. And it's no measure of success to have a few rich fucks in society while everyone else is impoverished to some degree and has no real say in the ownership and use of the means of production.
by VoVoDoCo » Mon Sep 09, 2019 11:59 pm
Torrocca wrote: Say there's two halves of labor: Embodied Labor (EL), which is basically tools, equipment, raw materials, and whatever other physical things are needed for production (the means of production, essentially), and Living Labor (LL), or human input that puts the EL to work.
Let's say, for simplicity's sake, EL has a value of $100, and LL per person has a value of $20. Say five people are working with the EL, bringing LL's value to $100. Any unit can be used in lieu of $, and any set of numbers can be used. Whatever they're making is irrelevant, but let's say it's a chair.
Add up EL and LL (so $100 + $100). You've now got a Total Labor (TL) value of $200 for the chair.
$100 would have to go back to get a new supply of EL to make a new chair with, leaving $100 leftover.
Torrocca wrote:Assuming this happens under a Capitalist dynamic, wherein these five workers have an employer privately who owns the EL, the means of production, X ("X" being the profits of the employer subtracted from Y1) would be the number subtracted from the remainder, and Y2/n ("Y2" being the remainder after subtraction and "n" being the number of workers) would be the profit of the workers. For simplicity's sake, let's say X in this instance is $50.
Y now becomes $50, and divided by n (5, in this case) becomes $10 per worker.
EL{$100}+LL{$100}=TL{$200}. TL{$200}-EL{$100}=Y1{$100}. Y1{$100}-X{$50}=Y2{$50}. Y2{$50}/n{5}=$10. That's Capitalism.
Torrocca wrote:Now, what happens under Socialism?
Simple: X - the employer and whatever profits they choose to make off the labor of their workers - is no longer a factor, because now the workers collectively own the EL, the means of production.
So now we go back: $100(EL)+$100(LL)=$200(TL). $200(TL)-$100(EL)=$100(Y). $100(Y)/5(n)=$20.
The workers just got back the full value of their labor off that one chair, and will continue to get back the full value of their labor off every subsequent chair. Each worker, instead of having whatever arbitrary amount of value they've created taken by an employer under Capitalism (in this example, half), receive it back in full. Everyone is better off because of this.
by Kubra » Tue Sep 10, 2019 1:05 am
What is "success"? What's the appeal of it?Northern Davincia wrote:Torrocca wrote:
So then your boss understands the struggles of poverty and the faults of Capitalism better than others, and you act like this was a Capitalist act?
Money isn't everything, champ. And it's no measure of success to have a few rich fucks in society while everyone else is impoverished to some degree and has no real say in the ownership and use of the means of production.
It's a measure of success to have the average fellow living in reasonable comfort and able to provide for his basic needs. It's a greater measure of success for that average fellow to become rich. Ownership of the means of production have nothing to do with it.
Tell me, how is everyone else impoverished to some degree?
Risk? And what is risk? If I am to understand it, at least from what is given, it is mere equity. But that is not all that can be risked, no?Northern Davincia wrote:Torrocca wrote:
The Capitalist loses some money if he fucks up; the worker can easily lose everything if the Capitalist fucks up.
It's not the Capitalist taking the most risk.
The capitalist is objectively taking the most risk.
by Torrocca » Tue Sep 10, 2019 3:50 am
VoVoDoCo wrote:
Your equation leaves out all the labor that business owners/ceo's do. Making a business plan, absorbing financial/legal risk, hiring workers, responding to customers, marketing, supervising, inventory, tech support, etc. The average work week is 34 hours, business owners and ceo's are often the outliers. New York Enterprise Report (as cited by INC) reports that 39% percent of small-business owners reported working more than 50 hours per week, while an additional 25% said they work more than 60 hours a week. Gallup, along with more statistics regarding business owner hours, found that only 57% take vacations, comparable to 48% of workers who do as well.
With CEO's, this work to pay ratio is heightened. It's closer to 62.5 hours a week, ceo'sget less sleep than the average worker, they face unhealthy amounts (80% of average work day) of stress compared to 36% of workers.
Not to mention, CEO's don't often pick their own salaries. They're picked by the directors, whom are picked by the stock holders. These directors don't intentionally "overpay" their CEO employee. That price is the price needed to get somebody to work those brutal hours and grant these directors access to somebody with the skills and education to run the company.
That's fair. 34% of business owners don't have a retirement savings plan (compared to the national average of 25%) and 65%-85% of their worth is usually tied to a single asset. This asset is the business your chair making co-op is set up to do. Remember, it's a widely known fact that co-ops really struggle to acquire the money to build the co-op, and while steps are being taken to rectify this, it's still a major con for sure.
So to summarize, in order to provide the initial funding to your chair business, somebody sacrificed their life savings. So the expectation of owning the business in question is reasonable.
Capitalism isn't against it. I'm a Capitalist. I love worker co-ops. I wish there were more. Good thing they're growing in number. The amount of co-ops in the bloody Capitalist US have doubled in the past decade, and the growth isn't stopping there. There are some 12 billion baby boomers out there that own a business. 40% of all co-ops start as a result of a priavately owned business selling the asset to the workers. And with the baby boomers businesses beginning to be up for grabs, 70% of them are expected to switch hands.
The future is bright.
by Torrocca » Tue Sep 10, 2019 4:21 am
by West Leas Oros 2 » Tue Sep 10, 2019 5:23 am
WLO Public News: Outdated Factbooks and other documents in process of major redesign! ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: <error:not found>
by Kowani » Tue Sep 10, 2019 6:49 am
by Dumb Ideologies » Tue Sep 10, 2019 6:50 am
by Grand Proudhonia » Tue Sep 10, 2019 10:15 am
by VoVoDoCo » Tue Sep 10, 2019 10:20 am
Kowani wrote:“Capitalism rewards innovation.”
>>The Video Game Industry
by -Ocelot- » Tue Sep 10, 2019 10:22 am
Grand Proudhonia wrote:Do any of yall support accelerationism? I have been looking at it more here recently as an alternative to violent insurgency... possibly supported through the use of mass strikes
by Washington Resistance Army » Tue Sep 10, 2019 10:25 am
Grand Proudhonia wrote:Do any of yall support accelerationism? I have been looking at it more here recently as an alternative to violent insurgency... possibly supported through the use of mass strikes
by VoVoDoCo » Tue Sep 10, 2019 10:59 am
Torrocca wrote: Okay, so, we have all this laid out, in addition to what I've brought up. And you've brought up valid points regarding overtime work and so on.
With that in mind, don't you see how much that reinforces my point about Socialism? Even CEOs (who, operating as employees of the directors and the business owner, presuming they themselves aren't the owner) end up unduly suffering under Capitalism. It would be inherently better to either have that work divided up among the entire business, assuming we're talking about Market Socialism, or to be made irrelevant, most preferably by a decentralized, bottom-up form of planned Socialism. If even the people commonly seen as the top-dogs of society are getting brutally fucked, then an egalitarian, democratic economic model is exactly what's needed to fix that, for everyone.
Torrocca wrote:You make a fair point, but we could simply do away with that question by adopting some form of a democratic economic model. It'd mitigate the wholesale strain Capitalism creates - which exists for everyone, as you've shown with your sources - by a huge magnitude
Torrocca wrote: I understand Capitalism isn't against it, and I know you're definitely not, but worker cooperatives are only a bandage solution to a gaping wound; if the economy's still oriented in such a way that private ownership of the means of production is still the primary mode of economics, rather than worker or social ownership, then too many people are still being unduly screwed, even if worker cooperatives are rising in number.
Torrocca wrote: Given the fact that Capitalism tends to produce way too much excess, as well (which, again, could be largely avoided with decentralized, bottom-up economic planning or even somewhat avoided through Market Socialism), we're seeing ecological collapse at a rate unseen before that requires drastic - not gradual - change to combat.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Aadhirisian Puppet Nation, Ancientania, Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, Burnt Calculators, Eahland, Floofybit, Google [Bot], Lophostoma, Pale Dawn, Statesburg, Tungstan, Unogonduria, Zurkerx
Advertisement