|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
DIsbell
Joined: 15 Oct 2008
|
 Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 7:39 am Post subject: |
 |
|
yes, michael moore is a greedy capitalist:
http://www.boingboing.net/2004/01/06/michael-moore-endors.html
it's not contradictory of socialism to own the products of your own labor; in fact you're the only one who ought to own them.
Recall that Moore gave away his last film, Sicko, as well- it was release free streaming on the internet. Basically he just doesn't want anyone trying to make a profit off of something he and his crew produced and are basically willing to give away. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 7:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| it's not contradictory of socialism to own the products of your own labor |
From each according to his ability and to each according to his needs suggests that ownership isn't by 'the self' but by the herd (held in trust by the state).
Our problem isn't a capitalism/socialism one. The issue of our day is the corporatism. Corporatism is disgusting to both left and right, capitalist and socialist.
I'd like to see a libertarian-progressive party or alliance. Put B. Sanders and Ron Paul (and their non-existing Canadian equivalents) in a room and make them hammer our a compromise. The economy and state will be separate, and the state will ensure a sufficient minimum standard of living (health etc). We classical liberals can give some things up and the leftists can too. The sane ends of both can hammer out a modern vision for the state that is consistent with reality. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DIsbell
Joined: 15 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
"from each according to ability, to each according to need" is more about establishing value and cooperation as a community. for example, today we would value a guy who can crank out computer code all day more than a guy who cleans toilets, yet we still need both. the guy cranking out code does so according to his ability, but he still needs the toilets at his office, in his local park, etc cleaned. that toilet cleaner cleans to his ability, but he also needs a decent quality of life, even though his work is not currently considered as valuable. The idea is we approach a truer, more human establishment of what work is and what we really need rather than leaving it up to the inequities of markets and capital ownership.
Related to that idea is "a worker is in control of the product of his labor"- a community of white-collars would quickly agree that their toilet-cleaners, trashmen, cooks, maintenance workers, mechanics, etc ought to have a decent quality of life if all the sudden they said "we will not share our labor with you if we have to live pitiable lives." Controlling one's own labor product also brings democracy to the workplace, engendering a spirit of cooperation and lateral management.
But yes, I do agree that corporatism is a scourge, and I also believe it opposes the ideals of both socialists and right-libertarians.
Last edited by DIsbell on Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:13 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| [quote="DIsbell"]"from each according to ability, to each according to need" is more about establishing value and cooperation as a community. for example, today we would value a guy who can crank out computer code all day more than a guy who cleans toilets, yet we still need both. the guy cranking out code does so according to his ability, but he still needs the toilets at his office, in his local park, etc cleaned. that toilet cleaner cleans to his ability, but he also needs a decent quality of life, even though his work is not currently considered as valuable. The idea is we approach a truer, more human establishment of what work is and what we really need rather than leaving it up to the inequities of markets and capital ownership. |
Who makes the decisions about allocation? The individual? If he owns his own labour, then he can decide not to participate, right? So, you establish a socialist society and I'll decide to keep my labour and you all go have fun. Is that in line with the history of socialism?
Ok, I don't want to argue this. Believe what you want. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DIsbell
Joined: 15 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
it's roughly in line with the history of socialism, yes. catalonia, paris commune, etc weren't compulsory in the sense that you couldn't just leave, and modern democratic socialism also allows people to leave the country or not work (it even is kind enough to let the non-working non-starve!).
let's agree not to bring stalinism/maoism into this, because I might as well bring up colonialism, slavery, and fascism as counterpoints and I think we both know that would take this discussion nowhere. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| it's roughly in line with the history of socialism, yes. catalonia, paris commune, etc weren't compulsory in the sense that you couldn't just leave, and modern democratic socialism also allows people to leave the country or not work (it even is kind enough to let the non-working non-starve!). |
Well, your dragging me in. The commune isn't socialism. Socialism is when the means of production are owned by the state for the benefit of "the people" (the party). Communism was supposed to be something else but devolved into what it obviously had to devolve into. You're speaking of Anarchosyndicalism, but Spain wasn't an example of that at all. Their end point would have been the state in the form of the unions, in another example in the long history of leftists calling a pig a cow and then hoping it goes mooooo :
http://economics.gmu.edu/bcaplan/spain.htm
And other communes have varied outcomes. Doesn't matter. The world will never shift to that model. My point is that you should use clear, honest language. If you want us all to live in a commune don't use "labour ownership" as the selling point. Use "equality". A pig is a pig and a cow is a cow.
Democratic socialism or social democracy have wages, inequality, capital and the rest. They try to smooth the edges. Every western state exists on some point of the spectrum of social democracy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 12:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DIsbell wrote: |
it's roughly in line with the history of socialism, yes. catalonia, paris commune, etc weren't compulsory in the sense that you couldn't just leave, and modern democratic socialism also allows people to leave the country or not work (it even is kind enough to let the non-working non-starve!).
let's agree not to bring stalinism/maoism into this, because I might as well bring up colonialism, slavery, and fascism ...... |
Yes, lets agree not to bring up all the evil forms of an evil system called socialism.
All forms of socialism are evil.
Colonialism, forming colonies by a government in another part of the world, is an act of the state, therefore it is socialism by definition.l
Slavery is the denial of individual rights at the most basic level - the right to self ownership - which is the primary necessary condition to the creation of a free market system. Slavery is another attribute of socialism - it can be direct, where the state disallows the rights of individuals to self ownership, or indirect, where the state makes slaves of most or all of its citizens through income taxes, the draft, and other laws that violate individual liberty.
Fascism is an extreme form of socialism, where nationalism and the interests of the nation state take precedence over the rights of the individual in intolerable ways. The National Socialist Party of Germany and various similar parties in other states are prime examples.
Stalinism, Maoism, Fascism, Slavery, Colonialism are all made possible by state socialism and are impossible in a free market system.
A voluntary commune can be a viable part of a free market system, along with all voluntary, non-governmental charitable groups. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DIsbell wrote: |
let's agree not to bring stalinism/maoism into this |
Impossible. They were fanatical Marxists. You sound just like a Christian asking is to ignore God mass-murdering Egyptian babies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gakduki
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Location: Passed out on line 2 going in circles
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Under the current world order is it possible for a country without fractional reserve banking to compete with a country that has it? |
I don't know. I assume so, though the transition would be extremely difficult. Pulling the debt out of the economy (removing the inflation) would make us more wealthy on balance. |
I dont know how it would make us more wealthy on balance. assets = debt + equity, where debt typically makes up a larger portion of the equation taking debt out of there, or at least more of it, the interest bearing portion would greatly decrease our assets. Maybe it's too simple of an arguement. But you did say removing inflation. And inflation doesn't make us poorer, it just redistributes money from those with resources to those with out.
| Quote: |
How in the hell someone supposed to retire? Our generation will need at least 1,000,000$. I guess "buy" a house and then reverse-mortgage it? The bank wins on both ends. |
The best way to invest to avoid inflation, something I was told a while back, is from the words of that really rich Roman guy. 1/3 land 1/3 inventory 1/3 money I think this formula is nearly perfect and can be extended to today. Balance your wealth, keep 1/3 in your property and businesses, 1/3 in comodities or inventory, 1/3 in money (gold-can be under commodities too, bonds, stocks not related to comodities or realestate, foriegn currencies.) Wit hsuch a formula you will nearly always gain recession or not. A problem is people throw all their money into their house, the rest into pension plans and get screwed during recessions (when things like gold gain value) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DIsbell wrote: |
it's roughly in line with the history of socialism, yes. catalonia, paris commune, etc weren't compulsory in the sense that you couldn't just leave, and modern democratic socialism also allows people to leave the country or not work (it even is kind enough to let the non-working non-starve!).
let's agree not to bring stalinism/maoism into this, because I might as well bring up colonialism, slavery, and fascism as counterpoints and I think we both know that would take this discussion nowhere. |
Good grief.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cheonmunka
Joined: 04 Jun 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Made in USA Fender and Gibson guitars are a safe investment. They never fluctuate nor depreciate.
A Gibson bought for 400 dollars in the eighties is 2500+ today. And if it has vintage value the price is up more than that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gakduki
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Location: Passed out on line 2 going in circles
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Cheonmunka wrote: |
Made in USA Fender and Gibson guitars are a safe investment. They never fluctuate nor depreciate.
A Gibson bought for 400 dollars in the eighties is 2500+ today. And if it has vintage value the price is up more than that. |
I hope you are joking. I would love to see a picture of Micheal Moore sitting in a room filled with guitars guarding them with his life in hopes that one day they will sky rocket in price and he will be able to join the capitalist elite he loathes so much. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Cheonmunka wrote: |
Made in USA Fender and Gibson guitars are a safe investment. They never fluctuate nor depreciate.
A Gibson bought for 400 dollars in the eighties is 2500+ today. And if it has vintage value the price is up more than that. |
Same thing with Steinway pianos. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 6:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| gakduki wrote: |
| I dont know how it would make us more wealthy on balance. assets = debt + equity, where debt typically makes up a larger portion of the equation taking debt out of there, or at least more of it, the interest bearing portion would greatly decrease our assets. Maybe it's too simple of an arguement. But you did say removing inflation. And inflation doesn't make us poorer, it just redistributes money from those with resources to those with out. |
Gakduki, are you studying Finance atm? It's actually Value(of Assets) = Debt + Equity, or V=D+E. Still, if you go further in Corporate Finance, you'll learn that it isn't always possible to issue debt as the more debt you issue, the higher the yields go. Likewise, as yields rise the value of the bond issue (debt) decreases. To reassure investors, your firm should prove that you have the equity to sell off in case of defualt to keep yields low.
| gakduki wrote: |
The best way to invest to avoid inflation, something I was told a while back, is from the words of that really rich Roman guy. 1/3 land 1/3 inventory 1/3 money I think this formula is nearly perfect and can be extended to today. Balance your wealth, keep 1/3 in your property and businesses, 1/3 in comodities or inventory, 1/3 in money (gold-can be under commodities too, bonds, stocks not related to comodities or realestate, foriegn currencies.) Wit hsuch a formula you will nearly always gain recession or not. A problem is people throw all their money into their house, the rest into pension plans and get screwed during recessions (when things like gold gain value) |
That Roman would be the modern day Harry Markowitz. Also, gold doesn't gain in value; it's a store of value. Which means a rising gold price signifies a sinking dollar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 7:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I dont know how it would make us more wealthy on balance. |
You could be right. I'm speaking to the inflation that has made it necessary to borrow for things that in the past could be saved for in a reasonable period of time. I owe, I owe, so it's off to work I go.
| Quote: |
| The best way to invest to avoid inflation, something I was told a while back, is from the words of that really rich Roman guy. 1/3 land 1/3 inventory 1/3 money I think this formula is nearly perfect and can be extended to today. Balance your wealth, keep 1/3 in your property and businesses, 1/3 in comodities or inventory, 1/3 in money (gold-can be under commodities too, bonds, stocks not related to comodities or realestate, foriegn currencies.) Wit hsuch a formula you will nearly always gain recession or not. A problem is people throw all their money into their house, the rest into pension plans and get screwed during recessions (when things like gold gain value) |
Commodities are preparing for another pullback. Land is too expensive. The USD is down almost 20% since March. The USD is a means of exchange but no longer a store of value. The CAD is strong now, but the BoC will depreciate it to help Ontario's manufacturing base. I've considered holding Chinese currency as that has nowhere to go but up, but in the short term (my preference) who knows what it will do. Gold is interesting but carries both storage and transaction charges that someone with a 2-3 year time horizon shouldn't absorb. I reckon some safe muni bonds.. Dunno. Maybe guns and butter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
