Hey

Post #374,732 by jake123 5/7/13 8:34:59 PM Reply	Hey we don't have free trade if there's no free trade in labour. Instead, we have privileging of capital at the expense of labour.
Post #374,756 by mmoffitt 5/8/13 8:35:31 AM Reply	IOW, you have capitalism.
Post #374,760 by jake123 5/8/13 9:36:27 AM Reply	I largely view capitalism as a technical term that describes a particular method for collecting capital to do things; in short, the use of capital markets. What we have here is not capitalism particularly... it's oligarchy. I think oligarchy is a much much better term for the situation we have at hand wrt capital vs. labour in international trade (let alone production). I'm kind of hoping to live for a good time yet; I want to see if democratic forms of government are able to extricate themselves from this situation like they managed to in the thirties and forties. I'm not sure it'll happen this time around; the oligarchs have invested a lot in destroying certain kinds of education and promoting others in the hope of hobbling democratic limits on what they can do with their capital.
Post #374,769 by mmoffitt 5/8/13 2:04:57 PM Reply	I largely view capitalism as a euphemism for the idea that the highest good is the extreme polarization of wealth and power into the fewest number of hands possible who possess the greatest ability to extract value from anything at tremendous expense to the masses.
Post #374,773 by jake123 5/8/13 6:47:51 PM Reply	Here's the problem with that Using it as a euphemism hides what's really going on, which is powerful wealthy people making decisions to harm poor powerless people for gain. It allows people to point at what is basically an intellectual tool for organising resources to accomplish something instead of the people responsible for those decisions. Oligarchy, otoh, makes it very clear just what is going on; the problem lies not in the tool, but in the people wielding it. I'm with Utah Phillips on the right way to look at this: "The earth is not dying, it is being killed, and those who are killing it have names and addresses." When people blame capitalism, or the system, all they're really accomplishing is letting shitty people off the hook for their shitty decisions.
Post #374,788 by mmoffitt 5/9/13 8:31:41 AM Reply	There we part ways. I will not argue with you about whether or not we, in the West, have oligarchies. We plainly do. But my view is that an oligarchy is the natural outcome of a capitalist society. Remove all socialist controls on capitalism and what do you get? What we have. It could be that my view of Capitalism is forever tainted by "American Capitalism". But if you look back over US history, you will see that the only good that came about from our brand of Capitalism for anyone other than the monied elite came about as a consequence of the, at times violent, reaction to the natural progress of that system. The most successful of these anti-American Capitalism reactions was the union movement. But the natural maturation of American Capitalism meant that ultimately the "People's Revolt" in the form of the union movement would be crushed. And that is because the primary function of American Capitalism is now what it has always been: the obscene concentration of wealth and power into the hands of the few at great cost to the many. IMO, it is logically inconsistent to simultaneously praise American Capitalism and condemn the Oligarchy it gave birth. (Caveat: It may well be that I wouldn't be so harsh on American Capitalism if all American Capitalists thought like Henry Ford. I've no illusions about Ford, the man. But he apparently possessed enough patience to wait for the money to flow through his workers hands before returning to him. Arguably all other American Capitalists - and clearly all Modern American Capitalists - lack this sort of patience. They want it all and they want it all immediately. The lower classes be damned. Damn them only after the American Capitalists have taken whatever paltry assets they have, of course. Their pensions, the value of their homes, their healthcare, their Social Security Trust Fund savings, etc.)
Post #374,789 by jake123 5/9/13 8:37:30 AM Reply	Ah, but you see... of course it does. It's a tool (and a very effective one) for capital formation and agglomeration. What would you expect to happen? The point here is that it's a tool that exists within a broader context; as you say, without socialist controls... I can just as easily say that without capital formation, socialism results in a far less efficient allocation of what capital it happens across. You seem to have this idea that there are no drawbacks to socialist organisation of resources either. Socialism also results in the formation of oligarchs, in case you haven't noticed. The point is that it depends on what people do with it, and when you blame capitalism, you let that guy that decided to drop the tailings into the river off the hook. We need to stop doing that.
Post #374,791 by mmoffitt 5/9/13 8:48:47 AM Reply	I recognize there are limits to the "goodness" of Socialism. That's why it should be allowed to mature into Communism. :0)
Post #374,795 by boxley 5/9/13 10:05:20 AM Reply	we already have that steal from the other guy and pass the savings onto you Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
Post #374,811 by mmoffitt 5/9/13 11:18:00 AM Reply	From each according to ability, to each according to need. That isn't even CLOSE to what you wrote.
Post #374,815 by boxley 5/9/13 12:08:24 PM Reply	naw Democracy, Democratic-style: You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. You feel guilty for being so successful. You vote politicians into office who tax your cows, which forces you to sell one to pay the tax. The politicians use the tax money to buy a cow for your neighbor. You feel good. Barbra Streisand sings for you. Democracy, Republican-style: You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. You move to a better neighborhood. British Democracy: You have two cows. You feed them sheep brains and they go mad. The government gives you compensation for your diseased cows, compensation for your lost income, and a grant not to use your fields for anything else. And tells the public not to worry. Capitalism : You have two cows. You sell three of them to your publicly-listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute an debt/equity swap with associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax deduction for keeping five cows. The milk rights of six cows are transferred via a Panamanian intermediary to a Cayman Isands company secretly owned by the majority shareholder, who sells the rights to all seven cows' milk back to the listed company. The annual report says that the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more. COMMUNISM as practiced: You have two cows. The government takes both and shoots you. PURE COMMUNISM You share two cows with your neighbors. You and your neighbors bicker about who has the most "ability" and who has the most "need". Meanwhile, no one works, no one gets any milk, and the cows drop dead of starvation. Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
Post #374,832 by Andrew Grygus 5/9/13 5:15:57 PM Reply	And this is the basic flaw of Communism. "From each according to ability, to each according to need." Under that system, personal optimization guarantees a population with very few abilities and a great many needs. You'd be a fool to be otherwise.
Post #374,850 by mmoffitt 5/10/13 9:10:13 AM Reply	Only if you buy the Capitalist vision of the meaing of life. If you accept the premise that all human beings want to live their lives for is the accumulation of more, More, MORE! then your point is valid. Communists choose to have more faith in the nature of man than that.
Post #374,854 by boxley 5/10/13 9:40:36 AM Reply	not if you are a comissar :-) Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
Post #374,869 by Andrew Grygus 5/10/13 5:14:54 PM Reply	I don't know how to farm . . . . . but I have a great need for food. You know how to farm, so you work your farm and give me the food. You have the ability, I have the need. And, "Communists choose to have more faith in the nature of man than that". I haven't heard that kind of pie in the sky since the early '60s. Wow!
Post #374,888 by mmoffitt 5/11/13 2:55:45 PM Reply	B.S. It isn't "Pie in the Sky". It is the truth. It is what makes it so difficult to be a Communist in a Capitalist society. We are taught from infancy in Capitalist societies that altruism is a horrible, despicable thing. A child is taught the notion of "private property" and its value very early on: "Don't touch that! It's Daddy's." "That is NOT your toy. It belongs to your sister." etc. sic nauseum. But a 2 year old will pass his favorite toy back and forth with you for hours. We are born with a sense of community, with a propensity to share and we strive to drive that sense of community out of our kids as quickly and as emphatically as we can. We do this for the exclusive benefit of the few. It's difficult to amass wealth and power in a society that values sharing over greed. But, don't kid yourself. Greed is learned. It is most definitely not natural.
Post #374,890 by a6l6e6x 5/11/13 3:48:13 PM Reply	So I can use your plane to take flying lessons? :) Alex
Post #374,948 by mmoffitt 5/13/13 9:09:33 AM Reply	Nu, konechno, tovarishch. ;0)
Post #374,954 by folkert 5/13/13 9:51:34 AM Reply	Re: Nu, konechno, tovarishch. ;0) Nu, konechno, yesli by my mogli chitat' tol'ko russkiye, tovarishch. -- greg@gregfolkert.net PGP key 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C
Post #374,891 by drook 5/11/13 5:51:40 PM Reply	Don't know what kids you've been hanging out with Yes, they'll give you stuff freely, but they'll also take things you're still using. And just try to take away something they shouldn't have, like scissors. Suddenly they MUST HAVE IT. Not because we taught them to hate altruism, but because they know they won't get it back. -- Drew
Post #374,904 by crazy 5/12/13 1:03:19 PM Reply	The same ones that live in rainbow unicorn land Don't forget, they shit jellybeans.
Post #374,905 by malraux 5/12/13 1:18:13 PM Reply	Tasty communal jelly beans With natural sharing built in. Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #374,908 by crazy 5/12/13 2:54:10 PM Reply	But sooner or later They have to go to the slave farm to get sugar refills.
Post #374,922 by Ashton 5/12/13 5:40:33 PM Reply	Cynicism is the natural default within what we've created, that is: probably the 'Vulture-' form was inexorable (as technology made it truly simple to let keyboards "earn" [??] $gazillions.) With you, on the possible evolution of homo-sap in --> that direction. But millions of deranged minds [their Affluenza-disease now fully transmitted to 1+ billion Chinese] now stand in the way of, any serious evolution beyond "I've Got Mine / Fuck You." Naturally too, this becoming-universal Solipsism virtually guarantees that evolution of this (or any other species larger than insect) shall have no time to proceed--as hardly Anyone, Seriously, aims to curb our infantile appetites--meaning: I've Got MIne Now / Fuck You, Planet + still-borm 'descendants'. Pity that the Russ were saddled with the dregs of their madmen--In Charge; sorta like recent developments here?
Post #374,926 by boxley 5/12/13 6:45:16 PM Reply	if kranoj is all one has, people will fight over the kranoj Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
Post #374,945 by mmoffitt 5/13/13 8:48:21 AM Reply	I couldn't agree more. While I maintain it is our natural state, I share the view that "civilization" has corrupted our natural state in nearly every way imaginable (and some that were well outside the imagination). Perhaps after the next large asteroid to strike earth?
Post #374,927 by Andrew Grygus 5/12/13 7:20:47 PM Reply	So, since it's our "natural state" . . . . . I'm sure you can point me to a few currently successful Communist societies of substantial size. And don't give me that "noble savage" crap from two centuries ago - an idealist myth - no such animal.
Post #374,931 by boxley 5/12/13 8:25:36 PM Reply	most alaskan native villages have such a system of course everyone is related somehow which is why it sort of half assed works Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
Post #374,799 by Another Scott 5/9/13 10:16:16 AM Reply	Along the way... For all the multitudes out there: If you haven't seen DeLong's thread on corporations, give it a look. Lots of good comments there. http://forum.iwethey...iwt?postid=374783 Cheers, Scott.

Welcome to IWETHEY!