eCONOMIC THEORY

abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
I could distill that long, long post down to "The current model is flawed". However my question or statement, however you wish to see it, has to do not with the shortcomings of right now, but with the proposed solution. If it runs against our basic animal human nature, it won't fly; it won't even launch. Jmo. cn
Click to expand...
Well, we have already established our disagreement regarding human nature.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Then show me wrong. (Not intended as a logic trap.) Show me that a nonauthoritarian society can emerge alongside, and survive with neighbors like ... any member of the UN Security Council. I would like to be given real reason that I'm being too negative. cn
 
C

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
This argument.

OK, nobody wants to take your shit. Nobody wants you to share your toothbrush. Nobody even wants to take your house, unless you're a family of two on 10k acres. Granted, the line is fuzzy as far as exactly what is considered excessive, but the idea is, liberty is not compatible with feudalism. When there is a small owning class, who owns all the land and means of production and hands it down to their children so your children can work for them, that bloodline is basically noble. That is to be avoided. If you read about libertarian socialism, there is mentioned respect for property, but not private ownership of means of production. Yes, the line is fuzzy, it is up for debate, but the idea driving the debate is clearly defined and democratically administered.

I seriously doubt anyone here is worth more than a few million, so this doesn't affect anyone on this board because none of us have the means to purchase a significant share of means of production of human necessities which would give them power over others. That last phrase there is the key, power over others.

Essentially, we are splitting hairs over what you consider wealth redistribution, but I find it rather telling that you avoid talking about the wealth redistribution that affects all of us and is crashing our economy. That is the 1% continuing to own everything and crush the rest of us.
Click to expand...
They don't want to take my shit. Gotcha.

Where do 401k's and stock go when the people take over the means of production?

Are stores means of production?

The line is as fuzzy as right and wrong. Everyone in society cannot agree on the line and therefor the line will be forced on some. This is not acceptable or in the spirt of liberty.

Voluntary wealth redistribution(capitalism) vs involuntary wealth redistribution(socialism). Liberty would require that everything be voluntary.
 
C

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
I know of only two engines that have spurred innovation in human history.
1) Greed for wealth
2) Greed for power

Of the two, #1 is the gentler. Fully expressing #2 leads to wars of conquest and often annihilation.

If you can suggest an engine of innovation that is as robust or more so than the above two, I invite you to say so. Just remember that the test of a country running on that principle is to share borders with two countries that embrace #1 and #2 respectively. cn
Click to expand...
Well said.
 
kenny ken 77

kenny ken 77

Active Member
abandonconflict said:
Even then it isn't calling for out right wealth redistribution from the owning class. We need to be free from laws which bind us to monopolized resources, we ought to be completely free to obviate demand for such things. Also, the workers who are essential to the production ought to own a share in the means (tradeable stock) proportional to their work and that should be hereditary. We want to make the 1% share with us.

The problem with a capitalist model is that innovation is spurred by profits. It just isn't profitable to save the world from man made global warming, it is profitable to publish studies disputing it. Fracking is profitable. Exploiting workers is insanely profitable.
Click to expand...
Sounds like communism! Where's senator Mc Carthy when you need him..lol!
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Carthoris said:
They don't want to take my shit. Gotcha.

Where do 401k's and stock go when the people take over the means of production?

Are stores means of production?

The line is as fuzzy as right and wrong. Everyone in society cannot agree on the line and therefor the line will be forced on some. This is not acceptable or in the spirt of liberty.

Voluntary wealth redistribution(capitalism) vs involuntary wealth redistribution(socialism). Liberty would require that everything be voluntary.
Click to expand...
Oh, voluntaryism. You mean like private armies to protect means of production from hungry mobs? Yeah, that sounds a lot like liberty. Please go on about how liberty is possible with out justice.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Then show me wrong. (Not intended as a logic trap.) Show me that a nonauthoritarian society can emerge alongside, and survive with neighbors like ... any member of the UN Security Council. I would like to be given real reason that I'm being too negative. cn
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you're asking of me. I can tell you that what i am proposing challenges authority and that sooner or later authority ought to be challenged. I can also tell you that said challenge will run the risk of falling into a Stalin-esque despotism.

We have already seen a fake vanguard come along and mislead a growing anarchist sentiment to embrace voluntryist ideas.

If you are asking me to convince you that people are capable of controlling their own destinies all I can say is that I believe you are and I don't think you are special.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top