Australian Politics Forum - Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?

Pantheon

Gold Member

Offline

Woke

Posts: 1256
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #135 - Oct 31^st, 2013 at 7:27pm

|dev|null wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 12:22pm:

Pantheon wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 10:51am:

|dev|null wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 10:36am:

Pantheon wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 10:19am:

I already answered them..

No you didn't. These things occur and are obviously exploitational. Yet you continue to brush them off. Why?

I've already pointed out that your "employee can leave" belief is not always true. If there are no jobs, if they have commitments which prevent them from being able to be unemployed, etc. The Employer will hold the threat of dismissal over their heads unless they comply with their exploitation.

If, as you claim, this exploitation is counter-productive, why do employers do it? Unless they believe they should or are allowed to?

They are clear examples of how Capitalism is exploitative. Which is what you asked for.

As for my personal situation, I have always been lucky that my skills are highly sought after. That an Employer would think they had a right to demand my time for free has always amazed me. If you business isn't profitable enough without making unfair demands on your employees, perhaps you should think of getting out of the business? If customers think rates are too high, perhaps they should change their expectations to something realistic.

If there are no jobs get a union involved or leave and be unemployed.

Unions are having their powers steadily eroded by Governments whom are complicit with the Employers. As for unemployment, have you tried it? Workers are heavily penalised if they leave employment without what is considered a "good reason" by Centrelink.

Quote:

If its not right making the worker work overtime with no pay why is it ok to force a employer to pay for overtime he either doesn't have the money for or unwilling to pay for. If its that outrages no one will accept the job with them and they lose, going bankrupt.

Perhaps because workers aren't meant to be exploited in a just and fair society? The social contract is that if you work, you should be paid fairly for your labour.

Quote:

And of cause exploitation is counter-productive no one would disagree that that, some employers are bastards other don't have the money or saving up for an expansion or saving for a rainy day (you would have to ask them )and want you to worker over time with no pay, is it right no, that's why the employee can say no to these unfair requests.

And then be sacked. Is that fair as well? Unfair Dismissal has been largely removed as means of complaint against a sacking. Looks to me like the worker is being squeezed by everybody over everything.

Quote:

If you business isn't profitable enough without making unfair demands on your employees, perhaps you should think of getting out of the business?

Thats the key, in the past business that isn't profitable enough to pay for overtime to save themselves would go bankrupt or sell out.

They still do. The problem is the workers yet again end up being shafted with their entitlements being often lost because the system believers shareholders' rights take priority over workers' rights. Angry

Watch the video it explains the relationship between employers and employees and how both sides are equal until union/ big business come in and influence government until one sides lose (believe it or not if one side lose both sides loses)

when Government intervention things always get worst. We should leave it up to the employers and employees and if you like unions to deal with their own issues.

What your saying like Perhaps because workers aren't meant to be exploited in a just and fair society? The social contract is that if you work, you should be paid fairly for your labour. is all true, what we see today isn't capitalism but a socialist crony capitalism heavy interfere by governments and backed Unions/ big business.

Quote:

And then be sacked. Is that fair as well? Unfair Dismissal has been largely removed as means of complaint against a sacking. Looks to me like the worker is being squeezed by everybody over everything.

Is it fair for employees to be sacked because they are unwilling to worker unusually long hours? , yes its fair, its mean and not nice but who knows maybe the small business is struggling to make money or pay its bills on time and needs more work time done without pay,

If your sacked from your job because your unwilling to work 8 hours for 5 hours of pay your obversely in the wrong job. Some business are own by bad people who do bad things this is the same in both capitalist or socialism systems.

Why is it fair to force a business to do something it might not even be afforded?

Quote:

They still do. The problem is the workers yet again end up being shafted with their entitlements being often lost because the system believers shareholders' rights take priority over workers' rights

This can be explained by the video.. thank your big business and government..

Back to top

[b][center]Socialism had been tried on every continent on earth. In light of its results, it's time to question the motives of its advocates.

IP Logged

Vuk11 Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 1797 QLD Gender:	Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers? Reply #136 - Oct 31^st, 2013 at 7:40pm Glad we can all agree corporations have to much power and the government gives them this power.
Back to top	e8eZV-300x216.jpg (24 KB \| 52 ) IP Logged

Vuk11 Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 1797 QLD Gender:	Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers? Reply #137 - Oct 31^st, 2013 at 7:41pm Whenever I hear socialists complaining about capitalism.
Back to top	Statism.jpg (72 KB \| 62 ) IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #138 - Oct 31^st, 2013 at 7:58pm

Pantheon wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 7:27pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 12:23pm:

I have provided you with a simple first step reference, I have referred to advocates of capitalism who warn about the inherent immorality and un natural self destructive elements that are BUILT IN to the capitalist regime/ I could go on...

You have ignored these points even though they are basic starting points for this important debate.

Your mind seems to be made up on this issue.

So the only things left for me to fire at you are the basal rocks that expose your hypocrisy, your inability to empathise with your fellow human being, your persistent adherence to totalitarianism, your refusal to award basic human rights and freedoms to the working class and treat them as the capitalist slaves that you wish them to be, your deranged lack of social justice.

I could go on - but I wont.

I will allow you to stew in your own ferment - to pick up the pieces of your lunacy and plungement into the abyss of your own cerebral vomit you flowery scoundrel

you referred some who saw the inherent immorality and un natural self destructive elements of capitalism are a better option than socialism or any other economic system.

Interesting enough its because of him who helped worsen capitalism by enabling government and big business to push down not only small business to the ground but the worker worst of all.

Jesus Christ was a socialist - are you casting moral aspersions on Christian ethics?

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

Pantheon

Gold Member

Offline

Woke

Posts: 1256
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #139 - Oct 31^st, 2013 at 8:17pm

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 7:58pm:

Pantheon wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 7:27pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 12:23pm:

I have provided you with a simple first step reference, I have referred to advocates of capitalism who warn about the inherent immorality and un natural self destructive elements that are BUILT IN to the capitalist regime/ I could go on...

You have ignored these points even though they are basic starting points for this important debate.

Your mind seems to be made up on this issue.

So the only things left for me to fire at you are the basal rocks that expose your hypocrisy, your inability to empathise with your fellow human being, your persistent adherence to totalitarianism, your refusal to award basic human rights and freedoms to the working class and treat them as the capitalist slaves that you wish them to be, your deranged lack of social justice.

I could go on - but I wont.

I will allow you to stew in your own ferment - to pick up the pieces of your lunacy and plungement into the abyss of your own cerebral vomit you flowery scoundrel

you referred some who saw the inherent immorality and un natural self destructive elements of capitalism are a better option than socialism or any other economic system.

Interesting enough its because of him who helped worsen capitalism by enabling government and big business to push down not only small business to the ground but the worker worst of all.

Jesus Christ was a socialist - are you casting moral aspersions on Christian ethics?

Why are you bringing religion into this debate?,

That's not the way i saw it, Jesus wasn't a socialist but instead was advocating free choose, so the individual can choose to donate to charity to help the poor for example can help. i don't remember readying anything in the bible saying Jesus wanted the government to force hard working family to pay for other peoples life styles.

However even if he was a socialist, i don't care.. now get back to the topic...

Back to top

[b][center]Socialism had been tried on every continent on earth. In light of its results, it's time to question the motives of its advocates.

IP Logged

Vuk11

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1797
QLD
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #140 - Oct 31^st, 2013 at 8:20pm

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 7:58pm:

Jesus Christ was a socialist - are you casting moral aspersions on Christian ethics?

Christians have ethics just as bad as Muslims and Jews.

God's punishments for:
-Fortune telling
-Hitting a parent
-Cursing a parent
-Not listening to a priest
-Following another religion
-Adultery
-Not seeking god
-Fornication
-Prophesying falsely
-Homosexuality
-Blasphemy
-Working on the Sabbath
-Having a few people in your town worship another god: Death for the entire town and the livestock and put the entire town to the torch so it is in ruin forever. (Deuteronomy 13:13-16)

Death Death Death,
But that is a conversation for another time and is irrelevant

Back to top

IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #141 - Oct 31^st, 2013 at 9:05pm

Pantheon wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 8:17pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 7:58pm:

Pantheon wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 7:27pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 12:23pm:

I have provided you with a simple first step reference, I have referred to advocates of capitalism who warn about the inherent immorality and un natural self destructive elements that are BUILT IN to the capitalist regime/ I could go on...

You have ignored these points even though they are basic starting points for this important debate.

Your mind seems to be made up on this issue.

So the only things left for me to fire at you are the basal rocks that expose your hypocrisy, your inability to empathise with your fellow human being, your persistent adherence to totalitarianism, your refusal to award basic human rights and freedoms to the working class and treat them as the capitalist slaves that you wish them to be, your deranged lack of social justice.

I could go on - but I wont.

I will allow you to stew in your own ferment - to pick up the pieces of your lunacy and plungement into the abyss of your own cerebral vomit you flowery scoundrel

you referred some who saw the inherent immorality and un natural self destructive elements of capitalism are a better option than socialism or any other economic system.

Interesting enough its because of him who helped worsen capitalism by enabling government and big business to push down not only small business to the ground but the worker worst of all.

Jesus Christ was a socialist - are you casting moral aspersions on Christian ethics?

Why are you bringing religion into this debate?,

That's not the way i saw it, Jesus wasn't a socialist but instead was advocating free choose, so the individual can choose to donate to charity to help the poor for example can help. i don't remember readying anything in the bible saying Jesus wanted the government to force hard working family to pay for other peoples life styles.

However even if he was a socialist, i don't care.. now get back to the topic...

Don't contaminate the ethics of Christianity with your materialistic fascist corporatized capitalist immorality

I am not a Christian - but I enjoy exposing hypocritical insecure corporatists with little baby Jesus

The first thing they often do is SCREAM that Jesus was not a socialist - lol

In the USA they openly claim that Jesus would approve of imperial militarism and war as well as their capitalist ideologies (which they don't have anyway)

you were exposed in public for what you are

Its good that you posted this thread topic

How is the Poll going?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Oct 31^st, 2013 at 9:19pm by Chimp_Logic »

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

perceptions_now

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth WA
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #142 - Oct 31^st, 2013 at 9:05pm

I re-post this here, as it is relevant!

perceptions_now wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 9:04pm:

Pantheon wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 7:45pm:

I heard today of this idea and here it is:

The idea is simple, your employer pays the employee x amount for an income, however the government would now top off the employees x amount with a small x amount of money that can increase or decrease depending if the national GDP trends.

So as long as the national GDP increase each year the x amount the employees receive from the Government will continuously increase.

Good idea or Bad idea?

Well, it's a idea that doesn't seem like a good fit, with pure unadulterated Capitalism!

And notwithstanding that it's probably not a good fit with Capitalism & that it's already been tried before, I don't think it's a goer, going forward!

Back to top

IP Logged

Setanta

Gold Member

Offline

\/ Peace man!

Posts: 16644
Northern NSW
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #143 - Oct 31^st, 2013 at 11:33pm

Vuk11 wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 5:57pm:

A lot of people tend to disagree with Adam Smith due to times being different now and economics evolving. Obviously that isn't a refutation to his argument but i'd love to see someone explain how these "cartels" form in the absence of a state? Without using logic that includes causation due to corporations (state created) and direct state actions.

Cheers.

You are talking about capitalism without govt control, eh? Look no further than the cocaine cartels of South America, competition ganging up against each other.. No state? Who would make it illegal? Supply and demand. If you want an example of capitalist avarice, look no further than the "Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies", better known as the "East India Company." Tell me the misery and millions of deaths it caused were mutually beneficial contracts. You refuse to see any failing in capitalism, it's blatantly obvious all around the world but you see the system as a friendly cuddly teddy bear when in reality it has the hunger and voraciousness of a Brown Bear just out of hibernation..

Edit: Really the modern feel good talk of happy workers are more productive, so we want to keep you all happy(and sedated?) is bullshit. If it was true people would have worked it out 1000s of years ago. The reason slavery in the western world ended not that long ago, was not because capitalists saw the error of their ways, children working in mines and mills even after slavery was given up, adults and children still working as virtual slaves in some countries was/is because of capitalism. Slavery is profitable. Greed is not good except for the greedy. Funny, we teach our kids to share, don't be greedy then when they leave school all you have taught them is turned on it's head and you tell 'em go get all you can, sweep your arms wide and collect all the toys you can and don't let anyone touch them. Embarrassed

OK, there's my alcohol fueled rant for the night.. Well for a while probably. Roll Eyes

I try not to rant.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Oct 31^st, 2013 at 11:56pm by Setanta »

IP Logged

Vuk11

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1797
QLD
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #144 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 12:04am

Setanta wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 11:33pm:

You are talking about capitalism without govt control, eh? Look no further than the cocaine cartels of South America, competition ganging up against each other.. No state? Who would make it illegal? Supply and demand. If you want an example of capitalist avarice, look no further than the "Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies", better known as the "East India Company." Tell me the misery and millions of deaths it caused were mutually beneficial contracts. You refuse to see any failing in capitalism, it's blatantly obvious all around the world but you see the system as a friendly cuddly teddy bear when in reality it has the hunger and voraciousness of a Brown Bear just out of hibernation..

Edit: Really the modern feel good talk of happy workers are more productive, so we want to keep you all happy(and sedated?) is bullshit. If it was true people would have worked it out 1000s of years ago. The reason slavery in the western world ended not that long ago, was not because capitalists saw the error of their ways, children working in mines and mills even after slavery was given up, adults and children still working as virtual slaves in some countries was/is because of capitalism. Slavery is profitable. Greed is not good except for the greedy. Funny, we teach our kids to share, don't be greedy then when they leave school all you have taught them is turned on it's head and you tell 'em go get all you can, sweep your arms wide and collect all the toys you can and don't let anyone touch them. Embarrassed

OK, there's my alcohol fueled rant for the night.. Well for a while probably. Roll Eyes

Sneaky sneaky Wink

It is late so I'll address the East India Company tonight, I'll look into the cartels tomorrow and the whole slavery thing was kept afloat by state mandates, slavery isn't as profitable as people think. It's far more profitable to have slaves that don't think they are slaves, they are more efficient that way. I considered us...the current tax cows/sheep as slaves in a way to states and state mandated corporations. Anyways the rest I'll reply to tomorrow.

"The Company of merchants of London trading into The East Indies is granted a royal charter by Queen Elizabeth I, established with 125 shareholders and £72,000 of capital. Sir Thomas Smythe is The Company’s first Governor. Elizabeth also limited the liability of the EIC’s investors as well as her liabilities in granting a Royal Charter. This made The Company the world’s first limited liability corporation."

Also:

"Well, you know, when left-libertarians get into arguments with progressives about this sort of thing, and we point out that, historically speaking, American-style capitalism did not really arise in anything resembling a free market — that there never has been anything resembling a free market — and when we point to the actual history of regulatory capture, legal monopoly, state subsidy, government dependence, etc. that historically lies behind commercial empires like the East India Companies (government-chartered and government-protected monopolies),...."

EDIT: More special privilege
" The directors of the company attempted to avert bankruptcy by appealing to Parliament for financial help. This led to the passing of the Tea Act in 1773, which gave the Company greater autonomy in running its trade in the American colonies, and allowed it an exemption from tea import duties which its colonial competitors were required to pay."

The problem I think is free markets as they are theorized (Ie current markets free from states completely) didn't arise because of those in control. I mean look as far back in written history as possible, you have Pharaohs, Kings, Senates, Chieftains, there always has been some form of overarching monopoly of violent coercion controlling a society.

It it now that people start to realize and theorize that "hey we don't need these fools destroying and restricting our lives, most people just want to be left alone and can peacefully interact and defend themselves/each other without the need for violence". It's the promotion of peaceful solutions to complex social problems using human nature and objective morality (a new concept of course ethics is subjective at the moment but people like Stefan Molyneux are working towards providing an ethical framework and sort of ethics/philosophies first laws, like laws of gravity etc but for morality)

Back to top

« Last Edit: Nov 1^st, 2013 at 12:34am by Vuk11 »

IP Logged

Setanta

Gold Member

Offline

\/ Peace man!

Posts: 16644
Northern NSW
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #145 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 12:17am

Vuk11 wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 12:04am:

Setanta wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 11:33pm:

You are talking about capitalism without govt control, eh? Look no further than the cocaine cartels of South America, competition ganging up against each other.. No state? Who would make it illegal? Supply and demand. If you want an example of capitalist avarice, look no further than the "Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies", better known as the "East India Company." Tell me the misery and millions of deaths it caused were mutually beneficial contracts. You refuse to see any failing in capitalism, it's blatantly obvious all around the world but you see the system as a friendly cuddly teddy bear when in reality it has the hunger and voraciousness of a Brown Bear just out of hibernation..

Edit: Really the modern feel good talk of happy workers are more productive, so we want to keep you all happy(and sedated?) is bullshit. If it was true people would have worked it out 1000s of years ago. The reason slavery in the western world ended not that long ago, was not because capitalists saw the error of their ways, children working in mines and mills even after slavery was given up, adults and children still working as virtual slaves in some countries was/is because of capitalism. Slavery is profitable. Greed is not good except for the greedy. Funny, we teach our kids to share, don't be greedy then when they leave school all you have taught them is turned on it's head and you tell 'em go get all you can, sweep your arms wide and collect all the toys you can and don't let anyone touch them. Embarrassed

OK, there's my alcohol fueled rant for the night.. Well for a while probably. Roll Eyes

Sneaky sneaky Wink

It is late so I'll address the East India Company tonight, I'll look into the cartels tomorrow and the whole slavery thing was kept afloat by state mandates, slavery isn't as profitable as people think. It's far more profitable to have slaves that don't think they are slaves, they are more efficient that way. I considered us...the current tax cows/sheep as slaves in a way to states and state mandated corporations. Anyways the rest I'll reply to tomorrow.

"The Company of merchants of London trading into The East Indies is granted a royal charter by Queen Elizabeth I, established with 125 shareholders and £72,000 of capital. Sir Thomas Smythe is The Company’s first Governor. Elizabeth also limited the liability of the EIC’s investors as well as her liabilities in granting a Royal Charter. This made The Company the world’s first limited liability corporation."

Also:

"Well, you know, when left-libertarians get into arguments with progressives about this sort of thing, and we point out that, historically speaking, American-style capitalism did not really arise in anything resembling a free market — that there never has been anything resembling a free market — and when we point to the actual history of regulatory capture, legal monopoly, state subsidy, government dependence, etc. that historically lies behind commercial empires like the East India Companies (government-chartered and government-protected monopolies),...."

The problem I think is free markets as they are theorized (Ie current markets free from states completely) didn't arise because of those in control. I mean look as far back in written history as possible, you have Pharaohs, Kings, Senates, Chieftains, there always has been some form of overarching monopoly of violent coercion controlling a society.

It it now that people start to realize and theorize that "hey we don't need these fools destroying and restricting our lives, most people just want to be left alone and can peacefully interact and defend themselves/each other without the need for violence". It's the promotion of peaceful solutions to complex social problems using human nature and objective morality (a new concept of course ethics is subjective at the moment but people like Stefan Molyneux are working towards providing an ethical framework and sort of ethics/philosophies first laws, like laws of gravity etc but for morality)

You must realise that even though it was authorised by the Crown, if there was no Crown they would need no authorisation? It's superfluous, irrelevant. You know that they had their own army(the culmination being the Sepoy Rebellion), that they squeezed all they could back to the "merchants", yes the govt copped it's share in tax, but that had nothing to do with the aim and didn't impact the company business any more than no govt at all.
^
Edit:In fact the govt(Crown) had to step in an try to ameliorate the damage done by the Company, the start of the Raj, because their greed drove India to revolution.

Oh.. Please tell why was I sneaky? I wasn't trying to be but if I was I might be able to use it again some time.

edit: Is it the East India Company as an example? It's part of my family's history, we were part of the Raj until 1947 when my dad's family came as "boat people" to Fremantle. My GG grandfather was one of those two telegraphists that sent the telegram that "saved the empire in India". One of them died in the reprisals of the hastily assembled "light horse" units, obviously he's not my forefather.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Nov 1^st, 2013 at 12:44am by Setanta »

IP Logged

Grey

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 5341
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #146 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 12:29am

Dunknow about tea, but we could make an interesting dinner party

One of the more interesting threads of late.

Quote:

Chimp - Ahovking's pathetic little misspelt POLL is not going well for him

I refused the offering too

Quote:

Ahovking - We live in Australia where we are introducing socialist policy, for example the central bank system which is the cause all these problem and
except being a man and say we have it wrong, you blame capitalism the very system for over 200 years brought wealth and well being to the west making
us the most freest, healthiest, happiest and wealthiest people on earth for both the rich and the poor.

Capitalism was born at the begining of the 17thC. Making it over 500 years old, (even older than I was claiming

.

Quote:

The earliest recognized joint-stock company in modern times was the English (later British) East India Company, one of the most famous joint-stock companies. It was granted an English Royal Charter by Elizabeth I on December 31, 1600, with the intention of favouring trade privileges in India. The Royal Charter effectively gave the newly created Honourable East India Company (HEIC) a 15-year monopoly on all trade in the East Indies.[12] The Company transformed from a commercial trading venture to one that virtually ruled India as it acquired auxiliary governmental and military functions, until its dissolution.

The East India Company's flag initially had the flag of England, St. George's Cross, in the corner.Soon afterwards, in 1602,[13] the Dutch East India Company issued the first shares that were made tradeable on the Amsterdam Stock Exchange, an invention that enhanced the ability of joint-stock companies to attract capital from investors as they now easily could dispose of their shares. The Dutch East India Company became the first multinational corporation and the first megacorporation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock#History

Quote:

ArfAViking - Its interesting to note around the time we begin having depressions, economic downturns and high unemployment was around the time we were introducing
these socialist policy.

And we were doing so well with workhouses, child labour and slavery tch.

Quote:

Vuk - am well aware of the divisions between socialists (socialist founders and coiners of "anarchism") and capitalists. The reason why you guys views capitalism as anti-anarchism is because YOU subjectively view earning a wage voluntarily as wage slavery and private property as theft/immoral and view both as hierarchical.

Where to start?

In short Capitalism, a means to make very big bundles of money out of small ones, IS corporatism. If Capitalism meant 'bookeeping' it would never have got messy.

Anarch... O we can leave that for a moment

Quote:

This is irrelevant as my post was trying to talk about a common misconception that is wage slavery. I think you are being incredibly hypocritical Grey. You should know that I am using the terms because everyone can understand what Anarcho-Capitalism proposes (whether you agree with it or not) and what Anarcho-socialism proposes, if I were to "falsesly" as you say lump us both together this would not be desirable in conversation especially for you

Anarchism from MPOV deems a couple of things to be self evident, Racism (and by extension sexism etc), and Coercion, (making people live the way your gang wants them to live by threat and/or violence) are so obviously WRONG and having had NO good benefit are to be eliminated entirely from the equation of human society. How you may ask? By wiping this trouble off our BOOTS.

Apart from that Anarchism is an investigation into a structure that allows decisions to be made by general consensus. If you call yourself an Anarcho-Capitalist, (duh) or an Anarcho-Socialist you're nothing but a splitter, a backslider into gangsterism.

Back to top

"It is in the shelter of each other that the people live" - Irish Proverb

IP Logged

Vuk11

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1797
QLD
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #147 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 12:38am

Setanta wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 12:17am:

You must realise that even though it was authorised by the Crown, if there was no Crown they would need no authorisation? It's superfluous, irrelevant. You know that they had their own army(the culmination being the Sepoy Rebellion), that they squeezed all they could back to the "merchants", yes the govt copped it's share in tax, but that had nothing to do with the aim and didn't impact the company business any more than no govt at all.

The point is they had special privilege, financial backing by the monarchy when they ran into trouble from over expansion/competition, they had limited liability protections. THESE kept them safe from responsibility and competition and failure. Do you see though how this is just another state mandated corporation and not an example of a free market?

Besides the moral imperative to remove state control, I continually put forward many ways to avert such issues while most other Ancaps purely attack the logic of the argument. The article I posted fro DRO's and Credit rating agencies is a great way for easing the fears of people. You have to remember it's a transition, as each tentacle of the state is removed from the people, people fill in what need to be filled in. I think the internet would be a great help here from when companies make announcements of what they are willing to do once each government action is revoked to appease consumer fears etc.

Quote:

Oh.. Please tell why was I sneaky? I wasn't trying to be but if I was I might be able to use it again some time.
edit: Is it the East India Company as an example? It's part of my family's history, we were part of the Raj until 1947 when my dad's family came as "boat people" to Fremantle. My GG grandfather was one of those two telegraphists that sent the telegram that "saved the empire in India". One of them died in the reprisals of the hastily assembled "light horse" units, obviously he's not my forefather. Wink

I apologize by sneaky I just meant you said free from government and it's like one of the first corporations to exist -.- lol

Back to top

IP Logged

Vuk11

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1797
QLD
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #148 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 12:49am

Thanks for the reply grey!

I totally agree about the NO force or coercion part. (obviously Shocked

)

Would I be correct in saying that capitalism is viewed as hierarchical and property as theft by Anarchists?

For the whole gang thing tell me if this clears it up. We have a society that runs a certain way today, an Ancap just advocates freedom from state coercion. So you remove state coercion yadda yadda and now you have today's society without a state, yet with a market. So people can still be working, still trading and most importantly free to be self sufficient and to group into societies/communities that they most agree on. The main point being you remove the coercion and you are free to form whichever society you wish, however I am quite content with purely having what we have no, without state coercion.

Basically by saying Ancap I'm saying I would like to remove state control from my life on moral grounds and would afford the same courtesy to any other human being, people are free to go be state tax cows if they like as long as it's voluntary etc, so I would like the same courtesy to pursue life how I see fit voluntarily and extend the same courtesy to anyone else.

Free market capitalism being co-operation through trade and competition through business, isn't at it's core immoral. I would put it to anyone that without state mandated corporations like the East India Company, without state coercion and control of markets you would not have had these problems that are evident in history.

As all forms of "capitalism" have erupted from state coerced societies, so a free market has never really existed, except for varying degrees of regulation etc. Blaming the East India Company of what a company would do in a free society is fallacious.

Quote:

Apart from that Anarchism is an investigation into a structure that allows decisions to be made by general consensus. If you call yourself an Anarcho-Capitalist, (duh) or an Anarcho-Socialist you're nothing but a splitter, a backslider into gangsterism.

Can you expand slightly just to clarify what you mean by consensus. Do you mean organize society how everybody wants? Like true consensus or majority rules democracy? (I'm obviously guessing true consensus)

One interesting point above voluntary trade (that has created so much and forwarded society) is that it's spontaneous and natural, where you don't need a vote or specific consensus, rather people just do it.

"I have two bottles of water and you have two fish, I'll trade you a bottle of water for your fish"

^ Each would value what the other has more than one of what they had. Then when you go on a larger scale people use medium of exchange to represent; subjective values, labor, time, resources, energy and can then trade this as it represents future value that someone wants it for. "I'm going to catch 10 fish, even though I only need 1, because I can trade the other 9 in for $9 and buy a bottle of water which I really need/want!" etc etc

The price mechanism amazes me how you don't have to do anything, you don't have to research, you don't have to control you just have to let people do what they want/need voluntarily and from it, you get a clear indication of the infinite desires of human beings, who wants want, how many want so many of something etc

^I would ask you Grey in you personal opinion (not for the sake of debate just curiosity) what do you see replacing price mechanism with? Pure human co-operation and gift economies?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:00am by Vuk11 »

IP Logged

Grey

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 5341
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #149 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 12:57am

Anarchism is FOR individualism and freedom, in as much as the individual counts their own sovereignty as sacred and not to be given away to some gangster you don't know from a bar of soap.

But Anarchism is also for mutualaid and co-operation.

It's a balance thing. Anarchism is opposed to totalitarianism of L or R.

Quote:

Jumping into every thread I post in with pointless grammar Nazism of "You don't exist only we do!!!!" is a little irritating and adds nothing to the substance of the conversation.

You can tack a seagulls wings on a dog, but will it fly?

Quote:

Can you refrain from this incessant derogatory categorizing of people that have an opposing view from YOU as gang members? For with your logic Christians are gang members, all political parties are gang members, when all we are trying to do is use labells for ease of conversation!

Yes, by my logic Religions and political parties are gangs, and not much different in aims and objectives. See, you're getting there

Quote:

I have no idea why you keep saying "If you can't bear to sit and discuss at the table with people of differing opinions Anarchism isn't your bag. ", why else would I be on a political forum reading what people say and replying if I didn't care for opposing view points? Can you stop these lies please it's getting irritating.

What lies? Look, you cannot sit at the Anarchist table and represent a gang. It's just NOT ON, we'd have to kill you. Grin

Quote:

It represents a soft landing if it;s a multi-generational change. However your "true anarchism" is tainted by militant Anarchists willing for violent
revolution and violent destruction of property. As long as those people are advocating the same thing you are but violently you will NEVER persuade
an Ancap.

'True Anarchism' IS tainted, that can't be denied. 'Anarchy of the Deed' is BOLLOCKS. But hardly anybody claiming to be an Anarchist would advocate for violent revolution, that's not in the same ball park. And the vast majority of 'True Anarchists' have very clear and accurate understandings of the fundamentals. Personally i've been very heartened by the truth of this assertion in discussions with Euro-Black Bloc'ers etc.

Back to top

"It is in the shelter of each other that the people live" - Irish Proverb

IP Logged

Poll
Question: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Yes, ofcause. 18 (72.0%) No, it doesnt 7 (28.0%) Total votes: 25 « Created by: Pantheon on: Oct 29^th, 2013 at 9:31am »