Australian Politics Forum - Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?

Chimp_Logic Gold Member Offline πολιτικός Posts: 4826 Mawson Base Gender:	Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers? Reply #150 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:06am Vuk11 wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 12:49am: Free market capitalism being co-operation through trade and competition through business, isn't at it's core immoral. [/b] Do you actually read what you actually post?
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

Setanta

Gold Member

Offline

\/ Peace man!

Posts: 16644
Northern NSW
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #151 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:08am

Vuk11 wrote on 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.

The problem with that is that there is and will be coercion. If it's in the entity's interests and it has power it will be used. Human nature, as capitalists are so want to point out. Unfettered greed is not good, unfettered any of the "deadly sins" is not good. They(the 7 sins) are all enhancement to our lives in small doses, none should rule our lives.

Even if we go back to the tribal situation we talked about before, look at New Guinea tribes, do they trade for capitalist reasons? No, the trade between tribes is showing largess to each other, gifts, feasts, coming back to what was important to them, social cohesion between tribes just as it was in the tribe. Once gifts had been exchanged did the tribes, receiving gifts reciprocally, share the bounty? Of course! We evolved and are a co-dependant social species, it's how we got here but it may not be how we leave.

Back to top

IP Logged

Vuk11

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1797
QLD
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #152 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:09am

Grey wrote on 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.

Whether what Anarchism is for (in anyone's personal view) if someone is free from coercion and wants to trade time for something they value, so that they can then obtain something else they value whether it be a need or want, then it really is no one's business, whether sitting a table or not xD

Quote:

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

Lol good one! Though come on, does that analogy really imply that voluntary trade for mutually perceived benefit has no place in a free society? Remember it's all subjective once you remove the coercion and to argue it on moral grounds....well I'd like to see someone try, many have Wink

Quote:

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

I would agree with religions and political parties because it's basically who someones want to control peoples lives whether it be BS religious tenets or political parties and their statism. Again though wanting to be free and to be able to trade isn't the same thing. Though one day we really have to get into the whole property thing, because it's freaky, Ancaps are scared because if the state is removed we have militant Anarchists obsessed with removing private property to worry about -.- so bothersome.

Quote:

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

What I meant by lies is this whole "if you can't stand peoples opposing view points anarchism isn't for you" I thrive on logical discourse and learning from other people it's what I am. Though again wanting to be free and to trade voluntarily is not anywhere need the same as political parties and coercive religions, I'm sure you only say that due to private property (just my assumption)

Quote:

'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.

Great to hear. Whenever I advocate freedom from coercive states, I always go into quelling peoples fears with examples and logic etc. I mean if you ignore "what if" scenarios people tend not to take it seriously. Perhaps one day you can do the same for me, with my fear of militant Anarchists. The only reason it's a fear is because of the rapid hatred directed at property owners! lol

Back to top

IP Logged

Vuk11

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1797
QLD
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #153 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:10am

Chimp_Logic wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:06am:

Vuk11 wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 12:49am:

Free market capitalism being co-operation through trade and competition through business, isn't at it's core immoral. [/b]

Do you actually read what you actually post?

Well come on Chimpy old boy, either you are saying that trade isn't co-operative or both are somehow immoral? Well.....how

?

To clarify what I was saying is that both exist in harmony in free market capitalism. The consumer trades = co-operation and business compete for customers = competition. Both are beneficial for everybody! Cheesy

Back to top

« Last Edit: Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:16am by Vuk11 »

IP Logged

Vuk11

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1797
QLD
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #154 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:14am

Setanta wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:08am:

The problem with that is that there is and will be coercion. If it's in the entity's interests and it has power it will be used. Human nature, as capitalists are so want to point out. Unfettered greed is not good, unfettered any of the "deadly sins" is not good. They(the 7 sins) are all enhancement to our lives in small doses, none should rule our lives.

Even if we go back to the tribal situation we talked about before, look at New Guinea tribes, do they trade for capitalist reasons? No, the trade between tribes is showing largess to each other, gifts, feasts, coming back to what was important to them, social cohesion between tribes just as it was in the tribe. Once gifts had been exchanged did the tribes, receiving gifts reciprocally, share the bounty? Of course! We evolved and are a co-dependant social species, it's how we got here but it may not be how we leave.

Which is exactly right, we all fear that exact thing, that unfettered greed and exploitation by those that have power. HOWEVER and this is the big however (capital letters and all), you have to remember that no state = no corporations and no state coercions. The only power people can exercise could ever possibly be with their own bodies or through the bodies of others through the use of money. Which is why if we ever to (we will) slowly remove state tentacles, these tentacles would only be removed if peoples fears could be calmed.

Which is why I think as a sort of end goal in a world still having markets etc DRO's and credit agencies present an ingenious way for resolving dispute in the absence of courts etc. Seriously here's the link again I'd love to know a full opinion: (not just the usual gloss over because the last time I linked this people came back with questions that are literally answered a few paragraphs down -.- how bothersome)

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2005/10/stefan-molyneux/the-stateless-society-an-exam...

Back to top

IP Logged

Vuk11 Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 1797 QLD Gender:	Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers? Reply #155 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:21am Just so I'm on the same page would I be correct in saying that human desires are infinite and resources are finite/scarce? Or am I going to get into a conversation about how desires and scarcity are created by capitalism?
Back to top	IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #156 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:22am

Vuk11 wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:10am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:06am:

Vuk11 wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 12:49am:

Free market capitalism being co-operation through trade and competition through business, isn't at it's core immoral. [/b]

Do you actually read what you actually post?

Well come on Chimpy old boy, either you are saying that trade isn't co-operative or both are somehow immoral? Well.....how

?

How does one co-operate whilst competing?

In any case, we neither have free markets nor capitalism operating.

There can be no better example than the fascist corpocracy in the USA running around the planet trying to con smaller nations into signing free trade agreements

If you believe in a globally run FREE TRADE system why promote exclusive free trade agreements with specific nations?

China is a State run pseudo capitalist system
Whilst the USA is a corporately run pseudo capitalist system.

Both are non democratic tyrannies by definition.

Capitalism is just another economic model - like the barter system. It is inherently class based and survives on two major foundations. Exploitation of the working classes, and the generation of profit for the elite who somehow possess the capital or have access to credit.

capitalism is inherently immoral and incompatible with democratic principles.

Whats happened in the west (particularly in the USA) is that capitalism (the corporatized version) has been deliberately coupled with democracy and freedom through the propaganda system.

vuk11 needs to face the truth about his beloved free market capitalist nirvana - A nirvana that resides in the house of the devil. Even little baby Jesus understood this Universal axiom.

vuk11 you stand condemned as a clown puppet for the corpocracy.

I hope at least they are paying you well

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

Setanta

Gold Member

Offline

\/ Peace man!

Posts: 16644
Northern NSW
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #157 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:26am

Vuk11 wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:14am:

Setanta wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:08am:

The problem with that is that there is and will be coercion. If it's in the entity's interests and it has power it will be used. Human nature, as capitalists are so want to point out. Unfettered greed is not good, unfettered any of the "deadly sins" is not good. They(the 7 sins) are all enhancement to our lives in small doses, none should rule our lives.

Even if we go back to the tribal situation we talked about before, look at New Guinea tribes, do they trade for capitalist reasons? No, the trade between tribes is showing largess to each other, gifts, feasts, coming back to what was important to them, social cohesion between tribes just as it was in the tribe. Once gifts had been exchanged did the tribes, receiving gifts reciprocally, share the bounty? Of course! We evolved and are a co-dependant social species, it's how we got here but it may not be how we leave.

Which is exactly right, we all fear that exact thing, that unfettered greed and exploitation by those that have power. HOWEVER and this is the big however (capital letters and all), you have to remember that no state = no corporations and no state coercions. The only power people can exercise could ever possibly be with their own bodies or through the bodies of others through the use of money. Which is why if we ever to (we will) slowly remove state tentacles, these tentacles would only be removed if peoples fears could be calmed.

Which is why I think as a sort of end goal in a world still having markets etc DRO's and credit agencies present an ingenious way for resolving dispute in the absence of courts etc. Seriously here's the link again I'd love to know a full opinion: (not just the usual gloss over because the last time I linked this people came back with questions that are literally answered a few paragraphs down -.- how bothersome)

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2005/10/stefan-molyneux/the-stateless-society-an-exam...

I guess this is where we disagree then. No states != no corporations. States are in fact an obstacle to corporations, without a state, they will not name themselves as a body under Law but will just exist, all the same, and do what they do. States are our protection, such that it is, against unfettered capitalism. In the early days corporations in the US had a limited life, for a specific goal, then dissolved. They did this for a reason. Since then and ignoring what they "knew" would happen, we are where we are.

Edit: Without states, under capitalism, corporations would take their place unless we change the idea that grabbing all you can at the expense of your tribe and the neighbours and taking all you can for your own benefit is a good thing to do.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:32am by Setanta »

IP Logged

Grey

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 5341
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #158 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:35am

Vuk11 wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 12:49am:

Thanks for the reply grey!

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

)

Hmm I thought I would be the only poster up this late on this thread.

And dammit the East Indies has already go the mention. But the fact remains that IS the start of Capitalism.

Quote:

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

Capitalism is just bollocks pure and simple. The most traded commodity is money. It's engaged in this crazy game of pass the parcel in which when you get the parcel you add more paper, inside nobody knows but it probably contains derivatives, subprime mortgages, junk bonds and third world debt. When the music stops nobody wants to open the package, (rather humourously called a security) and it would take half the expected life of the Universe to work out who owns what. So everybody goes into a funk and gets the government to throw enough workers money into the jukebox to get the music rolling again. The Capitalist system is irredeemably broken. Time for a new game.

Property is theft, but that doesn't mean your home isn't your castle and I'm entitled to steal your hammer. It means if you are not and have no intention of ever using the land, you're not entitled to it, and by the way how dare you try and charge ten times what you bought it for when all you've done is sold off the timber to a smelter for firewood and created a desert. Where's the value added in that?

Quote:

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.

So you just want to not pay tax and don't recognise any issues where co-operation would be adventitious? The Russians are coming, they're under your bed Wink

I deem all people to be born equal and deserving of equal opportunities. If some of them need a little help it's because they've been denied that at some point. If some are sick we can afford to look after them. Don't be so bloody mean

to be cont.

Back to top

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

IP Logged

Setanta Gold Member Offline \/ Peace man! Posts: 16644 Northern NSW Gender:	Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers? Reply #159 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:40am From memory, the Dutch started the idea of corporations and stock markets, the Brits couldn't be outdone by a bunch of Boors(English for Boers, just for Andrei) so took to it with gusto.
Back to top	IP Logged

Vuk11

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1797
QLD
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #160 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:44am

Setanta wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:26am:

I guess this is where we disagree then. No states != no corporations. States are in fact an obstacle to corporations, without a state, they will not name themselves as a body under Law but will just exist, all the same, and do what they do. States are our protection, such that it is, against unfettered capitalism. In the early days corporations in the US had a limited life, for a specific goal, then dissolved. They did this for a reason. Since then and ignoring what they "knew" would happen, we are where we are.

I don't see how that was logically follow.
A business is a business I'm sure we know what a business is, however they become corporations when state give them (yes I know and all/other business') limited liability, as well as subsidies, legal protections, privatization basically giving one group a monopoly on a resource or service.

Without the state what do you have? You have business, you no longer have legal protection for the state in the form of limited liability and you don't have tax payer funding. What this does is make all business owner responsible for their actions, this is also makes them at the mercy of people. If people choose not to buy BigMacs because they are putting wood chippings in their burger, they go out of business and have to please customers. I was going to say it's as simple as that but obviously you and others (understandably) fear what a business could do in the absence of regulations.

This is where peoples power as a consumer comes in like I said above, just choose to do business with ones that support your ideals, if they don't there are alternatives, not just alternative business but self sufficiency and just plain alternatives to certain products. On top of this the reason why I keep linking the article is because it shows how you can be protected as an employee/consumer/business owner from people acting immorally.

One important thing to point out about the DRO and Credit agency idea is that today, this is what people are gravitating towards anyway! Public courts are too expensive and time consumers for all but the ultra wealthy, unless you risk incurring debt etc. Instead most people resolve issues outside of courts using their mutual arbiter lawyers etc, but better than this is peaceful incentives like Credit rating agencies today with utilities and services, things like the TICA rental blacklist.

I mean you don't have to worry about a business or consumer no upholding a contract as you'd nominate and neutral arbiter in the case of dispute. If you are seen to break contract your contract rating goes down making it harder in the future etc,. "who will watch the watchers", "what if the rich just buy out the DRO!", all of these extremities are in the article I linked! Grin

Quote:

Edit: Without states, under capitalism, corporations would take their place unless we change the idea that grabbing all you can at the expense of your tribe and the neighbours and taking all you can for your own benefit is a good thing to do.

This has been addressed many times, in a transition from what we have now it's basically called the power vacuum myth.

Back to top

IP Logged

Grey

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 5341
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #161 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:46am

Quote:

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.

I'd put it to you that human existence under god/emporers was not totally honky-dory.

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.

Quote:

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)

I mean to reverse the flow of power so that it comes from the roots up. For everything that can be decided and paid for at a local level to be. And that people discuss issues as equals and keep discussing until a win win solution is found that sways the overwhelming majority. Consensus doesn't have to be 100% but it has to be a whole lot better than 49% v 51%.

Quote:

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?

Well we have enough shyte, money is producing cars and white goods designed to fail as soonh as the warranty runs out. the world is over supplied with new cars, a moneyless society could actually work a lot better but such talk tends to frighten the kiddies.

I have no real problem with real money. What we need to be able to do is to start respecting people for what they give rather than what they take. Honouring the quietly altrusitic rather than the avaricious show ponys.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Nov 1^st, 2013 at 2:03am by Grey »

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

IP Logged

Setanta

Gold Member

Offline

\/ Peace man!

Posts: 16644
Northern NSW
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #162 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:53am

Vuk11 wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:44am:

Setanta wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:26am:

I guess this is where we disagree then. No states != no corporations. States are in fact an obstacle to corporations, without a state, they will not name themselves as a body under Law but will just exist, all the same, and do what they do. States are our protection, such that it is, against unfettered capitalism. In the early days corporations in the US had a limited life, for a specific goal, then dissolved. They did this for a reason. Since then and ignoring what they "knew" would happen, we are where we are.

I don't see how that was logically follow.
A business is a business I'm sure we know what a business is, however they become corporations when state give them (yes I know and all/other business') limited liability, as well as subsidies, legal protections, privatization basically giving one group a monopoly on a resource or service.

Without the state what do you have? You have business, you no longer have legal protection for the state in the form of limited liability and you don't have tax payer funding. What this does is make all business owner responsible for their actions, this is also makes them at the mercy of people. If people choose not to buy BigMacs because they are putting wood chippings in their burger, they go out of business and have to please customers. I was going to say it's as simple as that but obviously you and others (understandably) fear what a business could do in the absence of regulations.

This is where peoples power as a consumer comes in like I said above, just choose to do business with ones that support your ideals, if they don't there are alternatives, not just alternative business but self sufficiency and just plain alternatives to certain products. On top of this the reason why I keep linking the article is because it shows how you can be protected as an employee/consumer/business owner from people acting immorally.

One important thing to point out about the DRO and Credit agency idea is that today, this is what people are gravitating towards anyway! Public courts are too expensive and time consumers for all but the ultra wealthy, unless you risk incurring debt etc. Instead most people resolve issues outside of courts using their mutual arbiter lawyers etc, but better than this is peaceful incentives like Credit rating agencies today with utilities and services, things like the TICA rental blacklist.

I mean you don't have to worry about a business or consumer no upholding a contract as you'd nominate and neutral arbiter in the case of dispute. If you are seen to break contract your contract rating goes down making it harder in the future etc,. "who will watch the watchers", "what if the rich just buy out the DRO!", all of these extremities are in the article I linked! Grin

Quote:

Edit: Without states, under capitalism, corporations would take their place unless we change the idea that grabbing all you can at the expense of your tribe and the neighbours and taking all you can for your own benefit is a good thing to do.

This has been addressed many times, in a transition from what we have now it's basically called the power vacuum myth.

I understand what you are saying "legally". It comes down to without a govt a corporation would not be named a corporation and not have any laws applied to it. What would it be? A rose by another name? I'm sorry, I just don't have your faith, and that's what it it, in letting greed run our economic system. I have seen no reason in over half a century to think greed works in the interests of the majority. Markets should serve all people not vise versa.

Back to top

IP Logged

Vuk11

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1797
QLD
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #163 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 2:03am

Grey wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:35am:

Hmm I thought I would be the only poster up this late on this thread.

I'd be off soon but truth be told I'm being held hostage by massive spiders -.-
Halloween aye Wink

Quote:

And dammit the East Indies has already go the mention. But the fact remains that IS the start of Capitalism.

Sure I can agree it's a fact, however it isn't an example of free market capitalism though. I feel the distinction is important logically to not compare apples with oranges, both may be fruit but one is acidic! (citrus)

Quote:

Capitalism is just bollocks pure and simple. The most traded commodity is money.

I know money is the sum of all evil for people, however it takes a bit of understanding and I'm not going to assume whether you understand what I'm about to say or not.

Money represents time/labour/resources/energy and subjectivity of value. For arguments sake do you agree value is subjective? Now given that value is subjective when you trade one of the above for money you are basically swapping the above action for a tangible store of value, that can be used at a later date.

Maybe you deal in fish, have enough fish to eat and have enough water to drink. Now you have a surplus in fish by your own actions, trading this surplus of fish to someone who values the fish more than their money. However what does their money represent? Maybe they helped build a house, you are basically trading the value of the fish for the value of the other mans labour, he gets the fish and you get the value of his labour. Then you spend that time encapsulated labour for something else that you want /need. But at the core of it, it represents those excess of fish that you caught and traded to someone who valued the fish more then they valued their time building a house.

So the idea of money isn't as simple as trading something arbitrary that controls people, but are literally passing around and trading peoples time, resources, energy, labour and most importantly subjective value.

Quote:

It's engaged in this crazy game of pass the parcel in which when you get the parcel you add more paper, inside nobody knows but it probably contains derivatives, subprime mortgages, junk bonds and third world debt. When the music stops nobody wants to open the package, (rather humourously called a security) and it would take half the expected life of the Universe to work out who owns what. So everybody goes into a funk and gets the government to throw enough workers money into the jukebox to get the music rolling again. The Capitalist system is irredeemably broken. Time for a new game.

A lot of the above come from the fiat monetary system which I am against, Hayek proposed multiple competing private currencies as opposed to a single privately owned central bank monopoly on all the world currencies (most atm).

Quote:

Property is theft, but that doesn't mean your home isn't your castle and I'm entitled to steal your hammer.... Where's the value added in that?

yeah I can agree, so you do have a form of ownership? Because I've recently been debating Zeitgeisters (venus projectors) and they go on about all ownership of anything is immoral, with flawed logic. So we can agree on that.

The whole vacant land thing, I dunno aye, I mean what if someone has traded their labour for money that represents the value of the labour, then traded that for land with a cottage on it. They bulldoze the cottage and you have vacant land, it was acquired voluntarily, legitimately and for something valuable. However what if they don't have the means for building on it yet? Someone can come along and start building on it, even though they caught all those fish, traded that labour for a house, bulldozed it and now it simply isn't theirs? I think we can agree that it requires you to do something to have a claim to the land not just say you own it.

Quote:

So you just want to not pay tax and don't recognise any issues where co-operation would be adventitious? The Russians are coming, they're under your bed Wink

Of course I recognize that co-operation is advantageous, that's the whole point of wanting to trade. I am not against any other form of charity or co-operation at all. An no it isn't about not paying taxes I hate that generalization (not that you are). It's about morality at the core. Taxation is immoral and I'd more then happily fund a levy for roads/defense whatever, but it's also about self responsibility, personal choice and freedom to pursue ones own destiny. Everything must be moral and voluntary! Ancaps advocate responsibility above all else I mean come on.

Quote:

I deem all people to be born equal and deserving of equal opportunities. If some of them need a little help it's because they've been denied that at some point. If some are sick we can afford to look after them. Don't be so bloody mean

to be cont.

hey I'm not depriving them of anything, they should be free to survive on their own or with the help of others. What I'm against is forcibly taking from one person to feed another person, with no sense of community or morality.

Do people forget that mutual aid and charity were massive before the welfare state? That's what I encourage, not theft!

Back to top

Statism_001.jpg (72 KB | 49 )

IP Logged

Vuk11

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1797
QLD
Gender: male

Re: Does Capitalism Exploit Workers?
Reply #164 - Nov 1^st, 2013 at 2:13am

Grey wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 1:46am:

I mean to reverse the flow of power so that it comes from the roots up. For everything that can be decided and paid for at a local level to be. And that people discuss issues as equals and keep discussing until a win win solution is found that sways the overwhelming majority. Consensus doesn't have to be 100% but it has to be a whole lot better than 49% v 51%.

For sure, but the best thing about free market capitalism is that I'd argue it does that. It makes the elite accountable, it gives people opportunity to increase their lot in life if they so desire and it gives power to the people through the vote of their wallet. The business becomes a servant to please consumers for profit.

Quote:

Well we have enough shyte, money is producing cars and white goods designed to fail as soonh as the warranty runs out. the world is over supplied with new cars, a moneyless society could actually work a lot better but such talk tends to frighten the kiddies.

I have no real problem with real money. What we need to be able to do is to start respecting people for what they give rather than what they take. Honouring the quietly altrusitic rather than the avaricious show ponys.

Yeah, if money were to be replaced it would HAVE to be replaced as it represents too much that is essential to society. It literally represents the labour etc mentioned above. Importantly also is it contains the information of all human desires/needs/supply/demand etc through economic calculation.

Though planned obsolescence is pretty simple people just buying from companies they trust and that don't shaft them. If your washing machine breaks a few weeks after the warranty you're obviously going to shop elsewhere, If it lasts 5 years after, maybe you will stay.

Back to top

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 »