Why Socialism?
- Thread starter bit_pattern
- Start date
superelephant
Bluelighter
This is really quite hilarious
Great argument. You're so smart. How can anyone disagree with that popcorn smiley? 8)
The majority of economics is over-intellectualized rubbish. The faith you place in it is akin to the faith placed in organized religion.
bloodshed344
Bluelighter
- Joined
- May 9, 2012
- Messages
- 1,576
Very good points. I just don't believe our politicians could successfully implement something that gives the workforce a hand over corporations. I have little faith in our current elected officials to work on a social approach the way you describe it. If we could find ways to allocate resources to the people (redistribution, but also the transfer of the means of production as you say) it could work out really well, but it would have to be done right... I can't think of how. Would the union related to whatever business it is that the people are acquiring be the one who manages the reallocation of resources? No... there's too much chance of corruption with a set up like that.
It's confusing to think of solutions.
No, I don't think taxing the rich is blasphemous. That's one of the few areas where me and the libertarians disagree. However, like whoever it was that said it, any more taxes than what is absolutely necessary is just legalized robbery. I think America is in a unique position of class disparity... 80% of the country is lower class. These people need tax cuts. The middle class do not need tax hikes, either. But the top 5%? Yeah, they can get their taxes increased, and the top .5% should pay the most for taxes.
Capitalism has worked in the past plenty of times in these types of situations. A successful person would set up a business and help a whole community. If the community didn't like it, they knew who the offender was. In today's world, the "capitalists" are faceless and when they ruin a community with pollution, people don't know who to blame. In the past, a capitalist had much more incentive to be a positive part of the community which his operations are situated. In the world of today these "capitalists" are more like robber barons.
Last edited:
bit_pattern
Ex-Bluelighter
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2008
- Messages
- 8,127
It's not an argument, it's an observation. But, please, don't let me distract you from from sharing more your analyses. It is high entertainment.
Bardeaux
Bluelight Crew
This is backwards, I think. Trying to understand economic and social relations as a science is...well, science. Science is ever changing as new and more accurate theories are brought into existence, scientists are always trying to disprove other scientists. Saying everything aside from the market is rubbish, that the market will solve all of our problems on its own, that the market cannot be questioned, that the market has all the answers. This sounds more like religious faith to me.
How is it different from saying biology is over intellectualized nonsense, and the bible is all we need to take into consideration?
This comes back to a point I made earlier in the thread. The government is essentially irrelevant in implementing socialism at the enterprise level, the Detroit example I gave was just an example of what could have been done. There are schools of thought on the left that stress the importance of first taking control of the state in order to overthrow the capitalist system (which does carry some relevance), but the state is unnecessary for the workforce to begin the process of taking control of their workplaces. Political control of the state will be an eventual necessity though. This could be done legally, through purchasing abandoned factories and turning them into networks of cooperatives, or through less than legal means of simply taking these economic machines from their current owners (in which the state would become a hindrance to socialism). It's important to remember that a prime function of the state is to actually protect property rights.
As a functioning model of how this can begin, have a look at the Spanish Mondragon federation of cooperatives. Or to see how the process of expropriation works at the micro level, I find the documentary The Take to be a very good examination. It follows the process of former workers at an abandoned machinery factory expropriating the factory for themselves to run cooperatively among the larger expropriation movement in Latin America.
Last edited:
Droppersneck
Bluelighter
Human nature does not allow for socialism or any other kind of utopia and the sooner you realize that Bardo the sooner you will find a job.
Bardeaux
Bluelight Crew
Please explain these unbreakable laws of human nature....
Droppersneck
Bluelighter
You could also call these laws the seven deadly sins. I think the fact that most people are not content with just having what they need dispels any hopes of a Utopian society. Competition fuels greed and desire to be the best and these are things that are not allotted in your ideal society. UNLESS we round up all the people with too much motivation and put them in camps which I am all for.
Bardeaux
Bluelight Crew
Be honest. Have you ever heard anyone anywhere actually suggest this?
Droppersneck
Bluelighter
lol isn't that the driving force behind all those terrible Ayn rand books.. Dude it was cracking me up when that chick in the lounge came into that thread as your knight in shining armor. You know I just had to bust your balls about that hat. I hold no animosity towards you and your kind
superelephant
Bluelighter
I'm not saying that the market has all the answers, just that people make better choices and end up resolving things better themselves without all the bureaucracy. I'm not saying there won't be problems, just that the nature of the problems would be different.
Advances in biology are based on hypothesis that eventually become known as facts. Glutathione is the bodies primary antioxidant. Serotonin binds to serotonin receptors. etc. Economics is a bunch of people supposing shit, then articulating it the best they can. Economics is not comparable to biology.
Bardeaux
Bluelight Crew
lol isn't that the driving force behind all those terrible Ayn rand books.. Dude it was cracking me up when that chick in the lounge came into that thread as your knight in shining armor. You know I just had to bust your balls about that hat. I hold no animosity towards you and your kind
It's funny about Ayn Rand. Had the Soviets never taken power, she never would have been allowed to attend her university. Her father would have kept his pharmacy, but she wouldn't have gone on to inspire generations of bratty rich kids.
I tend to agree. Although this has nothing to do with socialism vs capitalism. This is why it's important to understand these terms, so we can know exactly what we're discussing.
It certainly is. There are objectively proven laws of economics just as there are objectively proven biological processes.
superelephant
Bluelighter
It is possible that technological advances could allow for global abundance of just about every good and service, not quite yet though.
Droppersneck
Bluelighter
Lol that was funny. The thing is she saw socialism ravage her country in real time, and there is something to be said about that...
superelephant
Bluelighter
LOL. like what?
Bardeaux
Bluelight Crew
Supply vs demand, diminishing returns, income elasticities, Gibrat's law of growth, Verdoorn's law, comparative advantages.
Most of these are covered in the very first chapter of any introductory macroeconomics textbook.
She saw it happen for just long enough to take advantage of her newly available free education before she left. Rational self interest, I suppose.
Most of these are covered in the very first chapter of any introductory macroeconomics textbook.
She saw it happen for just long enough to take advantage of her newly available free education before she left. Rational self interest, I suppose.
superelephant
Bluelighter
None of those are as cut and dry as proven biological processes. None of those fit outside of my primitive 'market', 'controlled market' paradigm...
Bardeaux
Bluelight Crew
It's not a physical science. Social sciences are agile and are always changing in accordance to societal changes. The point is, analysis can be performed, theories can be tested and results can be recorded. This is science.
Your "paradigm" simply states what it is we're talking about. It doesn't explain it's mechanics at all.
Your "paradigm" simply states what it is we're talking about. It doesn't explain it's mechanics at all.
superelephant
Bluelighter
therefore incomparable with biology.
that's because the mechanics can't be definitely stated.
If everyone, tomorrow, just sat down. instead of going to work, the store, instead of doing anything else but sitting right were they choose after they awaken, can this be quantified by 'economic science'?
Bardeaux
Bluelight Crew
So biology can't be analysed, theoretically tested and recorded?
h'okay then. We shouldn't try to understand the market, we should just accept it's divine and miraculous workings.
How couldn't it be quantified? This would have x effect on production and x effect on consumption, as a very basic example.