Home | Community | Message Board


Shroom Supply
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Bridgetown Botanicals CBD Edibles   PhytoExtractum Kratom Powder for Sale   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds, Feminized Cannabis Seeds, High THC Strains, USA West Coast Strains   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Amazon Scales

Jump to first unread post. Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Next >  [ show all ]
InvisibleLallafa
p_g monocle
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/13/01
Posts: 2,598
Loc: underbelly
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: Phred]
    #570915 - 03/05/02 10:59 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

z


--------------------
my tax dollars going to more hits of acid for charles manson


Edited by Lallafa (05/04/10 03:08 PM)


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 1 month
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: Lallafa]
    #570956 - 03/05/02 11:51 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Lallafa writes:

"capitalism is ultimately based on resource consumption.
is this agreed?"

Only to the extent that virtually ALL productive human effort involves consuming resources. Does a paper mill in a hippy commune not consume trees? Do their potters not consume clay? Do the sheep they raise for the wool they shear to make homespun weavings not consume grass?

"vulture capitalism, as practiced in the us..."

Whoa, whoa, whoa! YOU are the one that said that the US has never been capitalist. It certainly isn't now, that's for sure. If you are going to start using examples of government-subsidized corporations, call it something else, but DON'T call it capitalism, because it isn't.

"these resources are finite yet owned by private people, thus they do not benefit the common people like they should"

Which resources? Land? Does that mean that no one has the right to build a house on a 1/4 acre plot of land because that land now no longer benefits "the common people"? Who the hell are "the common people", anyway?

"if one person wants to buy resources it should benefit the people because these resources are not unlimited"

WHICH people? Those who don't own the resources, live nowhere near them, and would never miss them even if they knew about they existed? How does my mining of gadolinium in the middle of North Dakota somehow deprive someone of some "benefits"?

"there is no reason for one person to reap windfall profits because they simply own an oil field"

And there is no reason why they shouldn't. Two centuries ago, the owner of that oilfield was fucked... the land was worthless, couldn't farm on it, couldn't build anything on that icky goo either. Maybe two centuries from now the owner will be fucked again, because we'll be running on fusion power and using synthetic lubricants churned out from carbon dust by nanobots.

"pure capitalism requires pure private property"

ALL human existence requires private property. If everytime you acquire something it is taken from you, you cannot exist. Your clothes are your private property. Your eyeglasses are your private property. The ramen noodles in your pantry are your private property.

"we need a system where resources in the vast part benefit the state..."

Why? The only reason you need a "state" in the first place is to keep people from fucking with other people.

"...and money is made through services and the services to produce goods..."

Sounds like capitalism to me.

"the idea of capitalism is basically the people who work hard get rich"

Not true. The idea of capitalism is that people are free to do as they please as long as they leave others free to do as THEY please.

"but what happens is one person hits it fucking crazy and gets an assload of wealth and passes it down to some jackass who just grows it and does nothing"

Who is harmed? Are you saying that someone who works his ass off all his life, maybe finds the cure for cancer or something, does not have the right to leave this money to his children? Or to whoever he damn well pleases, for that matter? If not, why not?

"they changed the inheritance tax, lowered it"

Good. About time.

"that had the socialists clamoring"

Good.

"normally it would get taxed 40% every 30-40 years family fortunes whenever people died
now it is different"

Excellent. I would rather have some rich kid piss it away on fast cars and divorce settlements than have the government use it to fund the WOD. Wouldn't you?

"capitalism is an economic system,
it is not taking into account the political system"

Absolutely dead wrong. Capitalism is in fact a POLITICAL system where the government is specifically prohibited from having even the slightest thing to do with the economy... it is not even allowed to print currency, for pete's sake. It is completely up to each INDIVIDUAL to decide if he wants to use abalone shells or gold as currency, whether he wants to join other individuals who pool their resources and live in small hippy communes using barter as their economic system, or to form hierarchical interlocking corporations using electronic credit chits as currency, or whether he wants to live by himself in a cave in the wilderness somewhere and forage for nuts and berries. The government and the economy are COMPLETELY separate.

"our current economic system is one where people with an overabundance of capital do the moving and shaking"

And, as has been pointed out countless times, by countless people, YOURSELF INCLUDED, our current economic system is NOT capitalism.

"the top 1% takes 1.4 trillion, the next 9% take 2.6 trillion
then the other 255 million americans get 6 trillion"

Exactly. Without government intervention in the economy (bail-outs, subsidies, pork-barrel government contracts, protective tariffs, etc.), the mega-corporations generating the wealth of the ten per cent you refer to would not BE mega-corporations. Remember the Chrysler bailout? In a pure capitalist society, Chrysler corporation would have gone tits up in the 80s, and Chrysler stock would be worth squat.

"if we were purely capitalist, it would be much worse."

Quite the reverse. All those trust-fund babies (who you seem to think are such a threat to the poor) who are now living off proceeds from the Chrysler stock their daddies invested in would have to get a job.

"right now, we have a lot of non-profit government type things
mail
police
school
roads"

The government properly must provide a police force. The rest should not be the business of government.

"it's not pure capitalism, it is vulture capitalism
brainwashing the subjects into thinking it is freedom and democracy"

Agreed. That is trendal's whole point. America is NOT capitalist.

"a change is needed, but pure capitalism would not be the answer"

What is the answer then? Pure socialism?

pinky


--------------------


Edited by pinksharkmark (03/06/02 12:09 AM)


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleLallafa
p_g monocle
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/13/01
Posts: 2,598
Loc: underbelly
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: Phred]
    #570970 - 03/06/02 12:02 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

z


--------------------
my tax dollars going to more hits of acid for charles manson


Edited by Lallafa (05/04/10 03:08 PM)


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 1 month
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: Lallafa]
    #570973 - 03/06/02 12:04 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Lallafa writes:

"if you cant understand how these people keep the common people poor, i cannot help you"

I have invariably found that when people say "If you cannot understand... blah blah blah" rather than defending their position, it is because they CAN'T defend their position.

"look at the "economic stimulus" bill for fucks sake"

Oh... so when you said "im trying to imply that fools such as george w. inherit all of their wealth and stay filthy rich without working for shit", what you REALLY meant to say was that once fools of this kind become president, they then arrange to keep the common people poor. My bad.

I thought when you said "fools SUCH AS george w." we could have substituted in any old fool who inherited wealth, not the specific fool who is currently the president of a NON-CAPITALIST country.

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleLallafa
p_g monocle
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/13/01
Posts: 2,598
Loc: underbelly
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: Phred]
    #570976 - 03/06/02 12:08 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

"capitalism is an economic system,
it is not taking into account the political system"

"Absolutely dead wrong."

definition of capitalism: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market

there are two types of economic systems: privitization and nationalization
the capitalism you know uses privitization
economic systems are irrelevant to the political system; you can still be a 'capitalist' economy and be an autocracy or a democracy or a monarchy
like in england
capitalism revolves around private property where as socialism revolves around state property


who is absolutely dead wrong


--------------------
my tax dollars going to more hits of acid for charles manson


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleLallafa
p_g monocle
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/13/01
Posts: 2,598
Loc: underbelly
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: Phred]
    #570983 - 03/06/02 12:12 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

z


--------------------
my tax dollars going to more hits of acid for charles manson


Edited by Lallafa (05/04/10 03:09 PM)


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 1 month
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: Lallafa]
    #570985 - 03/06/02 12:14 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Lallafa writes:

"yeah, i sure want things such as waste disposal in the hands of private businesses, without any laws to regulate how they dispose of it."

Who says there would be no laws? Clearly dumping toxic waste into a river that runs through the properties of countless other individuals, for example, is a violation of the rights of those individuals and therefore against the law.

pinky



--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 1 month
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: Lallafa]
    #571012 - 03/06/02 12:41 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Lallafa writes:

"definition of capitalism: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market"

Would you care to quote the source of that definition? Any Poli-Sci professor (even a SOCIALIST Poli-Sci professor) will tell you that it is incomplete. But, even so, let's run with it for a while and see what it logically implies:

"...characterized by PRIVATE or CORPORATE ownership of capital goods..."

As opposed to what? COLLECTIVE or STATE ownership, presumably. In other words, the government has no say in the economy, just as I have maintained all along.

"... by investments that are determined by PRIVATE decision..."

As opposed to what? COLLECTIVE or STATE decision, presumably. In other words, the government has no say in THIS area of the economy either.

"...and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a FREE MARKET"

As opposed to what? Pricing, production and distribution of goods determined by the COLLECTIVE or STATE, presumably. In other words, the government has no say in THIS area of the economy either. So, even though this definition does not specifically point out that in a capitalist system there is no government iinvolvement in the economy, it is quite clear by implication that this is the case.

"economic systems are irrelevant to the political system..."

Not at all. If all industry and property is owned by the State, then by definition it is a Socialist political system, regardless of whether the rulers choose to call it a "People's Republic" or not.

"... you can still be a 'capitalist' economy and be an autocracy or a democracy or a monarchy
like in england"

For once, you are correct. The method by which the members of the government are chosen is irrelevant to whether or not a given government is capitalist. The determining factor is not whether the head cheese was voted into office or inherited it from his father, the determining factor is whether or not the government is forbidden to mess with the economy.

"capitalism revolves around private property where as socialism revolves around state property"

Agreed.

"who is absolutely dead wrong"

You are. Capitalism by definition (even the incomplete definition you quoted above) means the absence of government intervention in an economy. If that is not a political connection, what the hell is?

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 1 month
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: Lallafa]
    #571024 - 03/06/02 12:52 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Lallafa writes:



"the soviets didn't have private property for over 70 years

nothing they had was THEIRS"



Not so. They owned their clothes, their eyeglasses, their ramen noodles, their refrigerators, their bicycles. Even hardcore Soviets realized that private property is essential to human existence.



"the common people are the wage laborers. the ones who go to work and make the monetary unit worth something"



Ah. So if I work for Xerox and get paid $45 an hour ($90,000 a year) to fix copiers I am one of the common people. But the owner of the corner store I buy my cigarettes from on the way home from work who clears maybe $20,000 tops in a good year is not one of the common people. Got it.



pinky   


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleAgent Cooper
veteran

Registered: 08/04/00
Posts: 210
Loc: right behind you
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: Phred]
    #571039 - 03/06/02 01:05 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

In reply to:

There are countless cases where some employees of a given business make more than the owners of those businesses do. This is more often seen in small businesses than in large publicly-held corporations.




Are you speaking of wages or some other "outside" benefit such as tips? How many employees would such a small business have - one, two? What is the relationship between owner and uber-employee - family, good friends? Please provide real world examples of small businesses in which employees earn more than the owners. In my experience, most small business-owners pull in more than their employees. In your bar, pinksharkmark, do you pay your bartenders more than you pull in? If not, why not?

Obviously, within a multinational corporation those at the top of the pyramid receive much, much more than those lower than him even if the worker puts forth 10x more effort and sacrifice. This is due to hierarchial status and proximity to ownership - nothing more. Some would claim that those at the top have "more at stake" than the common worker, but I believe this is a incorrect. A billionaire has much less to worry about than a lower-middle class man working two jobs and trying his hardest to feed his family; not to deny that the billionaire has "nothing to worry about" but considerably less than others. What is the ratio of billionaires who loss their fortunes and go hungry vs. workers who are "downsized" and go hungry? Why the disparity? Why are people working more and more for less and less, while those at the top pull in more and more?

And I am curious - how voluntary is wage labor and external command?

"Some people giving orders and others obeying them: this is the essence of servitude. Freedom means more than the right to change masters." ~ Bob Black

If history is examined, one will learn that wage labor was regarded only a step above slavery. Only recently have wages become commonplace. A race to the bottom, if you ask me.

I personally am not too concerned about small businesses - capitalism at a local level is not very insidious. But once capital expands like cancer on a national level and then later on global scale and ownership of private property narrows, a global regime of immensely powerful top-down authoritarian institutions reign. Once again, people are powerless in the face of monolithic, hierarchial institutions. Yet again, a handful of men determine the economic life of billions.

Corporations, the crown and bastions of Capital, are totalitarian institutions. How "libertarian" are they? How much individuality does one possess within a corporation?

In reply to:

It is more accurate to say that under capitalism, individuals can KEEP the products of their efforts.




It is more accurate to say that under capitalism, private property owners can KEEP the products of their employees' efforts, handing out only a small percentage back to them in the form of wages.

[image]http://burn.ucsd.edu/images/france/f9.jpeg[/image]


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleAgent Cooper
veteran

Registered: 08/04/00
Posts: 210
Loc: right behind you
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: Phred]
    #571049 - 03/06/02 01:17 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

In reply to:

ALL human existence requires private property. If everytime you acquire something it is taken from you, you cannot exist. Your clothes are your private property. Your eyeglasses are your private property. The ramen noodles in your pantry are your private property.




No, those objects are possession. Private property is the medium through which labor creates capital. Ownership of private property determines who receives that capital.

In reply to:

The government and the economy are COMPLETELY separate.




Good luck separating the two since they both developed side by side, mutually supporting and re-enforcing each other and continue to do so in the present time.


Edited by Agent Cooper (03/06/02 02:09 AM)


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleTwelveThousand
pinksharkmark'spuppet
Registered: 03/03/02
Posts: 11
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: Agent Cooper]
    #571176 - 03/06/02 04:10 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Agent Cooper writes:

"No, those objects are possession."

Ah. The infamous "anarcho-syndicalist libertarian socialism" false distinction between "property" and "possession".

Let me see if I have this right. An individual has the right to keep something ("possess" it) only if it is an end product, and cannot be used to create something else, because if it CAN be used to create something else then it is not really a "possession", but "property".

So, if I go down by the riverbank, find a flint nodule, spend all day carefully chipping it into a knife blade which I then use to carve a bow from a fallen branch, that lump of flint is no longer my "possession", but instead must be considered "property", and everyone has as much right to it as I do. If I manage to conceal the existence of the knife long enough to use it to slice thin strips of linen reed, which I then dry and braid into a bowstring, then not only may my knife be confiscated from me, but my bow as well, since obviously the bow can be used to create capital (meat in the form of an animal killed by an arrow shot from the bow).

Similarly, a wild cob of corn which I gather from a field is my "possession" as long as I intend to eat it. But if instead I strip out the seeds, plant them, water the seedlings, fertilize them, protect them from being eaten by animals, and harvest the final crop, then that cob of corn is not my "possession" any more. It is "property".

Is there a common thread here? It would seem that by differentiating between an individual's "property" and an individual's "possessions", the inescapable conclusion is that an individual has the right to CONSUME, but has no right to PRODUCE. Production is reserved exclusively for the Collective.

"Private property is the medium through which labor creates capital."

Correct. In a capitalist society, sometimes the labor is provided solely by the owner of the property, as when a potter does everything from gathering the clay to throwing the pot to building the kiln to gathering the firewood for the kiln to firing the pot to selling it or trading it to the end user who can then rightfully own it because it is a "possession". But, sometimes in a capitalist society, a potter may decide that he would rather hire someone to gather the clay for him, since he loves shaping pots, but hates trudging back and forth to the riverbank's clay deposits. Similarly, he may decide that it makes sense to hire someone to gather firewood for him, and yet another person to take his finished pots door to door and sell them.

But wait! This potter has now become a greedy "exploiter" of the poor! He "dominates" his clay-gatherer, his firewood-gatherer, and his pot-seller by telling them what they must do in order for his pottery business to profit so that he can afford to pay them what they have agreed to accept in exchange for their labor. He has established a "hierarchy" in which he is the one at the top. Worse, he reserves "property" (the kiln HE designed and built) for his exclusive use.

Never mind that he is the one who thought up the design for this particular kiln, gathered all the materials necessary for its construction, and built it from scratch unaided. Never mind that the clay-gatherer and the firewood-gatherer were begging scraps from passersby before the potter decided to expand his business, and the pot-seller was foraging for roots and berries in the forest to keep himself alive. In the eyes of anti-capitalists, this potter is a bad man. And it can get even worse!

He could choose to cease production for a week or two, give his faithful employees a paid vacation, live off his savings during that time, and construct a second kiln so that he can produce even MORE pots and and hire even MORE clay-gatherers and firewood gatherers and pot-sellers. He can do this over and over again. He can even hire someone and teach them how to shape pots! The more kilns he builds, the more pots he sells, the more employees he hires, the more depraved he becomes.

Can it get any worse than this? Certainly! On hearing that he has contracted a fatal disease that will surely kill him in six months, he can make a gift of his property (his house, his kilns, his inventory of unsold pots and his savings from the sale of his pots) to a close friend, and spend the last months of his existence peacefully fishing for pleasure on the riverbank near his beloved clay deposits. This friend is even MORE depraved than the potter himself, since he did nothing to deserve this "windfall" except to be a cherished companion and occasional chess opponent throughout the potter's life.

The potter had clearly exploited both irreplaceable resources (the clay deposit) and human beings (his employees). His friend, who inherited the pottery business, sees the devastation that the potter has caused and decides that he doesn't want to be an exploiter. He donates the last of the pots to an orphanage and informs the employees that he is lifting the yoke of the oppressor from their necks and freeing them from their wage slavery. No longer will they have to be "dominated" and "exploited", because from this day forth "Percy's Pottery" is no more!

He dismantles the kilns so no one else will be tempted to use them to exploit others. He burns down the potter's home so he won't be tempted to live in it, thereby flaunting his wealth, and uses the potter's savings to live out the rest of his life modestly in a cheap boardinghouse, amusing himself with the odd game of chess and the occasional philosophical debate.

"Ownership of private property determines who receives that capital."

Of course. Anything else would be a blatant violation of individual rights.

pinky


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibletrendalM
J♠
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,772
Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: Lallafa]
    #571356 - 03/06/02 10:06 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Where did this idea come from that capitalism is the exploitation of the mass (the poor) by the few (the rich).

In a democracy, the "poor" are always exploited. If I own a house and peice of property, it should be mine and mine alone, shouldn't it? In a democracy, this isn't true. The government forces me to continue to pay them "property tax" for the land that I purchased. Never mind the fact that I had to work hard to get the money to buy the land. So if I will have to continue paying for something after I have already bought it...I am forced to continue working. So is everyone else. In a democracy you either work, or you lose everything. If people are forced to work, companies do not necessarily have to treat their employees in any just form. Democracy allows for the exploitation of workers.

In capitalism, once something is mine (when I buy it)...it is mine as long as I want to keep it. If I worked my ass off so that I could buy a couple hundred acres of land somewhere, then that land is mine. I don't have to continue paying the government for the land, so I don't necessarily have to continue working for anyone. So now the company I used to work for has to find someone else to do the job that I used to do. Or they might try to keep me working for them. Either way, the company has to give a good reason for anyone to work for them. If a company is known to exploit their workers, who would work for them? Since I don't need a job at all, why work for a company that doesn't treat me right? I can just quit working.

In a capitalist system, workers have a value attached to them. If a company wants people to work for them, they had better provide working conditions at least as good as their competitors. If they don't, their competitors will get all the workers.

There's a reason we have a "minimum wage". Because we are all forced to work (or lose all our posessions), companies will always have someone to hire, because there will always be someone who needs a job. If a company is guaranteed to have a workforce, they can choose to pay that workforce whatever they want, and treat them however they want. So the government has to step in and create a minimum wage, create laws to protect workers, ect, ect, ect. That's what happens in a democracy (or most any economic/political system).

In capitalism, a worker is valuable. Companies have to pay better and treat their workers better than their competitors. Competition for the workforce drives employee benefits, salaries, and working conditions ever higher.


--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinemadscientist
journeyman
Registered: 05/26/01
Posts: 110
Last seen: 18 years, 6 months
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: trendal]
    #571539 - 03/06/02 02:01 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

RE the discussion on 'pure capitalism' I think its worth pointing out that capitalism in its purest form is communism. Exactly why the great thinkers of the proliteriat thought communism (i.e. unbridled capitalism) would be a good thing is beyond me.


--------------------
Instead of the dove as the symbol of peace we should have a pillow. Its got more feathers but doesnt have that nasty sharp beak......


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleAgent Cooper
veteran

Registered: 08/04/00
Posts: 210
Loc: right behind you
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: TwelveThousand]
    #571545 - 03/06/02 02:09 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

In reply to:

Ah. The infamous "anarcho-syndicalist libertarian socialism" false distinction between "property" and "possession".




Actually, this distinction predates anarcho-syndicalism and libertarian socialism.

Care to actually educate yourself on the subject? I suggest What is Property? by Proudhon

Your examples are incredibly extreme and obnoxious. Like I stated before, these minor instances of private property (a hunting bow, a kiln, a small field of corn), employment, and exchange are of little consequence. I am not concerned.

But once capitalism expands and the means of existence are held in the hands of the few and in order to survive one must rent his time and labor and one must use wages to feed himself or live, this is when capitalism becomes a problem (save those at the top of the pyramid). There is little recourse other than "changing masters" or becoming a master himself, thus perpetuating the economic system that fucked him other in the first place.

And the solution to this cancerous problem is free-association, something you are either not aware of because Ayn Rand never mentioned it nor choose not to acknowledge.

In reply to:

Similarly, a wild cob of corn which I gather from a field is my "possession" as long as I intend to eat it. But if instead I strip out the seeds, plant them, water the seedlings, fertilize them, protect them from being eaten by animals, and harvest the final crop, then that cob of corn is not my "possession" any more. It is "property".




No, that is not private property. That is the cultivation of corn because you are hungry and curious. But once your grow massive amounts of corn that you could never possibly consume while others in your locality are hungry and do not have the means to grow their own, you have pretty much three options: 1) sell or 2) distribute on a mutual aid basis or 3) stockpile the corn.

If you decide to engage in wage-labor and sell the surplus corn, then your operation becomes private property.

In reply to:

It would seem that by differentiating between an individual's "property" and an individual's "possessions", the inescapable conclusion is that an individual has the right to CONSUME, but has no right to PRODUCE.




No, the individual has every right to produce and enjoy the full fruit of his or her labor. That is why we oppose capitalism.

In reply to:

Production is reserved exclusively for the Collective.




No, production is democratically managed by freely-associating members of the inclusive collective. Direct and free democracy is thus active in the workplace, eliminating the top-down hierarchial and masked authoritarian nature of capitalism and returning decision-making processes to the individual and his or her community.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibletrendalM
J♠
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,772
Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: madscientist]
    #571551 - 03/06/02 02:15 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

"I think its worth pointing out that capitalism in its purest form is communism"

Are you insane? Communism is nearly the exact opposite of capitalism. In communism the economy is controlled by the state. Individual rights no longer have any meaning in communism, because everything is for "the greater good" (which is whatever the state decides it to be). There are no individuals in communism. Everyone is just another small part of the collective, and everyone must devote their work to the good of the collective.

In capitalism the economy and the state are completely separated. Individual rights are the basis for law. Every individual is seen as separate, and every individual is allowed to do what they want, provided it does not infringe upon the rights of another individual. Each individual can work for whatever they want and keep their possessions (be it money, land, or goods) to themselves without having to give any away to "the greater good".


--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleAgent Cooper
veteran

Registered: 08/04/00
Posts: 210
Loc: right behind you
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: trendal]
    #571557 - 03/06/02 02:22 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

In reply to:

Where did this idea come from that capitalism is the exploitation of the mass by the few?




I think it has something to do with working your ass off and hardly being able to survive and having little voice in the workplace while the masters are off snorting coke in their yachts.

In reply to:

The government forces me to continue to pay them "property tax" for the land that I purchased.




Sorry, that is representative democracy at work - not Democracy. There is no state nor taxes in a real democracy.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleAgent Cooper
veteran

Registered: 08/04/00
Posts: 210
Loc: right behind you
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: trendal]
    #571559 - 03/06/02 02:27 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

In reply to:

In communism the economy is controlled by the state.




Wrong again. That is an example of state-capitalism.

In reply to:

There are no individuals in communism. Everyone is just another small part of the collective, and everyone must devote their work to the good of the collective.




Again, state-capitalism ala the Soviet Union. In real Communism, association is free.

In reply to:

In capitalism the economy and the state are completely separated




Good luck separating the two (outside of privileged, insular, academic circles of course).


Edited by Agent Cooper (03/06/02 02:59 PM)


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleAgent Cooper
veteran

Registered: 08/04/00
Posts: 210
Loc: right behind you
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: Agent Cooper]
    #571588 - 03/06/02 03:13 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Again, how voluntary is wage-labor? And how libertarian is working on external command?



Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinemr_minds_eye
Disposable Wage Whore
Male User Gallery
Registered: 01/22/02
Posts: 1,948
Loc: Samsara
Last seen: 8 years, 1 month
Re: The United States is NOT Capitalist... [Re: trendal]
    #571608 - 03/06/02 03:47 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Capitalism is a vampire of people born into a lower social level and of the environment. There is no point in a few people hoarding the goods that their pseudo-slavery produces. There are an "elite" few who don't have to do shit and are not at all concerned with the well being of their fellow humans. These little Richey Rich wanna be's are a leach upon the world as long as they are allowed to exist in this state. Have you ever seen those little African kids in the commercials that practically look like living corpses? Is capitalism a good thing? Hell no!!! The ideal of capitalism is that the harder you work the more you get. Is the sweatshop worker who has to work seven days a week often being forced to work multiple shifts getting more money than the oil company CEO that sits an his fat ass getting his cock sucked by his secretary? Hell no!!! I say fuck capitalism and anyone who promotes it. In the words of Zack da la Rocha, "Know your enemy!" This world cannot harbor a species that acts as if the world??s resources are unlimited. And this member of that species will not actively tolerate anyone who tries to exploit their fellow human being for their own selfish gain. Fuck the man!!!


--------------------
Our quest for discovery fuels our creativity in all fields, not just science. If we reached the end of the line, the human spirit would shrivel and die. But I don't think we will ever stand still: we shall increase in complexity, if not in depth, and shall always be the center on an expanding horizon of possibilities.
-Stephen Hawking


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Bridgetown Botanicals CBD Edibles   PhytoExtractum Kratom Powder for Sale   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds, Feminized Cannabis Seeds, High THC Strains, USA West Coast Strains   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Amazon Scales

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* United States of America The New Age Empire
( 1 2 all )
Mad_Buhdda_Abuser 1,915 37 08/24/04 09:06 PM
by Ancalagon
* How many people actually HATE the United States?
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Innvertigo 4,454 73 09/09/09 02:17 AM
by HaRo On KoRn
* United States becoming Police State
( 1 2 3 all )
psyphon 4,324 49 06/05/20 08:27 AM
by Trippypete
* To those who Hate the United States Harry_Ballsonia 1,540 4 09/13/01 10:04 AM
by Harry_Ballsonia
* Open Letter to the Citizens of the United States of America jux 454 0 09/20/04 05:52 PM
by jux
* The last good President of the United States...
( 1 2 3 all )
chunder 3,653 53 02/09/04 05:13 PM
by Blastrid
* N. Korea calls for "holy war against the United States"
( 1 2 3 all )
LearyfanS 2,655 57 01/13/03 08:16 PM
by Dilauded
* How Good a Friends the French Are to the United States
( 1 2 all )
Dilauded 1,888 20 01/25/03 03:50 PM
by Senor_Doobie

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
14,661 topic views. 2 members, 1 guests and 14 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic ]
Search this thread:
Magic-Mushrooms-Shop.com
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2021 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.052 seconds spending 0.004 seconds on 14 queries.