Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Top 0.1% now earn as much as the bottom 120 million

A forum for discussion of regional topics including oil depletion but also government, society, and the future.

Re: Top 0.1% now earn as much as the bottom 120 million

Unread postby Ludi » Sat 30 Oct 2010, 11:32:44

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PrestonSturges', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Oakley', '
') If you continue to support the government and their friends, unless you are one of them, your chances of being a survivor will be reduced since you will be burdened with supplying not only your own needs, but theirs as well.

Your idea of Utopia seems to be framed as the time where people were free to take someone else's private property without the interference of government.


That's a type of person who always assumes he'll be young, strong, healthy, and wealthy. That he will never be old, weak, sick, or poor. He doesn't see the need for the government protecting the weak from the strong (they sometimes do - see "entitlements" :roll: aka SS, disability, aid for families with children, etc)

Personally I've not felt "burdened" with "supporting the government." Probably because taxes have not been a problem to me, as a low-income earner. Mostly rich people worry about income taxes. And stupid poorer people who don't realize they probably don't pay much in income taxes anyway. :roll: But they seem to think it's important that rich folks and corporations don't pay taxes. Not sure why....

http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2010/04/1 ... tea-party/
Ludi
 

Re: Top 0.1% now earn as much as the bottom 120 million

Unread postby diemos » Sat 30 Oct 2010, 12:31:40

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Quinny', 'C')apitalism requires growth.


Negative.

Fractional reserve banking and debt money require endless growth. Capitalism does just fine in a steady state or shrinking system if its based on equity instead of debt.
User avatar
diemos
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: Fri 23 Sep 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Top 0.1% now earn as much as the bottom 120 million

Unread postby diemos » Sat 30 Oct 2010, 12:39:21

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Timo', 'C')apitalism only works when there are resources to exploit


Show me any economic system that can work without resources to exploit.

Economic system = how we organize ourselves to exploit resources of raw materials, capital, labor and decide who gets the resulting wealth.
User avatar
diemos
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: Fri 23 Sep 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Top 0.1% now earn as much as the bottom 120 million

Unread postby Ludi » Sat 30 Oct 2010, 13:08:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('diemos', '
')Economic system = how we organize ourselves to exploit resources of raw materials, capital, labor and decide who gets the resulting wealth.



Humans lived for some 100,000 years without "capital," "labor" or "deciding who gets the resulting wealth."
Ludi
 
Top

Re: Top 0.1% now earn as much as the bottom 120 million

Unread postby diemos » Sat 30 Oct 2010, 13:37:55

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'H')umans lived for some 100,000 years without "capital," "labor" or "deciding who gets the resulting wealth."


Really ludi, do we not have our thinking caps on this morning?

The boys going out hunting was labor.

Their spears and bows and arrows were capital.

The buffalo out on plains were raw materials.

And how the kill was distributed to the tribe was a collective decision of the tribe.
User avatar
diemos
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: Fri 23 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Top 0.1% now earn as much as the bottom 120 million

Unread postby Ludi » Sat 30 Oct 2010, 14:48:23

Nope, sorry, those things don't fit into the civilizational economics definitions of "capital" and "labor."

Put on YOUR thinking cap. Really. :)



capital

1. Cash or goods used to generate income either by investing in a business or a different income property.

2. The net worth of a business; that is, the amount by which its assets exceed its liabilities.

3. The money, property, and other valuables which collectively represent the wealth of an individual or business.


labor/work


1. General: Situation where a recurring or one-time task is performed.

2. Contracting: Entire scope of a project encompassing all people, equipment, material, and other goods and services required to fulfill the contractor's obligations under a contract.

wealth

3. Economics: Total of all assets of an economic unit that generate current income or have the potential to generate future income. It includes natural resources and human capital but generally excludes money and securities because the represent only claims to wealth. Two common types of economic wealth are (1) Monetary wealth: anything that can be bought and sold, for which there is market and hence a price. The market price, however, reflects only the commodity price and not necessarily its value. For example, water is essential for human existence but is usually very cheap. (2) Non-monetary wealth: things which depend on scarce resources, and for which there is demand, but are not bought and sold in a market and hence have no price. Examples are education, health, and defense.


The folks I'm talking about don't have "labor" in the usual sense, any more than a wolf or a deer has "labor." They don't have "capital" because they don't have property or businesses. They don't have "wealth" because they don't have money or markets.
Ludi
 

Re: Top 0.1% now earn as much as the bottom 120 million

Unread postby diemos » Sat 30 Oct 2010, 17:59:03

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'T')he folks I'm talking about don't have "labor" in the usual sense, any more than a wolf or a deer has "labor."


What? Food, clothing and shelter just magically pop into existence while they lounge around?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'T')hey don't have "capital" because they don't have property or businesses.


What? They don't have tools? Teepees? Beads? And a territory with its associated natural resources that they collectively own and defend with collective military action?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'T')hey don't have "wealth" because they don't have money or markets.


I'm sure Ooga thinks her beads are better than her neighbor's beads and so she's wealthier, plus her husband is a better hunter and she has a shift with fringes.

Just because their economic system isn't complex or involve cash or excessive specialization doesn't mean they don't have an economic system. It's just a fairly simple and informal one.
User avatar
diemos
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: Fri 23 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Top 0.1% now earn as much as the bottom 120 million

Unread postby Ludi » Sat 30 Oct 2010, 20:52:44

I think there's a tendency to think all human cultures are like civilization, and more particularly, like modern civilization, which is certainly not the case. HG cultures are not much like civilized cultures. Not all civilized cultures are alike, even (though different ones are now extinct. See Maya, Hohokam.)
Ludi
 

Re: Top 0.1% now earn as much as the bottom 120 million

Unread postby yeahbut » Sun 31 Oct 2010, 16:31:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'H')umans lived for some 100,000 years without "capital," "labor" or "deciding who gets the resulting wealth."


In particular, true hunter-gatherers accumulate practically no surplus. Surplus, particularly that generated by sedentary agriculture, is the prerequisite for any type of proto-economy and for true notions of capital.
User avatar
yeahbut
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 819
Joined: Tue 30 Oct 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Top 0.1% now earn as much as the bottom 120 million

Unread postby americandream » Sun 31 Oct 2010, 18:11:09

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yeahbut', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'H')umans lived for some 100,000 years without "capital," "labor" or "deciding who gets the resulting wealth."


In particular, true hunter-gatherers accumulate practically no surplus. Surplus, particularly that generated by sedentary agriculture, is the prerequisite for any type of proto-economy and for true notions of capital.


True up to a point. Surplus whether naturally occurring or generated by labour, is a necessary prerequisite for life itself. Itr's how we choose to apply that surplus, whether through the private or by way of the community.

A good analogy is the use of a parcel of land in private titles or by way of holding in commonality. As is evident with the former, increasing subdivision by way generational demands eventually leads to the exhaustion and eventual degradation of the parcel.

This is precisely what occurred in early Europe at the onset of private title and capital with the result that the eventual hunger for resourcing led to the adventures afar and the eventual spread of the European model to places such as Asia and Latin America. Africa is a WIP and will in due course fall to the intrigues of its own home grown bourgeoisie.

In the process, we will once again be revisiting resourcing and territoriality issues, but as a planetary civilisation in crisis. Unfortunately, there simply isn't the technical capacity to revive early colonial adventures in conquests of earth like planets so we will have to adapt.
americandream
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 8650
Joined: Mon 18 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Top 0.1% now earn as much as the bottom 120 million

Unread postby Ludi » Sun 31 Oct 2010, 20:35:22

Typically the only surplus in HG societies is what folks can carry or easily store in a cache (same as squirrels). This is significantly different from the accumulation of surplus in a civilized aka agricultural society. And of course the surplus is not "owned" by any individual in an HG society, but by the group. This surplus is not generated by "labour" any more than a squirrel's surplus is generated by "labour."
Ludi
 

Previous

Return to North America Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests