i think that what it all basically boils down to, is that in a purely capitalist society, human workforce is really pretty cheap. It's inherent value is quite low as there are many humans available. They can be reproduced for no upfront cost. It takes only 10-15 years for a fully matured one to be available for use and the costs of feeding and clothing it are left upto it's family. After that it is basically on it's own.
Realistically if you take a look at a commerical lumber operation, it takes more input and effort and maintenance to grow a mature pine tree than it does to grow a human.
We are common, we are cheap and abundant.
In certain areas we have risen above that problem, we expect mroe, but in areas where this is not the case, humans will work for pennies because they have no other choice.
until those of us with fancy laptops, who enjoy lounging about pontificating on internet forums, rather than operating cotton looms and harvesting crops, are prepared to get out there and do our fair share then basically the status quo remains.
I mean who says that a CEO should get paid any more than a machinist in a shirt factory in north china, or the guy driving the garbage truck that collects his trash ? The CEO will look pretty silly with no shirt, sitting ina pile of his own refuse, his shareholders will sell, assuming he has become mentally unstable and his company will collapse.
The little people really put in just as much as everyone else...........but that's communism right ? That failed so now we have this pseudo democratic fascism which is meant to be the only alternative.
The way it's heading it's going to turn out to be exactly the damn same if you ask me. All this patriotism and nationstate freedom is just another communist doctrine.
Somehow I think the Soviets won the cold war after all. Same like the Red Indians killed more people with tobacco than the whiteman ever killed of them. Although the communists lost, in the aftermath without the common foe that we spent so long objecting to, we are indanger of eating our own tail instead and without that pressure in place on us to maintain our own society, by way of opposing their, we will fall forwards into the hole they left behind.
PeakOil is You
Zero Sum Game
Re: Zero Sum Game
by richardmmm » Sun 11 Sep 2005, 17:30:41
-
richardmmm - Lignite
- Posts: 205
- Joined: Sat 20 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Re: Zero Sum Game
by jaws » Sun 11 Sep 2005, 17:47:59
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('CrudeAwakening', 'A')s did the slaves who helped the settlement and economic development of the US. But it took several generations before the fruits of this growth trickled down to their descendants.
To argue that these chinese factory workers have any kind of real choice, when, as you say, the alternative is starvation, is dissembling. One could argue that slavery is voluntary, as there is always the alternative of suicide.
Life is harsh. It's always been that way. Nature offers humans no guarantees of survival, no compassion, no mercy. Securing survival for the masses has been an amazing accomplishment of civilization, but it was never more than survival before capitalism emerged. Capitalism, for all its faults, is an immensely complex system of social cooperation based on security and liberty. That we can have security and liberty in the face of nature's merciless laws is already a wonderful accomplishment, but capitalism also fosters the accumulation and propagation of wealth. There has been no other system found to achieve this.
To argue that these chinese factory workers have any kind of real choice, when, as you say, the alternative is starvation, is dissembling. One could argue that slavery is voluntary, as there is always the alternative of suicide.
The chinese laborers of today have an unmistakable advantage over the laborers of the pre-capitalist era in that they can import capital from countries already at advanced stages of technology. This would empower them to achieve productivity parity in the span of one generation. The remarkable thing is that they don't, they export capital to these countries as a consequence of government intervention forcing their savings into loss-making arrangements. The miraculous productivity advances they have been making would be even more explosively rapid should they borrow capital from abroad, like the young United States did.
-
jaws - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1228
- Joined: Sun 24 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Re: Zero Sum Game
by knightrd » Sun 11 Sep 2005, 20:51:47
I sincerely hope I live to see the day that the economists are rounded up and shot.
-
knightrd - Wood
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Sat 03 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Re: Zero Sum Game
by jaws » Sun 11 Sep 2005, 23:04:56
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('knightrd', 'I') sincerely hope I live to see the day that the economists are rounded up and shot.
Flashback to Cambodia circa 1980? I'm sure there a few videos left of glorious revolutionaries murdering every intellectual they can get their hands on in order to throw their country back to the dark ages. You can watch them and enjoy the pleasure of knowing someone lived out your fantasy and suffered the consequences.-
jaws - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1228
- Joined: Sun 24 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Re: Zero Sum Game
by marko » Mon 12 Sep 2005, 12:20:17
I thought I'd check back into the thread to see if anyone had countered my argument that so-called "free trade" works to the benefit of capital at the expense of workers, especially in developed countries.
No one has countered that argument, no doubt because all of the evidence supports it.
It is really just a class issue. If you live from investment income, "free trade" is good for you. If you work for a living, it is bad for you. That simple.
In a true democracy, in which the wealthy did not determine government policy through campaign contributions and the like, fair trade would have replaced "free trade" long ago, to the long-term benefit of 80% of the population.
No one has countered that argument, no doubt because all of the evidence supports it.
It is really just a class issue. If you live from investment income, "free trade" is good for you. If you work for a living, it is bad for you. That simple.
In a true democracy, in which the wealthy did not determine government policy through campaign contributions and the like, fair trade would have replaced "free trade" long ago, to the long-term benefit of 80% of the population.
-
marko - Coal
- Posts: 443
- Joined: Mon 31 Jan 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: Massachusetts
Re: Zero Sum Game
by Concerned » Mon 12 Sep 2005, 22:31:12
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jaws', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('CrudeAwakening', 'A')s did the slaves who helped the settlement and economic development of the US. But it took several generations before the fruits of this growth trickled down to their descendants.
To argue that these chinese factory workers have any kind of real choice, when, as you say, the alternative is starvation, is dissembling. One could argue that slavery is voluntary, as there is always the alternative of suicide.
Life is harsh. It's always been that way. Nature offers humans no guarantees of survival, no compassion, no mercy. Securing survival for the masses has been an amazing accomplishment of civilization, but it was never more than survival before capitalism emerged. Capitalism, for all its faults, is an immensely complex system of social cooperation based on security and liberty. That we can have security and liberty in the face of nature's merciless laws is already a wonderful accomplishment, but capitalism also fosters the accumulation and propagation of wealth. There has been no other system found to achieve this.To argue that these chinese factory workers have any kind of real choice, when, as you say, the alternative is starvation, is dissembling. One could argue that slavery is voluntary, as there is always the alternative of suicide.
Life is indeed harsh. Common human decency saw people agitate for rights so it was not so harsh. It's why people agree to live in a society. An abolishment of slavery, 8 hour day, voting rights, civil rights, welfare for transitionary tough times, safety standards, environmental standards, womens sufferage and myriad other social contracts.
When you have an ideology that allows people to be exploited as "free & willing slaves" you have laid the foundations of a system that will fail in the long term.
Communism believe it or not was rooted in a growth based paradigm based on capital (machinery, land, resources, technology) and it to a far greater extent propagated wealth, not only internally but to other countries as well (soviet bloc). Soviet Russia in 1989 was far wealthier (materially) than in 1917.
The biggest economic problem with communism is there was no incentive to produce once basic needs were met.
Why would someone work to produce a new or better product when they would have no material advantage for their efforts? Obviously there may have been certain individuals who did but not enough for the entire system to function and continue to grow.
Interestingly when people are given the option of welfare they take that even in pseudo capatilistic societies like the USA. You have to laugh at Regans "welfare queens" statement and then juxtapose his life time pension but thats not welfare right
Also taxation is wealth appropriated from the producer to socalist government for their own pet junkets of military and social welfare programs. So the USA is a socalist country ironically the socalist tax is what holds it together as a national entity.
Jaws you seem honest and genuine with your belief in capatilism heavily indoctrinated but simple and honest nonetheless
I like the Austrian school of economics. This is what capatilism should be more like, not the fraud we have now.
http://www.mises.org/
I also enjoy people who challenge accepted economic theory and concepts.
http://www.debunking-economics.com/index.htm#General
I found the concept of Economic Democracy compelling.
http://www.ied.info/
"Once the game is over, the king and the pawn go back in the same box."
-Italian Proverb
-Italian Proverb
-
Concerned - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1571
- Joined: Thu 23 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
