[SuperTico]

Because they are dumbed down.
Here is the solution.
9% Flat Rate
Microsoft, Enron (oops) GE. Ford..whatever. No dedutions for anything.
9% PERIOD. You made 300 million ? Pay da fukk up ! Period
Yeah. Exxon as well.
The grass cuttin guy or the super stooper exec at Walmart... 9%
It works well down here............

[MrBean]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mackina1', '
')Just to declare my stance, i'm neither a free market beliver nor a dogmatic communists. I've been both, and today I see no reason to be... All systems are flawed, and will be so long as we accept the concept of free will. This little concept is something i like to much to give up so for now i'll advocate a mixed solution...

[Stonemason]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Gorm', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')sn't that rather an example of totalitarian/semi-dictatorial governmental regime?

[LoneSnark]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')age-slaves are eager to get wage that is the only way for them to keep eating. It's not free choice but extortion.

[cube]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eastbay', '.')... just something to point out:


Few communists envision an economic system with a totally equal distribution of wealth and equal incomes for all. No socialist system has had this either.

As a lifelong socialist, for me, a 100X spread in income and a reasonable cap on net worth would be ideal. This would allow a living wage for all, and a decent financial motivation for great scientists, inventors, and other kinds of creative genius.

[Snowrunner]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', '[')img]http://www.escapeartist.com/OREQ18/Freedom.gif[/img]

[jbrovont]

I know this seems like it should make sense, but I'll try to help make this clearer for you. Maximizing profit means two things: "spending the least to get the most," and "getting in return more than you expend."

By definition, a profitable enterprise extracts more from its surroundings than it puts back. If it didn't it wouldn't be profitable.

To make a profit, you must trade something of lesser value, for something of greater value.

I can hear the response "but when you manufacture something, you create value." While this seems like an obvious conclusion, it's an inductive leap. Whatever you "create" is "worth" what it took to create. See the problem here? Unless you have a magic machine that does work without needing to put anything in, you can't get more out than you put in.

Now you're probably thinking "what about the Sun, and crops, and stuff like that?" Is there a limiting factor on the collection of seemingly limitless solar energy, or crops?

If something is "limitless" it is by definition "worthless" because there is no "need" for it. If it is "worthless" you can't trade it. If there is a natural or artificial limit the supply of something, only then does it have "value."

Once you start trading, you're back in the value trap. If you take out more than you put in, you're a net drain of "value" on everyone around you - a burdon on society.

A person or group of persons extracting more from the people around them in "value" than they provide to those people are, from a social/civilization standpoint, not just "worthless," they actually have negative worth to society.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('LoneSnark', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')ure capitalism rewards the predator and the opportunist. The herd wanders and grazes while the lion sleeps the day away. Once the heard has done the work of collecting the grass and processing it into tasty nutricious meat, the predator comes and harvests the fruits of the herd's work.

[LoneSnark]

^ Well, what an interesting way to put it.

Of course, you are forgetting the most important feature of life: value is subjective.

To make a profit you must do exactly what you say, but in dollar terms. And you are mixing up buyer and seller: you must buy coal (cheap) and sell electricity (expensive) and profit the difference, which you use to buy a house in the hamptons.

In dollar terms, the formula is <coal> + <house in hamptons> == <electricity>

Why is coal cheap and electricity expensive? Because, as you say, coal is plentiful and therefore has little value (low price). Electricity is not plentiful, and so has value (high price).

So, are you creating value? Again, that is subjective. To me as an electricity consumer, absolutely yes. Coal is worthless to me as it will not run my computer. To me, coal is not of little value, it is of no value whatsoever. However, electricity will run my computer and therefore I value is immensely and will pay whatever is asked.

[mackina1]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')ree market would work if we could achive a world wherein these point were true:
Total information. Everybody knows about the best product at any time.
Limitless capabilty of expansion.
Eternal competetion in a perfect balance.
Free competition in all forms.

[MrBean]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('LoneSnark', '
')But so what? It is the nature of life that we are to be extorted. We are not free-floating aparitions, we all need things, and the only way to get those things is to cooperate somehow. The only question is how. Do I get extorted using method A, or do I get extorted using method B?

[LoneSnark]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')ut we really don't need all the stuff that we produce factories, it's capitalistic profit making that needs consumers to need that stuff.

[MrBean]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('LoneSnark', '
')If you are satisfied with bread and water so be it, but there is no conspiracy when the rest of us enjoy fast cars and fancy electronics: just basic evolution induced instincts.

[LoneSnark]

Why is it extortion when man does it to man, but mere-work when nature does it to man?

There is no doubt the so-called-owner of the land is extracting work from you with the threat of violence (you must now work to collect more mushrooms than you yourself needed). But so did the river you had to jump, the bear you had to run away from, the tree-root that almost broke your leg, the rodents that stole some of the mushrooms from you, etc.

We live in a world and that world is full of things requiring something from you to avoid punishment. Why do you have no philosophical objection when your own body uses pain and agony to control your behavior? I guess it is silly to ask, since hunger pain and injury pain are useful in the grand scheme of things. With the threat of such pain, we are likely to live much longer more productive lives (by eating and avoiding broken limbs).

Well, there is another form of pain: that inflicted by other humans when we tresspass or attempt to injure them. Similarly, such pain I would argue is just as useful in the grand scheme of things. The greatest argument in favor land ownership was not justice, but environmental protection (avoiding tragedy of the commons) and production (only secure owners will clear land and plant crops) and I find them persuasive. If this is the case, then just as hunger and injury pain cause us to live longer more productive lives, tresspassing and assault induced pain will cause us to live longer more productive lives.

[Quinny]

I've never been extorted by a mushroom!

You're having a laugh!

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('LoneSnark', 'W')hy is it extortion when man does it to man, but mere-work when nature does it to man?

There is no doubt the so-called-owner of the land is extracting work from you with the threat of violence (you must now work to collect more mushrooms than you yourself needed). But so did the river you had to jump, the bear you had to run away from, the tree-root that almost broke your leg, the rodents that stole some of the mushrooms from you, etc.

We live in a world and that world is full of things requiring something from you to avoid punishment. Why do you have no philosophical objection when your own body uses pain and agony to control your behavior? I guess it is silly to ask, since hunger pain and injury pain are useful in the grand scheme of things. With the threat of such pain, we are likely to live much longer more productive lives (by eating and avoiding broken limbs).

Well, there is another form of pain: that inflicted by other humans when we tresspass or attempt to injure them. Similarly, such pain I would argue is just as useful in the grand scheme of things. The greatest argument in favor land ownership was not justice, but environmental protection (avoiding tragedy of the commons) and production (only secure owners will clear land and plant crops) and I find them persuasive. If this is the case, then just as hunger and injury pain cause us to live longer more productive lives, tresspassing and assault induced pain will cause us to live longer more productive lives.

[MrBean]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('LoneSnark', 'W')hy is it extortion when man does it to man, but mere-work when nature does it to man?

There is no doubt the so-called-owner of the land is extracting work from you with the threat of violence (you must now work to collect more mushrooms than you yourself needed). But so did the river you had to jump, the bear you had to run away from, the tree-root that almost broke your leg, the rodents that stole some of the mushrooms from you, etc.

We live in a world and that world is full of things requiring something from you to avoid punishment. Why do you have no philosophical objection when your own body uses pain and agony to control your behavior? I guess it is silly to ask, since hunger pain and injury pain are useful in the grand scheme of things. With the threat of such pain, we are likely to live much longer more productive lives (by eating and avoiding broken limbs).

[LoneSnark]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')'ve never been extorted by a mushroom!

You're having a laugh!

[CrudeAwakening]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('LoneSnark', 'I') would argue human's are far more civilized about the issue of territory; instead of fighting to the death as is the custom in other species, we merely ask for something in exchange.

[Javaman]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Nickel', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Javaman', 'A')n equal distribution of money is somewhat analogous to an equal distribution of energy; in either case it is not possible to get any work done.

[Alcassin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('LoneSnark', 'H')ave you been to a forest recently? I grew up on a farm and spent a lot of time in the woods hunting and such. The briars tear your flesh, the cluttered ground sprains ankles, and the insects dig wounds and spill blood. Anyone going to the woods without products of the city expecting to become one with nature will eventually die of either injuries or the elements.

[MrBean]

We have saying that the way you address the forest, that's how the forest responds. It is very true. Addressing forest kindly starts with seeing the forest from the trees.

And so far, the extorting mushrooms have been doing their extortion rather kindly - or the way you choose to take their "punishment".