Total Posts:88|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Capitalism's Dirty Little Secret

Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 9:43:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 9:48:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Of course, either this is an incomplete picture of the value the caricatured fellow contributes or the worker is a moron who deserves what he gets, as this is a voluntary arrangement.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 9:49:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/30/2012 9:48:41 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Of course, either this is an incomplete picture of the value the caricatured fellow contributes or the worker is a moron who deserves what he gets, as this is a voluntary arrangement.

A voluntary arrangement that is backed with the power with a monopoly on violence: the state.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 9:52:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
First, most businesses are started with credit, not "I bought and sold stuff"

Second, the average basic worker has no clue how or where to sell stuff he makes, or he would open his own store.

Third, slavery is illegal in this country, you can leave your job. If theres a overabundance of labor due to few businesses which makes it impossible for you to find work, you should start your own, and take advantage of other's laziness.

Stop looking for a handout.

Fourth, no-one seems to care about convincing idiots to leave a job that pays them crap. You profit from the weak and stupid and lazy every time you shop at walmart.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 10:06:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/30/2012 9:48:41 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Of course, either this is an incomplete picture of the value the caricatured fellow contributes or the worker is a moron who deserves what he gets, as this is a voluntary arrangement.

A truly enlightening statement from Ragnar.

The worker is an idiot. It's really as simple as that.

However, I find the structuring of society around what one "deserves" to be a primitive concept.

What did you ever do to deserve the computer you're using, under the roof that shelter's you and the food that is chilled in your fridge, in your kitchen with running water. Did you did build these things or acquire them through your pure cunning? Have you done this better than those who do not have these things? Of course not. Now then...is it still better to have these things than not? Absolutely.

Human beings don't deserve shitt. We are infinitely stupid and arrogant. But that no less diminishes the fact they would be better off owning what they produce than otherwise.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 10:10:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/30/2012 9:48:41 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Of course, either this is an incomplete picture of the value the caricatured fellow contributes or the worker is a moron who deserves what he gets, as this is a voluntary arrangement.

Please.

Do explain how a business owner analogously depicted in that caricature is of 'value' (to what, how, based on what perception, etc.)

Thx.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 10:11:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/30/2012 10:06:36 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 1/30/2012 9:48:41 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Of course, either this is an incomplete picture of the value the caricatured fellow contributes or the worker is a moron who deserves what he gets, as this is a voluntary arrangement.

A truly enlightening statement from Ragnar.

The worker is every single working class American.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 10:13:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/30/2012 10:06:36 PM, FREEDO wrote:

What did you ever do to deserve the computer you're using, under the roof that shelter's you and the food that is chilled in your fridge, in your kitchen with running water.

Paid taxes to remain a part of the society that allows you to specialize and still access the products of other's specialty.

Still leaves worthless @ss business owners out of the picture.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 10:56:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/30/2012 10:06:36 PM, FREEDO wrote:

What did you ever do to deserve the computer you're using, under the roof that shelter's you and the food that is chilled in your fridge, in your kitchen with running water.

Producing goods or performing services for others that were found to be of greater value than those things.

Did you did build these things or acquire them through your pure cunning?

I imagine such a thing would be possible, although it would probably take a conman.

Have you done this better than those who do not have these things?

Since the premise is that the things were acquired by cunning, which is generally false, the answer would have to be no.

Of course not.

Then we agree.

Now then...is it still better to have these things than not? Absolutely.

That's also a given.

Human beings don't deserve shitt.

Non sequitur.

We are infinitely stupid and arrogant.

Oh, really?

But that no less diminishes the fact they would be better off owning what they produce than otherwise.

Again, non sequitur.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 11:03:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/30/2012 9:49:41 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/30/2012 9:48:41 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Of course, either this is an incomplete picture of the value the caricatured fellow contributes or the worker is a moron who deserves what he gets, as this is a voluntary arrangement.

A voluntary arrangement that is backed with the power with a monopoly on violence: the state.

The monopoly on violence quite permits the worker to attempt to produce the things that were sold to acquire the machines on his own, thus undermining the caricatured business model if said model is accurate. There's no law against it. What, he can't use the machines to do so? They were the things sold to acquire the machines, it's only logical that there's some other means to make those products.

The worker is an idiot. It's really as simple as that.
I actually prefer the first option of the two available explanations consistent with the fact of voluntarism.

However, I find the structuring of society around what one "deserves" to be a primitive concept.
What did you ever do to deserve the computer you're using
A person promised to give me something I'd like if I fulfilled a certain condition. I fulfilled it. Either I deserve for me to have it or they deserve for me to have it, depending how you look at it, but either way the deservings suffice to justify the reality.

under the roof that shelter's you
I bet future earnings on it, at the going rate. If I bet wrong, I also deserve the negative consequences that contractually accrue.

Do explain how a business owner analogously depicted in that caricature is of 'value'
They identify a market need, do planning work, bet on their identification, and receive a reward commensurate with their risk and how good their identification and planning was.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 11:10:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The key point here is that value is subjective not objective.

The entire point this video is making crumbles once you realize that the labor theory of value is total crap.
President of DDO
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 11:19:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/30/2012 11:03:10 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:

They identify a market need, do planning work, bet on their identification, and receive a reward commensurate with their risk and how good their identification and planning was.

???

Business owners do not conduct marketing.

I thought you were going to say investment. :\

Every one of the things you described (marketing/accounting), people are hired to do, and they receive significantly less money than those that hired them.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 11:21:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/30/2012 11:10:12 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
The key point here is that value is subjective not objective.

The entire point this video is making crumbles once you realize that the labor theory of value is total crap.

Actually, this is more the economic theory of value, or, the value of output as opposed to input.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 11:25:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/30/2012 11:03:10 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Do explain how a business owner analogously depicted in that caricature is of 'value'
They identify a market need, do planning work, bet on their identification, and receive a reward commensurate with their risk and how good their identification and planning was.

A business owner might, yes. But a capitalist qua capitalist simply owns capital and reserve a continual return. And a return for what? For letting others use the tools, machinery and factories he's claimed as his own? He could never use all those facilities himself, so it's not like he's giving anything up for this money, either.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 11:34:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The business man took all the risks in starting up the business to begin with, someone had to invest in the first machines who already had capital to risk.

Then the workers get hired. No one is forcing them to work there. If "15" dollars a day isn't enough people won't work and wages will rise. It's supply and demand.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 11:38:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/30/2012 11:34:47 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
The business man took all the risks in starting up the business to begin with, someone had to invest in the first machines who already had capital to risk.

Your missing the point. Some capitalist also happen to be entrepeneurs, true. But capitalists qua capitalists just horde a stock pile of productive resources and charge society for the ability to use them.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 11:38:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/30/2012 10:56:09 PM, mongeese wrote:
non sequitur.

But if workers only get to receive a portion of what they produce then aren't I a sexy mamma?
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 12:16:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/30/2012 11:34:47 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
The business man took all the risks in starting up the business to begin with, someone had to invest in the first machines who already had capital to risk.

Then the workers get hired. No one is forcing them to work there. If "15" dollars a day isn't enough people won't work and wages will rise. It's supply and demand.

This is completely false. People will continue to work because if they do not, they will have no means to survive. Read Steinbecks' The Grapes of Wrath. If you have no interest in that, read about the "scabs"/strikebreakers.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 3:38:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/30/2012 11:19:45 PM, Ren wrote:
At 1/30/2012 11:03:10 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:

They identify a market need, do planning work, bet on their identification, and receive a reward commensurate with their risk and how good their identification and planning was.

???

Business owners do not conduct marketing.
I didn't describe marketing.


I thought you were going to say investment. :\
I described the process of investment.

A business owner might, yes. But a capitalist qua capitalist simply owns capital and reserve a continual return.
It is impossible to "simply own capital," one must acquire capital.

Some capitalist also happen to be entrepeneurs, true.
"Happen" to be? You act as though entrepreneurship would be possible in the absence of private ownership of capital.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 2:37:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/31/2012 12:16:43 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/30/2012 11:34:47 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
The business man took all the risks in starting up the business to begin with, someone had to invest in the first machines who already had capital to risk.

Then the workers get hired. No one is forcing them to work there. If "15" dollars a day isn't enough people won't work and wages will rise. It's supply and demand.

This is completely false. People will continue to work because if they do not, they will have no means to survive. Read Steinbecks' The Grapes of Wrath. If you have no interest in that, read about the "scabs"/strikebreakers.

This is not completely false. If this were completely false wages would never change.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 2:45:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/31/2012 3:38:44 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/30/2012 11:19:45 PM, Ren wrote:
At 1/30/2012 11:03:10 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:

They identify a market need, do planning work, bet on their identification, and receive a reward commensurate with their risk and how good their identification and planning was.

???

Business owners do not conduct marketing.
I didn't describe marketing.

They identify a market need, do planning work, bet on their identification, and receive a reward commensurate with their risk and how good their identification and planning was.

"Marketing is used to identify the customer, satisfy the customer, and keep the customer. With the customer as the focus of its activities, marketing management is one of the major components of business management."

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Lol, I hate using wiki, but this definition is correct and I don't know a business dictionary offhand.

I thought you were going to say investment. :\
I described the process of investment.

No, you didn't. You described marketing.

Investment is done by investors and producers, not by business owners. Businessmen hire writers to write their proposals and business plans to appeal to investors.

Clearly, you're not sure what a businessman is.

And, that's alright, I'm sure you don't, because you're fairly bright, and you still don't consider them useless.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 4:17:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/30/2012 11:38:58 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 1/30/2012 10:56:09 PM, mongeese wrote:
non sequitur.

But if workers only get to receive a portion of what they produce

That assumes that the worker was the only factor in the production. There's also the land and capital involved, provided by the businessman. The workers receive a share proportional to their skill and effort in making the product.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 4:22:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/31/2012 4:17:43 PM, mongeese wrote:
That assumes that the worker was the only factor in the production. There's also the land and capital involved, provided by the businessman.

Oh, you're right. I'm sure the capitalist created the land.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 4:27:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/31/2012 4:22:53 PM, Reasoning wrote:
At 1/31/2012 4:17:43 PM, mongeese wrote:
That assumes that the worker was the only factor in the production. There's also the land and capital involved, provided by the businessman.

Oh, you're right. I'm sure the capitalist created the land.

You're starting to sound like a commie
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 5:07:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/31/2012 4:22:53 PM, Reasoning wrote:
At 1/31/2012 4:17:43 PM, mongeese wrote:
That assumes that the worker was the only factor in the production. There's also the land and capital involved, provided by the businessman.

Oh, you're right. I'm sure the capitalist created the land.

The capitalist acquired the land with capital. After the land passes hands enough times, the original owner becomes irrelevant; what matters is that the capitalist paid the market price for the land as an investment.

Also, don't forget the capital, like the tools used.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 6:36:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/31/2012 2:45:13 PM, Ren wrote:
At 1/31/2012 3:38:44 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/30/2012 11:19:45 PM, Ren wrote:
At 1/30/2012 11:03:10 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:

They identify a market need, do planning work, bet on their identification, and receive a reward commensurate with their risk and how good their identification and planning was.

???

Business owners do not conduct marketing.
I didn't describe marketing.

They identify a market need, do planning work, bet on their identification, and receive a reward commensurate with their risk and how good their identification and planning was.

"Marketing is used to identify the customer, satisfy the customer, and keep the customer. With the customer as the focus of its activities, marketing management is one of the major components of business management."
Identifying a need and identifying the who behind the need are different things. Regardlesss...


http://en.wikipedia.org...

Lol, I hate using wiki, but this definition is correct
Ad authoritatem.

Investment is done by investors and producers, not by business owners. Businessmen hire writers to write their proposals and business plans to appeal to investors.
Most businessmen, known as "small businessmen," can afford no such thing. Furthermore, implicit in the act of hiring is the act of planning-- planning who to hire and why. (also implicit is the acquisition of something to hire with by a means on which you choose to blank out).


Clearly, you're not sure what a businessman is.

And, that's alright, I'm sure you don't, because you're fairly bright, and you still don't consider them useless.
Businessmen lacking a function contradicts demonstrated preference.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 6:38:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Also, name some people you would describe as businessmen, Ren.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/1/2012 7:23:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
The theory in the stupid cartoon maintains (1) the accumulation of capital, such as to buy equipment, has no value and (2) taking risk does not deserve to be compensated. If those two things were true, then socialists would have an easy and obvious path to taking over society. Simply start businesses and hire workers while making no profit. Then institute a rule that no one the company will be required to work more than they feel is appropriate.

This never happens because the premises are false. Cost of capital and cost of risk are not political theories, they are laws of nature. No society has ever overcome them, any more than collective will power can overcome gravity.