Laid Off

[Osomir]

I don't think you understood what I said. I said that actors under a feudalistic system were rational actors, that is exactly why serfs were very unproductive workers. Because they had no ownership and thus no incentive to produce beyond the bare minimum. Without enforced private property rights there is just little incentive for investment. Once again, we have seen this very problem in communal farming markets. They tend to be highly unproductive and eventually collapse when they can't compete.

How do you know they were unproductive, and the free ukraine/etc weren't unproductive, much like all of those who came before capitalism, it's idiotic rhetoric man. The fundamental difference is that under socialism, people would still work for some sort of payment, they would just be able to cooperatively own production, together, so they still own it, essentially, and they get paid for what their labor is actually worth. Your examples are idiotic, I can point out somalia, which is essentially anarcho-capitalism, and show that capitalism is a broken system if not heavily regulated.

I know they were unproductive because we actively monitored how much they produced relative to other systems, I know they are relatively unproductive because we can and do still measure such cooperatives. They simply can't compete in production terms. Tanzania for example tried it in its agricultural sector and it caused the sector to collapse. You haven't given any reason outside of altruism why workers would be incentivized under your system to produce. Nor have you in any way addressed the very real economic concept of the free rider problem which plagues such systems. And I also hate anarcho-capitalism, I find it just as economically naive as anarcho-communsm. I am in favor of a mixed economic system (like most economists) where a largely private market exists that is regulated by the state.

You did not monitor the free Ukraine... Sorry.

I'm not sure what specific example you are attempting to point to but one data point in a sea of hundreds is not significant.

Modern day worker coops, territories In Spain during the revolution... I'll link readings if you want.

Please do, I'm always up for economic analysis. One question though: why don't they exist anymore in Spain?

 

[Marxist]

It's the concept of exploiting what the laborer is worth, purposefully underpaying the labor, fighting regulations, endorsing child labor...

And India created high levels of progressive labor laws which completely stymied the development (initial costs were too high) of its manufacturing sector so China gobbled it all up allowing China to lift millions out of poverty and causing India to fall behind and maintain instead a largely low productivity informal manufacturing sector which it is only now starting to streamline.

Thus Indians were left without the jobs and thus without the associated progressive benefits that were supposed to come with them. Your vision is of no value to them if it fails in execution.

I already know progressive labor laws are hated by capitalists, and the initial cost wouldn't destroy the capitalists, they're just afraid of profit. Lift millions out of poverty? Yeah, to what exactly, unsafe working conditions where they are essentially still in poverty, wage slaves... I refer you to the articles in my signature for more on this, but moving on.

Except we have seen quite plainly that initial costs of such labor laws have prevented India's manufacturing market from taking off relative to other states. The result? India's unskilled workers remain impoverished and without labor benefits. Such laws can't really precede development, they have to come after it has started otherwise they represent large cost barriers and the market simply doesn't grow, and that doesn't benefit anyone. You remind me a bit of Robert Mugabe. Someone who would sit at the head of a crumbling economy that you destroyed all the while blaming some sort of elusive capitalist conspiracy.

It could have taken off just fine, but the capitalist greed is infinite. Oh, and when they get the benefits, the exploitive labor shifts again. Yeah, a nonexistent system destroyed the economy, tell me more about the Great Depression and 2008

"It could have" "if only" these are nice sayings and moral soapbox speeches on your part, but the simple fact is that in India they turned out to be prohibitive and for all of your desire to help people, they did the exact opposite and relegated them to rural poverty. Your system is only of value if it actually works in the real world.

I refer you to my readings on feudalism in my signature to see why your point is idiotic.

 

[Marxist]

How do you know they were unproductive, and the free ukraine/etc weren't unproductive, much like all of those who came before capitalism, it's idiotic rhetoric man. The fundamental difference is that under socialism, people would still work for some sort of payment, they would just be able to cooperatively own production, together, so they still own it, essentially, and they get paid for what their labor is actually worth. Your examples are idiotic, I can point out somalia, which is essentially anarcho-capitalism, and show that capitalism is a broken system if not heavily regulated.

I know they were unproductive because we actively monitored how much they produced relative to other systems, I know they are relatively unproductive because we can and do still measure such cooperatives. They simply can't compete in production terms. Tanzania for example tried it in its agricultural sector and it caused the sector to collapse. You haven't given any reason outside of altruism why workers would be incentivized under your system to produce. Nor have you in any way addressed the very real economic concept of the free rider problem which plagues such systems. And I also hate anarcho-capitalism, I find it just as economically naive as anarcho-communsm. I am in favor of a mixed economic system (like most economists) where a largely private market exists that is regulated by the state.

You did not monitor the free Ukraine... Sorry.

I'm not sure what specific example you are attempting to point to but one data point in a sea of hundreds is not significant.

Modern day worker coops, territories In Spain during the revolution... I'll link readings if you want.

Please do, I'm always up for economic analysis. One question though: why don't they exist anymore in Spain?

Violence against them.
Free Territory - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Revolutionary Catalonia - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
List of worker cooperatives - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Osomir]

And India created high levels of progressive labor laws which completely stymied the development (initial costs were too high) of its manufacturing sector so China gobbled it all up allowing China to lift millions out of poverty and causing India to fall behind and maintain instead a largely low productivity informal manufacturing sector which it is only now starting to streamline.

Thus Indians were left without the jobs and thus without the associated progressive benefits that were supposed to come with them. Your vision is of no value to them if it fails in execution.

I already know progressive labor laws are hated by capitalists, and the initial cost wouldn't destroy the capitalists, they're just afraid of profit. Lift millions out of poverty? Yeah, to what exactly, unsafe working conditions where they are essentially still in poverty, wage slaves... I refer you to the articles in my signature for more on this, but moving on.

Except we have seen quite plainly that initial costs of such labor laws have prevented India's manufacturing market from taking off relative to other states. The result? India's unskilled workers remain impoverished and without labor benefits. Such laws can't really precede development, they have to come after it has started otherwise they represent large cost barriers and the market simply doesn't grow, and that doesn't benefit anyone. You remind me a bit of Robert Mugabe. Someone who would sit at the head of a crumbling economy that you destroyed all the while blaming some sort of elusive capitalist conspiracy.

It could have taken off just fine, but the capitalist greed is infinite. Oh, and when they get the benefits, the exploitive labor shifts again. Yeah, a nonexistent system destroyed the economy, tell me more about the Great Depression and 2008

"It could have" "if only" these are nice sayings and moral soapbox speeches on your part, but the simple fact is that in India they turned out to be prohibitive and for all of your desire to help people, they did the exact opposite and relegated them to rural poverty. Your system is only of value if it actually works in the real world.

I refer you to my readings on feudalism in my signature to see why your point is idiotic.

If you want to make an argument based on it then make it. Telling people to read a bunch of stuff in your signature isn't helpful to anyone nor does it further discourse in any way. I might as well tell you to go get an advanced degree in economic theory and then come back and tell me how Anarcho-Communism wouldn't be crushed under the weight of pervasive free rider problems.

 

[Wry Catcher]

shit like this belongs on the board?

whining republicans need to man up, and shut up.

Or the left need to realize that it's their own policies that is causing this rather than Capitalism.
It isn't just about lower pay.
It has most to do with other countries that has;
Easy Business set up
Simple Tax system
Less Regulations.
Punishing our Businesses does not help to keep them here in the USA.

It is about lower pay, and about less regulations.

Our tax system is complicated, why is that? I recently heard that corporations will spend more to lobby Congress than the funding in the budget provided for Congress. True or not, that does not surprise me.

I don't know about "easy business set up", but in most of America a business can be assured of power, water, sewage, police and fire services and a consumer based economy. Of course fees and taxes are assessed; no business is an island: No one is self-sufficient; everyone relies on others. This saying comes from a sermon by the seventeenth-century English author John Donne.

 

[Osomir]

I know they were unproductive because we actively monitored how much they produced relative to other systems, I know they are relatively unproductive because we can and do still measure such cooperatives. They simply can't compete in production terms. Tanzania for example tried it in its agricultural sector and it caused the sector to collapse. You haven't given any reason outside of altruism why workers would be incentivized under your system to produce. Nor have you in any way addressed the very real economic concept of the free rider problem which plagues such systems. And I also hate anarcho-capitalism, I find it just as economically naive as anarcho-communsm. I am in favor of a mixed economic system (like most economists) where a largely private market exists that is regulated by the state.

You did not monitor the free Ukraine... Sorry.

I'm not sure what specific example you are attempting to point to but one data point in a sea of hundreds is not significant.

Modern day worker coops, territories In Spain during the revolution... I'll link readings if you want.

Please do, I'm always up for economic analysis. One question though: why don't they exist anymore in Spain?

Violence against them.
Free Territory - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Revolutionary Catalonia - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
List of worker cooperatives - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

So in other words, their society under-produced a public good (security) and was destroyed due to a basic free rider problem.

 

[BlackSand]

I propose you move to somalia, capitalism is running free there. Live your dream. Quit with the strawmen.

I didn't go to Somalia ... Nothing there interests me ... And there are places much more hospitable and interested in making money closer by.
I am living my dream ... Not thinking about crap and complaining about what doesn't happen because I was too scared to do what needed to be done to achieve my goals.

It is only a strawman argument for you ... Because you lack the balls to put your money where your mouth is and do what it takes to experience what you are asking for.
I think it because all you have is a strawman argument or rhetoric ... And lack the courage to get out there and make it happen.

Hence (again) ... The difference in thinking something and doing something.
The reason your ideas continue to fail ... As well as any attempt on your part to achieve your own goals.

You are just a slacker ... Too weak or incompetent to achieve your own goals.

.

 

[Osomir]

I propose you move to somalia, capitalism is running free there. Live your dream. Quit with the strawmen.

I didn't go to Somalia ... Nothing there interests me ... And there are places much more hospitable and interested in making money closer by.
I am living my dream ... Not thinking about crap and complaining about what doesn't happen because I was too scared to do what needed to be done to achieve my goals.

It is only a strawman argument for you ... Because you lack the balls to put your money where your mouth is and do what it takes to experience what you are asking for.
I think it because all you have is a strawman argument or rhetoric ... And lack the courage to get out there and make it happen.

Hence (again) ... The difference in thinking something and doing something.
The reason your ideas continue to fail ... As well as any attempt on your part to achieve your own goals.

You are just a slacker ... Too weak or incompetent to achieve your own goals.

.

It is a strawman on his part because it is an assumption that, through our dislike of what he is proposing he is assuming that we must be supportive of anarcho-capitalistic ideologies, which most "capitalists" aren't. I would also be curious to see how, through his model and without a government through which a monopoly on force could be present, he would be able to guarantee that his model of anarcho-communism wouldn't devolve into exactly the kind of state that we see in southern Somalia.

 

[Dragonlady]

The idea that manufacturing in China has lifted millions out of poverty is laughable. The workers aren't paid enough to lift themselves out of poverty. The Chinese oligarchs are making massive amounts of money but not the workers.

 

[BlackSand]

It is a strawman on his part because it is an assumption that, through our dislike of what he is proposing he is assuming that we must be supportive of anarcho-capitalistic ideologies, which most "capitalists" aren't. I would also be curious to see how, through his model and without a government through which a monopoly on force could be present, he would be able to guarantee that his model of anarcho-communism wouldn't devolve into exactly the kind of state that we see in southern Somalia.

Yeah ... But he could skip all the bad stuff associated with his ideas if he were to actually do it here in the States in a community tailored to the design.
They benefit from the freedoms and security our society provides ... And get to establish and run their own communities by their principles.

Again ... It is the difference associated with actually accomplishing something.
All it takes is the effort necessary to achieve the basic requirements ... And the courage to actually do something.

.

 

[Osomir]

The idea that manufacturing in China has lifted millions out of poverty is laughable. The workers aren't paid enough to lift themselves out of poverty. The Chinese oligarchs are making massive amounts of money but not the workers.

And yet through a combination of higher level manufacturing and the green revolution in agriculture China has seen millions lifted out of abject poverty.

 

[Marxist]

I propose you move to somalia, capitalism is running free there. Live your dream. Quit with the strawmen.

I didn't go to Somalia ... Nothing there interests me ... And there are places much more hospitable and interested in making money closer by.
I am living my dream ... Not thinking about crap and complaining about what doesn't happen because I was too scared to do what needed to be done to achieve my goals.

It is only a strawman argument for you ... Because you lack the balls to put your money where your mouth is and do what it takes to experience what you are asking for.
I think it because all you have is a strawman argument or rhetoric ... And lack the courage to get out there and make it happen.

Hence (again) ... The difference in thinking something and doing something.
The reason your ideas continue to fail ... As well as any attempt on your part to achieve your own goals.

You are just a slacker ... Too weak or incompetent to achieve your own goals.

.

It is a strawman on his part because it is an assumption that, through our dislike of what he is proposing he is assuming that we must be supportive of anarcho-capitalistic ideologies, which most "capitalists" aren't. I would also be curious to see how, through his model and without a government through which a monopoly on force could be present, he would be able to guarantee that his model of anarcho-communism wouldn't devolve into exactly the kind of state that we see in southern Somalia.

If a state doesn't exist, how do you postulate someone grabbing power with democracy and protections?

 

[Osomir]

I know they were unproductive because we actively monitored how much they produced relative to other systems, I know they are relatively unproductive because we can and do still measure such cooperatives. They simply can't compete in production terms. Tanzania for example tried it in its agricultural sector and it caused the sector to collapse. You haven't given any reason outside of altruism why workers would be incentivized under your system to produce. Nor have you in any way addressed the very real economic concept of the free rider problem which plagues such systems. And I also hate anarcho-capitalism, I find it just as economically naive as anarcho-communsm. I am in favor of a mixed economic system (like most economists) where a largely private market exists that is regulated by the state.

You did not monitor the free Ukraine... Sorry.

I'm not sure what specific example you are attempting to point to but one data point in a sea of hundreds is not significant.

Modern day worker coops, territories In Spain during the revolution... I'll link readings if you want.

Please do, I'm always up for economic analysis. One question though: why don't they exist anymore in Spain?

Violence against them.
Free Territory - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Revolutionary Catalonia - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
List of worker cooperatives - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Looking at these I don't really see any analysis of how well they were able to function, how well liberty was preserved, the levels of violence (outside of claims that the Spanish regions were quite harsh) and no real economic data from the regions in question that would allow anyone to analyze how well they were able to function economically speaking. Do you have data on any of that that i could review? I suppose I am interested primarily in why you feel like these two short lived entities should be considered a success and emulated outside of an ideological affinity for anarcho-communism on your part.

 

[Osomir]

I propose you move to somalia, capitalism is running free there. Live your dream. Quit with the strawmen.

I didn't go to Somalia ... Nothing there interests me ... And there are places much more hospitable and interested in making money closer by.
I am living my dream ... Not thinking about crap and complaining about what doesn't happen because I was too scared to do what needed to be done to achieve my goals.

It is only a strawman argument for you ... Because you lack the balls to put your money where your mouth is and do what it takes to experience what you are asking for.
I think it because all you have is a strawman argument or rhetoric ... And lack the courage to get out there and make it happen.

Hence (again) ... The difference in thinking something and doing something.
The reason your ideas continue to fail ... As well as any attempt on your part to achieve your own goals.

You are just a slacker ... Too weak or incompetent to achieve your own goals.

.

It is a strawman on his part because it is an assumption that, through our dislike of what he is proposing he is assuming that we must be supportive of anarcho-capitalistic ideologies, which most "capitalists" aren't. I would also be curious to see how, through his model and without a government through which a monopoly on force could be present, he would be able to guarantee that his model of anarcho-communism wouldn't devolve into exactly the kind of state that we see in southern Somalia.

If a state doesn't exist, how do you postulate someone grabbing power with democracy and protections?

This question doesn't make a lot of sense to me, perhaps it is the phrasing? We've seen state structures form in Somalia (in the north for example) and we saw the formation of basic state structures in the south through the ICU before Ethiopia's invasion. As of now a new government is in the process of forming. So I am not sure what point you are trying to make with regards to Somalia, especially since I have espoused that it isn't anything like the economic and governance system that I espouse support for. Nor did you answer my question / concern about what guarantees would exist within your anarcho-communist system that would prevent it from devolving into what we see in southern Somalia.

 

[Marxist]

The idea that manufacturing in China has lifted millions out of poverty is laughable. The workers aren't paid enough to lift themselves out of poverty. The Chinese oligarchs are making massive amounts of money but not the workers.

And yet through a combination of higher level manufacturing and the green revolution in agriculture China has seen millions lifted out of abject poverty.

Poverty as defined by idiotic standards. Don't kid yourself.

 

[Osomir]

The idea that manufacturing in China has lifted millions out of poverty is laughable. The workers aren't paid enough to lift themselves out of poverty. The Chinese oligarchs are making massive amounts of money but not the workers.

And yet through a combination of higher level manufacturing and the green revolution in agriculture China has seen millions lifted out of abject poverty.

Poverty as defined by idiotic standards. Don't kid yourself.

Idiotic standards such as standard of living and purchasing power? How would you like to define poverty for the sake of future discussion?

 

[Marxist]

I propose you move to somalia, capitalism is running free there. Live your dream. Quit with the strawmen.

I didn't go to Somalia ... Nothing there interests me ... And there are places much more hospitable and interested in making money closer by.
I am living my dream ... Not thinking about crap and complaining about what doesn't happen because I was too scared to do what needed to be done to achieve my goals.

It is only a strawman argument for you ... Because you lack the balls to put your money where your mouth is and do what it takes to experience what you are asking for.
I think it because all you have is a strawman argument or rhetoric ... And lack the courage to get out there and make it happen.

Hence (again) ... The difference in thinking something and doing something.
The reason your ideas continue to fail ... As well as any attempt on your part to achieve your own goals.

You are just a slacker ... Too weak or incompetent to achieve your own goals.

.

Yeah, you obviously know anything about me.

 

[Marxist]

The idea that manufacturing in China has lifted millions out of poverty is laughable. The workers aren't paid enough to lift themselves out of poverty. The Chinese oligarchs are making massive amounts of money but not the workers.

And yet through a combination of higher level manufacturing and the green revolution in agriculture China has seen millions lifted out of abject poverty.

Poverty as defined by idiotic standards. Don't kid yourself.

Idiotic standards such as standard of living and purchasing power? How would you like to define poverty for the sake of future discussion?

I'll go off of your standard.

 

[Marxist]

It is a strawman on his part because it is an assumption that, through our dislike of what he is proposing he is assuming that we must be supportive of anarcho-capitalistic ideologies, which most "capitalists" aren't. I would also be curious to see how, through his model and without a government through which a monopoly on force could be present, he would be able to guarantee that his model of anarcho-communism wouldn't devolve into exactly the kind of state that we see in southern Somalia.

Yeah ... But he could skip all the bad stuff associated with his ideas if he were to actually do it here in the States in a community tailored to the design.
They benefit from the freedoms and security our society provides ... And get to establish and run their own communities by their principles.

Again ... It is the difference associated with actually accomplishing something.
All it takes is the effort necessary to achieve the basic requirements ... And the courage to actually do something.

.

You did not monitor the free Ukraine... Sorry.

I'm not sure what specific example you are attempting to point to but one data point in a sea of hundreds is not significant.

Modern day worker coops, territories In Spain during the revolution... I'll link readings if you want.

Please do, I'm always up for economic analysis. One question though: why don't they exist anymore in Spain?

Violence against them.
Free Territory - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Revolutionary Catalonia - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
List of worker cooperatives - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

So in other words, their society under-produced a public good (security) and was destroyed due to a basic free rider problem.

No, they had security, they were overwhelmed, Jesus Christ.

 

[Osomir]

It is a strawman on his part because it is an assumption that, through our dislike of what he is proposing he is assuming that we must be supportive of anarcho-capitalistic ideologies, which most "capitalists" aren't. I would also be curious to see how, through his model and without a government through which a monopoly on force could be present, he would be able to guarantee that his model of anarcho-communism wouldn't devolve into exactly the kind of state that we see in southern Somalia.

Yeah ... But he could skip all the bad stuff associated with his ideas if he were to actually do it here in the States in a community tailored to the design.
They benefit from the freedoms and security our society provides ... And get to establish and run their own communities by their principles.

Again ... It is the difference associated with actually accomplishing something.
All it takes is the effort necessary to achieve the basic requirements ... And the courage to actually do something.

.

I'm not sure what specific example you are attempting to point to but one data point in a sea of hundreds is not significant.

Modern day worker coops, territories In Spain during the revolution... I'll link readings if you want.

Please do, I'm always up for economic analysis. One question though: why don't they exist anymore in Spain?

Violence against them.
Free Territory - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Revolutionary Catalonia - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
List of worker cooperatives - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

So in other words, their society under-produced a public good (security) and was destroyed due to a basic free rider problem.

No, they had security, they were overwhelmed, Jesus Christ.

Do you have data on them? It is also worth noting that the simple fact that they had some security doesn't negate the issue of the underproduction of security. Public goods tend to be underproduced without government structures because of the free rider problem: something which you have ignored about a half dozen times now in our discussion.