Republicans can’t seem to accurately define what socialism is

[Tehon]

The "value" = "intrinsic value" = "amount of labour socially necessary" you're talking about has nothing at all to do with market value.

Very good, I made that point 11 pages ago.

Marx made it 150 years ago.

You made the point that Marx's labor theory of value is economically meaningless?

Economics is a social science, yes. It purports to study the system of production and distribution of life's necessities in society. As such, Marx's theory of labor value is of great value (not market value ) to the understanding of economics. He stripped away the facade that is the money form and exposed the true essence of the commodity, the basic unit of trade in an economy.

It can be ignored, indeed it has been actively suppressed. But it is still there, underlying the whole economic system. His theory accurately explains the capitalist system of production.

There are two sources of value in an economy. Nature and labor. It is only by labor that nature is improved upon. Value added.

Labor has been exploited in one form or another for most of human history.

In human's less developed stage slavery was the method.

As humans developed, that form of exploitation lost favor and a new system of exploitation developed in the form of feudalism. Now people were free to work the land for themselves but only after they had produced what was required from the owners of the land. Well, some people were set free anyway.

Eventually that lost favor and a new form of labor exploitation developed, capitalism.

^ this is what Marx's theory makes evident.

It is only labor that improves upon nature and adds value to society in the form of a commodity. Without labor your economic system is irrelevant, it doesn't exist.

You two are nothing but a couple of monkeys slinging mud in all directions trying to discredit something that is fundamentally true.

The fundamental conceit of marxists is their conviction that capitalists (entrepreneurs, business owners, investors, speculators, etc...) contribute no labor, and add no value, to the goods and services they produce, that profit is, by nature "unearned". It's all "money-for-nothing".

It isn't until they get their druthers, and eliminate the capitalists, that they realize their error.

There are two types of labor, productive and unproductive.

I would say that the bulk of your capitalist's labor, especially when you exclude the petit bourgeoisie, is unproductive. It is designed to expropriate the value produced by productive labor.

Your capitalists own this country. They gave rise to the State and use the State to keep labor in line. With the aid of the State they are attempting to control the planet.

You're nothing but an apologist for the globalist agenda, or an unwitting dupe.

 

[Ame®icano]

The truth of the matter is that it is a very broad term. It’s something that’s always been apart of the framework of this country yet Repubs like to pretend it is the antithesis of the Founding Father’s philosophy. Republicans have a hard time even defining the term in their OWN WORDS. That alone tells you they lack a basic understanding of the word.

Citation needed. It looks to me like you're considering infrastructure as Socialist, despite that being totally false, and debunked by me the last time we discussed it.

There’s really no need to cite anything. Any program funded by tax payers is socialism. You will figure that out if you look up the actual definition. Our defense budget, for example, is the biggest socialist institution in the world. Lol and of course our infrastructure is socialist. It’s funded by tax payers.

How many of those programs are listed in the Constitution?

 

[Ame®icano]

It's an oppressive economic construct that forcibly confiscates the property of some to give to others who didn't earn it. It's immoral and unethical and hardly surprising that you support it.

Why are the happiest people living in countries you call Socialist?

They haven't experienced the full force of socialism, yet.

It comes in stages.

1. Promise free shit to get it trough.
2. Rob Peter to pay Paul.
3. When Peter runs out of money, limit the free shit.
4. Make everyone equally miserable.
5. Claim "it works".

Take commie-care. They implemented good shit first. Than they forced everyone into it. The next step would be to take it over completely, but Trump happened.

 

[Ame®icano]

What's the point of working 3 jobs when you can collect welfare checks, ssi- checks, food stamps, free housing and free healthcare...
And all the benefits for lazy retards...
While most hard working folks are filling for bankruptcy and putting their homes on remortgage ?
America was not built by lazy socialists.

In Europe you don't have to have to work 3 jobs to make ends meet. I work 1 and I'm capable of making the mortgage support my wife and kid go on vacation,send my kid to college and own a decent car. As I said I'm European and pay high taxes. If I get unemployed the government pays me enough so I can survive. I wouldn't be able to make the mortgage but I would have a roof over my head,food in my mouth, healthcare and my kid would still go to college. The fact that even while unemployed I'd still be able to afford this forces the employers to give high enough wages to compete. This makes it that I don't have to work 3 jobs.

"In Europe". Are you talking about Bulgaria, Turkey or Norway?

Be precise, what country in Europe?

 

[forkup]

What's the point of working 3 jobs when you can collect welfare checks, ssi- checks, food stamps, free housing and free healthcare...
And all the benefits for lazy retards...
While most hard working folks are filling for bankruptcy and putting their homes on remortgage ?
America was not built by lazy socialists.

In Europe you don't have to have to work 3 jobs to make ends meet. I work 1 and I'm capable of making the mortgage support my wife and kid go on vacation,send my kid to college and own a decent car. As I said I'm European and pay high taxes. If I get unemployed the government pays me enough so I can survive. I wouldn't be able to make the mortgage but I would have a roof over my head,food in my mouth, healthcare and my kid would still go to college. The fact that even while unemployed I'd still be able to afford this forces the employers to give high enough wages to compete. This makes it that I don't have to work 3 jobs.

"In Europe". Are you talking about Bulgaria, Turkey or Norway?

Be precise, what country in Europe?

Belgium
I did actually say that a few pages further.

 

[dblack]

I would say that the bulk of your capitalist's labor, especially when you exclude the petit bourgeoisie, is unproductive. It is designed to expropriate the value produced by productive labor.

Your capitalists own this country. They gave rise to the State and use the State to keep labor in line. With the aid of the State they are attempting to control the planet.

I don't know how you're determining which labor is "productive" and which isn't. But I'll bet it's a subjective evaluation, and nothing intrinsic. The point being, if you don't think capitalists are adding value, don't buy their products. Other people will likely disagree with you, and happily give the capitalists their money. You can always just wait around for "labor" to produce the things you need on their own. Good luck with that.

You're nothing but an apologist for the globalist agenda, or an unwitting dupe.

Well, you're a poo-poo head!

 

[Tehon]

I would say that the bulk of your capitalist's labor, especially when you exclude the petit bourgeoisie, is unproductive. It is designed to expropriate the value produced by productive labor.

Your capitalists own this country. They gave rise to the State and use the State to keep labor in line. With the aid of the State they are attempting to control the planet.

I don't know how you're determining which labor is "productive" and which isn't. But I'll bet it's a subjective evaluation, and nothing intrinsic. The point being, if you don't think capitalists are adding value, don't buy their products. Other people will likely disagree with you, and happily give the capitalists their money. You can always just wait around for "labor" to produce the things you need on their own. Good luck with that.

You're nothing but an apologist for the globalist agenda, or an unwitting dupe.

Well, you're a poo-poo head!

^ Stockholm syndrome

 

[dblack]

I would say that the bulk of your capitalist's labor, especially when you exclude the petit bourgeoisie, is unproductive. It is designed to expropriate the value produced by productive labor.

Your capitalists own this country. They gave rise to the State and use the State to keep labor in line. With the aid of the State they are attempting to control the planet.

I don't know how you're determining which labor is "productive" and which isn't. But I'll bet it's a subjective evaluation, and nothing intrinsic. The point being, if you don't think capitalists are adding value, don't buy their products. Other people will likely disagree with you, and happily give the capitalists their money. You can always just wait around for "labor" to produce the things you need on their own. Good luck with that.

You're nothing but an apologist for the globalist agenda, or an unwitting dupe.

Well, you're a poo-poo head!

^ Stockholm syndrome

Marxism is fine until you actually try to implement it. The thing is, simply transferring wealth from the capitalists to the government doesn't change as much as you might think. Someone still has to decide what to do with that wealth. Someone still has to decide how much "labor" gets paid. Someone still has to decide what we produce, and in what quantities. The only question is whether government appointees will do a better job making those decisions than the capitalists. That's a hard sell in my experience.

 

[Ame®icano]

What's the point of working 3 jobs when you can collect welfare checks, ssi- checks, food stamps, free housing and free healthcare...
And all the benefits for lazy retards...
While most hard working folks are filling for bankruptcy and putting their homes on remortgage ?
America was not built by lazy socialists.

In Europe you don't have to have to work 3 jobs to make ends meet. I work 1 and I'm capable of making the mortgage support my wife and kid go on vacation,send my kid to college and own a decent car. As I said I'm European and pay high taxes. If I get unemployed the government pays me enough so I can survive. I wouldn't be able to make the mortgage but I would have a roof over my head,food in my mouth, healthcare and my kid would still go to college. The fact that even while unemployed I'd still be able to afford this forces the employers to give high enough wages to compete. This makes it that I don't have to work 3 jobs.

"In Europe". Are you talking about Bulgaria, Turkey or Norway?

Be precise, what country in Europe?

Belgium
I did actually say that a few pages further.

OK, let's discuss. The way you put it, it seems like you're under some impression that we Americans all have to work three jobs and we're left to die if we lose one or all three of them.

In USA, or precisely in Michigan where I live, you don't have to work three jobs to make ends meet. I got one job and I am capable of paying my mortgage, support my family, go to vacation to Europe (where my wife is from) every year, send my older kid to college and have four cars. As I said, I am American and I pay high taxes to my federal government, and low taxes to my state.

I was never unemployed, but if I lose the job I would get unemployment benefits that will help me get through until I find another job. Of course, we would have to cut back on some things, but I'd still have normal life.

The fact that I am paying high federal taxes, enables my country to provide the military protection to half of Europe including your country that wouldn't be able to protect itself. It also enables your country to spent more of your taxes into your own infrastructure, social programs, safety nets, etc. Speaking of infrastructure, being rebuild after WWII, you don't really have to ad much to it, except for addition in population, that rose only 1.5 million in past 50 years. Having said that, you're being ripped off by your government big time. None of this was critique of Belgium, just facts.

But this is. Your safety nets, socialism, comes at the cost, and I am not referring to monetary cost. Your government guaranteed "free speech" doesn't exist if you try to criticize your own government. You can't defend from it if it become tyrannical. They keep coming and you keep bending over, every time. You have no say who can come to your country. And having EU above you, you became pretty much non-country. Yeah, I know it's nice to work only 40 hrs a week, but it sucks that you're not allowed to work more even if you want to. You'd say that's protection for your own benefit, I believe it's not. I may explain it later.

It's nice to know that if you lose the job you'll have some help, but it sucks more to know that cost you half of what you make, even if you never lose the job. Hands up for couple of your soccer players, and few of Belgium owned US beers. We'll talk more.

 

[Tehon]

I would say that the bulk of your capitalist's labor, especially when you exclude the petit bourgeoisie, is unproductive. It is designed to expropriate the value produced by productive labor.

Your capitalists own this country. They gave rise to the State and use the State to keep labor in line. With the aid of the State they are attempting to control the planet.

I don't know how you're determining which labor is "productive" and which isn't. But I'll bet it's a subjective evaluation, and nothing intrinsic. The point being, if you don't think capitalists are adding value, don't buy their products. Other people will likely disagree with you, and happily give the capitalists their money. You can always just wait around for "labor" to produce the things you need on their own. Good luck with that.

You're nothing but an apologist for the globalist agenda, or an unwitting dupe.

Well, you're a poo-poo head!

^ Stockholm syndrome

Marxism is fine until you actually try to implement it. The thing is, simply transferring wealth from the capitalists to the government doesn't change as much as you might think. Someone still has to decide what to do with that wealth. Someone still has to decide how much "labor" gets paid. Someone still has to decide what we produce, and in what quantities. The only question is whether government appointees will do a better job making those decisions than the capitalists. That's a hard sell in my experience.

We, as in homo sapiens, are not yet ready for it. We will be lucky to survive capitalism, imo.

If it were to happen sometime in the distant future, there would be no need for the state to protect private property. Or referee an economic system driven by competition. Wealth would be distributed naturally as a consequence of the new social form of production. Government would become more localized.

That's the vision anyway.

 

[forkup]

What's the point of working 3 jobs when you can collect welfare checks, ssi- checks, food stamps, free housing and free healthcare...
And all the benefits for lazy retards...
While most hard working folks are filling for bankruptcy and putting their homes on remortgage ?
America was not built by lazy socialists.

In Europe you don't have to have to work 3 jobs to make ends meet. I work 1 and I'm capable of making the mortgage support my wife and kid go on vacation,send my kid to college and own a decent car. As I said I'm European and pay high taxes. If I get unemployed the government pays me enough so I can survive. I wouldn't be able to make the mortgage but I would have a roof over my head,food in my mouth, healthcare and my kid would still go to college. The fact that even while unemployed I'd still be able to afford this forces the employers to give high enough wages to compete. This makes it that I don't have to work 3 jobs.

"In Europe". Are you talking about Bulgaria, Turkey or Norway?

Be precise, what country in Europe?

Belgium
I did actually say that a few pages further.

OK, let's discuss. The way you put it, it seems like you're under some impression that we Americans all have to work three jobs and we're left to die if we lose one or all three of them.

In USA, or precisely in Michigan where I live, you don't have to work three jobs to make ends meet. I got one job and I am capable of paying my mortgage, support my family, go to vacation to Europe (where my wife is from) every year, send my older kid to college and have four cars. As I said, I am American and I pay high taxes to my federal government, and low taxes to my state.

I was never unemployed, but if I lose the job I would get unemployment benefits that will help me get through until I find another job. Of course, we would have to cut back on some things, but I'd still have normal life.

The fact that I am paying high federal taxes, enables my country to provide the military protection to half of Europe including your country that wouldn't be able to protect itself. It also enables your country to spent more of your taxes into your own infrastructure, social programs, safety nets, etc. Speaking of infrastructure, being rebuild after WWII, you don't really have to ad much to it, except for addition in population, that rose only 1.5 million in past 50 years. Having said that, you're being ripped off by your government big time. None of this was critique of Belgium, just facts.

But this is. Your safety nets, socialism, comes at the cost, and I am not referring to monetary cost. Your government guaranteed "free speech" doesn't exist if you try to criticize your own government. You can't defend from it if it become tyrannical. They keep coming and you keep bending over, every time. You have no say who can come to your country. And having EU above you, you became pretty much non-country. Yeah, I know it's nice to work only 40 hrs a week, but it sucks that you're not allowed to work more even if you want to. You'd say that's protection for your own benefit, I believe it's not. I may explain it later.

It's nice to know that if you lose the job you'll have some help, but it sucks more to know that cost you half of what you make, even if you never lose the job. Hands up for couple of your soccer players, and few of Belgium owned US beers. We'll talk more.

Well we're both in the same boat my wife is American, so when I make comparisons I do speak from first hand experience. First lets clarify my positions, this way we can have an actual meaningful conversation. -No, I don't think all Americans need to have 3 jobs to make ends meet. In fact I'm pretty sure at the level of a college graduate, American's make a lot more then Belgians on the same level of education. My claim is that at the level of people with a high school education, a lot, by no means all Americans have troubles making ends meet. This is not the case in Belgium were ALL citizens have a basic level of care not available in the US.
-My wife is from New York, a place called Middletown and I can say that the rent prices being as high as they are over there,services costing an arm and a leg, that she wouldn't have been able to have a normal life on unemployment compensation. Furthermore I've seen the situation her mother fell into after she got a hernia at 55. An RN making 6 figures ended up without her house and savings because she had to go into early retirement, and developed serious health issues. A situation that would not have occurred here.
-I don't think that your OVERALL tax rate compares to that in Belgium.
- As far as military spending goes. The US spends 3.3 percent of it's GDP on the military compared to 0.9 for Belgium I'm of the opinion that Belgium should spend more, on the other hand 2.4 percent of the GDP extra hardly seems a sufficient justification for millions not having access to decent healthcare, or having to work several jobs to make a decent living.
- As to us having no say in our government or even a more bold claim that we aren't allowed to criticize our government. Whatever gave you that idea???? We have a parliamentary Democracy. We vote on city, language area, federal and European level. Our elections are funded by public funds, they are limited in time, limited in means of getting votes , and even more importantly in how you get money for election campaigns. I dare say it's a more honest way of voting since deep pockets doesn't mean more exposure. We also have more then 2 parties insuring a more diverse ideological base

 

[kaz]

As far as military spending goes. The US spends 3.3 percent of it's GDP on the military compared to 0.9 for Belgium

The first thing we need to do is to stop defending free loading countries for free. That would greatly help us bring our military costs back in line

 

[Kosh]

Another far left drone thread that proves the far left utopia is North Korea!

 

[dblack]

We, as in homo sapiens, are not yet ready for it. We will be lucky to survive capitalism, imo.

Then it sounds like we should focus on getting capitalism right rather, rather than daydreaming about the distant future.

 

[forkup]

As far as military spending goes. The US spends 3.3 percent of it's GDP on the military compared to 0.9 for Belgium

The first thing we need to do is to stop defending free loading countries for free. That would greatly help us bring our military costs back in line

I couldn't find the figures for Belgium I did find them for Germany a country comparable to us. In 1989 Germany spend 2.41 of it's GDP on defense in 2016 1.18. So it declined 1.23 percent. For the US it went from 5.37 percent to 3.29 percent. So a relative decline of 2.08 percent. Seems to me that Germany didn't cut back it's relative military spending as much as the United States after the cold war, neither did it start wars under falls pretext ( Iraq). Nor does it use it's military capability to spread it's influence throughout the world. When you bemoan the lack of spending from other nations, you also have to be prepared to exert less influence as other countries get stronger. Are you prepared to give up your status as the only real superpower?Military Spending - Our World in Data

 

[forkup]

As far as military spending goes. The US spends 3.3 percent of it's GDP on the military compared to 0.9 for Belgium

The first thing we need to do is to stop defending free loading countries for free. That would greatly help us bring our military costs back in line

I couldn't find the figures for Belgium I did find them for Germany a country comparable to us. In 1989 Germany spend 2.41 of it's GDP on defense in 2016 1.18. So it declined 1.23 percent. For the US it went from 5.37 percent to 3.29 percent. So a relative decline of 2.09 percent. Seems to me that Germany didn't cut back it's relative military spending as much as the United States after the cold war, neither did it start wars under falls pretext ( Iraq). Nor does it use it's military capability to spread it's influence throughout the world. When you bemoan the lack of spending from other nations, you also have to be prepared to exert less influence as other countries get stronger. Are you prepared to give up your status as the only real superpower?Military Spending - Our World in Data

Oh and btw, since near all weaponry used by the military in the US is manufactured in the US itself, the money doesn't leave the US but fuels the armaments industry. In Europe a lot of the military hardware is produced in the United States. In other words of the money Europe spends on the military a substantial amount goes to the United States. While very little of the money goes the other way. So I think the status quo, with Europe not developing it's armaments industry as much as it could benefits the US.

 

[Tehon]

We, as in homo sapiens, are not yet ready for it. We will be lucky to survive capitalism, imo.

Then it sounds like we should focus on getting capitalism right rather, rather than daydreaming about the distant future.

I might be a daydreamer, but you're delusional.

The system is inherently flawed. That knowledge was Marx's contribution to this world. If people didn't dismiss Marx out of hand, more people would probably see it for what it is.

In the early twentieth century people in this country, and especially in Europe, did see it. But those days are long gone. The capitalists have mastered the craft of persuasion and it is all but hidden now.

 

[danielpalos]

The truth of the matter is that it is a very broad term. It’s something that’s always been apart of the framework of this country yet Repubs like to pretend it is the antithesis of the Founding Father’s philosophy. Republicans have a hard time even defining the term in their OWN WORDS. That alone tells you they lack a basic understanding of the word.

The right wing is always clueless and Causeless when it comes to understanding our form of federal Government.

Socialism must start, with a social Contract. Our Constitutions are written examples of Social-ism.

 

[Doc1]

We, as in homo sapiens, are not yet ready for it. We will be lucky to survive capitalism, imo.

Then it sounds like we should focus on getting capitalism right rather, rather than daydreaming about the distant future.

I might be a daydreamer, but you're delusional.

The system is inherently flawed. That knowledge was Marx's contribution to this world. If people didn't dismiss Marx out of hand, more people would probably see it for what it is.

In the early twentieth century people in this country, and especially in Europe, did see it. But those days are long gone. The capitalists have mastered the craft of persuasion and it is all but hidden now.

We've seen the movie, it never ends well.

 

[kaz]

As far as military spending goes. The US spends 3.3 percent of it's GDP on the military compared to 0.9 for Belgium

The first thing we need to do is to stop defending free loading countries for free. That would greatly help us bring our military costs back in line

I couldn't find the figures for Belgium I did find them for Germany a country comparable to us. In 1989 Germany spend 2.41 of it's GDP on defense in 2016 1.18. So it declined 1.23 percent. For the US it went from 5.37 percent to 3.29 percent. So a relative decline of 2.08 percent. Seems to me that Germany didn't cut back it's relative military spending as much as the United States after the cold war, neither did it start wars under falls pretext ( Iraq). Nor does it use it's military capability to spread it's influence throughout the world. When you bemoan the lack of spending from other nations, you also have to be prepared to exert less influence as other countries get stronger. Are you prepared to give up your status as the only real superpower?Military Spending - Our World in Data

Actually, mathematically from your numbers, the US reduced our defense spending by 39% and Germany did by 51%.

The difference is that 3.29% is enough to defend ourselves and 1.18% is not enough for Germany to defend itself. Germany at that rate is just counting on us to defend them.

I worked in Benelux for 10 months a couple years ago. I was based in Rotterdam. They were very aware of Russian intimidation right now. Is that the same in Belgium? I worked in Brussels, but that was in the 90s so I don't know how things are now.

Between Muslims and Russians, you need a lot more defense than we do right now.

BTW, I was in Antwerp the weekend before Xmas, it was awesome