Republicans can’t seem to accurately define what socialism is

[Tehon]

You admitted that the term simply means the labor cost of an item, which didn't determine the price.

The price of a commodity is determined in the market. Is it not? The cost of producing a commodity would likewise be determined in the market since labor is also a commodity.

You failed utterly to demonstrate that the term "intrinsic value" means anything.

It's the accumulated labor hours required to produce a commodity. Surely you can agree that it takes time and labor to improve upon nature. That is something all commodities have in common irrespective of cost.

You also failed to demonstrate there is any connection between labor cost and "intrinsic value.

There isn't one.

The cost of a commodity is determined by the market the commodity it is being sold in. So, if you have a completely competitive economy, which in the real world is pretty much non existent, then you get the agreement between many sellers and many buyers negotiating a price.
Add monopoly power, which is normal in any economy today, and you get an additional part of price determination. And as such, things get more expensive, based solely on monopoly power.
A good deal of socialism today is devoted to trying to mediate monopoly power.

So, while actual socialism does exist, the opposite end of the spectrum does not. Pure capitalism is a theory. Same thing as a Libertarian economy. No social, or government, component. But it never, ever works. There is no successful libertarian economy, and there is no purely socialistic, or communist economies. All we have are economies with some degree of capitalist and socialist mix. Except for a couple questionable communist economies which have not yet fully failed.

So, get over the idea that the only rational economy is one that is fully capitalistic, or LIBERTARIAN. They do not exist. The argument is how much socialism is best.

Apparently I have a different working definition of socialism than every other participant in this thread.

Anyway, thank you for confirming my statement.

 

[Tehon]

You failed utterly to demonstrate that the term "intrinsic value" means anything.

It's the accumulated labor hours required to produce a commodity. Surely you can agree that it takes time and labor to improve upon nature. That is something all commodities have in common irrespective of cost.

I can agree to that. As long as you don't try to equivocate and compare that measure to the market value. Apples and oranges.

I don't believe I have.

 

[bripat9643]

You failed utterly to demonstrate that the term "intrinsic value" means anything.

It's the accumulated labor hours required to produce a commodity. Surely you can agree that it takes time and labor to improve upon nature. That is something all commodities have in common irrespective of cost.

I can agree to that. As long as you don't try to equivocate and compare that measure to the market value. Apples and oranges.

But he believes the market value is a means of "expoiting" the workers because they aren't being paid for the "intrinsic value" of their labor, so don't agree with him. He uses words that you think you understand, but they mean something entirely different to him. According to Marxism, the market price is not the "intrinsic value" of an item.

 

[bripat9643]

You admitted that the term simply means the labor cost of an item, which didn't determine the price.

The price of a commodity is determined in the market. Is it not? The cost of producing a commodity would likewise be determined in the market since labor is also a commodity.

You failed utterly to demonstrate that the term "intrinsic value" means anything.

It's the accumulated labor hours required to produce a commodity. Surely you can agree that it takes time and labor to improve upon nature. That is something all commodities have in common irrespective of cost.

Edit: I figure I can't leave anything to chance with you. Like you knowing the meaning of the word .
Intrinsic;
belonging naturally; essential.

You also failed to demonstrate there is any connection between labor cost and "intrinsic value.

There isn't one.

#1) Intrinsic value: "It's the accumulated labor hours required to produce a commodity."

#2) You also failed to demonstrate there is any connection between labor cost and "intrinsic value": "There isn't one."

You contradicted yourself. Does the "intrinsic value" equal the labor cost or not?

 

[Billy000]

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.

You've got to read the book. They always butcher the movie.

Here Marx attempts to correct the storyline before the release of the movie.

Critique of the Gotha Programme

Idiots like the op have long existed. It's the reason Marx proclaimed that he wasn't a Marxist.

Billy000 is not a democratic socialist, he is a stooge for the capitalist state.

Are this much of a moron to believe Marxism is the same as social democratic principles?

You don't claim to be a social democrat. You claim to be a democratic socialist. Do you understand the difference?

There is no difference depending on the source but yes there are minor differences. I really wouldn’t expect you to understand that because you think it’s the same as Marxism.

 

[bripat9643]

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.

You've got to read the book. They always butcher the movie.

Here Marx attempts to correct the storyline before the release of the movie.

Critique of the Gotha Programme

Idiots like the op have long existed. It's the reason Marx proclaimed that he wasn't a Marxist.

Billy000 is not a democratic socialist, he is a stooge for the capitalist state.

Are this much of a moron to believe Marxism is the same as social democratic principles?

You don't claim to be a social democrat. You claim to be a democratic socialist. Do you understand the difference?

There is no difference depending on the source but yes there are minor differences. I really wouldn’t expect you to understand that because you think it’s the same as Marxism.

Most socialists use Marxist arguments to justify their Utopia.

 

[Billy000]

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

You've got to read the book. They always butcher the movie.

Here Marx attempts to correct the storyline before the release of the movie.

Critique of the Gotha Programme

Idiots like the op have long existed. It's the reason Marx proclaimed that he wasn't a Marxist.

Billy000 is not a democratic socialist, he is a stooge for the capitalist state.

Are this much of a moron to believe Marxism is the same as social democratic principles?

You don't claim to be a social democrat. You claim to be a democratic socialist. Do you understand the difference?

There is no difference depending on the source but yes there are minor differences. I really wouldn’t expect you to understand that because you think it’s the same as Marxism.

Most socialists use Marxist arguments to justify their Utopia.

No they do not.

 

[Tehon]

You admitted that the term simply means the labor cost of an item, which didn't determine the price.

The price of a commodity is determined in the market. Is it not? The cost of producing a commodity would likewise be determined in the market since labor is also a commodity.

You failed utterly to demonstrate that the term "intrinsic value" means anything.

It's the accumulated labor hours required to produce a commodity. Surely you can agree that it takes time and labor to improve upon nature. That is something all commodities have in common irrespective of cost.

Edit: I figure I can't leave anything to chance with you. Like you knowing the meaning of the word .
Intrinsic;
belonging naturally; essential.

You also failed to demonstrate there is any connection between labor cost and "intrinsic value.

There isn't one.

#1) Intrinsic value: "It's the accumulated labor hours required to produce a commodity."

#2) You also failed to demonstrate there is any connection between labor cost and "intrinsic value": "There isn't one."

You contradicted yourself. Does the "intrinsic value" equal the labor cost or not?

No.

Where is the contradiction?

 

[Tehon]

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.

You've got to read the book. They always butcher the movie.

Here Marx attempts to correct the storyline before the release of the movie.

Critique of the Gotha Programme

Idiots like the op have long existed. It's the reason Marx proclaimed that he wasn't a Marxist.

Billy000 is not a democratic socialist, he is a stooge for the capitalist state.

Are this much of a moron to believe Marxism is the same as social democratic principles?

You don't claim to be a social democrat. You claim to be a democratic socialist. Do you understand the difference?

There is no difference depending on the source but yes there are minor differences. I really wouldn’t expect you to understand that because you think it’s the same as Marxism.

You're obfuscating.
Which do I believe is the same as Marxism, social democracy or democratic socialism?

 

[regent]

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

You've got to read the book. They always butcher the movie.

Here Marx attempts to correct the storyline before the release of the movie.

Critique of the Gotha Programme

Idiots like the op have long existed. It's the reason Marx proclaimed that he wasn't a Marxist.

Billy000 is not a democratic socialist, he is a stooge for the capitalist state.

Are this much of a moron to believe Marxism is the same as social democratic principles?

You don't claim to be a social democrat. You claim to be a democratic socialist. Do you understand the difference?

There is no difference depending on the source but yes there are minor differences. I really wouldn’t expect you to understand that because you think it’s the same as Marxism.

Most socialists use Marxist arguments to justify their Utopia.

Both Marx and Engels had no use for Utopian Socialists.

 

[Billy000]

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

You've got to read the book. They always butcher the movie.

Here Marx attempts to correct the storyline before the release of the movie.

Critique of the Gotha Programme

Idiots like the op have long existed. It's the reason Marx proclaimed that he wasn't a Marxist.

Billy000 is not a democratic socialist, he is a stooge for the capitalist state.

Are this much of a moron to believe Marxism is the same as social democratic principles?

You don't claim to be a social democrat. You claim to be a democratic socialist. Do you understand the difference?

There is no difference depending on the source but yes there are minor differences. I really wouldn’t expect you to understand that because you think it’s the same as Marxism.

You're obfuscating.
Which do I believe is the same as Marxism, social democracy or democratic socialism?

Neither one you dumb shit.

 

[Tehon]

You've got to read the book. They always butcher the movie.

Here Marx attempts to correct the storyline before the release of the movie.

Critique of the Gotha Programme

Idiots like the op have long existed. It's the reason Marx proclaimed that he wasn't a Marxist.

Billy000 is not a democratic socialist, he is a stooge for the capitalist state.

Are this much of a moron to believe Marxism is the same as social democratic principles?

You don't claim to be a social democrat. You claim to be a democratic socialist. Do you understand the difference?

There is no difference depending on the source but yes there are minor differences. I really wouldn’t expect you to understand that because you think it’s the same as Marxism.

You're obfuscating.
Which do I believe is the same as Marxism, social democracy or democratic socialism?

Neither one you dumb shit.

Then why did you say I thought "it" is the same as Marxism?

Say what you mean.

 

[Tehon]

You failed utterly to demonstrate that the term "intrinsic value" means anything.

It's the accumulated labor hours required to produce a commodity. Surely you can agree that it takes time and labor to improve upon nature. That is something all commodities have in common irrespective of cost.

I can agree to that. As long as you don't try to equivocate and compare that measure to the market value. Apples and oranges.

But he believes the market value is a means of "expoiting" the workers because they aren't being paid for the "intrinsic value" of their labor, so don't agree with him. He uses words that you think you understand, but they mean something entirely different to him. According to Marxism, the market price is not the "intrinsic value" of an item.

Lol, I don't believe workers are being exploited by the market, stupid.

 

[Tehon]

Are this much of a moron to believe Marxism is the same as social democratic principles?

You don't claim to be a social democrat. You claim to be a democratic socialist. Do you understand the difference?

There is no difference depending on the source but yes there are minor differences. I really wouldn’t expect you to understand that because you think it’s the same as Marxism.

You're obfuscating.
Which do I believe is the same as Marxism, social democracy or democratic socialism?

Neither one you dumb shit.

Then why did you say I thought "it" is the same as Marxism?

Say what you mean.

Actually, I don't really care.

There is a distinct difference between a social democrat and a democratic socialist.

You are a social democrat. You believe in redistribution of wealth by means of the state. You believe this because you believe in the capitalist system but wish to offset the worst of its abuses.

As opposed to a democratic socialist. One who believes in Marxist principles relating to the social means of production but believes it will be brought about through democracy rather than social revolution.

 

[Billy000]

Are this much of a moron to believe Marxism is the same as social democratic principles?

You don't claim to be a social democrat. You claim to be a democratic socialist. Do you understand the difference?

There is no difference depending on the source but yes there are minor differences. I really wouldn’t expect you to understand that because you think it’s the same as Marxism.

You're obfuscating.
Which do I believe is the same as Marxism, social democracy or democratic socialism?

Neither one you dumb shit.

Then why did you say I thought "it" is the same as Marxism?

Say what you mean.

Um probably because you are even talking about Marxism and this brand of socialism in the same post. Just admit it. You’re talking out of your ass.

 

[Billy000]

You don't claim to be a social democrat. You claim to be a democratic socialist. Do you understand the difference?

There is no difference depending on the source but yes there are minor differences. I really wouldn’t expect you to understand that because you think it’s the same as Marxism.

You're obfuscating.
Which do I believe is the same as Marxism, social democracy or democratic socialism?

Neither one you dumb shit.

Then why did you say I thought "it" is the same as Marxism?

Say what you mean.

Actually, I don't really care.

There is a distinct difference between a social democrat and a democratic socialist.

You are a social democrat. You believe in redistribution of wealth by means of the state. You believe this because you believe in the capitalist system but wish to offset the worst of its abuses.

As opposed to a democratic socialist. One who believes in Marxist principles relating to the social means of production but believes it will be brought about through democracy rather than social revolution.

Lol I’m guessing you looked up these terms just now. As you can see Marxism is irrelevant to the conversation.

 

[bripat9643]

You admitted that the term simply means the labor cost of an item, which didn't determine the price.

The price of a commodity is determined in the market. Is it not? The cost of producing a commodity would likewise be determined in the market since labor is also a commodity.

You failed utterly to demonstrate that the term "intrinsic value" means anything.

It's the accumulated labor hours required to produce a commodity. Surely you can agree that it takes time and labor to improve upon nature. That is something all commodities have in common irrespective of cost.

Edit: I figure I can't leave anything to chance with you. Like you knowing the meaning of the word .
Intrinsic;
belonging naturally; essential.

You also failed to demonstrate there is any connection between labor cost and "intrinsic value.

There isn't one.

#1) Intrinsic value: "It's the accumulated labor hours required to produce a commodity."

#2) You also failed to demonstrate there is any connection between labor cost and "intrinsic value": "There isn't one."

You contradicted yourself. Does the "intrinsic value" equal the labor cost or not?

No.

Where is the contradiction?

You're absolutely hopeless.

#1) you say intrinsic value is equal to the labor cost of a product.

#2) you say intrinsic value is NOT equal to the labor cost of a product.

 

[bripat9643]

You failed utterly to demonstrate that the term "intrinsic value" means anything.

It's the accumulated labor hours required to produce a commodity. Surely you can agree that it takes time and labor to improve upon nature. That is something all commodities have in common irrespective of cost.

I can agree to that. As long as you don't try to equivocate and compare that measure to the market value. Apples and oranges.

But he believes the market value is a means of "expoiting" the workers because they aren't being paid for the "intrinsic value" of their labor, so don't agree with him. He uses words that you think you understand, but they mean something entirely different to him. According to Marxism, the market price is not the "intrinsic value" of an item.

Lol, I don't believe workers are being exploited by the market, stupid.

Then you aren't a marxist.

 

[Tehon]

There is no difference depending on the source but yes there are minor differences. I really wouldn’t expect you to understand that because you think it’s the same as Marxism.

You're obfuscating.
Which do I believe is the same as Marxism, social democracy or democratic socialism?

Neither one you dumb shit.

Then why did you say I thought "it" is the same as Marxism?

Say what you mean.

Actually, I don't really care.

There is a distinct difference between a social democrat and a democratic socialist.

You are a social democrat. You believe in redistribution of wealth by means of the state. You believe this because you believe in the capitalist system but wish to offset the worst of its abuses.

As opposed to a democratic socialist. One who believes in Marxist principles relating to the social means of production but believes it will be brought about through democracy rather than social revolution.

Lol I’m guessing you looked up these terms just now. As you can see Marxism is irrelevant to the conversation.

Weak dude, you admitted to me that you were a social democrat nearly nine months ago.

That you believe Marx to be irrelevant in a conversation about the definition of socialism is pretty unbelievable.

 

[Tehon]

You failed utterly to demonstrate that the term "intrinsic value" means anything.

It's the accumulated labor hours required to produce a commodity. Surely you can agree that it takes time and labor to improve upon nature. That is something all commodities have in common irrespective of cost.

I can agree to that. As long as you don't try to equivocate and compare that measure to the market value. Apples and oranges.

But he believes the market value is a means of "expoiting" the workers because they aren't being paid for the "intrinsic value" of their labor, so don't agree with him. He uses words that you think you understand, but they mean something entirely different to him. According to Marxism, the market price is not the "intrinsic value" of an item.

Lol, I don't believe workers are being exploited by the market, stupid.

Then you aren't a marxist.

How would you know?