What is Profit?

[KevinWestern]

Oh and to answer your question, I don't think capitalism is a zero sum game.

If a company buys $30 worth of wood, nails, and sandpaper and turns it into a boat worth $100 (with skills and expertise), they have essentially created some new positive value for the economy. The person who purchased the boat couldn't have done the same thing him/herself if he/she simply bought the $30 worth of raw materials (which is why he/she is willing to pay $100 for it).

The boat is not worth just the sum of its parts.

 

[gnarlylove]

You can theorize all day about systems where wealth is shared more equally, etc, however IN PRACTICE those systems always have turned out to be catastrophic.

This is a total lie made up by our country to get us to think we live in democracy when we live in industrial feudalism where corporations control the gist of the world. No body denies that.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0L9NvUdEzRo&feature=c4-overview&list=UUxMu38GAMIVPyhsxzd2PVGw"]And in practice socialism has been evacuated of meaning[/ame]. I doubt you have an understanding of socialism or alternative theories for what they are, you understand them through the lens of capitalism which necessitates that it is the final stage of history. There is no more progress beyond markets. This is a fat lie and if it's not, our economics will create ultimate doom within the next century or two. I refuse to believe humanity will die out and so we will not continue in these bad economic policies that support a few people on the backs of everyone else. As long as folks like yourself only care about your circumstances, we will continue to be a tyrannical society dominated by corporate power with government enforcing it.

 

[KevinWestern]

You can theorize all day about systems where wealth is shared more equally, etc, however IN PRACTICE those systems always have turned out to be catastrophic.

This is a total lie made up by our country to get us to think we live in democracy when we live in industrial feudalism where corporations control the gist of the world. No body denies that.

I doubt you have an understanding of socialism or alternative theories for what they are, you understand them through the lens of capitalism which necessitates that it is the final stage of history. There is no more progress beyond markets. This is a fat lie and if it's not, our economics will create ultimate doom within the next century or two. I refuse to believe humanity will die out and so we will not continue in these bad economic policies that support a few people on the backs of everyone else. As long as folks like yourself only care about your circumstances, we will continue to be a tyrannical society dominated by corporate power with government enforcing it.

We’ll lets clarify something here. I realize that we’re not living under a truly free market, and that many of the problems you describe are a result of crony capitalism – which I 100% oppose. If it weren’t for crony capitalism, we wouldn’t have had the housing bubble, we wouldn’t have had the bailout, and we’d be sitting in a much better place today than we are currently.

But my main question – what (in a few short words) sort of system do you propose in place of the one we have now? What will be the incentives to work? What will be the forces that keep things together and running smoothly? I'm open for discussion.

 

[Rshermr]

You can theorize all day about systems where wealth is shared more equally, etc, however IN PRACTICE those systems always have turned out to be catastrophic.

This is a total lie made up by our country to get us to think we live in democracy when we live in industrial feudalism where corporations control the gist of the world. No body denies that.

I doubt you have an understanding of socialism or alternative theories for what they are, you understand them through the lens of capitalism which necessitates that it is the final stage of history. There is no more progress beyond markets. This is a fat lie and if it's not, our economics will create ultimate doom within the next century or two. I refuse to believe humanity will die out and so we will not continue in these bad economic policies that support a few people on the backs of everyone else. As long as folks like yourself only care about your circumstances, we will continue to be a tyrannical society dominated by corporate power with government enforcing it.

We’ll lets clarify something here. I realize that we’re not living under a truly free market, and that many of the problems you describe are a result of crony capitalism – which I 100% oppose. If it weren’t for crony capitalism, we wouldn’t have had the housing bubble, we wouldn’t have had the bailout, and we’d be sitting in a much better place today than we are currently.

But my main question – what (in a few short words) sort of system do you propose in place of the one we have now? What will be the incentives to work? What will be the forces that keep things together and running smoothly? I'm open for discussion.

Perhaps something close to the German Social Market System. Though no economic system from any other country single system will fit any other country necessarily.
Answers your questions. No problems with motivation to work, or keeping things moving smoothly.

Or, you could simply listen to economists relative to changes in our own economy, and look at other countries. See how things work. Instead, that is, of trying to believe that only the usa has a valid economy.

 

[DGS49]

It is only rational to presume that for everyone employed anywhere, that employment is the BEST OPTION THEY HAVE to derive the GREATEST POSSIBLE BENFIT from their time and effort. If they could find a better job, they would have done so, otherwise they are not behaving rationally. As an outsider, you may not agree with that assessment, or may not understand it, but if people are working 20 hours a week at WalMart, with minimal benefits, that must be satisfactory TO THEM, otherwise, they wouldn't be there.

Conversely, every employer has an obligation to its owners to obtain the materials and services it needs to function at the lowest possible overall cost. Purchasing agents are encouraged (if not required) to go out regularly and obtain as much competition as possible among vendors, to negotiate as hard as possible, and to constantly look at beneficial intangibles to derive the greatest possible value from procurement dollars.

And the same thing goes for human capital. If the marketplace allows an employer to hire people at the statutory minimum wage, and those people can do the job adequately, then the employer would be doing a disservice to its owners to pay more.

I worked for a company once that made a decision to shut down its own manufacturing operations because they realized that with their high shop rates, they could have their products manufactured by others at a lower overall cost. There was nothing "immoral" about it, even though many people lost their jobs. The shops where we bought our stuff had to hire additional workers to cover the additional work.

But most often, workers who have the desired skills, experience, work habits, and so on WILL NOT WORK FOR MINIMUM WAGE, so the employer must pay more - it must pay a market price for the people it needs. This is why you go to school, learn a trade, or develop unique skills and capabilities - to make yourself valuable to potential employers (and customers).

The harmful effect of Unions is that they exert pressure on employers to negotiate greater compensation than the marketplace would otherwise require, resulting in end products that COST more than the market will bear. And the employer loses money, and eventually goes out of business. This was the formula for the death of the domestic steel and heavy manufacturing industries in the 1970's.

It is totally irrational to say (or believe) that the employers control "everything." Why do you think petroleum engineers are making $80-100 thousand right out of college right now? There is a huge demand for their knowledge, and not enough of them to fill the demand. If an employer advertised a position for a pet-eng for $50 thousand, the only people who would apply would be people with dubious credentials or fuck-ups who have failed someplace else.

How do top law school grads command six figure starting salaries? Because law firms are gullible? Hardly.

And if you have NO skills and NO work experience you need to take whatever job you can to get in the door, then once you have proven your value, look for something better. If you are still making MW after 2 years on the job, it is not a problem with the EMPLOYER, it's a problem with YOU.

And when the SEIU organizes a demonstraton DEMANDING that some group of workers have their wages increased by 50%, just because they want the money - even if the NEED the money - it is total nonsense. Wages are not determined by how much you want or need, but by how much VALUE you bring to the table. Nobody gives you a raise when you have a kid (and your financial requirements increase), or when your wife gets fired. It's up to you to increase your value to your present employer or go out and get a better job.

We do not live in North Korea or Cuba or the Soviet Union. Deal with it.

 

[KevinWestern]

This is a total lie made up by our country to get us to think we live in democracy when we live in industrial feudalism where corporations control the gist of the world. No body denies that.

I doubt you have an understanding of socialism or alternative theories for what they are, you understand them through the lens of capitalism which necessitates that it is the final stage of history. There is no more progress beyond markets. This is a fat lie and if it's not, our economics will create ultimate doom within the next century or two. I refuse to believe humanity will die out and so we will not continue in these bad economic policies that support a few people on the backs of everyone else. As long as folks like yourself only care about your circumstances, we will continue to be a tyrannical society dominated by corporate power with government enforcing it.

We’ll lets clarify something here. I realize that we’re not living under a truly free market, and that many of the problems you describe are a result of crony capitalism – which I 100% oppose. If it weren’t for crony capitalism, we wouldn’t have had the housing bubble, we wouldn’t have had the bailout, and we’d be sitting in a much better place today than we are currently.

But my main question – what (in a few short words) sort of system do you propose in place of the one we have now? What will be the incentives to work? What will be the forces that keep things together and running smoothly? I'm open for discussion.

Perhaps something close to the German Social Market System. Though no economic system from any other country single system will fit any other country necessarily.
Answers your questions. No problems with motivation to work, or keeping things moving smoothly.

Or, you could simply listen to economists relative to changes in our own economy, and look at other countries. See how things work. Instead, that is, of trying to believe that only the usa has a valid economy.

But the German economy IS profit driven, correct?

 

[gnarlylove]

We’ll lets clarify something here. I realize that we’re not living under a truly free market, and that many of the problems you describe are a result of crony capitalism – which I 100% oppose. If it weren’t for crony capitalism, we wouldn’t have had the housing bubble, we wouldn’t have had the bailout, and we’d be sitting in a much better place today than we are currently.

While I think the short term effects on global markets would have been devastating. Our institutions and the Feds feared "systemic risk" where the whole damn world would have been changed. Now that's debatable whether it would turn out that way, but undoubtedly suffering would have multiplied when trillions of more dollars, would have vanished had not there been forced moved and buyouts by the gov't.

In the long run, would we have been better off? Say in 25 or more years? Yeah. Probably way better off than if we keep trudging along with this system we currently obey.

But my main question – what (in a few short words) sort of system do you propose in place of the one we have now? What will be the incentives to work? What will be the forces that keep things together and running smoothly? I'm open for discussion.

This sort of stuff makes my heart sing and is all too rare on this board. It is literally the first step to reaching a better system (or even one without government or dominating forces like corporate media). We must first redefine our understanding and it starts with this question--what do you suppose replace the present circumstances?

So it begins with understanding that humans are not only motivated by the greed incentive. Very few people in our economy operate solely based on greed, the one's that do are the best and they are also known as "functional psychopaths." But what is our supposed main motivation? Well, that people only do something when it's for themselves.

This is a whole ego centric philosophy that puts a person at the center of the universe and says me and my tribe is all that matters. If we can go beyond this narrow idea of human competition and see that humans can just as easily be brought up to realize that creating welfare for everyone can be as valid as one's own interest and indeed, highly a motivating incentive.

Many state socialist nations are familiar with non-greed incentives like Norway but we can easily educate everyone in the USA to also accept communal thanks (knowing your skills provide valuable service to your community--the global community) and the genuine benefits are sustenance for your family but does not cater to unlimited greed. That say a doctor who saves lives can be satisfied/rewarded sufficiently by knowing he saved lives and that enabled real human beings to develop and flourish reuniting loved ones etc. Of course this seems like a daunting task but it's not impossible--humans are marvelously able to adapt to most anything--including societal values.

But Wall St. financial speculation and Goldman Sachs computers skimming change off the market and pensions provides no social utility except satisfying avarice of a few elite. This harms society and requires a huge source of cheap labor to continue supporting this eternal struggle of keeping the masses enslaved.

These ways of looking at the world are indoctrinated, they are not innate to human beings. It easily to imagine a different society than our own and indeed there are about 190 of these experiments going on right now. USA pretends it has a monopoly on freedom and domination but this is genuine oppression of peoples including its citizens sometimes with the bludgeon and other times repression of information or propaganda.

This was Marx's hope for socialism--transform what capitalism has made man into a more aware caring human being aka reciprocal altruistist. So socialism is a means to an end as well as an end in itself. We simply will not be able to switch society in the blink of an eye to caring for one another so we need transitions. Socialism is of course the basic idea the workers control the means of production instead of private elite whom you'll never meet.

Now if you resist what I'm saying or more accurately my descriptions of reality, it's because we have never been taught this in the course of normal life. We simply are not taught to ask these questions. Thus we need a re-description of reality in narratives and in our core values and philosophy. This would not happen with ease and the education to these unfamiliar descriptions would encounter wide resistance. But only through this re-education and re-description can we begin to formally create a better society. Only upon critical inspection of ourselves and our sources can we begin to understand our reality differently.

Now if you're simply looking for principles for a new society look nor further than other countries. But if you want a more idealized system to guide us, there are variety of books, critical books and essays might I add.
Envisioning Real Utopias

Richard Rorty has a number of books and is very accessible, lucid writer unlike most philosophers I know.
Fraternity Reigns - NYTimes.com
Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity - Richard Rorty - Google Books

Here is a simply educated blogger writing on The sustainable society of 2040 | Education for Sustainable Development

edited: I'd also recommend this book and his blog. http://www.neweconomyworkinggroup.org/visions/new-economy-20

 

[KevinWestern]

We’ll lets clarify something here. I realize that we’re not living under a truly free market, and that many of the problems you describe are a result of crony capitalism – which I 100% oppose. If it weren’t for crony capitalism, we wouldn’t have had the housing bubble, we wouldn’t have had the bailout, and we’d be sitting in a much better place today than we are currently.

While I think the short term effects on global markets would have been devastating. Our institutions and the Feds feared "systemic risk" where the whole damn world would have been changed. Now that's debatable whether it would turn out that way, but undoubtedly suffering would have multiplied when trillions of more dollars, would have vanished had not there been forced moved and buyouts by the gov't.

In the long run, would we have been better off? Say in 25 or more years? Yeah. Probably way better off than if we keep trudging along with this system we currently obey.

But my main question – what (in a few short words) sort of system do you propose in place of the one we have now? What will be the incentives to work? What will be the forces that keep things together and running smoothly? I'm open for discussion.

This sort of stuff makes my heart sing and is all too rare on this board. It is literally the first step to reaching a better system (or even one without government or dominating forces like corporate media). We must first redefine our understanding and it starts with this question--what do you suppose replace the present circumstances?

So it begins with understanding that humans are not only motivated by the greed incentive. Very few people in our economy operate solely based on greed, the one's that do are the best and they are also known as "functional psychopaths." But what is our supposed main motivation? Well, that people only do something when it's for themselves.

This is a whole ego centric philosophy that puts a person at the center of the universe and says me and my tribe is all that matters. If we can go beyond this narrow idea of human competition and see that humans can just as easily be brought up to realize that creating welfare for everyone can be as valid as one's own interest and indeed, highly a motivating incentive.

Many state socialist nations are familiar with non-greed incentives like Norway but we can easily educate everyone in the USA to also accept communal thanks (knowing your skills provide valuable service to your community--the global community) and the genuine benefits are sustenance for your family but does not cater to unlimited greed. That say a doctor who saves lives can be satisfied/rewarded sufficiently by knowing he saved lives and that enabled real human beings to develop and flourish reuniting loved ones etc. Of course this seems like a daunting task but it's not impossible--humans are marvelously able to adapt to most anything--including societal values.

But Wall St. financial speculation and Goldman Sachs computers skimming change off the market and pensions provides no social utility except satisfying avarice of a few elite. This harms society and requires a huge source of cheap labor to continue supporting this eternal struggle of keeping the masses enslaved.

These ways of looking at the world are indoctrinated, they are not innate to human beings. It easily to imagine a different society than our own and indeed there are about 190 of these experiments going on right now. USA pretends it has a monopoly on freedom and domination but this is genuine oppression of peoples including its citizens sometimes with the bludgeon and other times repression of information or propaganda.

This was Marx's hope for socialism--transform what capitalism has made man into a more aware caring human being aka reciprocal altruistist. So socialism is a means to an end as well as an end in itself. We simply will not be able to switch society in the blink of an eye to caring for one another so we need transitions. Socialism is of course the basic idea the workers control the means of production instead of private elite whom you'll never meet.

Now if you resist what I'm saying or more accurately my descriptions of reality, it's because we have never been taught this in the course of normal life. We simply are not taught to ask these questions. Thus we need a re-description of reality in narratives and in our core values and philosophy. This would not happen with ease and the education to these unfamiliar descriptions would encounter wide resistance. But only through this re-education and re-description can we begin to formally create a better society. Only upon critical inspection of ourselves and our sources can we begin to understand our reality differently.

Now if you're simply looking for principles for a new society look nor further than other countries. But if you want a more idealized system to guide us, there are variety of books, critical books and essays might I add.
Envisioning Real Utopias

Richard Rorty has a number of books and is very accessible, lucid writer unlike most philosophers I know.
Fraternity Reigns - NYTimes.com
Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity - Richard Rorty - Google Books

Here is a simply educated blogger writing on The sustainable society of 2040 | Education for Sustainable Development

At work so I'll have to read through this all in more detail later, but I think we'd agree on a lot of things especially when it comes to the banking industry, exorbitant fees, exotic derivatives, government partnerships, and computers that trade 500 stocks in a millisecond. This is all garbage - in my view. However, this doesn't define "capitalism".

While I agree that greed isn't the only motivator, I still think it's the best we have at the moment. Sure, we can strive for a society that is raised to strive for motivator X (ie something other than money), and be as equally charged - as a group - to still build these ultra efficient companies that create products that benefit you or I immensely (ie computers, internet tools, etc) at a cheap price, but we have this very real problem that this is simply unattainable at the moment. I'm trying to be as rational as possible. The world is so incredibly complex that a free market - at the moment - seems to be the best solution. Until we - in a uniform way, as humans - reach some sort of higher plane and understanding the free market (to me) makes the most sense.

If the market isn't free, then (by definition) it must be the case that it's being controlled somehow. And as you or I know, inevitably the person/people controlling it are bound to be corrupted, bound to divvy out more to his/her friends, etc.

Again, (correct me if I'm wrong) the ideas you're proposing require some level of heavy "control" - right?

What's going to keep the controllers honest, ethical, and acting in the best interests of the people?

 

[gnarlylove]

At work so I'll have to read through this all in more detail later, but I think we'd agree on a lot of things especially when it comes to the banking industry, exorbitant fees, exotic derivatives, government partnerships, and computers that trade 500 stocks in a millisecond. This is all garbage - in my view. However, this doesn't define "capitalism".

While I agree that greed isn't the only motivator, I still think it's the best we have at the moment. Sure, we can strive for a society that is raised to strive for motivator X (ie something other than money), and be as equally charged - as a group - to still build these ultra efficient companies that create products that benefit you or I immensely (ie computers, internet tools, etc) at a cheap price, but we have this very real problem that this is simply unattainable at the moment. I'm trying to be as rational as possible. The world is so incredibly complex that a free market - at the moment - seems to be the best solution. Until we - in a uniform way, as humans - reach some sort of higher plane and understanding the free market (to me) makes the most sense.

If the market isn't free, then (by definition) it must be the case that it's being controlled somehow. And as you or I know, inevitably the person/people controlling it are bound to be corrupted, bound to divvy out more to his/her friends, etc.

Again, (correct me if I'm wrong) the ideas you're proposing require some level of heavy "control" - right?

What's going to keep the controllers honest, ethical, and acting in the best interests of the people?

I'm freakin' glad you notice the BS on Wall St. And it is quite true that is not the same as capitalism. I'd even go further to say you are right in that it's the best system for generating wealth/surplus.

Competition tends to create just like we see natural selection does. It gets the job done and so does market competition. But we know the market doesn't compete like it should; I'm not sure how much this is related but the efficient market hypothesis is just intellectual delusion and fantasy.

But really, what are we striving for? Generating greater amounts of wealth (and then it's being speculated on 100 times in the stock market)? Or a flourishing human society that may lack the incentive to create the latest gadget that does 1 additional thing the previous ones didn't?

Hasn't our system of cheap products from cheap labor totally deteriorated the model of capitalism anyway? Making inferior products generates more profit than does a handcrafted or solid product that lasts. I could point out examples all day but the point is yes, we would have to sacrifice certain good qualities or extremely fast advancement that capitalism or the model of competition has provided in order to achieve a holistically better society.

So we need to recognize the value of competition, which you correctly identify but we must also recognize where it should fit in. Do we want break neck pace of development (towards infinite growth) or a somewhat slower system that ends up satisfying the lot of humanity? It's a genuine debate that needs to be had. Right now, I can't see this issue being on the table ever but someday it has to or our species will basically kill itself.

But as a matter of who keeps those with power in check is the matter of the people controlling the decisions--a genuine democracy. Democracy and socialism goes hand in hand in one aspect: with having worker controlled factories and community owned community development, we would see greater participation and a better awareness of the balance of power. Currently we have about 5% of the populace voting based on issues.

I admit power is typically corrupting but I don't think it's absolutely necessary--we can avoid from making corrupt decisions but our whole system is predicated on pursuing ever loftier heights--corruption seems to be woven into the fabric.

Sorry for the long posts, I can't seem to remain brief!!!

 

[bripat9643]

We’ll lets clarify something here. I realize that we’re not living under a truly free market, and that many of the problems you describe are a result of crony capitalism – which I 100% oppose. If it weren’t for crony capitalism, we wouldn’t have had the housing bubble, we wouldn’t have had the bailout, and we’d be sitting in a much better place today than we are currently.

But my main question – what (in a few short words) sort of system do you propose in place of the one we have now? What will be the incentives to work? What will be the forces that keep things together and running smoothly? I'm open for discussion.

Perhaps something close to the German Social Market System. Though no economic system from any other country single system will fit any other country necessarily.
Answers your questions. No problems with motivation to work, or keeping things moving smoothly.

Or, you could simply listen to economists relative to changes in our own economy, and look at other countries. See how things work. Instead, that is, of trying to believe that only the usa has a valid economy.

But the German economy IS profit driven, correct?

Yes. "Social market economy" is a propaganda term. It means nothing in economics.

Also, everything Rshermr posted is bullshit. Free enterprise is good for everyone. It works wherever it is tried.

 

[Rshermr]

We’ll lets clarify something here. I realize that we’re not living under a truly free market, and that many of the problems you describe are a result of crony capitalism – which I 100% oppose. If it weren’t for crony capitalism, we wouldn’t have had the housing bubble, we wouldn’t have had the bailout, and we’d be sitting in a much better place today than we are currently.

But my main question – what (in a few short words) sort of system do you propose in place of the one we have now? What will be the incentives to work? What will be the forces that keep things together and running smoothly? I'm open for discussion.

Perhaps something close to the German Social Market System. Though no economic system from any other country single system will fit any other country necessarily.
Answers your questions. No problems with motivation to work, or keeping things moving smoothly.

Or, you could simply listen to economists relative to changes in our own economy, and look at other countries. See how things work. Instead, that is, of trying to believe that only the usa has a valid economy.

But the German economy IS profit driven, correct?

Most any economy is to some degree. The german economy is but has social controls in addition. Consider the great recession and how the german economy reacted: Rather than see layoffs in the hundreds of thousands, similar proportionally to the US situation, in germany workers worked less hours. , The result was MUCH lower unemployment.and they did not experience anything like the income losses US workers did. And the economy saw a much lower loss of aggregate demand than the us economy did. All because of government intervention into lay off policies. In the US, people were simply fired. Did not work out well. Unless, of course, you like high unemployment, lowered aggregate economic demand, and resultant depression of the economy.

In addition, the German gov restricts imports that hurt their manufacturing base. If you a german manufacturer, you can not simply decide to outsource your manufacturing and lay off employees. As such, they have a much healthier manufacturing sector. Kinda hurts the top layers of the corporations, as they do not make as high earnings as US manufacturing management. But productivity is very high, and the economy has been very strong.

 

[Barb]

We’ll lets clarify something here. I realize that we’re not living under a truly free market, and that many of the problems you describe are a result of crony capitalism – which I 100% oppose. If it weren’t for crony capitalism, we wouldn’t have had the housing bubble, we wouldn’t have had the bailout, and we’d be sitting in a much better place today than we are currently.

While I think the short term effects on global markets would have been devastating. Our institutions and the Feds feared "systemic risk" where the whole damn world would have been changed. Now that's debatable whether it would turn out that way, but undoubtedly suffering would have multiplied when trillions of more dollars, would have vanished had not there been forced moved and buyouts by the gov't.

In the long run, would we have been better off? Say in 25 or more years? Yeah. Probably way better off than if we keep trudging along with this system we currently obey.

But my main question – what (in a few short words) sort of system do you propose in place of the one we have now? What will be the incentives to work? What will be the forces that keep things together and running smoothly? I'm open for discussion.

This sort of stuff makes my heart sing and is all too rare on this board. It is literally the first step to reaching a better system (or even one without government or dominating forces like corporate media). We must first redefine our understanding and it starts with this question--what do you suppose replace the present circumstances?

So it begins with understanding that humans are not only motivated by the greed incentive. Very few people in our economy operate solely based on greed, the one's that do are the best and they are also known as "functional psychopaths." But what is our supposed main motivation? Well, that people only do something when it's for themselves.

This is a whole ego centric philosophy that puts a person at the center of the universe and says me and my tribe is all that matters. If we can go beyond this narrow idea of human competition and see that humans can just as easily be brought up to realize that creating welfare for everyone can be as valid as one's own interest and indeed, highly a motivating incentive.

Many state socialist nations are familiar with non-greed incentives like Norway but we can easily educate everyone in the USA to also accept communal thanks (knowing your skills provide valuable service to your community--the global community) and the genuine benefits are sustenance for your family but does not cater to unlimited greed. That say a doctor who saves lives can be satisfied/rewarded sufficiently by knowing he saved lives and that enabled real human beings to develop and flourish reuniting loved ones etc. Of course this seems like a daunting task but it's not impossible--humans are marvelously able to adapt to most anything--including societal values.

But Wall St. financial speculation and Goldman Sachs computers skimming change off the market and pensions provides no social utility except satisfying avarice of a few elite. This harms society and requires a huge source of cheap labor to continue supporting this eternal struggle of keeping the masses enslaved.

These ways of looking at the world are indoctrinated, they are not innate to human beings. It easily to imagine a different society than our own and indeed there are about 190 of these experiments going on right now. USA pretends it has a monopoly on freedom and domination but this is genuine oppression of peoples including its citizens sometimes with the bludgeon and other times repression of information or propaganda.

This was Marx's hope for socialism--transform what capitalism has made man into a more aware caring human being aka reciprocal altruistist. So socialism is a means to an end as well as an end in itself. We simply will not be able to switch society in the blink of an eye to caring for one another so we need transitions. Socialism is of course the basic idea the workers control the means of production instead of private elite whom you'll never meet.

Now if you resist what I'm saying or more accurately my descriptions of reality, it's because we have never been taught this in the course of normal life. We simply are not taught to ask these questions. Thus we need a re-description of reality in narratives and in our core values and philosophy. This would not happen with ease and the education to these unfamiliar descriptions would encounter wide resistance. But only through this re-education and re-description can we begin to formally create a better society. Only upon critical inspection of ourselves and our sources can we begin to understand our reality differently.

Now if you're simply looking for principles for a new society look nor further than other countries. But if you want a more idealized system to guide us, there are variety of books, critical books and essays might I add.
Envisioning Real Utopias

Richard Rorty has a number of books and is very accessible, lucid writer unlike most philosophers I know.
Fraternity Reigns - NYTimes.com
Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity - Richard Rorty - Google Books

Here is a simply educated blogger writing on The sustainable society of 2040 | Education for Sustainable Development

edited: I'd also recommend this book and his blog. New Economy 2.0 | New Economy Working Group

@gnarlylove, Thank you for the list and links I think you might also like this book:

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Other-Road-Serfdom-Sustainable-Democracy/dp/1584659610]The Other Road to Serfdom and the Path to Sustainable Democracy: Eric Zencey: 9781584659617: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]

and here's a link to a free chapter!

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B7uOLC1Cg1SycnAycVNfRmtrMTA/edit

 

[Norman]

Perhaps something close to the German Social Market System. Though no economic system from any other country single system will fit any other country necessarily.
Answers your questions. No problems with motivation to work, or keeping things moving smoothly.

Or, you could simply listen to economists relative to changes in our own economy, and look at other countries. See how things work. Instead, that is, of trying to believe that only the usa has a valid economy.

But the German economy IS profit driven, correct?

Most any economy is to some degree. The german economy is but has social controls in addition. Consider the great recession and how the german economy reacted: Rather than see layoffs in the hundreds of thousands, similar proportionally to the US situation, in germany workers worked less hours. , The result was MUCH lower unemployment.and they did not experience anything like the income losses US workers did. And the economy saw a much lower loss of aggregate demand than the us economy did. All because of government intervention into lay off policies. In the US, people were simply fired. Did not work out well. Unless, of course, you like high unemployment, lowered aggregate economic demand, and resultant depression of the economy.

In addition, the German gov restricts imports that hurt their manufacturing base. If you a german manufacturer, you can not simply decide to outsource your manufacturing and lay off employees. As such, they have a much healthier manufacturing sector. Kinda hurts the top layers of the corporations, as they do not make as high earnings as US manufacturing management. But productivity is very high, and the economy has been very strong.

Surely the fact that the housing bubble was primarily a american bubble had nothing to do with it?

 

[oldfart]

GDP is simply not a measure of well-being or life satisfaction. There is a non-zero sum arc to history but in the immediate human life span it's much more difficult to tell whether that arc is presently bending towards or away from well being. Don't confuse the two. Policies of the last 30 years are responsible for extreme poverty that simply should not exist in the wealthiest country on earth by far.

GDP: A Flawed Measure of Progress | New Economy Working Group
Dethroning GDP as our measure of progress - The Drum (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Wall Street’s Zero Sum Game: Phantom Wealth

OK, I read the three links. The third had nothing to do with your topic, it dealt with financial markets without discussing how that relates to well-being of a society.

Similarly, the first was a list of shortcomings of GDP as a measure of economic well-being, which I venture most economists would agree with. So that leaves you two choices: one is to take your ball and go home, having stated that the existing metrics are not good enough (it's hard to have a discussion between something as a metric and nothing; it may be true, but it doesn't lead anywhere). The other is to propose an alternative measure, which the first link does not do.

So we have the second link which does propose an alternative, the "Genuine Progress Indicator" referenced in a further link. Going to that link, it looks like a good attempt to suggest a measure that factors in income distribution, sustainability, and externalities into adjustments to GDP. I applaud the effort, I know of similar projects with similar results. None of these measures has achieved any level of common acceptance and all are pretty hard to find and track.

So my question is: Do you want to discuss GPI or a similar measure, or do you want to just look down your nose at GDP as being too inferior to use and end the discussion now?

I'm not being snarky, you set up the question and I think we deserve an answer before wasting time replying to you if your only interest is to cope out on anyone like Toro who dares disagree with you by playing the "none of these statistics is any good" card.

 

[oldfart]

You can theorize all day about systems where wealth is shared more equally, etc, however IN PRACTICE those systems always have turned out to be catastrophic.

This is a total lie made up by our country to get us to think we live in democracy when we live in industrial feudalism where corporations control the gist of the world. No body denies that.

I doubt you have an understanding of socialism or alternative theories for what they are, you understand them through the lens of capitalism which necessitates that it is the final stage of history. There is no more progress beyond markets. This is a fat lie and if it's not, our economics will create ultimate doom within the next century or two. I refuse to believe humanity will die out and so we will not continue in these bad economic policies that support a few people on the backs of everyone else. As long as folks like yourself only care about your circumstances, we will continue to be a tyrannical society dominated by corporate power with government enforcing it.

While I admire your ideological position without sharing it (I'm a Fabian not a Marxist) your posts have created a real mishmash of ideas. You ask a question when you have an agenda to push and push it regardless of how people reply. This is both a poor way of trying to persuade anyone (even people like me who would be sympathetic to your views), it is also intellectually dishonest.

You can either scree yourself hoarse to an empty room, or lose the doctrinaire attitude and discuss real issues, like the nature and role of profit or measures of economic well-being, where you listen and respond to other ideas. Your choice.

 

[oldfart]

But the German economy IS profit driven, correct?

Most any economy is to some degree. The german economy is but has social controls in addition. Consider the great recession and how the german economy reacted: Rather than see layoffs in the hundreds of thousands, similar proportionally to the US situation, in germany workers worked less hours. , The result was MUCH lower unemployment.and they did not experience anything like the income losses US workers did. And the economy saw a much lower loss of aggregate demand than the us economy did. All because of government intervention into lay off policies. In the US, people were simply fired. Did not work out well. Unless, of course, you like high unemployment, lowered aggregate economic demand, and resultant depression of the economy.

In addition, the German gov restricts imports that hurt their manufacturing base. If you a german manufacturer, you can not simply decide to outsource your manufacturing and lay off employees. As such, they have a much healthier manufacturing sector. Kinda hurts the top layers of the corporations, as they do not make as high earnings as US manufacturing management. But productivity is very high, and the economy has been very strong.

Surely the fact that the housing bubble was primarily a american bubble had nothing to do with it?

Southern Europe, especially Spain and Portugal, had massive housing bubbles also, proportionately larger than the US, and with similar results. What made it worse was that it occurred in the Euro zone so exchange rate adjustments were not available and there was no common fiscal policy as in the US.

 

[gnarlylove]

First off, I appreciate your questions. It sounds like you want to discuss and I'm all for that. But you had a tinge of frustration for lack of a better word. Frustration over the fact you thought I was incomplete. I think that's to be expected: why in the world would you think I am suppose to have a thorough system laid out in each of my posts? I have answers to your questions but I don't want to let you get away with your nonsensical approach of critiquing someone. Just ask me questions and leave out your bitter flavor of absurd expectations. I ask that you can recognize this shortcoming and don't let it infect our debate. It does nothing to advance dialogue nor should it be expected that each person post is a full coherent system in and unto itself (like Hegelian or Kantian system). So take your foot off the accelerator and lets discuss this like adults.


I don't know why you think I'm ideological. Maybe that's just your standard word for those in whom you find fault. I'm completely open to reality and think it's the foundation for understanding. Your questions are entirely valid and we must assess them using reality, not ideology.

The fact is GDP doesn't correspond 1:1 as a measure of well being. You know this and so don't assert my lack of acceptance of it as a fault or critique. The last link was posted in order to have a clearer understanding of how the financial system of speculation has little to do with the real economy yet we understand the economy to be doing OK when poverty is growing every day. It's only doing OK because a few people are doing so well that it balances out the measurements. You know this and I don't mean to insult your intelligence. I'm sorry your finding no relevancy for the last link, but just as our measurement that includes Wall St and Corporate profits in the well being of the economy, similarly, GDP is less a reflection on human well being and more a reflection on domestic products or an isolated aspect of human activity. Humans think in compartmentalized ways but this only tricks us into believing the rigidity of something when it's only one tiny aspect of reality that has vapid meaning in isolation.

In the 90s Greenspan was propounding "worker insecurity" as a major reason the economy was doing so well then. Turns out that this rubric has very little to do with the well being of a nation and a lot more to do with how well a few centers of wealth are doing.

So you rightly want to know my alternative proposals. Well, first of all, its technically a logical fallacy to stick with weak rubrics or positions simply because you are unaware of alternatives or that those alternatives yet to exist. That's by no means a legitimate critique! But luckily I'm not the only person who thinks this and so there are alternatives that did not exist just a decade or more ago. You're smart and can find plenty of alternatives because like I said, I'm not the only person who thinks this. So let me proffer one of the best one's I've seen. It's called the Happy Planet Index.

But what the real root of your problem with my language is that you align yourself with American political spectrum. You understand the parameters of debate to be right or left as defined by the establishment and media outlets. Your pursuit of truth within this narrow spectrum of thought is noble but its like banging your head on a wall because you confine yourself to limited understanding. If I am to respond on these pre-set terms of debate, you are right. We have very few alternatives to GDP within the spectrum of thought you seem to be focused on.

However, if you want to step outside of this box and ask some more foundational questions like, what should society be doing? Well, if you have a moral compass instead of a narcissistic one, we can begin to understand the reasons why GDP is flawed or more importantly, what might replace the aim of increased GDP; so simply stop concerning ourselves only with producing maximum amount of products (most are shoddy and contain planned obsolescence, the precise opposite of the concept of economy/efficiency). Instead, let's focus on building communities and outlets for activity (work, volunteer etc) that actually benefit the people and the community. Outsourcing makes total sense when you don't concern yourself with the well being of a society. It makes no sense from the perspective of human existence since it leaves millions without decent opportunities for contributing to society. 1 in 6 Americans are unemployed. We have massive resources that are not being used in capital and labor but somehow GDP is growing. Our "recovery" is totally anemic because a small sector is doing so well while the rest of slipping away into poverty. 60% of Americans will face poverty for one year or more (wikipedia "Poverty in US").

Princeton just released a study a week or so ago showing only 11% of folks who are currently unemployed can expect to find work in any given month. That means long term unemployment will continue to rise and the study concludes this trend will not reverse (how convenient it is not calculated in our ~8% unemployment measurement).

This demonstrates that the economy does not exist for humans, it exists for those at the top to plunder the rest and the world's resources. So we need to step outside this narrow paradigm of standard political discourse of the last 30 years and start asking some more foundational, moral and honest questions instead of running like a rat on a wheel with a pre-determined range of debate that precludes sensible discussion and human flourishing.

 

[whitehall]

It is about making money. Don't ever ask "what is profit" at a big flea market or you might be placed in the autistic row.

 

[gnarlylove]

It is about making money. Don't ever ask "what is profit" at a big flea market or you might be placed in the autistic row.

Your thoughts seem half formed or half baked. I cannot explain your odd reference to a flea market. But why do you think life is all about money? So what about attaining inner peace or at least emotional stability with the world? The pursuit of money brings with it endless troubles. I'm not saying money is not valuable, it is, but if all we do is promote narcissism through profit, we are in danger. Narcissism lends itself to intolerance and fascism.

 

[alan1]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIBT-JYiCuE]Star Trek Ferengi Rules of Acquisition Actual Show Footage - YouTube[/ame]