Who's Afraid of Socialism?

[sakinago]

The abolition of money is just a naive way of thinking that one could stop human brains from doing what they are wired to do, in order to survive, which is constantly attributing value and utility to the world around us. That’s actual science, and the fact that you rolled that thought out there shows how little science is behind this type of thinking. Attributing value and utility to things is what your subconscious brain never stops doing. Currency is nothing more than an efficient way of attributing value in a more quantifiable way. Currency is a human achievement, and it is a shortcut that allows the conscious brain to keep up with the subconscious brain and do a much better job of making decisions...in a way the rest of your “tribe” agreed upon. Currency has been a constant of humanity long before we’ve had recorded history, and way long before we put a numerical value to it thousands of years ago. It’s a part of nature that even insects participate in. It’s literally a system that is millions of years old, and there’s a pretty good reason why every civilization uses money since the invention of money.

Saying that you could abolish currency is like saying you could abolish the thinking behind what makes Matthew Mcconaughey and Scarlet Johanessen hot. You’d have immensely better luck abolishing smartphones. It’s extremely naive and narcissistic thinking, but most importantly, has zero basis in actual science.

Ah, but the scientific socialist understands this. That is why Marx began his magnum opus with the commodity, value, exchange value and the money form. I understand that there has to be an exchange of value, that doesn't mean it has to be in the form of circulating money that exists now. It can be a simple exchange of equal values.

How do you think it possible to argue against something you've never taken the time to understand? You might consider reading the link at the bottom of my post.

"Hence, when we bring the products of our labour into relation with each other as values, it is not because we see in these articles the material receptacles of homogeneous human labour. Quite the contrary: whenever, by an exchange, we equate as values our different products, by that very act, we also equate, as human labour, the different kinds of labour expended upon them. We are not aware of this, nevertheless we do it.[28] Value, therefore, does not stalk about with a label describing what it is. It is value, rather, that converts every product into a social hieroglyphic. Later on, we try to decipher the hieroglyphic, to get behind the secret of our own social products; for to stamp an object of utility as a value, is just as much a social product as language. "

Economic Manuscripts: Capital Vol. I - Chapter One

IVE READ MARX AND HEGEL. He semi acknowledges it, and then suggests the right thing to do is to tear down that system, and essientially pretend like it doesn’t exist. Which is why Marxism needs so much “re-education” to be implemented. They’re trying to say the human brain doesn’t work right, and let’s completely ignore human nature and evolution and do this instead. Because these guys don’t understand basic human evolutionary/biological/sociological psychology (since they were alive over 100 years ago, and these are still virgining fields in science). They are narcissistic enough to think they (and/or) the “elite” are so great that they have the absolute answer for thousands of complex systems not even close to being scientifically understood by man. And surprise surprise, to get that system in place you have to jam in society back into the toothpaste tube, and obviously plenty of toothpaste is going to have to be “thrown out”. By thrown out I am obviously talking about the 100 million dead people we’ve seen die from communist oppression in the form of executions, purposeful starvation, and starvation due to extremely stubborn incompetence.

Moral of the story is, it’s much easier to simplify the world around you, vs the impossible task of understanding it in its entirety. So I have ZERO admiration for the ones who think they understand it so well, and can implement their understanding in a way that’ll be better in their fantasy. That line of thinking brings forth Hell on earth.

This is laughable. Clearly you don't understand Hegel's dialectic process put into practice by Marx.

Marx can't ignore the value relationship between commodities. That's why he breaks the commodity down to its component value forms and then reconstitutes it till he gets to the money form. At which point he shows how money begins to distort the value relationship.

The whole point of scientific socialism is to bring the value relationship between commodities back into focus.

Lie to yourself all you want but if you can't communicate with me without doing so, then stop communicating with me. I don't have the inclination to force an understanding on you. That is a personal journey.

What is it I’m lying about? I’m not the one saying the abolition of money is going to be a good thing...and what? Have “government” redefine value for us lowly imbeciles? Have government determine the value of my labor? Have government determine the value of the goods I want? Have them determine the value of services I want? Money is a technological achievement. One could say it is a part of human evolution much like smart phones are a part of human evolution. What you’re doing is saying “see, these phones break so easily, and they don’t get good reception everywhere, therefore let’s scrap ALL the tech completely and us “philosophically elite” will create a better form of communication.”

You probably don’t like that analogy, which I think is spot on accurate...but the rest you’d probably agree with as being you’re main point. To abolish money, and have government determine value.

You are lying about having read Marx and Hegel. You're just making shit up. You've provided another example in this post.

Government doesn't determine value in a socialist system of production.

You think your analogy is spot on but you are actually manifesting symptoms of Dunning Kruger.

Then who? We’re gonna abolish money, then what? And yes I have read both. Have I studied them, no, because I was learning actual science and the actual liberal arts. And my western civ classes werent run by an ideological hack.

 

[Tehon]

Ah, but the scientific socialist understands this. That is why Marx began his magnum opus with the commodity, value, exchange value and the money form. I understand that there has to be an exchange of value, that doesn't mean it has to be in the form of circulating money that exists now. It can be a simple exchange of equal values.

How do you think it possible to argue against something you've never taken the time to understand? You might consider reading the link at the bottom of my post.

"Hence, when we bring the products of our labour into relation with each other as values, it is not because we see in these articles the material receptacles of homogeneous human labour. Quite the contrary: whenever, by an exchange, we equate as values our different products, by that very act, we also equate, as human labour, the different kinds of labour expended upon them. We are not aware of this, nevertheless we do it.[28] Value, therefore, does not stalk about with a label describing what it is. It is value, rather, that converts every product into a social hieroglyphic. Later on, we try to decipher the hieroglyphic, to get behind the secret of our own social products; for to stamp an object of utility as a value, is just as much a social product as language. "

Economic Manuscripts: Capital Vol. I - Chapter One

IVE READ MARX AND HEGEL. He semi acknowledges it, and then suggests the right thing to do is to tear down that system, and essientially pretend like it doesn’t exist. Which is why Marxism needs so much “re-education” to be implemented. They’re trying to say the human brain doesn’t work right, and let’s completely ignore human nature and evolution and do this instead. Because these guys don’t understand basic human evolutionary/biological/sociological psychology (since they were alive over 100 years ago, and these are still virgining fields in science). They are narcissistic enough to think they (and/or) the “elite” are so great that they have the absolute answer for thousands of complex systems not even close to being scientifically understood by man. And surprise surprise, to get that system in place you have to jam in society back into the toothpaste tube, and obviously plenty of toothpaste is going to have to be “thrown out”. By thrown out I am obviously talking about the 100 million dead people we’ve seen die from communist oppression in the form of executions, purposeful starvation, and starvation due to extremely stubborn incompetence.

Moral of the story is, it’s much easier to simplify the world around you, vs the impossible task of understanding it in its entirety. So I have ZERO admiration for the ones who think they understand it so well, and can implement their understanding in a way that’ll be better in their fantasy. That line of thinking brings forth Hell on earth.

This is laughable. Clearly you don't understand Hegel's dialectic process put into practice by Marx.

Marx can't ignore the value relationship between commodities. That's why he breaks the commodity down to its component value forms and then reconstitutes it till he gets to the money form. At which point he shows how money begins to distort the value relationship.

The whole point of scientific socialism is to bring the value relationship between commodities back into focus.

Lie to yourself all you want but if you can't communicate with me without doing so, then stop communicating with me. I don't have the inclination to force an understanding on you. That is a personal journey.

What is it I’m lying about? I’m not the one saying the abolition of money is going to be a good thing...and what? Have “government” redefine value for us lowly imbeciles? Have government determine the value of my labor? Have government determine the value of the goods I want? Have them determine the value of services I want? Money is a technological achievement. One could say it is a part of human evolution much like smart phones are a part of human evolution. What you’re doing is saying “see, these phones break so easily, and they don’t get good reception everywhere, therefore let’s scrap ALL the tech completely and us “philosophically elite” will create a better form of communication.”

You probably don’t like that analogy, which I think is spot on accurate...but the rest you’d probably agree with as being you’re main point. To abolish money, and have government determine value.

You are lying about having read Marx and Hegel. You're just making shit up. You've provided another example in this post.

Government doesn't determine value in a socialist system of production.

You think your analogy is spot on but you are actually manifesting symptoms of Dunning Kruger.

Then who? We’re gonna abolish money, then what? And yes I have read both. Have I studied them, no, because I was learning actual science and the actual liberal arts. And my western civ classes werent run by an ideological hack.

It is no big deal that you haven't studied Marx. I haven't crossed paths with any here who have, that I am aware of.
I just don't know why you are making an argument against something you don't understand. And have the audacity to call me arrogant.

Marx breaks value down into different forms. I assume you would be asking who determines the exchange value. That would be determined by the socially necessary labor time needed to produce the commodity.

 

[dblack]

Then who? We’re gonna abolish money, then what? And yes I have read both. Have I studied them, no, because I was learning actual science and the actual liberal arts. And my western civ classes werent run by an ideological hack.

Done there been that. The key thing to understand about Tehon's bloviating is that he knows the secret truth about Marxism. If it sounds irrational or contradictory, it's because you are ignorant.

 

[Tehon]

Then who? We’re gonna abolish money, then what? And yes I have read both. Have I studied them, no, because I was learning actual science and the actual liberal arts. And my western civ classes werent run by an ideological hack.

Done there been that. The key think to understand about Tehon's bloviating is that he knows the secret truth about Marxism. If it sounds irrational or contradictory, it's because you are ignorant.

There is no secret. Here.

Economic Manuscripts: Capital Vol. I - Chapter One

The problem is that you have a bias and you are interested in proving it.

 

[danielpalos]

Ah, but the scientific socialist understands this. That is why Marx began his magnum opus with the commodity, value, exchange value and the money form. I understand that there has to be an exchange of value, that doesn't mean it has to be in the form of circulating money that exists now. It can be a simple exchange of equal values.

How do you think it possible to argue against something you've never taken the time to understand? You might consider reading the link at the bottom of my post.

"Hence, when we bring the products of our labour into relation with each other as values, it is not because we see in these articles the material receptacles of homogeneous human labour. Quite the contrary: whenever, by an exchange, we equate as values our different products, by that very act, we also equate, as human labour, the different kinds of labour expended upon them. We are not aware of this, nevertheless we do it.[28] Value, therefore, does not stalk about with a label describing what it is. It is value, rather, that converts every product into a social hieroglyphic. Later on, we try to decipher the hieroglyphic, to get behind the secret of our own social products; for to stamp an object of utility as a value, is just as much a social product as language. "

Economic Manuscripts: Capital Vol. I - Chapter One

I understand that there has to be an exchange of value, that doesn't mean it has to be in the form of circulating money that exists now. It can be a simple exchange of equal values.

Money facilitates the exchange of equal values.

Yes it does, but it does more than that. It is a commodity but it doesn't get consumed in the transaction. It enters into circulation and takes on a social character all its own.

And it works much better than barter.

Socialism isn't a barter system. Barter is useless in today's modern society.

Check out Venezuela. It's effectively a barter system. Their currency is absolutely worthless.

lousy right wing management? Hoover only came up with Hoovervilles.

FDR came up with solutions not excuses.

 

[sakinago]

IVE READ MARX AND HEGEL. He semi acknowledges it, and then suggests the right thing to do is to tear down that system, and essientially pretend like it doesn’t exist. Which is why Marxism needs so much “re-education” to be implemented. They’re trying to say the human brain doesn’t work right, and let’s completely ignore human nature and evolution and do this instead. Because these guys don’t understand basic human evolutionary/biological/sociological psychology (since they were alive over 100 years ago, and these are still virgining fields in science). They are narcissistic enough to think they (and/or) the “elite” are so great that they have the absolute answer for thousands of complex systems not even close to being scientifically understood by man. And surprise surprise, to get that system in place you have to jam in society back into the toothpaste tube, and obviously plenty of toothpaste is going to have to be “thrown out”. By thrown out I am obviously talking about the 100 million dead people we’ve seen die from communist oppression in the form of executions, purposeful starvation, and starvation due to extremely stubborn incompetence.

Moral of the story is, it’s much easier to simplify the world around you, vs the impossible task of understanding it in its entirety. So I have ZERO admiration for the ones who think they understand it so well, and can implement their understanding in a way that’ll be better in their fantasy. That line of thinking brings forth Hell on earth.

This is laughable. Clearly you don't understand Hegel's dialectic process put into practice by Marx.

Marx can't ignore the value relationship between commodities. That's why he breaks the commodity down to its component value forms and then reconstitutes it till he gets to the money form. At which point he shows how money begins to distort the value relationship.

The whole point of scientific socialism is to bring the value relationship between commodities back into focus.

Lie to yourself all you want but if you can't communicate with me without doing so, then stop communicating with me. I don't have the inclination to force an understanding on you. That is a personal journey.

What is it I’m lying about? I’m not the one saying the abolition of money is going to be a good thing...and what? Have “government” redefine value for us lowly imbeciles? Have government determine the value of my labor? Have government determine the value of the goods I want? Have them determine the value of services I want? Money is a technological achievement. One could say it is a part of human evolution much like smart phones are a part of human evolution. What you’re doing is saying “see, these phones break so easily, and they don’t get good reception everywhere, therefore let’s scrap ALL the tech completely and us “philosophically elite” will create a better form of communication.”

You probably don’t like that analogy, which I think is spot on accurate...but the rest you’d probably agree with as being you’re main point. To abolish money, and have government determine value.

You are lying about having read Marx and Hegel. You're just making shit up. You've provided another example in this post.

Government doesn't determine value in a socialist system of production.

You think your analogy is spot on but you are actually manifesting symptoms of Dunning Kruger.

Then who? We’re gonna abolish money, then what? And yes I have read both. Have I studied them, no, because I was learning actual science and the actual liberal arts. And my western civ classes werent run by an ideological hack.

It is no big deal that you haven't studied Marx. I haven't crossed paths with any here who have, that I am aware of.
I just don't know why you are making an argument against something you don't understand. And have the audacity to call me arrogant.

Marx breaks value down into different forms. I assume you would be asking who determines the exchange value. That would be determined by the socially necessary labor time needed to produce the commodity.

By “haven’t studied” I mean my professor didn’t preform fellatio on Karl Marx’s or Hegels ghosts for the entire Mod WestCiv course. We still went over them, I still got A’s in entirly written exams.

And uh huh, but someone still has to be the judge of that. Apparently a free marketplace where society and the laws of supply and demand don’t do a good enough job of that. So would the judge, or “society” as you put it have to be ultimately determined by government in the end?

 

[bripat9643]

IVE READ MARX AND HEGEL. He semi acknowledges it, and then suggests the right thing to do is to tear down that system, and essientially pretend like it doesn’t exist. Which is why Marxism needs so much “re-education” to be implemented. They’re trying to say the human brain doesn’t work right, and let’s completely ignore human nature and evolution and do this instead. Because these guys don’t understand basic human evolutionary/biological/sociological psychology (since they were alive over 100 years ago, and these are still virgining fields in science). They are narcissistic enough to think they (and/or) the “elite” are so great that they have the absolute answer for thousands of complex systems not even close to being scientifically understood by man. And surprise surprise, to get that system in place you have to jam in society back into the toothpaste tube, and obviously plenty of toothpaste is going to have to be “thrown out”. By thrown out I am obviously talking about the 100 million dead people we’ve seen die from communist oppression in the form of executions, purposeful starvation, and starvation due to extremely stubborn incompetence.

Moral of the story is, it’s much easier to simplify the world around you, vs the impossible task of understanding it in its entirety. So I have ZERO admiration for the ones who think they understand it so well, and can implement their understanding in a way that’ll be better in their fantasy. That line of thinking brings forth Hell on earth.

This is laughable. Clearly you don't understand Hegel's dialectic process put into practice by Marx.

Marx can't ignore the value relationship between commodities. That's why he breaks the commodity down to its component value forms and then reconstitutes it till he gets to the money form. At which point he shows how money begins to distort the value relationship.

The whole point of scientific socialism is to bring the value relationship between commodities back into focus.

Lie to yourself all you want but if you can't communicate with me without doing so, then stop communicating with me. I don't have the inclination to force an understanding on you. That is a personal journey.

What is it I’m lying about? I’m not the one saying the abolition of money is going to be a good thing...and what? Have “government” redefine value for us lowly imbeciles? Have government determine the value of my labor? Have government determine the value of the goods I want? Have them determine the value of services I want? Money is a technological achievement. One could say it is a part of human evolution much like smart phones are a part of human evolution. What you’re doing is saying “see, these phones break so easily, and they don’t get good reception everywhere, therefore let’s scrap ALL the tech completely and us “philosophically elite” will create a better form of communication.”

You probably don’t like that analogy, which I think is spot on accurate...but the rest you’d probably agree with as being you’re main point. To abolish money, and have government determine value.

You are lying about having read Marx and Hegel. You're just making shit up. You've provided another example in this post.

Government doesn't determine value in a socialist system of production.

You think your analogy is spot on but you are actually manifesting symptoms of Dunning Kruger.

Then who? We’re gonna abolish money, then what? And yes I have read both. Have I studied them, no, because I was learning actual science and the actual liberal arts. And my western civ classes werent run by an ideological hack.

It is no big deal that you haven't studied Marx. I haven't crossed paths with any here who have, that I am aware of.
I just don't know why you are making an argument against something you don't understand. And have the audacity to call me arrogant.

Marx breaks value down into different forms. I assume you would be asking who determines the exchange value. That would be determined by the socially necessary labor time needed to produce the commodity.

That's obvious bullshit. Take two oranges. One was harvested before a major frost. The other was harvest after a major frost. The later orange sells for several times the price of the first orange. How does your theory of "socially necessary labor time" account for that when the labor that went into each of them is identical?

 

[Tehon]

This is laughable. Clearly you don't understand Hegel's dialectic process put into practice by Marx.

Marx can't ignore the value relationship between commodities. That's why he breaks the commodity down to its component value forms and then reconstitutes it till he gets to the money form. At which point he shows how money begins to distort the value relationship.

The whole point of scientific socialism is to bring the value relationship between commodities back into focus.

Lie to yourself all you want but if you can't communicate with me without doing so, then stop communicating with me. I don't have the inclination to force an understanding on you. That is a personal journey.

What is it I’m lying about? I’m not the one saying the abolition of money is going to be a good thing...and what? Have “government” redefine value for us lowly imbeciles? Have government determine the value of my labor? Have government determine the value of the goods I want? Have them determine the value of services I want? Money is a technological achievement. One could say it is a part of human evolution much like smart phones are a part of human evolution. What you’re doing is saying “see, these phones break so easily, and they don’t get good reception everywhere, therefore let’s scrap ALL the tech completely and us “philosophically elite” will create a better form of communication.”

You probably don’t like that analogy, which I think is spot on accurate...but the rest you’d probably agree with as being you’re main point. To abolish money, and have government determine value.

You are lying about having read Marx and Hegel. You're just making shit up. You've provided another example in this post.

Government doesn't determine value in a socialist system of production.

You think your analogy is spot on but you are actually manifesting symptoms of Dunning Kruger.

Then who? We’re gonna abolish money, then what? And yes I have read both. Have I studied them, no, because I was learning actual science and the actual liberal arts. And my western civ classes werent run by an ideological hack.

It is no big deal that you haven't studied Marx. I haven't crossed paths with any here who have, that I am aware of.
I just don't know why you are making an argument against something you don't understand. And have the audacity to call me arrogant.

Marx breaks value down into different forms. I assume you would be asking who determines the exchange value. That would be determined by the socially necessary labor time needed to produce the commodity.

By “haven’t studied” I mean my professor didn’t preform fellatio on Karl Marx’s or Hegels ghosts for the entire Mod WestCiv course. We still went over them, I still got A’s in entirly written exams.

And uh huh, but someone still has to be the judge of that. Apparently a free marketplace where society and the laws of supply and demand don’t do a good enough job of that. So would the judge, or “society” as you put it have to be ultimately determined by government in the end?

It is intrinsic in the production process. Are you suggesting that government would manipulate it somehow? What would be the point?

 

[bripat9643]

What is it I’m lying about? I’m not the one saying the abolition of money is going to be a good thing...and what? Have “government” redefine value for us lowly imbeciles? Have government determine the value of my labor? Have government determine the value of the goods I want? Have them determine the value of services I want? Money is a technological achievement. One could say it is a part of human evolution much like smart phones are a part of human evolution. What you’re doing is saying “see, these phones break so easily, and they don’t get good reception everywhere, therefore let’s scrap ALL the tech completely and us “philosophically elite” will create a better form of communication.”

You probably don’t like that analogy, which I think is spot on accurate...but the rest you’d probably agree with as being you’re main point. To abolish money, and have government determine value.

You are lying about having read Marx and Hegel. You're just making shit up. You've provided another example in this post.

Government doesn't determine value in a socialist system of production.

You think your analogy is spot on but you are actually manifesting symptoms of Dunning Kruger.

Then who? We’re gonna abolish money, then what? And yes I have read both. Have I studied them, no, because I was learning actual science and the actual liberal arts. And my western civ classes werent run by an ideological hack.

It is no big deal that you haven't studied Marx. I haven't crossed paths with any here who have, that I am aware of.
I just don't know why you are making an argument against something you don't understand. And have the audacity to call me arrogant.

Marx breaks value down into different forms. I assume you would be asking who determines the exchange value. That would be determined by the socially necessary labor time needed to produce the commodity.

By “haven’t studied” I mean my professor didn’t preform fellatio on Karl Marx’s or Hegels ghosts for the entire Mod WestCiv course. We still went over them, I still got A’s in entirly written exams.

And uh huh, but someone still has to be the judge of that. Apparently a free marketplace where society and the laws of supply and demand don’t do a good enough job of that. So would the judge, or “society” as you put it have to be ultimately determined by government in the end?

It is intrinsic in the production process. Are you suggesting that government would manipulate it somehow? What would be the point?

"Intinsic?" What the fuck does that mean? What is the value of an ounce of gold or a gallon of gas? How does the socialist economy determine that without market where they are bought and sold by private owners?

 

[Tehon]

This is laughable. Clearly you don't understand Hegel's dialectic process put into practice by Marx.

Marx can't ignore the value relationship between commodities. That's why he breaks the commodity down to its component value forms and then reconstitutes it till he gets to the money form. At which point he shows how money begins to distort the value relationship.

The whole point of scientific socialism is to bring the value relationship between commodities back into focus.

Lie to yourself all you want but if you can't communicate with me without doing so, then stop communicating with me. I don't have the inclination to force an understanding on you. That is a personal journey.

What is it I’m lying about? I’m not the one saying the abolition of money is going to be a good thing...and what? Have “government” redefine value for us lowly imbeciles? Have government determine the value of my labor? Have government determine the value of the goods I want? Have them determine the value of services I want? Money is a technological achievement. One could say it is a part of human evolution much like smart phones are a part of human evolution. What you’re doing is saying “see, these phones break so easily, and they don’t get good reception everywhere, therefore let’s scrap ALL the tech completely and us “philosophically elite” will create a better form of communication.”

You probably don’t like that analogy, which I think is spot on accurate...but the rest you’d probably agree with as being you’re main point. To abolish money, and have government determine value.

You are lying about having read Marx and Hegel. You're just making shit up. You've provided another example in this post.

Government doesn't determine value in a socialist system of production.

You think your analogy is spot on but you are actually manifesting symptoms of Dunning Kruger.

Then who? We’re gonna abolish money, then what? And yes I have read both. Have I studied them, no, because I was learning actual science and the actual liberal arts. And my western civ classes werent run by an ideological hack.

It is no big deal that you haven't studied Marx. I haven't crossed paths with any here who have, that I am aware of.
I just don't know why you are making an argument against something you don't understand. And have the audacity to call me arrogant.

Marx breaks value down into different forms. I assume you would be asking who determines the exchange value. That would be determined by the socially necessary labor time needed to produce the commodity.

That's obvious bullshit. Take two oranges. One was harvested before a major frost. The other was harvest after a major frost. The later orange sells for several times the price of the first orange. How does your theory of "socially necessary labor time" account for that when the labor that went into each of them is identical?

And here we go. You like oranges, don't you?

You are comparing apples and oranges, lol. The latter orange wouldn't sell for twice the price in my theory. The price would be the same for either orange, given the same amount of labor was used. And assuming it was fit for sale.

 

[bripat9643]

What is it I’m lying about? I’m not the one saying the abolition of money is going to be a good thing...and what? Have “government” redefine value for us lowly imbeciles? Have government determine the value of my labor? Have government determine the value of the goods I want? Have them determine the value of services I want? Money is a technological achievement. One could say it is a part of human evolution much like smart phones are a part of human evolution. What you’re doing is saying “see, these phones break so easily, and they don’t get good reception everywhere, therefore let’s scrap ALL the tech completely and us “philosophically elite” will create a better form of communication.”

You probably don’t like that analogy, which I think is spot on accurate...but the rest you’d probably agree with as being you’re main point. To abolish money, and have government determine value.

You are lying about having read Marx and Hegel. You're just making shit up. You've provided another example in this post.

Government doesn't determine value in a socialist system of production.

You think your analogy is spot on but you are actually manifesting symptoms of Dunning Kruger.

Then who? We’re gonna abolish money, then what? And yes I have read both. Have I studied them, no, because I was learning actual science and the actual liberal arts. And my western civ classes werent run by an ideological hack.

It is no big deal that you haven't studied Marx. I haven't crossed paths with any here who have, that I am aware of.
I just don't know why you are making an argument against something you don't understand. And have the audacity to call me arrogant.

Marx breaks value down into different forms. I assume you would be asking who determines the exchange value. That would be determined by the socially necessary labor time needed to produce the commodity.

That's obvious bullshit. Take two oranges. One was harvested before a major frost. The other was harvest after a major frost. The later orange sells for several times the price of the first orange. How does your theory of "socially necessary labor time" account for that when the labor that went into each of them is identical?

And here we go. You like oranges, don't you?

You are comparing apples and oranges, lol. The latter orange wouldn't sell for twice the price in my theory. The price would be the same for either orange, given the same amount of labor was used. And assuming it was fit for sale.

Actually it would, only most of them would be sold on the black market because no smart farmer is going to hand his oranges over to the produce Kommissar for 1/4 of what he could get. That's how things worked in the USSR. Most produce was sold on the black market.

 

[Tehon]

You are lying about having read Marx and Hegel. You're just making shit up. You've provided another example in this post.

Government doesn't determine value in a socialist system of production.

You think your analogy is spot on but you are actually manifesting symptoms of Dunning Kruger.

Then who? We’re gonna abolish money, then what? And yes I have read both. Have I studied them, no, because I was learning actual science and the actual liberal arts. And my western civ classes werent run by an ideological hack.

It is no big deal that you haven't studied Marx. I haven't crossed paths with any here who have, that I am aware of.
I just don't know why you are making an argument against something you don't understand. And have the audacity to call me arrogant.

Marx breaks value down into different forms. I assume you would be asking who determines the exchange value. That would be determined by the socially necessary labor time needed to produce the commodity.

By “haven’t studied” I mean my professor didn’t preform fellatio on Karl Marx’s or Hegels ghosts for the entire Mod WestCiv course. We still went over them, I still got A’s in entirly written exams.

And uh huh, but someone still has to be the judge of that. Apparently a free marketplace where society and the laws of supply and demand don’t do a good enough job of that. So would the judge, or “society” as you put it have to be ultimately determined by government in the end?

It is intrinsic in the production process. Are you suggesting that government would manipulate it somehow? What would be the point?

"Intinsic?" What the fuck does that mean? What is the value of an ounce of gold or a gallon of gas? How does the socialist economy determine that without market where they are bought and sold by private owners?

Definition of intrinsic
1a: belonging to the essential nature or constitution of a thing

What is the weight in gold that can be mined in an hour given the current technology? Value could be determined by that.

 

[Tehon]

You are lying about having read Marx and Hegel. You're just making shit up. You've provided another example in this post.

Government doesn't determine value in a socialist system of production.

You think your analogy is spot on but you are actually manifesting symptoms of Dunning Kruger.

Then who? We’re gonna abolish money, then what? And yes I have read both. Have I studied them, no, because I was learning actual science and the actual liberal arts. And my western civ classes werent run by an ideological hack.

It is no big deal that you haven't studied Marx. I haven't crossed paths with any here who have, that I am aware of.
I just don't know why you are making an argument against something you don't understand. And have the audacity to call me arrogant.

Marx breaks value down into different forms. I assume you would be asking who determines the exchange value. That would be determined by the socially necessary labor time needed to produce the commodity.

That's obvious bullshit. Take two oranges. One was harvested before a major frost. The other was harvest after a major frost. The later orange sells for several times the price of the first orange. How does your theory of "socially necessary labor time" account for that when the labor that went into each of them is identical?

And here we go. You like oranges, don't you?

You are comparing apples and oranges, lol. The latter orange wouldn't sell for twice the price in my theory. The price would be the same for either orange, given the same amount of labor was used. And assuming it was fit for sale.

Actually it would, only most of them would be sold on the black market because no smart farmer is going to hand his oranges over to the produce Kommissar for 1/4 of what he could get. That's how things worked in the USSR. Most produce was sold on the black market.

The USSR didn't have a socialist system of production. They didn't eliminate capital nor did they have the technological capability to carry it out.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

the 4 million people that fled Ven.

they fear it so much that they are running to countries that they don't know the language.

the 4 million people that fled Ven.

Which four million refugees are you referring to?

3 million people have fled Venezuela, says UNHCR | News ...
https://www.dw.com/en/3-million-people-have-fled-venezuela-says...
The number of migrants and refugees who have fled Venezuela has reached 3 million, the United Nations announced on Thursday.

How many people have fled Venezuela?
At least 500,000 people have fled Venezuela this year. That's the lowest estimate around. Colombia says that over a million of them are living there now. Venezuelans have been trickling out of the country for at least 10 years.

Do you think additional US sanctions will reduce the flow of refugees from Venezuela?
"Treasury sanctions Venezuela state-owned oil firm in bid to transfer control to Maduro opposition

• The Trump administration announces sanctions against Venezuela's state-owned energy company PDVSA.
• The sanctions aim to transfer control of Venezuela's oil wealth to the forces that oppose socialist dictator Nicolas Maduro.
• U.S. companies can continue to import oil from Venezuela, but the funds must be held in accounts that are not accessible to the Maduro regime."

Treasury sanctions Venezuela state-owned oil firm in bid to transfer control to Maduro opposition

The US has been funding Venezuelan opposition since Chavez was first elected in 1999.

Currently, Maduro has popularity numbers about equal to Trump's. During the last presidential election about 6 miilion votes went to Maduro and zero votes went to Juan Guaido whom a majority of Venezuelans had never heard of before he proclaimed himself president.

Does that sound like a coup, to you?

ROFL! So you believe the state controlled propaganda organs of the Maduro regime?

Do you actually believe that Maduro is popular with people who are starving?

"Nicolás Maduro Fast Facts"

Nicolás Maduro Fast Facts - CNN

"August 4, 2018 - Survives an apparent assassination attempt after several drones armed with explosives fly toward him during a speech at a military parade. Maduro blames the attack on far-right elements and Colombia's outgoing president, Juan Manuel Santos. A Colombian presidential source tells CNN that Maduro's accusations are 'baseless.'

"August 5, 2018 - Venezuela's Interior Minister Néstor Reverol says that six people have been arrested after the apparent assassination attempt on Maduro.

"September 8, 2018 - A report is published in the New York Times detailing secret meetings between US officials and Venezuelan military officers planning a coup against Maduro. CNN confirms the report, which describes a series of meetings over the course of a year. Ultimately, the US government decided not to back the coup."

There are far more Venezuelans who support Maduro than there are Venezuelans who support another US coup in South America.

There are far more Venezuelans who support Maduro than there are Venezuelans who support another US coup in South America.

Of course, they support the hell out of him. DURR.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The abolition of money is just a naive way of thinking that one could stop human brains from doing what they are wired to do, in order to survive, which is constantly attributing value and utility to the world around us. That’s actual science, and the fact that you rolled that thought out there shows how little science is behind this type of thinking. Attributing value and utility to things is what your subconscious brain never stops doing. Currency is nothing more than an efficient way of attributing value in a more quantifiable way. Currency is a human achievement, and it is a shortcut that allows the conscious brain to keep up with the subconscious brain and do a much better job of making decisions...in a way the rest of your “tribe” agreed upon. Currency has been a constant of humanity long before we’ve had recorded history, and way long before we put a numerical value to it thousands of years ago. It’s a part of nature that even insects participate in. It’s literally a system that is millions of years old, and there’s a pretty good reason why every civilization uses money since the invention of money.

Saying that you could abolish currency is like saying you could abolish the thinking behind what makes Matthew Mcconaughey and Scarlet Johanessen hot. You’d have immensely better luck abolishing smartphones. It’s extremely naive and narcissistic thinking, but most importantly, has zero basis in actual science.

Ah, but the scientific socialist understands this. That is why Marx began his magnum opus with the commodity, value, exchange value and the money form. I understand that there has to be an exchange of value, that doesn't mean it has to be in the form of circulating money that exists now. It can be a simple exchange of equal values.

How do you think it possible to argue against something you've never taken the time to understand? You might consider reading the link at the bottom of my post.

"Hence, when we bring the products of our labour into relation with each other as values, it is not because we see in these articles the material receptacles of homogeneous human labour. Quite the contrary: whenever, by an exchange, we equate as values our different products, by that very act, we also equate, as human labour, the different kinds of labour expended upon them. We are not aware of this, nevertheless we do it.[28] Value, therefore, does not stalk about with a label describing what it is. It is value, rather, that converts every product into a social hieroglyphic. Later on, we try to decipher the hieroglyphic, to get behind the secret of our own social products; for to stamp an object of utility as a value, is just as much a social product as language. "

Economic Manuscripts: Capital Vol. I - Chapter One

I understand that there has to be an exchange of value, that doesn't mean it has to be in the form of circulating money that exists now. It can be a simple exchange of equal values.

Money facilitates the exchange of equal values.

Yes it does, but it does more than that. It is a commodity but it doesn't get consumed in the transaction. It enters into circulation and takes on a social character all its own.

And it works much better than barter.

Socialism isn't a barter system. Barter is useless in today's modern society.

Socialism isn't a barter system.

What about Scientific Socialism?

Barter is useless in today's modern society.

I agree, eliminating money is a moronic idea.

 

[bripat9643]

Then who? We’re gonna abolish money, then what? And yes I have read both. Have I studied them, no, because I was learning actual science and the actual liberal arts. And my western civ classes werent run by an ideological hack.

It is no big deal that you haven't studied Marx. I haven't crossed paths with any here who have, that I am aware of.
I just don't know why you are making an argument against something you don't understand. And have the audacity to call me arrogant.

Marx breaks value down into different forms. I assume you would be asking who determines the exchange value. That would be determined by the socially necessary labor time needed to produce the commodity.

By “haven’t studied” I mean my professor didn’t preform fellatio on Karl Marx’s or Hegels ghosts for the entire Mod WestCiv course. We still went over them, I still got A’s in entirly written exams.

And uh huh, but someone still has to be the judge of that. Apparently a free marketplace where society and the laws of supply and demand don’t do a good enough job of that. So would the judge, or “society” as you put it have to be ultimately determined by government in the end?

It is intrinsic in the production process. Are you suggesting that government would manipulate it somehow? What would be the point?

"Intinsic?" What the fuck does that mean? What is the value of an ounce of gold or a gallon of gas? How does the socialist economy determine that without market where they are bought and sold by private owners?

Definition of intrinsic
1a: belonging to the essential nature or constitution of a thing

What is the weight in gold that can be mined in an hour given the current technology? Value could be determined by that.

But it's not. The chart below shows the price of gold over time. The amount that can be mined in an hour has hardly changed.

 

[bripat9643]

Then who? We’re gonna abolish money, then what? And yes I have read both. Have I studied them, no, because I was learning actual science and the actual liberal arts. And my western civ classes werent run by an ideological hack.

It is no big deal that you haven't studied Marx. I haven't crossed paths with any here who have, that I am aware of.
I just don't know why you are making an argument against something you don't understand. And have the audacity to call me arrogant.

Marx breaks value down into different forms. I assume you would be asking who determines the exchange value. That would be determined by the socially necessary labor time needed to produce the commodity.

That's obvious bullshit. Take two oranges. One was harvested before a major frost. The other was harvest after a major frost. The later orange sells for several times the price of the first orange. How does your theory of "socially necessary labor time" account for that when the labor that went into each of them is identical?

And here we go. You like oranges, don't you?

You are comparing apples and oranges, lol. The latter orange wouldn't sell for twice the price in my theory. The price would be the same for either orange, given the same amount of labor was used. And assuming it was fit for sale.

Actually it would, only most of them would be sold on the black market because no smart farmer is going to hand his oranges over to the produce Kommissar for 1/4 of what he could get. That's how things worked in the USSR. Most produce was sold on the black market.

The USSR didn't have a socialist system of production. They didn't eliminate capital nor did they have the technological capability to carry it out.

Yeah, yeah, I know. No system that has ever been tried is truly socialist. That's because the harder a society tries to move towards "true socialism," the more they starve.

 

[georgephillip]

the 4 million people that fled Ven.

they fear it so much that they are running to countries that they don't know the language.

the 4 million people that fled Ven.

Which four million refugees are you referring to?

3 million people have fled Venezuela, says UNHCR | News ...
https://www.dw.com/en/3-million-people-have-fled-venezuela-says...
The number of migrants and refugees who have fled Venezuela has reached 3 million, the United Nations announced on Thursday.

How many people have fled Venezuela?
At least 500,000 people have fled Venezuela this year. That's the lowest estimate around. Colombia says that over a million of them are living there now. Venezuelans have been trickling out of the country for at least 10 years.

Do you think additional US sanctions will reduce the flow of refugees from Venezuela?
"Treasury sanctions Venezuela state-owned oil firm in bid to transfer control to Maduro opposition

• The Trump administration announces sanctions against Venezuela's state-owned energy company PDVSA.
• The sanctions aim to transfer control of Venezuela's oil wealth to the forces that oppose socialist dictator Nicolas Maduro.
• U.S. companies can continue to import oil from Venezuela, but the funds must be held in accounts that are not accessible to the Maduro regime."

Treasury sanctions Venezuela state-owned oil firm in bid to transfer control to Maduro opposition

The US has been funding Venezuelan opposition since Chavez was first elected in 1999.

Currently, Maduro has popularity numbers about equal to Trump's. During the last presidential election about 6 miilion votes went to Maduro and zero votes went to Juan Guaido whom a majority of Venezuelans had never heard of before he proclaimed himself president.

Does that sound like a coup, to you?

ROFL! So you believe the state controlled propaganda organs of the Maduro regime?

Do you actually believe that Maduro is popular with people who are starving?

I don't believe the Western corporate media.

Abby Martin visited Venezuela this past year. She tells a different story than what the corporate media is telling. She says that Maduro still has a lot of support among the poor people living in Venezuela.

Abby Martin has reportedly been threatened with lynching by the so-called "peaceful" opposition in Venezuela:

"CHILE — The U.S.-backed right-wing opposition in Venezuela is consistently described as 'peaceful,' protesting non-violently against the leftist regime of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, who mainstream media throughout the Americas and the world consider an autocrat, or dictator who is hell-bent on accumulating more power.

"However, the Venezuelan opposition has proven themselves to be anything but peaceful, especially in recent weeks.

"Late last month (5/2017), a mob of around 40 opposition protesters were caught on video beating 21-year-old Orlando José Figuera, then dousing him with gasoline and lighting him on fire after he was accused of being a 'Chavista infiltrator.'"

Venezuelan Opposition Threatens To Lynch American Journalist Abby Martin

 

[georgephillip]

Which four million refugees are you referring to?

3 million people have fled Venezuela, says UNHCR | News ...
https://www.dw.com/en/3-million-people-have-fled-venezuela-says...
The number of migrants and refugees who have fled Venezuela has reached 3 million, the United Nations announced on Thursday.

How many people have fled Venezuela?
At least 500,000 people have fled Venezuela this year. That's the lowest estimate around. Colombia says that over a million of them are living there now. Venezuelans have been trickling out of the country for at least 10 years.

Do you think additional US sanctions will reduce the flow of refugees from Venezuela?
"Treasury sanctions Venezuela state-owned oil firm in bid to transfer control to Maduro opposition

• The Trump administration announces sanctions against Venezuela's state-owned energy company PDVSA.
• The sanctions aim to transfer control of Venezuela's oil wealth to the forces that oppose socialist dictator Nicolas Maduro.
• U.S. companies can continue to import oil from Venezuela, but the funds must be held in accounts that are not accessible to the Maduro regime."

Treasury sanctions Venezuela state-owned oil firm in bid to transfer control to Maduro opposition

The US has been funding Venezuelan opposition since Chavez was first elected in 1999.

Currently, Maduro has popularity numbers about equal to Trump's. During the last presidential election about 6 miilion votes went to Maduro and zero votes went to Juan Guaido whom a majority of Venezuelans had never heard of before he proclaimed himself president.

Does that sound like a coup, to you?

ROFL! So you believe the state controlled propaganda organs of the Maduro regime?

Do you actually believe that Maduro is popular with people who are starving?

I don't believe the Western corporate media.

Abby Martin visited Venezuela this past year. She tells a different story than what the corporate media is telling. She says that Maduro still has a lot of support among the poor people living in Venezuela.

If Abby Martin says so, then it must be true!

If Abby Martin says so, then it must be true!

Abby's reported from Venezuela in spite of death threats:

Venezuelan Opposition Threatens To Lynch American Journalist Abby Martin

"However, the Venezuelan opposition has proven themselves to be anything but peaceful, especially in recent weeks. Late last month, a mob of around 40 opposition protesters were caught on video beating 21-year-old Orlando José Figuera, then dousing him with gasoline and lighting him on fire after he was accused of being a 'Chavista infiltrator.'

"While the young man suffered first- and second-degree burns on more than half of his body and survived more than six knife wounds to the stomach, the U.S. and its allies in Latin America have remained silent.

Venezuelan Opposition Spreads Lies About U.S. Journalists, Inciting Violence, Death Threats

"Now, two independent U.S. journalists have been threatened with a similar fate after traveling to Venezuela to report on the protests: Abby Martin and Mike Prysner of the Telesur-affiliated Empire Files, a documentary and interview video series.

"Although the Empire Files is hosted on Telesur, the program is independently produced by Prysner and Martin.

"The pair has traveled through Venezuela’s capital, talking to eyewitnesses.

"Martin wears protective gear, including a helmet as a measure against the violence that has rocked the city in recent years.

"The trouble began when influential members of the opposition, including José Carrasquero, accused the pair of infiltrating protests to gather intelligence for the Venezuelan government.

"Soon similar accusations spread throughout the opposition’s leadership, leading opposition sympathizers to call for violence."

 

[bripat9643]

Which four million refugees are you referring to?

3 million people have fled Venezuela, says UNHCR | News ...
https://www.dw.com/en/3-million-people-have-fled-venezuela-says...
The number of migrants and refugees who have fled Venezuela has reached 3 million, the United Nations announced on Thursday.

How many people have fled Venezuela?
At least 500,000 people have fled Venezuela this year. That's the lowest estimate around. Colombia says that over a million of them are living there now. Venezuelans have been trickling out of the country for at least 10 years.

Do you think additional US sanctions will reduce the flow of refugees from Venezuela?
"Treasury sanctions Venezuela state-owned oil firm in bid to transfer control to Maduro opposition

• The Trump administration announces sanctions against Venezuela's state-owned energy company PDVSA.
• The sanctions aim to transfer control of Venezuela's oil wealth to the forces that oppose socialist dictator Nicolas Maduro.
• U.S. companies can continue to import oil from Venezuela, but the funds must be held in accounts that are not accessible to the Maduro regime."

Treasury sanctions Venezuela state-owned oil firm in bid to transfer control to Maduro opposition

The US has been funding Venezuelan opposition since Chavez was first elected in 1999.

Currently, Maduro has popularity numbers about equal to Trump's. During the last presidential election about 6 miilion votes went to Maduro and zero votes went to Juan Guaido whom a majority of Venezuelans had never heard of before he proclaimed himself president.

Does that sound like a coup, to you?

ROFL! So you believe the state controlled propaganda organs of the Maduro regime?

Do you actually believe that Maduro is popular with people who are starving?

I don't believe the Western corporate media.

Abby Martin visited Venezuela this past year. She tells a different story than what the corporate media is telling. She says that Maduro still has a lot of support among the poor people living in Venezuela.

Abby Martin has reportedly been threatened with lynching by the so-called "peaceful" opposition in Venezuela:

"CHILE — The U.S.-backed right-wing opposition in Venezuela is consistently described as 'peaceful,' protesting non-violently against the leftist regime of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, who mainstream media throughout the Americas and the world consider an autocrat, or dictator who is hell-bent on accumulating more power.

"However, the Venezuelan opposition has proven themselves to be anything but peaceful, especially in recent weeks.

"Late last month (5/2017), a mob of around 40 opposition protesters were caught on video beating 21-year-old Orlando José Figuera, then dousing him with gasoline and lighting him on fire after he was accused of being a 'Chavista infiltrator.'"

Venezuelan Opposition Threatens To Lynch American Journalist Abby Martin

It sounds like he got what he deserve. Maduro has killed thousands of Venezuelans.Abby Martin is a 9/11 truther. She sounds like a fucking commie. I won't shed any tears the day she is killed.

The time for peaceful protests in Venezuela is over. What the opposition needs is military grade weapons.