Don'tcha love their 'logic'?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
By the way, Anthony, your dream capitalist society sounds about as fantastical and unreal as you seem to believe Signy's dream non-capitalist society would be.

---

TKO


The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

I mowed the lawn increasing the the value of my house. That must be capitalism! I ate breakfast, and it benefited me. That must be capitalism! The sun came up, shining on my farm. That must be capitalism!

Yanno, not everything that benefits you is capitalism! No wonder you're so reluctant to think about giving it up!

Quote:

---

But let me put it this way: I made a phaser in 1979 using materials that were worth maybe 25 cents, plus a pre-made nozzle I purchased for $10. I sold it at a convention for $50.

---

Not capitalism. Primitivism. Peeps have been doing this since anyone wove a basket or chipped a flint. Did you sell stocks in your company, Chris? Did you own and sell someone elses labor?

Quote:

---

I bought a commodity when it was poorly valued, and sold it when it was valued highly. I made a profit based on no labor whatsoever (other than carrying around a box) simply by investing capital into an asset and re-selling it at an opportune moment.

---

Not capitalism. Mercantilism. Unless you could transfer the ownership of your trading company to someone else.

Every time someone makes money on something, you think its capitalism. But that's not true. Even in an economy of cooperatives, and even under socialism, peeps put work in to get something out. In fact, the idea of socialism or cooperatives is not that you give something up, its that you get to KEEP MORE. I mean, what could be a more pure capitalist economy than one where EVERYONE is an owner?

Quote:

---

My point was in the socialist environ depicted in my scenario, there would not be exclusive things for people of extreme wealth, because there would not be people of extreme wealth period. Not even the leaders would supposedly have such things. And yes, I'd say that the lure of somehow, someday obtaining something luxuriant is a motivator. While most of us won't live in luxury, many of us will be able to buy a special something at some point in our lives, whatever it is, that strikes our fancy. Something that is part of a lifestyle beyond our means, but this singular element is obtainable with effort.

---

Tony, once again you have conflated several things. Do you want to own a yacht? There's is nothing under socialism or cooperativism (technically called economic democracy) to prevent you from owning that "special something". You seem to think that the point of socialism or economic democracy is that everyone be equally poor. But the REAL point is that everyone can be RICH.

OTOH, you make several invalid assumptions (and you know what assumptions do, right? They make an *ass* out of *u* and *me*.)

1) You assume that what the EU does (aggressively redistribute income) is "socialism". It's not. Socialism is where the means of production are owned socially. Socialism actually doesn't address distribution of wealth. Even describing the EU as a "mixed economy" doesn't work, because what that describes is some of the means of production are owned socially and some are owned privately. I don't know a word to describe aggressive wealth redistribution, because its really only in place to keep capitalism viable. Distributivism, maybe???

2) You assume that luxury goods are exclusive to capitalists. Again, not true. You can have luxury good under ANY economic system provided the level of production is high. But, if you want luxury good to be exclusive... in other words, you don't want them for their intrinsic value to you but for their snob appeal... then ANY extreme hierarchal system will do: Monarchy, with you at the top. Or fascism, with you at the top.

ETA to remove comment.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

"There are stupid people everywhere. Why do you bother talking to them?"

Hello,

This is why I am reticent to try to understand anything by discussing it with people here.

It usually comes down to this.

--Anthony



"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Tony, despite the fact that we went through an intensely detailed discussion of what capitalism is and is not, you boomeranged right back to the most ignorant of assumptions.

I knew I shouldn't have put that in, but yanno what? That's exactly what he said, I didn't make it up. It's one thing to be ignorant, it's another thing to be incapable of learning. I just wanted to toss in an outsider's view of this discussion to let you know how your (plural) assumptions would be considered by a neutral third party... how your (plural) views would be considered by an expert. So, I will remove the comment, but I wanted you to know... I'm not making these definitions up.

AND BTW- it doesn't "boil down" to that comment. There is a whole discussion above it which you have ignored. The fact that you DO ignore everything else is what narrows the conversation.

---------
Done

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME