Howabout we work and give away what we make while others work to give us what they make? The only thing to eliminate is then the money. Not the work. Give to those who produce for the community or are too disabled or old.
Howabout we work and give away what we make while others work to give us what they make? The only thing to eliminate is then the money. Not the work. Give to those who produce for the community or are too disabled or old.
Instead of arguing over silly extremist scenarios, How about we consider building houses for people to live in. That is the form of the house follows this purpose, instead of following the purpose of maximizing profits to the builder. In other words, we build some inexpensive and efficient homes for people who don't have a lot of money, and then we sell them for the cost of the labor and materials that went into them. We don't have to dismantle our whole economic system, we simply could change our priorities a little, from the current goal of maximum profits, to a more humane goal of improving the well-being of everyone involved in a given enterprise. Builders could still build 'mcmansions' and sell them to people who have more money than they need at prices that are beyond what the homes are worth. Just like now. But perhaps they could try not doing this EVERY TIME.
Instead of arguing over silly extremist scenarios, How about we consider building houses for people to live in. That is the form of the house follows this purpose, instead of following the purpose of maximizing profits to the builder. In other words, we build some inexpensive and efficient homes for people who don't have a lot of money, and then we sell them for the cost of the labor and materials that went into them. We don't have to dismantle our whole economic system, we simply could change our priorities a little, from the current goal of maximum profits, to a more humane goal of improving the well-being of everyone involved in a given enterprise. Builders could still build 'mcmansions' and sell them to people who have more money than they need at prices that are beyond what the homes are worth. Just like now. But perhaps they could try not doing this EVERY TIME.
That's talking about a move in the right direction.
Slogan/motto:
All hail our Dark Mother, Destroyer of Illusions, may she liberate us from false consciousness and feast on the blood of demonic capitalism.
Reputation:
July 31st, 2011, 12:14 PM
A great example of the illogic of the system of capitalism. Capitalism has an inherent tendency towards crises of overproduction because, as material wealth increases, economic wealth decreases. Artificial scarcity must be created to boost the rate of profit for capitalist exploiters. In capitalism, wealth rules over man. In socialism, man rules over wealth.
The Soviet Union did not get a chance to fully realize socialism because of outside sanctions. Citing the failure of Soviet state capitalism does not show that socialism is not the solution to the crises of overproduction that we witness today. Meeting human needs must replace the private profit motive. Human relationships must replace property relationships.
No. By creating the world market, big industry has already brought all the peoples of the Earth, and especially the civilized peoples, into such close relation with one another that none is independent of what happens to the others.
A great example of the illogic of the system of capitalism.
Capitalism can work as well as Socialism, if not better. The issue is individual morality on a large scale. Without moral people, no company and no government can be moral.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pan Dulche
Capitalism has an inherent tendency towards crises of overproduction because, as material wealth increases, economic wealth decreases. Artificial scarcity must be created to boost the rate of profit for capitalist exploiters. In capitalism, wealth rules over man. In socialism, man rules over wealth.
The Soviet Union did not get a chance to fully realize socialism because of outside sanctions. Citing the failure of Soviet state capitalism does not show that socialism is not the solution to the crises of overproduction that we witness today. Meeting human needs must replace the private profit motive. Human relationships must replace property relationships.
Slogan/motto:
All hail our Dark Mother, Destroyer of Illusions, may she liberate us from false consciousness and feast on the blood of demonic capitalism.
Reputation:
July 31st, 2011, 01:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1PeaceMaker
Capitalism can work as well as Socialism, if not better. The issue is individual morality on a large scale. Without moral people, no company and no government can be moral.
In Mammon worship, you mean, not capitalism.
Capitalism is immoral. You can't separate the system of private ownership in the pursuit of profit from its fundamental basis in personal greed. The idea that greed is good, even with regulation, is an evil subversion of all rectudinous moral systems.
Capitalism is the system which allows good to come to those who do harm unto others. (big tobacco, weapons manufacturers, entertainment industry, etc.)
In the inevitable future socialist world, good will come only to those who do good unto others, by rewarding those who meet human needs, fulfill human relationships; instead of those who meet corporate shareholder needs, who fulfill capitalist property relationships (extracting surplus value from labor of workers [exploitation]).
Instead of arguing over silly extremist scenarios, How about we consider building houses for people to live in. That is the form of the house follows this purpose, instead of following the purpose of maximizing profits to the builder. In other words, we build some inexpensive and efficient homes for people who don't have a lot of money, and then we sell them for the cost of the labor and materials that went into them. We don't have to dismantle our whole economic system, we simply could change our priorities a little, from the current goal of maximum profits, to a more humane goal of improving the well-being of everyone involved in a given enterprise.
Sounds great!
Is anybody stopping you from doing this?
Pick up a hammer and go to work - build a house and give it away.
Quote:
Builders could still build 'mcmansions' and sell them to people who have more money than they need at prices that are beyond what the homes are worth. Just like now. But perhaps they could try not doing this EVERY TIME.
Capitalism is immoral. You can't separate the system of private ownership in the pursuit of profit from its fundamental basis in personal greed. The idea that greed is good, even with regulation, is an evil subversion of all rectudinous moral systems.
Greed is "good" in that it recognizes a fundamental human truth - that if you want a productive society, you have to offer rewards for effort.
Yeah brilliant idea. I work all week and half my income pays for my studio apartment, meanwhile some scrounger gets handed a free house.
Hey! There's plenty of cars sitting on dealers lots and I ride a bike and use public transportation. Can I has a free car? Can I has one if I don't work? I just want a new Fiat 500, there's plenty of them on a dealer's lot near where I live.
I will have to agree with P66 on this. Loafers shouldn't be getting a free ride. Programs for the homeless should be aimed at getting them gainfully employed, not just giving them handouts.
If a guy is down on his luck, we should help him get a job. There's a lot of bums out there resist all attempts to help them. These guys should not get a free ride.
Slogan/motto:
All hail our Dark Mother, Destroyer of Illusions, may she liberate us from false consciousness and feast on the blood of demonic capitalism.
Reputation:
July 31st, 2011, 02:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by some other dude
Greed is "good" in that it recognizes a fundamental human truth - that if you want a productive society, you have to offer rewards for effort.
Capitalism does not reward effort. It rewards the property owners of profitable means of production. Hence why Paris Hilton is a multi-millionaire while a working class mother who has three jobs lives in poverty. True innovators do not do so because there will be a reward for themselves. They do it because it is flows in nature.
Similarly, a person does not make the effort to take a breath of air in order to be "rewarded" with oxygen. S/he does it naturally. A person who breaths is not greedy. Greed is something else, much more sinister.
Capitalism does not reward effort. It rewards the property owners of profitable means of production. Hence why Paris Hilton is a multi-millionaire while a working class mother who has three jobs lives in poverty.
Lives in "poverty" with free education for her children, free government health care, subsidized housing and an income stream sufficient to keep her and her children going.
You want to see poverty?
Look at Africa.
Quote:
True innovators do not do so because there will be a reward for themselves. They do it because it is flows in nature.
Question: Why did Edison invent the light bulb?
Quote:
Similarly, a person does not make the effort to take a breath of air in order to be "rewarded" with oxygen. S/he does it naturally. A person who breaths is not greedy. Greed is something else, much more sinister.
Greed is a natural part of our human psyches, as natural as breathing. To deny that is to deny the obvious.
To exploit it as part of an economic system? Brilliant!
Linear Mode
