Whenever I hear ppl rant about individual responsibility, this is the land of opportunity where anyone can make it, pick yourself up by your bootstraps, etc., I find out they got help--from their parents, relatives, friends, neighbors or the government. Those of us who truly have overcome obstacles with little or no help from others know how hard--and sometimes impossible it is. I've met ppl who come from wealthy or upper middle class families who'll cry poverty. They haven't a clue.
My point is if you read the book by Adam Shepard you'll find a story of a young man with $25 (sorry I was off) in his pocket that moves for another city to prove that in a year he'll have a job, a furnished apartment, a car and money in the bank. He does this. My point is anything is atainable if one is driven to achieve it. Perhaps living on the government doll is the better way to go?
Adam Shepard has told an anecdote - a story about himself. This is not social science.
The Sociological Imagination is the intersection of ones life and history and social science. If Shepard's point is that unemployment is a personal problem or failing, a historian might note this is a period of very high unemployment. An economist might say unemployment is personal failing when unemployment is 3% or less, but today's 10% plus unemployment is societies' problem.
To Radiohagan, you need to read the book by Adam Shepard I believe where he goes to a town with $20 and earns a living. Barbara Ehreneich had spending way beyond her means and wrote a book about how she couldn't make a decent living on her wage but she was buying $40 pants when she was broke as an example.
I urge you to read a book by a man with both a law degree and a journalism degree. Steven Greenhouse is a reporter for the NY Times. He has written "The Big Squeeze - Tough Times for the American Worker" published in 2008.
While Greenhouse uses anecdotes as themes in chapters, he also uses a wide array of references and statistics. There is little doubt American workers face the toughest times in a century.
Please see my video "Why the Middle Class Hates the Poor," based on Max Weber's book: "The Protestant Work Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism."
As to your possible hatred of the poor, one can't help it. Christianity, mass media, teachers, corporations all teach us to hate the poor. It is called the class system.
Since the system I believe in is based on free association, whether I love or hate someone or some group has little significance on the system as a whole. Such feelings only have a real impact if there is an exploitative system to funneling that hatred through. I.E. the state.
That is the beauty of free association. Most people's hatred isn't so great as to willingly forgo their time, resources, and wellbeing.
Even in the utopian fantasy capitalism, and even if it 'were' free association, hatred itself does matter.
It can be easily discerned with a quick look at the statistics which show us that discrimination is holding back ethnic minorities financially, for example. The state is irrelevant here.
This is still less important than the analysis which suggests that the system actively 'breeds' hatred. The point is to recognise the social deficiency as a criticism of the system for those reasons.
When the law books for every state are to large for anyone to read in a lifetime the state is never irrelevant. Racial discrimination is economically irrational. Companies who do discriminate based on race will be at a competitive disadvantaged to companies who do not discriminate. Governments create barriers to entry and make it more difficult for someone who doesn't have access to large amounts of capital to become entrepreneurs. this has the potential to sustaining racial discrimination.
"Racial discrimination is economically irrational."
Your premise is false, and it makes for an incorrect conclusion. This is where class analysis is imperative. By demonising, dehumanising, and otherwise disparaging specific sectors of the labouring class, it is possible to create a "superexploited class". Blacks slaves being a perfect case. Racism isn't a development in isolation - children aren't born racist. Rather, racism was bred in order to justify exploitation of black slaves. If they
are regarded as inferior, it is easier to justify their maltreatment. The effects of this demonisation, stemming from economic reasons has been entrenched to the point that racism is thought of as "natural", and the super-exploited still bear the brunt.
In the wage-system, a super-exploited class which finds it difficult to get a well paid job will be willing to work for you for a lower wage, keeping wage demands down.
It also has the Machiavellian bonus of keeping the exploited class
in a state of disunity. The greater numbers of labourers vs owning class means that unity serves as a great advantage, but you don't revolt when you think your black brother is the problem. You're distracted from class struggle. Likewise, workers blame immigrants for lower wages - not the boss.
With regards to the rich-poor divide, it is easier to exploit all workers when they are disparaged, like the slaves.
In all of this, the state is entirely irrelevant. The economics demand it regardless.
"Ethnic minorities" aren't being held back. Indians, most Asians, and Jews are doing just fine. They also fall under the category of ethnic minority. Of the ethnic minorities in america who are not prospering, the biggest thing holding them back would have to be the war on drugs. For one, growing up with a father locked in a rape house can't be conducive to a healthy psychological state for anyone involved. the WoD gives pigs to more power, which means more power to discriminate.
The class system is not a matter of persecuted minorities. The largest group of persecuted minorities is poor whites throughout America. The class system persecutes all.
As to racial minorities, my Chinese family has suffered tremendous discrimination in America. Race reduced their chances of finding work in their field and finding good housing. Many Indians live in my town. They work at minimum wage at the A&P.
Jews have the same advantage as the Irish. Both are white and speak English. Italians had a much harder time.
Aside from adopting all the racial stereotypes, what is your point? Are you saying that people of lower class are more likely to rape a family member, then an upper class white Anglo Saxon Protestant (WASP)? Absurd!
What do you mean by: "the WoD gives pigs to more power---?"
"Free association" is not possible in a system that enables some individuals or groups to control the economic lives of other people who rely on renting themselves to authoritarian masters. Being free to be told what to do by business owners is not freedom. A tribal private capital system without a state is more exploitative and corrupt than what we have now. Neo classical economics is mathematically unsound nonsense and should not be used as a basis for society.
Why would you chose to rent yourself to an authoritarian master? Why would anyone choose to rent themselves to an authoritarian master? Why would anyone sell themselves into slavery? Why would you associate with a "tribal private capital system" if it is so corrupt?
Depending on the system in question, a person with no property would be required to either steal or rent themselves to an employer who has control over that person's life. If everyone could afford to retire then I'd agree that you could have free association, since everyone could tell employers to f*** off with their insulting job offers of rented slavery. Having no state police force would require tribal private police forces, and there would be no choice about freely associating with it or not
why would someone have no property? With opportunities to become a member to a mutual aid organization, or take advantage of charity there is no reason to be without property. Why not compete against the big evil employer? If his deal is so lopsided, there exists waste. Where there is waste, there is opportunity to compete. With competition comes a general rise in wages, which will tend towards the value of workers labor.
So in your system, everyone magically starts with property and money and therefore is not required to enter into lopsided agreements with employers? Or is it that there are charity organisations which conveniently exist to cover up the gaps in the economic system that results in poor people who require charity? Market systems are inefficient and wasteful; they just happen to be better for some things than the state. Are you against monopoly pricing rights in the form of copyrights and patents?
In this modern time, intellectual property is probably one of the most significant forms of state privledge. Of course I am against it. Intellectual property allows corporations to sell their products at monopoly prices while destroying progress.
Against Copyrights etc? OK then! So given that businesses currently freeride on decades of public research and development[*] and you are against a state which currently supports the economy in that way, how is anything going to be invented? No business is going to be able to invest in research because of no copyrights and patents, and no state exists to fill the gap either! [*e.g. computers invented in 40's, no business involvement till 60's, same kind of story with all technology / discovery]
The American libertarian and mutualist traditions have always been against intellectual property. With a few notable exceptions. I am not a communist. That should be obvious. If you feel better by calling me a communist then go right ahead. The american anarchists such as Spooner and Benjamin Tucker, who had a tremendous impact on modern american libertarianism considered themselves socialists. If your positions weren't so disturbing, I would welcome being accepted as a fellow socialist.
I really don't know what you are talking about. China isn't communist, I am not an agent provocateur, I don't know what a G-man is, and I think it is great Chinese businesses are ignoring patent laws. Although from what I hear their knockoffs are pretty bad, and many of the customers aren't aware they are getting a poor knock-off.
Human ingenuity is useless without massive investments of capital, which so far has only been affordable by the state. Some huge corporations spend a lot of money on R&D but the idea human ingenuity and a few things like a cell phone is enough to create technological advances is so niave to be laughable. Perhaps the average person should build himself a particle accelerator? Or a medical lab?
I do not look at everyone as a helpless child like you do. That's why I believe in freedom. Being homeless isn't that common of a thing, and the people who are homeless usually suffer from mental issues, and would benefit greatly from external support. Whether it be from mutual aid, or charity. Why is this unreasonable? Again, why not just start your own business. As long as you have a good idea, a bank would benefit by giving you a loan. Not to mention alternative ways to raise money.
You are a propagandist. Homelessness is rampant. 850,000 were homeless in NYC alone in the mid 1980's and economic conditions are worse today. In fact, much of the homeless are unseen and uncounted. You believe in the freedom to be homeless.
In Holland there were zero homeless people in the 1991 - 1998. I didn't see any when I lived there for 8 years. Is this because Americans are insane and the Dutch are not? You may have something there.
The Dutch built 50,000 to 100,000 affordable housing units every year for well over a half century. As a result of having enough "affordable" housing, there is no homelessness in Holland.
As to charity, please remember what Thomas Paine said to a French nobleman fleeing Paris for his life. When the royal told Paine the people needed charity, Paine replied "The people want their rights."
If we accept the rich are thieves stealing from the poor as Jean Jacques Rousseau asserted, then the return of the stolen wealth must be returned (redistributed). The crumbs from the table will no longer do.
Aside from the fact over 50% of businesses fail in the 1st five years, large amounts of capital are required. Only the already wealthy qualify for loans and the interest mechanism is just another way the rich rob the poor.
I am not talking about homelessness: When I spoke of "property" I meant money or wealth, or whatever means a person uses to obtain commodities in a monetary system. I repeat: It is not possible for a person to be free if his only choice is to obtain money via employment to a business which tells him what to do. Apparently you are in favour of a system that enables businesses to control people's lives in that way, so you must mean the Orwellian "free to do what we tell you."
And fuck off with running a business! Not everyone likes running businesses, or thinks that society should reward most those who have the most business or financial accumen. Nor do most people have skills most suited to that sort of career, and indeed mastering business skills as well as something else unreasonable.
Markets do not measure the value created by labour. Those who have to rely on employment due to lack of capital are at the mercy of business people who, in acts of grandiose conceit, pay themselves more than the people who actually solve the problems: Technicians solve problems, not business people who merely own things and tell people what to do.
Again, when the artificial barriers to entry created by the state no longer exist, in order to start a restaurant, all you will need is a stove and a good cook. All you will need to set up a day care service is the kids. This goes on and on. There are countless ways to start a business with very little start up capital. Even manufacturing has been moving (technologically) towards smaller local manufacturing. Your communist model is obsolete. It may have been more relevant 150 years ago.
Once the state has been removed, private interests will erect their own barriers to entry to ensure their own advantage. There will even less chance of escaping wage slavery since the businesses in control of everything from police forces to education wont even be removable by the vote! It will be a society of fascist tribes.
Besides, once businesses have to start paying the true costs of things like damage to roads proportionate to use, training of people to read and write, university training, and countless other state subsidies, they will all go bust. And none of them will be innovating beyond very basic development because nobody can afford the research costs.
And another thing: Like you said, people are not helpless children, so they don't need businessmen telling them what to do. So the only businessmen bring to the table is the fact of ownership: No more a qualification for authority than heredity or divine rights.
If the business men bring nothing to the table, then let them to freely compete against the worker cooperative or whatever alternative model you advocate. Why are you afraid of competition? Do you have that little faith in your system.
What force of nature or politics can stop businessmen from doing as they please? Such monopolists control the economy and government completely. It is they who allow no competition. You seem unfamiliar with American history. You must live in a land that does not exist.
Business people only have an advantage through the capital that they start with. If we take away all their money through a 250% inheritance tax then I'll agree to your competition.
I like Milton Friedman's solution to poverty and unemployment. As to your Labor Theory of Value is straight out of Marx's playbook. Unfortunately, Marx was the last of the Liberal economists of the 19th century. Marx's Labor Theory of Value was replaced by the NeoLiberal economists view that "marginal utility" determines value.
The marginal theory of value is more fundamental, and logically sound then the LTV, but in a free market wages will naturally tend towards the amount of value created through the individual's labor. I must of missed the chapter of the communist manifesto where Marx talks about free markets in such positive light. Although I may be wrong, I thought commies interpreted the LTV as prescriptive rather then descriptive.
Being an economic illiterate, you are unfamiliar with the history of economics. In the 19th century Marx was considered a great economist - a main line classical economist. Try reading Marx's economic books.
1. Land theft, horse theft, slavery (no chance to accumulate capital), no inheritance (most capital is inherited), no government programs for the lowest classes to make them rich, as in the case of capitalists (gov't. intervention), etc.
2. As with most anarchists, you are unable to point to any successfully operating societies based on "mutualism." Give us a name? A place?
first, I am not a mutualist. Second, there are many historical examples of uncommon services being provided without the centeral planning of a state. If you name it, there are historical examples of it being efficiently provided outside of a state.
3. Economists refer to this as the cost of entry. People without capital cannot start businesses.
4. Your assumption there is waste is not proven. All capitalists claim to be efficient and they are. Even with waste, there is still the high cost of entry.
5. Your contention that competition raises wages is unproven and absurd. You are an economic illiterate.
In a free society, the natural barrier to entry for starting a business would be very low. For example, anyone with a cell phone and a automobile/motorcycle/scooter, could start a taxi service. Infact the cellphone isn't even all that necessary, depending on where you are.
You must be Dutch. Holland has only 3.2% unemployment. Certainly America has mass unemployment, by any measure. You are cavalier about the misery of your fellow men. Your lack of Solidarity is normal in Post Modernity.
Again you are painting the humans as the helpless victims of this untouchable class that can only be defeated through violent action. But you are also doing much more then that. You accusing me of economic illiteracy while spouting out BS economic principles.
You are putting words in my mouth and creating strawmen so you can tilt at windmills. Those who so so are either teachers, lawyers, G-men and/or the insane.
Noone I know of or have read is calling for "violent action," to use your phrase. Yet, you put words in my mouth. Are you an agent provocateur or G-man?
Do you have degree in economics from a highly respected college or university? My videos and comments are informed by my education.
Certainly capitalism has at least as many victims as Bolshevism. Your denial of reality is referred to by Karl Marx as "false consciousness." Rather then helpless, I see these victims as having a bad case of "false consciousness," developed by the worlds most propagandized country t have ever existed.
4. There are no alternatives. Reform socialism is a major improvement over America's raw capitalism. Moving to Europe is a partial answer to the neo fascism of America.
Hi DeraJa: Did you actually watch my video on Muckrakers? Every one of your comments were not germane to my video.
Is your mentor Murray against muckrakers? Are there no muckrakers in the Rothbard utopia? Are anarchist societies so perfect that muckrakers are not needed?
Can you or your mentor point to a single successful "free association" society?
Whenever I hear ppl rant about individual responsibility, this is the land of opportunity where anyone can make it, pick yourself up by your bootstraps, etc., I find out they got help--from their parents, relatives, friends, neighbors or the government. Those of us who truly have overcome obstacles with little or no help from others know how hard--and sometimes impossible it is. I've met ppl who come from wealthy or upper middle class families who'll cry poverty. They haven't a clue.
PurrGrrl 1 year ago
Meant governement dole ;)
gina7177 2 years ago
My point is if you read the book by Adam Shepard you'll find a story of a young man with $25 (sorry I was off) in his pocket that moves for another city to prove that in a year he'll have a job, a furnished apartment, a car and money in the bank. He does this. My point is anything is atainable if one is driven to achieve it. Perhaps living on the government doll is the better way to go?
gina7177 2 years ago
Adam Shepard has told an anecdote - a story about himself. This is not social science.
The Sociological Imagination is the intersection of ones life and history and social science. If Shepard's point is that unemployment is a personal problem or failing, a historian might note this is a period of very high unemployment. An economist might say unemployment is personal failing when unemployment is 3% or less, but today's 10% plus unemployment is societies' problem.
Have you ever worked?
radiohogan 2 years ago
To Radiohagan, you need to read the book by Adam Shepard I believe where he goes to a town with $20 and earns a living. Barbara Ehreneich had spending way beyond her means and wrote a book about how she couldn't make a decent living on her wage but she was buying $40 pants when she was broke as an example.
gina7177 2 years ago
To Gina7177:
What is your point?
All the Best / Mike H
radiohogan 2 years ago
I urge you to read a book by a man with both a law degree and a journalism degree. Steven Greenhouse is a reporter for the NY Times. He has written "The Big Squeeze - Tough Times for the American Worker" published in 2008.
While Greenhouse uses anecdotes as themes in chapters, he also uses a wide array of references and statistics. There is little doubt American workers face the toughest times in a century.
radiohogan 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Jesus Christ has returned. I AM.
IAMJESUSmovie 2 years ago
Good One Here, Thanks - also Look at Chris Hedges - on RT News "Fighting corporate rape of US" - Interesting and was downloaded today.
BGBurch 2 years ago
Okay, I get it. The only people who care about poor people are the social democrats. I didn't realize I hated poor people so much.
DeraJa 2 years ago
Dear DeraJa:
Please see my video "Why the Middle Class Hates the Poor," based on Max Weber's book: "The Protestant Work Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism."
As to your possible hatred of the poor, one can't help it. Christianity, mass media, teachers, corporations all teach us to hate the poor. It is called the class system.
radiohogan 2 years ago
or utilitarianism.
fruitsofnews 2 years ago
Since the system I believe in is based on free association, whether I love or hate someone or some group has little significance on the system as a whole. Such feelings only have a real impact if there is an exploitative system to funneling that hatred through. I.E. the state.
That is the beauty of free association. Most people's hatred isn't so great as to willingly forgo their time, resources, and wellbeing.
DeraJa 2 years ago
Even in the utopian fantasy capitalism, and even if it 'were' free association, hatred itself does matter.
It can be easily discerned with a quick look at the statistics which show us that discrimination is holding back ethnic minorities financially, for example. The state is irrelevant here.
This is still less important than the analysis which suggests that the system actively 'breeds' hatred. The point is to recognise the social deficiency as a criticism of the system for those reasons.
samsonlovesyou 2 years ago
When the law books for every state are to large for anyone to read in a lifetime the state is never irrelevant. Racial discrimination is economically irrational. Companies who do discriminate based on race will be at a competitive disadvantaged to companies who do not discriminate. Governments create barriers to entry and make it more difficult for someone who doesn't have access to large amounts of capital to become entrepreneurs. this has the potential to sustaining racial discrimination.
DeraJa 2 years ago
"Racial discrimination is economically irrational."
Your premise is false, and it makes for an incorrect conclusion. This is where class analysis is imperative. By demonising, dehumanising, and otherwise disparaging specific sectors of the labouring class, it is possible to create a "superexploited class". Blacks slaves being a perfect case. Racism isn't a development in isolation - children aren't born racist. Rather, racism was bred in order to justify exploitation of black slaves. If they
samsonlovesyou 2 years ago
are regarded as inferior, it is easier to justify their maltreatment. The effects of this demonisation, stemming from economic reasons has been entrenched to the point that racism is thought of as "natural", and the super-exploited still bear the brunt.
In the wage-system, a super-exploited class which finds it difficult to get a well paid job will be willing to work for you for a lower wage, keeping wage demands down.
It also has the Machiavellian bonus of keeping the exploited class
samsonlovesyou 2 years ago
in a state of disunity. The greater numbers of labourers vs owning class means that unity serves as a great advantage, but you don't revolt when you think your black brother is the problem. You're distracted from class struggle. Likewise, workers blame immigrants for lower wages - not the boss.
With regards to the rich-poor divide, it is easier to exploit all workers when they are disparaged, like the slaves.
In all of this, the state is entirely irrelevant. The economics demand it regardless.
samsonlovesyou 2 years ago
Dear Samsonlovesyou:
Your three part analysis of the effects of the class system is excellent.
Thank you / Mike H
radiohogan 2 years ago
Race is the most important element of class, according to social psychologist Kenneth Clark.
radiohogan 2 years ago
Sear DeraJa:
Why haven't you addressed SamsonLovesYou's excellent analysis of the class system?
All the Best / Mike H
radiohogan 2 years ago
"Sear DeraJa:
Why haven't you addressed SamsonLovesYou's excellent analysis of the class system?"
Because I need to sleep.
DeraJa 2 years ago
You woke up and did not address SamsonLoves You's analysis.
radiohogan 2 years ago
When will you address SamsonLovesYou's description of the class system. Libertarians support the class system. Do you deny it?
radiohogan 2 years ago
prt 2
"Ethnic minorities" aren't being held back. Indians, most Asians, and Jews are doing just fine. They also fall under the category of ethnic minority. Of the ethnic minorities in america who are not prospering, the biggest thing holding them back would have to be the war on drugs. For one, growing up with a father locked in a rape house can't be conducive to a healthy psychological state for anyone involved. the WoD gives pigs to more power, which means more power to discriminate.
DeraJa 2 years ago
The class system is not a matter of persecuted minorities. The largest group of persecuted minorities is poor whites throughout America. The class system persecutes all.
radiohogan 2 years ago
Part A
As to racial minorities, my Chinese family has suffered tremendous discrimination in America. Race reduced their chances of finding work in their field and finding good housing. Many Indians live in my town. They work at minimum wage at the A&P.
Jews have the same advantage as the Irish. Both are white and speak English. Italians had a much harder time.
radiohogan 2 years ago
Part B
Aside from adopting all the racial stereotypes, what is your point? Are you saying that people of lower class are more likely to rape a family member, then an upper class white Anglo Saxon Protestant (WASP)? Absurd!
What do you mean by: "the WoD gives pigs to more power---?"
radiohogan 2 years ago
"Free association" is not possible in a system that enables some individuals or groups to control the economic lives of other people who rely on renting themselves to authoritarian masters. Being free to be told what to do by business owners is not freedom. A tribal private capital system without a state is more exploitative and corrupt than what we have now. Neo classical economics is mathematically unsound nonsense and should not be used as a basis for society.
utinomen 2 years ago 2
Why would you chose to rent yourself to an authoritarian master? Why would anyone choose to rent themselves to an authoritarian master? Why would anyone sell themselves into slavery? Why would you associate with a "tribal private capital system" if it is so corrupt?
DeraJa 2 years ago
Depending on the system in question, a person with no property would be required to either steal or rent themselves to an employer who has control over that person's life. If everyone could afford to retire then I'd agree that you could have free association, since everyone could tell employers to f*** off with their insulting job offers of rented slavery. Having no state police force would require tribal private police forces, and there would be no choice about freely associating with it or not
utinomen 2 years ago 2
why would someone have no property? With opportunities to become a member to a mutual aid organization, or take advantage of charity there is no reason to be without property. Why not compete against the big evil employer? If his deal is so lopsided, there exists waste. Where there is waste, there is opportunity to compete. With competition comes a general rise in wages, which will tend towards the value of workers labor.
DeraJa 2 years ago
So in your system, everyone magically starts with property and money and therefore is not required to enter into lopsided agreements with employers? Or is it that there are charity organisations which conveniently exist to cover up the gaps in the economic system that results in poor people who require charity? Market systems are inefficient and wasteful; they just happen to be better for some things than the state. Are you against monopoly pricing rights in the form of copyrights and patents?
utinomen 2 years ago 2
In this modern time, intellectual property is probably one of the most significant forms of state privledge. Of course I am against it. Intellectual property allows corporations to sell their products at monopoly prices while destroying progress.
DeraJa 2 years ago
Against Copyrights etc? OK then! So given that businesses currently freeride on decades of public research and development[*] and you are against a state which currently supports the economy in that way, how is anything going to be invented? No business is going to be able to invest in research because of no copyrights and patents, and no state exists to fill the gap either! [*e.g. computers invented in 40's, no business involvement till 60's, same kind of story with all technology / discovery]
utinomen 2 years ago
"how is anything going to be invented?"
Human ingenuity.
"No business is going to be able to invest in research because of no copyrights and patents"
That is a myth. Intellectual property actually prevents progress. The incentive to create and improve will always exist.
DeraJa 2 years ago
DerjaJa is advocating the Communist position. This is good to see. Right on comrade.
radiohogan 2 years ago
The American libertarian and mutualist traditions have always been against intellectual property. With a few notable exceptions. I am not a communist. That should be obvious. If you feel better by calling me a communist then go right ahead. The american anarchists such as Spooner and Benjamin Tucker, who had a tremendous impact on modern american libertarianism considered themselves socialists. If your positions weren't so disturbing, I would welcome being accepted as a fellow socialist.
DeraJa 2 years ago
Communist China is the world leader in ignoring patent law.
G-men have used native American Anarchism to legitimize your propaganda.
I don't think you are a Communist; I think you are an agent provocateur or G-man.
radiohogan 2 years ago
I really don't know what you are talking about. China isn't communist, I am not an agent provocateur, I don't know what a G-man is, and I think it is great Chinese businesses are ignoring patent laws. Although from what I hear their knockoffs are pretty bad, and many of the customers aren't aware they are getting a poor knock-off.
DeraJa 2 years ago
Human ingenuity is useless without massive investments of capital, which so far has only been affordable by the state. Some huge corporations spend a lot of money on R&D but the idea human ingenuity and a few things like a cell phone is enough to create technological advances is so niave to be laughable. Perhaps the average person should build himself a particle accelerator? Or a medical lab?
utinomen 2 years ago
I do not look at everyone as a helpless child like you do. That's why I believe in freedom. Being homeless isn't that common of a thing, and the people who are homeless usually suffer from mental issues, and would benefit greatly from external support. Whether it be from mutual aid, or charity. Why is this unreasonable? Again, why not just start your own business. As long as you have a good idea, a bank would benefit by giving you a loan. Not to mention alternative ways to raise money.
DeraJa 2 years ago
Part A
You are a propagandist. Homelessness is rampant. 850,000 were homeless in NYC alone in the mid 1980's and economic conditions are worse today. In fact, much of the homeless are unseen and uncounted. You believe in the freedom to be homeless.
radiohogan 2 years ago
Part B
In Holland there were zero homeless people in the 1991 - 1998. I didn't see any when I lived there for 8 years. Is this because Americans are insane and the Dutch are not? You may have something there.
The Dutch built 50,000 to 100,000 affordable housing units every year for well over a half century. As a result of having enough "affordable" housing, there is no homelessness in Holland.
radiohogan 2 years ago
Part C
Rather then mental illness, 50% of the homeless are children. Are the kids crazy?
A majority of adults are war veterans who work but do not make enough to afford housing in the heart of capitalism.
Holland has a Socialist tradition and the Socialist Party is the 3rd biggest in Holland.
radiohogan 2 years ago
Part D
As to charity, please remember what Thomas Paine said to a French nobleman fleeing Paris for his life. When the royal told Paine the people needed charity, Paine replied "The people want their rights."
If we accept the rich are thieves stealing from the poor as Jean Jacques Rousseau asserted, then the return of the stolen wealth must be returned (redistributed). The crumbs from the table will no longer do.
radiohogan 2 years ago
Part E
Aside from the fact over 50% of businesses fail in the 1st five years, large amounts of capital are required. Only the already wealthy qualify for loans and the interest mechanism is just another way the rich rob the poor.
radiohogan 2 years ago
I am not talking about homelessness: When I spoke of "property" I meant money or wealth, or whatever means a person uses to obtain commodities in a monetary system. I repeat: It is not possible for a person to be free if his only choice is to obtain money via employment to a business which tells him what to do. Apparently you are in favour of a system that enables businesses to control people's lives in that way, so you must mean the Orwellian "free to do what we tell you."
utinomen 2 years ago
And fuck off with running a business! Not everyone likes running businesses, or thinks that society should reward most those who have the most business or financial accumen. Nor do most people have skills most suited to that sort of career, and indeed mastering business skills as well as something else unreasonable.
utinomen 2 years ago
What I want is for people to earn based one the value they create through their labor.
DeraJa 2 years ago
Markets do not measure the value created by labour. Those who have to rely on employment due to lack of capital are at the mercy of business people who, in acts of grandiose conceit, pay themselves more than the people who actually solve the problems: Technicians solve problems, not business people who merely own things and tell people what to do.
utinomen 2 years ago
Again, when the artificial barriers to entry created by the state no longer exist, in order to start a restaurant, all you will need is a stove and a good cook. All you will need to set up a day care service is the kids. This goes on and on. There are countless ways to start a business with very little start up capital. Even manufacturing has been moving (technologically) towards smaller local manufacturing. Your communist model is obsolete. It may have been more relevant 150 years ago.
DeraJa 2 years ago
You are a Red Baiter calling folks Communists. Your arguments have been easily destroyed by conventional analysis - no communism or violence needed.
You are an agent provocateur, a paid G-man, plain and simple. Cut the con. You are transparent. Get more training.
I advocate Milton Friedman's solution to poverty and unemployment. Are you calling Miltie a Commie? Shame on you.
radiohogan 2 years ago
Once the state has been removed, private interests will erect their own barriers to entry to ensure their own advantage. There will even less chance of escaping wage slavery since the businesses in control of everything from police forces to education wont even be removable by the vote! It will be a society of fascist tribes.
utinomen 2 years ago
Besides, once businesses have to start paying the true costs of things like damage to roads proportionate to use, training of people to read and write, university training, and countless other state subsidies, they will all go bust. And none of them will be innovating beyond very basic development because nobody can afford the research costs.
utinomen 2 years ago
And another thing: Like you said, people are not helpless children, so they don't need businessmen telling them what to do. So the only businessmen bring to the table is the fact of ownership: No more a qualification for authority than heredity or divine rights.
utinomen 2 years ago
If the business men bring nothing to the table, then let them to freely compete against the worker cooperative or whatever alternative model you advocate. Why are you afraid of competition? Do you have that little faith in your system.
DeraJa 2 years ago
What force of nature or politics can stop businessmen from doing as they please? Such monopolists control the economy and government completely. It is they who allow no competition. You seem unfamiliar with American history. You must live in a land that does not exist.
radiohogan 2 years ago
Business people only have an advantage through the capital that they start with. If we take away all their money through a 250% inheritance tax then I'll agree to your competition.
utinomen 2 years ago
I like Milton Friedman's solution to poverty and unemployment. As to your Labor Theory of Value is straight out of Marx's playbook. Unfortunately, Marx was the last of the Liberal economists of the 19th century. Marx's Labor Theory of Value was replaced by the NeoLiberal economists view that "marginal utility" determines value.
radiohogan 2 years ago
The marginal theory of value is more fundamental, and logically sound then the LTV, but in a free market wages will naturally tend towards the amount of value created through the individual's labor. I must of missed the chapter of the communist manifesto where Marx talks about free markets in such positive light. Although I may be wrong, I thought commies interpreted the LTV as prescriptive rather then descriptive.
DeraJa 2 years ago
Being an economic illiterate, you are unfamiliar with the history of economics. In the 19th century Marx was considered a great economist - a main line classical economist. Try reading Marx's economic books.
radiohogan 2 years ago
And I would suggest you read Rothbard's Man, Economy, and State.
DeraJa 2 years ago
Is Murray the crank who teaches at Ramapo College?
radiohogan 2 years ago
Answers:
Part I
1. Land theft, horse theft, slavery (no chance to accumulate capital), no inheritance (most capital is inherited), no government programs for the lowest classes to make them rich, as in the case of capitalists (gov't. intervention), etc.
2. As with most anarchists, you are unable to point to any successfully operating societies based on "mutualism." Give us a name? A place?
radiohogan 2 years ago
first, I am not a mutualist. Second, there are many historical examples of uncommon services being provided without the centeral planning of a state. If you name it, there are historical examples of it being efficiently provided outside of a state.
DeraJa 2 years ago
All capitalism exists outside the state - by definition. You are simply stating a truism.
radiohogan 2 years ago
I understand your comment, but it doesn't make sense in the context of anything I was talking about.
DeraJa 2 years ago
Part II
3. Economists refer to this as the cost of entry. People without capital cannot start businesses.
4. Your assumption there is waste is not proven. All capitalists claim to be efficient and they are. Even with waste, there is still the high cost of entry.
5. Your contention that competition raises wages is unproven and absurd. You are an economic illiterate.
radiohogan 2 years ago
In a free society, the natural barrier to entry for starting a business would be very low. For example, anyone with a cell phone and a automobile/motorcycle/scooter, could start a taxi service. Infact the cellphone isn't even all that necessary, depending on where you are.
Humans aren't helpless children.
DeraJa 2 years ago
So, the answer to mass unemployment is cell phones and scooters. You have no Sociological Imagination."
radiohogan 2 years ago
what mass unemployment?
DeraJa 2 years ago
You must be Dutch. Holland has only 3.2% unemployment. Certainly America has mass unemployment, by any measure. You are cavalier about the misery of your fellow men. Your lack of Solidarity is normal in Post Modernity.
radiohogan 2 years ago
in response to 5.
That is econ 101 dude. The principle you are arguing against is supply and demand. Didn't keynes believe in supply and demand?
DeraJa 2 years ago
Are you referring to "competition" in the labor market or the labor market?
Competition among capitalists causes them to lower wages. They have successfully done so for 30 years.
Competition among workers in the labor market causes lower wages. More workers (increased supply) = lower wages. Lower aggregate demand = lower wages.
Again, you are an economic illiterate.
radiohogan 2 years ago
Again you are painting the humans as the helpless victims of this untouchable class that can only be defeated through violent action. But you are also doing much more then that. You accusing me of economic illiteracy while spouting out BS economic principles.
DeraJa 2 years ago
Part 1
You are putting words in my mouth and creating strawmen so you can tilt at windmills. Those who so so are either teachers, lawyers, G-men and/or the insane.
Noone I know of or have read is calling for "violent action," to use your phrase. Yet, you put words in my mouth. Are you an agent provocateur or G-man?
Do you have degree in economics from a highly respected college or university? My videos and comments are informed by my education.
radiohogan 2 years ago
Part 2
Certainly capitalism has at least as many victims as Bolshevism. Your denial of reality is referred to by Karl Marx as "false consciousness." Rather then helpless, I see these victims as having a bad case of "false consciousness," developed by the worlds most propagandized country t have ever existed.
radiohogan 2 years ago
Answers:
1. Poverty.
2. Poverty
3. Slaves are captured (stolen) and sold.
4. There are no alternatives. Reform socialism is a major improvement over America's raw capitalism. Moving to Europe is a partial answer to the neo fascism of America.
radiohogan 2 years ago
Hi DeraJa: Did you actually watch my video on Muckrakers? Every one of your comments were not germane to my video.
Is your mentor Murray against muckrakers? Are there no muckrakers in the Rothbard utopia? Are anarchist societies so perfect that muckrakers are not needed?
Can you or your mentor point to a single successful "free association" society?
radiohogan 2 years ago