we shouldn't all earn the same but why don't the WORKERS THEMSELVES employ the managers who control them, rather than allow a class of owners to employ the managers and cream off the profit?
They were all the rage 100 years ago, wonder why they are so few now and most of the financial co-ops (building societies) are now in private hands. Maybe you just can't buy the loyalty of the management classes.
The reason is because they're not as economically efficient....and when you're not efficient at running a business and making profit it means that you're not satisfying the customers in a sustainable way.
That's why profit is important. It lures in more businesspeople into that area, which expands production, which means more choices, which leads to competitive product differentiation and price cutting so that it makes whatever it is more affordable.
if there is a need to delegate some sort of responsibility or bring in some specialized expertise, then they'd be hired and participate in decisions just like any other member because that is what they'd be
I'm a hardcore Libertarian, who borders on anarcho-capitalism, but Chomsky is SO right, and SO articulate on U.S. foreign policy, he gets a free pass for his condemnations of what he calls "capitalism". I have about 20 Chomsky books, and he knows that he's talking about when it comes to his denunciation of imperialism, etc.
I don't disagree on foreign policy but what he mistakenly calls "capitalism" is part & parcel of the warfare state, so he doesn't get a pass from me. If he can't correctly identify the form of interventionist government policies into the economy that allow for the funding of imperialism and then turns and condemns free markets by confusing it with corporatism, then the problem is never solved. We've never had so many wars as we've had since the Federal Reserve, IRS, expanded govt. interferences.
It is obvious you dont understand Noam's ideas on economics and I believe it is possible you are making judgements prior to understanding as your descriptions of his ideas are wrong and he believes some of the same things you wrote here. Keep checking him out.
Here is were you fail to understand, Noam believes the US economy is a State-Capitalist not just capitalist. He has written thousands of articles on its interventionist nature stating it is not only capitalist. If he calls it capitalist it is because he is talking or writing about the capitalist nature or elements in this system and you probably missed that distinction within a context of State Capitalism or he wasnt clear. it is a little embarrasing to me that you missed that
but since you kids all seem to be of the HURR DURR MARKET school of thought I guess you cant even conceptualize a democratic society and will just presume more force.
Hurr Durr "Democratic" societies always become totalitarian regimes. It takes a special brand of naivety to believe that somehow the ruling political class are noble and incorrupt angels and that they will order society for us. They will create fairness and never dream of enriching themselves or their connected friends. The founding fathers hated Democracy and wrote the Constitution to create a Republic.
As long as there differing levels of production and accomplishment, there will be differing levels of private property ownership that is just and equitable. Your view that private property shouldn't exist (that you have to then work around by stipulating "use" as a criteria for possession) facilitates a ruling class to enforce this utopian & unrealistic concept. How do you suppose that humans will magically & voluntarily discard the idea of ownership no matter how much they produce over others?
But the misunderstanding is at least instructive in that it demonstrates the extreme loathing of the general population & workers that is inherent to this warped in-name-only version of Libertarian
No not really. It doesn't work based on theory, and even if you're into empirical evidence, it doesn't even turn out that way in practice. There simply is no basis for that thought.
All "private tyrannies" have operated because of government help. Without it, they might operate in the short run, but people will naturally support another business and work for another that they are more satisfied with.
By the way, you should watch the Youtube vid with Thomas DiLorenzo"Myth of Natural Monopoly"
hmm your distinction between democracy and republic is interesting - i've some heard conservatives or libertarians (and even those in the liberal mainstream on cnn or something) say that "too much democracy" will lead to totalitarianism. you seem to be asserting that the opposite is the case. that our problem is too little democracy and the problem is the republic
It's called the tyranny of the majority. Your problem is not with a free market. We haven't had a free market in generations. What we have is a corporatist system where government and business form an alliance and create an oligarchy. Govt makes it possible when it doesn't stay within the confines of the Constitution and it starts interfering with the market on the behalf of lobbyists who incentivize and even write the legislation. How anyone could confuse that with a free market is beyond me.
we shouldn't all earn the same but why don't the WORKERS THEMSELVES employ the managers who control them, rather than allow a class of owners to employ the managers and cream off the profit?
alex871uk 2 years ago
As far as I know, there isn't any law against that. You could form a co-op.
stealthswimmer 2 years ago
They were all the rage 100 years ago, wonder why they are so few now and most of the financial co-ops (building societies) are now in private hands. Maybe you just can't buy the loyalty of the management classes.
alex871uk 2 years ago
The reason is because they're not as economically efficient....and when you're not efficient at running a business and making profit it means that you're not satisfying the customers in a sustainable way.
That's why profit is important. It lures in more businesspeople into that area, which expands production, which means more choices, which leads to competitive product differentiation and price cutting so that it makes whatever it is more affordable.
stealthswimmer 2 years ago
if there is a need to delegate some sort of responsibility or bring in some specialized expertise, then they'd be hired and participate in decisions just like any other member because that is what they'd be
KentAllard 2 years ago
I'm a hardcore Libertarian, who borders on anarcho-capitalism, but Chomsky is SO right, and SO articulate on U.S. foreign policy, he gets a free pass for his condemnations of what he calls "capitalism". I have about 20 Chomsky books, and he knows that he's talking about when it comes to his denunciation of imperialism, etc.
P.S. great interview.
AntonBatey 2 years ago
I don't disagree on foreign policy but what he mistakenly calls "capitalism" is part & parcel of the warfare state, so he doesn't get a pass from me. If he can't correctly identify the form of interventionist government policies into the economy that allow for the funding of imperialism and then turns and condemns free markets by confusing it with corporatism, then the problem is never solved. We've never had so many wars as we've had since the Federal Reserve, IRS, expanded govt. interferences.
mjhonsun 2 years ago
mjhonsun,
It is obvious you dont understand Noam's ideas on economics and I believe it is possible you are making judgements prior to understanding as your descriptions of his ideas are wrong and he believes some of the same things you wrote here. Keep checking him out.
Marly61 2 years ago
mjhonson,
Here is were you fail to understand, Noam believes the US economy is a State-Capitalist not just capitalist. He has written thousands of articles on its interventionist nature stating it is not only capitalist. If he calls it capitalist it is because he is talking or writing about the capitalist nature or elements in this system and you probably missed that distinction within a context of State Capitalism or he wasnt clear. it is a little embarrasing to me that you missed that
Marly61 2 years ago
he also knows what he is talking about on economics
KentAllard 2 years ago
Ohhh how sweet it is!
Several years ago, I was on my way to becoming a full Chomskyite, wage slave. I discovered Ron Paul. Then I discovered Rothbard.
AubreyHerbert 2 years ago
so you just wanted someone to tell you that your "Fuck you I got mine" pathology is perfectly acceptable.
KentAllard 2 years ago
who's philosophy is "fuck you i got mine" ?
libertarianism is the philosophy that one shouldn't coerce others.
You are seeing "don't tread on me", where you should be seeing "I won't tread on you"
libertyplayground 2 years ago
You mean as opposed to your "I'll get mine from you with force!" pathology?
mjhonsun 2 years ago
I fail to see where there is force in a socety participating in decision making and then carry it out
KentAllard 2 years ago
but since you kids all seem to be of the HURR DURR MARKET school of thought I guess you cant even conceptualize a democratic society and will just presume more force.
KentAllard 2 years ago
Hurr Durr "Democratic" societies always become totalitarian regimes. It takes a special brand of naivety to believe that somehow the ruling political class are noble and incorrupt angels and that they will order society for us. They will create fairness and never dream of enriching themselves or their connected friends. The founding fathers hated Democracy and wrote the Constitution to create a Republic.
mjhonsun 2 years ago 2
You've been brainwashed to support the interests of the rich, so I should expect this.
You dont seem to quite grasp anarcho syndicalism or libertarian socialism, or any actual meaning of liberarian.
Protip: in such a society there would be no ruling political class.
KentAllard 2 years ago
As long as there differing levels of production and accomplishment, there will be differing levels of private property ownership that is just and equitable. Your view that private property shouldn't exist (that you have to then work around by stipulating "use" as a criteria for possession) facilitates a ruling class to enforce this utopian & unrealistic concept. How do you suppose that humans will magically & voluntarily discard the idea of ownership no matter how much they produce over others?
mjhonsun 2 years ago 2
see this is what I'm talking about, what you think this and accusing me off is completely different to what I'm talking about.
KentAllard 2 years ago
But the misunderstanding is at least instructive in that it demonstrates the extreme loathing of the general population & workers that is inherent to this warped in-name-only version of Libertarian
KentAllard 2 years ago
there's no ruling class in anarcho-capitalism either...
stealthswimmer 2 years ago
just private tyrannies capable of operating unrestrictedly.
KentAllard 2 years ago
No not really. It doesn't work based on theory, and even if you're into empirical evidence, it doesn't even turn out that way in practice. There simply is no basis for that thought.
All "private tyrannies" have operated because of government help. Without it, they might operate in the short run, but people will naturally support another business and work for another that they are more satisfied with.
By the way, you should watch the Youtube vid with Thomas DiLorenzo"Myth of Natural Monopoly"
stealthswimmer 2 years ago
hmm your distinction between democracy and republic is interesting - i've some heard conservatives or libertarians (and even those in the liberal mainstream on cnn or something) say that "too much democracy" will lead to totalitarianism. you seem to be asserting that the opposite is the case. that our problem is too little democracy and the problem is the republic
boing3887 2 years ago
Thank you, you're mostly right.
That "republic not democracy" is just juvenile sloganeering about on the level of "support the troops" in my opinion.
KentAllard 2 years ago
It's called the tyranny of the majority. Your problem is not with a free market. We haven't had a free market in generations. What we have is a corporatist system where government and business form an alliance and create an oligarchy. Govt makes it possible when it doesn't stay within the confines of the Constitution and it starts interfering with the market on the behalf of lobbyists who incentivize and even write the legislation. How anyone could confuse that with a free market is beyond me.
mjhonsun 2 years ago 2
no my problem is with you capitalist thugs misconstruing everything
KentAllard 2 years ago
great interview!! great questions!!! thanks very much. :)
PrudenceWright 2 years ago 4