Capitalism is born out of the rationalism of the enlightenment. It is based on the assumption that individuals can identify what's best for them. And actually studies suggest that we aren't that smart. Propaganda and commercials have a greater effect on our decisions than rationally weighing the benefits does.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Your version of capitalism requires you to lay claim to things you do not produce and values you do not create all at the expense of others. You do not create the earth, land and natural resources and the individual does not create land value. Land value is created 100% by the community as a whole, by society, and private collection of it is an unearned income forcing our governments to tax our earned incomes from labor and real capital investment. Theft on both sides of that equation. Flaw!
Oil in the groupd is absolutely worthless until some *induvudual* spends money to dig it out, so it's perfectly fair that he keeps whatever money he makes off of it.
I worked for an oil company but that is not necessary to know that oil in the ground after it is discovered and before it is pumped has a market value. That value far exceeds the cost of exploration and discovery. Tell me how that value exists if it is not the value given to it by all those who want and need oil which is all of us which by definition is the community as a whole. The oil company keeps what they "make off of it" but does not create or earn the community created value it pockets.
Values are created by having a use for an item. One generation's poison (radioactive salts) are a high priced commodity in another generation only because a use has been determined for them. Items have no intrinsic value, only the prices that are willing to be paid for them. Your labour rolling a rock in your backyard is worthless to me. Your labour in making a bookshelf I will buy. "the tragedy of the commons" refutes your community basis for value.
CMinerAB: The flip side of the so-called tragedy of the commons which was a hypothetical and now disproven construct of Garret Hardin now used to justify privatizing the commons contrary to Hardin's intent in writing the piece back in 1968 is the tragedy of the underuse of the commons. That is a far more real and actual practice by the private owners of land and natural resources who do so to increase their take of the community created value of land leading to urban sprawl among other things.
ourearthhome: Over or under use depends upon the viewer, and an individual would use different criteria than a a collective in determining if the resource is being "underused". The Newfoundland Cod fisheries off the east coast of North America (part in Canadian waters, mostly in in international) would seem to disagree with you. As for "disproven", I'd argue that Marx' work has been much more thoroughly demolished by reality, and yet still serves as a bludgeon for millions around the globe.
CMinerAB: The market rent of land indicates the optimum use it can be put to and that is a market indicator. It also happens to be a collective/community phenomenon which all markets are. Public collection of community created land value via a tax amounting to the rental value of land would encourage just the right amount of use of land. Not taxing it is an unearned subsidy to land owners and removal of a subsidy is not an intervention in the market don't ya know.
turisas1234: I am a student of an American born free market loving economist of the 19th century, Henry George. The simple point is that anything without a cost of production like land and natural resources can only get their market value from the community as a whole. private collection of this value is uneanerned in the hands of land "owners" which historically has forced governments to tax what is private property, the products and incomes from labor and capitl investment in the real economy.
Aaron, kudos for the self-criticism of the movement and "knowing" not "feeling". Bravo, man.
GOPsithlord 1 year ago
Capitalism is born out of the rationalism of the enlightenment. It is based on the assumption that individuals can identify what's best for them. And actually studies suggest that we aren't that smart. Propaganda and commercials have a greater effect on our decisions than rationally weighing the benefits does.
CIAagent11 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CIAagent11 "Capitalism is born out of the rationalism of the enlightenment."
Really? Well, it's interesting that people were engaging in free enterprise long before the enlightenment.
elijah5791 1 year ago
...How on Earth did someone like you end up subscribed to such awesome channels like Misesmedia, XCowboy2 or Nielsio?
Surhotchaperchlorome 2 years ago
For your benefit: /watch?v=52KLGqDSAjo
/watch?v=PoSVoxwYrKI
/watch?v=EU_AtHkB4Ms
/watch?v=N2B34sO7HPM
/watch?v=w5hs4KVeiAU
/watch?v=7nnVQ2fROOg
/watch?v=uXesBhYwdRo
Surhotchaperchlorome 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Your version of capitalism requires you to lay claim to things you do not produce and values you do not create all at the expense of others. You do not create the earth, land and natural resources and the individual does not create land value. Land value is created 100% by the community as a whole, by society, and private collection of it is an unearned income forcing our governments to tax our earned incomes from labor and real capital investment. Theft on both sides of that equation. Flaw!
ourearthhome 2 years ago
Oil in the groupd is absolutely worthless until some *induvudual* spends money to dig it out, so it's perfectly fair that he keeps whatever money he makes off of it.
shamgar001 2 years ago
I worked for an oil company but that is not necessary to know that oil in the ground after it is discovered and before it is pumped has a market value. That value far exceeds the cost of exploration and discovery. Tell me how that value exists if it is not the value given to it by all those who want and need oil which is all of us which by definition is the community as a whole. The oil company keeps what they "make off of it" but does not create or earn the community created value it pockets.
ourearthhome 2 years ago
Values are created by having a use for an item. One generation's poison (radioactive salts) are a high priced commodity in another generation only because a use has been determined for them. Items have no intrinsic value, only the prices that are willing to be paid for them. Your labour rolling a rock in your backyard is worthless to me. Your labour in making a bookshelf I will buy. "the tragedy of the commons" refutes your community basis for value.
CMinerAB 2 years ago
CMinerAB: The flip side of the so-called tragedy of the commons which was a hypothetical and now disproven construct of Garret Hardin now used to justify privatizing the commons contrary to Hardin's intent in writing the piece back in 1968 is the tragedy of the underuse of the commons. That is a far more real and actual practice by the private owners of land and natural resources who do so to increase their take of the community created value of land leading to urban sprawl among other things.
ourearthhome 2 years ago
ourearthhome: Over or under use depends upon the viewer, and an individual would use different criteria than a a collective in determining if the resource is being "underused". The Newfoundland Cod fisheries off the east coast of North America (part in Canadian waters, mostly in in international) would seem to disagree with you. As for "disproven", I'd argue that Marx' work has been much more thoroughly demolished by reality, and yet still serves as a bludgeon for millions around the globe.
CMinerAB 2 years ago
CMinerAB: The market rent of land indicates the optimum use it can be put to and that is a market indicator. It also happens to be a collective/community phenomenon which all markets are. Public collection of community created land value via a tax amounting to the rental value of land would encourage just the right amount of use of land. Not taxing it is an unearned subsidy to land owners and removal of a subsidy is not an intervention in the market don't ya know.
ourearthhome 2 years ago
@ourearthhome, I think you're the first communist that isn't a total nutjob or retard. Were you a politician in the Soviet Union by any chance?
turisas1234 2 years ago
turisas1234: I am a student of an American born free market loving economist of the 19th century, Henry George. The simple point is that anything without a cost of production like land and natural resources can only get their market value from the community as a whole. private collection of this value is uneanerned in the hands of land "owners" which historically has forced governments to tax what is private property, the products and incomes from labor and capitl investment in the real economy.
ourearthhome 2 years ago
7:20 Great point!
short and easy to understand - even for socialists ;-)
grraadd 2 years ago