Marxist Law

[redword2007]

The idea that capital first originated from the industriousness of its owners is a bedtime story that no serious economist would entertain.

You are seriously confused about what constitutes capital.Of course all value has its origins in the work of people. It only becomes capital when it is managed in such a way as to yield surplus value for its owner. Surplus value is the portion of wealth created by working people, that is appropriated from them by the owners of capital.

[ClarityNVision]

wow this sounds sooo destructive

[redword2007]

@ClarityNVision

This is vulgar propaganda. It is designed to make you believe that Marxism is evil.

It isn't.

[Nationalisten]

@redword2007

Any ideology that wants to steal property from individuals is evil in my eyes...

[redword2007]

@Nationalisten

Then it is capitalism that you should have a problem with. Marx demonstated how the owners of capital extract 'surplus value' (i.e. value that is the product of unpaid labour) from working people. Wealth should belong to those who create it.

[Nationalisten]

@redword2007

So in your opinion Marx was NOT in favor of abolition of private property?

[redword2007]

@Nationalisten

He did want to abolish private property, but as I pointed out above, he came to that view after having demonstrated that private property depends on exploitation.

You are willing to accept the routine exploitation of working people? You don't believe they should have a right to enjoy all the benefits of the value they create?

[Nationalisten]

In a free market it's your free will that decides whether or not you decide to work for someone else. If you are afraid of "exploitation" why not start your own business? This is a fundemental flaw that communists always does,that the good and well meaning nanny state is there to take care of us and make all our problems go away. Communism is nothing else than an ideology created by the bankers to con the serfs back to serfdom. Read "Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution" by Anthony C Sutton!

[redword2007]

@Nationalisten

In capitalist societies most people have only their labour to sell in return for a wage. The lucky ones may have some choice between selling it to capitalist A or capitalist B, others won't. But sell it they must as the only other choice is starvation and homelesness - and you call that free will!

You obviously don't know that communists identify the state as a tool of class opression. In a future classless society there will be no exploitation and therefore no state.

[redword2007]

@Nationalisten

As for the idea that communism is an "ideology created by bankers", your ignorance and naivety would make a first year undergraduate wince. Lenin identified German philosophy, French socialism and English political economy as the three sources of Marxism. You will find all these on the reading lists in the best universities. Anthony Sutton's book is nowehere to be found and that's fact.

Discussing Marxism with you is like trying to discuss aerodynamics with a chimpanzee.

[ThePaleoCon]

@redword2007 Anyone who is unhappy with a suggested wage rate could always work independently with his/her own capital. The reason that many chooses to work for others is that their productivity is greatly enhanced with the use of the capital that the entrepreneur provides so in reality the worker would be worse off on his/her own than working for the entrepreneur or "capitalist". The extra gains in productivity is split between the parties according to their preferences.

[redword2007]

@ThePaleoCon

Capitalism requires owners of capital (exploiters) and wage labourers (exploited). It simply isn't possible to run a capitalist economy without wage labourers. How could mining, manufacturing or any labour-intensive industry operate without them?

Capitalism creates an illusion that anyone can make a fortune or be the Prime Minister of President, but it is just that, an illusion. Pyramids require a wide base.

[ThePaleoCon]

@redword2007 Where do you think capital comes from? It has to be created by someone and to deprive the owners of capital of their labor is exploitation if anything. Did you not understand what I wrote about the split of net production between the employer and employee or do you just ignore it?

Employment is - like you said before - a way for someone without capital/savings to enhance their own production by using the capital of the employer.

[ThePaleoCon]

@redword2007 Employment is then a way for someone to use that extra income to build up his/her savings and later on profit from both employment and capital. Lousy wage rates and a weak standard of living is rather the result of regulating both entrepreneurs and workers out of business and therefor cause the lack of competition between entrepreneurs and the high unemployment for workers. In addition statists often resort to inflation of the money supply to enhance the finance of government.

[ThePaleoCon]

@redword2007 This inflation of the money supply then results in higher prices and a lower standard of living for everyone holding legal tender money. This is especially hurtful for the poor as they suffer most from higher prices and have a little to none opportunity to convert savings into reliable assets.

[redword2007]

@ThePaleoCon

Even if an individual capitalist starts with value that he or she created, it doesn't change the overall picture because the capitalist would soon have expended the original capital and will have come to rely on the surplus value created by and exploited from workers.

[alienvixen]

Life, faculties, production — in other words, individuality, liberty, property — this is man. And in spite of the cunning of artful political leaders, these natural birthrights precede all human legislation, and are superior to it. Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.

[Chuichupachichi]

Americans need to wake up & stop the Marxist tide thats rushing in. Their severely flawed views can only ensure more of the 20th century's bloodbaths. Marxists deny absolutes & believe their view to be correct, "absolutely". They can chase that flea forever & never catch it as long as it remains on the end of their tail. They deny a persons right to own property. But to determine that any particular property cannot be owned, is by default, acting as proprietor of that property. For who are

[Chuichupachichi]

they to make such determinations regarding any property if they themselves are not the proprietors? They being the rulers will enforce that no property be privately owned. But any course of action taken, regarding any particular property will be determined by them. Such determinations & actions are precisely those of a proprietor. "Do as I say, not as I do" is the Marxist ruler's attitude

Marxism's governing is totalitarian. The US Constitution's specific purpose is to disallow totalitarianism

[Chuichupachichi]

The Constitution & Marxism are diametrically opposed to each other. No country other than USA has a constitution like the USA's. For these reason no other peoples have even the potential to be as stupid as is a American whom chooses Marxism. From last count, considering the outcome of the last presidential elections, over 50% of Americans are the stupidest people in the world. The CFR should receive the most proficiently competent award. No one achieves anything as well as they make stupids