Calculation and Socialism | Joseph T. Salerno

[MamonMuch]

Haha This guy is a complete dumbass!! I can't believe there are people as stupid as this guy. And im not even a socialist. lol

[xXhypn0tiiqXx]

@MamonMuch

Why is he stupid? How is he stupid? You can't call someone a "complete dumbass" without any reasons why.

[machwon]

@xXhypn0tiiqXx Yes he can, and he did! However it would also make him an idiot for doing it.

[mynameisalsojeff]

Why cant you must make what people need? why does something have to have value?

[gergenheimer]

@mynameisalsojeff because "need" is not an objective, measurable trait. Everyone needs food, but what kinds and amounts cannot be objectively determined by a central planner. The same holds true for clothes, shelter, education, healthcare, etc. "Value" is not an objective trait either, but is based on individual, subjective preferences. A functioning price system organically conveys crucial information to both producers and consumers, allowing them to assess matters for themselves.

[Garegin]

@mynameisalsojeff did you listen to the video. there are no price signals to calculate. its like stabbing in a dark. needs are not ends in themselves. a single end has an infinite amount of means.

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

Everyone, take a look in the comments section at the dialogue between me and kajmobile. Thumb this post up if you think I completely destroyed him, or thumb it down if you think I lost.

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

Watching the Austrian School grow and attract haters from the Keynesian/Socialist thought is hilarious, even though the Keynesian ideas have been tried and have utterly failed.

Salerno also gave a lecture concerning the death of Macroeconomics, which was 100% correct. Macroeconomic thought is dying out, even in the mainstream circles. The global economic crisis is showing the people that the Macroeconomists/Socialists have absolutely no clue what they're talking about.

[kajmobile]

...and finally, socialists would clearly be able to know exactly what to produce.

since everything is priced in labor time, the total price of everything produced would be paid out in total income so that demand equals supply.

socialists would then just produce whatever it is that people buy.

this guy needs to get a little more educated on what socialism is and how it works!!

[PanzerDivisionBOM]

@kajmobile

Your position is predicted and addressed in the article. I feel no obligation or inclination to restate it here.

In your defense, the argument presented in the article is very intricate, and these speakers are generally forced by time constraints to recount it very quickly. I only understood it after sitting down a few minutes with a text version, and if you're the least bit interested in comprehending and addressing the argument put forth therein, then I suggest you do the same.

[kajmobile]

@PanzerDivisionBOM "Your position is predicted and addressed in the article"

what article?

his critique of labor time in this talk is wrong. he says it wont work because u cant compare the labor of cashiers and scientists. but u dont need to in order to manage an economy. 1hour = 1hour regardless of profession. consumers dont care what professions created the product

and he says u cant price capital goods. y cant a company that makes capital goods add up their labor time? it's an absurd claim

[PanzerDivisionBOM]

@kajmobile

The article that the entire video is about. The article which Dr. Salerno mentions by name at 00:50, and goes on to paraphrase and discuss throughout the entire video (in my opinion, much too cursorily for anyone not already familiar with the argument to follow, but oh well): Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth.

Again, in your defense, I feel that your failure to notice this has much more to do with his failure to communicate than with any shortcoming on your part.

[kajmobile]

@PanzerDivisionBOM ur comment wasnt clear. i thought u were referring to an article that salerno wrote. lol

the economic calculation article written by mises was debunked by economists in the subsequent "economic calculation debate."

hayek later tried to salvage mises's argument by saying that although calculation is possible in a socialist economy, the information was too hard to gather which is ridiculous and no economist takes seriously.

[sunnyvegas702]

@kajmobile love that line "socialists would then just produce whatever it is that people buy" , YOU have NO IDEA what people would buy, thats the problem, since you can't predict sales, you can't predict how to organize and pay ppl in a company. Think about the fact that ppl at microsoft are just as smart as ppl at apple but apple is more creative to use their skills to make more sales. You can't dictate an economy you just have to let ppl run it on their own.

[kajmobile]

@sunnyvegas702 "since you can't predict sales, you can't predict how to organize and pay ppl in a company"

if u took the time to get a business education u would learn that is not true. managers r able to organize companies even though they cannot predict sales with 100% certainty.

both apple and microsoft r able to organize their companies. they have been around for a long time

.

"You can't dictate an economy"

i dont advocate a dictatorship. companies run on their own.

[sunnyvegas702]

@kajmobile Again you misunderstood, I was referring to organizing companies economically, how can you truly figure out what to pay people if you can't predict sales, thats the problem of society, if you could predict sales then everything can be organized. But you can't, people are willing to work, but they dont know what other ppl want them to do.This is why a history teacher can know a lot but lil wayne makes more money because he does something other ppl are willing to spend on.

[kajmobile]

@sunnyvegas702 u can organize companies because u can predict sales to some degree. and people will work at companies that produce the things people r buying.

consumer purchases dictate where u can work.

if ur sales prediction turned out wrong and revenue is less than expenses, the company will get shut down and the employees will have to work at another company that is producing things people r buying

[sunnyvegas702]

@kajmobile your exactly right, the company will go out of business, socialism doesn't do that. The market MUST be dictated by what people are buying thats what I mean an economy can't be dictated or managed. Even if you wanted to produce things that you might think is better for people i.e. healthy food you can't do it unless people voluntary buy your product. Socialism or any other government management doesn't allow the ability to fail, thats the problem and in some form thats a dictatorship.

[kajmobile]

@sunnyvegas702 the socialist system proposed by Lange was called market socialism because it used a market to determine production and allocate goods and services.

businesses would be independently run and subjected to market demand. if the company could not sell what it produces at whatever the cost was, it would be shut down just like a privately owned company.

it would achieve the pareto efficiency that a free market would achieve under perfect competition. that is y socialism is superior

[sunnyvegas702]

@kajmobile But how companies are organized aren't static systems they are dynamic and changing. it would work if there was just one system for everything then you could cut the extra money out but no system is static, software is changing that everyday. Thats why you have to have the freedom for everyone to compete. Remember the goal is to make the most efficient systems not trying to get everyone to have a lot of cash, thats what you dont understand.

[kajmobile]

@sunnyvegas702 yes the market is dynamic. and the managers of companies have to constantly adjust to evolving market conditions.

having everyone paid equally doesnt prevent u from developing efficiencies. u want to produce what people want for the least amount of labor. that is how u create efficiency

getting some poor desperate worker to take a pay cut so u can lower ur price is not creating efficiency

[sunnyvegas702]

@kajmobile "getting some poor desperate worker to take a pay cut so u can lower ur price is not creating efficiency" your're right there are shitty companies out there but you're not going to fix it with regulation you can only fix it by competing with them and being better. This reminds me of apple, they invent the magnetic power cord for their laptops, so that if your stepped on the power cord, it would just unplug magnetically. But regulation wouldn't figure it out only apple did.

[kajmobile]

@sunnyvegas702 regulation wont fix anything. and more competing wont ever create an economy where every worker earns $127k and is wealthy. that is y i advocate replacing capitalism with market socialism

in market socialism the guy who made the magnetic power cord and other people like him will still continue to work and still continue to develop new ideas

[sunnyvegas702]

@kajmobile you can't do that cuz you would be limited to 127k investments.See its a double edge sword, if a person needs to spend a million dollars freely to invest in a company that might help society he also has the freedom to spend a million on drugs and hookers. It comes within territory and you also never thought about the fact that maybe business A spends 10 mil to do something and business B does it with 6 mil but spends 1 mil on a yacht , business B is still better for society,see that?

[kajmobile]

@sunnyvegas702 "you can't do that cuz you would be limited to 127k investments"

cant do what?

the economy doesnt need ur million to invest. the $127k is based on using 15% of GDP towards investment which is allocated to banks which they use to invest in viable ideas.

if Biz B can do what Biz A does for less, their price will be lower which will drive Biz A out of business. there will still be competition

[kajmobile]

@sunnyvegas702 adam smith in wealth of nations only advocated capitalism because he thought it would produce perfect equality of outcome under perfect competition.

we now know capitalism will never achieve perfect competition and doesnt produce anywhere near equality of outcome.

only market socialism can achieve that. everyone would earn $127k per year. everyone would be wealthy. that will never happen in capitalism, only in market socialism.

[sunnyvegas702]

@kajmobile ahhhh another fallacy, see you can't do that because not everyone values everyone equally. See thats the problem with socialized medicine and anything socialized, you DON'T want to discriminate on a person's ability to produce i. e. we should all receive same health care etc.. BUT you DO want to discriminate only to use people who HAVE skills like doctors i. e. I want the service of a professional doctor and not a homeless man with no skills.

[kajmobile]

@sunnyvegas702 how u value people has nothing to do with worker pay. if u and i both work hard for 8 hours, we should both get the same pay regardless of what u think of me

im not sure how u think that means we r going to use homeless people as doctors

u need to be licensed in order to be a doctor. equal pay has nothing to do with requiring qualification to do certain jobs

[sunnyvegas702]

@kajmobile See money is a tool to trade products and services, I give you money then you work for me, then you give it back to me when I work for you, see the doctors and other people of skills that society values will have money BUT its getting people to want to learn those skills, theres nothing you can do to a lawnmower to make as much money as a doctor unless he becomes a doctor, you can't dictate what ppl value.

[kajmobile]

@sunnyvegas702 im not trying to dictate what people value. if u r interested in medicine and there r jobs available, u can become a doctor. if u r interested in mowing lawns and there r jobs available, u can become a landscaper.

u can choose whatever job u r interested in so long as there r jobs available in that field.

equal pay doesnt mean u r forced to do anything

[sunnyvegas702]

@kajmobile you can't do equal pay because people dont SPEND equally, if they did there would be NO issue , get it? you can't dictate pay to anyone because no one can dictate what people spend. As far as getting paid the same, no one can manage that, thats penny wise but pound foolish, if someone gets paid 1 or 2 more dollars than you its ont the end of the world, focus on being a doctoor or some other profession with skill thats what matters

[kajmobile]

@sunnyvegas702 paying u $127k is not dictating u have to spend $127k. u can spend or save as much of that as u want.

paying someone $1 or $2 more is pointless

[kajmobile]

...in socialism, since everything is priced based on labor time, efficiency would be correctly defined as reducing the amount of labor in producing things.

so they would obviously try to mechanize and use factories to mass produce in order to minimize labor which minimizes cost!!...

[ngupowered]

@kajmobile I like ur reasoning, throughout the comment section, about labor time, but only as an intermediary to the adoption of an RBE-economy which, undoubtedly, is what technology progresses towards. What happens if technology becomes so efficient, that one mere man can produce a robot that in turn, with artificial intelligence, can replicate and outsmart any human in any field. That will surely be the end of all form of capitalism and once those that are left, the "private" ...

[ngupowered]

@kajmobile property owners, realizes that man himself has become superfluousness will surely advocate a "mass reduction of people".Therefore, the notion of private property is a root cause because there is no upper bound.

Indeed, efficiency dictates that money will have to be replaced because its mere existence is inefficient, wasting resources, all in favor of an RBE.

[kajmobile]

@ngupowered the technology u mention wont be available in our lifetimes and is several centuries away. so i think it is pointless to talk about a future society where we no longer have to ration resources

i think all workers should go on strike until all biz is publicly owned and all income is allocated fairly (eg every1 earns $115k-$460k) and the week is reduced to 20 hours. raising the minimum wage to $115k for working part-time is something enough workers will want to strike for

[kajmobile]

THE STUPIDITY OF THIS GUY IS EMBARRASSING

in socialism, the cost of everything (raw materials, capital goods and finished goods/services) is the labor time it takes to make.

so socialism can calculate prices more rationally than capitalism and this was proven by lange in the socialist calculation debate

ALL production comes from labor. so the cost of producing ANYTHING is how much of our labor was used in producing it...

[Xasew]

@kajmobile

47:45

Did you even watch the video?

[kajmobile]

@Xasew did u even read my comment to what he said about labor time?

he says it wont work because u cant compare the labor of cashiers and scientists. but u dont need to in order to manage an economy! 1 hour = 1 hour regardless of profession. consumers DONT CARE what professions created the product they r buying

and he says u cant price capital goods. y cant a company that makes capital goods add up their labor time!?! it's an absurd claim

his argument against labor time makes no sense

[Xasew]

@kajmobile

Whether consumers care or not is completely irrelevant. Do you not understand that you can't add up heteregenous units? The results will be meaningless.

The company that makes capital goods also uses capital goods. And those capital goods were made with the help of capital goods. And the production of those capital goods also required capital goods and it's a long regression all the way back to the stone age.

And hey, I guess the value of raw land is zero(no labor required!)...

[Xasew]

@Xasew

That's what happens if you try to add up the capital goods into the calculation. But if you don't, then it will lead to absurdities: Two identical ditches will have completely different prices if the other one's done with a bulldozer and the other one with bare hands.

[kajmobile]

@Xasew if u dig 1 hole by hand for 5 hours, the cost is 5 hours.

if u dug a second hole for 5 hours with a bulldozer, the cost would be 5 hours plus the time it took to make the bulldozer times whatever percentage 5 hours consumes of the bulldozers lifespan

if it takes 10k hours to make a bulldozer and it will last 500 hours of use, the cost of using that bulldozer for 5 hours is 100 labor hours

so the second hole costs 105 labor hours

this is the same accounting system every biz today uses

[kajmobile]

@Xasew labor is NOT heterogeneous.1 hour of sweeping the floor is the SAME as 1 hour of cleaning a window or designing a building. they are ALL 1 hour of labor

ALL production comes from labor. so the cost of anything is how much of our total labor it took to produce

if u mold an ounce of silver into a square or a cross or a sphere, they do not become heterogeneous. they r all still an ounce of silver

saying product A took 1200 hours to make and product B took 50 hours is NOT meaningless!

[Xasew]

@kajmobile

So a silver coin and pendant are homogeneous goods as long as they both weigh 1 ounce? What an absurd position to take.

So you're arguing that every hour of labor is homogeneous, because in the end they're all still one hour of labor. You're sure you can't spot any fallacious logic here?

Let me try! Food is NOT heterogeneous. 1 kg of apples is the SAME as 1 kg of oranges. They are all 1 kg of food.

Whoa!

[kajmobile]

@Xasew assuming they use the same molding process, YES an ounce of silver molded into a pendant is EXACTLY the same as an ounce of silver molded into a coin

comparing an apple to a steak, just because we call them food, is not the same as comparing an hour of labor to another hour of labor. if it takes a different amount of labor to make an apple than a steak, they will have different prices

ALL production comes from labor, so the cost of everything is the amount of our labor used

[Xasew]

@kajmobile

A coin and pendant are homogeneous goods?! You're hilarious.

What does the amount of labor have to do with whether apples and steaks are homogeneous or not? Absolutely nothing. Do you even know what homogeneous means? And you manage to conflate costs and prices. Great job.

[kajmobile]

@Xasew "A coin and pendant are homogeneous goods?! Do you even know what homogeneous means?"

it means "composed of parts or elements that are all of the same kind". so yes a 1 ounce silver coin and a 1 ounce silver pendant r homogeneous

u might wanna learn about business and the terms u use before u debate about them

ur understanding of homogeneous is just as wrong as ur claim that products contain labor dating back to the stone age.

u and salerno r both clueless

[Xasew]

@kajmobile

Homogeneous means something else in economics. We're not talking about physics or chemistry.

[kajmobile]

@Xasew and when u price things in labor time, u can account for ALL the labor that went into everything including capital goods!!

if every company priced their goods and services in labor time, from miners to capital goods manufacturers to utilities to finished goods and services, EVERY SINGLE COMPANY, u will know the exact amount of total labor that went into each thing we produce

this guy doesnt understand business

[Xasew]

@kajmobile

Let's say current production requires capital goods. The production of those capital goods required other capital goods in the past. The production of these capital goods also required capital goods. And so on, until you go temporally backwards enough to reach a point where no capital goods are required(e.g. the stone age). That's how far back you would have to go in history to do your neat calculations. Very useful.

[kajmobile]

@Xasew apparently u have about as much of a clue as to how business works as this salerno clown.

if a product u bought required all the labor back to the stone age, it would cost trillions.

think this thru. do u honestly think that u can buy something that required the use of someone's labor and not pay for that labor!?!?!?

if we werent able to account for all the labor that goes into making things, business today wouldnt be able to function. some employees wouldnt get paid

[Xasew]

@kajmobile

Are you going to answer my argument at some point? After painting yourself into an intellectual corner you fail to understand my point or just dance around the issue on purpose. Are you going to deny that production takes time? And if you don't deny this, then how can you not realize that you have to go backwards temporally to do your calculations?

[kajmobile]

@Xasew production does take time. that is y the only rational way to measure production cost is to measure how much labor time it took

u dont pay the earth when u take its gold, u dont pay the forest when u take its wood. u pay people for their labor time only

so the cost of everything produced is the total labor time it took to make that good or service and the depreciated portion of all the labor time it took to make the tools, machines, materials used in its production

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

@kajmobile So is an hour of a Brain-Surgeon's time worth an hour of a construction worker's time? Of course not. Labor is a heterogeneous commodity that has to be bought within the market place. Since each laborer *in different fields of labor* produce different things, and have differing processes and tools of production that must be used in the production of a good or service, it is completely impossible to calculate the cost of production using labor hours.

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 in a humane, civilized, democratic society 1 hour of a construction worker's labor is equal to1 hour of a surgeon's labor. people r not treated like heads of cattle.

but the consumer still has full control over how they value what is produced because they decide what they buy and dont buy

and just because people produce different things using different tools, that doesnt mean we somehow lose the ability to count the amount of hours people work! that makes no sense

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

@kajmobile "but the consumer still has full control over how they value what is produced because they decide what they buy and dont buy"

That doesn't matter. If the cost of production can't be accurately calculated, then even if consumers are buying, then chances are you're losing money per good sold, because you couldn't accurately calculate the cost of production. And since labor hours can't be universally applied to all fields of labor, it is impossible to calculate the costs.

Cont.

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 we can count the amount of hours people work. lol

so we can accurately calculate the cost of everything produced. and we can accurately track what consumers r buying. so we can accurately calculate what products r viable and which ones r not

and since we all live with the same laws of physics, 1 hour of labor time is equal to 1 hour of labor time no matter whether u r a doctor or a construction worker. so labor time can be applied universally to all fields of labor

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

@kajmobile You're not getting it. The number of hours is irrelevant. Each laborer produces different goods using different tools and processes. Because each of these processes require different things, each of these processes has it's own cost. Because of this, labor hours can NOT be used to calculate the cost of production because different laborers produce more/less within an hour. Attempting to put a universal price tag on an hour of labor, no matter what it is, is going to completely fail.

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 the tools and machines that laborers use require labor to make, so their cost is part of the final price of goods and services

very few jobs r tied directly to production. most workers get a fixed salary based on their supply not on their productivity

if workers produce less for a given hour of labor than their competitor the price of their goods will be higher. so they either pick up their productivity or they will be out of a job

labor time is a more rational system

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

@kajmobile You're just not getting it. Because each laborer produces DIFFERENT things using DIFFERENT processes, and produce at DIFFERENT outputs within a unit of hours, each of these DIFFERENT processes has it's OWN, UNIQUE cost attached to it. You absolutely CAN NOT attach a universal value to an hour's worth of labor. It is completely impossible. Oh, and your idea that workers get a fixed salary based on supply and not their productivity shows you complete ignorance of the market system.

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 u r not understanding the conversation. perhaps read my earlier comments.

"Because each laborer produces DIFFERENT things using DIFFERENT processes, and produce at DIFFERENT outputs within a unit of hours, each of these DIFFERENT processes has it's OWN, UNIQUE cost attached to it."

that is true. each thing we produce requires different amounts of labor. so they will have different prices. the price is TOTAL labor including the labor of all inputs (tools, material, etc)

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 "your idea that workers get a fixed salary based on supply and not their productivity shows you complete ignorance of the market system."

that is how the market works, based on supply and demand.

u think everyone works off of commission? they dont. most workers r paid a salary

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

@kajmobile Finally, to deal the final deathblow to this silly line of argumentation, you want the government to apply a universal value on a unit of hours for labor. Well, how is the government going to know exactly how to value 1 unit of hours in the Labor Force? In attempting to dictate the value of 1 unit of hours, you're also attempting to dictate the cost of production. This is completely impossible, and I wouldn't take anyone who suggested this seriously.

Your argument is dead. NEXT!!!!

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 "how is the government going to know exactly how to value 1 unit of hours"

1 hour equals 1 hour. things r priced in labor time. if something took 10 labor hours to make, its cost would be $10 (assuming u keep the dollar symbol)

if this was implemented today a better idea might be to just make 1 hour equal to $60 which is the current avg hourly income. this way prices will approximate what they r today

so if something took 10 hours to make its price would be $600

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 "In attempting to dictate the value of 1 unit of hours, you're also attempting to dictate the cost of production."

the cost of production is dictated by the total labor time it takes to make capital goods. it isnt dictated by the government

if it takes 1000 labor hours to make a tractor, 1000 will be its price. govt doesnt dictate its price. the efficiency of manufacturers will dictate its price

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

@kajmobile "the cost of production is dictated by the total labor time it takes to make capital goods. it isnt dictated by the government"

Who dictates the value of 1 unit of hours? The government does. So in effect, not only are they dictating everyone's value, which is tyrannical, they're trying to dictate everyone's costs.

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

@kajmobile Continued:

Not only that, but the labor hours formula completely destroys the exchange system. If Producers have to buy tools that cost 4 hours to produce, but output a good that product that costs 5 hours to produce, under your system, the produces is running at a loss no matter what he's producing. He could be producing medical innovations. So are you going to bail him out? But how are you going to do that when the government has no capital because the PEOPLE have no capital?

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 "If Producers have to buy tools that cost 4 hours to produce, but output a good that product that costs 5 hours to produce, under your system, the produces is running at a loss no matter what he's producing."

u r not understanding how labor time works. read thru my earlier comments. or read the actual socialist calculation debate

if u make something that takes 5 hours and u used a tool that took 4 hours, the cost would be 9, not 5 (assuming the tool can only be used once)

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

@kajmobile "if u make something that takes 5 hours and u used a tool that took 4 hours, the cost would be 9, not 5 (assuming the tool can only be used once)"

But who's buying the tools? If the producer is buying them, he's losing money in this instance, and if the government is buying them, EVERYONE is losing because the government has to run a deficit in order to sustain inefficient means of production with relation to cost.

What you're talking about is just silly.

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 "But who's buying the tools? If the producer is buying them, he's losing money in this instance"

im not sure y this is not getting thru

if u r the manager of a factory and have an employee cost of $4 and a tool cost of $5 and r selling ur product for $9, how is it that u think ur factory is losing money? ur revenue is covering cost. u r not losing money. $9 EQUALS $9

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

@kajmobile Continued:

It has been proven, beyond all reasonable doubts, that the only viable method of exchange and calculation are those with private property in the means of production, and those who let the people's individual subjective values create the price system through supply and demand. This is the only proven system that creates capital for everyone involved.

I'd suggest you do some better research into market behavior before screaming that a socialist economy is better.

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 "It has been proven, beyond all reasonable doubts, that the only viable method of exchange and calculation are those with private property"

if u actually read the socialist calculation debate, the conclusion held among professional economists was that Lange's labor time system would be more effective than a free market

hayek conceded that socialist calculation was possible so he tried a different tactic by saying u would have an information problem which is as groundless

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

@kajmobile Hayek conceded a lot of things, and I don't consider Hayek to be a real supporter of the Free-Market, so referencing him in this conversation is moot. If the Labor Time system was truly better and had that many economists swinging to it, we'd have the system already in place. But we don't. So somewhere along the line, assuming that professional economists thought the Labor Time system was better to begin with, discarded this opinion at one point. It's not a valid position anymore.

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 "If the Labor Time system was truly better and had that many economists swinging to it, we'd have the system already in place"

u think economists have the power to abolish capitalism!?! lol

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 wealthy people obviously have an enormous stake in keeping the existing system. and they own all the media, think tanks and politicians. so their attack against alternatives will be formidable

in a democratic system, u would make $127k per year. the current median income is $33k. if the avg worker thinks they r best served by taking a 75% pay cut, they r getting suckered

capitalism is based on propaganda, not science and evidence.

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

@kajmobile And how much is 127k worth in your system? It's worth the same as 33k in the current system. This false dichotomy you're trying to create between your system's pay and the current system's is just a total PHAIL on every front. 127k is only worth a lot more than 33k if there are people making 33k but very few making 127k. AGAIN! Individual subjective value.

Your arguments are simply silly. Just walk away and save whatever face you have left.

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 "And how much is 127k worth in your system? It's worth the same as 33k in the current system."

u dont understand the difference between median income and average income? u think they r the same?

no wonder u r gullible. u r being taken advantage of.

but i cant argue the stupidity out of u. so keep fighting for that $33k pay. billionaire capitalists have ur best interest at heart. lol

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 if u make cars, u r only responsible for adding up ur own employee time. but that is not the final cost. u have to also add in the cost of machines, factory, gas, electric, phones, tools, material, etc

the companies u buy those inputs from will be responsible for adding up their own labor and expenses. so they will just give u a price for the tools, electric, phones, etc

so accounting will work exactly as it does now. the only difference is everyone gets the same salary

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

@kajmobile "so accounting will work exactly as it does now. the only difference is everyone gets the same salary"

Dude, just walk away. You're beating a dead horse, and your horse is literally dead. Accounting now depends upon MARKET PRICES that are created though the consumer's subjective value that is attached to the product. And if the economists thought that the Labor Time argument works, how come there are no economists in the media arguing for it?

This position is dead. Just accept it.

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 "Accounting now depends upon MARKET PRICES"

i understand how business currently works. the point i was making is that a business on its financials and in determining prices needs to add its direct labor costs and its indirect expenses, some of which r depreciated. in a labor time system, businesses will continue to do the exact same thing: adding their direct labor costs plus its indirect expenses, some of which r depreciated.

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 "how come there are no economists in the media arguing for it?"

in the US? the US is the most ideologically driven country in the world. capitalism is a religion here. u cant get on mainstream tv to talk about ending capitalism. u think the billionaires that own those companies want to give a platform to socialists?

they used to lock u up if u were a socialist. u cant get citizenship here if u were a member of the US socialist party

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

@kajmobile "the US? the US is the most ideologically driven country in the world. capitalism is a religion here. u cant get on mainstream tv to talk about ending capitalism."

What the hell have you been smoking!? You think the US is a Capitalist country!? And that you can't get on TV to talk about ending Capitalism!? What the fuck do you think Michael Moore has been doing!? Or Bill Maher!? Or Lawrence O'Donnell!?

This proved that you have absolutely no idea what's going on in this country.

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

@kajmobile And who's paying the final costs? Under your system, the only person who could is the government, but if everyone makes the same salary in an hour's time, what incentive is there to actually be productive? We see this all the time in public employees. Garbage men who don't take out the trash, mailmen who don't run on time, road workers just standing around talking instead of getting the job done.

People are NOT equal. They can never BE equal. You're just deluding yourself.

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 "And who's paying the final costs?"

consumers. u use ur income to buy whatever u want just like u do now.

"what incentive is there to actually be productive?"

the same as there is now: to have a job. u will get paid $127k per year. that is a pretty large incentive.

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

@kajmobile Having a job is not the only incentive to be productive. You also have to consider the possibility of expanding your horizons and being able to work your way up in the company (or wherever you're working), which means PAY RAISES, which means NO EQUAL INCOME.

Please stop spewing your idiocy regarding human nature.

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

@kajmobile This will be my last reply to you. I'd recommend you read the book, "Socialism" by Ludwig Von Mises. And I'd also recommend that you actually learn Human Nature before advocating these silly social systems. Humans work with others to achieve their INDIVIDUAL subjective value. This collective nonsense you're trying to promote is just some straight garbage, and what's worse, you're too stupid to see that you just got your ass handed to you.

Yet another Statist killed. NEXT!!!!

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 the academic world views mises as a crackpot because he advocates pseudoscience. he rejects science and evidence.

u r a fool if u think u will learn about human nature from him.

if u wanna learn about how the world works, read real peer reviewed science instead - not a book by some discredited crackpot from 100 years ago

watch the dan pink ted talk for the science on incentives

ur clueless and being used because of it

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 "We see this all the time in public employees. Garbage men who don't take out the trash, mailmen who don't run on time"

my garbage is ALWAYS taken. and the US post office is more reliable than private companies. they r near perfect. ive never had them lose any mail on me.

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

@kajmobile "my garbage is ALWAYS taken. and the US post office is more reliable than private companies. they r near perfect. ive never had them lose any mail on me."

Go to the big cities and get back with me on that. New York, DC, Chicago, Detroit, San Fransisco, LA, these are the most Socialist cities in the country and they ALL have this same problem.

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 i live in new york. i always get my mail and my garbage is always taken out

[Episcopicide]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 Funny thing is he's right. I used to live in San Fransisco for some time. He hit the nail right on the head. And these problems STILL occur in smaller towns and communities. Not just big cities.

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 "People are NOT equal. They can never BE equal. You're just deluding yourself."

democracy is about treating people equally. u dont get more votes or more wealth or better treatment under the law because ur good looking or white or come from the right family or connected or healthy or smart.

if u think all the people that make the same income as u do today r exact equals to u, u r just deluding urself

[kajmobile]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 in ur car factory, the final cost of the cars will be ur factory employee time plus all the expenses incurred from buying tools, machines, gas, electric, water, materials, etc.

business from an accounting standpoint will work exactly the same as they do now. they would follow all of the same accounting rules and depreciation schedules. the only difference is employee compensation is fixed, they r not determined by the market.

[sunnyvegas702]

@kajmobile But you don't know the cost cuz SOMEONE has to label the cost in terms what they will work for labor, no one other than the person that can do the labor will label how much they will work for. You can't force a doctor to be paid the same as a lawnmower because the doctor won't work for it. Thats like making a law doctors will work for 1$/hr , you can make the law but there will be no doctors. The point he made was that all costs come from PEOPLE'S perception in what they value

[kajmobile]

@sunnyvegas702 "no one other than the person that can do the labor will label how much they will work for"

if u arent willing to work for $127k per year, u can move to another country and make less.

.

"You can't force a doctor to be paid the same as a lawnmower because the doctor won't work for it"

doctors will work for $127k if that is the job they want to do. if they would rather mow lawns, they wont become a doctor

[kajmobile]

@sunnyvegas702 "all costs come from PEOPLE'S perception in what they value"

u can perceive the value of a rolls royce to be $500 all you want. it is not going to change the fact that it costs $350,000

ur perception of value has no impact on cost

[sunnyvegas702]

@kajmobile NO you misunderstood me you have it backwards, ROLLSROYCE perceive it cost $350,000 , it probably cost them $50-$100,000 based on what the workers who make rollsroyce PERCEIVE their jobs i valued, this is why a guy who does the exact same job might ask for more money working ofr rolls royce cuz they perceive their are more valuable in that job. My point was you can't control what ppl PERCEIVE their job value, they will only work under their terms. get it right.

[kajmobile]

@sunnyvegas702 all production comes from labor. so the cost of anything produced is the amount of labor hours it consumed of the total labor hours we are able to work.

since we both abide by the same laws of physics, 1 hour of my labor time is exactly equal to 1 hour of your labor time regardless of how u think u perceive yourself

[derekaiton]

Why is there so much animosity between Cato/Mises?

[PanzerDivisionBOM]

@derekaiton

Any answer to your question is going to be controversial, but this is my understanding of it.

The Cato Institute considers its libertarianism a part of the political right, and concerns itself with political advocacy, and with protecting the reputations of existing corporations.

The Mises institute regards the libertarian tradition as being separate from both the left and the right, having had only historical connections to either movement. They are very rigorous proponents

-

[PanzerDivisionBOM]

-

of capitalism, and are as ready to point out the problems with corporatism as those of socialism. This is not to say that every member of their institute is anti-statist, but many are, and the institute as a whole is generally friendly to this point of view.

I think there was also some sort of controversy over the Koch Foundation. C accepts donations from Koch, LvMi does not.

[AussieAustrianBlog]

@derekaiton I don't think there is "so much animosity." For example, John Stossel, who is linked with the Cato Institute, recently had Jeffrey Tucker on his Fox show. However, It is my understanding and opinion, that Cato is like a half-hearted Libertarian outfit in the academic sense. They believe in certain regulations, ie some Anti trust laws are good etc. Whereas Murray Rothbard would be much more black/white. Either you believe in non agression etc or you don't - no middle ground!

[Leofus1986]

Joe Salerno: THA BAUS!!

[PanzerDivisionBOM]

InB4 "socialism wins because profits are evil exploitation". : )

[dysesthesiaAethiopi1]

Who the fuck is Von Mises?

Any qualification that a Koch Bro et al, brain washing institution gives out is not worth more than toilet paper.

[Moragauth]

@dysesthesiaAethiopi1 On a scale of 1 - 10, how painful is your stupidity?

[alistairproductions]

@Moragauth lol! 5 star comment man

[s0beit]

@Moragauth He can't calculate his own stupidity, because his stupidity is dependent on the inter-subjective evaluation of all the people on this page right now!

[reason285]

@dysesthesiaAethiopi1 Maybe you should just listen to the lecture, you might just learn something :)

[clemonsx90]

@dysesthesiaAethiopi1 Ironic that YOU'RE talking about contributions being worth less than toilet paper.

[ladyattis]

@dysesthesiaAethiopi1

Actually, Mr. Rockwell doesn't work with the Koch brothers. The last time I checked the LvMi is pretty much black marked by them. You won't find any LvMi being a guest at a Cato Institute meeting any time soon.

[dieyoung]

@dysesthesiaAethiopi1 How do you have the first comment. You have to be a troll, there's no way you just stumbled in here.