It doesn’t change the fact that the free market is the greatest tool to bring society to general prosperity.
Are you sure about that, AG? How many alternative economic systems have you looked at?
I think free access to all the work on the planet would do a better job then accepting the crumbs leftover by the boss.
Do you have any hope of owning a Maserati?
Under my proposal production ramps up until demand is met and everybody that wants one, or any other consumer good, gets one.
It is not a fact that you can transition to your system.
It is as much a fact as any religion, you can't prove that we can't and I can't prove that we can.
However logically, the proposal is sound and proper education meets the transitional needs.
The fact that you don’t want to adopt it on a small scale proves it won’t work on a large scale.
It can't be done on a small scale, just the toilet paper factory overwhelms any small number of people and doesn't get to the Maserati factory.
Either the proposal is accepted on a broad basis or it doesn't float.
If your system was better then free coops would out-perform private institutions and more people would choose them
That is a strawman, how do private co-ops obtain goods from a crapitalist absent some medium of exchange accepted/controlled by the crapitalist?
This is exactly why half measures won't bring about the transistion, the mind control of the crapitalists prevents it.
If I entered into a co-op it would have to produce all consumer goods within it's self or fail due to having to trade with the outside crapitalist world.
That being said if enough people accept what I propose the crapialists will be out of luck.
because of the relative lack of goods and freedom in your system
Let's review the proposal,.....the structure that is walmart becomes the central distribution network, we can include target and Costco, the workers continue to supply the distribution system as if everything were normal, except that instead of paying at the register they just take what they need to keep supplying the distribution chain.
As long as the workers supplying the system continue to do so the shelves are full.
What has happened is the workers have taken over from the owners.
Now all profits accrue to the workers and not the bosses.
At some point demand is met and work lessens.
Instead of working for less than the value their labor creates they now work only to satisfy themselves that they are not a drain on the whole.
If I get my Maserati and leave it in working order when I die how much work have I consumed? Very little, as the work is still there in the form of a working car.
Now, if I eat, I need to contribute in a measure that equals the labor involved in supplying that food.
I don't have to grow my own food, I can work in the toilet paper factory.
I don't claim to have a lock on what measure most equitably changes the hours I spend making tp into the equivalent of a hamburger, but better mathematicians than me can do the math in minutes and I can access their determination on the web.
I'm at the library, I have to log off, I will continue from here upon my return.
----------------------------------------------------------------
I’m really glad you wrote the above statement about “controlling the mass media.” This shows the true authoritarian nature of your system if it were ever adopted.
Not really, once the transition is made control will be in the hands of the workers that make the transmitter work.
Yes, in the short term the mass media will be a necessary tool, but nobody will be sending troops to take control of the towers. The workers themselves will rise against their corporate masters, or they will remain slaves to them.
This is why you refuse to allow any alternatives to your system to exist.
I don't have to 'allow' alternatives to exist, they will naturally cease because they do a lesser job of equitably splitting up the labor needed to supply the world with consumer goods.
You are a monopolist, there can be only one way, your way.
I don't know where you get that, I have repeatedly stated that the proposal is voluntarily accepted as a better method of dividing the labor amongst us or it doesn't happen.
In my world your system and free market anarchism could exist side by side.
Why would a free worker submit to having a portion of his labor accrue to your wealth?
If my labor creates $100 and you pay me something less than that why would I agree to accept that when I can go next door and only have to labor in the amount of hours that assures that 100% of what I have consumed is replaced?
Under my proposal 100% of my labor meets my consumption needs whereas under your system I get a smaller percentage credited to me while a portion of what I make accrues to you.
How do you figure J. Paul Getty got all that money?
He certainly didn't do without keeping some of the value that his workers created for himself and he didn't get it by dividing the values created equally.
He exploited the poor to his own advantage.
In your system we would give up crapitalist domination in order to be dominated by you.
LOL, you are trapped in the paradigm,....Have I not repeated enough that the system is voluntary?
Even if you chose not to work a minute in your life you are still going to get fed, albeit with the reputation, and consequences, of being a bum, but you would be able to get your supper without submitting to work.
I don’t need you to control my media or to indoctrinate my kids thank you.
Jeez, you are trapped in the paradigm, who is controlling your mass media and indoctrinating your kids today?
I take it that you are happy with how they have indoctrinated the kids?
Wouldn't it be better to listen for 10 minutes to live in a world absent coercive control?
Or have the
Monarchs done such a good job on you that even though you claim to be an anarchist you still want to be a tool in the economic system that was designed by the very people you claim to reject?
Typical marxist nonsense,
I haven't spent much time reading Marx, mostly just excepts, but if what was done in his name is any indication, Marxist nonsense is a mischaracterization of the proposal.
Let this on the spot report speak for it's self,.....
There is no Communism in Russia.
We would all follow your system if you could just indoctrinate us to believe that people will work hard without any personal remuneration.
Again, you misstate the proposal, under my proposal not only would you be given access to goods that are denied to you under crapitalism, but you could have them now and with only the debt of making your consumption neutral.
If it is determined that hours of labor is the standard then the hours to make a Maserati is the hours you will need to contribute to have one.
Any question that you will never have a Maserati under crapitalism?
My system delivers you one just as quick as production can meet demand, first come first served.
If you leave the car in working order the hours needed to make your consumption neutral will be less than if you crash it.
I'm sure that the math nerds can make webpages to calculate what you need to contribute to make your consumption neutral on the labor of others.
I don’t think in “dog eat dog” terms either and I never did.
Then why do you support a dog eat dog system?
Your 'free' markets still starve me unless I meet your demands.
You will not give to me from your pile unless I create value in excess of your compensation.
You will not sell me your widget unless you get more than you paid for it, thereby eating my dog because I don't have access to your widget for less.
This is exactly the reason why people in the market place say “How can I help you.” Nobody would say that in your system.
Sure they say it, but do they live it?
How many panhandlers have you given a dollar?
How many have you cast contempt upon and told get a job?
In the free market all money is still going to be debt money, and debt money makes us slaves to those that have the money.
Under my system panhandlers, human traffickers, drug pushers, and prostitutes all cease to exist.
They don't have to beg or traumatize the lives of others to eat.
Your free market still leaves me to starve unless I submit to wage slavery.
I don’t want people to submit to my rules either,
Yes, you do. How do you propose to keep your free market in place? Either folks submit to exploitation by those that have money to trade for their labor or they starve.
Does you system come with a free lunch?
Mine does, although I would think that the life of leaching on the workers would not be a pleasant one.
Also I don’t demand that the entire world go to my system.
Are you blind to your double speak??
How is demanding free markets not demanding the whole world submit to your system?
Really, AG??
If you want to try some ridiculous social experiment, than go ahead.
So, the monarchs are winning,.....
Don’t force me to join or to pay for it.
I won't have to force you, when you take off the crapitalist blinders you will see that my system compensates your work much better.
I may just have to wait until the herd, and your herd mentality, catches up.
The type of work you describe here is not stealing at all.
OMG,....LOL,......seriously??
I have to choose between watching my kids starve or submit to you not paying me the full value of my work and you classify that as legitimate?
At no time does the employer take the property of the employee, so there is no theft in any of your examples
Jesus H,.....the employer takes the MOST valuable property from the worker, his time.
The system you are supporting steals our lives and gives us discounted paper vouchers in return.
Why should someone plant potatoes and not receive the entirety of what he planted?
Indeed, why should the worker settle for less than the entire value of his labor?
the employer cleared the land and made it arable so that it would produce something in the first place
If he did the work himself, ok, at least he contributed that much labor.
or he paid the 1.2 million dollars from the person that did
And how much of that 1.2 mil came from the value that his workers created and how much came from charging grandma $2 for $1 worth of potatoes?
Did he exploit the worker or gouge the consumer for this money?
He deserves a portion of the produce because of this.
Ok, I can agree to that, his labor entitles him to one share of all the work done.
Will he divide the profits by the number of workers, or will he keep the millions while paying the hundreds?
The employer bought all of the farm equipment so that the laborer can be productive. Without these farm tools the laborer would produce 100 potatoes by hand instead of 1000. He deserves a portion of the produce because of this.
That is circular logic, you can't point to crapitalism to justify more crapitalism.
When the employer pays a laborer $100 to produce $1000 worth of potatoes, he is taking a risk.
And what risk is that, that the worker will wake up to his enslavement and be mad??
If there is a bad harvest and he produces only $50 worth of potatoes then the employer loses money.
Now this is true, crapitalism does come with the risk of loss.
The bankster will make sure that the farmer doesn't get to uppity.
The labor theory of value and the marxist idea of "surplus value" are behind your misunderstanding here.
Not really, I've stated that I have only read excepts of marx, this proposal comes much more from Kropotkin and Goldman than from marx.
The facts are that we can divide the labor needed to keep the consumer goods on the shelves by the number of folks between 20 and 45 and work less hours and enjoy a higher standard of living than if we let the crapitalists take without working.
The shareholders will never have enough profits to keep for themselves, ie, the shareholders will never have enough value created by our labor.
Today we work from 18 to 65 creating millions in profits while retiring to poverty because the crapitalist keeps the difference between our wages and the actual value created by our labor.
you have been working so many years and have been a part of this website for so long and haven’t figured this out yet.
Why would I accept my enslavement by a system that you don't fully understand?
IF you did understand it you would be angry.
It seems that you don’t even want to pretend to understand economics.
I think it is you that doesn't understand economics.
It is you that I think is blinded by effective PR.
People will loot the stores until there is nothing left then they will degenerate to a level of SUBSISTENCE living.
You say that as if people would be satisfied subsisting, we have already proven that the people will work to improve their lot in life.
So, once the looting you propose is over they will begin to rebuild.
If the people are prepared to transition from here to here there will be no looting, the day after will look much like the last day under crapitalism but in 6 weeks the world will be transformed.
This means that people will produce only what they need to survive. They certainly won’t switch to your paradigm where they enjoy “the full value of their labor.”
Look around, the people have already disproven you.
Absent the mindset that crapitalism has put into you with very sophisticated mind control techniques people will continue to make the goods because it will be in their best interest to do so.
If you want flashylight boxes you will have to continue to produce widgets so that those that produce TV's can still enjoy having widgets.
Honestly,
you mind has been closed to utopia by people that want to keep you on the plantation.
Many people would rather live in a free society where they can own property.
My proposal does that, no crime will be tolerated by the neighbors.
The only way the Bolsheviks could get people to behave otherwise was to put a gun to their head.
Well, they did believed in rule by force.
Do I need to yet again restate that my proposal is voluntary and only a matter of opening the eyes of the slaves to their slavery?
Not even your indoctrination schools or re-education camps can change that.
Well, your's have had a 100 year head start on that, but I don't think you can deny that Generation Y is on the path to throwing off the leaches already.
Gov is the system favored by dictators the world over.
Name a dictator that didn't have bankster backers and a crapitalist economy,....
In your system gov would still exist, how else will you control the media?
Nope, it won't.
Control of the media will be taken by the workers that make it tick, not some thugs in uniform directed by a central authority. Really, stop trying to force your world view on my proposal, it is you that needs thugs to keep the slaves producing.
Unlike you, I don’t want to “control” anyone, even the media.
As long as the agree to follow your 'free' market rules, at least,....
If you are so confident that people will work simply "to ensure that they are not parasites" then give your system a try.
That is what I am doing. I can't do it alone and I haven't convinced my tv buddy to let me into the control room long enough to broadcast the message. He keeps whining about keeping his job so he can eat.
I’m not the one calling for “control” and “indoctrination.”
Of course you aren't, your control and indoctrination is already in force.