commiegirl
Member
From each according to their wants to each according to their needs.
Posts: 110
|
Post by commiegirl on Sept 8, 2012 17:10:17 GMT
private property and the desire to own as much of it as possible has lead to misery and exploitation.
|
|
|
Post by rembrandt on Sept 8, 2012 19:32:50 GMT
That is correct. Does this hold when the state desires to own as much of it as possible?
|
|
|
Post by rembrandt on Sept 8, 2012 19:33:40 GMT
Has capitalism ever lead to anything that benefited people other than the property owner?
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 8, 2012 20:28:12 GMT
Are you referring to trickle-down theory? There are two ideas of government. There are those who believe that if you just legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, that their prosperity will leak through on those below. The Democratic idea has been that if you legislate to make the masses prosperous their prosperity will find its way up and through every class that rests upon it
William Jennings Bryan
|
|
|
Post by rembrandt on Sept 8, 2012 21:22:27 GMT
I will agree that legislation does not positively effect an economy for either idea. Yet the quote and link do not answer either question posed.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 8, 2012 21:59:46 GMT
Has capitalism ever lead to anything that benefited people other than the property owner? There is always the free rider effect. But, in reference to laissez-faire capitalism, I see no overall social benefits. What overall social benefits do you propose? Has socialism or real communism ever led to anything that benefited people?
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 8, 2012 22:10:27 GMT
That is correct. Does this hold when the state desires to own as much of it as possible? I'm not sure a State can be said to "desire" anything in this sense. Under any system of government, it is State legislation which defines and determines property rights. This was highlighted by the Enclosure of the Commons in Briton. It goes both ways, there is privatization of some public assets and the nationalization of some private assets. Through it all, with respect to land ownership, there runs an issue of sovereignty.
|
|
commiegirl
Member
From each according to their wants to each according to their needs.
Posts: 110
|
Post by commiegirl on Sept 8, 2012 22:33:43 GMT
Being that I'm anti-State I don't think I care much about what the state needs.
|
|
|
Post by rembrandt on Sept 8, 2012 23:15:58 GMT
Has capitalism ever lead to anything that benefited people other than the property owner? There is always the free rider effect. But, in reference to laissez-faire capitalism, I see no overall social benefits. What overall social benefits do you propose? Has socialism or real communism ever led to anything that benefited people? Of course there is a free rider problem. So there are no benefits other than air travel, improved medicine, and other such advances from evil people that stole from those that could not develop these things. So what is the free rider problem? Is it a person that develops something that others can't do but want or a person that can't do that claims that work of another. There certainly is a free rider problem.
|
|
|
Post by rembrandt on Sept 8, 2012 23:17:17 GMT
That is correct. Does this hold when the state desires to own as much of it as possible? I'm not sure a State can be said to "desire" anything in this sense. Under any system of government, it is State legislation which defines and determines property rights. This was highlighted by the Enclosure of the Commons in Briton. It goes both ways, there is privatization of some public assets and the nationalization of some private assets. Through it all, with respect to land ownership, there runs an issue of sovereignty. If the state can't desire anything then it already doesn't exist and the workers' paradise is upon us. Another interpretation is that our betters use the state to continue the appropriation of individuals' property for their own enrichment.
|
|
|
Post by rembrandt on Sept 8, 2012 23:18:01 GMT
Being that I'm anti-State I don't think I care much about what the state needs. What could the state be if not the people, or should all be ran on the whim of 51%?
|
|
commiegirl
Member
From each according to their wants to each according to their needs.
Posts: 110
|
Post by commiegirl on Sept 9, 2012 6:08:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by rembrandt on Sept 9, 2012 16:05:29 GMT
I am not sure what I am take from that link? Am I to understand that people should be able to debate up to the constraints of the vanguard?
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 10, 2012 4:21:57 GMT
If the state can't desire anything then it already doesn't exist and the workers' paradise is upon us. How so? This sounds like anthropomorphic gobbledygook. Another interpretation is that our betters use the state to continue the appropriation of individuals' property for their own enrichment. You make a good case for participatory democracy.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 10, 2012 4:28:33 GMT
Of course there is a free rider problem. Seemingly what I see as an "effect" becomes a "problem" for you!? Some maintain that everyone deserves a fair share of the common-wealth, regardless of birth — not just a few crumbs which drop to the floor from the high table (enough to contain the discontent of many).
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 10, 2012 4:29:55 GMT
Has socialism or real communism ever led to anything that benefited people?
|
|
|
Post by rembrandt on Sept 10, 2012 4:56:01 GMT
I am not sure what I am take from that link? Am I to understand that people should be able to debate up to the constraints of the vanguard? Anything on this? The centralized democracy provided by this link seems to provide for debate as long as it does not cross the ideas of the vanguard. We have seen that before. Is that the direction we should go to the apex of is it gobbleygook?
|
|
|
Post by rembrandt on Sept 11, 2012 4:56:50 GMT
So nothing then? Was the link for entertainment value? I expected more than glittering generalities.
|
|
|
Post by rembrandt on Sept 14, 2012 3:04:10 GMT
Nice
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 14, 2012 9:32:54 GMT
|
|