Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 80

Thread: Navy deployed to Venezuela airports, seaports

  1. #31
    don't panic
    marduc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    10-22-17 @ 04:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,301

    Re: Navy deployed to Venezuela airports, seaports

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    We aren't "led to believe" that support for Chavez is prevalent in any form. On the contrary, the American mass media would have us believe that Chavez's elections were fraudulent, despite the contrary opinions of reputable international observers, and that he "shut down" opposition media, despite the inaccuracy of that claim also.
    I am sorry, I did not clarify then.. as Chavez wants us to believe. I don't get my perception of the reality of the situation in Venezuela from the media, I get it from friends and family who actually are living in Venezuela, and it is a cross segment of social and economic classes.

  2. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Between Hollywood and Compton.
    Last Seen
    11-25-09 @ 12:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,497

    Re: Navy deployed to Venezuela airports, seaports

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    How much of that local management actually exists and what would stop Chavez from overruling it once he has finished consolidating power?
    He's not in the process of "consolidating power." He does have an interest in power, as all state officials naturally will (a problem that will only be solved by elimination of the state, which isn't an immediately available option), but his alleged "tyranny" seems no greater than that of any other head of state, and indeed, seems far less than that of most. The greatest check to state supremacy is, and always will be, public opposition to such. The public is unwilling to abandon participatory, democratic economic structure at the grassroots level to statist bureaucracy, and would likely resort to violent physical resistance if such schemes were to be forcibly implemented.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    So if corporate entities where actually the cause of the problems why not just reform instead of take drastic actions to remove ownership.
    Nothing short of socialism is capable of entirely eliminating the capitalist business cycle. As such, nothing short of socialism is capable of generating the efficiency gains that the Bolivarian democratic model has delivered to the Venezuelan citizenry. You're on similarly dubious grounds regarding the alleged immorality of democratic ownership and control of the means of production formerly dominated by corporate entities.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Markets are usually best implemented with less intervention from outside forces like governments that can not see into the future.
    That's a poor analysis dependent on free market utopianism. Since the reality is that government is a necessary stabilizing agent in a capitalist economy, you'll have to examine the nature of government protection of infant industries in developing states, for instance, to understand the manner in which government often has the effect of promoting capitalist expansion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    I'm not ignoring anything, I see plenty of flaws with populist ideologies that restrain individual freedom in favor of collectivism.
    There's little "restraint" of individual freedom involved. Unlike the coercive nature of the capitalist firm, the democracy and participatory qualities of the worker-owned enterprises have the effect of minimizing coercion to a significant degree, essentially eliminating it in the appropriate situational context in which the circumstances are favorable to such a policy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Humans naturally gravitate to that which benefits them most. If at some point one sees that they can generate excess revenues outside of the collective on their own they will.
    You're not familiar with the structural formation of cooperatives and economic democracy as implemented in Venezuela. There isn't a means available for one individual to exploit other members of the cooperative or local community because the democratic structure of cooperatives would prevent him/her from accessing the means of production to any significant degree. Ownership and control of the means of production and generally productive assets are necessarily the sovereign realm of the public at large, not powerful individuals or classes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Or if they can take a stronger leadership role inside the collective to increase their personal returns they will do what is necessary to get to that point.
    Then if that was the case, national intervention in the operation of cooperatives would ultimately be a lesser imposition of tyranny than the alternative. But that's typically not the case, because the democratic structure of cooperatives includes checks and balances on the power of individuals and powerful classes, as opposed to the structure of a capitalist firm.

    Quote Originally Posted by marduc View Post
    I am sorry, I did not clarify then.. as Chavez wants us to believe. I don't get my perception of the reality of the situation in Venezuela from the media, I get it from friends and family who actually are living in Venezuela, and it is a cross segment of social and economic classes.
    Anecdotal evidence, in that case? There are obviously a widely varying degree of people in Venezuela with a widely varying degree of opinions on the nature of Hugo Chavez and of Bolivarian socialism, which is why statistical and empirical evidence is a necessary component of a detailed analysis of political and economic matters there, as with any situation.

  3. #33
    Educator Grateful Heart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Last Seen
    12-27-09 @ 03:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,010

    Re: Navy deployed to Venezuela airports, seaports

    I posted on another political board about five years ago on which one of the members was a committed communist/anarchist. She had this odd ability to disgorge voluminous posts with all sorts of novel and revolutionary ideas about transforming society into her own Utopian ideal. The few forummers who chose to engage her soon regretted it.


  4. #34
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Navy deployed to Venezuela airports, seaports

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    He's not in the process of "consolidating power." He does have an interest in power, as all state officials naturally will (a problem that will only be solved by elimination of the state, which isn't an immediately available option), but his alleged "tyranny" seems no greater than that of any other head of state, and indeed, seems far less than that of most. The greatest check to state supremacy is, and always will be, public opposition to such. The public is unwilling to abandon participatory, democratic economic structure at the grassroots level to statist bureaucracy, and would likely resort to violent physical resistance if such schemes were to be forcibly implemented.
    The public does not always violently resist.
    The public can not always be counted on for assurance of continuing democratic governments.

    The present situation in the U.S. and Europe are obvious of that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Nothing short of socialism is capable of entirely eliminating the capitalist business cycle. As such, nothing short of socialism is capable of generating the efficiency gains that the Bolivarian democratic model has delivered to the Venezuelan citizenry. You're on similarly dubious grounds regarding the alleged immorality of democratic ownership and control of the means of production formerly dominated by corporate entities.
    Socialism whether Bolivarian or other will eventually have diminished returns once the psychological factors start to take effect.

    Democratic ownership is by design inefficient. Your again using short term gains to show long term results which won't happen.

    What about privately owned non corporate entities?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    That's a poor analysis dependent on free market utopianism. Since the reality is that government is a necessary stabilizing agent in a capitalist economy, you'll have to examine the nature of government protection of infant industries in developing states, for instance, to understand the manner in which government often has the effect of promoting capitalist expansion.
    It is not a Utopian assessment. A free market will always have inefficiencies and efficient aspects. They are complementary and can never disappear.

    Otherwise there is little need to have market competition.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    There's little "restraint" of individual freedom involved. Unlike the coercive nature of the capitalist firm, the democracy and participatory qualities of the worker-owned enterprises have the effect of minimizing coercion to a significant degree, essentially eliminating it in the appropriate situational context in which the circumstances are favorable to such a policy.
    Capitalism is by design voluntary. No coercion needed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    You're not familiar with the structural formation of cooperatives and economic democracy as implemented in Venezuela. There isn't a means available for one individual to exploit other members of the cooperative or local community because the democratic structure of cooperatives would prevent him/her from accessing the means of production to any significant degree. Ownership and control of the means of production and generally productive assets are necessarily the sovereign realm of the public at large, not powerful individuals or classes.
    That is just pure unfettered foolishness.
    Just as everything else has been manipulation proofed there is always an individual or class sly enough to consolidate power.

    Talk about Utopia.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Then if that was the case, national intervention in the operation of cooperatives would ultimately be a lesser imposition of tyranny than the alternative. But that's typically not the case, because the democratic structure of cooperatives includes checks and balances on the power of individuals and powerful classes, as opposed to the structure of a capitalist firm.
    Checks and balances depend on the individuals involved and if one powerful class, like the uneducated poor in Venezuela gain power they invariably support fallacious policies because it sounds good not because it is economically sound.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  5. #35
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Navy deployed to Venezuela airports, seaports

    Quote Originally Posted by Grateful Heart View Post
    I posted on another political board about five years ago on which one of the members was a committed communist/anarchist. She had this odd ability to disgorge voluminous posts with all sorts of novel and revolutionary ideas about transforming society into her own Utopian ideal. The few forummers who chose to engage her soon regretted it.

    If you wade through all the big words and unfounded short sighted assumptions and "empirical" evidence you can shoot right through the nonsense.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  6. #36
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Between Hollywood and Compton.
    Last Seen
    11-25-09 @ 12:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,497

    Re: Navy deployed to Venezuela airports, seaports

    Quote Originally Posted by Grateful Heart View Post
    I posted on another political board about five years ago on which one of the members was a committed communist/anarchist. She had this odd ability to disgorge voluminous posts with all sorts of novel and revolutionary ideas about transforming society into her own Utopian ideal. The few forummers who chose to engage her soon regretted it.

    In other words, you weren't capable of rebuttal? That's thoroughly unsurprising.

    Of course, the most "utopian" of economic ideas presented is free market capitalism, which is characterized by an air of extreme unreality, due to its lack of practical applications outside of the textbook. Socialism is merely practical in that it produces efficiency gains that actually existing capitalism is unable to generate, due to its minimization of information asymmetries and their related problems, for instance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    The public does not always violently resist.
    The public can not always be counted on for assurance of continuing democratic governments.

    The present situation in the U.S. and Europe are obvious of that.
    You're clearly unfamiliar with the tumultuous political climate of Latin America, I'd say. You can point to no historical record of public apathy whilst democratic management of political and economic structure is being stripped from them, since the perpetuation of power is a natural human inclination, and those who have power over the means of production will naturally wish to perpetuate it, be they authoritarian dictators or libertarian collectives. Or can you point to a situation in which there was decentralized public control of political and economic structure, and it was willingly surrendered to an authoritarian state?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Socialism whether Bolivarian or other will eventually have diminished returns once the psychological factors start to take effect.
    There's no basis for this claim. Capitalism has the tendency to promote inefficient outcomes due to its ignorance of imperfect information and social opportunity costs in an economic system. Socialism's egalitarian elements prevent such ignorance and thereby generate efficiency gains, as is the case with autogestion (workers' self-management), for instance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Democratic ownership is by design inefficient. Your again using short term gains to show long term results which won't happen.
    That is not an accurate description of the nature of worker-owned enterprises, as indicated by empirical evidence rather than ideological dogma. I'd recommend that you have a look at the work of researchers Logue and Yates in Cooperatives, Worker-Owned Enterprises, Productivity and the International Labor Organization. As noted by the abstract:

    A survey of empirical research on productivity in worker-owned enterprises and cooperatives finds a substantial literature that largely supports the proposition that worker-owned enterprises equal or exceed the productivity of conventional enterprises when employee involvement is combined with ownership. The weight of a sparser literature on cooperatives tends toward the same pattern. In addition, employee-owned firms create local employment, anchor jobs in their communities and enrich local social capital.
    Hence, you have clearly committed insufficient analysis to the role of worker ownership and management in efficiency increases.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    What about privately owned non corporate entities?
    Given the non-existence of the "free market" that you fallaciously depict, private entities of all varieties typically lack the efficiency-increasing qualities of socialism and worker management.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    It is not a Utopian assessment. A free market will always have inefficiencies and efficient aspects. They are complementary and can never disappear.

    Otherwise there is little need to have market competition.
    Inefficiencies can be minimized, as is the case with a socialist economy. Regardless, you haven't addressed the point of my assessment, which is that the state functions as a necessary stabilizing agent in a capitalist economy, as with government protection of infant industries serving as a means for greater long-term capitalist expansion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Capitalism is by design voluntary. No coercion needed.
    That is a flagrantly inaccurate analysis that is again dependent on a utopian conception of political economy. Considering my frequent assessment that "capitalism is an economic system in which the private ownership of the means of production and consequent hierarchical subordination of labor under capital enables the extraction of surplus value from the working class in the production process through the use of wage labor and subsequent utilization in the circulation process in order to perpetuate a vicious cycle of capital accumulation," the subordination of workers under an employer is itself anti-democratic and coercive.

    As I've noted, since the means of production are privately owned, large components of the public have no alternative but to subordinate themselves under an employer. The best way to illustrate this form of authoritarianism is to use the "robbery analogy." If a person were to be violently tackled by an assailant and have his/her valuables torn out of his/her pockets, we would accurately call this a robbery. Now, if the assailant were to instead point a gun at the victim and demand that the valuables be surrendered, we would still call this a robbery, as coercion was used to gain the valuables, if not outright physical violence. The fact that the victim technically "consented" to surrender his/her valuables is not pertinent, since it was consent yielded while under duress.

    The former example represents the direct tyranny of statism, often blunt, direct, and brutal, whereas the latter represents the more subtle tyranny of capitalism, specifically wage labor, in which a person technically "consents" to work for an employer, but does this only because he/she has no other alternative for sustenance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    That is just pure unfettered foolishness.
    Just as everything else has been manipulation proofed there is always an individual or class sly enough to consolidate power.

    Talk about Utopia.
    Your own ideas and conceptions are utopian. Since you fail to realize this through an explanation of structural framework, can you point to any single case in Venezuela, in which socialism has effectively existed for about six years, in which a powerful group of individuals from the financial class or any other similarly powerful class hijacked a cooperative or federations of cooperatives?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Checks and balances depend on the individuals involved and if one powerful class, like the uneducated poor in Venezuela gain power they invariably support fallacious policies because it sounds good not because it is economically sound.
    Ultimately, there aren't economically unsound elements of Bolivarian socialism to the same extent that they exist in capitalism, which is why Bolivarian socialism has had the effect of promoting economic growth and development to a far greater degree than capitalism ever did, ever can, or ever will.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    If you wade through all the big words and unfounded short sighted assumptions and "empirical" evidence you can shoot right through the nonsense.
    You haven't "shot through" anything except your initial semblance of credibility. You're simply hostile to empirical evidence. That's fine if it's acceptable to you, but it doesn't equip you for serious economic analysis.

  7. #37
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Between Hollywood and Compton.
    Last Seen
    11-25-09 @ 12:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,497

    Re: Navy deployed to Venezuela airports, seaports

    Quote Originally Posted by Grateful Heart View Post
    I posted on another political board about five years ago on which one of the members was a committed communist/anarchist. She had this odd ability to disgorge voluminous posts with all sorts of novel and revolutionary ideas about transforming society into her own Utopian ideal. The few forummers who chose to engage her soon regretted it.

    In other words, you weren't capable of rebuttal? That's thoroughly unsurprising.

    Of course, the most "utopian" of economic ideas presented is free market capitalism, which is characterized by an air of extreme unreality, due to its lack of practical applications outside of the textbook. Socialism is merely practical in that it produces efficiency gains that actually existing capitalism is unable to generate, due to its minimization of information asymmetries and their related problems, for instance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    The public does not always violently resist.
    The public can not always be counted on for assurance of continuing democratic governments.

    The present situation in the U.S. and Europe are obvious of that.
    You're clearly unfamiliar with the tumultuous political climate of Latin America, I'd say. You can point to no historical record of public apathy whilst democratic management of political and economic structure is being stripped from them, since the perpetuation of power is a natural human inclination, and those who have power over the means of production will naturally wish to perpetuate it, be they authoritarian dictators or libertarian collectives. Or can you point to a situation in which there was decentralized public control of political and economic structure, and it was willingly surrendered to an authoritarian state?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Socialism whether Bolivarian or other will eventually have diminished returns once the psychological factors start to take effect.
    There's no basis for this claim. Capitalism has the tendency to promote inefficient outcomes due to its ignorance of imperfect information and social opportunity costs in an economic system. Socialism's egalitarian elements prevent such ignorance and thereby generate efficiency gains, as is the case with autogestion (workers' self-management), for instance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Democratic ownership is by design inefficient. Your again using short term gains to show long term results which won't happen.
    That is not an accurate description of the nature of worker-owned enterprises, as indicated by empirical evidence rather than ideological dogma. I'd recommend that you have a look at the work of researchers Logue and Yates in Cooperatives, Worker-Owned Enterprises, Productivity and the International Labor Organization. As noted by the abstract:

    A survey of empirical research on productivity in worker-owned enterprises and cooperatives finds a substantial literature that largely supports the proposition that worker-owned enterprises equal or exceed the productivity of conventional enterprises when employee involvement is combined with ownership. The weight of a sparser literature on cooperatives tends toward the same pattern. In addition, employee-owned firms create local employment, anchor jobs in their communities and enrich local social capital.
    Hence, you have clearly committed insufficient analysis to the role of worker ownership and management in efficiency increases.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    What about privately owned non corporate entities?
    Given the non-existence of the "free market" that you fallaciously depict, private entities of all varieties typically lack the efficiency-increasing qualities of socialism and worker management.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    It is not a Utopian assessment. A free market will always have inefficiencies and efficient aspects. They are complementary and can never disappear.

    Otherwise there is little need to have market competition.
    Inefficiencies can be minimized, as is the case with a socialist economy. Regardless, you haven't addressed the point of my assessment, which is that the state functions as a necessary stabilizing agent in a capitalist economy, as with government protection of infant industries serving as a means for greater long-term capitalist expansion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Capitalism is by design voluntary. No coercion needed.
    That is a flagrantly inaccurate analysis that is again dependent on a utopian conception of political economy. Considering my frequent assessment that "capitalism is an economic system in which the private ownership of the means of production and consequent hierarchical subordination of labor under capital enables the extraction of surplus value from the working class in the production process through the use of wage labor and subsequent utilization in the circulation process in order to perpetuate a vicious cycle of capital accumulation," the subordination of workers under an employer is itself anti-democratic and coercive.

    As I've noted, since the means of production are privately owned, large components of the public have no alternative but to subordinate themselves under an employer. The best way to illustrate this form of authoritarianism is to use the "robbery analogy." If a person were to be violently tackled by an assailant and have his/her valuables torn out of his/her pockets, we would accurately call this a robbery. Now, if the assailant were to instead point a gun at the victim and demand that the valuables be surrendered, we would still call this a robbery, as coercion was used to gain the valuables, if not outright physical violence. The fact that the victim technically "consented" to surrender his/her valuables is not pertinent, since it was consent yielded while under duress.

    The former example represents the direct tyranny of statism, often blunt, direct, and brutal, whereas the latter represents the more subtle tyranny of capitalism, specifically wage labor, in which a person technically "consents" to work for an employer, but does this only because he/she has no other alternative for sustenance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    That is just pure unfettered foolishness.
    Just as everything else has been manipulation proofed there is always an individual or class sly enough to consolidate power.

    Talk about Utopia.
    Your own ideas and conceptions are utopian. Since you fail to realize this through an explanation of structural framework, can you point to any single case in Venezuela, in which socialism has effectively existed for about six years, in which a powerful group of individuals from the financial class or any other similarly powerful class hijacked a cooperative or federations of cooperatives?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Checks and balances depend on the individuals involved and if one powerful class, like the uneducated poor in Venezuela gain power they invariably support fallacious policies because it sounds good not because it is economically sound.
    Ultimately, there aren't economically unsound elements of Bolivarian socialism to the same extent that they exist in capitalism, which is why Bolivarian socialism has had the effect of promoting economic growth and development to a far greater degree than capitalism ever did, ever can, or ever will.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    If you wade through all the big words and unfounded short sighted assumptions and "empirical" evidence you can shoot right through the nonsense.
    You haven't "shot through" anything except your initial semblance of credibility. You're simply hostile to empirical evidence. That's fine if it's acceptable to you, but it doesn't equip you for serious economic analysis.

  8. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Between Hollywood and Compton.
    Last Seen
    11-25-09 @ 12:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,497

    Re: Navy deployed to Venezuela airports, seaports

    Sorry about the duplicate.

  9. #39
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Navy deployed to Venezuela airports, seaports

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Of course, the most "utopian" of economic ideas presented is free market capitalism, which is characterized by an air of extreme unreality, due to its lack of practical applications outside of the textbook. Socialism is merely practical in that it produces efficiency gains that actually existing capitalism is unable to generate, due to its minimization of information asymmetries and their related problems, for instance.
    Free market approaches are less Utopian than socialist ones because they directly infer human nature.

    Socialism ignores the consequences of this.

    No matter which system you operate under information asymmetries always exist.

    Capitalism recognizes this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    You're clearly unfamiliar with the tumultuous political climate of Latin America, I'd say. You can point to no historical record of public apathy whilst democratic management of political and economic structure is being stripped from them, since the perpetuation of power is a natural human inclination, and those who have power over the means of production will naturally wish to perpetuate it, be they authoritarian dictators or libertarian collectives. Or can you point to a situation in which there was decentralized public control of political and economic structure, and it was willingly surrendered to an authoritarian state?
    I understand clearly how the culture of Latin America operates.

    What you do not understand is that under state sponsored and mandated education systems, the state domesticates the population at large with extreme non violence programs.

    The Latin Americans as a whole are already on this path.

    There are examples in antiquity and even modern times of revolt but that was before the introduction of state sponsored and mandated education systems which promote extreme non violence to authoritarianism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    There's no basis for this claim. Capitalism has the tendency to promote inefficient outcomes due to its ignorance of imperfect information and social opportunity costs in an economic system. Socialism's egalitarian elements prevent such ignorance and thereby generate efficiency gains, as is the case with autogestion (workers' self-management), for instance.
    Humans by nature do inefficient things all the time, it will be no different under a socialist regime.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    That is not an accurate description of the nature of worker-owned enterprises, as indicated by empirical evidence rather than ideological dogma. I'd recommend that you have a look at the work of researchers Logue and Yates in Cooperatives, Worker-Owned Enterprises, Productivity and the International Labor Organization. As noted by the abstract:
    That is all well and good but they are short term examples.

    You don't measure the success of a program over the short term because nearly all the results will be positive.

    With the human mind diminished returns follow over the long term.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Hence, you have clearly committed insufficient analysis to the role of worker ownership and management in efficiency increases.
    And you have failed to apply the role of global goods and services in this regard.

    No industry is permanent to a nation it can not permanent anchor a job to a specific area ever.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Given the non-existence of the "free market" that you fallaciously depict, private entities of all varieties typically lack the efficiency-increasing qualities of socialism and worker management.
    A single owner has more at stake to regulating and promoting efficiency than does a collective.

    As a collective grows the less efficient it gets, that is the beauty of capitalism, it recognizes this and openly understands that in the end corporations and all private entities will fail giving rise to new and smaller private businesses.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Inefficiencies can be minimized, as is the case with a socialist economy. Regardless, you haven't addressed the point of my assessment, which is that the state functions as a necessary stabilizing agent in a capitalist economy, as with government protection of infant industries serving as a means for greater long-term capitalist expansion.
    The state is not supposed to serve as a stabilizing agent. It exists to promote Justice among individuals.

    Stability can not be guaranteed by any state.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    That is a flagrantly inaccurate analysis that is again dependent on a utopian conception of political economy. Considering my frequent assessment that "capitalism is an economic system in which the private ownership of the means of production and consequent hierarchical subordination of labor under capital enables the extraction of surplus value from the working class in the production process through the use of wage labor and subsequent utilization in the circulation process in order to perpetuate a vicious cycle of capital accumulation," the subordination of workers under an employer is itself anti-democratic and coercive.
    Hierarchies are destined to exist for quite some time as humans develop differently from each other assuming different qualities that others don't develop.

    What happens when one of the collective members starts to accumulate more capital than the others?

    What if they can buy out another member?


    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    As I've noted, since the means of production are privately owned, large components of the public have no alternative but to subordinate themselves under an employer. The best way to illustrate this form of authoritarianism is to use the "robbery analogy." If a person were to be violently tackled by an assailant and have his/her valuables torn out of his/her pockets, we would accurately call this a robbery. Now, if the assailant were to instead point a gun at the victim and demand that the valuables be surrendered, we would still call this a robbery, as coercion was used to gain the valuables, if not outright physical violence. The fact that the victim technically "consented" to surrender his/her valuables is not pertinent, since it was consent yielded while under duress.
    That is completely false.

    They can form a new entity to compete with the old one but they have to offer greater efficiency and innovation.

    No one is being forced to work for a lesser organization, it is not coercion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    The former example represents the direct tyranny of statism, often blunt, direct, and brutal, whereas the latter represents the more subtle tyranny of capitalism, specifically wage labor, in which a person technically "consents" to work for an employer, but does this only because he/she has no other alternative for sustenance.
    And your example represents the tyranny of democracy, the tyranny of mob rule.

    One in your example is forced to be a member of a collective when they may have no desire to do so, they are forced to do so because of your restrictive economic policies.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Your own ideas and conceptions are utopian. Since you fail to realize this through an explanation of structural framework, can you point to any single case in Venezuela, in which socialism has effectively existed for about six years, in which a powerful group of individuals from the financial class or any other similarly powerful class hijacked a cooperative or federations of cooperatives?
    I have read your explanation and it is completely short sighted.

    You measure gains in the span of years, I measure it in the span of decades.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Ultimately, there aren't economically unsound elements of Bolivarian socialism to the same extent that they exist in capitalism, which is why Bolivarian socialism has had the effect of promoting economic growth and development to a far greater degree than capitalism ever did, ever can, or ever will.
    There are no perfect economic situations anywhere.

    Capitalism has a greater chance of furthering human evolution than does collectivist socialism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    You haven't "shot through" anything except your initial semblance of credibility. You're simply hostile to empirical evidence. That's fine if it's acceptable to you, but it doesn't equip you for serious economic analysis.
    I'm not hostile to empirical evidence, I'm hostile to people who cite short term gains to illustrate success.

    I can pull up tons of examples that over the short term something is a success or failure, just as you have.

    Whether you believe it or not we have very similar ideologies.

    It is how we get there that is different.

    I personally think the most free and efficient model of human success was in the Indian tribal communities.
    Last edited by Harry Guerrilla; 03-15-09 at 09:09 PM.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  10. #40
    Educator Grateful Heart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Last Seen
    12-27-09 @ 03:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,010

    Re: Navy deployed to Venezuela airports, seaports

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    In other words, you weren't capable of rebuttal?
    No rebuttal that you'd find the least bit interesting, I'm sure.

    If you don't mind a personal question... what is it you do for a living?


Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •