Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 80

Thread: Navy deployed to Venezuela airports, seaports

  1. #61
    Sage
    Khayembii Communique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 07:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,897

    Re: Navy deployed to Venezuela airports, seaports

    I assert that based on the man naturally pools his own resrouces and capital that your assertion is complete bunk.
    Yet this argument has already been disproven by myself, to which you agreed.

    Also, as an aside, the ability to "pool capital" necessitates the existence of capital.

  2. #62
    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 Red_Dave View Post
    This is where the hubris of your ilk really becomes aparent. The "uneducated poor" are educated enough to understand that the washington consensus model doesnt work [indeed I,ld imagine they are educated all too well in this respect] which is why they are voteing against it and for an alternative. Given that the washington consensus model had to be implemented by violence during the "cold war" and is failing all over the continent you should not be surprised if the backlash to this comes with an extremity you find unpaletable.
    Sigh, I never said I agreed with the Washington consensus.

    These uneducated poor people are subject to the rules of group think just as much as anyone else is.

    They have a charismatic leader, (unsustainable) social policy, and an enemy in which they have to defeat.

    Quote Originally Posted by Red_Dave View Post
    Even a cursory look at the stats will demonstrate that Chavez has alot of support in the country because he has improved the situation there. I would ask you to look healthcare, infant mortality, literacy and access to higher education in venuzuela. I would ask you to look at how the relatively free market policies used in Peru and Brazil have made a small section of the population rich and made no difference to the rest of the population, but few people on this forum are paying a great deal of attention to this all they care about is whether the country conforms to their very narrow ideological model.
    Non of you socialist, communists believe in social Darwinism/evolution so my argument will fall on deaf ears.

    Quote Originally Posted by Red_Dave View Post
    As far as your concerned if the venuzuelans vote against this then their opinion becomes invalid because it doesnt conform to your own. Indeed as far as your concerned its the very fact that they can vote against policys that only benefit a tiny minority of the population that makes the country so undemocratic.

    My opinion is that strong centralized government shouldn't exist.

    I don't want anyone having anymore sway over government than anyone else.
    I want everyone to leave everyone else alone.

    Democracy is a joke when everyone can't be counted on to review information objectively.
    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

  3. #63
    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 Khayembii Communique View Post
    Yet this argument has already been disproven by myself, to which you agreed.

    Also, as an aside, the ability to "pool capital" necessitates the existence of capital.
    You never proved me wrong.

    I said there are no absolutes.

    What I know is that man is selfish, suicide is a selfish act.
    Your pretending to not agree only because you can't reconcile this with your perfect government, social Utopia.
    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

  4. #64
    Sage
    Khayembii Communique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 07:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,897

    Re: Navy deployed to Venezuela airports, seaports

    What I know is that man is selfish, suicide is a selfish act.
    Your pretending to not agree only because you can't reconcile this with your perfect government, social Utopia.
    Animals enter into relationships in order to further the survival of their species; this can either be in cooperation or competition. Certainly, though, one does not by nature take precedent over the other; these relationships are determined by the environment in which one lives.

    So I agree with your statement, but would qualify it with a second: Competition is done because something is easier to get than if it was done through cooperation.

    Following from this, any such view that the socialization of production "goes against human nature" does not have a leg on which to stand, for if human consciousness is determined by the environment in which it develops then there is no inherent barrier in transforming to one conducive with socialization (aside from one's environment, which is exactly why the Utopian Socialists were incorrect in their outlook).

  5. #65
    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 Khayembii Communique View Post
    Animals enter into relationships in order to further the survival of their species; this can either be in cooperation or competition. Certainly, though, one does not by nature take precedent over the other; these relationships are determined by the environment in which one lives.

    So I agree with your statement, but would qualify it with a second: Competition is done because something is easier to get than if it was done through cooperation.

    Following from this, any such view that the socialization of production "goes against human nature" does not have a leg on which to stand, for if human consciousness is determined by the environment in which it develops then there is no inherent barrier in transforming to one conducive with socialization (aside from one's environment, which is exactly why the Utopian Socialists were incorrect in their outlook).
    It does not go against human nature to act in cooperation or act in competition.

    What I said was that those acts are inherently selfish.
    You are failing to see this. They are doing it because it is easier for them to achieve their goals, if another easier move advantageous way of achieving their goals comes around they will choose that path.

    That is why your entire argument is bunk. You are failing to recognize that your system is not perfect and that another system will invariably develop to replace it or a person of questionable intent will take power from the collective.

    The whole argument you two are presenting hings on self perpetuation which is impossible.
    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. #66
    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
    That is hardly the case.

    You assert that irrational hierarchies will not develop.

    I assert that based on the man naturally pools his own resrouces and capital that your assertion is complete bunk.
    Is there a reason you're still prattling on about this? I've already made it quite clear that I don't favor the "one share, one vote" scheme practiced in some ESOPs. I favor a "one person, one vote" scheme so as to maximize the practice of direct democracy in worker-owned and managed enterprises.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    What you don't understand is that with in socialism there is a class of people who naturally develop a sedentary lifestyle in favor of actually producing something.
    I would hope that this isn't related to a fallacious belief regarding an alleged "lack of incentive" in a socialist economy. It isn't, is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    It doesn't matter if you support it or not.

    Your assertion is that an irrational one won't develop, that is just crap.
    Over time as one group or individual amasses this capital an irrational hierarchy develops.

    You still haven't reconciled this, instead you say what you think will happen and not what will happen or you refrain from calling it what it is.
    Of course it matters. If no "one share, one vote" scheme exists in a worker-owned enterprise, there's no capacity for mere share accumulation to result in greater decision-making power. A very basic and elementary fact, yet you have somehow proven capable of badly misunderstanding it...

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Not inaccuracies they are the truths outside of your textbook perfect society.
    What's most amusing here is that the only person advocating a "textbook perfect" society is you, inasmuch as advocacy of "free markets" fails to analyze numerous aforementioned issues, such as the prevalence of information asymmetries, agency costs, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    You can post all the short term examples of greatness with social programs etc etc, it still doesn't prove that your perfect society will develop with minimal irrational hierarchy developments.
    We have again encountered several fallacious claims by you. Not only have I not pointed to "short term examples" to indicate long term gains (I note your continued ignorance of the mentions of the Mondragon Cooperative Corporation, the Israeli kibbutzim, and EZLN-controlled Chiapas, incidentally), I never claimed to favor the existence of a "perfect society." Indeed, such a belief would require the utopianism possessed by supporters of free market capitalism. In reference to "minimal irrational hierarchy," there are obviously existing examples of this, such as the anarchist collectives of the Spanish Revolution or the Free Territory of Ukraine. We could also point to the brief existence of the Paris Commune and the later French student/worker uprising of 1968, though your mendacious criticisms would likely be revived. We could also point to smaller "colonies" of sorts such as the Whiteway Colony and Freetown Christiania, though they're of limited value when discussing the implementation of large scale libertarian socialism. In reference to the expansion of worker-owned and managed enterprises, we could also indicate the Argentine "factory recovery" movement and the autogestion in Titoist Yugoslavia. And all this, of course, is merely a sampling.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    It won't happen, man is selfish whether you want to believe it or not, irrational hierarchies will develop as they have for the whole of history.
    All your plan does is leave a power vacuum for a centralist charismatic leader that appeals to the group think of your "horizontal democracy"(laugh).
    As usual, you have failed to substantiate your claims with any relevant commentary. You might first note that the power-hungry have already seized control in current societal and economic conditions, but that would likely not be disingenuous enough for your purposes. Regardless, your analysis fails to comprehend the active nature of direct participation that has existed throughout the anarchist tradition and in essentially every anarchist society that has ever come into existence. It was put best by Kropotkin:

    The only way in which a state of Anarchy can be obtained is for each man [or woman] who is oppressed to act as if he [or she] were at liberty, in defiance of all authority to the contrary . . . In practical fact, territorial extension is necessary to ensure permanency to any given individual revolution. In speaking of the Revolution, we signify the aggregate of so many successful individual and group revolts as will enable every person within the revolutionized territory to act in perfect freedom . . . without having to constantly dread the prevention or the vengeance of an opposing power upholding the former system . . . Under these circumstance it is obvious that any visible reprisal could and would be met by a resumption of the same revolutionary action on the part of the individuals or groups affected, and that the maintenance of a state of Anarchy in this manner would be far easier than the gaining of a state of Anarchy by the same methods and in the face of hitherto unshaken opposition . . . They have it in their power to apply a prompt check by boycotting such a person and refusing to help him with their labor or to willing supply him with any articles in their possession. They have it in their power to use force against him. They have these powers individually as well as collectively. Being either past rebels who have been inspired with the spirit of liberty, or else habituated to enjoy freedom from their infancy, they are hardly to rest passive in view of what they feel to be wrong.
    Just as the Spanish anarchists resisted the pretensions of the Republican government, and of Caballero, Companys, Comorera, etc., so will a legitimately anarchist population resist an imposition of hierarchy or statist mandates, even if they initially come from within. Empirical evidence has indicated the veracity of this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    It is a joke to even suggest that this perfect democracy would stand the test of any measure of time.
    No one has spoken of "perfect democracy." Regardless, your argument constitutes an appeal to ignorance, because while there have not been long-lasting anarchist communities or societies on an especially large scale, neither have there been large-scale anarchist communities or societies that collapsed of their own accord, as the result of an internal failure of anarchist principles. Throughout the existence of the Spanish anarchist collectives, their progress was hampered not by the failure of direct democracy or collectivization, but by external sabotage from Leninist and Stalinist opponents. (Inaccurately called "socialists" today.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Your clearly ignore psychology in favor of tired old false arguments like your lame train station example. Humans do mean things all the time for self, personal comedic fulfillment.
    Certainly. The analogy was merely intended to illustrate the absurdity of rational choice theory, since the reality is that self-interested behaviors have a tendency to manifest themselves on the social and collective level rather than on the purely individual level. If each individual attempted to maximize their own self-interest with no regard for that of others, the result would be a chaotic absurdity, similar to that of Hardin's inaccurately applied "tragedy of the commons."

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Would your perfect society not do this? Would the members of your perfect society not express the cruelness or group think, the follow the leader syndrome that humans possess?
    Of course such conditions would likely manifest themselves from time to time, as hierarchical organization is a biologically natural tendency, in my opinion. But there is also a degree of subservience to hierarchy manufactured by present societal and economic conditions, as in the aforementioned example of schools functioning as a component of the capitalist mode of production. Hence, it is not unlikely that hierarchical organization patterns can be consciously overcome, as was the case in the aforementioned anarchist societies that enjoyed a prosperous record of existence, just as biologically natural proclivities to rape, assault, and kill can be overcome.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    I just don't understand why you keep trying to distract me from the crux of your argument with the infant industry argument when a company that is less efficient than the old shouldn't develop, Infant industry be damned if it can't compete.
    There is no "distraction" involved. I noted that the state functioned as a necessary stabilizing agent in a capitalist economy, contrary to free marketers' bleating about "government intervention." I pointed to the infant industry argument to support this claim. You did not and have not replied, which lends one to believe that you likely don't understand the argument and possibly don't even know the infant industry argument is. If so, I would recommend having a look at Ha-Joon Chang's Kicking Away the Ladder.

    As noted therein, trade liberalization promotes adverse socioeconomic impacts as long as heavily industrialized countries entice poorer and underdeveloped countries into remaining dependent on trade with them rather than utilizing their productive assets into forming a viable manufacturing and industrial sector of their own, much the same way that capitalism necessitates worker dependence on the wage provider, so that he may deprive them of the products of their labor.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    It does not go against human nature to act in cooperation or act in competition.

    What I said was that those acts are inherently selfish.
    You are failing to see this. They are doing it because it is easier for them to achieve their goals, if another easier move advantageous way of achieving their goals comes around they will choose that path.
    Nobody has denied the reality of this. Indeed, as I said before, socialism simply ensures that wage and/or compensation norms are altered to accurately reflect supply and demand criteria, a condition not present in a capitalist economy.

  7. #67
    Sage
    Khayembii Communique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 07:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,897

    Re: Navy deployed to Venezuela airports, seaports

    What I said was that those acts are inherently selfish.
    The problem is that attributing this to selfishness effectively hollows out the word; it becomes meaningless. All you're really saying is that people do what they choose to do.

    You are failing to see this. They are doing it because it is easier for them to achieve their goals, if another easier move advantageous way of achieving their goals comes around they will choose that path.

    That is why your entire argument is bunk. You are failing to recognize that your system is not perfect
    What part of my argument has been disproven by anything you have said? Where have I said that "my" system is perfect?

    and that another system will invariably develop to replace it or a person of questionable intent will take power from the collective.
    This is not really an argument at all. In order for one to accumulate capital, for example, capital must first exist. In a society where capital does not exist (or money, or government, or the state) this simply is not possible. As I have said earlier, social being determines consciousness; in order for someone to develop such a consciousness, their social being must necessitate that development. As I said earlier (and you agreed), one's consciousness is determined by the environment in which one lives.

    Your argument shows your complete ignorance of the interconnections between social being and consciousness, and how both are formed, perpetuated, evolve, change, adapt, etc...

  8. #68
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Navy deployed to Venezuela airports, seaports

    The bottom line is that Venezuelan nationalism is a threat to American globalization and neo-liberalization. That's where the anti-Communist rhetoric stems from.

    If the Venezuelans choose this road, then it's their choice as it's their country. Popular protest, to my knowledge, has not been suppressed by Chavez recently. If people were so against what he was doing we would already see a massive backlash. As it stands, the cabinet voted in agreement with him.

    So there you go.

  9. #69
    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
    Much as we're agonized by the lack of what would undoubtedly be thrilling insights from you, you might note that the conventional debater uses what we amateurs call "arguments" to support a favored conclusion.

    Does that mean you don't care to tell me what you do for a living?

    Just to be fair... I'll go first. I'm a former aerospace engineer who now sells real estate.

    And you?


  10. #70
    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
    Is there a reason you're still prattling on about this? I've already made it quite clear that I don't favor the "one share, one vote" scheme practiced in some ESOPs. I favor a "one person, one vote" scheme so as to maximize the practice of direct democracy in worker-owned and managed enterprises.
    You are failing to understand that what you favor has no bearing on reality.
    It is what will develop.

    What can you propose that can assure no one will collectivize power?

    Your direct democracy can itself become very inefficient all alone affecting the multiple worker owned "businesses" of course that depends on the size of such collectives.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    I would hope that this isn't related to a fallacious belief regarding an alleged "lack of incentive" in a socialist economy. It isn't, is it?
    Do you assert that there is more incentive? How and why?
    If one is left to do as they wish inside the worker collective what incentive is left if they have acquired all that they need?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Of course it matters. If no "one share, one vote" scheme exists in a worker-owned enterprise, there's no capacity for mere share accumulation to result in greater decision-making power. A very basic and elementary fact, yet you have somehow proven capable of badly misunderstanding it...
    Sigh, for you being an elitist academic you ignore the most obvious fallacies that exist in your argument.

    Is share accumulation the only way to achieve more power?
    Its sad I have to ask this.

    Funny though is that while you go one about how bad irrational hierarchies are your words present you as an elitist academic, I wonder if that is an irrational hierarchical role?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    What's most amusing here is that the only person advocating a "textbook perfect" society is you, inasmuch as advocacy of "free markets" fails to analyze numerous aforementioned issues, such as the prevalence of information asymmetries, agency costs, etc.
    What you fail to realize is that I completely recognize asymmetrical information and I support its existence.

    Pure Capitalism can't exist without asymmetrical information.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    We have again encountered several fallacious claims by you. Not only have I not pointed to "short term examples" to indicate long term gains (I note your continued ignorance of the mentions of the Mondragon Cooperative Corporation, the Israeli kibbutzim, and EZLN-controlled Chiapas, incidentally), I never claimed to favor the existence of a "perfect society." Indeed, such a belief would require the utopianism possessed by supporters of free market capitalism. In reference to "minimal irrational hierarchy," there are obviously existing examples of this, such as the anarchist collectives of the Spanish Revolution or the Free Territory of Ukraine. We could also point to the brief existence of the Paris Commune and the later French student/worker uprising of 1968, though your mendacious criticisms would likely be revived. We could also point to smaller "colonies" of sorts such as the Whiteway Colony and Freetown Christiania, though they're of limited value when discussing the implementation of large scale libertarian socialism. In reference to the expansion of worker-owned and managed enterprises, we could also indicate the Argentine "factory recovery" movement and the autogestion in Titoist Yugoslavia. And all this, of course, is merely a sampling.
    Yes yes, your examples.

    What were conditions like prior to the establishment of these collectives?

    What your saying is that, before they built the factory production was flat, but after they built it production went up 100%.

    No matter what form of governance took place there is almost a guarantee that efficiency would go up because of the prior instability.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    As usual, you have failed to substantiate your claims with any relevant commentary. You might first note that the power-hungry have already seized control in current societal and economic conditions, but that would likely not be disingenuous enough for your purposes. Regardless, your analysis fails to comprehend the active nature of direct participation that has existed throughout the anarchist tradition and in essentially every anarchist society that has ever come into existence. It was put best by Kropotkin:

    Just as the Spanish anarchists resisted the pretensions of the Republican government, and of Caballero, Companys, Comorera, etc., so will a legitimately anarchist population resist an imposition of hierarchy or statist mandates, even if they initially come from within. Empirical evidence has indicated the veracity of this.
    Is this your proof a logical fallacy? Appeal to authority?

    Your empirical evidence doesn't include prior instability before the establishment of these short lived utopia's.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    No one has spoken of "perfect democracy." Regardless, your argument constitutes an appeal to ignorance, because while there have not been long-lasting anarchist communities or societies on an especially large scale, neither have there been large-scale anarchist communities or societies that collapsed of their own accord, as the result of an internal failure of anarchist principles. Throughout the existence of the Spanish anarchist collectives, their progress was hampered not by the failure of direct democracy or collectivization, but by external sabotage from Leninist and Stalinist opponents. (Inaccurately called "socialists" today.)
    Right so there lack of long term existence means that they will exist long term?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Certainly. The analogy was merely intended to illustrate the absurdity of rational choice theory, since the reality is that self-interested behaviors have a tendency to manifest themselves on the social and collective level rather than on the purely individual level. If each individual attempted to maximize their own self-interest with no regard for that of others, the result would be a chaotic absurdity, similar to that of Hardin's inaccurately applied "tragedy of the commons."
    So do you agree with the behaviorist theory?

    If so you are completely ignoring the findings of all the other schools of psychology.
    Some choices are made in regards to the social community at large, others are made for self.

    Are you ignoring genetics in psychological development?


    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Of course such conditions would likely manifest themselves from time to time, as hierarchical organization is a biologically natural tendency, in my opinion. But there is also a degree of subservience to hierarchy manufactured by present societal and economic conditions, as in the aforementioned example of schools functioning as a component of the capitalist mode of production. Hence, it is not unlikely that hierarchical organization patterns can be consciously overcome, as was the case in the aforementioned anarchist societies that enjoyed a prosperous record of existence, just as biologically natural proclivities to rape, assault, and kill can be overcome.
    You must be forgetting the bell curve.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    There is no "distraction" involved. I noted that the state functioned as a necessary stabilizing agent in a capitalist economy, contrary to free marketers' bleating about "government intervention." I pointed to the infant industry argument to support this claim. You did not and have not replied, which lends one to believe that you likely don't understand the argument and possibly don't even know the infant industry argument is. If so, I would recommend having a look at Ha-Joon Chang's Kicking Away the Ladder.
    An industry can develop without government assistance or protectionism.

    If the government does intervene to protect or nuture industry that is mercantilism or protectionism not capitalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    As noted therein, trade liberalization promotes adverse socioeconomic impacts as long as heavily industrialized countries entice poorer and underdeveloped countries into remaining dependent on trade with them rather than utilizing their productive assets into forming a viable manufacturing and industrial sector of their own, much the same way that capitalism necessitates worker dependence on the wage provider, so that he may deprive them of the products of their labor.
    That is subjective opinion, what you call adverse another calls prosperous.

    Seeing as no country can produce everything it needs, trade must happen.

    Unless of course you believe in complete primitive economies.

    Your subjective view of deprivation, what you call deprivation another would call prosperous.

    But I guess if they don't agree with you they're wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Nobody has denied the reality of this. Indeed, as I said before, socialism simply ensures that wage and/or compensation norms are altered to accurately reflect supply and demand criteria, a condition not present in a capitalist economy.
    What you fail to comprehend is that socialism can not accurately reflect supply and demand.

    Asymmetric information and all that you were railing on.
    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

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 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
  •