No, you are confusing "capitalism" with "corporatism". Too Big To Fail isn't a Capitalist dogma, it's a Corporatist one.
Maybe so. To be clear, I'm not entirely opposed to capitalism. At its most primal element (namely trade) it is purely human expression. On the other hand, the licensing of fractal banking privilege to a core elite is really just a throwback to feudalism and the same ol' hierarchy of oppression and the corruption it invariably entails. Corporatism is the inevitable political product of capitalism. There is no point in denying this.
the labor theory of value?!? :lamo this would be the one that even Lenin eventually had to abandon as not taking into effect the necessary value added of capital? :lol:
Who said anything about value? We are talking about production, no? The worker creates the product. The capital just sits in somebody's vault, as idle and physically unproductive as it always is. Yes, this is a fact of pure science:
Money is an inanimate object.
Of course, Marx was dead wrong when he defined "value" in terms of the amount of human energy expended in the creation of a product. History is replete with examples of "White Elephants." Why Marx failed to comprehend the fact that value cannot be defined by any precise and consistent human measure is beyond me. Perhaps, he was high on laudanum.
"
Value," like Beauty, and Quality, and Justice, is one of those mercurial and ultimately indefinable human aesthetics. Value can only be fleetingly ascertained on the free market because it is a function of human desire.
That being said, "value" and the physical phenomenon of production are two entirely different things.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW OR SHOULD I EXPLAIN IT TO YOU USING MUPPETS IN ORDER TO HOLD YOUR ATTENTION???
But okay, I'll bite. If a robot builds a car, and an overseer makes sure the Robot doesn't break down, which entity is building the car?
The overseer (at least until the Robot is endowed with some sort of silicon limbic system and accompanying software inducing him to exclaim by his own independent impulses and subjective experience, "
I suffer, therefore I am.")
yup. we called it "feudalism".
Yup, and we're doing it again.
the Industrial Revolution.
No, the
Industrial Revolution is gauged between 1750 and 1850. Try again.
Fascinating. Are you suggesting that people on the farms were exploiting themselves? Or is it just that you see "labor" and think "exploitation!".
Are you suggesting that Old MacDonald,
at any time in human history, did all the farm labor on an industrial size farm all by himself? Could you really be that unacquainted with the enormous toils of agriculture?
actually the assumptions in that thought model are pretty basic. the Japanese auto makers were able to enter into and take massive swathes of the American market share because they were producing a superior product which they were able to make for less than their UAW American Competitors.
Actually, you are not getting it all. Without the UAW, and labor unions in general, there would have been no consumer base in America for Toyota to drawn from. Therefore, there would have been no Toyota car company in America and your brother would be unemployed.
The rise of the American Middle Class really began with the independent tradesmen and farmers of the 18th century. The rise of the modern industrial-age middle class really began in the 1920's. The UAW was founded in 1935.
The rise of the
industrial middle class was concomitant with the rise of industrial labor unions.
Believe it or not, this manifestation is both logical and observable. It is really very simple: The more people were paid, the more they were able to buy. You are fond of graphs. Go check the graphs comparing the earnings of industrial workers between 1850 and 1950 and the emergence of the "consumer based economy." You will notice a conspicuous relationship.
That is unfortunately incorrect. Unions are not responsible for the defeat of Communism; containment was.
Were it not for the unions and the higher wages they were able to obtain for their members,
there would have been no containment. Communism would have swept over America like a rabid inferno. You do not know your history. That much is more than obvious.
Sadly not so much. Thanks to our unionized educational system, costs have skyrocketed while quality has - at best - flatlined.
Costs have skyrocketed because schools are being built at twice the fair market value. The costs of textbooks, desks, and school computers has mysteriously quadrupled. The graft associated between our public schools and their contracts with private sector is so outrageous that if anyone ever took a good look at it they might just pass out from shock. All the while, the average gullible American dunderhead is being distracted and disinformed by upper-class nabob reports that it is the middle class teachers who are to blame for the high cost of education.
NEVERMIND THAT THE UPPER CLASS NABOBS HOLDING PUBLIC SCHOOL CONTRACTS ARE SHAMELESSLY RIPPING OFF THE MIDDLE CLASS TAXPAYER WITH THEIR GROSS OVERCHARGES TO STATE AND MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT!!! IT IS THE MIDDLE CLASS TEACHER THAT IS THE VILLAIN, RIGHT???
You're so gullible you make me want to vomit.
Well hell, let's raise the minimum wage to $1 bn a year, and we can all be rich!
Hell with that. Let's kill the unions and toss out the 13th Amendment. Then some of us can own slaves and live like royalty off the sweat and tears of everyone else, at least until we finally revisit that most bitter lesson of history:
where there is no fair wage, there is a dying economy; and thus a dying society.
When you artificially increase the price of a product or service, you lower the demand. This works the same for labor as it does with anything else - which means that when you artificially increase the cost of hiring workers, you ensure that fewer workers will be hired. What is the purchasing power of the unemployed?
And when you decrease the cost of labor by allowed to forcibly pay less than a fair market wage, you ultimately lower the demand by killing the purchasing power of the very people to whom you are ultimately trying to sell.
Don't you get it?