• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

The "Occupy" movement and Communism

Started by Zircon, August 24, 2012, 09:53:13 AM

Zircon

Ben, I've never lived under communism but know several people who lived under it as well as fascists. I was wondering if you have personal experience living under a totalitarian dictatorship?

Also interesting that you use the words "MIGHT not be" as it suggests you would try to amass riches regardless. It would appear you'd find or have found something wrong with that system and tried to counter its restrictions.

The General

Quote from: Ben Shockley on August 25, 2012, 11:05:47 PM
This whole topic depresses me more than I can convey, and your ending there General disturbs me more than I can address in here.   Let me try to be quick:
How can you possibly (and so naturally and glibly) equate "liberty" with "capitalism?"  For one thing, they are utterly different concepts with different sets of assumptions underlying them (not to mention how hopelessly vague "liberty" is).   But beyond that, how can an economic system (capitalism) which decrees winners, losers, and "unqualified to compete" before the game even begins have anything to do with "liberty" for a society?    Capitalism only works for those with "capital."   Most people don't have any, so by definition --as well as through it's murderous operation-- capitalism does nothing good for most people, and in no way bestows "liberty" upon them nor enhances those things which they may find the liberty to do.   And from what I've seen, when those with the capital and for whom the system works speak of "liberty," they typically mean "freedom to do as I want regardless of the effect upon or the cost to anyone or anything else."

I stand by my not-so-rhetorical question (and answer) regarding the fear of "communism."  The natural operation of capitalism with it's exploitation of everybody and everything within reach chills me a hell of a lot more than the prospect that, within communism, I might not be able to amass obscene riches through unlimited exploitation.

Is capitalism unfair?  Yes.  So is life.  For all of its shortcomings, capitalism is the least flawed economic system as I see it.  The wild card in any socioeconomic structure is human nature.  If we all were predictable, reliable, and equal then communism would work fine, but we are not robots.  A communist society needs constant regulation, and a socioeconomic structure that needs constant regulation requires constant regulators.  I want very little from my government.  I want them mostly to stay the hell out of my life and let me keep at least most of the money that I earn.  (And I am by no means rich.)  People living under socialism or communism inevitably will be living under the weight of an oppressive government.  There's no other way to enforce it.  That's why I equate liberty with capitalism,  it's not so much that I am in love with capitalism, just that it is the least oppressive system to live under, when it is done right.  Obviously we have some controls and safeguards in place, we wouldn't want a completely unregulated free market. 

If capitalism only works for people with Capital, how do you explain the self made millionaires that proliferate our system?  How did they exploit their way to the top if they started with nothing?  Capital is actually quite easy to get in our system.  A little too easy, maybe.  That's part of our debt crisis.  But what about working hard and saving up?  That's what I've done.  I started with nothing.  I make a product with capital that I've saved by working hard and I've exploited no one in the process.  I've made enough money to be able to put 20% cash down on a house.  That was done through hard work.   

In a communist country I would be investigated for typing the above paragraphs. 
And THAT sums it up pretty well.

Capitalism is shorthand for property ownership and free exchange.  Free exchange can only occur when people own their own labor, goods and property, and are allowed to trade their property or services to someone else for other property or services.  Both gain or the exchange is not made.  Wealth is thus created.

In a situation where the group - dictated by the rulers - own all the goods, property and labor and decides who gets what, none are free.

Ben Shockley

Quote from: Paper*Boy on August 26, 2012, 03:15:07 AM
Capitalism is shorthand for property ownership and free exchange.
You can call a word "shorthand for" anything, but capitalism strictly speaking is a financial system of generating profits from capital, which in turn, in the most basic terms, is previous profits which remain the property of the owner even after the profit is generated.   Please note that the central concept in defining capitalism, and it's central operating goal, is "profit," NOT the production and distribution of "necessary goods and services" which is the universal, generic definition of what "an economy" SHOULD do.
You were right about the "ownership" part.   But capitalism is about "keeping and enriching," NOT about "providing" anything.   And that's no way to run or even materially-supply a society.

Quote from: Paper*Boy on August 26, 2012, 03:15:07 AM
Free exchange...
Has no necessary (or even particularly practical) relationship to the concept of "capitalism."

Quote from: Paper*Boy on August 26, 2012, 03:15:07 AM
[When] people own their own labor, goods and property, and are allowed to trade their property or services to someone else for other property or services...Both gain or the exchange is not made.  Wealth is thus created.
I'm afraid that you are sorely misled about the definition of "wealth."   The situation you described --such as "service for service"-- could be one of barter where absolutely no "wealth" is created; in any case and regardless of definitions, I imagine that a few seconds of reflection will show you that no one "gains" in a barter situation, else it's highly unlikely that one or the other party would even cooperate.  Wealth is created when value is added to something that already existed, or something is created that didn't exist before.   Manufacturing things out of raw materials creates wealth for (in a capitalist society) whoever is adjudged to "own" the stuff thus created.   In a capitalist society, the people who made the "stuff" --workers-- are almost never adjudged to own what they create.   Therefore, though they create "wealth," they aren't considered to own it-- which means that a lifetime of "working" in a capitalist society will never make you "wealthy."

Quote from: Paper*Boy on August 26, 2012, 03:15:07 AM
In a situation where the group - dictated by the rulers - own all the goods, property and services and decides who gets what, none are free.
In a situation where the "elite few" -- the capitalists who pragmatically are the rulers -- own all the goods, property and services and decide who gets what, none are free.

Zircon

Ben, capitalism does in fact make money for the owner or investor. Capitalism employs people. They can learn and grow and perhaps, if they have the gumption, go out on their own and start a company with some great idea. That is how the company he works or worked for got started.

Maybe the original founder is long dead and coat tails are ridden (no denying that takes place) but if they don't know what they're doing the company will fail - or at least it used to until Obama decided to pick winners and losers.

Distribution of goods and services may very well be the product being produced. What is the point of doing anything unless you benefit and you can market your product. It is amazing, I'm sure you'll agree, that so many people have sacrificed so much from around the world to get into this country and begin again. Most of the original immigrants don't make it rich but they realize education and hard work will for their children. Look at the Asians.

So, even with all of its imperfections, capitalism actually the best thing that has ever happened to the human condition and the United States is blessed in being that place where it can be realized and a person's dreams can become a reality. NO GUARANTEES ... BUT OPPORTUNITY. "To each according to their abilities" - no restrictions of ages old "class stratification" and limitations. If you don't try, are lazy or expect things to be handed to you that person will have imposed a life in the background and lifelong strife upon themselves.

Quote from: Paper*Boy on August 26, 2012, 03:15:07 AM
Capitalism is shorthand for property ownership and free exchange.  Free exchange can only occur when people own their own labor, goods and property, and are allowed to trade their property or services to someone else for other property or services.  Both gain or the exchange is not made.  Wealth is thus created.

In a situation where the group - dictated by the rulers - own all the goods, property and labor and decides who gets what, none are free.
Quote from: Paper*Boy on August 25, 2012, 06:01:33 PM
Whatever people want to call it, there is an element that has constantly been pushing us toward a one world government with them at the top.  They could never sell it that way of course, it's incremental, each step is sold as something that has a nice ring to it - taxing the rich, free medical care, free trade and free trade agreements, commom currency (Euro), defence pacts among countries, international peacekeeping missions, the International Court, IMF, World Bank. ...
So free trade = bad, but free exchange = good?


Quote from: RealCool Daddio on August 27, 2012, 10:00:11 PM
So free trade = bad, but free exchange = good?

These Free Trade Agreements are a bit of a misnomer - they are actually managed trade agreements - put together by Fortune 500 lobbyists for their own benefit.  A true free trade agreement could be written on one page, but these things run thousands of pages - all sorts of rules, concessions, exemptions, etc.  The end result is most foreign goods and producers remain protected in their countries while ours aren't here, jobs and whole factories are exported while few foreign factories open here.  The resultant wages, taxes on those wages, business taxes on goods from elsewhere but sold here are paid overseas instead of here.  The big corps do just fine, the govt does just fine (those dollars have to come back here somehow and they do so in the form of foreign entities buying our excess muni and Fed bonds).  Etc.

It's a bit of apples and oranges comparing Free Trade Agreements to Free Exchange.  Free Exchange is an economic term and presupposes a fair and level playing field.  These Free Trade agrements are political documents. 

Juan

Communism is a religion masquerading as a system of government.  It relies wholly on belief.

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod