Lets take this whole discussion in a new direction. If everybody was being honest than this would be their question.
Any of you starting or planning to start a business?
I would love to start a business and be able to make a living off of it. Not even join the 1%, just make what I make as a teacher so i can quit and do my business. But its super hard to start it with kids. I'm going to have to force myself to start it one day. Its an internet business. The site is almost all built...except a few things and credit card functionality.
business as a hobby? Yes. I would start it and actually, started... but the income is very very low... for now :D
(english is not my native language, sorry for grammar.)
I have a vague idea for a business plan, revolving around sanitation services, renewable power, organic farming, and rental property management, all rolled into one!
I have to say I just love the way you answered your own thread title question in your own OP.
I wouldn't start a business. Good luck with that. I would buy an already established business with my inheritance, or I would steal an idea from someone else that's going to be huge, with my intelligence. Then I would aggressively squash or buy-out the competition, petition the state for special favors, militantly suppress labor power, set up a pension fund for my workers and then raid it.
... isn't that how the 1% created themselves?
In States a fresh law is looked upon as a remedy for evil. Instead of themselves altering what is bad, people begin by demanding a law to alter it. ... In short, a law everywhere and for everything!
~Peter Kropotkin
I'd get a job on wallstreet.
Laotzu del Zinn: I wouldn't start a business. Good luck with that. I would buy an already established business with my inheritance, or I would steal an idea from someone else that's going to be huge, with my intelligence. Then I would aggressively squash or buy-out the competition, petition the state for special favors, militantly suppress labor power, set up a pension fund for my workers and then raid it. ... isn't that how the 1% created themselves?
You do realize it only takes about $380k annual income to be in the 1%. Technically you could be an employee and get that. Or just a really good salesman of really expensive high-end goods.
Right, that's why I dislike these liberal class distinctions based on income. Whom I was really talking about was the .1% lol.... and that's still arbitrary. Football players are in the top .1%. The real problem is with bankers, capitalists, and the politicians that beg at their table.... whom would you deny can often be found engaging in just the activities I mentioned?
Laotzu del Zinn:Right, that's why I dislike these liberal class distinctions based on income. Whom I was really talking about was the .1% lol.... and that's still arbitrary. Football players are in the top .1%. The real problem is with bankers, capitalists, and the politicians that beg at their table.... whom would you deny can often be found engaging in just the activities I mentioned?
Of course corporatism exists. That's partly why most of us are here. But what does that have to do with there being other ways to get into the 1% than engaging in it?
I would steal an idea from someone else that's going to be huge, with my intelligence
Yes, because capital is abundant and good business ideas are both scarce and obviously good.
Clayton -
Can you get there without engaging in aggressive capitalism? If you're just an employee at Goldman Sachs or Beoing you may not be actively engaging in corporatism, but you still derive huge benefits from it. Even small local business' get tax breaks and the like from the government (tax breaks regular people don't get; hence it being a "special favor").
I don't know. Ask Michael Moore, since he now admits to being part of the 1%.
To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process. Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!" Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."
I would love to see that on tape. Do you have a link?
Laotzu del Zinn: Of course corporatism exists. That's partly why most of us are here. But what does that have to do with there being other ways to get into the 1% than engaging in it? Can you get there without engaging in aggressive capitalism?
Can you get there without engaging in aggressive capitalism?
Aggressive capitalism? I thought all capitalism was aggressive.
[...] Even small local business' get tax breaks and the like from the government (tax breaks regular people don't get; hence it being a "special favor").
Yes, like Solyndra, the flagship of the anti-capitalistic Greens®.
He blogged it: http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mike-friends-blog/life-among-1
C'mon man, I'm at least trying not to partake in overtly socialist language. I was trying to allow him to have his "corporatism," which I would normally call "just capitalism" by calling it "aggressive capitalism."
But yes. Private property is aggression.
Ya. LIke them.
"But yes. Private property is aggression."
.
Tzu, can you either adopt some cooky form of socialism or pretend to be capitalist? You don't fit what's seen as the normal socialist paradigm around here and you have the audacity to focus on the real issue like property and wealth disparity, so it ends up in these long and, more importantly to me, boring debates about the nature of property and the like in which both sides are talking past each other to some extent or other.
COME ON! Either change the quote in your sig to Kropotkin and your avatar to the IWW logo or go home!
JK, but seriously if you're in an opposing forum for a while you could at least TRY to make it a little more interesting when the inevitable strife occurs.
Tzu, can you either go some cooky form of socialism or pretend to be capitalist?
I like your style
You don't fit what's seen as the normal socialist paradigm around here so it ends up in these long and, more importantly to me, boring debates about the nature of property and the like in which both sides are talking past each other to some extent or other.
It does get boring when you cannot engage in baseless caricatures, I know! I'm always trying to call all capitalists murderous pig-dogs. But then they're humans who've not actively killed anyone... oh man, how boring
(To be fair, I have, for years, remained unrestricted on Revleft [despite heavy posting]. So, it seems my brand of socialism is at least acceptable by the community at large.)
You, my good sir, are a winner. In the friendlies and most congenial of spirits I bestow you a humble request of friendship and give you the following.
Edit:
And I like the Kropotkin quote BTW. If you are misfortunate enough to have read "an appeal to th young" then I heartily reccomend it.
I actually did place my hand over it. But I'm more of a fan of the:
I'd run for elected office, serve a few terms, and become a lobbyist.
I am getting into the internet marketing thing. Made a site. PlusI am also thinking of doing Export/import after I make something in Inernet marketing. Being in India gives me many advantages for exports/imports.
You don't need to serve terms to become a lobbyist. Multitask like many of your future colleagues do.
What's your firm? Van De Lay industries? Any matchstick/potato chip stock?
Nothing like that.
LOL, sorry, it's a reference to the American television series Seinfeld.
What about doing away with class divisions altogether?
What do you consider to be a "class division"?
The keyboard is mightier than the gun.
Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.
Voluntaryism Forum
1% is meant to designate the ownership class. 99% is a useful fiction to create a sense of class solidarity among the rest of us.
I own a house, a car, and some other things. Does that make me part of the "ownership class"?
""I own a house, a car, and some other things. Does that make me part of the "ownership class"?
I think this is where it gets interesting with people who ascribe to Mises' theories, because you own those things, but you don't own the construction company, auto factory or bank that made the loans to allow you to get them. Capitalists own those things, sometimes referred to as the means of production.
Well you made a distinction between "the ownership class" and "the rest of us". With the former, I figured you were referring to a class of people who own things. If that's not the case, then what do you really mean by "the ownership class"?
Regarding means of production, I think my car is a means of production. After all, it allows me to get to work.
"Well you made a distinction between "the ownership class" and "the rest of us". With the former, I figured you were referring to a class of people who own things. If that's not the case, then what do you really mean by "the ownership class"?
"Regarding means of production, I think my car is a means of production. After all, it allows me to get to work."
Oh boy, here we go on the gravity (and logic) defying Misean Merry-go-round!
Your car does not allow you to extract a profit (unless you have one of those advertising trucks). It allows you to go to work, where hopefully you make enough to pay your bills and debts. Totally different from owning the auto factory.
occupy_octopi:Oh boy, here we go on the gravity (and logic) defying Misean Merry-go-round! Your car does not allow you to extract a profit (unless you have one of those advertising trucks). It allows you to go to work, where hopefully you make enough to pay your bills and debts. Totally different from owning the auto factory.
I think my car does allow me to extract a profit. By taking me to work, it allows me to earn money, which I prefer over the time and effort spent in working at my job. How is that not a profit?
"our car does not allow you to extract a profit"
In a narrowly defined version of the word "profit" maybe not. In the sense of allowing you to get more than you had previously, yes it does.
Autolykos,
The existence of property tax makes your argument a little more nuanced than all that. Existance in this world either requires money, or criminality.
Can you please clarify how property tax makes my argument more nuanced?
So most of the folks on here really see no material difference between the class of investment bankers, central bankers, industrialists, etc and the majority of the population in this country?
For most people, a car is both a consumer good and a producer good. They use it go to on trips and vacations and take Sunday drives, on the one hand, and they use it to get to work and the grocery store, on the other hand. Where's the merry-go-round?