Gregoravich: everyone puts emotion it there theory because its something they believe in, however i will admit that i have some statistics wrong, it was around 60% of wealth is inherited in the UK. right now where to start....
everyone puts emotion it there theory because its something they believe in, however i will admit that i have some statistics wrong, it was around 60% of wealth is inherited in the UK.
right now where to start....
IMO focus on LadyAttis, Wilderness, or Andrew Cain. Feel free to ignore my previous posts and stick to them.
Gregoravich:hey guys im back, right now where to start....
I did leave off with you with I making a post with two links to two previous posts of mine to get to some basics on what we both are trying to conveying to each other. Here's the post with the links.
>are you saying redisterbution of wealth is a negative thing? i strongly believe it is a posative,
Whether it's one person robbing you at gun point, or 1,000,000 people robbing you, it's still robbery. If you like redistribution that much, let me give you my address and you can mail me some money.
>and camps do not provice fairness for all inside because they were never "fairly" put there in the first place
I agree being thrust into a concentration camp is unfair. Being thrust into thralldom under a communist government (like USSA) is also unfair.
>exploitation is not forcing someone at gun point all it involves is the realisation that these people are being paid next to nothing that bairly keeps them alive
Yeah, the evil capitalist should stop "exploiting" them and just let them starve.
>i believe the world we live in a screwed up little planet full of evil exploiting people that need to be stoped...
Agreed. But the problem isn't capitalism. In USSA it's politicians committing criminal acts like theft, check kiting, counterfiting, bailment fraud, debasement, etc. When one person commits a crime (e.g. robbery, counterfeiting, murder, bailment fraud), it's called a crime, but when an entire country does its called "taxation", "monetary policy", "national defense", "fractional reserve banking".
I don't understand why anyone would support communism in this day and age. In 1920's Mises proved that USSR would collapse due to the economic calculation problem. The 1920's are phoning you, they want their idea back.
ok im going to asume you understand what a constituency is but basically every party had a member in a costituency that run for Member of Parliment and basically the person with the most votes wins the constituency and a seat in the house of commons, andwho ever has the most seats becomes goverment. however most partys win around 40% of the actual vote that leads to massive under representation... this is FPTP
Gregoravich:however most partys win around 40% of the actual vote that leads to massive under representation
How would a communist government remedy this?
thats the thing, i hate this first past the post voting system so would change it if i came into power, to a the hybrid known as AMS (not sure what to abreviation really is though sorry)
How does the AMS system work?
ok its basically the same principle as FPTP but more representative, its the same but after they look at the number of votes partys got because tehcnically a party can have the most votes in total (all constituencies added toghether) and still not win... but they look at the votes and use a mathmatic system to add this to the number of seats and in a sense "top up" there representation in the house of commons
We can talk about the obvious flaws of democracy in another thread. If at all possible Greg could you consider re-evaluating Wilderness's or LadyAttis's prior posts and submit a response?
Gregoravich:everyone puts emotion it there theory because its something they believe in, however i will admit that i have some statistics wrong, it was around 60% of wealth is inherited in the UK.
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
Gregoravich:but they look at the votes and use a mathmatic system to add this to the number of seats and in a sense "top up" there representation in the house of commons
How would you ensure the math wouldn't be skewed by corrupt accountants.
I think I know what the problem is. but I'm unfamiliar with your solution, FPTP?
don't know what that is...
But if the problem is that George, John, and Thomas run against each other. if there are 15 voters, and george gets 6, John 5, and Thomas 4, then George wins even though he doesn't have a majority.
I think the most appropriate solution to this is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqblOq8BmgM
Instant voter run off.
Yet this is only a solution to a technical problem and doesn't get at what the winner of the election should do once he is in office, or the problems of there being an office in the first place.
Everything you needed to know to be a libertarian you learned in Kindergarten. Keep your hands to yourself, and don't play with other people's toys without their consent.
Gregoravich: thats the thing, i hate this first past the post voting system so would change it if i came into power, to a the hybrid known as AMS (not sure what to abreviation really is though sorry)
"If one rejects laissez faire on account of mans fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action." - Ludwig von Mises, Planning for Freedom.
Do they teach Arrow's impossibility theorem in your politics class?
@Truthisnonexistent
Laborers add value to a product, but they aren't the determining factor that determines its value. In your attack against "capitalist exploitation" you gave the statistic to the effect of chinese workers get the equivalent of 1.50 an hour for shoes that sell at least 13 dollars. Now, can you tell me exactly how many shoes these guys are making? What if these workers are only making a shoe every 6 hours (which would be extremely unproductive, but this is a hypothetical)? Do you see how you can't base things off wage rates but also productivity? And you said the only added cost was the transportation. This is flat out wrong, and transportation isn't cheap (trying driving/flying anywhere, it gets expensive, now try it across the ocean and the costs run in the thousands). Not only this, but the laborers aren't the only thing adding value. What about the sewing machines? I'm actually not familiar with the set up a shoe making factory but I'm sure there are other automatized machinery that goes into making the shoe cheaper and faster. How much value does this add? Well you'll say that the machine couldn't operate without the worker, but could the worker make as many shoes without the machine? Your basic argument is we should all go back to doing things by hand, since machines add no value. Thats what it comes down to. There is also the matter of time preference and market interest rates. Workers get paid BEFORE the products they make are sold. All future products are sold at a discount to present goods, or in different words, people prefer present goods to future goods. Entrepreneurs and capitalist sell good in the "future" they aren't paid till they sell goods. There is risk in making products that don't sell. Workers get paid even if goods aren't sold.
"It has been well said that, while we used to suffer from social evils, we now suffer from the remedies for them."
F.A. Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty
ChroMattic:Laborers add value to a product, but they aren't the determining factor that determines its value. In your attack against "capitalist exploitation" you gave the statistic to the effect of chinese workers get the equivalent of 1.50 an hour for shoes that sell at least 13 dollars.
Freedom allows to decide what one procures and to decide what one would like to produce. Under Communism (I know that they claim they only advance in that direction, it's state control of the means of production) the bureaucracy decides what is produced and via that what people can procure.
Torsten: ChroMattic:Laborers add value to a product, but they aren't the determining factor that determines its value. In your attack against "capitalist exploitation" you gave the statistic to the effect of chinese workers get the equivalent of 1.50 an hour for shoes that sell at least 13 dollars.The labor process (and previous processes) are what gives the final product it's physical characteristics. Valuation is a different process. It is that what your customer prefers in his judgement. A customer has of course certain expectations towards the product in question. He will most likely prefer shoes that fit and that last + some fancy design features perhaps. Freedom allows to decide what one procures and to decide what one would like to produce. Under Communism (I know that they claim they only advance in that direction, it's state control of the means of production) the bureaucracy decides what is produced and via that what people can procure.
I apologize, you're right I was being naive.