Seth wrote:Sisifo wrote:No. Suppy and demand are an economic law. Not a capitalist one. Demand without profit would be unattended in an entirely capitalist system.
Supply and demand are part and parcel of capitalism. And yes, demand without profit would be unattended, and rightfully so. Just because you want something does not obligate others to labor on your behalf to provide it to you without the compensation of profit for their labor.
The rest of the statements, such as "the destruction of civilization and the progenitor of death en masse", "the slothful proletariat, who deserve to starve" "who NEED to go hungry because that's the best way to instill some industry and accountability in them" denotes that more than a exchange of opinions, we would need an exchange of life experiences to understand each other.I believe you are too engaged emotionally to the topic of economic organisation to build any kind of educational debate.
Refusing to recognize the economic reality of collectivism is not the path to enlightenment.
I am glad that you are so attached to your beliefs though. On my part, I prefer to be more open to ideas from every side and see the world less burdened and angered by my opinions
When you see oppression, death, destruction and tyranny resulting from Marxism and socialism as a universal, unavoidable consequence of the core principles of the ideology, it's perfectly justifiable to point out the fundamental flaws as a counterbalance to the propaganda that makes collectivism superficially attractive to the dependent classes. Collectivism, socialism and particularly Marxism depend upon the ability of the intellectual elite class to propagandize the proletarian class and stir them to action without actually telling them everything. That's why the Marxist dialectic focuses on the supposed inequities of "exploitation of the working class" without critically examining the role of capital investment and the necessary rewards for risk-taking through capital investment that make free markets function.
I note that nothing in US law prevents any group of workers from "owning the means of production," and indeed large segments of the population do exactly that, like family farmers, small business owners and others who labor long and hard to acquire the means of production precisely so that they can enjoy the fruits of their labor. Moreover, nothing prevents groups from "socializing" together to create a company that owns the means of production collectively, and such companies do exist in the US. They are in fact ubiquitous. They are called "corporations."
In a corporation, you see, they generally start out small, with a group of individuals getting together to pursue some grand idea for a product that will sell in the market. These people both invest their personal capital assets and their labor and they work together, usually putting in long hours at high risk of personal bankruptcy, to create a profitable business. Generally, start-up corporations are founded with the capital of the initial partners, who agree to operate the business collectively, although they may assign duties and roles depending on the particular strengths of each partner.
Over time, if the company is successful, they begin to hire employees. They may offer profit-sharing or stock options to create loyalty to the company through a direct financial interest in its success. As time passes, the original shareholders, who rightfully control and profit from that which they have created, hire employees, build factories and seek investment from others who see the potential for profit.
Then the Marxists show up and complain that they are being "exploited" because they came late to the table, risked nothing, and accepted a wage in return for their labor. Understandably and rightfully, the people who worked to build the company, who own the majority of the share of stock, and their investors, who invested and risked their money to help the business succeed and expand, tell the Marxists to go fuck themselves.
The problem with Marxists and socialists is that they think that they are entitled to walk in whenever they feel "exploited" and demand that the people who built the company from the ground up, who risked their personal fortunes, their houses and everything they owned, who worked day and night to build the company into a success, turn the "means of production" over to the employees the owner hire to do a day's work for a day's pay.
Fuck them. If they want to own the means of production, then they can fucking well BUILD IT THEMSELVES, from the ground up, using THEIR OWN capital investment and THEIR OWN labor to create whatever the fuck they want by way of "means of production." They have no right, and no moral expectation to be able to seize from someone else what that person worked to create, no matter how large or successful that corporation may have become over time. The asswipes in the autoworkers unions had absolutely NO RIGHT whatsoever to be granted an ownership share in GM under ANY circumstances, and particularly not over the interests of the secured bond holders whom Obama defrauded in one of the biggest Marxist government rip-offs in history.
If the labor unions want, they can go pool their own money and either BUY the assets of GM, or go build their own fucking auto plants and set them up any way they like. But they don't, they collude with the Marxist asswipe in the White House to steal GM from the people who risked their own money to keep it in business instead.
But for them to steal the money of the secured bond holders is reprehensible beyond all imagining. It's a violation of law and custom that defies reason, and it has egregiously damaged our economy because now people are not willing to invest their money in corporations as secured bond holders because they know the government can simply lawlessly step in and strip them of their property without so much as a by-your-leave. This cripples our corporations and our economy, and it's why both businesses and investors are sitting on their cash and not investing it.
The fact that every corporation on the face of the earth started out with some individuals pooling and risking their own money and their own labor to fund a good idea and build it into a wealth-generating juggernaut that employs the proletarian dependent class is lost on Marxists, who, in their individual greed and selfishness, think that all that wealth just created itself and therefore ought to be seized by the working class because not to do so is to exploit them.
Lunatics, every one.
