"throw capitalism at it" ad absurdum

[untermensche]

Their ideas can be totally ignored at will.

Their jobs can be sent overseas without their consent.

I didn't say they had full say. I said they had more say. And your vote last Nov mattered how? Were those people listening to you?

The problems with US democracy is another topic.

We agree that dictatorship in government is immoral and unjust.

It is just as immoral and unjust in the workplace.

 

[LordKiran]

Consumers have about as much say as employees do "Love it or leave it."

Both have a say in what's going on. Employees have a lot more to say. But I would argue that an employee even in this so called dictatorship has more say on what goes on then a person democratically voting in the US.

Sure, but the discussion is that employees should have more representation in executive decision making on the merit that they are 'investing' (His word not mine) their labor into the company. See what the logical implications of that are? Why not give consumers an equal say on the merit that they are 'investing' their money into the company?

 

[coloradoatheist]

I didn't say they had full say. I said they had more say. And your vote last Nov mattered how? Were those people listening to you?

The problems with US democracy is another topic.

We agree that dictatorship in government is immoral and unjust.

It is just as immoral and unjust in the workplace.

The problem as described to you with a dictatorship is the lack of choice in entering that agreement.

 

[untermensche]

The problems with US democracy is another topic.

We agree that dictatorship in government is immoral and unjust.

It is just as immoral and unjust in the workplace.

The problem as described to you with a dictatorship is the lack of choice in entering that agreement.

That is not the problem.

The problem is a moral problem.

Humans understand that no single person has the right to dictate over them.

In political dictatorships many people are very happy and many just as happy as many Americans.

Happiness is not the problem. Wanting to leave is not the problem.

 

[Harry Bosch]

The problem as described to you with a dictatorship is the lack of choice in entering that agreement.

That is not the problem.

The problem is a moral problem.

Humans understand that no single person has the right to dictate over them.

In political dictatorships many people are very happy and many just as happy as many Americans.

Happiness is not the problem. Wanting to leave is not the problem.

When you hire someone to work on your home, do you tell them what to do? Or do you give them the freedom to do what they want?

 

[untermensche]

That is not the problem.

The problem is a moral problem.

Humans understand that no single person has the right to dictate over them.

In political dictatorships many people are very happy and many just as happy as many Americans.

Happiness is not the problem. Wanting to leave is not the problem.

When you hire someone to work on your home, do you tell them what to do? Or do you give them the freedom to do what they want?

Why when I discuss problems of power within institutions do I get this? The real problem today is the power of the multinationals. Everyone of them a rigid dictatorship.

If we are speaking morally, what you should pay the person who works on your home is what you would expect to do the same work.

Not the lowest amount possible.

 

[coloradoatheist]

When you hire someone to work on your home, do you tell them what to do? Or do you give them the freedom to do what they want?

Why when I discuss problems of power within institutions do I get this? The real problem today is the power of the multinationals. Everyone of them a rigid dictatorship.

If we are speaking morally, what you should pay the person who works on your home is what you would expect to do the same work.

Not the lowest amount possible.

So now it's only a problem with large institutiions and not dictatorship in general?

Not to side track, but if democracy was as universal as you said, then the Iraqis should have been celebrating us when we got there.

 

[iolo]

Why when I discuss problems of power within institutions do I get this? The real problem today is the power of the multinationals. Everyone of them a rigid dictatorship.

If we are speaking morally, what you should pay the person who works on your home is what you would expect to do the same work.

Not the lowest amount possible.

So now it's only a problem with large institutiions and not dictatorship in general?

Not to side track, but if democracy was as universal as you said, then the Iraqis should have been celebrating us when we got there.

Everyone welcomes murderous colonialists who come to impose their will, while mouthing lying blather: just look at history! Jesus wept!

 

[coloradoatheist]

So now it's only a problem with large institutiions and not dictatorship in general?

Not to side track, but if democracy was as universal as you said, then the Iraqis should have been celebrating us when we got there.

Everyone welcomes murderous colonialists who come to impose their will, while mouthing lying blather: just look at history! Jesus wept!

So even though they are under an immoral and evil dictator they would prefer that over democracy?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

That is an absurd fantasy.

I agree, trying to make what you say correlate to the world is a fantasy. You said you do not give labor. Unless you are paid before you give it of course you do.

Saying you have to get paid in real time is an absurd fantasy that doesn't change the reality of my pay being the purchase price for my labor.

If you are doing work without getting paid you are giving it in the hopes you will get paid.

I know I will get paid because that is the mutual agreement that my employer and I freely entered into.

You could get fired. And your pay could be withheld. You might have to fight for it.

You know nothing. You hope.

No, I have an agreement entered into by freely given mutual consent.

My pay is not "just compensation", it is the purchase price of my labor.

That's what a purchase is.

Giving somebody compensation for the value placed in what they are selling.

It is giving them what is "owed" them.

Your pay is what is owed you.

It is not some carrot leading you someplace. You are already there.

That is some fantasy story for children.

And you lose the analogy.

You win by saying nothing?

Wow, you sure do make it easy for yourself.

You've lost the thread of the analogy. I was right that you would have a difficult time understanding the analogy. You really do hold the deeply immoral position that there is no difference between applying a punishment and withholding a reward. The rest of your immoral ideology is derived from that immoral premise.

Dissolving an mutual arrangement because it is no longer mutual is not a stick.

If only one of the two can do the firing and only one can be fired it is not a mutual arrangement. Nothing mutual about it. An arrangement sure. Mutual means everybody is at the same level.

It is just a power structure submitted to for one reason or another.

A form of coercion.

Any mutual agreement can be dissolved by either party because once one party no longer wishes the agreement then it is no longer a mutual agreement. Your argument applies equally well to any desire I might have to resign. Saying an employer does not have the right to say "I no longer wish to purchase your labor" is to say that the employer must be a slave of the employee. In typical collectivist fashion you are advocating slavery. Plus do you think I have the right to dissolve my half of the agreement because I longer wish the agreement?

Consumers have about as much say as employees do "Love it or leave it."

As much say about what?

They have a little more say about how they spend their time.

A purchase is also a mutual agreement. If the one with the money is unable to decline a mutual agreement, then by your logic a purchaser has no right to go anywhere else.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

People in a democratic setting will freely decide that skilled work is more valuable than less skilled work.

They want to attract and keep skilled workers. They want to be compensated for training and time on the job.

All unions had pay scales. people were not all paid the same thing.

You are making no point.

You are not justifying dictatorship in the least.

So you did some labor and were compensated?

And you are claiming you were paid too much?

Probably true.

No, I am pointing out that when a high skill worker does something beneath their level they're still paid according to their skill.

It can happen, but it is a dodge not an attempt to answer the problem.

What the person should be paid is what you would want to do the same work. Considering profits from the work of all involved. Not what you might possibly get.

That is morality. That is placing yourself into the shoes of your fellow man.

You're contradicting yourself, want to try again?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm still waiting to hear Unter's rationale for why employees are deserving of a say in company decisions but not consumers when both are a part of the economic system that make such a business possible, and when applying Unter's definition of "Investment" both are "Investing" in said company.

Consumers have a say.

They have a say as to how much they will pay and how much they will buy.

But they cannot demand to pay less than it costs to make something.

Economics 101:

Demand depends on price.

Also, note that there are a huge number of products for which the consumer demands to pay less than the cost of manufacture. The result is simply no sale. As time goes on companies figure out how to make things cheaper and more consumers buy them.

Look back 30 years--cell phones were pretty much rich man's toys. It's not that they weren't useful, it's that the consumers demanded a price lower than their cost. As the price has plummeted now they are ubiquitous.

You are still stuck on your notion of everyone being stamped out with a cookie cutter.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

You are still stuck on your notion of everyone being stamped out with a cookie cutter.

Makes sense. He thinks it is unfair that he could not bid his own wages higher with his oppression studies degree, so therefore everyone is stuck in the same rut he is in.

 

[untermensche]

Why when I discuss problems of power within institutions do I get this? The real problem today is the power of the multinationals. Everyone of them a rigid dictatorship.

If we are speaking morally, what you should pay the person who works on your home is what you would expect to do the same work.

Not the lowest amount possible.

So now it's only a problem with large institutiions and not dictatorship in general?

Not to side track, but if democracy was as universal as you said, then the Iraqis should have been celebrating us when we got there.

That is where this immorality will hurt everyone.

If you are immoral with the kid who cuts your lawn nobody else suffers.

But when these dictators at huge multi-nations behave immorally they hurt billions.

When these multi-nationals fund research to reach the conclusions THEY want, like in the field of climate change, and then buy politicians that only read this corrupted research, they harm billions.

These are dictatorships destroying the planet.

As we all sit back and let them because we have no morality and have no problem with dictatorship in the workplace.

 

[untermensche]

You're contradicting yourself, want to try again?

No.

Once again you have no point. You have no training in science so you don't understand the absolute weakness of anecdotes.

Please don't try again. You have nothing to offer except a lack of understanding and reason.

 

[coloradoatheist]

So now it's only a problem with large institutiions and not dictatorship in general?

Not to side track, but if democracy was as universal as you said, then the Iraqis should have been celebrating us when we got there.

That is where this immorality will hurt everyone.

If you are immoral with the kid who cuts your lawn nobody else suffers.

But when these dictators at huge multi-nations behave immorally they hurt billions.

When these multi-nationals fund research to reach the conclusions THEY want, like in the field of climate change, and then buy politicians that only read this corrupted research, they harm billions.

These are dictatorships destroying the planet.

As we all sit back and let them because we have no morality and have no problem with dictatorship in the workplace.

Actually your system would help global warming. No economy=no consumerism=very reduced carbon emissions. Everybody is extremely worse off.

 

[untermensche]

That is where this immorality will hurt everyone.

If you are immoral with the kid who cuts your lawn nobody else suffers.

But when these dictators at huge multi-nations behave immorally they hurt billions.

When these multi-nationals fund research to reach the conclusions THEY want, like in the field of climate change, and then buy politicians that only read this corrupted research, they harm billions.

These are dictatorships destroying the planet.

As we all sit back and let them because we have no morality and have no problem with dictatorship in the workplace.

Actually your system would help global warming. No economy=no consumerism=very reduced carbon emissions. Everybody is extremely worse off.

My system, Anarchism?

When it existed in Spain it was more efficient and productive than the capitalist system in Spain.

When humans are free and not living under dictatorships every day they are happier and more productive.

My system is superior in every way imaginable.

Except to those who want to be petty dictators over others, which is perhaps a natural human inclination like wanting to rape others.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Actually your system would help global warming. No economy=no consumerism=very reduced carbon emissions. Everybody is extremely worse off.

My system, Anarchism?

When it existed in Spain it was more efficient and productive than the capitalist system in Spain.

When humans are free and not living under dictatorships every day they are happier and more productive.

My system is superior in every way imaginable.

Except to those who want to be petty dictators over others, which is perhaps a natural human inclination like wanting to rape others.

The one that lasted a whopping 3 years? Communism was very inefficient but lasted 50 years. When they were running did they include official statistcis such as unemployment, GDP, GDP growth, productivity per GDP, poverty measures? Or was efficiency defined as Orwell saying it might be better?

I think for a short period efficiency would increase and the drop over time.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're contradicting yourself, want to try again?

No.

Once again you have no point. You have no training in science so you don't understand the absolute weakness of anecdotes.

Please don't try again. You have nothing to offer except a lack of understanding and reason.

What is this, a transcript-wagging contest??

Anecdotes aren't relevant is this case, I was pointing out that you were contradicting yourself.

 

[untermensche]

No.

Once again you have no point. You have no training in science so you don't understand the absolute weakness of anecdotes.

Please don't try again. You have nothing to offer except a lack of understanding and reason.

What is this, a transcript-wagging contest??

Anecdotes aren't relevant is this case, I was pointing out that you were contradicting yourself.

High School students learn about the scientific method.

Many understand the absolute weakness of anecdotes as evidence.

All you offered was some anecdote about the time you got paid more than you are worth.

It was absolutely worthless as an argument.