User Tag List

First 142223242526 Last

Results 231 to 240 of 268

  1. #231
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    And I was just taking a shot at your pie-in-the-sky desires.

    Well, that's not all I was doing...

    I have been curious as to how exactly you think that should happen.

    See, cuz, from how I see it, ownership of a company by employees is not socialist -- not in the least.

    It's the government coming in, taking the current shareholders' shares from them, and redistributing them to the employees that makes it socialist.

    An employee-owned corporation is just an employee-owned corporation.
    If the workers own the means of production it's socialist. You can provide another definition which I can't technically call illegitimate, I suppose. I'm just using a very old and still rather well known definition.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  2. #232
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    No, it really is not.
    Yes, actually it is.

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    No, it is not. Not at all. You're completely wrong. You're not going to win this one.
    No, actually, I'm not.

    You're wrong, and you're obviously out of your league.

    Think you can provide any argumentation beyond "no, you're wrong"?

    I clearly provided argumentation that you in no way provided an adequate response to.

  3. #233
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Replace every corporation with a worker cooperative and you'd have a pretty robust market that would still be socialist. I don't believe there's presently any society operating like that, however.
    That would be common ownership of the means of production, so it would be socialist, but it wouldn't be totally economically unfree, as the market processes would still be in place, sure. I doubt such a system would have a lot of free trade or labor mobility, though. And who knows about the regulatory framework?
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  4. #234
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    If the workers own the means of production it's socialist. You can provide another definition which I can't technically call illegitimate, I suppose. I'm just using a very old and still rather well known definition.
    So at what % of ownership does the enterprise change from being a capitalist corporation to a socialist one?

  5. #235
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    That would be common ownership of the means of production, so it would be socialist, but it wouldn't be totally economically unfree, as the market processes would still be in place, sure. I doubt such a system would have a lot of free trade or labor mobility, though. And who knows about the regulatory framework?
    Maybe it wouldn't have a lot of free trade, but I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing. Let me ask you this; supposing this cooperative economy emerged (who knows how, maybe it would emerge with no more government intervention than the corporate economy did), if it did exist and resulted in there being less free trade, the lower amount of free trade still wouldn't have anything to do with government regulation, it would just be the logical outcome of these economic entities.

    I don't see that labor mobility would necessarily be hurt, so long as turning in a share to the rest of the cooperative and taking out a share from another cooperative were not made difficult processes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    So at what % of ownership does the enterprise change from being a capitalist corporation to a socialist one?
    The answer to that probably requires genuine research. It depends on what the tipping point is for workers to have legitimate dominance of the course of their firm.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  6. #236
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Maybe it wouldn't have a lot of free trade, but I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing. Let me ask you this; supposing this cooperative economy emerged (who knows how, maybe it would emerge with no more government intervention than the corporate economy did), if it did exist and resulted in there being less free trade, the lower amount of free trade still wouldn't have anything to do with government regulation, it would just be the logical outcome of these economic entities.
    What would possibly be logical about reducing one's exports? Imports?

    You sound so far removed from reality it's absurd.

    All just pie in the sky.

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    I don't see that labor mobility would necessarily be hurt, so long as turning in a share to the rest of the cooperative and taking out a share from another cooperative were not made difficult processes.
    No offense, but it's responses like these that prohibit me from respecting your opinion.

    Your idea is so full of it shit it's absurd.

    Full of inferior Fe desires for holding hands and singing cumbaya.

    Would workers be allowed to sell their shares if they so desired? Or would they have to hold onto the exact same shares of the company for which they work, regardless of their beliefs in the profitability and viability of the corporation for which they work? Would workers be allowed to own shares of a different corporation for which they do not work, or would they be prohibited from doing so? If they were allowed to: would these shares be traded on a public market? And, once again, how would they go about acquiring all of the shares of the company?

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    The answer to that probably requires genuine research. It depends on what the tipping point is for workers to have legitimate dominance of the course of their firm.
    That's really not that difficult.

    There's voting power that comes with shares.

    Are you basically saying that as long as workers had >50% voting power, then the corporation would be socialist?

  7. #237
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    That's really not that difficult.

    There's voting power that comes with shares.

    Are you basically saying that as long as workers had >50% voting power, then the corporation would be socialist?
    Taking your premise to be true, I would say yes.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  8. #238
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Yes, actually it is.

    No, actually, I'm not.

    You're wrong, and you're obviously out of your league.
    If I get to make up my own definitions of things, as you seem to want to do, I could make it so you would never be right. We don't get to do that.


    Think you can provide any argumentation beyond "no, you're wrong"?
    I refer you to the dictionary definition again. And the Economic Freedom Index. And tons of other evidence.

    I clearly provided argumentation that you in no way provided an adequate response to.[/QUOTE]

    Your argumentation is weak. It needs very little response before it can be discarded.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  9. #239
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Maybe it wouldn't have a lot of free trade, but I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing. Let me ask you this; supposing this cooperative economy emerged (who knows how, maybe it would emerge with no more government intervention than the corporate economy did), if it did exist and resulted in there being less free trade, the lower amount of free trade still wouldn't have anything to do with government regulation, it would just be the logical outcome of these economic entities.
    I follow your thinking here. It would really depend on the organization of the entities and to whom they were offering their wares/services. If this were to be a non-communist society (that is, the workers would run their business, but still be selling the products to other markets, as opposed to using them all for themselves), then free trade might not necessarily be lessened. Economic freedom would be, in that private ownership of capital would be gone.

    As to labor, I think that would decrease labor mobility, since you'd lose your ownership stake in the organization if you left its workforce, correct? I doubt people would leave positions nearly as frequently if they lost both "income" (money or output, from their labor input) and ownership if they left a job. Decision making power, also.


    I don't see that labor mobility would necessarily be hurt, so long as turning in a share to the rest of the cooperative and taking out a share from another cooperative were not made difficult processes.
    You say this now, but I think of the labor union wars of the early-1900s.


    The answer to that probably requires genuine research. It depends on what the tipping point is for workers to have legitimate dominance of the course of their firm.
    And how they achieve it. And what happens to the old capitalists. And the inevitable governmental response. There are so many questions.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  10. #240
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    If I get to make up my own definitions of things, as you seem to want to do, I could make it so you would never be right. We don't get to do that.
    First off: it's "wont".

    Second: Si-user.

    Third: I used *your* definition, and showed why you, based on *it*, were wrong in your claims.

    I'm sorry that you can't figure out how to adequately respond.

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    I refer you to the dictionary definition again.
    I already used it.

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    And the Economic Freedom Index.
    You obviously don't know what you're talking about, as government spending as a % of GDP is one of the factors that goes into the Economic Freedom Index. Wow... that's, like, exactly what I said. And exactly what you tried to claim was not true. And based on the very definition of the index you tried to point to to say that I was wrong.

    +1 for me, -1 for you

    *whoops on your part*

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    And tons of other evidence.
    Where?

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    Your argumentation is weak. It needs very little response before it can be discarded.
    Actually, you're obviously full of shit and don't know what you're talking about.

    If it were so easy to respond to, why couldn't you just do it?

    1. Much like the Economic Freedom Index you've espoused, the amount of capitalism vs socialism inherent an economy should be thought of on a spectrum. This is how it's taught in economics classes and in economics textbooks. I know. I have a degree in economics.
    2. Canada, Finland and the US are all mixed economies: not completely capitalist, not completely socialist.
    3. Higher levels of government spending and larger welfare states are, by the same definition of socialism you provided, and by the Economic Freedom index (according to your understanding of it), signs of a greater degree of socialism.
    4. By these measures alone, Canada and Finland are more socialist than the US; however, both have significantly improved their scores on the Economic Freedom Index over the last decade, to the point that Canada (but not Finland), since the economic crisis, actually (barely) surpassed the US on it.
    5. Your argument seems to be based on the false assumption that where a country scores on the Economic Freedom Index is 1:1 inversely correlated with how socialist it is.


    I've seen you argue with a bunch of people about economics, and I've never really read much of it, as, any time I did, it wasn't anything I didn't already know, but most those people who you argued with are people who don't really know what they're talking about. I do. Almost certainly more than you. Trying to pull the same bullshit on me ain't gunna work. And, frankly, based on your response above, you're rapidly losing credibility.

Similar Threads

  1. [MBTItm] NF, How Are You NOT Like Your Type Description?
    By SquirrelTao in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 115
    Last Post: 08-27-2017, 05:28 PM
  2. [SJ] SJ, How Are You NOT Like Your Type Description?
    By SquirrelTao in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 06-04-2017, 06:25 PM
  3. [SP] SP, How Are You NOT Like Your Type Description?
    By SquirrelTao in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 103
    Last Post: 05-15-2017, 03:39 AM
  4. Anyone who thinks Ron Paul Shouldn't be President is completly stupid or ignorant...
    By Munchies in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 152
    Last Post: 01-13-2012, 01:47 PM
  5. [NT] NT, How Are You NOT Like Your Type Description?
    By SquirrelTao in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 09-27-2008, 05:05 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO