Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Simply having a welfare state or some nationalized industries is not socialism. Yes it is. It is a matter of degree. When you have an income tax, you have socialized income. If you have a "workers factory", you have socialized the means of production. Your first paragraph seemed like you had the right insights, yet you contradicted yourself by the second.
No, I didn't. Even co-ops that exist today must sell on the capitalist market. There is no use-value based economic planning today.
The world is socialist
131–140 of 162 posts
Re: The world is socialist
#132Socialism is forced cooperation, as opposed to voluntary cooperation.
Re: The world is socialist
#133I have it on good word that Rand was pro health insurance.
"Her books provided wide-ranging parables of "parasites," "looters" and "moochers" using the levers of government to steal the fruits of her heroes' labor. In the real world, however, Rand herself received Social Security payments and Medicare benefits under the name of Ann O'Connor (her husband was Frank O'Connor)." http://www.alternet.org/story/149721/ayn_rand_railed_against...
If you pay into it then why would you not take the money? You are being ridiculous.
Re: The world is socialist
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your post does nothing but put down and ridicule an entire philosophical and political branch of thought without any rationale at all. It's a shame that this type of comment can receive so many upvotes in a community that alleges to care about quality discussion.
> Your post does nothing but put down and ridicule an entire philosophical and political branch of thought without any rationale at all. Not every quip or fart deserve serious attention, and Rand's "philosophical branch of thought" would not have garnered any attention at all if not for the popularity of her books among American teens. Her "philosophy" is hardly recognized as such. I am not comparing Rand to Hitler,…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law#Corollaries_and_...
Re: The world is socialist
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's no such thing as voluntary cooperation when all of the land is already owned.
Why not?
2. "Property" cannot exist without enforcement. If you own land and I don't, chances are that I can find another poor bastard who will help me to take it from you.
Re: The world is socialist
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I didn't. Even co-ops that exist today must sell on the capitalist market. There is no use-value based economic planning today.
Could they not exchange goods with other co-ops?
Re: The world is socialist
#137Re: The world is socialist
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Your post does nothing but put down and ridicule an entire philosophical and political branch of thought without any rationale at all. Not every quip or fart deserve serious attention, and Rand's "philosophical branch of thought" would not have garnered any attention at all if not for the popularity of her books among American teens. Her "philosophy" is hardly recognized as such. I am not comparing Rand to Hitler,…
You know that the "Godwin's law fail" rule was derived to deal with exactly the type of argument you are making? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law#Corollaries_and_...
And when have Hitler comparisons, if you think I made one, ever been more apt? ;)
EDIT (if I need to spell it out): It was claimed that an offhand dismissal of a famous "philosophy" is inappropriate in a quality discussion. I then offered a famous example of an entirely different "philosophy", undeserving any serious merit and discussion on its own, and yet important historically for its effect on society. Rand is considered a childish, ridiculous "philosopher", so people rarely take the time to argue with her beliefs as their falsehood is apparent to almost anyone with a pair of eyes and/or ears, but her writings have played a part in recent American history. In no way other than in her intellectual rigor, should Ayn Rand (who, BTW, is one of my favorite historical characters; she was so deliciously cruel and lost at the same time) be compared to Adolf Hitler, the Nazis, the SS, the SA, the Luftwaffe or any of their affiliates.
Re: The world is socialist
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are. Socialism is an economy where production is owned and run by the workers for the benefit of the working class, which would be the ruling class at that time. Simply having a welfare state or some nationalized industries is not socialism. The source of power and ownership of production is still in the hands of the bourgeoisie. Mises as serious? Hah. But yes, he and the others are attacked less but only becaus…
Socialism and capitalism can be occurring at the same time in the same city. If one company was worker controlled and one company was hierarchically controlled then it would be fine. As long as nobody is forcing somebody into a different system both could work together.
http://www.marxists.org/archive/fromm/works/1961/man/ch06.ht...
Re: The world is socialist
#140> All these people who are so great aren't really that much greater than the average schmuck on the subway. There really isn't that much range in the smartness or fitness of human beings. Whelp, you've lost me. The difference in productivity and smartness---as measured by the consistent ability to impact the world---of people is enormous (the additional importance of luck notwithstanding). I'm not sure why you though…
I've taught programming to kids from very poor classes of society who grokked it and excelled at it. But, guess what– a lot of them will be stuck working at McDonald's because they can't go to college, or because even if they could go to public universities their family didn't understand why they should spend 4+ years not bringing in any money when they could work at McDonald's right away. I've also taught/privately…