Updates from September, 2013 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • rogerglewis 7:23 am on September 23, 2013 Permalink | Reply  

    Capitalist Dead Horse Flogs 99% 

    The term Flogging a Dead horse shouldn’t need any introduction. Whether Capitalism is a Golden Goose or a Dead horse may require some further explanation.

    Capitalism is the New religion, The Free Market is the New Heavan and a belief in Capitalism is an unquestionable stance. Criticise Capitalism and you are declaring the Earth Flat, the Sun revolves around the Earth and are dangerously out of line.

    ”As Bakunin put it, property “is a god” and has “its metaphysics. It is the science of the bourgeois economists. Like any metaphysics it is a sort of twilight, a compromise between truth and falsehood, with the latter benefiting from it. It seeks to give falsehood the appearance of truth and leads truth to falsehood.” [The Political Philosophy of Bakunin, p. 179]
    http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Anarchist_FAQ/What_are_the_myths_of_capitalist_economics%3F

    Two Discussion caught my Eye this past Week, One the Question of Minimum Wages and Mc Donalds and the Other a Film about Artists rights and the devaluing of Creative property due to digitisation.

    //player.vimeo.com/video/58809695
    Unsound: extended trailer rough cut from Count Eldridge on Vimeo.

      This raises some interesting questions. How does a Capitalist economic system deal with the notion of abundance? WIth respect to the view point one takes on this initially the debate could be driven in an unhelpful direction for the majority of musicians and creative people as the perspective in legislation will be Capitalistic and focus on the interests of the winners, in the Music business as elsewhere in corparatised economy there are hardly any winners they are the top 1/10 of 1% and they advocate systems that syphon off most of the value of the work of those further down their Capitalistic food chain which they represeent as some immutable law of the Jungle as a natural consequence of natural laws which apply to a political economy as much as they do to the rate of acceleration due to gravitational attraction.
13 minutes ago · Like






    Roger Glyndwr LewisI have been having a discussion about the Minimum wage on linked in where the militant state monopoly capitalist right are having a field day doing the usual narrow thinking and saying those who demand living wages are killing the Capitalist Free Market golden goose. Well Capitalism is a dead horse that is flogging the 99% to death and is not a golden goose, the Music Industry as Golden Goose was never such a thing for the vast majority of musicians barriers to entry were easier to erect with older technology erecting false barriers to entry in a world with more than adequate resources for everyone is actually The Capitalist Dead horse dirtiest secret.
9 minutes ago · Like






    Roger Glyndwr LewisHeres a flavour of the discussion on Linked In.
    Rami it seems the Huff Post and Forbes share your concern.
    I have read both of these articles as well.
    Out of interest what is your view regarding income support policies I.E the minimum Wage is made up from a central fund so that no one had to survive on less than a living Wage?
    There is a race to the bottom in Globalism which is beggaring our neighbors I find that this is uncivilised Blaming the poor for their Plight is a generalisation that I would hope you can see really doesn’t work. How can it apply to all cases I suggest it actually doesn’t apply in the vast majority of cases, did you read the Article I linked too regarding the French Language professor above?
    I advocate the Guaranteed income scheme which in a post industrial society is inevitable at the moment it is only in place for the Banker sand High Rollers in the financialised economy. They should be duking it out not the folks at the bottom of the heap.
    Advocates[edit source | editbeta]
    The first Muslim Caliph Abu Bakr introduced a guaranteed minimum standard of income, granting each man, woman, and child ten dirhams annually; this was later increased to twenty dirhams.[3]
    American revolutionary Thomas Paine advocated a basic income guarantee to all US citizens as compensation for “loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property” (Agrarian Justice, 1795).
    French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte echoed Paine’s sentiments and commented that ‘man is entitled by birthright to a share of the Earth’s produce sufficient to fill the needs of his existence’ (Herold, 1955).
    In 1962, economist Milton Friedman proposed a Negative Income Tax coupled with a flat tax in support of a guaranteed minimum income.[4]
    In 1963, Robert Theobald published the book Free Men and Free Markets, in which he advocated a guaranteed minimum income (the origin of the modern version of the phrase).
    In 1966 the Cloward–Piven strategy advocated “overloading” the US welfare system to force its collapse in the hopes that it would be replaced by “a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty”.
    In his final book Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community? (1967) Martin Luther King Jr. wrote[5]
    I am now convinced that the simplest approach will prove to be the most effective — the solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now widely discussed measure: the guaranteed income.
    —from the chapter titled “Where We Are Going”
    In 1968, James Tobin, Paul Samuelson, John Kenneth Galbraith and another 1,200 economists signed a document calling for the US Congress to introduce in that year a system of income guarantees and supplements.[6]
    In 1973, Daniel Patrick Moynihan wrote The Politics of a Guaranteed Income in which he advocated the Guaranteed Minimum Income and discussed Richard Nixon’s GAI proposal.
    Have a great weekend everyone.
    Rog

    ANyway I am happy to commit this Capitalist, Free Market Blasphaemy and fully admit that I do not believe in their Gods the whole edifice is founded upon a metaphysical confidence trick.


    ”As Bakunin put it, property “is a god” and has “its metaphysics. It is the science of the bourgeois economists. Like any metaphysics it is a sort of twilight, a compromise between truth and falsehood, with the latter benefiting from it. It seeks to give falsehood the appearance of truth and leads truth to falsehood.” [The Political Philosophy of Bakunin, p. 179]
    http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Anarchist_FAQ/What_are_the_myths_of_capitalist_economics%3F


    John Ruskin tackles this question in unto this last regarding what is a fair payment.
    “I choose my physician and my clergyman, thus indicating my sense of the quality of their work.” By all means, also, choose your bricklayer; that is the proper reward of the good workman, to be “chosen.” The natural and right system respecting all labour is, that it should be paid at a fixed rate, but the good workman employed, and the bad workman unemployed. The false, unnatural, and destructive system is when the bad workman is allowed to offer his work at half-price, and either take the place of the good, or force him by his competition to work for an inadequate sum.
    Essay I: “The Roots of Honour,” section 29.
    There is no wealth but life. Life, including all its powers of love, of joy, and of admiration. That country is the richest which nourishes the greatest numbers of noble and happy human beings; that man is richest, who, having perfected the functions of his own life to the utmost, has also the widest helpful influence, both personal, and by means of his possessions, over the lives of others.
    Essay IV: “Ad Valorem,” section 77.
    ‘Wealth, therefore, is “The possession of the valuable by the valiant”; and in considering it as a power existing in a nation, the two elements, the value of the thing, and the valour of its possessor, must be estimated together. Whence it appears that many of the persons commonly considered wealthy, are in reality no more wealthy than the locks of their own strong boxes are, they being inherently and eternally incapable of wealth; and operating for the nation, in an economical point of view, either as pools of dead water, and eddies in a stream (which, so long as the stream flows, are useless, or serve only to drown people, but may become of importance in a state of stagnation should the stream dry); or else, as dams in a river, of which the ultimate service depends not on the dam, but the miller; or else, as mere accidental stays and impediments, acting not as wealth, but (for we ought to have a correspondent term) as “illth”, causing various devastation and trouble around them in all directions; or lastly, act not at all, but are merely animated conditions of delay, (no use being possible of anything they have until they are dead,) in which last condition they are nevertheless often useful as delays, and “impedimenta” ‘ (Unto this Last, 1860)

    I have a great sympathy for the notion that the highest paid employee in a corporation should not be paid more than a societal consensus on what the multiple should be.

    Here the head of Barclays has had difficulty with the question in the past. Modragon offers a good example in Spain.

    Wage regulation[edit source | editbeta]
    At Mondragon, there are agreed-upon wage ratios between executive work and field or factory work which earns a minimum wage. These ratios range from 3:1 to 9:1 in different cooperatives and average 5:1. That is, the general manager of an average Mondragon cooperative earns 5 times as much as the theoretical minimum wage paid in his/her cooperative. In reality, this ratio is smaller because there are few Mondragon worker-owners that earn minimum wages, because most jobs are somewhat specialized and so are classified at higher wage levels. The wage ratio of a cooperative is decided periodically by its worker-owners through a democratic vote.[19]
    Compared to similar jobs at local industries, Mondragon wages are 30% or less at management levels[clarification needed] and equivalent for middle management, technical and professional levels. Lower wage levels are on average 13% higher than similar jobs at local businesses. Spain’s progressive tax rate further reduces any disparity in pay.[19]


    People need to be wary of both state and corporations, Corporations are but the Government in the sun casting its shadow over government as Dewey described. Society and societal institutions will still exist in the absence of a State and Trans national corporations. Through the monetary system the established power State and Capital pull of our strings most of us do not see what puppets we are and believe we are free.

    corporations would not grow to their positions of power in the absence of the monetary system we have which allows private banking corporations to create 97% of all money as debt thereby guaranteeing a Syphoning of wealth from the poorest and least powerful in society to the top. Marx’s Labour theory of value is actually rather solid and most arguments against minimum wage are thin justifications for the theft of the Labour of those powerless to
    object.
    I find the initial argument put forward by Rami very unconvincing, one has to consider Political economy and any employer paying less than a living wage should not be in business they are parasites on the rest of society.


    on the subjective theory of value I find this an interesting Native American insight.
    When all the trees have been cut down,
    when all the animals have been hunted,
    when all the waters are polluted,
    when all the air is unsafe to breathe,
    only then will you discover you cannot eat money.
    ~ Cree Prophecy ~


    ‘Marx describes capitalism as having an institutional framework in which a small minority (the capitalists) oligopolize the means of production. The workers cannot survive except by working for capitalists, and the state preserves this inequality of power. In normal role of force is structural, part of the usual workings of the system. The reserve army of unemployed workers continually threatens employed workers, pushing them to work hard to produce for the capitalists.”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value

    How do we as individuals value things ? there is an immediate dualist problem distinguishing between satisfying needs and insatiable wants? it goes on to be even more complicated than that, If one does not consider the market than anything other than another flawed and manipulated construct how then do we establish a fair use value.
    I have considered this question at length with respect to housing prices. It is a particularly interesting question in that area of fundamental human need and human rights ( to that of Shelter) and its commodification as a speculative playground for the wealthy. ( Mea Culpa, former property developer, gamekeeper turned poacher)

    1. http://letthemconfectsweeterlies.blogspot.se/2011/05/further-thoughts-on-distressed.html

    2. http://letthemconfectsweeterlies.blogspot.se/2011/06/some-more-notes-on-mortgages.html

    Your essay is mercifully short, perhaps an indication of how little analysis the anti minimum wage stance actually has.

    Applying your analysis to one example of Mc Donalds and applying some fairly cursory arithmetic based on reducing the ceos pay and upping the pay rates leading to a large increase in what needs to be charged for the product does not actually stand up to scrutiny and constitute a serious analysis.

    Further There are a whole host of other practices that large corporations indulge in regarding not making fair payments to their suppliers which need examining but you analysis seems firmly set in the main stream Democrat/ republican puppet show which is always unconvincing at best.

    From WIkipedia,

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage

    In 2006, the International Labour Organization (ILO)[7] argued that the minimum wage could not be directly linked to unemployment in countries that have suffered job losses. In April 2010, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)[78] released a report arguing that countries could alleviate teen unemployment by “lowering the cost of employing low-skilled youth” through a sub-minimum training wage. A study of U.S. states showed that businesses’ annual and average payrolls grow faster and employment grew at a faster rate in states with a minimum wage.[79] The study showed a correlation, but did not claim to prove causation.
    Although strongly opposed by both the business community and the Conservative Party when introduced in 1999, the minimum wage introduced in the UK is no longer controversial and the Conservatives reversed their opposition in 2000.[80] A review of its effects found no discernible impact on employment levels.[81] However, prices in the minimum wage sector were found to have risen significantly faster than prices in non-minimum wage sectors, most notably in the four years following the implementation of the minimum wage.[82]
    Since the introduction of a national minimum wage in the UK in 1999, its effects on employment were subject to extensive research and observation by the Low Pay Commission. The Low Pay Commission found that, rather than make employees redundant, employers have reduced their rate of hiring, reduced staff hours, increased prices, and have found ways to cause current workers to be more productive (especially service companies).[83] Neither trade unions nor employer organizations contest the minimum wage, although the latter had especially done so heavily until 1999.

    There are a whole host of US government policies that are damaging to the interests of what Americans call the ´middle class´of America, Google, the hollowing out of America for the myriad examples. Opposition and propaganda falsely citing minimum wage as a factor in decline of American employment is dishonest intellectually or just plain intellectual laziness ( and probably both.).

    The race to the bottom so beloved of the Trans Global corporations and Banks is found in these specious minimum wage opposition arguments. Wider policy issues regarding the end of growth, the leisure society as machines replace human labour and future policies such as guaranteed income whereby no one is excluded from the common wealth are all up for examination clinging onto a Dickensian view that the poor should be grateful for the crumbs condescending from the top table is to me repugnant. The main stream political puppet show is fully complicit in our corrupt and fundamentally unworkable monetary system, should this be fixed along with other government welfare policies for the large corporations and banks we would find the real economy would remove the garrote of financialisation and debt and allow the economy to function properly again to the wider benefit of society.

    Ghandi said and I agree with him that poverty is the worse form of violence. saying there is an absence of coercion in desperation is flase Ricky. There is not a lack of coercion the coercion is latent, covert and pernicious to the self justfying and amoral nature of capitalism and the profit motive absent any appreciation of externalities.

    1. http://nationalpriorities.org/cost-of/

    2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOP2V_np2c0

    • Ricky Peter Newins

      Ricky Peter

      Experienced in Finance and Economics, Professional Translator.
      By the way, Capitalism has been humanity´s most successful way of defeating poverty, this is an empirical fact.
    • Roger Lewis
      Chief chef and bottlewasher at Tonefreqhz
      Is it an empirical fact Ricky? personally I think that is nonsense if its empirical lets hear the evidence I suspect that there is a faith requirement to believe that it is so.
    • Roger Lewis
      Chief chef and bottlewasher at Tonefreqhz
      Capitalism Ricky is the private ownership for private benefit of the means of production. Further capitalism has the natural course of leading to an exponential rise in centralisd economic power over time as larger entities erect unfair barriers against smaller entities.
    • Ricky Peter Newins

      Ricky Peter

      Experienced in Finance and Economics, Professional Translator.
      Roger man, I can´t believe we are even debating this and you that you are asking for evidence and saying I need to have faith in order to state what I am. Free market capitalism creates wealth.In you opinion, what economic system is responsible for getting millions of poor people out of poverty?
    • Roger Lewis
      Chief chef and bottlewasher at Tonefreqhz
      Capitalism creates poor people Ricky, Free Market Capitalism does not and never has existed I suspect that if it did we would find a more suitable name for it.
      Capitalism has lead to the extermination and genocide of many indigenous peoples and cultures many of which had never known poverty before the Mercantile imperialists sailed into town I have no romantic notions about Capitalism as it has manifested itself it has been invariably a hindrance to human progress and many of the laurels it claims are dishonestly misappropriated from the real creators who were in fact only acting out of their natural natures to be creative.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDCxwq1yESc

    • Ricky Peter Newins

      Ricky Peter

      Experienced in Finance and Economics, Professional Translator.
      “centralisd economic power over time as larger entities erect unfair barriers against smaller entities.”

      Would you mind telling me what you mean by power here and also tell me how you larger entities erect these unfair barriers against smaller entities?

    • Ricky Peter Newins

      Ricky Peter

      Experienced in Finance and Economics, Professional Translator.
      Well in actual fact, neither Free Market Capitalism nor Capitalism exist.

      “Capitalism has lead to the extermination and genocide of many indigenous peoples and cultures many of which had never known poverty before the Mercantile imperialists”

      These people were not capitalists, they did not believe in free trade.

      And no, many of these indigenous peoples did not know poverty, but they were by no means living in peace with one another prior to the visitation of the mercantile white man.

    • Roger Lewis
      Chief chef and bottlewasher at Tonefreqhz
      Economic power ricky is seldom gained fair and square on an even playing pitch over time the rules are skewed in favour of those who become winners and we are at a stage of history now where the rules are so skewed in favour of the undeserving rich and continuing to be so corrupted that the real end game of Capitalism is very easy to see as communism failed in the former Soviet Union State monopoly global Capitalism is similarly failing and it is increasingly clear that both systems are just two sides of the same coin.

      Basically the goal posts are moved to suit the requirements of the big boys and the bigger they are the more bullying and corrupt they become. At larger scales organisations become bureaucratic dogmatic and ultimately tyrannical.

    • Roger Lewis
      Chief chef and bottlewasher at Tonefreqhz
      And no, many of these indigenous peoples did not know poverty, but they were by no means living in peace with one another prior to the visitation of the mercantile white man.

      Really, there are many anthropologists who can point you in the direction of much more peaceful and successfull trading communities than the present Nirvana.

    • Ricky Peter Newins

      Ricky Peter

      Experienced in Finance and Economics, Professional Translator.
      Utopia, nirvana and perfection are ideals that cannot exist Roger, a rational person knows this.Can´t you give me a heads up on a more successful model than voluntary free trade?If I pop by your house because I see a sign saying “Front lawn needs a trim, 100 quid for the job” and even though the going rate is 150 quid I decide to exchange my labour for your 100 quid because I am not a gardener, who is losing out here?
    • Roger Lewis
      Chief chef and bottlewasher at Tonefreqhz
      Ricky as Ruskin points out a fair price for a fair job is almost Natural justice the injustice of the stinting workman devaluing the work of the diligent workman speaks for itself and scaled up leads to the race to the bottom divide and rule attack on the dignity of honest labour we see all over the world today. Your example ends with one disadvantaged person who would do the job for a bowl of rice and the favours of his daughter being undercut by the disadvantaged person who is willing to undercut that poor chat by accepting 1/2 a bowl of rice and the favours of his Wife and daughter.
    • Dorin Farca

      Dorin

      Business Consultant at H.E.M Alltjänst AB
      Things can look easy sometimes…but there are plenty honest ppl who have real life debates and struggle to find a better system.
      Sure capitalism is good..how long stay just capitalism…but must to count also that human mind can be evil too.
      And allways (let say just almost alllways) will find or will try to find a way to trick a system.
      Now i can agree that some ppl are smart and hard working too and some are dumb and lazzy.Those smart and hard working ,in time,will get big advantages…and sure will start to think they should handle everything.
      Problem will be for future..when other new generation (that come from those dumb and lazzy) can be smart and hard working…but they will don t have any chance to succed in a society that will be allready handled. And maybe some from descendants of smart and hard working … will be just dumb and lazzy…but they will have allready the controll.
    • Ricky Peter Newins

      Ricky Peter

      Experienced in Finance and Economics, Professional Translator.
      @Roger, again, who are you or I or anyone else to intervene in the voluntary exchange of anybody?We live in a world of supply/demand, and people who supply the least amount of human capital get paid the least amount of money.
    • Ricky Peter Newins

      Ricky Peter

      Experienced in Finance and Economics, Professional Translator.
      Back to the minimum wage:If the minimum wage does not cause unemployment why not raise it to 20EUR/GBP 35USD an hour and make everyone a lot wealthier?Any rational economic thinker knows why this is not implemented and that is because all it would do is cause further unemployment, full stop.A business employs someone because this person is able to produce more money for the business than the business needs to pay for that person´s labour.If a person is only able to make/produce 6EUR an hour for a business and the minimum wage is 7EUR an hour, the business cannot hire the person and pay them, let´s say, 5EUR an hour.The minimum wage:Hurts small businessesCan cause price inflationBenefits some groups at the expense of the poorest and least productive/those with less human capital to offerMoves employment overseas where there is no-minimum wage or allow lower.cost labour.Excludes certain groups (ethic/gender) from the labour market.
    • Dorin Farca

      Dorin

      Business Consultant at H.E.M Alltjänst AB
      That s right…without to say that state take 2 x taxes for a employee…from employer and from employee..and that can be up to 70 % in some countries.
      Problem is how those public money are used too.

       Ricky Peter N. likes this

    • Roger Lewis
      Chief chef and bottlewasher at Tonefreqhz
      Ricky your position on this is idealogical not reasoned and scientific as you are endeavoring to claim.

      The value of money itself is an imaginary construct it is also offensive to claim that for instance a Nurse or a Doctor should be paid a factor of several thousand times less than a Wall Street or Movie Mogul based upon some imaginary metric of value of labour produced this is purely subjective and idealogical stuff.

      The answers to these question all lie outside of the existing paradigm. Murray Rothbard not withstanding he is also enslaved within a narrow conservative american concept of the real American Dream flavoured with some vienna cream.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlH4QZtCjWc

    • Ricky Peter Newins

      Ricky Peter

      Experienced in Finance and Economics, Professional Translator.
      Yes, it is ideological (a system of ideas and ideals forming the basis of an economic or political theory) and based upon rational and empirical study, tonnes of it.

      Money is a means of exchange, that´s all, there is nothing wrong with sound money Roger, I assume you know the history of money and how it came about.

      “also offensive to claim that for instance a Nurse or a Doctor should be paid a factor of several thousand times less than a Wall Street or Movie Mogul”

      Supply and demand Roger, there are more good nurses and doctors available to contract than there are top goal scorers in the world of football for instance. Also, more people are more willing to spend their money on entertainment than healthcare (subjective value). I think it is idiotic, but I would not intervene and stop people from doing what they want with their money.

      “Murray Rothbard not withstanding he is also enslaved within a narrow conservative american concept of the real American Dream flavoured with some vienna cream”

      You have not read up enough on Rothbard, if you had you would not be using the word conservative nor American Dream to refer to his work/philosophy. Rothbard was a voluntaryist first and foremost and this has nothing to do with being a conservative.

    • Ricky Peter Newins

      Ricky Peter

      Experienced in Finance and Economics, Professional Translator.
      By the way Roger, what would you substitute for 1) money, 2) voluntary free market trade (what´s left of it) and 3) the profit motive?

      “The answers to these question all lie outside of the existing paradigm.”

      Could you give me some of your answers?

    • Roger Lewis
      Chief chef and bottlewasher at Tonefreqhz
      I would replace private fiat money with non debt credit money issued by a publicly owned trust with full stakehholder oversight
      http://www.positivemoney.org/our-proposals/

      Did voluntary free market trade ever exist? its news to me like your unicorns Ricky. I think trade and commerce would carry on quite naturally and fairly left to its own devices with a system of laws and customs put in place as between local and regional community councils run for and by stakeholders along the lines of direct democracy along anarcho syndacalist lines.

      The profit motive is not the prime mover in most of us human animals ricky its the creative and agapistic instinct that drives us not the pursuit of profit. That that drives some is not in doubt we have to ask why that is and what part does EGO re inforcement and denial of self play in that pursuit.

      I am myself a recovering Multi millionaire serial entrepreneur I can honestly say that all of that success was not for me and was not nourishing to my I . My more ascetic and artistic life these days is many times more rewarding. ( Thats just me I fully accept that others may find their mileage varies.)

    • Ricky Peter Newins

      Ricky Peter

      Experienced in Finance and Economics, Professional Translator.
      @RogerSo, you are not against money per se, but against fiat money as I am.Voluntary free market trade exists within our mixed market economies, yes, a great deal of it. When I buy some fruit at my local grocery, I want the 2 kilos of tomatoes more than I want my 2EUR, and the grocery wants my 2EUR more than their 2 kilos of tomatoes.Direct democracy and anarcho syndicalism? So you are for mob rule (direct democracy) and against the private means of production?”The profit motive is not the prime mover in most of us human animals…”You will find that it is when it comes to cooperation between human beings Roger, not psuedo-altruism. We act in our self interest, this is a reality.Money is a means to and ends, people want things, and in order to get things, most have to employ their capital in exchange for money or the things they want. What is wrong with this?”My more ascetic and artistic life these days is many times more rewarding.”Yep, value is subjective. Others don´t value the aesthetic/artI am not a money orientated person myself Roger, I love peace and quite and free time to read philosophy and listen to music. I appreciate money as I like to eat well at home and have a nice bottle of Ale every now and then. I am a lot more happy now earning a lot less than I was 4-5 years ago.


      • Money is a means of exchange, that´s all, there is nothing wrong with sound money Roger, I assume you know the history of money and how it came about.

        Randall Wrays Paper regarding the alternative history of money. How do you believe it came about Ricky.
        http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_717.pdf

      • Roger Lewis
        Chief chef and bottlewasher at Tonefreqhz
        ”Supply and demand Roger, there are more good nurses and doctors available to contract than there are top goal scorers in the world of football for instance. Also, more people are more willing to spend their money on entertainment than healthcare (subjective value). I think it is idiotic, but I would not intervene and stop people from doing what they want with their money”.

        There are lots of aspects of want and need and therefore supply and demand which are manipulated and part of the elaborate construct that constitutes the practice of living a life. Much of it is not what could be called free will or not coerced in my view Ricky( necessity is the mother of invention and needs must when the devil drives and all that). If you take your starting point according to some sort of universal set of Values or a golden Principal you will pretty much end up in trouble very soon defending contradictions anomalies and plain absurdities by elevating one theoretical position to a reified law of nature.( Such as Rothbards free market in Babies?and his platonic nod to the exposure of the surplus issue of society.)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Murray_Rothbard#Child-starving_and_euthanasia
        Most theorising starts it seems to me at some point within the existing paradigm favouring perhaps a part of it that appeals to the theory of the Author and seeking then to make that the gravitational centre of everything else. Economics its seems to me is the most self justifying, self important , belief based and factionally cult based load of old nonsense. Personally I see Economics as the new Church of the Market and I simply do not believe in it as a science as Economics qua Economics. Political Economy is a different matter in that it recognises the idealogical basis for the choices we are presented with, where there are choices people should have a choice to advocate for what they would prefer.

        On Rothbard, and indeed Mises they have something to say or had something to say. The idolotary worship of all they said repulses my free thinking nature Ricky. We are all without exception wrong about many things including those two. As a sum of our experiences we rationalise our own prejudices, all of us do that . The Market and Capitalism are neither natural or indeed all providing that is a problem which we all have an interest in solving they are not sacred and flawless concepts.

      • Ricky Peter Newins

        Ricky Peter

        Experienced in Finance and Economics, Professional Translator.
        Morning Roger mate,

        Yep, we are manipulated and guided into doing and buying things we would otherwise do and buy, but who is not guilty of attempting to persuade Roger? We could list tonnes of examples of things we do, buy and believe that involve manipulation and persuasion, benign and malign, positive and negative.

        You do realize that coercion involves threats or violence don´t you?

        When I read The Ethics of Liberty, I too was a little shocked when I read the part on letting a baby die.

        However, the free market for babies would be the best option for many babies who are not wanted by their parents and would keep the neglect of babies and children down to a minimum.

        Rothbard´s problem is with coercive legal state obligation.

        We also must realize one extremely important point when arguing for/debating what a voluntary society would be like and that is there would be an awful lot more stable human beings in it, and a lots less individuals turning to crime. These factors are fundamental with regard to the mental health/state of individuals in a society. (I would love to go into this in some detail sometime) We cannot think of a voluntary society populated by the same individuals in our statist societies.

        Roger, I worship no man, I adhere to one simple principle as a Voluntaryist (I have no problem labeling myself as a Voluntaryist, I think it helps to do so for concept´s sake) that I consider should be universalized and that is the non-aggression principle i.e. it is wrong to initiate of threaten the use of force against another or his/her rightfully owned property. There is no need to pin this principle to any human being to make it more credible, the vast majority of people live their lives by this principle and I dare say that the vast majority do so because they are good people.

        I have yet to hear an argument against this principle and this is believe is down to ethical intuitiveness.

        Also, one cannot logically argue against the NAP.

        As Kant said:

        “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law without contradiction.”

        Roger, the Free Market is a natural market, but would you mind telling why you believe it to not be natural?

      • Roger Lewis
        Chief chef and bottlewasher at Tonefreqhz
        Markets are merely one of many human conceptions Ricky they are invented abstract notions how is that in any way Natural, they are neither necessary or universal.

        Coercion involves compulsion against ones own interests by a threat of harm Direct violence is not the only form of harm that acts as coercion. The non aggression principle is a good one yes but aggression is not limited to the physical violence sort.

        I think Kant was wrong about the golden rule we went over that in our discussion about moral relativism if you remember.

        Morning to you too, sunny here today.

      • Ricky Peter Newins

        Ricky Peter

        Experienced in Finance and Economics, Professional Translator.
        Roger, the free market is, quite simply, a market whereby human beings exchange things free from centralization , regulation/coercion.

        How is this not natural and aprt of what we naturally do?

        And just because human concepts exist does not mean they are not part of nature.

        “The non aggression principle is a good one yes but aggression is not limited to the physical violence sort.”

        Of course, not, to threaten violence or bullying are also violations of the NAP.

        Re: The Golden Rule. It falls short for me, because it allows a nutter who would have something horrid inflicted upon him to justify inflicting it upon others.

      • Roger Lewis
        Chief chef and bottlewasher at Tonefreqhz
        That people exchange things , trade things gift things and so forth is quite natural to say that this is a behaviour ascribable to a market or that due to the nature of or existence of markets, people do these things is non-sensicle .The concept of the Market in a Capitalist sense gets further away from human nature. Commerce exchange and trade would exist without capitalism and without our conception of Market.


















    The Free Market is a chimera one of many reflections we prisoners interpret on The wall of plato´s cave according to our own belief systems. The exercise of free will by individuals is a completely separate question for which any concept of markets is wholly unnecessary. That all things boil down to a Market and that Capitalism is the best way for Markets to do what they do best is the basis of a particular way of looking at the world as one group of people think it is best looked at. Delete 3 days ago Ricky Peter Ricky Peter Newins Experienced in Finance and Economics, Professional Translator. Roger, we have already established that voluntary trade/association between human beings is natural and desirable. Free market philosophy holds just this. Free will (noun the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one’s own discretion) derives from volition (voluntary actions) Like Reply privately Flag as inappropriate 3 days ago Roger Lewis Chief chef and bottlewasher at Tonefreqhz lots of philosophies hold that Ricky the word Market is unnecessary, the sense in which the word Market is usually used has a lot of baggage. Kind of off topic but not completely this post from here. http://www.golemxiv.co.uk/2013/09/my-interview-about-syria-on-npr/#comment-139605 ´´Heads up on a new must watch lecture series (for the Ecuadoran gov) by Steve Keen. Starting here: Crash Course in Non-Equilibrium Economics Lecture 1A – YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wb7Tmk2OABo&feature=youtu.be&a This is Keen explaining his reasons for pursuing his dynamic systems modelling with the importance of debt & money factored in drawing on, well, his entire academic career. I think Keen is miles ahead in understanding how a real macro economy works & why the present mainstream thinking is so utterly crap & deeply corrupted by vested interests. Keen’s distinction between the ‘dynamic’ (mathematically ‘chaotic’) system that is reality versus the ‘equilibrium’ or static system it is assumed to be, is massively important in considering macro policy. Engineers & mathematicians should grasp this immediately. But Keen makes a good effort at explaining this for others, and I think he absolutely nails probably the most important aspects of money & macro, drawing on insights & critiques of Marx, Shumpeter, Keynes, Fisher, Kalecki, Goodwin, Minsky and others. Top stuff.´´ I am a big fan of Steve Keen and particularly his work on Minsky’s instability hypothesis. Ceteris paribus is an analysis tool it has nothing to do with natural systems where Pante Rhei rules http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heraclitus#Panta_rhei.2C_.22everything_flows.22 Delete 3 days ago Ricky Peter Ricky Peter Newins Experienced in Finance and Economics, Professional Translator. Roger, I don´t care how people do things, as a voluntaryist I claim I do not know what is best for others, I don´t know what is best for me most of the time. The most important thing is that human association is free from coercion/violence, that it is voluntary. As I mentioned before, if you boil it down, that is what the free market is about. Call it whatever you want, it is what it is. Like Reply privately Flag as inappropriate 3 days ago Rami Rami Rustom Strategist • Executive Coach • Philosopher • Writer @ Roger So, in a few short words, what does Steven Keen advocate? Like Reply privately Flag as inappropriate 3 days ago Roger Lewis Chief chef and bottlewasher at Tonefreqhz I accept thats what freedom is about, that it is what ´´Free Market ´´is about I do not know if that is so. In a pure sense of a perfect knowledge where all transactions are fully informed of all the facts and all participants participate on their own terms, would that or could that ever exist? Delete 3 days ago Ricky Peter Ricky Peter Newins Experienced in Finance and Economics, Professional Translator. Roger, perfect knowledge is impossible. If you sell me your winter coat because I have not a winter coat and I am cold, you are not to blame if I do not realize that it isn´t waterproof. If I ask you “Is it waterproof?” and you say “yes” and it turns out it isn´t, you then have committed fraud. Like Reply privately Flag as inappropriate 3 days ago Roger Lewis Chief chef and bottlewasher at Tonefreqhz Hi Rami Steve Keen provides a valid criticism of modern main stream economics in that its models are both static and ignore banks and their role in the money creation process. Keen following up on the work of Minsky shows that these over simplifications lead to the boom and bust cycles which are inherent to the capitalist system. If your models do not include the components which are causing the instability then they will be of no use for forecasting and avoiding choke points in the system. Keen is largely pro Capitalism and Markets and I personally find his analysis compelling but do not think his solutions are nearly bold or radical enough. Keen is a professor of Economics he is not a politician he studies in an intellectually honest way and reveals some inconvenient truths that the main stream and less plain speaking branches of his profession steer clear of , in my opinion in a fear of losing patronage ( funding). Keens Blog is linked here I have been reading it for several years http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/ In a nutshell Keen and many others such as Michael Hudson single out the Federal reserve and its role on the Debt FIat money swindle for particular criticism. My first introduction was through Tomlinson who has an excellent online book that can be downloaded here. http://www.honest-money.com/ My favourite author on the subject is James Robertson and his book future Money. 1. http://www.jamesrobertson.com/futuremoney.htm 1. http://letthemconfectsweeterlies.blogspot.se/2011/11/james-robertson-real-critical-thought.html David Greibers Debt the first 5000 years is also a classic on the subjects of the debt money artifice into which we have all been tricked. If capitalism is what it does and has done then the current problems which we face are due to Capitalism as it is practiced. To say what is practiced is not Capitalism is disingenuous, The Soviet Union Failed due to the Failure of Communism, most Capitalists have little problem claiming a victory over Communism of course the current troubles are due to what ( Communism dressed up in Capitalist clothing?)Rashim I know exactly how the Fed says it works and how it actually works, I also have a pretty sound knowledge of Economics, Economic Geography and various different schools of thoughts in Politics( both National and International) Economics and Philosophy. It is a multi faceted world in which we live and a dualist left 7right , Capitalist /communist , red / blue fairy tale is not helpful for anyone looking for some real answers.On the over simplifications in Economic modeling , leaving Banks and Money out of Economic modeling is something of an over simplification wouldn’t you say? how can one make oneself any clearer than that.Capitalism as I state above to Ricky is the Ownership of the Means of Production by private interests for private benefit. It excludes in its deliberations externalities or costs to wider society. We have very little to be grateful to Capitalism for even though it is preached otherwise. Free Market or Laizzez faire Capitalism is an anachronistic and wasteful system of distributing wealth it is a destroyer of wealth not a creator of wealth and the financialisation of the Economy is similarly destructive.Having established that neither of the two great tyrannical systems of the past 200 years are actually fit for purpose to serve the greatest benefit as custodians of the future husbandry of the common wealth for now and future generations what is needed is thought outside of the antiquated paradigm. People like Charles Eisenstein have made a start in this direction taking of Resource based economics, Roy Madron with his Gain Economics, Robertsons future Money, Wilkinson and Pickets Spirit Level, Toby Russel and Econosophy with his writings on Guaranteed income and Ralph Boes and the Hertz iv laws in Germany (http://thdrussell.blogspot.de/2012/03/ralph-boes-my-new-hero-part-i.html)Now to the point of concision and the mindless shorthand of dishonest narratives parroted in Main Stream media and by main stream media wannabees. Here is Noam Chomsky.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_gkS2ai3Wo Some links to some more blasphemy against Capitalism. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_capitalism 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-capitalism 3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_capitalism http://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=78660&type=member&item=274563750&qid=26bd8afb-d043-409e-adeb-8146f82c2415&trk=groups_search_item_list-0-b-cmr

     
  • rogerglewis 6:22 pm on September 15, 2013 Permalink | Reply  

    Chomsky’s Chant: the Essence of Human Nature 

    “Government in the Future” is the narrative source of the “Chomsky’s Chant” video and was originally delivered at the YM-YWHA Poetry Center in New York on February 16, 1970. Human Nature. Noam Chomskys main points interpreting the Classical Liberal enlightenment view. 1. ´´Man is born to inquire and create. 2, Man never regards what he possesses,as so much his own, as what he does Whatever does not spring from a man’s free choice, remains alien to his true nature. 3. men who love their labor improve it by their own inventive skill and there by cultivate intellect ennoble their character and refine their pleasures. 4. We have today the technical and material resources to meet man’s animal needs We have not developed the cultural and moral resources that make possible the humane and rational use of our material wealth and power.´´ The companion Essay regarding this multimedia presentation http://chantmedia.org/chant-essay/
     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel