Evergreen State College: Collective Psychosis

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Tecmos Deception [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

As I see it, all of this just comes back to the social "contract" not being anything like a contract. It's an excuse to force one group's wants onto others. You say I shouldn't get to benefit from society without paying, but how it really works out is every individual is paying for a ton of "benefits" that they don't actually want, subsidizing government inefficiency, propping up cronyism, etc. There's also tons of wiggle room for people to be free riders with VERY little incentive for anyone to do anything about it.

It's a valid criticism of the current system if you ignore the benefits of the way we do things, ie, organizations are capable of existing for reasons other than profit motive or short term whims... which has important implications for things like public health and protecting the environment.

Originally Posted by Tecmos Deception [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Privatizing everything wouldn't collapse society. People would still be able to get together and decide what they want to contribute towards a public society. But nobody would be threatened with violence by a nearly-omnipotent state to pay for any more than they actually want to... and since everything is private, individuals have incentive to make sure there aren't free riders or inefficiency, etc.

What keeps people from adding lead to their gasoline? Are you going to make a law that says anyone who burns gas can't add lead to it to make it more efficient? What are you going to do if they refuse? Are you going to sue them for scrambling your children's brains with lead? Prove they are responsible.

What do you do about the natural concentration of wealth over time, if there are no means for redistribution? In a capitalist system, the more wealth you have, the better your ability to capture a greater share of all current and newly generated wealth (When a capitalist acquires an asset his ability to acquire more assets increases). For example, Paris Hilton inherits $500 million. All Paris Hilton has to do is hire brilliant minds to manage her wealth and investments. Her chance of losing money to market forces is far smaller than her chance of making money off purchasing profitable businesses and properties, or making safe investments. This requires no labor on her behalf, it is purely her money making money.

Progressive taxation is the only force that acts against this and prevents a small number of people from eventually owning virtually all of society. (The lack of which also being a major contributor to why things have been in the shitter since Reagan)

[entruil]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What do you do about the natural concentration of wealth over time, if there are no means for redistribution? In a capitalist system, the more wealth you have, the better your ability to capture a greater share of all current and newly generated wealth (When a capitalist acquires an asset his ability to acquire more assets increases). For example, Paris Hilton inherits $500 million. All Paris Hilton has to do is hire brilliant minds to manage her wealth and investments. Her chance of losing money to market forces is far smaller than her chance of making money off purchasing profitable businesses and properties, or making safe investments. This requires no labor on her behalf, it is purely her money making money.

Progressive taxation is the only force that acts against this and prevents a small number of people from eventually owning virtually all of society. (The lack of which also being a major contributor to why things have been in the shitter since Reagan)

I don't expect such short-sightedness from you lune... progressive taxation and the redistribution in the form of here take this we will take care of you is exactly what keeps the richer getting richer and the poor get just enough to vote for who gives it to them...

Until we deal with the hidden taxes caused by our now fiat currency and central bank the wealth gap will continue to at least stay the same and this progressive theft and choosing who doesn't get to climb the economic ladder of their own volition and on their own merit also creates a sense of entitlement that does not meld with the tenets of liberty.

While all of this is going on there is massive Social-Engineering in every area imaginable, to what end are we really being lead?

[Lune]

Originally Posted by entruil [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't expect such short-sightedness from you lune... progressive taxation and the redistribution in the form of here take this we will take care of you is exactly what keeps the richer getting richer and the poor get just enough to vote for who gives it to them...

Until we deal with the hidden taxes caused by our now fiat currency and central bank the wealth gap will continue to at least stay the same and this progressive theft and choosing who doesn't get to climb the economic ladder of their own volition and on their own merit also creates a sense of entitlement that does not meld with the tenets of liberty.

While all of this is going on there is massive Social-Engineering in every area imaginable, to what end are we really being lead?

Progressive tax doesn't choose who gets to climb the economic ladder and it doesn't discourage achievement. You've really got to get those two Reagan-era lies out of your head. They were designed to make you work against your own best interest and make you shuck and jive for the people who own you.

Nothing about progressive tax means you have to take it and then give it to Shaguamquisha as a lump sum payment. You invest it in schools, national parks, health care, infrastructure, and all the things that make it easier for people to climb the economic ladder.

Trickle down economics will continue to funnel wealth into the hands of capitalists at the expense of everyone who has to sell their labor to survive (that includes you). There is no market force to end this

Republicans have a responsibility to quit swallowing corporate loads and answer to the middle class on this. Frankly, Democrats can't be trusted not to just tax the shit out of everyone and funnel it to inner-city parasites. And that's assuming they win elections which they don't because of retardation.

We need Eisenhower Republicans back.

[AzzarTheGod]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Progressive tax doesn't choose who gets to climb the economic ladder and it doesn't discourage achievement. You've really got to get those two Reagan-era lies out of your head. They were designed to make you work against your own best interest and make you shuck and jive for the people who own you.

Nothing about progressive tax means you have to take it and then give it to Shaguamquisha as a lump sum payment. You invest it in schools, national parks, health care, infrastructure, and all the things that make it easier for people to climb the economic ladder.

Trickle down economics will continue to funnel wealth into the hands of capitalists at the expense of everyone who has to sell their labor to survive (that includes you). There is no market force to end this

Republicans have a responsibility to quit swallowing corporate loads and answer to the middle class on this. Frankly, Democrats can't be trusted not to just tax the shit out of everyone and funnel it to inner-city parasites. And that's assuming they win elections which they don't because of retardation.

We need Eisenhower Republicans back.

He woke but Lune woker capitalism is a ded end. Too bad Marx didn't outline how capitalism would die, only that it absolutely would because its unsustainable and it was an eventuality.

[Wowbagger]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Trickle down economics will continue to funnel wealth into the hands of capitalists at the expense of everyone who has to sell their labor to survive (that includes you). There is no market force to end this

I don't believe that wealth creation is necessarily tied to exploitation of labor (unfair wage). Marx thought so, but honestly, it's his angle on the Hegelian Dialectic that's infected college campuses (and spawned countless new liberal arts disciplines entirely based on it) and created the very atmosphere we're all watching choke the life out of Evergreen State College, from the OP.

That said - even in the "capitalist exploits labor for profit" scenario... two examples of market forces addressing this come to mind:

1) Worker improves the value of their labor - through experience (free) or education (cheap). Worker negotiates higher wages - possibly from a competing employer. Maybe even eventually collecting enough capital to take the risk of becoming an owner... possibly even offering a fair wage!

2) A competing capitalist offers a fair wage for the same job.

Fixt.

[entruil]

Originally Posted by Wowbagger [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't believe that wealth creation is necessarily tied to exploitation of labor (unfair wage). Marx thought so, but honestly, it's his angle on the Hegelian Dialectic that's infected college campuses (and spawned countless new liberal arts disciplines entirely based on it) and created the very atmosphere we're all watching choke the life out of Evergreen State College, from the OP.

That said - even in the "capitalist exploits labor for profit" scenario... two examples of market forces addressing this come to mind:

1) Worker improves the value of their labor - through experience (free) or education (cheap). Worker negotiates higher wages - possibly from a competing employer. Maybe even eventually collecting enough capital to take the risk of becoming an owner... possibly even offering a fair wage!

2) A competing capitalist offers a fair wage for the same job.

Fixt.

Post again... too many medallions floating around...

*When was wealth last created? (if you are coming from USA then you know not for a while, they just print it, and wealth only stays the same or is Delimited)...

[entruil]

Originally Posted by entruil [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Post again... too many medallions floating around...

*When was wealth last created? (if you are coming from USA then you know not for a while, they just print it, and wealth only stays the same or is Delimited)...

I would like to ask as well, what country on earth harbors capitalism, only one I would say seized 20k out of each personal bank account(i would still be wrong!).

Originally Posted by AzzarTheGod [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Somewhat true

I see Xaanka mugging but I'm swanging big thangs in real life. In real life I'm life goals.

In real life they like me? In real life I'm like no

I don't see an awakening as wishy-washy bullshit... few people saw some shit, I will be the negative for some positive self-gains... I also missed some-a-lot from way back, foolish to think it went way back as well...

that last part a question to each their own homie... Get good. Right?

[Wowbagger]

Originally Posted by entruil [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Post again... too many medallions floating around...

*When was wealth last created? (if you are coming from USA then you know not for a while, they just print it, and wealth only stays the same or is Delimited)...

Wealth is being created constantly... by trade.

The value of currency, however... fiat currency, in particular, that's a whole other ballgame.

As long as people continue to have different skillsets, talents, and resources... trade will be the primary driver of wealth creation. The cobbler has great shoes, but eats poorly, sometimes even affecting his ability to fix/make shoes. The farmer eats very well, but his shoes fall apart, his feet blister up, affecting his ability to farm. The two neighbors trade their skills and both eat well, perhaps better than before - and both have healthy feet - perhaps better than before... that's "wealth" without currency, without the extraction of any more natural resource than before the trade (more efficient use of the same materials), or exploitation of labor. Silly analogy, perhaps, but simply illustrating the concept.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Wowbagger [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

1) Worker improves the value of their labor - through experience (free) or education (cheap). Worker negotiates higher wages - possibly from a competing employer. Maybe even eventually collecting enough capital to take the risk of becoming an owner... possibly even offering a fair wage!

2) A competing capitalist offers a fair wage for the same job.

Fixt.

Those don't address the problem. The problem isn't that people who rely on the value of their labor aren't getting enough value. The problem is with the people who don't rely on selling labor. No matter how highly compensated a worker is, his creation of personal wealth scales linearly with the sale of his labor in a manner that does not create a positive feedback loop.

A union plumber who makes $90,000 a year for his labor will make $90,000 the next year with the same labor and the same market, and maybe $100,000 a year after that if he gets a higher wage or successfully invests.

If Paris Hilton has $100 million being managed by investment bankers, in a few years it will grow to $120 million. In the next few years with a higher principle it will grow even more. Paris Hilton's wealth creation is only dependent on aggregate wealth because the wealth itself is the vehicle for income. As her wealth increases, her capacity to generate even more wealth also increases. There is no natural force in the free market that counteracts the tendency of the Paris Hiltons of the worlds' investment accounts to grow over time at a rate totally unparalleled by those who sell their labor.

Even something like an economic crash, bubble burst, poor management, fraud, etc, doesn't keep pace with the diversification of investments.

Basically, without things like progressive taxation, capitalists come to be 'owners' of ever-larger segments of society.