Remember me
▼ Content

What is this Church of Marxism?



Page 1 of 5123>>>
What is this Church of Marxism?24-09-2016 05:03
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
So you've cracked my mind open on the topic of AGW. I'm inclined to trust you a bit more than normal, and considering that my initial reaction was to scream at the evil bourgeoisie-supporter and all of his laissez-faire nonsense, I'm beginning to think there's some amount of indoctrination involved in my political beliefs.

So what is the Church of Marxism? And what's wrong with it?


"Heads on a science
Apart" - Coldplay, The Scientist

IBdaMann wrote:
No, science doesn't insist that, ergo I don't insist that.

I am the Ninja Scientist! Beware!
24-09-2016 05:04
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Oops, I meant to post this in the Politics section. Meh.
24-09-2016 10:33
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9597)
jwoodward48 wrote:
So you've cracked my mind open on the topic of AGW. I'm inclined to trust you a bit more than normal, and considering that my initial reaction was to scream at the evil bourgeoisie-supporter and all of his laissez-faire nonsense, I'm beginning to think there's some amount of indoctrination involved in my political beliefs.

So what is the Church of Marxism? And what's wrong with it?


Quite simply, it is the teachings of Karl Marx and the Communist Manifesto.

In this document, Marx makes the case against the bourgeoisie, the factory and business owners and how they oppress the workers, or proletarians. The conclusion of the argument results in the commune (or communism), where no one owns anything.

There is no problem with the factory owners, because no one owns the factory.

There is no problem with the workers, because there is no owner to oppress them.

This is the general argument put forth by Marx.

Now for what's wrong with it.

What Marx has described here is that everyone is a chief and there are no indians. The problem is that a factory isn't just a building with machinery and enslaved workers, it is a house of knowledge and skills.

The skill it took to create the product the factory makes was started by the founder, the owner. By hiring workers and training them on sections of that knowledge, he can produce more than he can produce alone.

He can teach some of his workers a lot of skills and knowledge in the product (and they learn on their own anyway), to that they can become assistants to the owner, or managers.

They in turn teach that knowledge to others underneath them and you have middle managers, and so on, all the way down to the straw boss.

It all starts with the founder or founders. They are the owners of the entire affair. They took the gamble, built the factory, and found the market for the product. Continuing this model, which is capitalism, continues developing new products and to develop ways to make existing products for less resources (money, fuel, materials, etc).

The incentive of any profit making venture is to make more profit. That means finding customers willing to pay for the product and providing the needs of the market. That means being the best at what you do, whatever you do.

Some people suck at it. They either can't change with the needs of the market, or they get tyrannical with their workers and wind up with an unproductive and demoralized staff. Their production suffers, they can't compete anymore because someone is doing it better. The awful hole these people dig for themselves (and for their workers unfortunately) is eventual bankruptcy.

When a new buyer of the failed company appears, he might actually know what he's doing and not suck at it. He might not. It he does, Kumbayah. It not, bankruptcy again, until you DO find a buyer that is competent.

---

Communism takes this away. With no incentive to take the chance, and no incentive to compete, there is no reason for things to improve. The factory basically is useless.

You need a leader to get things moving.

Communism makes that leader the government. Despite not knowing anything about the technology, the markets, the needs of the consumers, they build the factory and install their people in it to manage the place.

You still have the workers just as before, but now they are managed by incompetent idiots that have no incentive and have no background in the product.

Dischord looms. The workers are unhappy, the consumers are unhappy, and the people are unhappy. They gather in their community groups and plot how to change the situation. These are often church communities. After all, their pastor or priest is a leader to them, and is acting as a focal point of that dischord.

The government, to maintain the commune must crack down, and they do, upon the religious leaders. Churches are replaced by a State religion. No organization against the government can be tolerated.

Any that shows is cracked down upon, violently.

Depending on your dictator (or oligarchy), he may begin liquidating (killing) whole sections of populations that he deems are forming against him.

The people remain unhappy. Everything they produce is the government's. They have become slaves.


The problem with communism is that it can't use price discovery to set prices. It must depend on capitalistic systems to steal from to survive.The promised Utopia never materializes. It is the road to slavery.


The Parrot Killer
24-09-2016 17:29
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Are you talking about State Capitalism, which has been the end result of most Communist revolutions? Because one part of Communism is abolishing the state. (I have begun research in earnest on the topic of Communism; just a week or so ago I made the same mistake you did.)

So yes, I did just use the No True Communist argument, but that's not always a fallacy.
24-09-2016 20:58
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9597)
jwoodward48 wrote:
Are you talking about State Capitalism, which has been the end result of most Communist revolutions? Because one part of Communism is abolishing the state. (I have begun research in earnest on the topic of Communism; just a week or so ago I made the same mistake you did.)

So yes, I did just use the No True Communist argument, but that's not always a fallacy.


Actually, you did. Here's why:

The promise of the Utopian commune is to have no leaders. Exactly what you just said here.

It cannot function because you can't build and operate a factory without having someone directing operations. Communal factories (if they get built at all) never get around to really producing anything much. The second problem is the marketplace itself.

Since no one can own anything, there is nothing you can use of value to trade for anything else. Money in that sense is essentially a worthless idea, since money is just a medium of exchange instead of direct barter.

Money or any other trade of value can only be set by price discovery. The only price discover taking place at all with such a commune is by outside trade (international trade). That means capitalism is what sets the prices, no matter how you slice it.

Internal markets have another problem. Since there is no inherent value in anything (no one can own anything), there is nothing from stopping everyone from wanting everything. Unfortunately, they can't have it. Who decides what an individual may have?

Sooner or later, a leader of some type will have be chosen to make decisions like this. This leader will eventually have to micromanage production and market, trying to outguess what demand is going to be instead of letting the market decide through price discovery.

Take the dairy market. The leader doesn't know anything about cows, or the dairy industry.

At some point, the people want 2% milk. So, the leader directs the dairy to produce more 2% milk. This takes time to implement, say about a month or so.

By that time, summer has come and people want more ice cream. There isn't any because the dairies are concentrating on producing 2% milk, a product they don't want.

The leader directs the dairy to produce ice cream. By the time they retool, the public wants whole milk to make pies for the upcoming fall festival.

The leader is constantly behind the curve, and what you do with all that w% milk and ice cream that goes unwanted?

The result is shortages and waste.

And this is just dairy. Now have this one guy (or a few guys) do this with a whole economy. It is just not possible to micromanage an economy. There will always be shortages, waste, unhappy people, and problems. This is in addition to the other problems I already mentioned.

--

Now consider how capitalism would handle it.

A guy, who really likes cows, decides to start a ranch. He knows how to treat a cow so it's happy and produces more milk. He knows how to feed them in the winter. He knows how to best provide water for them. He knows what diseases they can catch that can destroy the herd or get into the milk.

Another guy, sees the rancher and decides he can open a dairy and provide the processed foods from the product the rancher produces. The milk, the ice cream, the butter, etc.

The dairyman knows how to start small, what equipment he needs, how to read the market. He watches the prices carefully in the free market. They tell him what the people want, and what the other dairyman in competition with him can provide. He must respond, quickly. Soon he learns to anticipate the market. It's is only business and he can concentrate on that market alone.

Soon the dairyman gets really good at his job. He sells more product, and maybe can even find a way to make it cheaper to outbid his competitors.

The rancher needs to supply more milk because the dairyman is doing so well. So he buys more cows and expands his operation with the profit he is making. The ranch expands, possibly buying another piece of property to do it.

Now you have wealth being generated (the dairy products). The people are happy because they can get what they want when they want it. Prices are fair. Shortages are minimal.

Now some other guy comes along that sees a need for an adhesive in the market. He plays around and finally comes up with a recipe for an adhesive that happens to use milk as one of the ingredients. Milk is available, so he begins to buy it and opens his factory, at first a one-man shop. Now the rancher sells even more milk and can expand even more.

The adhesive is put on the market, and everybody wants it. Far more than the the one man can produce on his own. He takes his profit, hires workers to help him and improves his equipment so he can make more adhesive. The rancher sells even more milk and can expand even more.

You now have three producers. The rancher, the dairyman, and the adhesive maker. Three products that didn't exist before and everyone making money. The public has a new adhesive as well as the other dairy products they want when they want it.

If the public doesn't want ice cream anymore, the various dairies can anticipate that by analyzing the past behavior of the market. They have the time and inclination to do that. Dairy is their only business. They aren't trying to run a country too.

The rancher can anticipate changes in the raw milk market. Ranching is his only business. He is an expert handling cows and obtaining whatever product he can sell. He can handle downturns because it simply means he doesn't need to harvest as much milk. He has a surplus, which gives him the incentive to find another market for his excess milk.

The adhesive maker, seeing a downturn in the market, has all the incentive he needs to come up with a better adhesive then before, so he survives over his competitors. Downturns are a weeding out process. It diverts resources from less productive companies to more productive companies.

---

If a government interferes with natural market forces (to say protect an unproductive company or industry), this self correction can no longer act. You begin to build the problems of the commune into the market. The government aren't experts at anything but government. The don't know how to ranch, run a dairy, or make glue.

That's no way to run a railroad, a factory, or anything else.


The Parrot Killer
25-09-2016 03:24
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
There's something wrong with your scenario. The people in the capitalist society, the ones that are good at what they do - where are they in the socialist society?

And we've never really had true socialism - Cuba, China, the USSR? All state capitalism. There was still a class owning the means of production - but that class was now the government.
25-09-2016 03:40
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4926)
jwoodward48 wrote:And we've never really had true socialism - Cuba, China, the USSR? All state capitalism.

I beg to differ.

They all start out as pure socialism. It cannot survive on its own as the economy deteriorates so, yes, state capitalism and black markets develop. The socialism eventually collapses and all people remember are the capitalist elements that flourished at one point or another.

We have had PLENTY of examples of socialism. They're all like watching the exact same train wreck in slow motion instant replay. You can tell everyone exactly what is going to happen down to amazing detail.

I hope nothing about Venezuela comes as any surprise to you.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
25-09-2016 03:50
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
But true socialism doesn't HAVE a state.
25-09-2016 04:47
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4926)
jwoodward48 wrote:But true socialism doesn't HAVE a state.

All denominations of Marxism have a State which is "the people."


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
25-09-2016 09:53
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9597)
jwoodward48 wrote:
There's something wrong with your scenario. The people in the capitalist society, the ones that are good at what they do - where are they in the socialist society?

Nowhere. They either have had everything taken from them and distributed to the people (they are the bourgeoisie. They have been put down by the commune as enemies of the commune. It they survived at all, they are just workers.
jwoodward48 wrote:
And we've never really had true socialism - Cuba, China, the USSR? All state capitalism. There was still a class owning the means of production - but that class was now the government.


If you go back and read my post, you will see how that happens every time socialism is tried. The Utopia is not possible.


The Parrot Killer
25-09-2016 09:55
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9597)
jwoodward48 wrote:
But true socialism doesn't HAVE a state.


Initially, that's true. Read my post again. You will see how the stateless commune eventually results in a leader, a State, and a government. It must, because the Utopia cannot provide for everyone's desires.


The Parrot Killer
25-09-2016 12:34
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
jwoodward48 wrote:
So you've cracked my mind open on the topic of AGW. I'm inclined to trust you a bit more than normal, and considering that my initial reaction was to scream at the evil bourgeoisie-supporter and all of his laissez-faire nonsense, I'm beginning to think there's some amount of indoctrination involved in my political beliefs.

So what is the Church of Marxism? And what's wrong with it?


The resemblance to normal religions of Marxism is along the line of having a set of beliefs that come from a single source, the communist manifesto in this case, which are learnt and studied without questioning their actual fitness.

Any policy is justified by quoting selected bits of the holy book. The commissars are directly analogous to the priesthood of other religions.

Have a chat with any good communist and you will find the same attitude towards open discussion as any fundimentalist Christian or Islamic prat.
25-09-2016 21:30
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9597)
Tim the plumber wrote:
jwoodward48 wrote:
So you've cracked my mind open on the topic of AGW. I'm inclined to trust you a bit more than normal, and considering that my initial reaction was to scream at the evil bourgeoisie-supporter and all of his laissez-faire nonsense, I'm beginning to think there's some amount of indoctrination involved in my political beliefs.

So what is the Church of Marxism? And what's wrong with it?


The resemblance to normal religions of Marxism is along the line of having a set of beliefs that come from a single source, the communist manifesto in this case, which are learnt and studied without questioning their actual fitness.

Any policy is justified by quoting selected bits of the holy book. The commissars are directly analogous to the priesthood of other religions.

Have a chat with any good communist and you will find the same attitude towards open discussion as any fundimentalist Christian or Islamic prat.


Here tend to agree. I have seen the same. It is also why I call it a church.

There are, however, those that do not treat it like a religion. There are those that actually understand the philosophy behind it and want to implement it so they can become the ruling class.


The Parrot Killer
26-09-2016 00:54
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
But there is no ruling class in true socialism!
26-09-2016 12:02
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
Into the Night wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
jwoodward48 wrote:
So you've cracked my mind open on the topic of AGW. I'm inclined to trust you a bit more than normal, and considering that my initial reaction was to scream at the evil bourgeoisie-supporter and all of his laissez-faire nonsense, I'm beginning to think there's some amount of indoctrination involved in my political beliefs.

So what is the Church of Marxism? And what's wrong with it?


The resemblance to normal religions of Marxism is along the line of having a set of beliefs that come from a single source, the communist manifesto in this case, which are learnt and studied without questioning their actual fitness.

Any policy is justified by quoting selected bits of the holy book. The commissars are directly analogous to the priesthood of other religions.

Have a chat with any good communist and you will find the same attitude towards open discussion as any fundimentalist Christian or Islamic prat.


Here tend to agree. I have seen the same. It is also why I call it a church.

There are, however, those that do not treat it like a religion. There are those that actually understand the philosophy behind it and want to implement it so they can become the ruling class.


Yes, all religions have their sociopaths who actually run the thing.

Religion is the con artist's best idea ever.
26-09-2016 12:27
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4926)
jwoodward48 wrote:But there is no ruling class in true socialism!

There is no ruling class in the Utopia communism. Socialism has the "transitional" dictator who leads the proletariat revolution.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
26-09-2016 14:46
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
But you could have a leaderless, democratic revolution!
26-09-2016 15:55
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4926)
jwoodward48 wrote: But you could have a leaderless, democratic revolution!

Like the TEA Party?


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
26-09-2016 16:05
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
jwoodward48 wrote:
But you could have a leaderless, democratic revolution!


Not with humans.
26-09-2016 20:35
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
"It's just human nature"? Yeah, no. Feudalists said the same thing. Capitalism is an improvement over feudalism, right?
26-09-2016 20:36
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9597)
jwoodward48 wrote:
But there is no ruling class in true socialism!


Not at first, but my post describes the process by how it comes about.

Every time communism has been applied, it always ends the same way. The Utopian ideal of communism is not possible.

Go read that post again. The entire process is described there. It is a process that can't be stopped. It's inevitable.


The Parrot Killer
26-09-2016 20:38
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
But you assume that a leader must exist. That is not true. Direct democracy works. People in charge of organizing and managing jobs? Sure. An owner, someone whose word is final? No.
26-09-2016 20:39
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9597)
Tim the plumber wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
jwoodward48 wrote:
So you've cracked my mind open on the topic of AGW. I'm inclined to trust you a bit more than normal, and considering that my initial reaction was to scream at the evil bourgeoisie-supporter and all of his laissez-faire nonsense, I'm beginning to think there's some amount of indoctrination involved in my political beliefs.

So what is the Church of Marxism? And what's wrong with it?


The resemblance to normal religions of Marxism is along the line of having a set of beliefs that come from a single source, the communist manifesto in this case, which are learnt and studied without questioning their actual fitness.

Any policy is justified by quoting selected bits of the holy book. The commissars are directly analogous to the priesthood of other religions.

Have a chat with any good communist and you will find the same attitude towards open discussion as any fundimentalist Christian or Islamic prat.


Here tend to agree. I have seen the same. It is also why I call it a church.

There are, however, those that do not treat it like a religion. There are those that actually understand the philosophy behind it and want to implement it so they can become the ruling class.


Yes, all religions have their sociopaths who actually run the thing.

Religion is the con artist's best idea ever.


Compositional error. It is also one that involved people. Your statement is bigotry, based on an argument of ignorance.


The Parrot Killer
26-09-2016 20:43
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Religion can be good, Tim. If more people listened to what Jesus reportedly said, the world would be a better place.

Religion is only bad when it displaces science.
26-09-2016 20:46
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9597)
jwoodward48 wrote:
But you could have a leaderless, democratic revolution!


Democracies (we aren't one) fail. There is no one charge except the people themselves. Sooner or later one powerful group (money, influence, what have you) begin swaying votes to their favor.

There is nothing protecting the minority from the majority even if the majority decide to exterminate the minority.

This is why a republic is a better way. Republics have constitutions, which limit the effect of what the majority rule can do. Even though the leaders are chosen democratically by the people, that does not make it a democracy.

A constitution provides stability of law. That is essential for planning ahead, whether you are an individual or a business.


The Parrot Killer
26-09-2016 21:03
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9597)
jwoodward48 wrote:
"It's just human nature"? Yeah, no. Feudalists said the same thing. Capitalism is an improvement over feudalism, right?


You are confusing an economic system with a governmental structure.

Capitalism does indeed coexist with either feudal governments, republics, and even to a certain extent dictators.

Capitalism is the free market in action. No matter what kind of government you have, the free market will be there in some form. You can't kill it. It's immortal. It will still function, even if it's a black market.

No dictator can stop the black market.

Feudal governments, with the king (often blessed by State sanctioned church), lords, merchants, and peasants, had a lot of problems; namely the king (a dictator), and the lords (which would often war with each other over the throne), the merchants spending much of their time trying to stay out of the way, and the peasants (guess who was conscripted for the armies for the wars?)

Think Game of Thrones and you will get an idea of what that sort of system is like. (Incidentally, that series was inspired by the War of the Roses, a real war between houses that really took place. The Dune books were inspired by the same war.)
---
Under a republican system, you have the best of both worlds. You have an influence by a majority will of the people, but they don't have ultimate authority. You have a constitution that provides for stability of law and helps protect the little guy from majority rule. You have a system where you elect leaders so you can concentrate on your business and life without having to decide every little thing about how many are going to benefit from some road in a neighboring town that connects with yours or whether that road is going to be paved with concrete, asphalt, or just graveled, or just left as dirt.


The Parrot Killer
26-09-2016 21:49
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
But the workers are being exploited... They sow, and then they get a pittance of the harvest.
26-09-2016 23:15
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9597)
jwoodward48 wrote:
But the workers are being exploited... They sow, and then they get a pittance of the harvest.


You may call it a pittance, but in a socialist system, they get nothing at all.

That pittance, as you call it, can be quite a respectable wage. It is totally dependent on price discovery. The wage of a worker is dependent on how rare the skills are, and how much in demand those skills are.

A worker's wage is like any other product.

Any worker can start a business of their own. If they don't have the money to do it, they can get someone that has money to go along with the idea.

In a socialist system, the workers are paid some arbitrary amount in effectively meaningless currency, both of which are set by the government. No one has any incentive to start a new business, because no one can own anything.


The only value that currency has is on the international trade market.


The Parrot Killer
27-09-2016 00:01
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
You are correct in the most humorous way.

They certainly get no money. In true socialism, there is no money! You're still describing state capitalism.
Edited on 27-09-2016 00:02
27-09-2016 01:12
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9597)
jwoodward48 wrote:
You are correct in the most humorous way.

They certainly get no money. In true socialism, there is no money! You're still describing state capitalism.


In effect, yes I am. The State is the only thing that owns anything in socialist systems. It has incentive for a profitable economy, but it doesn't have the expertise.

The workers, who have the expertise, are not allowed to own anything or make use of that expertise to improve the economy beyond their role as a worker. Indeed, there is little reason for that worker to use his expertise at all.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 27-09-2016 01:13
27-09-2016 01:30
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4926)
jwoodward48 wrote:But the workers are being exploited... They sow, and then they get a pittance of the harvest.

I beg to differ. "Exploited" never enters into the picture.

Workers only get to become workers *if* someone offers them a job.

That is so worth repeating. Workers only get to become workers *if* someone creates those jobs for them and offers them those jobs. When someone creates jobs and offers one to someone we can say:
A. the person offered the job is being exploited, *or*
B. the person offered the job owes the job creator a crapload of thanks if he accepts, even moreso if he really, really needs a job.

...hmmmm, I wonder which one.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
27-09-2016 01:33
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
So you're saying that the bourgeoisie isn't exploiting the proletariat? That they are both getting a proper amount of money from the relationship of owner and worker? That happens... Sometimes.
27-09-2016 01:41
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4926)
jwoodward48 wrote:So you're saying that the bourgeoisie isn't exploiting the proletariat?

That is exactly what I'm saying.


jwoodward48 wrote:That they are both getting a proper amount of money from the relationship of owner and worker? That happens... Sometimes.

Compensation is based on value added and not on level of exertion.

Workers have the right to not accept a job without any justification required.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
27-09-2016 01:52
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
But do they always have that choice? What if it's a choice between bad job and worse job?
27-09-2016 01:55
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9597)
jwoodward48 wrote:
So you're saying that the bourgeoisie isn't exploiting the proletariat? That they are both getting a proper amount of money from the relationship of owner and worker? That happens... Sometimes.


No, there is no exploitation taking place.

The worker isn't forced to work there. The owner isn't forced to hire them.

The worker will only work there if he is getting paid enough to work there.

The owner will only hire him if the worker has something to contribute. He will only pay him what that contribution is worth on the open market.

An unskilled worker isn't worth much. Anybody consuming oxygen can be that kind of worker. The demand isn't high enough to absorb the availability. The price is low.

A highly skilled worker is worth a lot. Few have those skills. Demand is higher than availability, his price is high.

It is the same price discovery as any other kind of product.

To say the owner is exploiting the worker is the same as you exploiting the drug store for selling you that candy bar you just bought.


The Parrot Killer
27-09-2016 01:58
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9597)
jwoodward48 wrote:
But do they always have that choice? What if it's a choice between bad job and worse job?


They always have a choice. They can either stay in the market where there is too much availability for the demand, or improve their skills and move to a market where there is too little availability for the demand.

It is their choice. Anyone can learn. You don't even have to go to school to do so. You've recently learned that, and not from any school.


The Parrot Killer
27-09-2016 15:58
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4926)
jwoodward48 wrote:But do they always have that choice? What if it's a choice between bad job and worse job?

They always have a choice. They can always say "If you want me working for you then you have to notch up the compensation and/or benefits."

In fact, they always have the option of starting their own companies, creating exactly the jobs they want to have and being rewarded for it. Otherwise, if they are not inclined to add that level of value to society then they can always accept any offers that any others make.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
27-09-2016 16:19
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
Into the Night wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
jwoodward48 wrote:
So you've cracked my mind open on the topic of AGW. I'm inclined to trust you a bit more than normal, and considering that my initial reaction was to scream at the evil bourgeoisie-supporter and all of his laissez-faire nonsense, I'm beginning to think there's some amount of indoctrination involved in my political beliefs.

So what is the Church of Marxism? And what's wrong with it?


The resemblance to normal religions of Marxism is along the line of having a set of beliefs that come from a single source, the communist manifesto in this case, which are learnt and studied without questioning their actual fitness.

Any policy is justified by quoting selected bits of the holy book. The commissars are directly analogous to the priesthood of other religions.

Have a chat with any good communist and you will find the same attitude towards open discussion as any fundimentalist Christian or Islamic prat.


Here tend to agree. I have seen the same. It is also why I call it a church.

There are, however, those that do not treat it like a religion. There are those that actually understand the philosophy behind it and want to implement it so they can become the ruling class.


Yes, all religions have their sociopaths who actually run the thing.

Religion is the con artist's best idea ever.


Compositional error. It is also one that involved people. Your statement is bigotry, based on an argument of ignorance.


I've tried hard to get what you mean but have missed.

Do you think that there is any religion which has poeple running it less intelligent than the suckers who are paying for the priest not to have to work for a living?
27-09-2016 16:37
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4926)
Tim the plumber wrote:Do you think that there is any religion which has poeple running it less intelligent than the suckers who are paying for the priest not to have to work for a living?

The priest is working. He is providing valued services that provide comfort to the people who demand those services.

In many cases people are willing to pay top dollar for a particular feeling they receive from priests/ministers/vicars/mullahs/etc...


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
27-09-2016 18:15
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
jwoodward48 wrote:
Religion can be good, Tim. If more people listened to what Jesus reportedly said, the world would be a better place.

Religion is only bad when it displaces science.


Or when it supports things like ISIS, but on the other hand, there are plenty of peaceful Muslims, and we have some domestic terrorist groups that are Christian (KKK, for instance), so I'd say that these folks would be out there murdering people regardless of religion.


"Heads on a science
Apart" - Coldplay, The Scientist

IBdaMann wrote:
No, science doesn't insist that, ergo I don't insist that.

I am the Ninja Scientist! Beware!
Page 1 of 5123>>>





Join the debate What is this Church of Marxism?:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Marxism, Climate and Utter Dishonesty6401-10-2019 06:40
The only straw the Church of AGW can grasp is Venus8826-09-2019 05:49
The only straw the Church of AGW can grasp is Venus and Mercury418-09-2019 22:37
Amy Kloubuchar uses snow to prove there is climate change. Now that's top level Marxism.613-02-2019 23:05
The purpose of the Church of Global Warming2825-05-2018 02:37
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact