The One Cause of Poverty That’s Never Considered

[Revoltingest]

The person in charge of the plant was the son of the owner of the company. The son had no idea how to run the business or deal with people. I came on as a manager and started to turn around many of the morale problems the company was facing but the son was just too much. He harassed female workers, he criticized everyone. I finally have enough and quit even though the HR manager begged me to stay. Two months after I left they closed the plant down and the son had to go back to his daddy.

This is an important feature of capitalism,
ie, the self-pruning of deadwood.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

So, the means of production is produced by my, the worker's labor. Since I don't get to own what I produce, how am I compensated for my labor?

Depends on the system. Under market socialism you would be paid shares of the profits, or if you would be compensated by a governing authority.

Also... You CAN own what you produce. Again, what cannot be owned are the MEANS of production. You can still own the result of your labour and profit from them.

Socialist policies?
Meaning that what I produced through my labor gets slowly taken from me and distributed to the community?

No, see above. What you produce through your labour can still be yours.

Yes, the poor destabilize capitalism. So the existence of poor people do not benefit the capitalist. So they have as much reason as anyone to eliminate poverty.

And yet, they don't, when they very easily could. Like, practically overnight.

Inflation is a product of the government interfering with the free market.

No, it is not. Decreasing government regulation does not lead to less inflation. In fact, the most common way to reduce inflation is to increase taxes.

Value is determine by the individual in capitalism. You get to decide how much a product is worth to you.
Except when the government interferes with the free market and artificially drives up the value of that product.

This seems a very specific claim. Do you have any examples of this? There are tonnes of examples of corporations and business owners artificially driving up prices on products, either due to a spike in demand or by generating false scarcity.

That's not the fault of capitalism. It's the fault of the government interfering with the free market in the name of stabilizing the economy.

No, that's very much the fault of capitalism.

OTOH, I'm not sure how you determine value by utility or who decides the value of utility.

Seems that if you can't possibly decide that then the free market can't possibly decide much of anything either.

 

[Kfox]

All the capitalist food producers are controlled by their capital investors, and those investors all want to get as much money as possible in exchange for as little product as possible.

No, the food produces are controlled by the CEO. The CEO knows making as much money as possible does not always include exchanging for as little product as possible.

So switching from one producer to another isn't going to change that result.

Yes it does! Anyone who has ever run a business knows this.

And the buyers have to eat to live, so they cannot simply refuse to buy when the sellers price-gouge them (it's a captive market). So all the sellers will demand as high a price as they can get for as little product as they can give in return, and the seller cannot refuse to pay this price because they have to buy the food to live. Thus, the whole market, because it's a captive market, becomes a unified monopoly even though there are still many different businesses selling food. They are all unified by their greed motive.

No, that’s what happens under a monopoly like the socialism you speak of when they have no choice but to buy from the one source; government. Under capitalism, they have a variety of sellers to choose from, and the seller who does not have your business is willing to under cut the person you are buying from just to get your business and this will result in your supplier lowering his prices just to keep your business; and the end result of all of this is you getting the best price any of the sellers can afford to give you.

 

[Kfox]

What if they decide to share the limited resources and both adapt?

Or they decide to do nothing at all if they can't do it their way; thus nothing gets done.

 

[Kfox]

Or the community decides which it prefers.

The community does not always see the vision a person might have. A system should be in place where a person with a vision can invest in that vision if he has the means to do so. there has been a lot of good discovered that way

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Or they decide to do nothing at all if they can't do it their way; thus nothing gets done.

Yeah, that is also a subjective choice. Correct, but it is that, subjective.

 

[Kathryn]

No, but the state can override property rights when deemed necessary. That's something that capitalists have balked against for quite a long time, since they hold the view that property rights are "sacrosanct," ostensibly believing that their property becomes their own personal kingdom where they should be allowed to do whatever they want.

Hey, all I want to do is an overhaul of my own kitchen.

The standard capitalist refrain is that "if the employees don't like working there, they can quit." Same for the customers, since no one is forcing anyone to work there or to buy anything. The idea being that, as long as everyone has choices, workers can find better jobs with better pay, and customers can seek out better businesses to patronize.

Or workers and customers can stay where they choose to stay.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Hey, all I want to do is an overhaul of my own kitchen.
...

Ever heard of the concept of the tragedy of the commons. That might even apply to your kitchen.

 

[Revoltingest]

Hey, all I want to do is an overhaul of my own kitchen.


Or workers and customers can stay where they choose to stay.

Oh, you & your unreasonable desires & claims.
What if someone feels slighted because now your kitchen
is better than theirs, & needlessly luxurious? You're
selfishly using up the limited supply of counters & sinks.
We need a People's Department Of Kitchen Remodeling
to ensure that only patriotic revolutionary kitchens exist.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Oh, you & your unreasonable desires & claims.
What if someone feels slighted because now your kitchen
is better than theirs, & needlessly luxurious? You're
selfishly using up the limited supply of counters & sinks.
We need a People's Department Of Kitchen Remodeling
to ensure that only patriotic revolutionary kitchens exist.

The problem is that it can in the end involve several cases of harm including the tragedy of the commons.

 

[Revoltingest]

The problem is that it can in the end involve several cases of harm including the tragedy of the commons.

I know.
It's unreasonable for her to want a nicer kitchen.
(Especially now that my own remodeling is done.)

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I know.
It's unreasonable for her to want a nicer kitchen.
(Especially now that my own remodeling is done.)

No, but it is reasonable to ask under what conditions for worker safety it is happening and if the resources used can cause a case of the tragedy of the commons.
If she meets those, she can get a new kitchen as often as she likes.
Edit: There are even more questions to be asked.

 

[Revoltingest]

No, but it is reasonable to ask under what conditions for worker safety it is happening and if the resources used can cause a case of the tragedy of the commons.
If she meets those, she can get a new kitchen as often as she likes.
Edit: There are even more questions to be asked.

I've already criticized her for wanting a nicer kitchen.
She certainly hasn't gotten The People's determination
that her plans serve the proletariat & revolutionary goals.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I've already criticized her for wanting a nicer kitchen.
She certainly hasn't gotten The People's determination
that her plans serve the proletariat & revolutionary goals.

Well, I am a Social Democrat so I accept with limits with the laws for the common good that she can have a new kitchen. But then I am a right leaning socialist and thus a Social Democrat.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, I am a Social Democrat so I accept with limits with the laws for the common good that she can have a new kitchen. But then I am a right leaning socialist and thus a Social Democrat.

For a second there, I though you sounded like a capitalist.
But then, socialism is capitalism now for many socialists.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

For a second there, I though you sounded like a capitalist.
But then, socialism is capitalism now for many socialists.

I am both. I use both systems for different tasks.

 

[Revoltingest]

I am both. I use both systems for different tasks.

Why describe the same thing with 2 different words?
Socialism is capitalism...so it appears in this post-dictionary age.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Why describe the same thing with 2 different words?
Socialism is capitalism...so it appears in this post-dictionary age.

Well, not to me. But I am so post-modern that I think as an individual and don't follow group think. Neither for capitalism or socialism. That is how post modern I am.

 

[Stevicus]

Hey, all I want to do is an overhaul of my own kitchen.


Or workers and customers can stay where they choose to stay.

No problem. But for those who might want to convert their kitchens into meth labs, the government has been known to take action against them. Why would it be okay for the government to do that in a land where property rights are considered sacrosanct?

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, not to me. But I am so post-modern that I think as an individual and don't follow group think. Neither for capitalism or socialism. That is how post modern I am.

Adopting the common use of "socialism" by
both the right & the far left, I hereby declare
that I am a socialist.