|
Post by movieliker on Oct 11, 2018 7:12:05 GMT
And what incentive would anybody have to own a business or company and employ organized labor? If the the labor force had all the power? The worker's syndicates hire management of course. You keep the profit system but replace the capitalist class with a democratic system. Now a few families run everything and often their profligate children inherit the business. Anarcho-syndicalism is a much more efficient system. So, nobody gets rich? Everybody is taken care of by the state?
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Oct 11, 2018 8:28:39 GMT
That's pretty much the left nowadays as many of them (at least many in a position of power) are abandoning good for evil and are getting more hostile as time passes. they are for socialism more and more, which never works. basically the left is disordered and once someone goes too far off-the-rails, chaos ensues. hopefully things change as at the rate things have been going lately, if it keeps up at that rate, the country ain't going to be looking good in the not to distant future. p.s. God forbid the left gets back into power in the mid-term elections next month otherwise they will continue to screw over the common person/good. which is why I hope we (conservatives) can pull off another 2016 election like victory. but I think that Kavanaugh thing probably helped us a bit it as shows the common person how far the left is willing to go to maintain power and they don't care what lines they got to cross to get it and tried to destroy a person etc. For us conservatives we generally base our morality around God (i.e. The Holy Trinity (Father/Son(Jesus Christ)/Holy Spirit)) unlike the godless left who tends to oppose God more and more as time passes (not all of them, but enough of them do) and they are becoming more hostile to opposing viewpoints with their "protests" etc. the left is disordered basically. basically those godless types, who oppose Jesus Christ, tend to be quicker to violence in general. forming ones morals around Jesus Christ tends to bring society up and those who oppose His standards tend to bring society down as time passes. it's basically a battle of good vs evil in many ways in today's society as some on the left tend to support things God greatly opposes and the sad thing is, they are blind and they think we are the evil ones when it's really them. because when you look at right and wrong using God as a way to measure things it's pretty easy to see some stuff on the left is clearly evil, like those who are involved in the abortion industry etc as those who take part in that and think it's no big deal etc either have a very dulled/blinded conscience, or are just straight up evil. gameboyYeah, because it seems it's a fine line between something decent and taking things too far with the whole anti-male mindset of many on the left. to be anti-male is to be anti-family which is obviously bad for society. so overall feminism is more of a bad thing than a good thing. also, male/female are not the same as each are better at some things than others. it's just the way things are by nature. but those more radical feminist types are just hate-filed people. there life had to take a wrong turn somewhere for many of them to get that bad, sadly. I would disagree with that one. like for example... a male not being able to be with a female is not suddenly going to make him gay, in the slightest.
|
|
skribb
Sophomore
IMDb since June 2005
@skribb
Posts: 767
Likes: 204
|
Post by skribb on Oct 11, 2018 9:20:47 GMT
But humanity is not logical. Humanity is emotional. this is the issue I'm dealing with right now. all my life.... all my life....
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Oct 11, 2018 9:46:45 GMT
The worker's syndicates hire management of course. You keep the profit system but replace the capitalist class with a democratic system. Now a few families run everything and often their profligate children inherit the business. Anarcho-syndicalism is a much more efficient system. So, nobody gets rich? Everybody is taken care of by the state? If I remember/understand it correctly, the workers unions can become relatively rich. People take care of themselves and they take care of other people, too. Basically anarcho-syndicalism works kind of like capitalism, but any business is owned by all of the workers instead of just a small number of people who hire workers, there's a minimal central government, and social programs are run cooperatively, similarly to how businesses would be run. I'm not advocating anarcho-syndicalism, by the way, but I think it's better than our present system.
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Oct 11, 2018 10:02:11 GMT
So, nobody gets rich? Everybody is taken care of by the state? If I remember/understand it correctly, the workers unions can become relatively rich. People take care of themselves and they take care of other people, too. Basically anarcho-syndicalism works kind of like capitalism, but any business is owned by all of the workers instead of just a small number of people who hire workers, there's a minimal central government, and social programs are run cooperatively, similarly to how businesses would be run. I'm not advocating anarcho-syndicalism, by the way, but I think it's better than our present system. What about the law? Is there a Supreme Court? Or every company (business) makes their own law?
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Oct 11, 2018 10:04:52 GMT
If I remember/understand it correctly, the workers unions can become relatively rich. People take care of themselves and they take care of other people, too. Basically anarcho-syndicalism works kind of like capitalism, but any business is owned by all of the workers instead of just a small number of people who hire workers, there's a minimal central government, and social programs are run cooperatively, similarly to how businesses would be run. I'm not advocating anarcho-syndicalism, by the way, but I think it's better than our present system. What about the law? Is there a Supreme Court? Or every company (business) makes their own law? REPLY #2 And who is in charge of the business? Are their managers and supervisors? What if one worker is better than another? Does one get a raise or promoted? Who decides?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Oct 11, 2018 10:09:45 GMT
If I remember/understand it correctly, the workers unions can become relatively rich. People take care of themselves and they take care of other people, too. Basically anarcho-syndicalism works kind of like capitalism, but any business is owned by all of the workers instead of just a small number of people who hire workers, there's a minimal central government, and social programs are run cooperatively, similarly to how businesses would be run. I'm not advocating anarcho-syndicalism, by the way, but I think it's better than our present system. What about the law? Is there a Supreme Court? Or every company (business) makes their own law? I don't know what the exact structure of functions of the central government are under it, and I'm sure different anarcho-syndicalists have different ideas about that. Again, it's not my view. I just know something about it primarily because I've known some anarcho-syndicalists offline.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Oct 11, 2018 10:11:18 GMT
What about the law? Is there a Supreme Court? Or every company (business) makes their own law? REPLY #2 And who is in charge of the business? Are their managers and supervisors? What if one worker is better than another? Does one get a raise or promoted? Who decides? The workers unions own, manage, etc. businesses. Supervisors, etc. are voted on by the workers unions, and they collectively determine salaries, promotions, etc.
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Oct 11, 2018 10:47:29 GMT
REPLY #2 And who is in charge of the business? Are their managers and supervisors? What if one worker is better than another? Does one get a raise or promoted? Who decides? The workers unions own, manage, etc. businesses. Supervisors, etc. are voted on by the workers unions, and they collectively determine salaries, promotions, etc. Voted on? Sounds like politics. I would assume the political officials will have more power than others. Seems like an attempt to take power from those who have it. If the unions will be voting on supervisors and managers, they will have the political power. There is no way to eliminate ambition. Some people are more ambitious than others. They are going to want more power and money and those things power and money can acquire. Then they will be right back where capitalism is.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Oct 11, 2018 10:58:19 GMT
The workers unions own, manage, etc. businesses. Supervisors, etc. are voted on by the workers unions, and they collectively determine salaries, promotions, etc. Voted on? Sounds like politics. I would assume the political officials will have more power than others. Seems like an attempt to take power from those who have it. If the unions will be voting on supervisors and managers, they will have the political power. There is no way to eliminate ambition. Some people are more ambitious than others. They are going to want more power and money and those things power and money can acquire. Then they will be right back where capitalism is. Why would supervisors/managers have political power over others? Businesses are still run by workers unions/coops, it's just that there would be a need in some businesses to have people in supervisory roles so that the tasks at hand run smoothly (like construction coordination). The idea isn't to eliminate ambition. And you wouldn't be right back to capitalism, because capitalism wouldn't be a possibility under the system.
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Oct 11, 2018 11:39:05 GMT
Voted on? Sounds like politics. I would assume the political officials will have more power than others. Seems like an attempt to take power from those who have it. If the unions will be voting on supervisors and managers, they will have the political power. There is no way to eliminate ambition. Some people are more ambitious than others. They are going to want more power and money and those things power and money can acquire. Then they will be right back where capitalism is. Why would supervisors/managers have political power over others? Businesses are still run by workers unions/coops, it's just that there would be a need in some businesses to have people in supervisory roles so that the tasks at hand run smoothly (like construction coordination). The idea isn't to eliminate ambition. And you wouldn't be right back to capitalism, because capitalism wouldn't be a possibility under the system. Businesses are not run by the employees. They are run by those in charge. Those with the most power. Ambitious people want the rewards of accomplishment. If they are not rewarded, you will have the same problem the old USSR had. People doing just enough to get by. Because they knew the state would take care of them if they did just enough. But doing anymore was a waste of energy. Because there was no reward for the doing better. People come to the United States for opportunity. They know if they do better the sky is the limit in personal rewards. People want power and freedom. And success allows one to attain those rewards.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Oct 11, 2018 11:43:00 GMT
Why would supervisors/managers have political power over others? Businesses are still run by workers unions/coops, it's just that there would be a need in some businesses to have people in supervisory roles so that the tasks at hand run smoothly (like construction coordination). The idea isn't to eliminate ambition. And you wouldn't be right back to capitalism, because capitalism wouldn't be a possibility under the system. Businesses are not run by the employees. They are run by those in charge. Those with the most power. Ambitious people want the rewards of accomplishment. If they are not rewarded, you will have the same problem the old USSR had. People doing just enough to get by. Because they knew the state would take care of them if they did just enough. But doing anymore was a waste of energy. Because there was no reward for the doing better. People come to the United States for opportunity. They know if they do better the sky is the limit in personal rewards. People want power and freedom. And success allows one to attain those rewards. Under anarcho-syndicalism, unions/cooperatives of workers are those in charge. So under anarcho-syndicalism, businesses are run by the employees. There aren't owners and employees, where there's a difference between the two. The owners are the employees. It's not at all that no one would be rewarded. But it's the worker unions that are rewarded.
|
|
|
Post by ant-mac on Oct 11, 2018 11:44:26 GMT
We are one species living on one planet.We need to deal with our childish differences and get on with working together for the common good.And while we're at it, we should also create cold fusion, square the circle and work pi out to its last decimal place. I would say we are one of 'many' species living on one planet, but yes, nice points. Humans might be one of many species on Earth, but Humans are one species on their own and in their own right.
I was making the point that despite all the differences and disputes that constantly occur between the various countries, cultures and races, at the ed of the day, we are one species.
Our similarities are greater than our differences and we use them to work together for the common good.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Oct 11, 2018 11:49:44 GMT
Re: Business and who runs it.
It depends on the form of business entity. Sole proprietorship and partnerships are run almost entirely by business owners even if there are many staff. Anyone who shows dissent can be fired immediately. Incorporated businesses aka corporations involve a great degree of agency problem. The agents aka managers run the businesses that is owned by principals (owners). The owners have almost nothing to do with long or short term policies let alone day to day operations. That said the principles (owners) of corporations do elect the Board of Directors to see if managers are doing their job for the benefit of the owners but that still doesn't take away the fact the management runs the businesses uninterrupted by owners. It makes sense because corporations are very large entities and owners do not have expertise to run them as they are usually well diversified and have many different kinds of investments. The private corporations though are run mostly by owners.
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Oct 12, 2018 3:35:12 GMT
an aged concept.
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Oct 12, 2018 9:52:19 GMT
So, nobody gets rich? Everybody is taken care of by the state? Did your link and everything I said just fly right over your head? The state takes care of no one. In anarchism there is no state. Worker's syndicates run everything. If the syndicate is successful, the workers get rich. If the syndicate fails, the workers starve. What if I want to start my own business? I want to be the owner and boss. I want to make the rules. Not the workers. Is that against the law?
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Oct 13, 2018 2:56:44 GMT
That's pretty much the left nowadays as many of them (at least many in a position of power) are abandoning good for evil and are getting more hostile as time passes. they are for socialism more and more, which never works.
Really? Ask Japan, Sweden, Scandinavia, Finland, Canada and several other nations whether or not socialism 'works'. I suspect most of them would find your assertion laughable. And please don't start with that whole 'left evil, right godly' nonsense. I find that laughable. basically the left is disordered and once someone goes too far off-the-rails, chaos ensues. hopefully things change as at the rate things have been going lately, if it keeps up at that rate, the country ain't going to be looking good in the not to distant future. Er, you have noticed that it's not the 'left' controlling both Houses, the judiciary and the Executive? That would be the Right, dear. So if things are going at a not great rate now, perhaps we should lay responsibility for that on the correct doorstep? p.s. God forbid the left gets back into power in the mid-term elections next month otherwise they will continue to screw over the common person/good. which is why I hope we (conservatives) can pull off another 2016 election like victory. but I think that Kavanaugh thing probably helped us a bit it as shows the common person how far the left is willing to go to maintain power and they don't care what lines they got to cross to get it and tried to destroy a person etc.Yes, let's not be concerned about the lives Kavanaugh harmed, nor the ethical quagmires he's been involved in. It would hardly be seemly to point those things out in a 'tool' of the Lord's. For us conservatives we generally base our morality around God (i.e. The Holy Trinity (Father/Son(Jesus Christ)/Holy Spirit)) unlike the godless left who tends to oppose God more and more as time passes (not all of them, but enough of them do) and they are becoming more hostile to opposing viewpoints with their "protests" etc. the left is disordered basically.
Most of the Right, at least the portion in power, appears to base their morality around the acquisition of power and money, and the unbridled exercise of same, as far as I can tell. Although your god supposedly frowns on this, I can't see that he's taken much in the way of real-world measures to punish those of his children who are guilty of it. basically those godless types, who oppose Jesus Christ, tend to be quicker to violence in general. forming ones morals around Jesus Christ tends to bring society up and those who oppose His standards tend to bring society down as time passes.
it's basically a battle of good vs evil in many ways in today's society as some on the left tend to support things God greatly opposes and the sad thing is, they are blind and they think we are the evil ones when it's really them. because when you look at right and wrong using God as a way to measure things it's pretty easy to see some stuff on the left is clearly evil, like those who are involved in the abortion industry etc as those who take part in that and think it's no big deal etc either have a very dulled/blinded conscience, or are just straight up evil.Basically, you seem to be prone to making quite a lot of assertions that you'd be pretty hard put to provide proof of. But then again, I've never noticed those who wear the god blinkers to be too much burdened with concerns for being able to demonstrate the truth of their basically pretty silly assertions, basically. Yeah, because it seems it's a fine line between something decent and taking things too far with the whole anti-male mindset of many on the left. to be anti-male is to be anti-family which is obviously bad for society. so overall feminism is more of a bad thing than a good thing.
also, male/female are not the same as each are better at some things than others. it's just the way things are by nature. but those more radical feminist types are just hate-filed people. there life had to take a wrong turn somewhere for many of them to get that bad, sadly.
Provide some solid evidence for each of these assertions, please. And not with bible quotes. I would disagree with that one.like for example... a male not being able to be with a female is not suddenly going to make him gay, in the slightest.Clearly you have no familiarity whatsoever with prison life, military life, life in all-male academies, and virtually all other primarily male enclaves from which women are mostly excluded (um, the priesthood, anyone?). In point of fact, I rather suspect you have not much familiarity with life as it's lived by most human beings in many situations, a not surprising mental state of affairs for the average deep-dyed god-botherer..
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Oct 13, 2018 3:15:54 GMT
What if I want to start my own business? I want to be the owner and boss. I want to make the rules. Not the workers. Is that against the law? No, you can't monopolize other people's labor. And you can't lay claim to any of the earth's resources just like you can't own air. None of the business equipment or product belongs to you. You can organize a business. And they can elect you the chief executive. But the workers run the business. Why would I start my own business then? What's in it for me?
|
|
|
Post by Schwarzwald Magnus on Oct 13, 2018 3:36:14 GMT
Why would I start my own business then? What's in it for me? The beauty of the idea. You don't understand that you can still reap the benefits, and if it's successful you will make money. But you can't own the earth's resources and that includes labor. You can take possession of material items, but that doesn't mean you own them. This is common sense. When you die you lose it all anyway. Today is my 29th birthday.
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Oct 13, 2018 3:39:04 GMT
The beauty of the idea. You don't understand that you can still reap the benefits, and if it's successful you will make money. But you can't own the earth's resources and that includes labor. You can take possession of material items, but that doesn't mean you own them. This is common sense. When you die you lose it all anyway. Today is my 29th birthday. Happy Birthday.
|
|