The inherent flaw of capitalism

[Totally_Baffled]

For balance then, can we have a thread titled " The inherent flaws of Socialism"?

Maybe Dom or Lord Beria could start it up

[biffvernon]

Oh don't encourage them. The only flaw in socialism is that there are a lot of greedy people who don't like sharing with the rest of society. Thus we have the eternal struggle between Good and Evil.

[Little John]

Oh don't encourage them. The only flaw in socialism is that there are a lot of greedy people who don't like sharing with the rest of society. Thus we have the eternal struggle between Good and Evil.

Yes, indeed.

However, that statement could be equally made in regard to capitalism:

The only flaw in capitalism is that there are a lot of greedy people who don't like competing on a level playing field and so monopolistically exclude others from free and fair access to trade.

In other words, if it wasn't for those pesky humans willfully choosing to not follow the "rules", pretty much any system of human organisation would "work". Arguably, the problem isn't which ideology we choose to use.

The problem is us.

Or, rather, such ideological systems might be seen as merely an after-the-fact narrative used by elites to jusitify the oppression of the many by the few.

Sometimes those justifications have taken the form of "the Divinity of Kings", sometimes the "Word of God. More latterly, we have been treated to a variety of isms.

Same melody, different lyrics.

Same shit, different day.

[biffvernon]

Spot on.

[ceti331]

the world is clearly going downhill and I hear a lot of people saying its' because of capitalism, I always try to argue its' Peak Oil not any system that we're dealing with.

All the 'systems' (social software) end up having to solve similar problems..
they never turn out according to their original ideals (lots of 'software hacks' added later) all have similar emergent properties that result from being comprised of human beings.

there's always some sort of hierarchy, ability to get power from herd popularity, etc. Violence may be directed 'outward' or 'inward'.

Both 'socialists'(state) & 'capitalist'(bankers) - opposites - made a similar ponzi schemes - tax-funded pensions/welfare, and mortage-debt/interest. Both had the property that they needed more people paying into them. Perhaps both were an emergent response to people wanting to multiply?

IMO Our perceived social problems are a function of the type of technological *civilization* we have, not any *social* system, e.g. the ability to concentrate power into dense 'points' (oil-wells, key blueprints/soucecode, automatic weapons, ability to hypnotize herds with media/propoganda)

These real physical 'power' disparities get measured either as extreme wealth (billionares vs poor) or 'authoritarianism' (powerful dictator supported by kalashnikov-totting supporters exerting control over surrounding populace).
Of course take this tech away and we're back to the 'disparity' you can generate with castles/swords/armour ? remove those and you're back to the disparity between 'alpha-male' and 'the rest'.

remove money and the currency reverts to lives - number of copies of DNA, number of carriers of religious 'software' etc


(* if there's enough easily accessible ores to allow metals to be used to that extent in the future!)

[Little John]

the world is clearly going downhill and I hear a lot of people saying its' because of capitalism, I always try to argue its' Peak Oil not any system that we're dealing with.

All the 'systems' (social software) end up having to solve similar problems..
they never turn out according to their original ideals (lots of 'software hacks' added later) all have similar emergent properties that result from being comprised of human beings.

there's always some sort of hierarchy, ability to get power from herd popularity, etc. Violence may be directed 'outward' or 'inward'.

Both 'socialists'(state) & 'capitalist'(bankers) - opposites - made a similar ponzi schemes - tax-funded pensions/welfare, and mortage-debt/interest. Both had the property that they needed more people paying into them. Perhaps both were an emergent response to people wanting to multiply?

IMO Our perceived social problems are a function of the type of technological *civilization* we have, not any *social* system, e.g. the ability to concentrate power into dense 'points' (oil-wells, key blueprints/soucecode, automatic weapons, ability to hypnotize herds with media/propoganda)

These real physical 'power' disparities get measured either as extreme wealth (billionares vs poor) or 'authoritarianism' (powerful dictator supported by kalashnikov-totting supporters exerting control over surrounding populace).
Of course take this tech away and we're back to the 'disparity' you can generate with castles/swords/armour ? remove those and you're back to the disparity between 'alpha-male' and 'the rest'.

remove money and the currency reverts to lives - number of copies of DNA, number of carriers of religious 'software' etc


(* if there's enough easily accessible ores to allow metals to be used to that extent in the future!)

Facinating post. Thank you.

[stumuzz]

The Seven Wonders of Socialism;

1. Everybody is employed.
2. Although everybody is employed, nobody works
3. Although nobody works, everybody fulfills the plan.
4. Although everybody fulfills the plan, there are no goods.
5. Although there are no goods, everybody has everything.
6. Although everybody has everything, everybody steals.
7. Although everybody steals, nothing is ever missing.

I cannot remember whom said it, but it was said that if the sahara desert ever became a socialist republic it would have to import sand within three years

[Totally_Baffled]

The Seven Wonders of Socialism;

1. Everybody is employed.
2. Although everybody is employed, nobody works
3. Although nobody works, everybody fulfills the plan.
4. Although everybody fulfills the plan, there are no goods.
5. Although there are no goods, everybody has everything.
6. Although everybody has everything, everybody steals.
7. Although everybody steals, nothing is ever missing.

I cannot remember whom said it, but it was said that if the sahara desert ever became a socialist republic it would have to import sand within three years

[biffvernon]

I was introduced (an persuaded of its benefits) by a nun when I was about six years old. She was a temporary teacher and very nice. She held up the pen she used and told the class it was not her per but our pen, that in her community nobody had any personal possessions but that everybody saw to it that everybody else had all they needed. To my six year old mind it seemed a smart way to organise things. And I've not entirely changed my mind.

[UndercoverElephant]

...it seemed a smart way to organise things. And I've not entirely changed my mind.

It is a smart way to organise things so long as the group in question is no larger than a typical pre-civilisation tribe of Homo sapiens - which is something between 50 and 200 persons. Any larger than that and the system breaks down because of freeloaders. Everybody has to know everybody else, and everybody has to be on board. You seem to advocate this as a solution to problems on all scales, and this won't work. It won't work because human nature/psychology is pre-programmed to screw it up. I know of only one thing which is capable of "re-programming" people so they can overcome this nature/psychology. That thing is religion, and as I know you'll agree, this comes with its own set of risks. It is another case where the cure is likely to end up being worse than the disease.

[kenneal - lagger]

I was introduced (an persuaded of its benefits) by a nun when I was about six years old. She was a temporary teacher and very nice. She held up the pen she used and told the class it was not her per but our pen, that in her community nobody had any personal possessions but that everybody saw to it that everybody else had all they needed. To my six year old mind it seemed a smart way to organise things. And I've not entirely changed my mind.

But that's not socialism, Biff, that's community. They all work for each other. In Socialism you work for the State and Stumuzz' points 2 and 3 apply.

You can add to that list:-

The State pretends to pay us so we pretend to work.

[biffvernon]

I would say that it is socialism. State socialism is a deviant form that we both would have little truck with, Ken.

UE, I agree with your points about scale. That's why I said 'And I've not entirely changed my mind' since my six year old view. It's why localism (no, not the present government's agenda) will have to become more dominant in the post-climacteric world. It is the central theme of the late Dr David Fleming's Lean Logic.

[stumuzz]

It's why localism (no, not the present government's agenda) will have to become more dominant in the post-climacteric world. It is the central theme of the late Dr David Fleming's Lean Logic.

Is this the same lean logic that is used in industry under the title lean manufacturing?

If it is then I have seen it used very successfully to close manufacturing plants down.

Here is how it works.

1. Tell the workforce that the plant is not working at the moment and needs to improve and become ‘lean’
2. Feed them some cock and bull story about ‘ lean’ principles in post war Japan and how they squeezed every last drop of productivity out of the plant because of shortages of materials.
3. Select some of the more gullible, unquestioning types and send them on a six sigma course so they are qualified to implement ‘lean principles’
4. Impress on the workforce that waste will be eliminated. Not waste as in materials but waste as in overtime, enhanced pay for weekend work, company cars, pay rises and loyalty schemes.
5. When employees start asking about the lack of investment, maintenance, forward planning, training etc. Tell them they do not understand ‘lean principles’
6. Operate the plant, devoid of investment, until it can no longer function and close it.

Lean logic closing industry down. Ring any bells?

[biffvernon]

Is this the same lean logic that is used in industry under the title lean manufacturing?

No!

It would take quite a leap of imagination to detect much congruence between the industry version of lean logic and Fleming's work!

Dismiss any such thoughts.

[PS_RalphW]

Cameron rewrites conference speech to remove the one rational recommendation gaffe

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... gaffe.html

OK I rewrote that headline.