Libertarian Economic Logic (chart attached)

[Punk]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 06:19:13 +0000 (UTC)
jim bell <jdb10987 at yahoo.com> wrote:

 
> 
> 
>  >   But OK - let me 'disprove' this especially ridiculous bit : 
> 
>   >>  "Then came the Industrial Revolution, when products began to be made mostly, and eventually almost completely, by machines (and later, even robots)." 
> 
>     
>>     It is 'self-evident' that even to this very day little things like say, skycrapers or huge container ships are not made by 'machines'. They are made by people using tools. Lots of uh, WORKERS, work, for instance, in construction.


> That is a kind of work, and the people who do it are paid quite well.  Quite possibly overpaid.   

	So your previous claim about machines was at least partially wrong, and now you changed your argument on the fly. Now you're asserting that those people are 'well paid' or even 'overpaid' =)

	
>In any case, they are paid for the work they do.  

	Well, that's the whole issue. Obviously they are paid SOME amount. Question is, is that the right amount? How can we know? 


>They are not entitled to a fraction of the productivity of the people who will eventually live and work in the building they constructed.  

	I never said they are. 


> 
>    > As to the so called 'industrial revolution' 
> 
>     http://victorian-era.org/victorian-children-in-factories.html
>     Child Labour in the Mining Industry
>     
> >   So now, you should be asking yourself a few questions : 1) Is there a free market? 
> 
> I've never claimed that there a 'free market', at least in the last few hundred years.  
> 
> >2) Was there EVER a free market?
> 
> I cannot think of one.  


	Fine. So I guess we agree that the current distribution of property titles(and hence 'capital') is not the result of a free market at work. Without going back too far in time, it can be seen that the old government and commercial 'elites' have morphed into new 'elites' without losing too much power (if any).

	
	
> 
>  >3) How did 'capital' get distributed? 
> 
> I think of "capital" as merely accumulated wealth that the owners decide to invest in a venture they predict will be productive. 

	Yes, that's one aspect of it. But I was getting at how did wealth get accumulated in practice, in the first place. 

> I've never liked the term "capitalism", because it is only one aspect of what ought to be a "free market".   The modern term might be "crowdsourced investment money".  


	Yes, that's an accurate term. 


> 
> "4) How is capital distributed today?"
> 
> Your question is vague.  Maybe you should answer your own question, so we will all know what you meant.


	I'm getting at the fact that past and present distribution of property is far from ideal and just, on libertarian grounds. 



> 
>  >5) How are prices determined in the current fascist enviroment? 
> 
> To some degree, there is usually competition.


	True. And to some other degree there's central planning by govcorp. So, do you think govcorp will set the price of labor at levels that benefit them, or the 'workers'? 
	


> 
>  >   and 6) what is this? 
> >    The Big Bank Bailout
> 
> I'm not defending today's (or yesterday's)  societies, claiming that they represent "the free market".  

	...in that case you shouldn't be too bothered by the term 'surplus value' regardless of its marxist overtones because it can be used to refer to the fact that  current price for labor is not what it would be in a free market. Also, rigged markets mean that products are more expensive than they should be and so 'surplus value' flows from consumers to privileged producers.