PDA

View Full Version : Why do you agree or disagree with this statement?



tommieharris91
10/23/2008, 02:18 AM
(Marxism) hasn't been accurately attempted. i would argue that a capitalist society that favored worked-owned cooperatives would work very very well.

worker-owned business creates an atmosphere that is naturally self-regulating. if you don't pull your weight, your co-workers take care of it, but everyone gets an equal share.

Please post your opinions as to why you think something like this would (does) or would not (does not) work. :pop:

Frozen Sooner
10/23/2008, 02:22 AM
Four words:

Tragedy of the commons.

King Crimson
10/23/2008, 02:24 AM
when Party Leader Obama abolishes private property, and cancels the Bill of Rights, we'll all be happy.

Frozen Sooner
10/23/2008, 02:25 AM
To expand:

Resources that are communally-owned have two externality factors present: distributed cost/concentrated benefit and prisoner's dilemma. While significant incentives do exist for cooperative action, game theory shows that each rational individual will act in their short-term interest and extract as much wealth from the community-owned resource before competitors can extract their "share." This leads to destruction of the resource.

We can see some of this actually already played out in the form of corporate behavior. Shareholders tend to demand immediate profits to pump share prices instead of acting for the long-term benefit of the company.

SleestakSooner
10/23/2008, 02:53 AM
Utopian principles can never be mixed with capitalism... at least not for long. Eventually some will become more important cogs in the wheel and others less. This always creates tensions that are unresolvable and sides begin to be chosen.

Most humans need leadership, while others cannot abide by it well. Too many chiefs and not enough independent thought make for a great insect colony but not so much with conscious humans.

Democracy is meant to provide for the majority, but the minority is never happy. Capitalism has become nothing more than a huge pyramid scheme under trickle down economics.

I just can't see it working, giving the absolute power to everyone equally might take it longer to be corrupted but as long as human nature is involved it eventually falls back to that occurring. But some of America's greatest triumphs occurred during our most socialistic episodes. Massive fortunes were rebuilt, great wars won and monuments erected. If we could just keep the greedy bastards hands out of the till it wouldn't be so bad.

OU_Sooners75
10/23/2008, 05:17 AM
when Party Leader Obama abolishes private property, and cancels the Bill of Rights, we'll all be happy.

This is one of the stupidiest posts I have ever read!

Harry Beanbag
10/23/2008, 07:43 AM
This is one of the stupidiest posts I have ever read!


Hang on, he'll post again soon.

King Crimson
10/23/2008, 08:08 AM
Hang on, he'll post again soon.

so, you are going to head up the whiners posters this time around Harry? somehow i dont' see you as an effective dissident. you bite ankles way too much.

socialism, yeah!

Harry Beanbag
10/23/2008, 08:53 AM
so, you are going to head up the whiners posters this time around Harry? somehow i dont' see you as an effective dissident. you bite ankles way too much.

socialism, yeah!


Nobody whines around here more than you do. And biting ankles is much better than biting pillows....or so I hear.

King Crimson
10/23/2008, 08:57 AM
really clever...

royalfan5
10/23/2008, 09:05 AM
Please post your opinions as to why you think something like this would (does) or would not (does not) work. :pop:

The failure of Soviet Agricultural Collectives despite having some of the best land in the world is a pretty good illustration of why this doesn't work.

tommieharris91
10/23/2008, 10:05 AM
To expand:

Resources that are communally-owned have two externality factors present: distributed cost/concentrated benefit and prisoner's dilemma. While significant incentives do exist for cooperative action, game theory shows that each rational individual will act in their short-term interest and extract as much wealth from the community-owned resource before competitors can extract their "share." This leads to destruction of the resource.

We can see some of this actually already played out in the form of corporate behavior. Shareholders tend to demand immediate profits to pump share prices instead of acting for the long-term benefit of the company.

Yea, I pretty much reasoned that the best play for all players would be to defect.

Widescreen
10/23/2008, 10:40 AM
Marxism could work if humans were automatons. But human nature pretty much dictates that it will always fail.

jage
10/23/2008, 10:54 AM
This is one of the stupidiest posts I have ever read!

Is that because you don't read your own posts? ;)

Half a Hundred
10/23/2008, 11:03 AM
Given an environment where everyone has a community-oriented perspective, it is possible.

However, with a fundamental understanding of human psychology, and the knowledge that some individuals have no community orientation whatsoever, along with the need for individual power, the system is untenable. Around four percent of the population will take advantage somehow of a worker-owned means of production.

King Crimson
10/23/2008, 02:20 PM
on the subject of whining...about 90% of the political posts on this board would qualify as such if the haughty GOP criteria of 04 were applied today. especially from the military people.

cry on you are likely to lose GOP snot bags. your low brain power, easily manipulated worldview is about to replaced by a *different* low brain power, easily manipulated worldview.

Harry Beanbag
10/23/2008, 05:13 PM
on the subject of whining...about 90% of the political posts on this board would qualify as such if the haughty GOP criteria of 04 were applied today. especially from the military people.

cry on you are likely to lose GOP snot bags. your low brain power, easily manipulated worldview is about to replaced by a *different* low brain power, easily manipulated worldview.


So do you just hate everyone except for obscure bands that nobody has ever heard of? Serious question.

olevetonahill
10/23/2008, 05:52 PM
Please post your opinions as to why you think something like this would (does) or would not (does not) work. :pop:

I dont see it being able to work .
If all share equally, But the work Load is Not equally shared ( which It cant be ) then some ones gettin ****ed :)

Sooner_Havok
10/23/2008, 05:57 PM
I dont see it being able to work .
If all share equally, But the work Load is Not equally shared ( which It cant be ) then some ones gettin ****ed :)

I think that has been proven numerous times, comrade.