Poll: Who owns the means of production?
Poll Options
View poll results: Who owns the means of production?
The workers
15 48%
The managers, shareholders, etc.
15 48%
The state
1 3%
Voters: 31.
#1
Should the means of production be owned by the workers, or should they be privately owned?


EDIT:

Inspired by that other thread, this one is the real deal though. We had about 30 more "socialists" than "capitalists". Let's see how many actual socialist we have.

NB: To all my comrades out there - what would you call the current owners, aside from bourgeois, a term I detest?
Last edited by gabcd86 at Jul 26, 2010,
#3
I'm just going to sit back, and watch the socialists and capitalists destroy each other.
For the record, I'm leftish-liberal.
#5
Ideally I'd say workers... but I can see many problems arising from this.
So come on in
it ain't no sin
take off your skin
and dance around in your bones

#6
from an ideological point of view I would say the workers, but from a realistic point of view: the managers and shareholders.

EDIT: ^
You who build these altars now

To sacrifice these children
You must not do it anymore
#9
Quote by tubatom868686
Theoretically, the state and the workers should be the same poll option


Not really, no.

How much control does a French citizen have over La Poste?

Even if you accept that you have any control over the working of the state through the façade of democracy, you don't have much say in the workings of nationalised businesses.

Nor do you have much say in public services. The new UK coalition is forcing through all sorts of unpopular reforms that no-one voted for.


China and the USSR were heavily state-capitalist. Did the workers control that stuff?
#10
Quote by gabcd86
Not really, no.

How much control does a French citizen have over La Poste?

Even if you accept that you have any control over the working of the state through the façade of democracy, you don't have much say in the workings of nationalised businesses.

Nor do you have much say in public services. The new UK coalition is forcing through all sorts of unpopular reforms that no-one voted for.


China and the USSR were heavily state-capitalist. Did the workers control that stuff?


That's because it's a government that no one voted for. Depending on how you look at it.
#11
Quote by gabcd86
Not really, no.

How much control does a French citizen have over La Poste?

Even if you accept that you have any control over the working of the state through the façade of democracy, you don't have much say in the workings of nationalised businesses.

Nor do you have much say in public services. The new UK coalition is forcing through all sorts of unpopular reforms that no-one voted for.


China and the USSR were heavily state-capitalist. Did the workers control that stuff?


You do though. The idea is that you vote in representatives that will listen to you and do what you want. No different than when a Labor Union elects a president; just on a much much bigger scale
#12
So basically what we're doing here is creating a lot of political threads, justified by a poll, even though there is a perfectly good political thread?

meh.... Managers and shareholders should own it, and as said before, there is no real reason why workers can't also be shareholders, but if they are the sole owners (the workers) I can't see it ending well.
"You're a twat!"- That dude in morrisons

"You Ugly git!" - That girl in the restaurant

"You Were a Mistake!" - Mum

just a few of my fans..



#14
Quote by tubatom868686
You do though. The idea is that you vote in representatives that will listen to you and do what you want. No different than when a Labor Union elects a president; just on a much much bigger scale


But we don't. It's fairly clear. How is being given a choice between Democrats and Republicans any form of democracy?

And, again, how does a French citizen have control over the internal workings of La Poste?
#15
Damnit Gab there are already 2 rage worthy threads in here and you had to go make another.

With the workers.
Quote by Nosferatu Man

T-shirts are a sign of degeneration and decline.
#16
Quote by gabcd86
But we don't. It's fairly clear. How is being given a choice between Democrats and Republicans any form of democracy?

And, again, how does a French citizen have control over the internal workings of La Poste?


Independents can and do run. Its not their fault that no one votes for them
#17
Quote by tubatom868686
Independents can and do run. Its not their fault that no one votes for them


There is no way they can compete with the multi million dollar campaigns ran by the main two parties.
Quote by Nosferatu Man

T-shirts are a sign of degeneration and decline.
#18
Quote by will123456789

meh.... Managers and shareholders should own it, and as said before, there is no real reason why workers can't also be shareholders, but if they are the sole owners (the workers) I can't see it ending well.


They can't afford it maybe? Seems a pretty good reason.
Quote by Nosferatu Man

T-shirts are a sign of degeneration and decline.
#19
Quote by leeb rocks
Damnit Gab there are already 2 rage worthy threads in here and you had to go make another.

With the workers.



Well, one is just ****ing stupid, and the other is based on a false dichotomy, as Nietsche would say (Where is he, by the way? Posts are too short and easy to read all of a sudden.).

Was interested to see what the real political leanings of the Pit were.
#20
Quote by leeb rocks
There is no way they can compete with the multi million dollar campaigns ran by the main two parties.


Ill bet you their information is just as accessible as any other campaigns. After that, the responsibility sits squarely on the shoulders of the voter. Its easy to blame the candidates by saying their cheating by running ads every 5 seconds on TV and all that, but the fact is that the only people to blame are ourselves. If you voted republican/democratic in the last election, then you cant point the finger
#22
Quote by tubatom868686
Ill bet you their information is just as accessible as any other campaigns. After that, the responsibility sits squarely on the shoulders of the voter. Its easy to blame the candidates by saying their cheating by running ads every 5 seconds on TV and all that, but the fact is that the only people to blame are ourselves. If you voted republican/democratic in the last election, then you cant point the finger


It's called media control. The vast majority of people simply haven't got the time to hunt down every little candidate. You watch the news, and especially nowadays, think "Cameron seems more intelligent than Brown, and I like his buzzwords and meaningless policies, I'll vote Conservative", and that's mostly it.

Besides, the political system is weighted in favour of larger parties in UK and the US. Through the electoral colleges, etc, it's very unlikely they'd ever get anyway. Here too, FPTP ensures that it's a two, maybe three party race.
#23
Quote by tubatom868686
Ill bet you their information is just as accessible as any other campaigns. After that, the responsibility sits squarely on the shoulders of the voter. Its easy to blame the candidates by saying their cheating by running ads every 5 seconds on TV and all that, but the fact is that the only people to blame are ourselves. If you voted republican/democratic in the last election, then you cant point the finger


1. If I had voted it would not have been for one of the major parties in my country.
2. Most people who aren't politically literate will just see one party promising what they want or saying the other will do what they don't want and run with it. People are hugely influenced by what they have available to them and that makes it perfectly possible for an election to be bought.
Quote by Nosferatu Man

T-shirts are a sign of degeneration and decline.
#24
Quote by gabcd86
It's called media control. The vast majority of people simply haven't got the time to hunt down every little candidate. You watch the news, and especially nowadays, think "Cameron seems more intelligent than Brown, and I like his buzzwords and meaningless policies, I'll vote Conservative", and that's mostly it.

Besides, the political system is weighted in favour of larger parties in UK and the US. Through the electoral colleges, etc, it's very unlikely they'd ever get anyway. Here too, FPTP ensures that it's a two, maybe three party race.


If the average American watches 5+ hours of TV a day (http://articles.latimes.com/2009/feb/24/business/fi-tvwatching24) then they can research the candidates their voting for. Like I said, you cant point the finger at anyone but yourself
#25
So ignore the second point. Also ignore the fact that most people aren't interested in politics, because it's never really taught in school, and the media is shaped by elite opinion to divert attention to sport and entertainment, as well as framing the debate within acceptable limits. (Cut spending today or tomorrow?)
#26
Copied from my post in the socialist/capitalist cluster****.

How do capitalists explain the fact that somewhat worker owned industries have by and large taken the brunt of the recession much better than the completely privately owned industries? Example would be Tullis Russell which voted against pay rises as they would be accompanied by redundancies. They now hold a near monopoly on paper production in Scotland as their competitors have gone down with the market.

EDIT: to Gabby; not a fan of bourgeois myself either. Usually will use owners, owning class, capitalists or capitalist class to describe them. Works well enough for me.
Quote by Nosferatu Man

T-shirts are a sign of degeneration and decline.
Last edited by leeb rocks at Jul 26, 2010,
#27
Quote by gabcd86
So ignore the second point. Also ignore the fact that most people aren't interested in politics, because it's never really taught in school, and the media is shaped by elite opinion to divert attention to sport and entertainment, as well as framing the debate within acceptable limits. (Cut spending today or tomorrow?)


The weighting of the political system is easy to overcome by simply voting in different representatives. Schools are publicly run, and are an extension of the govt, and therefore can be fixed once again by voting in different representatives.

Basically, my entire point is point the finger at yourself.
#28
I might keep an eye on this thread simply because an angry socialist is amusing when he/she gets really worked up - well except if his name is Stalin or Lenin and he has control over the secret police.

To answer the question I have to stick with good old western capitalism simply because a pure socialist economy is yet to be proven as a working concept. The good people of Russia and the Chinese in the sweat shops will agree.
#29
What are you even talking about?

The political system is weighted so that it's harder to get in if you're not from a larger party. So is the media.

Sure, point the finger at us. But we weren't born out of nowhere. We live in a society. That society conditions us in certain ways.
#30
Quote by Fender Dane.
I might keep an eye on this thread simply because an angry socialist is amusing when he/she gets really worked up - well except if his name is Stalin or Lenin and he has control over the secret police.

To answer the question I have to stick with good old western capitalism simply because a pure socialist economy is yet to be proven as a working concept. The good people of Russia and the Chinese in the sweat shops will agree.


You could say a lot of the same about capitalism. Conditions of workers were much the same in America before labor unions as they are in China today
#31
Quote by tubatom868686
You could say a lot of the same about capitalism. Conditions of workers were much the same in America before labor unions as they are in China today




I was going to make a much weaker point. Well played, sire.
#32
Quote by Fender Dane.
I might keep an eye on this thread simply because an angry socialist is amusing when he/she gets really worked up - well except if his name is Stalin or Lenin and he has control over the secret police.

To answer the question I have to stick with good old western capitalism simply because a pure socialist economy is yet to be proven as a working concept. The good people of Russia and the Chinese in the sweat shops will agree.


Oh hi, my name is WORLDWIDE ECONOMIC CRISIS and I'd like to have a word with you.

in other words: a pure capitalist economy doesn't work either.
You who build these altars now

To sacrifice these children
You must not do it anymore
#33
Quote by Fender Dane.
I might keep an eye on this thread simply because an angry socialist is amusing when he/she gets really worked up - well except if his name is Stalin or Lenin and he has control over the secret police.

To answer the question I have to stick with good old western capitalism simply because a pure socialist economy is yet to be proven as a working concept. The good people of Russia and the Chinese in the sweat shops will agree.


1. I don't think you know much about Lenin.
2. the Russian economy only collapsed when they tried to use neoclassical economic methods to move to non state capitalism. In a wondrous display of how bad free market economics are they then ****ed the country over for decades to come following said advice.
3. Lenin openly abandoned an immediate socialist system when the German revolution failed going instead for state capitalism to allow an isolated Russia to industrialise. This is what the USSR remained till it's dying days.
4. Capitalism put them in sweat shops. To raise profits you lower costs.
5. I don't think you know much about socialism.
Quote by Nosferatu Man

T-shirts are a sign of degeneration and decline.
#34
Quote by tubatom868686
You could say a lot of the same about capitalism. Conditions of workers were much the same in America before labor unions as they are in China today


As it goes capitalism has been the dominant economical model in the west for a quite a long time. Despite its short coming it has brought growth and if that is your goal then I say it works pretty darn well.
A good socialist will likely prefere economic equality instead of growth but you can still have both if you combine elements from socialism and capitalism. I think we have done that here in Denmark and we are today one of the most equal countries while also being one the most economically free countries.

I better not get sucked into this thread because I really need to go pratice guitar, so peace out.
#35
Quote by Fender Dane.
As it goes capitalism has been the dominant economical model in the west for a quite a long time. Despite its short coming it has brought growth and if that is your goal then I say it works pretty darn well.
A good socialist will likely prefere economic equality instead of growth but you can still have both if you combine elements from socialism and capitalism. I think we have done that here in Denmark and we are today one of the most equal countries while also being one the most economically free countries.

I better not get sucked into this thread because I really need to go pratice guitar, so peace out.


Im just sayin, the most growth has come to America at least when it started incorporating socialist principles into its fabric.
Last edited by tubatom868686 at Jul 26, 2010,
#36
"you combine elements from socialism and capitalism"



The whole point of this thread was to reduce the amount of stupid like that.
#37
Quote by Fender Dane.
As it goes capitalism has been the dominant economical model in the west for a quite a long time. Despite its short coming it has brought growth and if that is your goal then I say it works pretty darn well.
A good socialist will likely prefere economic equality instead of growth but you can still have both if you combine elements from socialism and capitalism. I think we have done that here in Denmark and we are today one of the most equal countries while also being one the most economically free countries.

I better not get sucked into this thread because I really need to go pratice guitar, so peace out.


Actually for growth state controlled economics is the best bet. Private capitalism made America into a super power in 200 years. State capitalism made Russia into one in 20.

Guess who makes the cheap goods for the nice and free people of Denmark. Guess what conditions they work in and then guess which system necessitates that.
Quote by Nosferatu Man

T-shirts are a sign of degeneration and decline.
#38
Quote by gabcd86
"you combine elements from socialism and capitalism"



The whole point of this thread was to reduce the amount of stupid like that.



The stupids will always be there.