Communists, Don't Fear the Reaper....:D

[Velociryx]

By my count, I have asked nearly two dozen specific questions about your proposed system (EDIT: In this thread alone).

Not misrepresenting you...asking for points of clarification about what YOU propose.

So far, I've gotten one answer.

One. (edit: actually three, but one was a non-answer, and one has changed several times, so I can't really count it)

On the other hand, I have answered every question you had for me.

I've got better things to do.

I appreciate the invite, but will take a recess before I get agitated to the point of saying something cruel.

-=Vel=-

EDIT: It's YOUR system, Kid. I do not have the answers to these questions, because you are the one and only authority on YOUR system. So I've been attempting to get the answers straight from the one guy who should know.

If you feel I have misrepresented you, kindly quote me doing so to point it out, and I will remedy the situation.
-v.

[aneeshm]

Well , I think that they would have a chance .


Here's how :


The original founder of this small-scale industry is an innovator at heart . Also , he has a guiding hand in this business , because the family admits that they owe most of their good fortune to his brilliant idea . So now that they have economies of scale an order of magnitude smaller than their competitiors , but still bigger than the original garage-based cottage-industry business , they choose to diversify .

Instead of making just plain potato chips , they start flavouring them differently , and hire a few people for research into optimising their chips to make them the best . Thus , the people , who earlier had only one chip to choose from ( the state-manufactured one ) now has more , and also different flavours . So , the family business earns more .

From the profits of this venture ( of whom the workers age getting 50 % , the business 49 % , and the owners 1 % ) , they expand even further , making some products that the Board believed did not have a market , because they were rather trivial and that nobody would have so much money anyway . But these products have a market in the prosperous areas , and nearby regions , so the products are successful .

Because the national board considered these products too trivial , the family ties up with a few umemployed workers in nearby districts , and they set up small units for producing chips and other small things the Board conidered too trivial . Thus , the market for these things is totally theirs . The money for these units comes from the family business , because they want to exapnd . In these little sub-units , 50 % of profits go to workers , 15 % to the member of the family who has been told to govern it (family business has grown , and the top jobs are reserved for the most hardworking family members) , and the rest to expanding that branch (the family member or manager gets 15 % because the profits are rather small , the thing being only a branch) .

So , the family is creating a market for it's own goods by paying their workers more . The city they are living in becomes a sort of food-capital of the nation , simply because there are now many branches producing many goods the state had mandated trivial or frivolous . The city is big enough to meet their supply and productioan capacities . Now , they go on a spree of expansion , and they are able to compete because their a products have two things the state-owned ones lack : novelty and lots of choice (remember that they manufacture things that the state has no interest in at all) .

This ensures that even if their profits from chips are hurt , they can always survive by the profits and the market where the state doesn't compete at all .


Then , seeing that the city is a good place for business , some innovator comes up with a new invention and takes a loan from the chip-makers to start a business to make machines that makes the chip-making process cheaper . They give it . He approaches them because he knows that they will pay him more for the same thing than the state . They tell him that he will get 20 % of the money he saves them . He agrees . The management of the state-owned enterprises , being largely indifferent to innovators who don't come to them , ignore this . So now , not only has the origianl family-run business expanded , they can also pose a serious challenge to the government hegemony in this field by having better methods . Soon enough , the Natioanl Board of Industry decides that it requires the innovation for their own factories . So it goes ahead and takes them , but does not pay anything to the inventor because he already sold it to someone .













Tell me , is the prosperity of that city's workers fair or unfair ? And is it fair to take the invention without paying the inventor anything ?

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Absolutely.

How can you then complain that you cannot negotiate your wage at Wal-Mart, when that inability is caused by the minimum wage?

[Velociryx]

aneeshm, two problems with that scenario:

Debt is forbidden, no banking system, and interest will get you put under the jail (and as the 20% profit thing is essentially "interest" it is, under the current model's definitions, exploitive and illegal).

Second, Kid covered earlier in the debate that stealing an innovation is not exploitation, so should be "fair" under the current system.

But of course, I defer to the resident expert in case those answers have changed.

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

Point, LC!

-=Vel=-

[aneeshm]

To Vel - I say again , a little patience goes a long way .

[Velociryx]

After three days, even MY patience begins to wane...

-=Vel=-

[aneeshm]

No , the thing is not on debt . Everything is still owned by the family , and the family appoints its own people to managerial posts , so they are in effect paying interest to themselves - which is not interest at all .

[Velociryx]

I'm almost sure the state would disagree.

Guy "takes a loan" (which in itself is illegal)

and then promises 20% of the profits back for the money ("interest")

By this point in the expansion, you have, no doubt, drawn national attention, and the state would have little choice but to intervene, because of the rising affluence of the area, it's defeating the "fairness paradigm" upon which the entire system is based.

My hunch is (and again, it's not my system, so ultimately, we'll have to wait for the expert to chime in) that you would be shut down.

-=Vel=-

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Last Conformist

How can you then complain that you cannot negotiate your wage at Wal-Mart, when that inability is caused by the minimum wage?

I can't negotiate with or without the minimum wage. Without the minimum wage only my employer can negotiate, but for a lower wage of course. I wasn't complaining about the minimum wage. I was only making the point that the employer will pay the absolute minimum when there are plenty of people applying for the job.

[Velociryx]

An interesting side question would be....

if it IS legal as you propose (because the "loan taker" is a family member)....how would that be different than if the loan taker were a trusted family friend, and why would one be "less appropriate" than the other?

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

LC - without putting words in anybody's mouth, or misrepresenting, I believe Kid's point is that he does not accept that employees should be able to compete with each other on the basis of price.

That is to say, that it's "unfair" if you offer to work for someone for ten bucks an hour, and I come in willing to do that same job for eight fifty.....because if our skill levels were similar, odds would be overwhelmingly in my favor for getting the job.

Thus, competition on the basis of price (or specifically in this case, wage accepted) is unacceptable.

-=Vel=-

[Odin]

Originally posted by aneeshm
Well , I think that they would have a chance .


Here's how :


The original founder of this small-scale industry is an innovator at heart . Also , he has a guiding hand in this business , because the family admits that they owe most of their good fortune to his brilliant idea . So now that they have economies of scale an order of magnitude smaller than their competitiors , but still bigger than the original garage-based cottage-industry business , they choose to diversify .

Instead of making just plain potato chips , they start flavouring them differently , and hire a few people for research into optimising their chips to make them the best . Thus , the people , who earlier had only one chip to choose from ( the state-manufactured one ) now has more , and also different flavours . So , the family business earns more .

From the profits of this venture ( of whom the workers age getting 50 % , the business 49 % , and the owners 1 % ) , they expand even further , making some products that the Board believed did not have a market , because they were rather trivial and that nobody would have so much money anyway . But these products have a market in the prosperous areas , and nearby regions , so the products are successful .

Because the national board considered these products too trivial , the family ties up with a few umemployed workers in nearby districts , and they set up small units for producing chips and other small things the Board conidered too trivial . Thus , the market for these things is totally theirs . The money for these units comes from the family business , because they want to exapnd . In these little sub-units , 50 % of profits go to workers , 15 % to the member of the family who has been told to govern it (family business has grown , and the top jobs are reserved for the most hardworking family members) , and the rest to expanding that branch (the family member or manager gets 15 % because the profits are rather small , the thing being only a branch) .

So , the family is creating a market for it's own goods by paying their workers more . The city they are living in becomes a sort of food-capital of the nation , simply because there are now many branches producing many goods the state had mandated trivial or frivolous . The city is big enough to meet their supply and productioan capacities . Now , they go on a spree of expansion , and they are able to compete because their a products have two things the state-owned ones lack : novelty and lots of choice (remember that they manufacture things that the state has no interest in at all) .

This ensures that even if their profits from chips are hurt , they can always survive by the profits and the market where the state doesn't compete at all .


Then , seeing that the city is a good place for business , some innovator comes up with a new invention and takes a loan from the chip-makers to start a business to make machines that makes the chip-making process cheaper . They give it . He approaches them because he knows that they will pay him more for the same thing than the state . They tell him that he will get 20 % of the money he saves them . He agrees . The management of the state-owned enterprises , being largely indifferent to innovators who don't come to them , ignore this . So now , not only has the origianl family-run business expanded , they can also pose a serious challenge to the government hegemony in this field by having better methods . Soon enough , the Natioanl Board of Industry decides that it requires the innovation for their own factories . So it goes ahead and takes them , but does not pay anything to the inventor because he already sold it to someone .













Tell me , is the prosperity of that city's workers fair or unfair ? And is it fair to take the invention without paying the inventor anything ?

This is why i prefer Co-ops over state run industries, you get the best of both worlds.

[Kidlicious]

aneeshm,

All the state has to do is dump on the market. Sure the family could come up with new products and machinery, but the state could just copy them.

[aneeshm]

No , it is not really a loan , as the person actually owns the amount in question (the property is all in the anme of the family and none in the individuals' name) .

And Kidicious , please answer the question .