Are labor supply and freedom related?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian
This, however, is why modern capitalist societies provide some form of safety net...

-Arrian

Here's why I'm not for just a safety net. In your hypothetical example Berzerker helps me out when I'm down, and we assume that he doesn't pass judgement on me for needing his help, but in an actual capitalist society such people are treated as inferior, not by the law necessarily, but by those who think they are better then them because they are more financially independent.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flubber
Vel

While I agree with your approach, I am trying to show the fallacy of kid's distinctions even if we accept his premises that only work "counts". The bezerker kid island is a perfect example since we have set the scene with utopian equality at the beginning but now through work and only work, Bezerker has an asset of value, whether it be a farm or a tool or whatever. Now the question to kid is the manner in which the small two person society could allow kid to use or harvest that asset. Taking it for free means that kid is TAKING the value of Bezerker's sweating back-breaking work for NOTHING. THat HAS to be EXPLOITATION.

I'm just questioning whether eating the banana's without paying for them is really taking the fruits of his labor, since it's really not costing Berzerker anything.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flubber


Perhaps--- we are talking kid's version of communism here. I still remember that he indicated that Mrs Flubber MUST go to work. We would not have the option for her to stay at home with baby Flubber and for us to make do as a single-income family (at the state mandated fair wage of course)

I don't think I said that she shouldn't be able to stay home with a baby. If I did I probably misread your post.

[Apocalypse]

Yes taking his bananas is. He put time into getting them.

[Arrian]

Here's why I'm not for just a safety net. In your hypothetical example Berzerker helps me out when I'm down, and we assume that he doesn't pass judgement on me for needing his help, but in an actual capitalist society such people are treated as inferior, not by the law necessarily, but by those who think they are better then them because they are more financially independent.

Kid,

How we are treated under the law is the thing we can do most about. What individuals think about one another... that's tougher. Look at how hard it is to stamp out racism. We've come a long way, but it's a hard thing to fight. Changing a society's view of something takes time & effort... or a "cultural revolution."

And I don't think our culture is quite as harsh as that - what you describe sounds Victorian.

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
I have nine pages of catch up to do. The problem I have with these kid v everyone debates is that people keep saying BS stuff, like vel did about kid wanting party bosses to tell people where to live and what jobs to do. Kid is sometimes inconsistent, and that makes it a lot easier for everyone to twist what he's saying around. I don't really want to deal with that.

Either do I.

Thanks though for taking up some weight for me though.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Apocalypse
Yes taking his bananas is. He put time into getting them.

And they are going to perish anyway if I don't eat them.

[Apocalypse]

Originally posted by Kidicious
And they are going to perish anyway if I don't eat them.

Not necessarily...and they can be used in fertilizer.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious


I don't think I said that she shouldn't be able to stay home with a baby. If I did I probably misread your post.

Nope-- it was several threads ago but you were quite explicit in that she would have to go to work. Your reasoning was along the lines that many times both parents HAVE to go to work so she should have to as well. If you wish to change this view I would accept that, but there was no misinterpretation

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious


And they are going to perish anyway if I don't eat them.

Don't be obtuse. Change the example to wheat or carrots or potatoes or milk from a cow-- the specific asset is irrelevant.

The key idea is that Bezerker has created value through work-- all by himself. No one else could have any logical or moral argument that they have an entitlement to that value

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian


Kid,

How we are treated under the law is the thing we can do most about. What individuals think about one another... that's tougher. Look at how hard it is to stamp out racism. We've come a long way, but it's a hard thing to fight. Changing a society's view of something takes time & effort... or a "cultural revolution."

And I don't think our culture is quite as harsh as that - what you describe sounds Victorian.

-Arrian

Capitalism is the root of these problems Arrian. The prejudice against the poor has a lot to do with the self-interest of the middle class. It's not only the poor that has to struggle for survival, but the middle class are struggling too, and when you are so preoccupied with your own survival you tend to see enemies around you instead of friends.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Apocalypse

Not necessarily...and they can be used in fertilizer.

I'll pay him the price for fertilizer then.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flubber


Nope-- it was several threads ago but you were quite explicit in that she would have to go to work. Your reasoning was along the lines that many times both parents HAVE to go to work so she should have to as well. If you wish to change this view I would accept that, but there was no misinterpretation

But I don't think you said she had a baby, but just a child. I think I just figured the child was school age. Anyway, I could careless. You don't seem concerned with what I mean, only what you want me to mean. You want me to be a ficticious character so that you can win a debate. I don't care about winning a debate. I'm just here to talk.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flubber


Don't be obtuse. Change the example to wheat or carrots or potatoes or milk from a cow-- the specific asset is irrelevant.

The key idea is that Bezerker has created value through work-- all by himself. No one else could have any logical or moral argument that they have an entitlement to that value

The question is whether Berzerker is entitled to my labor. I say he is if he has done an equal amount of labor for trade. I'm not going to work, so that he can sit around. That's not me.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Capitalism is the root of these problems Arrian. The prejudice against the poor has a lot to do with the self-interest of the middle class. It's not only the poor that has to struggle for survival, but the middle class are struggling too, and when you are so preoccupied with your own survival you tend to see enemies around you instead of friends.

I have no prejudice against the poor. I know lazy people that are rich, middle class or poor. Ditto for stupid people.



I'm sure that you will consider me prejudiced but the reality is that there are numerous means for a smart person to take themselves out of poverty if thats how they choose to apply themselves. I know people that actually see other things as more important


Oh and on the idea of prejudice due to self-interest of the middle class, I call bullcrap. Most middle class folks are in professions that see only benefits from increased wealth and an even bigger middle class. Personally I want more and more people to have more and more money so they can buy more stuff, start more businesses and on divorce, have more stuff to divide. I presume that dentists, small business owners etc etc would feel the same .. . the more people with more discretionary income, the better