What, exactly, is socialism? Again this discussion seems necessary.

Discussion in 'Economics & Trade' started by Kode, Aug 19, 2018.

  1. crank

    crank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    34,972
    Likes Received:
    8,493
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He said Asian Americans are privileged. I asked what these privileges were. He said 'oil' (or some other BS).

    Meantime, I pointed out that not only are they not privileged (most originating in non-First World nations, and few being from the aristocracy of those nations), but that they're actively discriminated against.

    That is a single track, and I've stayed on it.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2020
  2. crank

    crank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    34,972
    Likes Received:
    8,493
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Asian Americans?
     
  3. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,669
    Likes Received:
    1,601
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He's given no economics and you've celebrated in it. Its all very pathetic. This thread deserves better than your cretinous right wing grunt.
     
  4. crank

    crank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    34,972
    Likes Received:
    8,493
    Trophy Points:
    113
    hahaha .. bless you Reivs :D
     
  5. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,669
    Likes Received:
    1,601
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You forgot to put it right? Why can't you actually refer to any socialist political economy? Why are you so reliant on ramble and rant at another fellow that can't be left wing?
     
  6. gottzilla

    gottzilla Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2019
    Messages:
    230
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    28
    :boo:I quoted clear and definite evidence in the post you just responded to that you are the one that got confused. Your unwillingness/inability to realize/admit what could in isolation merely be a minor slip up does help paint a nice picture of your modus operandi in these conversations. Thank you.
     
  7. crank

    crank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    34,972
    Likes Received:
    8,493
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Lost the power of speech? That made very little sense.
     
  8. crank

    crank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    34,972
    Likes Received:
    8,493
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Lord have mercy.
     
    Idahojunebug77 likes this.
  9. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,669
    Likes Received:
    1,601
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It wasnt difficult. You pretend to be left wing, but spend all your efforts pandering to right wing knuckle dragging. I was just wondering why you aren't able to refer to any heterodox economics in your pretense?
     
  10. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    4,176
    Likes Received:
    245
    Trophy Points:
    63
    No, that's just you makin' $#!+ up again. I provide economic critique when it is pertinent, and you know it.
    No. As you know, I have explained many times exactly why they are wrong. I just don't give the same explanation in every post.
    All Marxist garbage is based on the same absurdities, so the same critique applies.
    Again, that is just you makin' $#!+ up. I am most interested in ending institutionalized injustices because the sort of random, idiosyncratic, and/or trivial injustices you are trying to divert readers' attention to are nothing but a distraction to help you sustain the massive, systematic, institutionalized injustices you prefer to justice.
    No, that is just you makin' $#+ up again. Lots of things that ruin lives are nevertheless trivialities: high school athletics, unsafe commercial food handling, medical blunders, etc., etc.
    There are few actions more futile than offering you genuine economic comment.
     
  11. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    4,176
    Likes Received:
    245
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Thank you for having that much patience with crank. I didn't have it in me to reconstruct her confusion.
     
  12. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,669
    Likes Received:
    1,601
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Zero comment, again! I've not seen one genuine critique of Marxism from you. And here, given you can't adapt your land rant, you've simply dodged any economic comment on discrimination. Your bile and your lack of content is, mind you, consistent with that hypocrisy over justice.
     
  13. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,669
    Likes Received:
    1,601
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You're actually very similar. Neither of you actually refer to any economics.
     
  14. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    4,176
    Likes Received:
    245
    Trophy Points:
    63
    No, you did not. Gottzilla was kind enough to reconstruct your confusion, and prove that you asked me what injustices were visited upon Asian Americans, not what injustices they were visiting upon others. But the answer is the same -- privilege -- and the privileges are also the same: land titles, IP monopolies, bank licenses, broadcast spectrum allocations, oil and mineral rights, etc. Moreover, owning shares in the companies that own those things means participating in those privileges, too.
     
  15. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    4,176
    Likes Received:
    245
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Yes, of course you have: Marxism took the giant backward step of conflating land with production goods as "the means of production," reversing the progress classical economics had achieved by separating land from production goods. As a result, Marxism idiotically and dishonestly blames the factory owner for what the landowner does to the worker. That false accusation is the foundation of Marxism, and all of Marxism is invalidated by it.
     
  16. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    4,176
    Likes Received:
    245
    Trophy Points:
    63
    False. It made perfect sense. You have simply become confused.
    ?? Who on earth do you incorrectly imagine my "ideologically preferred people" are??
     
  17. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,669
    Likes Received:
    1,601
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's not a genuine critique of Marxism. That is you trying to justify your backward Georgism. We know that Marxism is needed to understand capitalism, from understanding labour markets to explaining macroeconomic crisis. That reality must annoy you somewhat, given it makes your Georgism spectacular in its relative irrelevance.
     
  18. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    4,176
    Likes Received:
    245
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Yes, it is. It flat-out refutes Marxism.
    Nope. That is just you being snotty but offering no facts or logic, as usual.
    Nope. We know it guarantees misunderstanding of capitalism.
    Nope. Marxism offers nothing whatever in understanding any aspect of economics. It can't even offer an empirically valid account of money.
    It's not reality, and every passing day confirms the truth of Henry George's estimate of Marx: "the prince of muddle-heads."
     
  19. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,669
    Likes Received:
    1,601
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ramble, nothing more. I had a sneak look at Science Direct to see if I could get any idea over why you cannot support your opinion with any credible economic evidence. I searched for Georgist and Marxist. Results? 28 hits for Georgist; 13,441 for Marxist. Tad a clue over the relative importance!
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2020
  20. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    4,176
    Likes Received:
    245
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Yes, well, if you consult the "Muslim" and "atheist" hits, you'll find that Islam has a big lead....
     
  21. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,669
    Likes Received:
    1,601
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not in Science Direct. They're both in the thousands. Why do you think Georgism has failed so abysmally?
     
  22. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    4,176
    Likes Received:
    245
    Trophy Points:
    63
    But the point remains: truth is not a popularity contest.
    Oh, that one is easy: the relentless lying about it by both capitalists and socialists.
     
  23. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,669
    Likes Received:
    1,601
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This isn't about popularity. It is about illustrating the nature of the available academic research. Crikey, even New Institutionalist economics- in trying to understand the boundaries of the firm- has similarities with Marx's views over property rights. It just neatly advertises the immaturity in your anti-Marxist grunt.

    And the idea that academics ignore Georgism because of "capitalists and socialists" is also cretinous.
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2020
  24. crank

    crank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    34,972
    Likes Received:
    8,493
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Thank you for answering my question - again!

    Now, where are these oil wells etc? The backyards of Asian Americans?
     
  25. crank

    crank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    34,972
    Likes Received:
    8,493
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Because you keep demonising those who aren't them. Literally, calling all landowners 'evil'.
     

Share This Page