Re: PEN-L equals redistributionist LIBERALS
At 06/02/03 01:12 +, Alois wrote: I look at PEN-L and all I see are a bunch of LIBERALS from universities whose economic schemes all seem to involve big government coming in to enact their redistributionist schemes. I see a lot of talk about economics, including the discredited Marx. Clearly you do not get the impression of much of a shared perspective with your own views, and perhaps lack the patience to stay. Briefly, the point is often made, but for the record, some people might acknowledge that there were problems (as well as successes) for the centralised state economies run in the 20th century by communists who honoured the name of Marx. However others recognise that Marx remains as a trenchant critic of capitalism, and did not specifically endorse those regimes that arose after his death. You put your finger on the question of redistribution, which is a common feature of socialist economic perspectives. However Marx criticised a distributionist perspective heavily in his Critique of the Gotha Programme. The whole argument is important to a marxist perspective, and in that some of us could agree with you. Briefly one quote: Vulgar socialism(and from it in turn a section of the democracy) has taken over from the bourgeois economists the consideration and treatment of distribution as independent of the mode of production and hence the presentation of socialism as turning principally on distribution. Well here are some things that you seem to have left out of your socialist redistributionist plans: #1 For all your carping about business, businesses CREATE JOBS. People would be out of work if business did not create jobs for them. Yes in a sense that it true, but looking at economic systems as a whole. Can you cite a single human society that ever existed which had mass unemployment as a regular feature (I do not mean as a result of a famine or some dreadful social catastrophe). Because global economists sensibly sketch the present economy of the world as one in which 1/3 of the labour force is unemployed or under-employed? Worth staying? Pehaps not for you as you sound in haste, but I thought I would briefly make at least the two points above, lest people who would naturally assume they are opponents of yours unthinkingly accept some of the premises of your polarised criticisms. For those who do stay, (and there is no reason to assume a mass exodus from PEN-L) I suggest one of the interesting questions provoked by Alois is whether left wing political economy should primarily be about fairer distribution? Chris Burford London
Re: PEN-L equals redistributionist LIBERALS
so, what kind of business is the catholic church? hmmm! webster's unabridged dictionary says: Liberal \Liber*al\: - Free by birth; refined; noble; independent; free; not servile or mean; - Bestowing in a large and noble way, as a freeman; generous; bounteous; open-handed; - Not narrow or contracted in mind; not selfish; enlarged in spirit; catholic. catholic? well, i guess you do belong here, amongst us liberals, after all! wait, there's more: - Not bound by orthodox tenets or established forms in political or religious philosophy; independent in opinion; not conservative; friendly to great freedom in the constitution or administration of government; having tendency toward democratic or republican, as distinguished from monarchical or aristocratic, forms; as, liberal thinkers; liberal Christians; the Liberal party. - One who favors greater freedom in political or religious matters; an opponent of the established systems; a reformer; seems like you are in good company, --ravi
RE: PEN-L equals redistributionist LIBERALS
Title: RE: [PEN-L:34374] PEN-L equals redistributionist LIBERALS Alois writes: #1 For all your carping about business, businesses CREATE JOBS. People would be out of work if business did not create jobs for them. -- why is it that JOBS are so important? why is it that people want THEM so much that they're willing to put up with the petty tyrannies of businesses, the mediocrity of managers and supervisors, unsafe or unhealthy job conditions, and/or simple misery on the job? Because capitalism as a social system says that the vast majority of people have no source of livelihood -- survival -- besides working for the capitalists, except sources such as government employment (which typically pays less) and the dole (which pays much less and is subject to paternalistic controls and bureaucratic meddling). of course, if too many jobs are created by businesses, it leads to wages that are seen as TOO HIGH, so that the businesses cut back and unemployment rises again. Absent forced-labor camps, unemployment is needed to motivate workers. #2 People who invest in business are RISKING THEIR MONEY on their investment. They deserve to be rewarded for this risk, not taxed by the nanny state. I have never seen any logic in this argument. Rich people have a lot of wealth, held in a diversified way, and can afford to RISK a small fraction of it without any real risk. If all else fails, the government or relatives bail them out. Look at George W. who rose to the pinnacle of power without ever taking a risk. On the other hand, if you work with your hands, you're taking the risk of losing your thumb. In a coal mine, you risk losing your life or lung. If risk-taking were the justification for capitalists' exalted incomes, coalminers would be paid millions. #3 People who don't like working for a company should START THEIR OWN BUSINESS. can you lend me the money? I was trying to will myself to START MY OWN BUSINESS and just couldn't find the finance. Unlike many capitalists, I didn't inherit any real wealth from my parents or grandparents. JD
RE: PEN-L equals redistributionist LIBERALS
Alois wrote: I look at PEN-L and all I see are a bunch of LIBERALS from universities whose economic schemes all seem to involve big government coming in to enact their redistributionist schemes. At this point I was sure we were going to be told we should stop being so reformist.
Re: Re: PEN-L equals redistributionist LIBERALS
At 06/02/03 01:12 +, Alois wrote: I look at PEN-L and all I see are a bunch of LIBERALS from universities whose economic schemes all seem to involve big government coming in to enact their redistributionist schemes. I see a lot of talk about economics, including the discredited Marx. reply Clearly you do not get the impression of much of a shared perspective with your own views, and perhaps lack the patience to stay. Briefly, the point is often made, but for the record, some people might acknowledge that there were problems (as well as successes) for the centralized state economies run in the 20th century by communists who honored the name of Marx. However others recognize that Marx remains as a trenchant critic of capitalism, and did not specifically endorse those regimes that arose after his death. You put your finger on the question of redistribution, which is a common feature of socialist economic perspectives. However Marx criticized a distributionist perspective heavily in his "Critique of the Gotha Programme". The whole argument is important to a Marxist perspective, and in that some of us could agree with you. C Burford Comment I most certainly agree that there are liberals in Universities and many may have redistributionist schemes. There has always been a constant thread in the economic life of America that has demanded that the consuming capacity of the masses - "the people," be raised as the basis for expanding reproduction along side of the argument that the key to economic prosperity is to raise productivity and free up capital for expanded production and distribution. The words "using big government" to redistribute means several things in my mind, which reduce themselves to "giving people something for nothing" or as the conservatives say giving one money for not working. I believe this is a narrow perspective because money is always transferred to various sections of the economy and the infrastructure or there would be no highway system in America or a huge military infrastructure. Let us take the so-called Welfare bureaucracy. One must admit that the bureaucracy that organizes, manage and administers welfare consumes more of the money than the infamous Welfare Queen, who allegedly fucks everyone, have babies and contributes nothing to society. Perhaps you are old enough to remember the political battle to abolish food stamps given to our infamous Welfare Queen whose alleged sexual exploits have always escaped me. Foods Stamps were not abolished because it entails collapsing the agricultural sector of the economy and at the time food chains like AP or today's "Farmer Jack." The capitalist have always looted the public wealth. My point is that redistributionist plans are as American as apple pie and have nothing to do with the writings of Karl Marx. I must caution you because I have read the writings of Karl Marx, including his "Critique of the Gotha Program," - at least 50 times over the course of 25 years. It is very obvious that you have not read Marx but rather critiques of Marx by others. Is not George Bush asking for a redistribution of wealth to achieve his programs? The real issue has always been what one thinks is worthy of being redirected. "Worthy" - the impact of human agency on economic affairs, is a valid economic category. I desire to dispense with this political equation called "left" and "right" wing because it grew out of the French Revolution and times have changed. Actually America evolved somewhat different than most of the world in its transition from manufacture to industry. I ask what are you stating and if you make sense then the truth is going to side with you. Facts will also help your case. Melvin P.
Re: PEN-L equals redistributionist LIBERALS
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I look at PEN-L and all I see are a bunch of LIBERALS from universities whose economic schemes all seem to involve big government coming in to enact their redistributionist schemes. I see a lot of talk about economics, including the discredited Marx. Well here are some things that you seem to have left out of your socialist redistributionist plans: #1 For all your carping about business, businesses CREATE JOBS. People would be out of work if business did not create jobs for them. #2 People who invest in business are RISKING THEIR MONEY on their investment. They deserve to be rewarded for this risk, not taxed by the nanny state. #3 People who don't like working for a company should START THEIR OWN BUSINESS. Neat-o. CAPITALIZATION to the rescue of capitalism! Carl _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
RE: PEN-L equals redistributionist LIBERALS
gee i never thought about it that way before . . . -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 8:12 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:34374] PEN-L equals redistributionist LIBERALS I look at PEN-L and all I see are a bunch of LIBERALS from universities whose economic schemes all seem to involve big government coming in to enact their redistributionist schemes. I see a lot of talk about economics, including the discredited Marx. Well here are some things that you seem to have left out of your socialist redistributionist plans: #1 For all your carping about business, businesses CREATE JOBS. People would be out of work if business did not create jobs for them. #2 People who invest in business are RISKING THEIR MONEY on their investment. They deserve to be rewarded for this risk, not taxed by the nanny state. #3 People who don't like working for a company should START THEIR OWN BUSINESS. -- Alois - This email was sent using FREE Catholic Online Webmail. Please tell your family, friends and children about COL Webmail! http://webmail.catholic.org/ During the Lenten Season, please help support the mission of Catholic Online by purchasing goods and services from our sponsors at http://www.catholic.org/clife/lent
Re: PEN-L equals redistributionist LIBERALS
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: People who don't like working for a company should START THEIR OWN BUSINESS. And people who don't like getting old should JUST GET YOUNGER! People who don't like being sick should JUST GET HEALTHY! I can forsee an entire genre of SELF-HELP HERE. Doug
Re: PEN-L equals redistributionist LIBERALS
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I look at PEN-L and all I see are a bunch of LIBERALS from universities === You forgot to mention that we're also a bunch of pantheists who see all of space-time as a temple with way too many money changers wrecking the place.
RE: Re: PEN-L equals redistributionist LIBERALS
Doug Sounds good to me, maybe you've writing the wrong kind of books. I'm sure you guys and gyns have discussed this already, but is Christopher Hitchens on some kind of medication? He sounds not so much reactionary as to my ears as incoherent, like the people who used to wander up and down Telegraph Avenue. Richard Marens And people who don't like getting old should JUST GET YOUNGER! People who don't like being sick should JUST GET HEALTHY! I can forsee an entire genre of SELF-HELP HERE. Doug
Re: Re: PEN-L equals redistributionist LIBERALS
I'm a liberal, but not from a university. The universities didn't want me because i was too radical. This is actually true. jks Ian Murray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message -From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I look at PEN-L and all I see are a bunch of LIBERALS from universities===You forgot to mention that we're also a bunch of pantheists who see all ofspace-time as a temple with way too many money changers wrecking the place.Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
Re: PEN-L equals redistributionist LIBERALS
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I look at PEN-L and all I see are a bunch of LIBERALS from universities Absolutely right mate. In fact it might be worse than that. I think that some of them are practically SOCIALISTS! Perhaps it would help if somebody could look up a few statistics from the Black Book of Communism. Once we've sorted that out we can move onto abortion and war in Iraq, on which issue I fear you may also be disappointed by the general tenor of discourse. dd
Re: PEN-L equals redistributionist LIBERALS
During the Lenten Season, please help support the mission of Catholic Online by purchasing goods and services from our sponsors at http://www.catholic.org/clife/lent Sounds suspiciously like your church is sponsoring redistribution, Alois. What's more, I can say for certain that a lot of us are not liberals or redistributionists --- we're _real_ socialists, or COMMUNISTS(!!!), both of which imply common ownership of the means of production, not redistribution ... But I'm not sure you could get your head around the distinction.
