If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
That's the trouble with people - they're messy and not exact. But if you notice, I actually wrote "or" not "and".
OK, lets analyse this further. How voluntary is it when people have no choice but to work for someone else and have that person expropriate part of the value of their labour, if they want to have a roof over their head, eat a meal, pay their bills etc? Not voluntary at all in fact, in fact they are very much coerced by necessity and economics.
Yes I did notice.My "and" wasn`t quoting you.It was emphasised to show that the definition contained both those phrases thereby making it,let`s say "fuzzy"/"grey".
A simple answer could be "we always have a choice,even when coerced" but that would be lazy,wouldn`t it?
"work for someone else" = trading with someone else however unfavourable the conditions on one side of the trade.
The use of the word value seems meaningless unless it is applied to someone.e.g.I value my football "skills" at £1 million a game.If no-one else does I am unlikely to receive £1million.The "value" has to be mutually agreed.To take this further,say someone did agree and by trading with me and utilising those skills recouped £1.1 million.Have they expropriated part of my "labour value" ?
seeker
You can either work for someone else, offer them your skills and/or labour, and consign yourself to be a salary/wage slave, or you can strike out on your own with entrepreneurial zeal and build a successful business and make loads of dosh.
The choice is there for everyone to make, some are braver than others!
Blagsta has already deconstructed Matadore's response from yesterday so I'm not going to go on a point-by-point answer. But what I'll do is reply to Matadore's request to provide more information regarding the state of the US healthcare system compared higher tax, public healthcare countries, and to even third world communist Cuba.
For your reading pleasure
So, Matadore, the US is the only country with private healthcare on that table. It's also the country with the WORST figures. Even ultra-poor, embargo-plagued, third world Cuba does better than your mighty USA and its low tax, private health system.
Very good eh?
The point is that we have material needs we have to satisfy in order to live. Under the system you favour, we have no choice but to sell our labour in order to satisfy those needs. Not really much of a choice is it?
Short answer - yes. But its not really a very useful example is it? What is the likelihood of anyone paying you any money at all to play football, unless you are a professional. Lets look at the real world - people have to sell their labour in order to survive. Businesses then expropriate some of the value of that labour as profit. Say John works in a factory making widgets. He gets paid £50/day for making these widgets. Yet the amount of widgets he makes get sold for £100. The value of those widgets was £100 on the market, yet John who made them only gets paid half that. Not really a free voluntary exchange is it? (yes, I know this is an overly simplistic example, but you get my drift I hope).
What if the "market" valued the widgets at £40,would you say John should hand back £10 of the £50 he received?
seeker
Noone has ever been asked? I do believe that the voters are asked every four years and the majority of people vote. It is only in the past few years that voting numbers have declined. YOu are nit-picking anyway, a consensus doesnt have to be unanimous, if you wanted one of those you would nevr get one. We both know that 40 million people are never going to agree on the same thing.
You want me to leave England? Its an affluent, middle class society with no absolute poverty, only relative poverty - which is a sham.
When I say broadly content I mean with the most basics of life. Accomodation, diet, entertainment, social networks.
I disagree, turnouts are falling becausr the government no longer has the influence it used to. Along with partisan dealignment, long periods of one party rule and a less deferential society. People believe politicians as much as they always have, but they simply dont have the compunction to vote anymore. Theres no point, why change a way of life with which the voting population broadly accepts.
750,000 march against war
Hardly a vast number in a country of 60 millions.
Society must always have a ruling class. It prevents chaos.
What you seek is impossible.
Where did I say I wanted private government?
Short of the whole of humanity ascending to enlightenment, its never going to happen.
I talk to plenty, thanks, and they broadly agree with me.
And no, no one has ever asked the people what system they want. Was the land enclosures act a democratic act? People can put a X every 4 years, to vote for capitalism, capitalism or capitalism. If you think that's democracy then you're fucked in the head.
in all fairness it's more like capatilism type A capatilism type B and capatalism type C...though point taken, things won't really be all that different...
That seems like a tacit endorsement of slavery :nervous: :nervous: :nervous:
If that was a factual statement,then what prevents "chaos" amongst the ruling class?
seeker
You're in favour of privatising public services.
Yes. Not the government itself. Very diffenert.
you do make me laugh rich kid.
their were fucking seven million of them scrounging bastards during 18 yrs of tory ruin.
but now ...a mere handfull in comparrison.
please remember why new labour swept away that 18 years.
becuase thatcher world almost destroyed the middle class ...the proffesionals ...mondeo man.
along with their scholls hospitals and police force!
the mass house reposessions ...etc etc etc.
it scares me that not enough people on this board experienced the dark tory days of heartbreak and fear ...yes fear.
Not really.
yea but that doesn't matter cos thstcher was the greatest prime minister since churchill and everyone loves her....shit was i being sarcastic there :chin: