Comments by "Michael Mappin" (@michaelmappin1830) on "David Lin "
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
 @AbAb-th5qe ," so the ones who stand most to gain would have you believe." That makes absolutely no sense at all. If someone asks you to vote for them, if someone asks you to give them dictatorial powers, if someone asks you to remove checks and balances from your government, then that's moving in the opposite direction of communism. That's moving right to the right. I might as well be asking you to give me ownership of your possessions, promising you that I'm going to give you a million dollars or something. It doesn't matter what system of organization you're dealing with. If you get rid of checks and balances within the government, if you give someone dictatorial powers, then you're asking for problems. Communism doesn't have anything to do with dictators or giving people dictatorial power. That's absolutely ridiculous. Like what the hell are you talking about? Socialism is on the left side of the political spectrum. If you continue to move to the left, then you're moving toward communism. Eventually, in theory, you end up with a classless, stateless and moneyless society. If you move in the other direction, then you're moving away from socialism and communism. You end up on the right side of the political spectrum. If you continue to move to the right you end up with fascism. And of course I'm referring to the political Spectrum that evolved out of the seating arrangement in the French Parliament after the revolution. "Oli" means few. "Mono" means one. "archy" means rule. "An" means "not" or "without". Anarchy means without rulers. Anarchy does not mean dictatorship. They're polar opposites. That's why communism and anarchism overlap and are on the same side of the political spectrum. Fascism and it's advocates, they believe that human beings are not rational and cannot govern themselves. They need an all-powerful state to do it for them. Anarchists / Communists believe that people are rational and can govern themselves. That's the point! That's the main point of contention.
Here's an example of socialism at the micro level in the United States https://youtu.be/-VdbFzwe8fQ the workers own their own means of production. They own the product of their labor. They're doing their own work. They're not utilizing other people's labor for profit, which would be capitalism. The workers have sovereignty. They are their own boss. They get all of the wealth that their labor produces. If most of the GDP were coming from worker-owned modes of production, then we would have a socialist economy. A capitalist economy is when most of the GDP comes from privately owned companies that utilize wage labor for profit. The workers do not have sovereignty and do not own the product of their labor. The workers and the community do not get to decide what is produced, how things are produced, where things are produced, how much workers get paid, etc. That's why most things are made in China and why the richest 1% now has almost as much wealth as the poorest in 91% of the American population. Capitalism is freedom for the capitalist class. Markets are free for the capitalist class. And the more money you have, the Freer you are.
1
-
 @AbAb-th5qe , ," so the ones who stand most to gain would have you believe." That makes absolutely no sense at all. If someone asks you to vote for them, if someone asks you to give them dictatorial powers, if someone asks you to remove checks and balances from your government, then that's moving in the opposite direction of communism. That's moving right to the right. I might as well be asking you to give me ownership of your possessions, promising you that I'm going to give you a million dollars or something. It doesn't matter what system of organization you're dealing with. If you get rid of checks and balances within the government, if you give someone dictatorial powers, then you're asking for problems. Communism doesn't have anything to do with dictators or giving people dictatorial power. That's absolutely ridiculous. Like what the hell are you talking about? Socialism is on the left side of the political spectrum. If you continue to move to the left, then you're moving toward communism. Eventually, in theory, you end up with a classless, stateless and moneyless society. If you move in the other direction, then you're moving away from socialism and communism. You end up on the right side of the political spectrum. If you continue to move to the right you end up with fascism. And of course I'm referring to the political Spectrum that evolved out of the seating arrangement in the French Parliament after the revolution. "Oli" means few. "Mono" means one. "archy" means rule. "An" means "not" or "without". Anarchy means without rulers. Anarchy does not mean dictatorship. They're polar opposites. Communism in anarchism overlap. That's why they're both on the left side of the political spectrum.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Of course capitalism is the problem. Capitalism gives a small minority extreme power over the majority. Anytime you have that type of situation you're going to have corruption, greed, exploitation, Etc.
Under capitalism the richest members of society own most of the capital. Those who own the capital get to decide what is produced, how things are produced, where things are produced, how much workers get paid, Etc. That's why most things are made in China and why wages are so low and why the riches 1% now has almost as much wealth as the poorest 91% of the population.
The capitals company the boss gets to decide when you work, how hard you work, what you can wear, when you get to eat, whether or not you get a coffee break. They can't even decide when and how long you get to go to the washroom. The boss wants to replace you with one of his family members or his new girlfriend, he can do it. If you worked your ass off for years and he wants to give a raise and bonus to the newest worker just because he's his best friend, he can do it.
If you think greed and Corruption is a problem, then you definitely don't want an economic system that gives the richest members of society extreme control over other people and resources.
1
-
1
-
1
-
 @ExPwner , of course capitalism allows the richest members of society own most of the capital. How could you not know this? 😃 what do you think capitalism is all about? It's about the maximization of capital accumulation. Why do you think it is that Bill Gates bought up as much of the Canadian Railway system as he could? Why do you think Bill Gates is the largest owner of Farmland in the United States?
Something like 86% of world stocks are owned by the richest 1%.
If you have an auction, if you privatize resources, who's going to be able to afford to buy the most? Those with the most money!
Why do you think it is the people like Bill Gates push for privatization in countries such as Canada, Russia, and everywhere else in the world?
You claim to have a master's degree in economics but yet it appears that you don't even have a great 12 education. It's not too hard to track where most of the money is going. There's a reason why the richest 1% has almost as much wealth as the poorest 91% of the population.
And I love how you're not even aware that capitalism causes inflation. Yeah, in the apartment building that I live in the landlord has doubled the rent over the last three years. At the grocery store I go to the owner increase the price of olive oil from $10 to $20. Then after seeing how much he could sell at that price, he reduced it to $15 a bottle calling it up price rollback. 😀 but yeah, you're correct. Capitalism doesn't increase prices. One of my good friends had to shut down or coffee shop when the landlord increase rent from ten to fifteen thousand a month. But no, that's not an example of inflation. Not at all. You ignorant uneducated twit.
"A significant portion of the wealth is owned and controlled by the richest 1% of the population. Income and wealth inequality in the United States have increased over the past few decades, with a disproportionate share of the country's wealth concentrated among a small percentage of individuals and families. This has been a subject of considerable debate and concern."
"The information about income and wealth inequality in the United States, specifically the concentration of wealth among the richest 1% of the population, is well-documented and widely discussed in various reputable sources:
1. Academic Journals: Economic and sociological journals publish research on income and wealth inequality. Notable journals include the American Economic Review, Journal of Economic Inequality, and Social Forces, etc.
2. Government Agencies: Reports and data from agencies like the U.S. Census Bureau, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and the Federal Reserve are valuable sources of information on income and wealth distribution.
3. Organizations such as the Pew Research Center, the Brookings Institution, and the Economic Policy Institute conduct and publish research on income inequality and related topics.
4. Text Books: Many books by economists, sociologists, and other experts delve into the topic of income and wealth inequality. Notable authors include Thomas Piketty ("Capital in the Twenty-First Century") and Joseph Stiglitz ("The Price of Inequality").
5. Reputable news organizations, such as The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Economist, often report on and analyze income and wealth inequality using data from various sources."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What are you talking about? Your comment makes no sense. Is English not your first language? Can you not comprehend what Richard Wolff is saying? Poison frogs? Dude, what Richard Wolff is saying is very very very very very very simple. When the rich people control the capital and the means of production then they get to decide what is produced, how things are produced, where things are produced, how much workers get paid, etcetera. They get most of the wealth produced by labor. That's why most things are made in China and why the richest 1% now has almost as much wealth as the poorest 91% of the American population. The 8 richest people almost as much wealth as the poorest half of the Earth's population.
Workers cannot afford to buy factories, grocery stores, apartment buildings, railroads, etc. So if they work together collectively, socially, then they can own their own means of production. When you own your own means of production, then you're free. You have a source of wealth and independence. You own the product of your labor. You get to keep all of the wealth of your labor produces. That makes you less dependent upon governments and capitals corporations when it comes to jobs and consumer goods. Do you understand? Can you comprehend? Is that clear enough? Fuc. Pay closer attention and take notes if you have to.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1