|
Ague Proof posted:Wendi Deng is not a 'pit.' Wendi Deng is a ladder.
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 00:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 20:34 |
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:While we're talking about the difference between liberalism and leftism (are we still there? I lost power from 12-5 today so I missed a lot of the thread) I just finished reading Utopia for Realists, which I liked a lot. The book advocates UBI, shorter workweeks, and open borders. Is this liberalism or leftism? I feel like it's leftism, but I wanna check. It sounds kinda socialisty, and if that's the case, then I guess I'm pretty socialisty, too, because I want all those things very much. Um, are there any books the leftists can recommend to me on more socialist theory? I'd really like to know the actual difference between socialism and communism. The best part is that everyone in this thread wants some sort of government-run healthcare, would very likely agree with a UBI, and believes that cops are terrible towards minorities. But that is the left. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 00:41
|
|
|
Mr Hootington posted:https://twitter.com/JustinWolfers/status/912446210128203778 p...productive? Is he serious?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 00:42
|
|
|
Chilichimp posted:p...productive? Is he serious? I know this year has been a bitch on everybody's ability to tell jokes from not (believe me, I know) but I'm pretty sure he's being sardonic/sarcastic when saying that considering his Twitter at large.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 00:45
|
|
|
Mr Hootington posted:https://twitter.com/JustinWolfers/status/912446210128203778 lol holy poo poo 'it is a good thing that we poo poo out poorly thought out legislation that nobody wants at an ever increasing rate'
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 00:46
|
|
|
Peachfart posted:The best part is that everyone in this thread wants some sort of government-run healthcare, would very likely agree with a UBI, and believes that cops are terrible towards minorities. some of us want those things very soon and think advocating for them will get us there sooner. others think hiding and cowering while the republicans have power and working bipartisanly to give away pieces of ppaca is the path to success
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 00:47
|
|
|
this take is also relevant https://twitter.com/joeprince___/status/912452516423569408 Condiv fucked around with this message at 00:51 on Sep 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:While we're talking about the difference between liberalism and leftism (are we still there? I lost power from 12-5 today so I missed a lot of the thread) I just finished reading Utopia for Realists, which I liked a lot. The book advocates UBI, shorter workweeks, and open borders. Is this liberalism or leftism? the leftist view would be mass decommodification alongside nationalization of things necessary to maintain a modern standard of living ubi doesn't really accomplish much if it's not enough to buy one's way out of immiseration
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:00
|
|
|
The Muppets On PCP posted:the leftist view would be mass decommodification alongside nationalization of things necessary to maintain a modern standard of living I think UHC is kind of a given in the situation (the author is Dutch). I don't know what other things you mean would need to be nationalized.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:While we're talking about the difference between liberalism and leftism (are we still there? I lost power from 12-5 today so I missed a lot of the thread) I just finished reading Utopia for Realists, which I liked a lot. The book advocates UBI, shorter workweeks, and open borders. Is this liberalism or leftism? I feel like it's leftism, but I wanna check. It sounds kinda socialisty, and if that's the case, then I guess I'm pretty socialisty, too, because I want all those things very much. Um, are there any books the leftists can recommend to me on more socialist theory? I'd really like to know the actual difference between socialism and communism. I see the liberal/left divide as being basically that liberalism sees the driving motor of society as rational individuals, and the left seeing that motor as structural relations of class, race, gender. I think UBI is actually a clear liberal policy, because it hands a presumed rational individual a wad of money and lets them do what they want with it, as compared to say a welfare state that directly provides material necessities of life like housing and medical care Shorter work week is more left IMO. Open borders you could frame as either I think I also don't think that liberalism is bad, just incomplete. I prefer the label liberal to progressive, because progressive at least in a US context has strong elitist connotations, and at least for the original generation of Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt an extremely Problematic relationship with scientific racism icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 01:14 on Sep 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:10
|
|
|
Peachfart posted:lol holy poo poo *Looks at the dude's other tweets* https://twitter.com/JustinWolfers/status/912448809363558402  He might have been joking?!?!?!
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:11
|
|
|
So I've got some people calling UBI liberal, some people calling it left. The author of the book sort of implies that he's talking about socialism without exactly saying that. Assuming UBI is liberal, would the leftists in this thread vote for a candidate campaigning on a UBI? Fundamentally, if the means of production are taxed heavily and the taxes are redistributed, is that functionally very different from them being seized?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:12
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Leftism cannot fail, it can only be failed. I know another group of people that thinks this way. So do I. *Waves around copy of "What Happened"*
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:12
|
|
|
BadOptics posted:*Looks at the dude's other tweets* Poe's Law is real, my friend.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:15
|
|
|
Also - book reqs? You guys have a Clintonite flirting with socialism. Get me over the edge.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:15
|
|
|
Condiv, while you're up on that cross, can you stop making double posts? Just take a breath before mashing 'submit' and make sure you get out everything you want to say. E: Or just use the 'edit' function?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:15
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:So I've got some people calling UBI liberal, some people calling it left. The author of the book sort of implies that he's talking about socialism without exactly saying that. well, part of the problem with UBI is that it can be used as an excuse to gut other welfare programs, and there's not much stopping capitalist forces from hoovering up all that free money without providing anything else in return unless you have other laws in place to keep costs under control . that's not to say it's evil or bad, but on it's own it's kind of useless as opposed to other leftist policies like single payer
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:16
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:I think UHC is kind of a given in the situation (the author is Dutch). I don't know what other things you mean would need to be nationalized. uhc and nationalization are two different things. uhc is just a payment plan to providers which can be public or privately held as for things which need to be nationalized beyond healthcare- energy, telecommunications, and transportation are a good start. basic bedrock stuff that allows a modern society to function defense should be in there as well just for cost-savings alone, but that gets into a larger discussion about imperialism
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
Ague Proof posted:Wendi Deng is not a 'pit.' They divorced years ago and she is a model of ruthless self-advancement. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
Condiv posted:well, part of the problem with UBI is that it can be used as an excuse to gut other welfare programs, and there's not much stopping capitalist forces from hoovering up all that free money without providing anything else in return unless you have other laws in place to keep costs under control . that's not to say it's evil or bad, but on it's own it's kind of useless as opposed to other leftist policies like single payer I think if we get to the point of UBI, UHC has to be assumed to be already there. If not, for the purposes of this discussion please do so assume.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
Oddly enough she's dating Putin now
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:Um, are there any books the leftists can recommend to me on more socialist theory? I'd really like to know the actual difference between socialism and communism. Communism is the goal, where there are no classes, "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" holds, and the government only exists to facilitate the planning of the economy, if at all. Socialism is where capitalism has been replaced by a planned economy (or some dumb market socialist scheme) and people are paid for the actual value of their labor (minus stuff needed for providing services for everyone, for maintaining the means of production held in common, and providing for those who can't work), meaning that wages for labor of the same intensity and duration would be equal. When it comes to people who call themselves communists and socialists, it becomes trickier and I'm not expert on those distinctions. In general, though, it seems like people who call themselves communists are more willing to defend actually-existing (or previously existing) socialist countries. They also tend to believe that socialism has to be achieved through revolution rather than gradually.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:So I've got some people calling UBI liberal, some people calling it left. The author of the book sort of implies that he's talking about socialism without exactly saying that. I don't really like the idea of a UBI, I think in practice it would be a massive effective cut to the safety net. It would serve as a means to say "we've given people just enough to survive on if they pinch every penny and keep all their books in perfect order, so if they're not surviving, it's their fault" I think the government should just provide people housing, healthcare, etc, directly. I wouldn't vote against UBI necessarily, and I don't think most people advocating it are doing so in bad faith, but I don't have much enthusiasm Hellblazer187 posted:I think if we get to the point of UBI, UHC has to be assumed to be already there. If not, for the purposes of this discussion please do so assume. Most proposals for UBI that I've seen basically get rid of the entire rest of the welfare state and say that people can just buy the things they need on their own with the UBI money
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:21
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:Also - book reqs? You guys have a Clintonite flirting with socialism. Get me over the edge. michael harrington's toward a democratic left and socialism: past and future are a good start his earlier book the other america was part of the inspiration for the war on poverty
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Most proposals for UBI that I've seen basically get rid of the entire rest of the welfare state and say that people can just buy the things they need on their own with the UBI money yeah, this is my fear of UBI
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
Something I've never really pondered before about a 100% socialist economy is how are things valued? Like, if someone is paid for the 'actual' value of their labor, how is that determined?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
Dismantling the welfare state was a selling point of the Negative Income Tax, which was Milton Friedman's take on the idea of UBI and the one he sold Nixon on, even if that little project never got off the ground.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:Also - book reqs? You guys have a Clintonite flirting with socialism. Get me over the edge. Listen Liberal is good https://www.amazon.com/Listen-Liberal-Happened-Party-People/dp/1627795391 Boon posted:Something I've never really pondered before about a 100% socialist economy is how are things valued? Like, if someone is paid for the 'actual' value of their labor, how is that determined? Do you mean in theory, or in reality in terms of how things are priced in shops? In theory Marx says things are worth the amount of labor that went into making them. This theory is largely not in use in mainstream economics, even mainstream center-left/social democratic economics. I would say you don't actually need to subscribe to LTV theory to be socialist though, you just need collective ownership and control of capital https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:29
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:So I've got some people calling UBI liberal, some people calling it left. The author of the book sort of implies that he's talking about socialism without exactly saying that. I think UBI is a good policy, especially as we're facing down the barrel of automation, but it's important to understand that UBI is inherently capitalistic and relies a lot on capitalist structural assumptions. I absolutely would vote for a candidate advocating UBI but I would make god drat sure that that candidate had good intentions and good legislation behind it, because: Condiv posted:well, part of the problem with UBI is that it can be used as an excuse to gut other welfare programs, and there's not much stopping capitalist forces from hoovering up all that free money without providing anything else in return unless you have other laws in place to keep costs under control . that's not to say it's evil or bad, but on it's own it's kind of useless as opposed to other leftist policies like single payer A lot of conservative thinkers have advocated for an UBI, hoping that it can supplant welfare programs and social services, selling it as a cost-saving anti-bureaucratization policy. I would like to see UBI alongside public services to improve the lives of people and improve quality of society, as well as with tighter regulations and controls on capitalistic excesses and abuses. I have personal experience living with something-like-UBI, as being Deaf means I'm entitled to roughly $775 a month if/when I'm unable to find work. This is meager and very difficult to live on. Something like $1000/month is much more doable except in some high-COL areas, but even then that means you're looking at $12,000 per person per year. As loath as I am to go the "How are you going to pay for that?" route, that's three trillion dollars a year to give every adult in America a basic income. The federal government pulls about 3.5 trillion a year in tax revenue, so you're talking doubling the tax burden (however it's distributed) to pay for an UBI. This will be an uphill battle, and I think right now our efforts are more efficiently spent on getting stuff like M4A and nationalizing energy/telecommunications. As automation becomes more and more widespread I think that businesses will start seeing their customer base dry up because they simply don't have jobs anymore and, therefore, no money to purchase goods and services with, and will start pushing for UBI on their own. I'm happy to leave the dirty work to them, but that's just my personal opinion.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:30
|
|
|
Boon posted:Something I've never really pondered before about a 100% socialist economy is how are things valued? Like, if someone is paid for the 'actual' value of their labor, how is that determined? By its duration. So an hour's worth of work should be able to buy something that has, embodied in it, an hour's worth of work. Now you would actually get paid less than that since there's services that need to be provided and whatnot (you would get taxed, essentially), but that's the general idea.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:31
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:Also - book reqs? You guys have a Clintonite flirting with socialism. Get me over the edge. Seconding "Listen Liberal." It's really readable. You may or may not agree 100% with all of his conclusions or assessments, but the history that he presents in it is extremely important to absorb, if you want to understand where the Democrats have ended up today.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:35
|
|
|
UBI was designed explicitly to supplant the welfare state. A UBI alongside an expansive welfare state would be largely pointless (in terms of the design of UBI) because if housing, education, health, and pensions are covered separately, then all UBI income would be supplemental/luxury spending.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:36
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Listen Liberal is good Both. The factors at play under our system currently range from economics to sociology to anthropology and more. Our system and understanding of behavior is so far beyond 'labor' as a source of valuation that it seems completely perplexing to me. Jizz Festival posted:By its duration. So an hour's worth of work should be able to buy something that has, embodied in it, an hour's worth of work. Now you would actually get paid less than that since there's services that need to be provided and whatnot (you would get taxed, essentially), but that's the general idea. Value is so much more complex than just labor though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:37
|
|
|
Boon posted:Both. The factors at play under our system currently range from economics to sociology to anthropology and more. Our system and understanding of behavior is so far beyond 'labor' as a source of valuation that it seems completely perplexing to me. someone that's actually smart correct me, please, but: isn't kind of the thing with marx about how value being divorced from labor is the problem, though?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:40
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:if housing, education, health, and pensions are covered separately, then all UBI income would be supplemental/luxury spending. so?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:42
|
|
|
The purpose of human existence is experiencing the pure drudgery of work.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:44
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:Also - book reqs? You guys have a Clintonite flirting with socialism. Get me over the edge. It's fiction, but the Mars trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson is both an entertaining read while also presenting a large variety of "What could non-capitalist societies look like?" ideas. When I read them as a teenager, I'd never previously realized that society could be structured any differently than the current American capitalistic version. The books were pretty eye-opening on that front. Theory and all that are great, but Robinson shows what it's like to live in one of these societies created on Mars, what engaging with politics and government might look like, how a money-free economy might work, the impact that great advances in technology could have on both capitalist and non-capitalistic societies. When trying to reach out to some people, I find that sometimes they might agree with the policy and philosophical points of what they're reading, but have trouble envisioning or imagining what life would look like or what the transition might entail -- so I recommend that they read Red Mars. KSR is an anticapitalist and one of my favorite authors. Kim Stanley Robinson, Green Mars posted:If democracy and self-rule are the fundamentals, then why should people give up these rights when they enter their workplace? In politics we fight like tigers for freedom, for the right to elect our leaders, for freedom of movement, choice of residence, choice of what work to pursue—control of our lives, in short. And then we wake up in the morning and go to work, and all those rights disappear. We no longer insist on them. And so for most of the day we return to feudalism. That is what capitalism is—a version in which capital replaces land, and business leaders replace kings. But the hierarchy remains. And so we still hand over our lives’ labor, under duress, to feed rulers who do no real work. The Dispossessed by Ursula K. Le Guin is also a good read in the same vein as described above.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
There is no political will or economic argument for raising taxes/cutting spending to the level required to pay for 4.2 trillion (for a low 12k per adult) in luxury spending. The entire U.S. budget is already only 3 trillion. With a modern welfare state on the scale of the U.K. and a UBI of 12k per adult, you would be around 11 trillion a year in spending. The entire GDP of the United States is only about 17 trillion. This also assumes no negative effects on economic growth, wages, hours worked, or tax collection.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:46
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:There is no political will or economic argument for raising taxes/cutting spending to the level required to pay for 4.2 trillion (for a low 12k per adult) in luxury spending.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 20:34 |
|
|
Boon posted:Both. The factors at play under our system currently range from economics to sociology to anthropology and more. Our system and understanding of behavior is so far beyond 'labor' as a source of valuation that it seems completely perplexing to me. Pricing is more complex than "just" labor, but the price of something is not usually equivalent to its value. Supply and demand and a whole bunch of other bullshit affects how value is translated into a price for a commodity.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 01:49
|
|