1
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Any takers for a discussion about “Marxian economics”?
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:28 pm to LEOPOLD2
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:28 pm to LEOPOLD2
quote:Gaslighting is telling me over and over that I'm arguing for Marxism when I haven't done that one time. You are unable to produce a single sentence of me arguing for Marxism so you're accusing ME of gaslighting.
This is gaslightinging
why are you even here? just to irritate me?
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:28 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Or at least I don't understand how these two ideas can reasonably coexist.
There is a lot you don't understand which probably explains these threads but you're going to the wrong place to gain the understanding ...
I'd suggest you start with Frederich Hayek - Road To Serfdom and Human Action - Ludwig von Mises ...
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:29 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Fire all the people and make the tractors do all the work. They are to productive element.
My point is that the general argument when people bring up worker productivity is that because they are theoretically more productive that they are more valuable individually. But precisely the opposite is actually true. I mean I can do my particular job probably 10 times faster than somebody doing the same exact job could do it in 1970. But that's not because I'm 10 times better quicker or smarter or anything else. It's because I have access to 10 times better quicker Smarter Tools. So am I providing the added value or did the employer Who provided the tools create the added value?
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:31 pm to 4cubbies
quote:what weird concept would even cause one to think there could be a system that allowed 100% of people to flourish when there is no reality in existence where 100% of humans are willing to put in the effort required to flourish? What kind of magic unicorn system would even hope to achieve such a goal
. Or at least I don't understand how these two ideas can reasonably coexist.
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:32 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
why are you even here? just to irritate me?
Well in case you haven't noticed I have given some substantive responses to your post. But the gas lighting is you pretending to not know what you're doing when you ask questions with obvious implications as if you're completely unaware of it
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:32 pm to AmishSamurai
quote:You are sharing your expert knowledge by telling me to Google something I'm not even arguing about.
Says the person who didn't know the Federal Budget numbers that are publicly available on the internet ...
Rather than asking your insipid questions here ... go read more.
The knowledge is no longer hostage.
Brilliant. The specific dollar amount assigned to a particular budget item doesn't change that the government wastes money of privatization that is supposed to be a cost-saving measure. Whether that is $100MM or $1BB doesn't change anything.
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:34 pm to 4cubbies
quote:not saying there aren't any in existence but can you give a specific example that you were referring to?
Brilliant. The specific dollar amount assigned to a particular budget item doesn't change that the government wastes money of privatization that is supposed to be a cost-saving measure. Whether that is $100MM or $1BB doesn't change anything
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:35 pm to 4cubbies
n theory Marxian economics (just like socialism and communism that are forms of it) sounds great. However it will always fail because the main stipulation for it to be successful is what causes it to not be successful when it moves from simply being an economic theory to reality. This is also the reason that a true communist country has never existed.
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:35 pm to beerJeep
quote:
Disposable income at an all time high
Cubbies is not interested in mere facts
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:38 pm to lurking
quote:
It’s 6+ pages of her asking the dumbest follow up questions imaginable.
Which would be defensible if she even could grasp a steady belief. She started a thread on the consolidation of the criminal clerk's position in New Orleans advocating for expanded local government by keeping a redundant position active. She railed on the state about overreaching. Which she then continually ignored the question of how the judiciary ruled on that claimed overreach.
She wanted more government.
Then she started a thread on capital punishment and argued that government is unable to effectively perform its duties in the area of justice.
She wanted less government.
NOW she starts a thread on the discussion of Marxist economics where the government has to have complete control of a shift to that economic policy.
She has shifted to a discussion discuss about the complete government control over the lives of the citizens.
It's an example of being informed on what to think.. and then repeating it verbatim... while then short circuiting on any challenge on it.
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:40 pm to CleverUserName
quote:
It's an example of being informed on what to think.. and then repeating it verbatim... while then short circuiting on any challenge on it.
Bingo. There’s no depth of understanding from her at all.
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:43 pm to beerJeep
quote:
Capitalism has single-handedly pulled more people out of poverty than any other economic system
Cubbies can't be having that. Without poverty, she wouldn't have sex partners
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:43 pm to CleverUserName
quote:
It's an example of being informed on what to think.. and then repeating it verbatim... while then short circuiting on any challenge on it.
Lenin (Communist) had a term for this ... can't quite put my finger on it ...
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:43 pm to 4cubbies
Are you trying to challenge slowflowretard for downvotes? If so impressive thread for that.
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:44 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
It's hard to argue in favor of capitalism as producing optimal conditions for society to function and flourish while also arguing that individuals can't depend on capitalism to create the conditions for them to function or flourish.
Why? It has done a pretty good job thus far. Better than mercantilism, fuedalism, etc. I am sure something better will come along sometime, but as of today, it is the very best ball to play with.
quote:
Or at least I don't understand how these two ideas can reasonably coexist.
They do not coexist in our society today not because of capitalism, but because of coporatism. Our economy is not capitalist. We do not live in a capitalist society. We live in a corporatist society. Our government(most western governments) play favorites to those who pay to play. We are actually closer to fascism than many actually wish to say...and this is regardless of what party is in the White House. Both parties pick winners and losers. They just give empty promises via gifts from the public coffers to placate the voter base.
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:47 pm to beerJeep
quote:
Capitalism has single-handedly pulled more people out of poverty than any other economic system
You mean like how the Amazon employees have to wear diapers because they don’t get piss breaks
quote:
It has made the poor of today live like the kings of yesteryear.
You mean how “peasants” only had to work like 100 days a year and all the other days were feast days where you got drunk with your boys
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:48 pm to el Gaucho
quote:
he/they
Another clown joins the circus ...
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:50 pm to VOR
quote:
Very few, if any, posters know anything about Marx’s theories or his writing…
Here is the practice that saves a lot of wasted time:
1) You pick a subject that involves, in this example, Karl Marx in some form or another.
2) You get the high points of his theories before digging into his works.
3) You search for one single country in this world in which the people and country flourished using Marx's economic theories.
4) Find any? Yes/No
5) if yes..continue. If No.... Toss the writings in the trash.
There could be a theory from a celebrated oncologist that claims urinating on an electric fence cures prostate cancer. If in practice it absolutely doesn't and punishes the person doing it with an electric shock... I'm tossing the paper he wrote on it in the trash. Simple. Saves a ton of time. And it keeps me from trying to defend an absurd theory.
This post was edited on 11/3/26 at 12:57 pm
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:51 pm to el Gaucho
quote:
You mean how “peasants” only had to work like 100 days a year and all the other days were feast days where you got drunk with your boys
Not even close to accurate
Posted on 11/3/26 at 12:52 pm to UtahCajun
quote:everything the government does is a pay for something scheme. Whether it’s tax cuts for certain people or buying stocks in certain companies or bailing out certain companies in other ways. It seems like people recognize this and many prefer regular citizens who aren’t already wealthy and powerful to benefit while many other citizens want the privileges of government favors concentrated where most of the wealth and power already can be found.
One day, we may learn that social programs, based upon the singular argument of "well, we should" is what is driving most countries bankrupt. These are nothing more than pay for vote systems and are full of even more fraud than infrastructure and military spending.
Page 12 of 24
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News