The Mises Community
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.
Forums
 »
Economics
 »
Economics Questions
 »
Noam Chomsky protege on Youtube

Thank you for your participation and interest in the Mises Community. This software platform has seen its day, however, and so is now closed. We are redoing our entire site, so look for some exciting developments by the end of the year. Thank you for your support of Austrian economics, liberty, and peace.

Noam Chomsky protege on Youtube

rated by 0 users
Answered (Not Verified) This post has 0 verified answers | 28 Replies | 7 Followers

Not Ranked
19 Posts
Points 560
AussieAustrianBlog posted on Wed, Oct 20 2010 11:22 PM

Here's a link to a video/channel of a Marxist youtuber to help you polish-up on your Capitalism vs Socialism debate skills.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_d8v5P_5KM

All Replies

Top 75 Contributor
1,365 Posts
Points 30,945
Reply
Prateek Sanjay replied on Sun, Oct 24 2010 10:51 AM

"coercion of living"

What?

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Male
1,899 Posts
Points 37,230
Reply
Laotzu del Zinn replied on Sun, Oct 24 2010 11:00 AM

The problem with that analysis, friends, is that the scarcity of land and food in this world is artificial.  There is plenty enough land and food to go around.  But systems of ownership create the scarcity.

For most everything else, scarcity is a real and concrete phenomenon that cannot be gotten around.  But for land and food, it is artificial.

In States a fresh law is looked upon as a remedy for evil. Instead of themselves altering what is bad, people begin by demanding a law to alter it. ... In short, a law everywhere and for everything!

~Peter Kropotkin

  • | Post Points: 50
Top 10 Contributor
Male
5,118 Posts
Points 87,310
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator
Reply
DanielMuff replied on Sun, Oct 24 2010 1:37 PM

Epicurus,

I agree with you. All the governments of all the worlds should divest themselves of the land they are hoarding and let the people homestead it. The statist system of ownership creates all kinds of mess. Btw, I got first dibs on Lake Tahoe; I just got to homestead it first.

To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process.
Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!"
Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Male
1,899 Posts
Points 37,230
Reply
Laotzu del Zinn replied on Sun, Oct 24 2010 1:39 PM

I in no way disagree with that assertion.  There are certain lands that were donated to cities/states etc that I wouldn't mind staying as public parks or wildlife conservation areas, but for the most part, get rid of it all.  Power to the people!

In States a fresh law is looked upon as a remedy for evil. Instead of themselves altering what is bad, people begin by demanding a law to alter it. ... In short, a law everywhere and for everything!

~Peter Kropotkin

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
5,118 Posts
Points 87,310
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator
Reply
DanielMuff replied on Sun, Oct 24 2010 1:48 PM

Epicurus: "There are certain lands that were donated to cities/states etc that I wouldn't mind staying as public parks or wildlife conservation areas"

Cool. I'll help you homestead those lands after I homestead Lake Tahoe.

To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process.
Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!"
Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Male
1,899 Posts
Points 37,230
Reply
Laotzu del Zinn replied on Sun, Oct 24 2010 1:53 PM

The right to their homesteading were already given up when they were "donated" to the city/state.  There's a large area in Pennsylvania donated to NYC that I'm thinking of, but I can't remember what it's called.

In States a fresh law is looked upon as a remedy for evil. Instead of themselves altering what is bad, people begin by demanding a law to alter it. ... In short, a law everywhere and for everything!

~Peter Kropotkin

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
5,118 Posts
Points 87,310
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator
Reply
DanielMuff replied on Sun, Oct 24 2010 1:57 PM

Are you sure that those lands weren't stolen away from the Native Americans?

To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process.
Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!"
Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Male
1,899 Posts
Points 37,230
Reply
Laotzu del Zinn replied on Sun, Oct 24 2010 2:10 PM

No, but if they can make claim, I will support theres over the public ownership.

In States a fresh law is looked upon as a remedy for evil. Instead of themselves altering what is bad, people begin by demanding a law to alter it. ... In short, a law everywhere and for everything!

~Peter Kropotkin

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
1,189 Posts
Points 22,990
Reply
Libertyandlife replied on Sun, Oct 24 2010 2:32 PM

Ya'll can take whatever land you want, as long as I can homestead the southern portion of New York state. So many mountains! smiley

Freedom has always been the only route to progress.

Post Neo-Left Libertarian Manifesto (PNL lib)
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Male
3,113 Posts
Points 60,515
Reply
Answered (Not Verified) Esuric replied on Sun, Oct 24 2010 4:33 PM

The problem with that analysis, friends, is that the scarcity of land and food in this world is artificial.  There is plenty enough land and food to go around.  But systems of ownership create the scarcity.

For most everything else, scarcity is a real and concrete phenomenon that cannot be gotten around.  But for land and food, it is artificial.

First, there has never been a famine in any advanced capitalistic society. Famines only occur precisely in those nations/civilizations that are not capitalistic, i.e., do not protect property rights to a sufficient degree (ownership). Next, scarcity has nothing to do with what people need in order to sustain life. Scarcity is about what people want, what makes them happy, and no one ever has "enough happiness." It is true that we could probably forcefully redirect all of the worlds productive efforts and scarce resources (including land) towards the production of bread and potatoes, and that this might drive down the costs of such goods to practically zero (maybe even zero).  But people don't just want bread and potatoes; they want Otoro tuna, medicine, houses, books, TVs, etc, etc. This is an undeniable fact, like the existence of gravity.

If you're saying that people shouldn't want such things, than that's just your own personal, subjective, and arbitrary opinion. It has nothing to do with the real world. You might as well say that gravity should be weaker, so that individuals could effortlessly jump from one building to the next. Either way, such a proposal (redirecting all production towards bread and potatoes), if implemented, would be self-defeating (because of incentives). It will become extremely scarce, once again.

Stop listening to those idiots at TVP.

"If we wish to preserve a free society, it is essential that we recognize that the desirability of a particular object is not sufficient justification for the use of coercion."

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 200 Contributor
430 Posts
Points 8,145
Reply
MrSchnapps replied on Sun, Oct 24 2010 4:45 PM

TVP = Textured Vegetable Protein?

Or am I missing something here? :)

“Remove justice,” St. Augustine asks, “and what are kingdoms but gangs of criminals on a large scale? What are criminal gangs but petty kingdoms?”
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
3,113 Posts
Points 60,515
Reply
Esuric replied on Sun, Oct 24 2010 4:55 PM

TVP = Textured Vegetable Protein?

The Venus Project.

"If we wish to preserve a free society, it is essential that we recognize that the desirability of a particular object is not sufficient justification for the use of coercion."

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
1,205 Posts
Points 20,670
Reply
JAlanKatz replied on Sun, Oct 24 2010 5:53 PM

Ok, so stop the land monopolies.  You mean to tell me there will be an abundance of food and no one will need to work to produce it?  There's a surplus of food because people produce it; if everyone lays down on the job, there won't be anymore.  Or do you want to say that there's natural food sitting around?  Maybe, but the supply of foods that can be eaten with no labor is quite low.  Grains need processing, meat needs killing...so how exactly will you liberate us from the coercion of needing to work in order to eat?

As far as land, yes, there's plenty, but there's not plenty of THIS land in particular.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
1,189 Posts
Points 22,990
Reply
Libertyandlife replied on Sun, Oct 24 2010 9:25 PM

"RP is an anarchist???? Are you FUCKING kidding me?

Sorry kid but anarchism isn't just hatred of the government. It also means wanting to do away with ALL hierarchal systems, such as capitalism, private property, wage labor, patriarchy, landlords, etc. When has RP ever come out against any of these other hierarchal systems?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GR8QOHOa2M&feature=email&email=comment_reply_received

 

 

Except you forget tyranny of the definition of a label. LAWLS, I pissed off some leftist by saying Ron Paul is an anarchist. 

Freedom has always been the only route to progress.

Post Neo-Left Libertarian Manifesto (PNL lib)
  • | Post Points: 5
Page 2 of 2 (29 items) < Previous 1 2 | RSS

Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528

Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119

contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises

Mises.org sitemap