I drink your milkshake! a metaphor for capitalism

[wayfair]

Re-read the headline.

I read the whole post...

 

[Babagounj]

This is misleading---Walmart will NOT be selling these cars. They are leasing kiosk space in their stores.

I don't write the stories , I just post them .
Contact the story's writer to voice your concerns.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

I don't write the stories , I just post them .
Contact the story's writer to voice your concerns.

Parroting the company line?

 

[Babagounj]

See post 691 in Media Bias for more bad headlines.

 

[rickyb]

Capitalism has always existed. Do you not know what it is?

When people are working but not engaging in capitalism, they are simply surviving (growing or catching their own food).

Capitalism can be producing more chicken eggs than you need in order to trade them for potatoes that your neighbor is growing so that you don't have to grow them.

mmm i dunno i forget, but it is true capitalism existed alongside other economic systems like slavery.

btw, trade is not unique to capitalism. they had trade under slavery and feudalism.

the problem with capitalism is that it has highly centralized power like communism, slavery, and feudalism. when you have centralized power like that, those in power will make decisions which reflect their best interests more often than not AND at the expense of the workers best interests.

thats the difference between coops and the above listed economic systems which is workers can collectively make the decisions at their jobs.

 

[rickyb]

Wal-Mart to start selling cars in Houston, Dallas

Wal-Mart has partnered with online car retailer, CarSaver to start selling cars at Supercenter locations in Houston, Dallas, Phoenix and Oklahoma City.

Beginning April 1, Carsaver staff will be in 25 Wal-Mart Supercenters helping customers select a new, used or certified pre-owned vehicle and apply for financing and auto insurance on kiosks. Customers will be directed to make an appointment with a local certified dealer for final sale.


Sixteen AutoNation stores in Houston, Dallas and Phoenix have already lined up to participate in the program.

The model was first tested in Florida last year with nearly 80 percent of dealership appointments leading to a sale.

why did you post this here (or anywhere on this forum) lol?

seems like fluff

 

[Babagounj]

Walmart will soon be the only place to do your shopping .
They will have you from birth until death ( once they start having coffins on sale ) .
And that will be the classic example for the future of capitalism .
No more governments only corporations .

 

[rickyb]

 

[JL 0513]

Would you rather us all still be living in caves? If you take the above passage literally then you believe business shouldn't exist because business cannot exist at a constant break even point - no profit scenario. This means no one would have a job. Nothing would exist to buy. We're indeed talking about returning back to before we were in our current human state.

 

[rickyb]

Would you rather us all still be living in caves? If you take the above passage literally then you believe business shouldn't exist because business cannot exist at a constant break even point - no profit scenario. This means no one would have a job. Nothing would exist to buy. We're indeed talking about returning back to before we were in our current human state.

no and you didnt respond to my previous point either about centralization of power.

i dont totally agree with that post anyways, but it does give an idea about exploitation.

i am saying we need worker self determination, and stop giving the power / ownership to the few.

 

[rickyb]

Would you rather us all still be living in caves? If you take the above passage literally then you believe business shouldn't exist because business cannot exist at a constant break even point - no profit scenario. This means no one would have a job. Nothing would exist to buy. We're indeed talking about returning back to before we were in our current human state.

capitalism, slavery, feudalism, state socialism all had exploitation.

it time to try a system without it.

 

[JL 0513]

capitalism, slavery, feudalism, state socialism all had exploitation.

it time to try a system without it.

You think profit is exploitation. It is not. No system can thrive without profit.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

You think profit is exploitation. It is not. No system can thrive without profit.

Cooperative systems thrive profit free.

 

[JL 0513]

Cooperative systems thrive profit free.

No they don't.

 

[wkmac]

You should at least quote the source. If you don't know the source, search it and that is not hard to do as I did to find out where it came from.

Would you rather us all still be living in caves? If you take the above passage literally then you believe business shouldn't exist because business cannot exist at a constant break even point - no profit scenario. This means no one would have a job. Nothing would exist to buy. We're indeed talking about returning back to before we were in our current human state.

Why would you think the above would as you say, "have us living in caves?" If you actually read through what is being said, some of that sounds a bit like the "labor theory of value" once a popular notion among advocates of Political Economy. It's not exact but it does have certain parallels with what later advocates of the theory have argued. Ironically one of the early advocates of the labor theory of value was none other than Adam Smith and it was Smith's positions that influenced Marx in his own adaptation of this economic theory. Thomas Paine was another. Last I heard none of them lived in caves so why would you think this would occur now?

capitalism, slavery, feudalism, state socialism all had exploitation.

it time to try a system without it.

Any system that employs a State as a means of compulsion and force will always have a component of exploitation to it. Does not mean any of these won't exist without a State but it won't have the capacity to monopolize and thus dominate a society or culture if the State is not there to compel it to be so.

You think profit is exploitation. It is not. No system can thrive without profit.

In a sense, yes on some level. In 1975, in "Spatial Monopoly, Natural Monopoly, Pure Profits, and Land Rents" the authors Curtis Eaton and Richard Lipsey wrote about profits and one point made that I'll paraphrase made sense to me the more I pondered on it. They stated that economic profits do not occur in a system of perfect competition as the nature of such would have no barriers to entry and thus new firms would enter the market thus driving down profits ultimately to zero. They went on to point out that profits require a market intervention, to keep certain numbers of actors out in order to maintain said profit. If one seeks a profit, then a truly Free Market with no State or 3rd party intervention is the very last thing you want but if it is profit you seek, an interventionist State or some form of central planning 3rd party is necessary in order to derive a profit. Now granted this alone is not the end all on this matter but it does make for an interesting economic thought exercise.

So to conclude, in order to derive a profit, some manner of market exploitation or market interventions is needed and thus necessary. Even a seller is trying to exploit the buyer to the optimum while the buyer is attempting the same for her own benefit and the resulting final price determines who was the better exploiter if you will.

 

[rickyb]

You should at least quote the source. If you don't know the source, search it and that is not hard to do as I did to find out where it came from.



Why would you think the above would as you say, "have us living in caves?" If you actually read through what is being said, some of that sounds a bit like the "labor theory of value" once a popular notion among advocates of Political Economy. It's not exact but it does have certain parallels with what later advocates of the theory have argued. Ironically one of the early advocates of the labor theory of value was none other than Adam Smith and it was Smith's positions that influenced Marx in his own adaptation of this economic theory. Thomas Paine was another. Last I heard none of them lived in caves so why would you think this would occur now?



Any system that employs a State as a means of compulsion and force will always have a component of exploitation to it. Does not mean any of these won't exist without a State but it won't have the capacity to monopolize and thus dominate a society or culture if the State is not there to compel it to be so.



In a sense, yes on some level. In 1975, in "Spatial Monopoly, Natural Monopoly, Pure Profits, and Land Rents" the authors Curtis Eaton and Richard Lipsey wrote about profits and one point made that I'll paraphrase made sense to me the more I pondered on it. They stated that economic profits do not occur in a system of perfect competition as the nature of such would have no barriers to entry and thus new firms would enter the market thus driving down profits ultimately to zero. They went on to point out that profits require a market intervention, to keep certain numbers of actors out in order to maintain said profit. If one seeks a profit, then a truly Free Market with no State or 3rd party intervention is the very last thing you want but if it is profit you seek, an interventionist State or some form of central planning 3rd party is necessary in order to derive a profit. Now granted this alone is not the end all on this matter but it does make for an interesting economic thought exercise.

So to conclude, in order to derive a profit, some manner of market exploitation or market interventions is needed and thus necessary. Even a seller is trying to exploit the buyer to the optimum while the buyer is attempting the same for her own benefit and the resulting final price determines who was the better exploiter if you will.

wouldnt capitalism or slavery without a state monopolize on its own over time?

 

[rickyb]

You think profit is exploitation. It is not. No system can thrive without profit.

profit is not exploitation in my books. cooperatives can and do run on a profit basis.

exploitation stops in my eyes when the workers themselves have an equal vote over what to do with the surplus of their labor.

 

[JL 0513]

Why would you think the above would as you say, "have us living in caves?" If you actually read through what is being said, some of that sounds a bit like the "labor theory of value" once a popular notion among advocates of Political Economy. It's not exact but it does have certain parallels with what later advocates of the theory have argued. Ironically one of the early advocates of the labor theory of value was none other than Adam Smith and it was Smith's positions that influenced Marx in his own adaptation of this economic theory. Thomas Paine was another. Last I heard none of them lived in caves so why would you think this would occur now?

I say that because people's labor is being exploited because the net outcome benefits the business. No, it benefits both parties just like a sale. I buy a car which makes my modern life possible. Hugely beneficial to me. Did the automaker and dealer exploit me for making money necessarily? Of course not. Without making a margin on the sale, neither the automaker or dealer would exist, thus I don't have a car to live my life. This is the same process for everything. Therefore, you take everything away and you live in a cave and hunt for your meal each day.

Point is, things don't progress without personal benefit (profit, pay, etc.). Why was the iPhone invented? For Apple to make money. If no money was to be made, would they have spent billions to create it? This is basic stuff folks. I can't believe people don't get the fundamentals on why we enjoy our modern lives.

 

[rickyb]

I say that because people's labor is being exploited because the net outcome benefits the business. No, it benefits both parties just like a sale. I buy a car which makes my modern life possible. Hugely beneficial to me. Did the automaker and dealer exploit me for making money necessarily? Of course not. Without making a margin on the sale, neither the automaker or dealer would exist, thus I don't have a car to live my life. This is the same process for everything. Therefore, you take everything away and you live in a cave and hunt for your meal each day.

Point is, things don't progress without personal benefit (profit, pay, etc.). Why was the iPhone invented? For Apple to make money. If no money was to be made, would they have spent billions to create it? This is basic stuff folks. I can't believe people don't get the fundamentals on why we enjoy our modern lives.

people dont always just do things because they are selfish...

your car example is not the same thing as workers owning and controlling the jobs they work in. these were popular ideas over 100 years ago in your country but the left was destroyed.

 

[wkmac]

wouldnt capitalism or slavery without a state monopolize on its own over time?

How would it come to monopolize with no entry barriers so that others can enter the market place and thus drive down its ability to profit? Slavery for example was only profitable when the law prohibited others in some sense from entering that marketplace and challenging the status quo. Even when the Civil War came to be slavery was dying and even the slave industry was trying to use State power to keep a dying system alive just a little longer.

Scratch farmers of the era who dared to even form cooperative groups to market their produce (a common approach across Appalachia) from a better bargaining position were crushed as a matter of law as the plantation system controlled the major market centers from which all goods circulated. And the State obiliged this situation because more economic gains would come their way as opposed to allowing the Scratch Farmers unbridled access the truly open markets whose goods would undercut profits. These conditions were arrived at by a matter of State law (market intervention) and not as a result of natural economic forces. Even in those days, there was a kind of elite verses common man.

As I said originally, there will be micro situations (as opposed to macro) where the conditions you speak of can arise but where there is no central power creating market entry barriers, market actors will arise, enter the market and undercut the ability of these exploitative systems the ability to profit.