Thebrownblob
Well-Known Member
It’s never enough they just always want a little more.
I drink your milkshake! a metaphor for capitalism
- Thread starter rickyb
- Start date
Oh, comrade.
Thebrownblob
Well-Known Member
What are you trying to show us @rickyb?
their housing prices have nothing to do with immigration and apparently tokyo is most densely populated city in the world
Thebrownblob
Well-Known Member
OK seems kind of random but gotcha
i was wrong the tokyo metro area is 37 million vs vancouver metro 2.6
Thebrownblob
Well-Known Member
That’s a lot of Damn people, but I’ve always wanted to go there.
france vs here. guess whos got hte stronger labor movement?
www.nortonrosefulbright.com
Ten things to know about labour and employment law in France
Employer-employee relationships are governed by a complex set of laws and regulations which leaves little room for individual negotiation
No he didn't.
In other words, Aristotle felt that if you have extremes of poor and rich, you can’t talk seriously about democracy. Any true democracy has to be what we call today a welfare state — actually, an extreme form of one, far beyond anything envisioned in this century.
(When I pointed this out at a press conference in Majorca, the headlines in the Spanish papers read something like, If Aristotle were alive today, he’d be denounced as a dangerous radical. That’s probably true.)
The idea that great wealth and democracy can’t exist side by side runs right up through the Enlightenment and classical liberalism, including major figures like de Tocqueville, Adam Smith, Jefferson and others. It was more or less assumed.
Aristotle also made the point that if you have, in a perfect democracy, a small number of very rich people and a large number of very poor people, the poor will use their democratic rights to take property away from the rich. Aristotle regarded that as unjust, and proposed two possible solutions: reducing poverty (which is what he recommended) or reducing democracy.
That Dangerous Radical Aristotle, by Noam Chomsky (Excerpted from The Common Good)
The Noam Chomsky Website.
chomsky talks about some of hte founding fathers being anti capitalist tooIn other words, Aristotle felt that if you have extremes of poor and rich, you can’t talk seriously about democracy. Any true democracy has to be what we call today a welfare state — actually, an extreme form of one, far beyond anything envisioned in this century.
(When I pointed this out at a press conference in Majorca, the headlines in the Spanish papers read something like, If Aristotle were alive today, he’d be denounced as a dangerous radical. That’s probably true.)
The idea that great wealth and democracy can’t exist side by side runs right up through the Enlightenment and classical liberalism, including major figures like de Tocqueville, Adam Smith, Jefferson and others. It was more or less assumed.
Aristotle also made the point that if you have, in a perfect democracy, a small number of very rich people and a large number of very poor people, the poor will use their democratic rights to take property away from the rich. Aristotle regarded that as unjust, and proposed two possible solutions: reducing poverty (which is what he recommended) or reducing democracy.
That Dangerous Radical Aristotle, by Noam Chomsky (Excerpted from The Common Good)
The Noam Chomsky Website.chomsky.info
So he designed a system that made sure democracy couldn’t function. He placed power in the hands of the "more capable set of men," those who hold "the wealth of the nation." Other citizens were to be marginalized and factionalized in various ways, which have taken a variety of forms over the years: fractured political constituencies, barriers against unified working-class action and cooperation, exploitation of ethnic and racial conflicts, etc.
(To be fair, Madison was precapitalist and his "more capable set of men" were supposed to be "enlightened statesmen" and "benevolent philosophers," not investors and corporate executives trying to maximize their own wealth regardless of the effect that has on other people. When Alexander Hamilton and his followers began to turn the US into a capitalist state, Madison was pretty appalled. In my opinion, he’d be an anticapitalist if he were alive today — as would Jefferson and Adam Smith.)
Both are really expensive but Vancouver is super expensive primarily due to Hong Kong Chinese buying property there.
So we're supposed to play what ifs. You're right, it was before capitalism as well as Marxism.
according to numbeo it is more expensive to rent in abbotsford which is a whopping 1 hour 10 minute drive from DT vancouver vs tokyo. again hte population is 2 and a half million vs tokyo area of 37 million
in this post i dive into madison's logic. so basically he
ed up because after capitalism things didnt work out like he plannedSo don't move to Vancouver. Problem solved. We're likely to see a worldwide crash in the next year. Those prices may not come down much there, but should come down.
What did he plan? To have the power in the hands of the wealthy landowners? You can't compare today with his time. Totally different world. All they could do is give us a framework to guide us. They did pretty good with that.in this post i dive into madison's logic. so basically he
Similar threads
- Locked
