They did bring out one very good point that is worth remembering for all future discussions:
The term "capitalism" was actually invented by Marxist theorists as a derogatory term. By naming "capitalists" they could then demonize them and attach all sorts of mythical evils to that class. (sort of like "the Jews")
But in reality, "capitalism" is nothing more than "individual freedom" expressed economically. Free people really do find that they can be more efficient and effective, and provide greater VALUE to those who freely buy their products in a free market, by pooling their "capital" to form "corporations". The "profits" are a reflection of how efficiently they provide VALUE to other free people.....for which they are demonized by "socialists".

It is probable that that kid doesn't know what socialism really is. He probably hasn't actually read Marx or Engels.

He (maybe) thinks socialism just means that workers should get more of the profits - which really means he thinks they ought to just get paid more. Most American socialists are of this strain - the "we just want to be paid more" socialists.

If he really thinks that workers should own the means of production, then he is, in fact, a socialist. But what he hasn't thought through is that that would require some outside force (the government is the only option) to take the means of production from the current owners and give it to the workers. That is what socialism actually is, but I bet he hasn't really thought that all the way through to its logical conclusion. Most Americans aren't real socialists. Even the ones who think they are.

"Now we're done." Lol.

That kid values himself and other workers too highly. That's the basic problem. He thinks, "without the labor the owner of the company has nothing." Shapiro drilled him with the fact that being able to do basic labor is nothing compared to the millions a business owner risks...so fuck off with your "we deserve the profits!" Without my company you don't have a job, but the business owners would still have the millions they invested. So who needs who again?

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
If he really thinks that workers should own the means of production, then he is, in fact, a socialist. But what he hasn't thought through is that that would require some outside force (the government is the only option) to take the means of production from the current owners and give it to the workers.

But that never happens. Once government 'takes' control, they never fully give it up to anyone. The Soviet Union, Cuba, and Venezuela are all examples of government owning the levers of production, not the people. The people equally owning the country's production is just another socialist lie told over and over again to people foolish enough to believe it.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
But that never happens. Once government 'takes' control, they never fully give it up to anyone. The Soviet Union, Cuba, and Venezuela are all examples of government owning the levers of production, not the people. The people equally owning the country's production is just another socialist lie told over and over again to people foolish enough to believe it.

They think that if the government owns the means of production that IS the workers owning it. In fact, the government has to own all the means of production, because if the workers at that particular factory/farm/store have direct control/ownership, then they simply become the new owners ("Meet the new boss, same as the old boss") and have to deal with the owners of all the other factories and farms, which means they are back in a free market system as between each collectively owned unit. Without central control, the system isn't really that different from capitalism.

Of course, that central control doesn't work. It doesn't work for the truly fundamental reason that the free market perfectly allocates resources on a price basis, where central, non-price control never does. And for the practical reason that the central controllers don't actually operate the system for the benefit of the workers.

It is sad and amazing at what people who risk little, believe they should have more to gain. I wonder what he is studying. Too many idiots in college. Those same idiots don't realize there is always an upper class no matter the type of government and in socialism, it is worse.

quote:

It is sad and amazing at what people who risk little, believe they should have more to gain.

That's exactly what it comes down to. People like this believe they are entitled to the "profits" but wouldn't dare be on the hook for any loss.

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
Of course, that central control doesn't work. It doesn't work for the truly fundamental reason that the free market perfectly allocates resources on a price basis, where central, non-price control never does. And for the practical reason that the central controllers don't actually operate the system for the benefit of the workers.

That deserves a repeat. Government works to the benefit of itself first and foremost and anyone else second. these ridiculous children have yet to learn that reality.

But there's another reason government control of all national production doesn't work...complexity. In Soviet Russia, even before the era of the truly global market, a national economy is simply too large and complex for a central group of men to control. As such, the system fails on numerous fronts as government is incapable of timely or accurately adjusting to economic movements/changes. Because the free market is decentralized and runs on a voluntary profit motive, it eclipses the centralized government model in terms of efficiency/effectiveness. Once again the arrogance, ignorance, and greed inherent in mankind promotes socialism/communism and then guarantees its ultimate failure.

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:
That's exactly what it comes down to. People like this believe they are entitled to the "profits" but wouldn't dare be on the hook for any loss.

That's where the bullets wizzing by your head come in. Trust me, it's an eye opener.

These people think that they can acomplish their goals without resistance. That people will submit. I have been a few places where people do not submit willingly, and like I said, a round over your head makes you wonder real fast.

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
It is probable that that kid doesn't know what socialism really is. He probably hasn't actually read Marx or Engels.

He (maybe) thinks socialism just means that workers should get more of the profits - which really means he thinks they ought to just get paid more. Most American socialists are of this strain - the "we just want to be paid more" socialists.

If he really thinks that workers should own the means of production, then he is, in fact, a socialist. But what he hasn't thought through is that that would require some outside force (the government is the only option) to take the means of production from the current owners and give it to the workers. That is what socialism actually is, but I bet he hasn't really thought that all the way through to its logical conclusion. Most Americans aren't real socialists. Even the ones who think they are.

But isn’t it the case that once the government takes the means of production they kinda forget that last step of giving it to the workers? We’re all equal comrade, it is just that those of us apparatchiks are a little more equal...

I see all the time people using the welfare states of Europe as examples of socialist economies that work. Except that they AREN'T socialist economies. Also police/fire departments and roads. The first are basic government functions lest you have anarchy, and the roads are (mostly) still built by private contractors. But if you point this out, they won't listen.

I think Ben could have mentioned that profits are shared with workers through bonuses. The more the company makes, the bigger the bonus pool. The larger the contribution by the worker (hard work etc...), the larger the individual bonus. Little contribution little bonus, large contribution, large bonus.

Of course, that is up to the owner(s).