Moo
Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
MooParticipant
– DJP
To be honest, I read the article a while ago, but put what I recalled it said about economics into my own words.
Here’s the relevant information from said article:
‘THE REASON THE natural and industrial resources of the world are not used to provide the abundance they are capable of producing is to be sought, not in the realm of technology, but in that of economics.
‘Economics is basically the study of what happens when wealth is exchanged — that is when it is either bartered for other wealth or bought and sold for money. It is not the study of the production and allocation of wealth as such, but the study of its exchange and how this affects decisions about production and allocation. Exchange is not to be confused with allocation.
‘Allocation (sometimes called distribution) is about the use which people make of the wealth they have produced: how much they consume immediately. How much they store for future consumption. How much they use to build up or renew their stock of tools and machines. “Allocation” is used here in preference to “distribution” because the latter has acquired other meanings which can cause confusion; it sometimes means transportation (which is really part of production)— but worse shops, which are exchange institutions, have taken to calling themselves the “distributive trade”.
‘In some past societies the amount and kind of wealth that was produced and allocated were decided according to some prearranged plan, even if this “plan” was just a set of tribal customs or some other unwritten code of social behaviour. Wealth was allocated directly for individual and communal use so that the sole aim of production could be said to have been direct allocation, or use.
‘In societies where the bulk of the wealth is exchanged after it has been produced (and before it is allocated) the production and allocation of wealth is no longer decided according to human plans or customs. The decisions are of course still made by people but within terms of reference outside of their control. Economics is the study of these terms of reference or, perhaps, of the laws or economic forces which come into operation once production for exchange becomes widespread.
(. . .)
‘An enterprise is an institution which seeks continually to increase the monetary value of its assets (the instruments of production, the raw materials, the stocks and the cash, including the wage fund, it controls.) The monetary value of these assets is sometimes called “capital”; hence “capitalism” as the name for the modern exchange economy.
(. . .)
‘Wealth production is no longer individual or local or national; it is social and worldwide. A single world society already exists but, because the workplaces of the world are controlled by enterprises, it takes the form of a world exchange economy.’
MooParticipantExcellent!
MooParticipantLittle Green Bag – George Baker
I dedicate this song to ALB, who loves ‘Sixties music.
You may recognise this song from a certain film.
MooParticipantA Little Respect – Bjorn Again
MooParticipant– Imposs1904
Reminds me of early Kylie Minogue. Is the sample: ‘Shout to the Top!’ by the Style Council?
– Rod Shaw
The only loot songs I know are ‘Greensleeves’ & ‘Green Grow the Rushes, O’. That piece of music you posted was very soothing; thanks for sharing.
MooParticipant– Rod Shaw
No, they haven’t.
Here’s a great, short-ish video chronicling the history of Chumbawamba:
This video was made in 2012 (when the band broke-up), however: ‘a mail-order EP, In Memoriam: Margaret Thatcher, was released on 8 April 2013. The CD had been recorded around 2005 and made available for pre-order at gigs and on the group’s website, to be issued upon the death of Margaret Thatcher.’ – Wikipedia.
MooParticipantAll ‘Bout the Money – Meja
A catchy pop song that has a socialistic message.
MooParticipantWhen I wrote that there are no considerable differences between the Republicans & Democrats – I meant from a working class perspective.
When I wrote that Trump positions himself as a racist & xenophobe – I meant against Muslims & illegal immigrants.
I agree with Thomas More – US “democracy” has always been under the control of oligarchic power.
MooParticipantIn my opinion, Trump won because Americans blame Biden for the cost-of-living crisis (due to the myth that governments control the economy, when it’s the other way ’round). Also, protectionism sounds good to workers, even though its an issue that only concerns the capitalist class.
MooParticipantZJW wrote:
‘What is the challenge to the imagination supposed to be?’
That Trump positions himself as a racist & xenophobe, & yet, he greatly increased his share of the vote from ethnic minorities.
BTW, whenever I write ‘can you imagine!’ or ‘imagine!’ I’m just copying Natalie Wood, who said the former in ‘the Affair’ & the latter in ‘Penelope’.
MooParticipantYoung Master Smeet wrote:
‘I do wonder if the slight margins of sexism (say worth 5% of the vote) come into play in a tight contest – say, would Walz on his own have won?’
I don’t think sexism had anything to do with it. After all, Hillary Clinton won the popular vote 8 years ago, & Biden won 4 years ago with a female running mate.
MooParticipantIn response to DJP’s post (at the bottom of page 2):
There are no considerable differences in economic policy between the Republicans & Democrats. The USA didn’t significantly reduce its GHG emissions during the Obama & Biden presidencies, & illegal immigrants weren’t exactly treated like royalty, either.
When it comes to the issue of women’s reproductive rights, Trump has already said he will not work for a federal ban on abortion, & believes the states should have authority on that issue.
Its very undemocratic that the president is allowed to appoint supreme court judges. This is because the supreme court is the government’s watchdog, so, it goes without saying that the government’s watchdog shouldn’t be appointed by the government!
MooParticipantAccording to BBC News, 48% of Hispanic-Americans & 50% of Asian-Americans voted for Trump! Can you imagine!
MooParticipantTrump has won.
All I will write is, thank god for the amendment that limits US presidents to two terms.
MooParticipantAccording to ITV news, Trump has won 266 electoral college votes & Harris has won 219.
This means there are 53 more electoral college votes to be cast; so, Harris could still get the (at least) 270 electoral college votes needed to win.
I hope Harris does win; not because she’s significantly better than Trump, but because the MSM will spend the next 4 years blaming the problems caused by capitalism on Trump (if he wins).
-
AuthorPosts