1 - It is time to renew my subscription at RHP. Can anyone help me remember how to do it?
2 - If you are a penguin living in darkness at antactica... can you see any issue that is not black and white?
3 - When a person gets a loan from a bank, and the bank is only required to carry 20% funds to cover the loan, where does the money come from?
4 - Can any person come 'de novo' into any argument and hope to win?
5 - If the answer to 3 is 'The bank creates new money', then... what does it do with the new money it created?
6 - Why is the 'creative density' of modern society only a small fraction of what it was during the time of Bach? That is, artfull creations per million of poplulation?
7 - What in the heck does the bank do with the 'debt' that it created when they issued the unfunded loan?
I appreciate any and all help on these matters. Mike
What is the perfect society? I had occasion last week with Rob to consider this. I must admit that to me it would involve the following resultants. How to get to them is quite out of my league.
1 - No person hungry, lacking of clean water,shelter or food.
2 - No person lacking of COMPLETE medical facility. If it can be had by a zillionaire, it should be had by a street urchin in Bombay.
3 - Complete personal privacy for all people.
4 - Outlaw tort. All disputes would be settled by arbitration and/or dueling.
This is a beginners list. But my basic "perfect society" would be that of the complete "Selfish" person as described by Ayn Rand.
Why did Marxism fail? ("Deterministic Economics 101"😉... Was it because he locked "Value" into the notion that "the value of a thing" is the human hours taken to create it? When in truth "the value of the thing, is in what the thing will bring?" Anyone can see the truth of it. A computer operated plant that spits out a thousand cell-phones per hour sets a value of $6 ... where a hand built one...( impossible, but lets indulge ourselves)... would be worth a thousand hours of his/her time... Poor old Marx. If it were not for history... (and theory) he would be viewed as an idiot. Or is he?
Originally posted by StarValleyWySince it is obvious this question is aimed at me (I don't think there's anyone else around here who would touch it), I will go ahead and answer it.
Why did Marxism fail? ("Deterministic Economics 101"😉... Was it because he locked "Value" into the notion that "the value of a thing" is the human hours taken to create it? When in truth "the value of the thing, is in what the thing will bring?" Anyone can see the truth of it. A computer operated plant that spits out a thousand cell-phones per h ...[text shortened]... old Marx. If it were not for history... (and theory) he would be viewed as an idiot. Or is he?
The value that is added to a product is still determined by the amount of labor required to manufacture it. Technology has simply decreased the amount of labor required, thus making the product cheaper. The value of the product is not determined by the actual number of hours it takes you to manufacture it, but by the number of hours it takes the average producer. Thus the person who manufactures phones by hand would find that his labor is valued at a much lower rate than the person who operates a mechanized phone factory.
Of course, there is no intrinsic value to anything. All values are socially determined. As such, the "value" of a phone will fluctuate depending on demand. But any value that the phone has (apart from the cost of materials and overhead) is the value added by labor.
Originally posted by rwingettSo you are saying that price is a function of "supply and demand"? And that if a machine does it for a dollar... the guy who used to do it for ten dollars is expendable?
Since it is obvious this question is aimed at me (I don't think there's anyone else around here who would touch it), I will go ahead and answer it.
The value that is added to a product is still determined by the amount of labor required to manufacture it. Technology has simply decreased the amount of labor required, thus making the product cheaper. Th ...[text shortened]... hat the phone has (apart from the cost of materials and overhead) is the value added by labor.
When one has a "passion"... mine is humans in space... is it wrong to see the silly buggers at NASA and EUROSpace as being a bunch of cowards? Talk about a bunch of risk adverse cowards.
They have a software problem that every "first year" programmer encounters. They try to keep a "history" in hopes of CYA.
Then they run out of resource.
Where in the hell is the "old guys" when you need them? The guys in the meeting who say "Yea! It was my fault. What can we do to make it better?"... I'll tell you where they are. They are in the next generation... or the one after that. The poor slobs in the thirties and twenties have not a clue. They have been beaten by Disney.
The only thing NASA is good at is public relations.
I posted a year ago that the damned shuttle pilot needs to "step outside" ... attached to a ten dollar nylon rope and do a walk around of the craft. That is exactly what the stupid bureaucrats have finally decided after a year of hemming and hawing...
If it is "illegal" for a commercial pilot to fly without a "walk-around" of the craft... why shouldn't it apply to the shuttle? Everyone put on your pressue suit. Open the main middeck crew egress door. Go out and look. Danger? Some. As dangerous as not looking? Apparently not. Considering the "crisp" results of re-entry on the faith of bureaucrats.
By the way... the whole operation... putting on suits, depressurizing, egress... walk-around.. re-entry, closing and repressurization would take about 38 minutes. Death by bureaucrat takes the rest of your life.
Originally posted by rwingett
Since it is obvious this question is aimed at me (I don't think there's anyone else around here who would touch it), I will go ahead and answer it.
The value that is added to a product is still determined by the amount of labor required to manufacture it. Technology has simply decreased the amount of labor required, thus making the product cheaper. Th ...[text shortened]... hat the phone has (apart from the cost of materials and overhead) is the value added by labor.
Rwingett, it would be helpful if you would make a distinction between value and price .... Marx did the same 😉
By the way, reading your post, can you explain why good works of art are so expensive ? The amount of labor put in it doesn't have any relation with the price, or has it ?
Originally posted by StarValleyWyIt must be kept in mind that Marx's analysis of labor added value was in relation to a capitalistic mode of production. So yes, supply and demand would play a role in the pricing of an object in that system. And in that capitalistic mode of production everyone would be expendable.
So you are saying that price is a function of "supply and demand"? And that if a machine does it for a dollar... the guy who used to do it for ten dollars is expendable?
Originally posted by ivanhoeArt is treated as a commodity, not as a manufactured product. Like gold, it is valuable because it is rare.
Rwingett, it would be helpful if you would make a distinction between value and price .... Marx did the same 😉
By the way, reading your post, can you explain why good works of art are so expensive ? The amount of labor put in it doesn't have any relation with the price, or has it ?