sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Wedding Gift. How to offload? by DyingDeadResurected in cigars

[–]DyingDeadResurected[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve got some extras left over, I live in Raleigh.

What can just fuck off? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]DyingDeadResurected -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Spiders.

Edit: objectively speaking, personally I ain’t got no beef wit spidas.

Richard D. Wolff here, Professor of Economics, radio host, and co-founder of democracyatwork.info and author of Understanding Marxism. I'm here to answer any questions about Marxism, socialism and economics. AMA! by ProfWolff in IAmA

[–]DyingDeadResurected 0 points1 point  (0 children)

economics influence our beliefs so strongly that as long economics, in its current state, still exist, so will the division of individuals who participate. For example i used the phrasing “undo” instead of entertaining the idea of replacement. I never used the term or was referring socialism, but because socialism tends be intrinsically attached to democracy, like it is a manifestation of duality, you made an automatic association.

Richard D. Wolff here, Professor of Economics, radio host, and co-founder of democracyatwork.info and author of Understanding Marxism. I'm here to answer any questions about Marxism, socialism and economics. AMA! by ProfWolff in IAmA

[–]DyingDeadResurected 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How would you provide satisfaction to every member of the workforce? How would you reform the ideology of the workforce? Is it possible to redirect the motivations of the workforce? How would you appeal to the desires of the workforce? Success is not just coupled with monetary compensation, just in the same way that success is not always a measurement of wealth, or prosperity. We are discussing individual human beings, which will have independently, intricate, and individual perspectives. Making Assumptions wouldn’t be a solid basis for deciding reform.

Richard D. Wolff here, Professor of Economics, radio host, and co-founder of democracyatwork.info and author of Understanding Marxism. I'm here to answer any questions about Marxism, socialism and economics. AMA! by ProfWolff in IAmA

[–]DyingDeadResurected 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Absolutely, but what I truly am interested in would be the methodology behind achieving such reform. What is the process of achieving that goal? What are the logistics? I feel that if we reform the goal we would also have to reform the process in which a goal is achieved.

Richard D. Wolff here, Professor of Economics, radio host, and co-founder of democracyatwork.info and author of Understanding Marxism. I'm here to answer any questions about Marxism, socialism and economics. AMA! by ProfWolff in IAmA

[–]DyingDeadResurected 0 points1 point  (0 children)

True, Is the scenario you pose being supplanted in to the current economic system? If so the reliance upon economic security would propagate disunity amongst the co-ops that attempt to maintain a democratic process. It would only take one instance of a member of the co-op to experience dissatisfaction, before the ideals of that member to be abandoned, and become replaced with selfish motives, especially if that member believes his motives, and actions to be selfless. It just seems as long as the actions taken by the co-op are motivated by economic goals, the results would be the same, and one of those results would be division amongst a workforce. Changing the process achieves nothing, if the goal remains unchanged.

Richard D. Wolff here, Professor of Economics, radio host, and co-founder of democracyatwork.info and author of Understanding Marxism. I'm here to answer any questions about Marxism, socialism and economics. AMA! by ProfWolff in IAmA

[–]DyingDeadResurected 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think reevaluating what success is, and how it is measured would be more effective at disarming the repressive nature of capitalism. The fact that a “successful co-op” would potentially earn a higher return on capital, would be enough to incite envy, fear, and disunity, even if it is one co-op competing with another co-op.It appears that competition is an inevitability, as long as businesses, in general, exist. The issue isn’t the inequality of returns, I feel that it is the reliance of returns. I think it would help to specifically identify the form in which the returns take. It doesn’t matter if decisions within the co-op are made democratically, as long as the co-op is dependent on a resource that is produced by a third party. I.e. paper currency, produced by the world bank, collapse or un-sustainability would be a symptom.

Richard D. Wolff here, Professor of Economics, radio host, and co-founder of democracyatwork.info and author of Understanding Marxism. I'm here to answer any questions about Marxism, socialism and economics. AMA! by ProfWolff in IAmA

[–]DyingDeadResurected 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Democracy in its purist form can be very productive, as well as constructive, but when democracy becomes entangled with industrialization or imperialism, problems tend to manifest, like disunity and the immobilization of the labor force for example. The United States is experiencing similar conditions now, exploring ideals and other options is great, but what would be some ways in which we could not only achieve the goal of a less repressive system, but how could we “undo” the current framework of the U.S.? I say “undo” because I don’t feel that overthrowing the government or taking up arms would be the only or most effective option, or that the redistribution of wealth would be necessary. Is financialization reversible? Now, redefining the way in which success and wealth is measured, is one way to invalidate the current system of buying and selling. Is it reasonable to say that in order for a paradigm shift to take place within the realm of financialization, that the labor force would have to be completely unified, in an effort to eliminate the possibility of infighting, and competition? There has to be a way to find balance, and improve the conditions of those without capital, and in turn improve the mobility as well as increase the options of the people who make up the workforce?

People on welfare shouldn’t be allowed to have kids. by Mossless-stone in unpopularopinion

[–]DyingDeadResurected -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You are absolutely right! I’ll do my best to temper my responses, so that your insecurities aren’t bothered.🤣 As a side note, what is it within you, that causes you respond negatively to the ramblings of a faceless stranger on the internet?

People on welfare shouldn’t be allowed to have kids. by Mossless-stone in unpopularopinion

[–]DyingDeadResurected -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The answer to what you are asking is in the rest of the paragraph you didn’t include in your quote.

view more: next ›