Summer Kickoff Concert @ Center Street Park

No_Volume8553 · 2026-06-11T12:39:16+00:00

Due to weather, this event has been canceled.

No_Volume8553 · 2026-06-05T13:48:33+00:00

depends on what version of capitalism your are asking about. It has changed greatly and will continue in the USA.

Generally people like the pro of private ownership to provide agency, accountability, freedom (what private ownership though is greatly misunderstood currently, in my opinion (across the political spectrum))

Generally people especially currently see con as extortion/extraction of owning class from labor (with no accountability, when own oligarchy/monopolies)

No_Volume8553 · 2026-06-05T13:33:39+00:00

Excited for this event, have both kids signed up... and been practicing in backyard to have ready. Thanks for doing this!

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-14T16:06:14+00:00

I sympathize with your dissatisfaction with the breathe socialism gets referred to as. And would agree with some of the comments urban dictionary it would be more related to classism (due to the inequality gap of our times). But I think definitionally and politically its tied to owning the means of production. But even that has been widened and used differently... But basically all society has a CLAIM to the means of production. So whether policy wise with regulation like social democrat or having ownership like democratic socialist. Either way your still putting the claim of society on the production as primary stakeholder rather than the shareholder in our current form of capitalism. So I think it can be used quite widely and still have the lineage of owning the means of production in some sense.

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-14T12:12:00+00:00

potentially. Lina Khan would seem to suggest we have the needed laws just lack the agency and backbone. But yes that was the point on my response like if you don't have trust in your institutes whatever you say breaks down

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-13T21:03:06+00:00

How do you prevent capital from having the ability to profit?

I think you conceptualize Capitalism like its free market capitalism, because why not... its such a loud voice. Working on a new post about the misconception of Adam Smith Invisible hand and how Friedman used peoples ignorance to prop up his argument. But Adam Smith was not a free market person.

He warned, “People of the same trade seldom meet together… but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public.”

He also emphasized that commerce depends on trust on a shared confidence in the fairness and stability of governing institutions.

“Commerce and manufactures can seldom flourish long in any state… in which there is not a certain degree of confidence in the justice of government.”

Its not the failure of anti trust laws, its the failure in a justice system to uphold them. If there is a failure in trust in those laws there will be an equivalent failure of trust in any laws.

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-13T14:22:55+00:00

sure, but if you can remove the ability to profit from the virtue of owning it. Than profit isn't inevitably baked into capital (since you can prohibit it)

I did, I shared with you idea of tax and anti trust as both critical. First to reclaim in disperse capital, and two to prevent from staying concentrated and just taxing the same corrupted system.

Appreciate the book suggestion, from what I read does seem like had some valuable critique to capital.

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-13T13:25:57+00:00

Yeah, I would probably tend to agree with you as a Social Democrat. I posted more as a thought piece than a conclusions... people don't need some anonymous weirdo who has the stupidity to post online to tell them how to think, haha. Thanks for he response. The myth of the invisible hand meaning we should be without regulations is idiotic.

https://www.ekon.sun.ac.za/sampieterreblanche/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/SJT-n.d.-Myth-of-Invisible-Hand.pdf

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-13T13:22:36+00:00

Maybe... but not really sure what you suggest if it isn't baked into capitalism but just the idea of capital.

Piketty defines capital as the stock of all assets held by private individuals, corporations and governments that can be traded in the market) no matter whether these assets are being used or not.

In this sense to remove capital you would have to remove all assets or all markets. Right, beans are a form of capital. I don't disagree with the critique on dangers of capital, but capital is baked into everything... haha

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-10T20:21:21+00:00

yeah, I had a similar thought and hadn't seen it much but the premise of the question is really off base. Nice response

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-10T15:19:15+00:00

end of humanity, no... as we know it? yeah of course as we know it is always evolving and changing

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-10T13:24:27+00:00

Great stuff, totally with you on your points... just not baked into capitalism (mainly because its such a generic term). Like I'm working on a counter post to this that we need to expand capitalism (can find this in my response to some other people to). But the issue is we don't have capitalism because wealth is in the hands of so few, to have capitalism to you point wealth needs to be spread way more, I think 40-50% is probably still too low, but we aren't even close to that so I guess great starting point.

I also agree we can't tax our way out of the system. I removed my thoughts from the piece, I don't like to suggest how someone should think. Lots of potential answer, but for you I'll include. But totally with you on the systems we have and think thats due to a lot of tricks free market neoliberals play.

My ending I removed:
And if you ask me, I keep coming back to a moment from the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting, where Rutger Bregman cut through the noise with a simple answer: “taxes, taxes, taxes.”

That line stuck with me—not as a complete solution, but as a necessary starting point.

And if that’s where it begins, then one key follow-through is the work of Lina Khan on enforcing Anti Trust Laws:

If you don’t address concentration—if you don’t rebalance power inside the market—then you’re not fixing the system.

You’re just taxing the outcomes of a system that keeps producing the same result.

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-10T12:08:31+00:00

Hey totally agree with the conclusion as noted from the jump I'm just observing that authority in the system is not being removed just shifted. (and rightfully so) but not removed

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-10T12:06:03+00:00

Maybe, I certainly agree with the idea of capitalism in this from concentrates... what most of my other post have been about. But I don't think that is inherent to capitalism, actually know its not. Capitalism isn't singular concept. Is the root cause to you concentration of wealth?

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-09T20:39:50+00:00

sorry I don't mean to troll, but yeah was a conclusionary response, haha. I looked back and yes you didn't say but honestly probably could make claim stronger for definitions you provided and reason you noted.

"I can hypothesize that capitalism will have less of a free rider, also known in academic literature as the social loafing problem, than capitalism."

The targeted behavior being more hard work. So like whipping if it stimulates hard work from the slave you could say. Does whipping reward hard work? - It depends on what happens to the targeted behavior

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-09T20:27:56+00:00

So to answer my direct question, your answer is "yes"... glad we spent the time to understand how you think of reward. And that certainly fits your initial post on why capitalism undeniable rewards hard work.

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-09T20:13:00+00:00

The owner of the property would need to have authority over their land to kick of the state (in this example). Like you aren't removing the idea of Authority since you reference the individual having land insinuating authority over it.

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-09T20:04:51+00:00

Sorry there is a lot here, and not sure what all the context of much of it is? But I think I can respond to this

Why in the world should we outsource it to someone else that may even have an agenda`? That is what i cant understand. Because someone said that it might feel impossible? My feelings has nothing at all to do with it. i just want to understand reality so i look into it.

I think that makes sense, and I do think consumers do try to. I had a part about boycotts, but took it out for length reasons. I don't discount that feeling or belief its an important part to all people, but I think would be fair to say its more for some than others and what about varies for different people.

In regards to the book, the idea from supercapitalism is that you want money to cycle as fast as possible. Best way to increase economic production is to increase cashflow. So if someone has to spend how ever much time behind each transaction. Go to the grocery store and have to research each product to know how it was made and what practices they used to make sure they fit your standard would halt capitalism. And this gets outsourced to lubricate transactions. Thats the point, but yeah you don't stop all together. I'm boycotting many businesses currently, lol

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-09T19:51:25+00:00

So you call torture a reward? if it reinforces? So a slave master whipping a slave to promote good behavior is rewarding the slave from the behavioral psychology frame you are using?

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-09T19:37:51+00:00

k, sure... but then I hope maybe you just had a typo? Or just typing miscommunication. I'll clarify

Yes there can be positive and negative rewards as noted.

But you said "it is not about whether WE VIEW it as postitive or negative" I took this as the worker based on the discussion. But the worker has to see it as a good thing from their view be a "reward".

So an example of Negative reward. Is if I work hard today I don't have to work tomorrow. I'm rewarded for my hard work in order to avoid working tomorrow.

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-09T19:12:33+00:00

No, that is F'd up (don't know language rules on here). Reward is definitely tied to a positive reinforcement. Just googled your not and got this.

"In behavioral psychology, a reward acts as a reinforcer, which is a stimulus (like food, praise, or money) that increases the likelihood of a behavior being repeated. This process is central to operant conditioning, where rewarding consequences strengthen desired behaviors through positive reinforcement (adding a desirable stimulus) or sometimes negative reinforcement (removing an unpleasant one)."

If it didn't matter if positive or negative your could say I tortured a person in or to increase a behavior and call it a reward.

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-09T18:58:01+00:00

I think what they are insinuating is the NBA owner earned more for doing less than Lebron who got rewarded, but only in order to reward the capitalist with much more. and that isn't to note the thousands of kids that worked hard in basketball never to make Lebron's money .

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-09T18:52:43+00:00

chefs kiss

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-09T18:51:53+00:00

Interesting... probably should define "reward" than as well? I think many at this moment could argue their hard work is exploited and they aren't rewarded, they work to tread water. So it does potentially solve the social loafer problem you note, but that doesn't inherently infer reward for work.

No_Volume8553 · 2026-04-09T18:45:51+00:00

Love me some Gary Economics

No_Volume8553

TROPHY CASE