The point is same, the bigger these companies get the more power they wield.
Why to care about a big company ? A big company on a free market only means they make greater and cheaper products. It is not like they have the power to force anyone to buy their stuff. If they can, I'm interested to know how. Exactly. In an anarchist society there are no rulers for the companies to fund election campaigns for. There are no rulers prepared to do the bidding of the companies. There is no government for them to buy out. If a company begins initiating the use of force, then they are now, by definition, either the government or criminals (some would say one and the same). |
|
|
|
freedom while consuming products and services but not to work
Yeah, I know what you are saying. But people need work. I don't mean working at Burger King on a zero hours contract. I mean doing something meaningful, something with responsibility, with scope for self expression. The traditional middle class jobs have cornered the market in this sort of thing. Teachers, artists, engineers, doctors, lawyers, accountants. But even these jobs are going to eventually get eaten up thru tech advances. What we going to do - all sit around all day watching Jerry Springer ? Go fishing, read a book, go camping, climb Mt Everest, ride a bike, have a bar-b-que, play soccer, smoke a joint..... I can think of so many things I would rather do than work  Oh yeah, have sex....how did I forget that one? |
|
|
|
freedom while consuming products and services but not to work
Yeah, I know what you are saying. But people need work. I don't mean working at Burger King on a zero hours contract. I mean doing something meaningful, something with responsibility, with scope for self expression. The traditional middle class jobs have cornered the market in this sort of thing. Teachers, artists, engineers, doctors, lawyers, accountants. But even these jobs are going to eventually get eaten up thru tech advances. What we going to do - all sit around all day watching Jerry Springer ? Go fishing, read a book, go camping, climb Mt Everest, ride a bike, have a bar-b-que, play soccer, smoke a joint..... I can think of so many things I would rather do than work |
|
|
|
In a stateless & capitalist society the big corporations have no regulatory body, therefore they would weild most power.
A corporation is a legal entity created by the state. Therefore, there are no corporations in a stateless society. Both Marxists and Anarchists share a common goal for liberating the working class
Me too. I'm all for liberating the working class from fiat. I think everyone in the working class should convert a portion of their earnings to sound, honest money. Also, no one should be forced to do anything against their will or be held as a prisoner, unless they have harmed someone else or their property. My error for thinking Anarchism has roots in Marxism. Anarchism has roots in philosophies pre Marx such as Rousseau
But during the time of the First International, Marx had ideological conflicts with Bakunin, an Anarchist. Marx eventually had Bakunin expelled from the group although they share a common anti capitalist goal
Okay, but can the philosophy of anarchism evolve? If an anarchist is someone that believes there should be "no rulers" in place, ruling over him, then there is no power in place to force him into an economic system he doesn't want to participate in. Socialist anarchists can cooperate with each other and form a socialist society and capitalist anarchists can cooperate with each other and form a capitalist society. The world is big enough for more than one economic system. Im not an expert on Marx. But I dont think he had a theory of what the state looks like in a post capitalist society. His idea of the modern state is that it serves the interest of the bourgouis class. I dont know if he just wants to replace that w a state that representative of the working class or no state/ minimal state
I've always assumed he was for a revolt that called for the working class to take over the reigns of power rather than eliminate the reigns of power and become the new rulers. They would then use that power to establish a socialist economic system and force that system on capitalists as well. |
|
|
|
1) Demand for human employment is not something that needs to be "maintained". I would actually prefer not to work. Why is further economic growth a goal? What collective decided this? Yes, there is an incentive to reduce resource use, he refers to it in the video, it's the incentive to maximize profit. Price keeps the supply and demand for a resource in balance.
2) If machines were providing all of our needs (not that this is even possible), and the market only demanded goods produced and services provided by those machines then those who needed or wanted jobs would have to get a job repairing or maintaining those machines.
3) Why should someone who doesn't want to work have the same income as someone who wants to work 40 hours a week? The inequity in labor income is a function of supply and demand in a free market economy.
So you are proposing an economy where the only needed labour is a basically repairing the machines and you expect this to work? My only proposal is that people be free to participate in an economic system of their own choosing. It sounds like David Joseph fears that machines and robots are going to make human labor obsolete. I don't believe it's possible for machines to supply all of the goods and services that the market demands, but if they were, then yes, the only human labor required by the market would be to repair and operate those robots and machines. What product or service would human labor produce or provide if robots and machines are supplying them all? It's just a pretty silly thought experiment. We have machines called automobiles that get us from place to place. We have machines that wash and dry our clothes. We have machines that plow farmland. The list goes on and on. These machines have to be designed, built, operated, repaired, and maintained by someone. |
|
|
|
Only invest into fiat what you can afford to lose.
LOL, love it! |
|
|
|
The reason why anarchism is incompatible with capitalism is that in a capitalist society the ones that hold all the capital are the rulers. Its not possible to have "no rulers" under capitalism
Holding or owning capital doesn't necessarily make one a ruler. It's having and exercising the ability to force someone to do something they otherwise wouldn't do that makes one a ruler. Rulers (governments) certainly have to have assets and resources to impose their will on the unwilling, but that doesn't mean that everyone with assets and resources will resort to initiating violence. Those that want to live peacefully in a free market can agree to respond with force against someone that declares them self a ruler and initiates the use of force. Anarchy is what happens after Capitalism collapse according to Marxist ideology. Marx thought to get to this state you need a proletariat revolution first. Anarchists think you can just skip the revolution part
So Marx wasn't a statist, but an anarchist? No rulers would be required—everyone would just freely choose to participate in a socialist economic system? |
|
|
|
so dooglus what are you going to do if those coins are still unclaimed for the next 5 yrs?
I really don't know. People keep telling me I should do a big giveaway with them, but they're not mine to give away. I guess I'll just hold on to them and wait to see if they are claimed. If there's a next time, you should probably force investors and players to provide a withdrawal address or make it unmistakably clear that the BTC will be returned to the sending address, if the site is shutdown, before providing them a deposit address. |
|
|
|
That article was published 3 months ago  and it's from alex jones' website "infowars.com" IIRC, Alex Jones and the folks at infowars.com were initially claiming that Bitcoin was a secret CIA/NSA conspiracy. |
|
|
|
Anarchism has nothing to do w AnCap except the word Anarchism
Its like Nazism has nothing to do w Socialism
Anarcho-capitalism is a combination of anarchy and capitalism. AnCaps don't understand Anarchism. Anarchism has its roots in Marxist thinking so the economic system for classical Anarchists would be Socialist. Anarchism & Capitalism are incompatible ideology. AnCaps are followers of Rothbard and the libertarian ones are followers of Ayn Rand. But its all just dumb neckbeard kids. Nobody serious takes them seriously. The same dumb kids who think Nazis are Socialists when everyone knows Nazis practice Fascism AND Capitalism Actually there are some people that refer to themselves as anarchists that don't seem to understand that the word "anarchy" simply means "no rulers". I'm not convinced that a truly anarchist society is possible, but I'm not opposed to letting them try it out. It might work, but I would be happy if we just moved towards a more libertarian, or minarchist, political system that let people participate in an economic system of their choice. Anarchists can be capitalists or socialists. As long as they don't condone the imposition of an economic system (or a monetary system) on someone against their will through the initiation of force by rulers. Just let people choose the monetary and economic system that they want to participate in, voluntarily. Ayn Rand was an ojectivist, but I don't believe she was a libertarian, I've even read that she despised libertarians. I've been a libertarian since the late 90's, but I don't think I qualify as an objectivist. I don't really know all of the details about Ayn Rand or objectivism. I believe there is a lot of overlap, and I agree with a great deal of her philosophy. However, I also think she supported the concept of "intellectual property" and state/military intervention in the affairs of other nations. |
|
|
|
Anarchism has nothing to do w AnCap except the word Anarchism
Its like Nazism has nothing to do w Socialism
Anarcho-capitalism is a combination of anarchy and capitalism. |
|
|
|
Some people do not like wasting time on useless things as that. If it is worth that sum, I'd happily sell some for half the price, right now.  Why would someone buy yours for half a million when there are others letting theirs go for less than $400? |
|
|
|
He came across a few struggles do to the fact that bitcoin isn't heavily adopted around us, yet, but still managed.
Kinda like trying to find a gas station for your automobile in the early 1900's. I wonder how many people were saying, "Cars are useless because there aren't any gas stations." |
|
|
|
|
1) Demand for human employment is not something that needs to be "maintained". I would actually prefer not to work. Why is further economic growth a goal? What collective decided this? Yes, there is an incentive to reduce resource use, he refers to it in the video, it's the incentive to maximize profit. Price keeps the supply and demand for a resource in balance.
2) If machines were providing all of our needs (not that this is even possible), and the market only demanded goods produced and services provided by those machines then those who needed or wanted jobs would have to get a job repairing or maintaining those machines.
3) Why should someone who doesn't want to work have the same income as someone who wants to work 40 hours a week? The inequity in labor income is a function of supply and demand in a free market economy.
|
|
|
|
Oh great, Peter Joseph. Hasn't Stefan Molyneux already addressed his mindset and this Zeitgeist thing? I couldn't even get halfway through it. Just illogical nonsense. Sounds like he wants to replace a centrally planned economy with a new, improved, centrally planned economy. |
|
|
|
Oh great, Peter Joseph. Hasn't Stefan Molyneux already addressed his mindset and this Zeitgeist thing? |
|
|
|
...Can we blame capitalist that hoard as much wealth as possible leaving only a thin slice of the .pie for the average guy to share among themselves?
Nope, it's the corrupt politicians and bankers. It's the monopoly on the ability to create money that is the problem, not capitalism. Ok, you may go in here and reply to these 3 questions, you and everyone else in this thread, it's relevant: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=854589.msg9507742#msg9507742Very interested in your replies. Okay, checking out your video now. |
|
|
|
You should make his info public in order to make it harder for him to devise another scam targeting others.
If I thought it was an out-and-out scam, I would. However, I genuinely believe that he is overworked and took on far too much for his plate. He works long hours at the store and had grand visions for the companies; however, these take time and time is something he is/was very short on. At what point does it become an outright scam? |
|
|
|
Per my comments earlier, I'm extremely disappointed with the lack of communication by ABitInterested. I do not want the responsibility of being the only one to hold is IRL identity. I'm one of the few people to which he disclosed his identity but the complete lack of updates, not returning my calls, and general lack of communication forces me to release his information in order for those who invested in him to get in contact with him. It's not fair, at this point, for me to be the one withholding it; he is the one violating the contract with his shareholders here.
If you are a shareholder, and you would like the pertinent information, please PM me with some sort of proof that you're a shareholder (comment from one of the threads from a while ago or something of the sort). I reserve the right to provide this to whomever I choose and to withhold at my discretion.
-2070
You should make his info public in order to make it harder for him to devise another scam targeting others. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
