Tuesday, October 13, 2015

Fuck the shit, and fuck your politics

I started watching the democratic debate, and coincidently I started drinking. Honestly, I've stopped watching because 5 minutes in I relieazed I hate real world politics when I start to follow it. So I'll tell you what, Imma gonna make a pot of tea, spike it with more whiskey, and then I'll rant to the void about the anarchist  and socialist stuff I've been reading lately.

For anyone playing along at home, I'm drinking green tea mixed with coconut milk, sugar, and a big dose of Jack Daniels brand whiskey. Yes, that's right, Jack Daniels brand whiskey is the only whiskey recommended by both doctors and pediatricians. If life has got you down and nothing seems to go your way, then try Jack Daniels brand whiskey for a new, IMPROVED, outlook on life.

What has fueled tonight's concept is drinking, Clinton's comment that capitalism is great because a business person can own there own business, and a small argument with a roommate about what Marx REALLY said. There's a couple thoughts I have right now, first: I've heard that said before, and that's not what make capitalism great. That's not even what makes it unique. Second: If you own your own business, you have pay various taxes and fees to the state and various licensing bodies, as well as trying to make money for your investors, so do you REALLY own your own business in our version or capitalism?

Did you know that Vladimir Lenin believed in private ownership of business? He did not believe in private ownership of property, but business he felt could help the state because of competition and such. Citation needed, but what keeps me from posting regularly is fact checking, so come at me bro. My point is, capitalism vs communism is not who gets to own the business. There was way more government regulation in the USSR, but that didn't stop people. Aside, I would argue that there was more of punk rock attitude in the USSR during the '70's then the rest of the world. Listen to Aquarium.

Wait, back up. So what is the difference? The best argument I found is The Capitalist's Bible, who argued that "Like classic economics, Marxian economics is based on the labor theory of value." To you the reader I ask, who deserves the fruit of labor? The best I can do is this: Socialism v Objectism. The value of an object is based on it's value. It's value is based on how much someone wants it. If I go out, and based on my initiative I decide to start selling widgets, because fuck all, whiskey has decided everyone needs a widget. The thing is, in order to produce one of these damn things I need a company. For ease, it's me, a salesman, a builder, and a janitor. Who should make the most money?

Simple Marxian economics is that the person who produced the most labor makes the most money. Without the builder, then the company is SOL. Objectivism says that since I make the tough decisions, then I should make the most money and fuck the janitor since we can clean our own damn building. Now, I included both the salesman and the janitor since they are both necessary jobs that I avoid like the plague. Sure, good man, good chairs, hard beaten path to his door and all that jazz, but his chairs are useless if no one knows about them. Also, I fucking hate cleaning. The only reason why I want too much money is to pay someone to clean for me. Sure I could sell my own product and clean up after myself, but to me the value of people who can do this better is worth it. This because time saved cleaning and selling is time spent coming up with new and better ideas.

In modern society, it's more complex. Man has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These are all marketable goods that have been assigned values by economists. Man, who thought that if you have the ability to help others, you should? It wasn't followers of Ayn Rand. It's just those basic human rights have too high of value. Not dieing of dehydration due to my own bad decisions is somewhere around 1500 USD. It's my right to be alive, but that's about as much as I make in a month, before my cost of living. If I can't buy the dollar value of not dieing of dehydration, should I be left to die and keep myself out of the gene pool? That's not even capitalism, that jut a strange concept from the early 20th century.

Should society meet the rights of the individual, or the should the individual meet the needs of of society? Is personal liberty more important than the greater good? The price of material comes from what value people put on it as well as the labor involved. It's a strange delicate system that is better suited for a different time. That's not the important question we need to ask ourselves. The money entitled to me, as a worker, does that go to an awesome mansion, a new car, and a rocking health care plane? Or does it go to "society" which could be me, or a down on his luck worker, or some lazy bastard who works the system? I don't know, because whiskey and green tea. You figure it out, I'm going to pass out. Luis Prat and Utah Phillips, play me out.

2 comments: