MARCELL DAREUS POWER

for ex., and state workers need to pay in more for what they get in terms of benefits--but this guy is just such a personally flawed standard bearer for any kind of message of change that even if I were inclined to support his positions I'd hesitate over supporting such a scuzzball, but that may just be me. (This is all not even mentioning his being bounced from school (rumors of cheating) or banned from Marquette Univ. politics for dirty tricks.) BTW, dirtballs exist on the left, too, and I wouldn't support them either. On Memorial Day Richard Blumenthal's "stolen valor" claims of serving in Vietnam come to mind, for ex..... but hes not even offering a real negotiation. he wants to cut and kill union rights. huge difference...

Im not a know it all. its not just theory. its actually practiced... they cant vote you out unless- a- you are not working. b- the capital plus whatever profit in the market is paid off. the same thing happens with a board of directors. why is this so hard for you to understand. the only thing we are changing is protecting the surplus value and the excess property for labor. in other words, now labor has a say... you can sell an idea on a market. but you still need capital and labor. you need material, you need smart engineers, you need people who put the **** together, you need to either pay a shipping company or let them be part of the co-op also. you need a part time lawyer, etc etc. you are ignoring every part of making a business and then asking, why cant i not work and get rich??? :blink: you are ignoring how the state plays a role in this process...

do you predict jarron gilbert will beat out dwan edwards?

you and your workers would go out of business. just because you start something, ie with capital or w/e, doesnt mean you sit back and do nothing and still get paid. we already talked about how capital is unproductive and after that initial capital is paid off, then there is no reason for that authority to be in place. but again, if you are a higher up, and you offer something actually needed, then the association will keep you. there is no free ride. e.g. if there is a higher up rep who handles business allocation and accounting, yeah, he might get paid more because of market forces, but without him/her, their business would fail. I'm struggling to understand what you're talking about in the first part of this quote, so I'll only respond to the last few lines. I *thought* we were talking about capitalists and capitalism. We're talking about the 95 voting themselves 95% (or 90 or whatever) of the profits. While that may strike you as 'fair', there would be no incentive to start new companies that disrupt the status quo and continue to generate wealth and ever higher and higher living standards for people. 1 person never starts a company, usually a large collection of people do. so even for something like a small bar, you still need 6-10 people. just because you bring capital doesnt mean you stop working. mathematically you realize that the unpaid labor will surpass my initial capital. this value,( ie surplus), that is more than capital continually grows and belongs to labor. so the state would protect capital until labor pays it off. its a collective process. in other words, people can pay you for your land/capital, or they can work it off collectively. i personally dont see a problem with letting the market determing that price/profit. Again: Why would I start a new company when I can take no risk and vote myself (and my worker buddies) all of the upside in my current company? If I start my own company, it might fail (lose any money I saved), and even if it succeeds, I am still in no better position than I was before because the people that work for me can 'vote' to take the upside of the new business? Why would I ever do that? people will start business. real risk is just how the world works. nothing is guaranteed. there is always a possibility, depending on your situation, say a middle class person and workers losing out. thats just part of a market. if your hot dogs suck, then hey, im sorry. the vote doesnt take place until initial capital is paid for. ie raw materials are paid for. if not, that would be stealing. people would start for a profit. i have no problem with interest, as long as its coming from real work, ie real money. the fractional reserve system and fed do not do this. this is like me printing out counterfeit money and then loaning it out on interest. im making money doing nothing, and im devaluing other real labor. ie inflation...

:w00t:

no argument here. chris hayes is a pretentious, pompous !@#$...!

we drafted easley, jones, and graham for a reason. they all have major ability and need to be allowed to compete. mcneil is done. glenn was a great great pick. lee smith is a great blocking te, dorin dickerson will be that hb we need imo... heard will beat out troup. imo, edwards, carrington, and heard our the 3 backup dts. we are fine at lb.

Until you accept this fact, you are merely naive. Who's stopping Russia, or China for that matter, from rolling their tanks? The EU? Where would dumbass Chomsky be if that were to happen? He'd be the same place he already is: hiding out on some college campus, hoping that nobody remembers all the dumbass videos he made. And we already have empirical evidence of this in: Where are all the college professors, the "dream team", who made up Obama's "economic council"? There were all going to show us how "intelligent () and reasonable () people manage the economy", so where are they? Answer: back hiding out on college campuses they came from, hoping nobody remembers how badly the ideas they have been preaching for 30 years FAILed. But yeah, we should listen to college professors/the non-responsible, whose job it is to never actually solve anything, or be responsible for anything. When confronted with the need to get something done today: Its always better to listen to some non-responsible person talk theory...than it is to listen to a seasoned professional speak from experience. Hehe. And that's just it: you and Chomsky have something in common, neither of you have any experience being responsible, in economics, high finance, or business in general. The good news for you is: you can change that. The question for you is: why are you listening to a guy who can't? they do pay for their defense, they give huge amounts in taxes to nato.

no, i said all wealth is created by work/labor. money exchanges that labor. when you print fake money, or use the fractional reserve system, labor/capital is bought for free. this devalues work through inflation, and this has no real consideration because its coming from nothing. this is why austrian economists wanted all currency backed in gold. or at the very least a set ratio. otherwise, bubbles develop and **** gets crazy. this can create incredible contraction when this debt, (ie the money supply), is not real. yes, land is not productive, the land represents finite work to buy the land. this labor will quickly surpass this. the reason marginal productivity doesnt work is founded on capital not being productive. its simply permission, ie arbitrary. labor is not getting paid for their full labor, this surpasses the capital value. nullifying the whole concept by simple math. if capital was productive, then we wouldnt need labor. the land would just farm itself, and distribute goods itself. its like letting someone borrow a bike. imagine for some odd reason there are only so many bikes, ( like land)... that value of that bike is 100$. which was bought for. the bike owner than lets someone ride that bike around and pick people up on the back. he gets paid 10$ an hr from what he produces. the people pay him. only he must give 30% to the owner. this is unpaid labor after 33 hrs. that 30% could eventually add up to a thousand bikes, maybe way more... yet that labor is lost through state power and protection of theft. this is why all risk belongs to the labourer after initial capital is met. this is why rent, interest, and capital are all exploitative. it allows someone to get rich without working. its a reward for doing nothing. because capital and land are finite, and labor cant be kept separate, the labourer has to work for capital, in a capitalist system. this just doesnt affect class, it affects politics, social issues, race, lobbying, corporatism, media, etc. he who holds the money,( land and capital ), holds the power and will make the rules. this is even more extreme with banks. for a small example, this is why many doctrines in islam think interest is a sin. its not just exploitation, its theft, ie a moral/ethical issue.

And we already have empirical evidence of this in: Where are all the college professors, the "dream team", who made up Obama's "economic council"? There were all going to show us how "intelligent () and reasonable () people manage the economy", so where are they? Answer: back hiding out on college campuses they came from, hoping nobody remembers how badly the ideas they have been preaching for 30 years FAILed. But yeah, we should listen to college professors/the non-responsible, whose job it is to never actually solve anything, or be responsible for anything. Hehe. And that's just it: you and Chomsky have something in common, neither of you have any experience being responsible, in economics, high finance, or business in general. The good news for you is: you can change that. The question for you is: why are you listening to a guy who can't? were just as bad as those countries. read persepolis. not going to argue with you on obama, i dont agree with his policies. hes all talk, but same as the old boss... chomsky always quotes the responsible and shows reasons on why they are wrong or right.... this is equivalent to the idea that because i was not in stalins cabinet, i could never see where he went wrong. really?

if they dont go with the p word, than edwards, carrington, and heard are the backup dts. p= troup, gilbert, ross, dotson... troup is crossed out imo, not because of play, but i dont think he comes back from back issues. if gilbert can be just as good or offer more pass rush than edwards, than they will keep him.

:nana: cant handle the truth?

Who was the biggest contributor to obama? wall st. who passed a corporate health care bill? who kept bush tax cuts? who takes from bain capital but is critical of bain now? who let big banks write dodd frank? who kept the war marchine going in afghanistan? who signed even worse neoliberal trade policy with south korea? not all dems, just most.

:wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash:

id want nukes too if the US overthrew my elected govt and tried again in the 80s...

they are all run by big business. dems and repubs. dont you know that? we have 1 party, the corporate party. 1 hides it, the other puts it in your face....

yeah, its not good. this has been chronic so... i still wouldnt count edwards out if gilbert doesnt show up....

so you enjoy stealing from others? you like the free ride? :sick:

i would do the same thing

ummm the capitalist is the welfare queen here, not labor. you see labor actually produces things and works. ya know 9-5. checking your blackberry in the bahamas is not work...

the skills arnt voted on stupid... if that single person paid for those materials, then he/she owns it. there is a difference between the means of production and possesion. this is possesion. not everything in the world is summed up in a collective circle. thats not how the world works.