Occupy Wall Street Sept 17 2011

[maple_leafs182]

When I said that 'that our lives depend on the production provided by corporations'. I was referring to the conveniences that we take for granted in our modern lives. Cars, electronics, mass produced clothing, et. al. None of these things would have happened without the organizational structure we call a corporation which pools risk and allows large quantities of capital to be invested effectively.

It isn't that corporations are bad it is that they are too large and hold too much influence over our lives. If we had something like sound money which limits the amount of credit available in the market then these corporation could not get so large. We virtually have oligopolies in every sector of the economy that stifles competition which inhibits innovation.

[cybercoma]

Can you give me one example of a co-operative businesses that does anymore than manage the distribution of agriculture production? How about an example of a technological innovation developed by a co-op?

This is a red-herring. We live in a capitalist society, where co-ops are atypical. It is possible, regardless of whether I can dig up an example or not.

[maple_leafs182]

This is a red-herring. We live in a capitalist society, where co-ops are atypical. It is possible, regardless of whether I can dig up an example or not.

we do not live in a capitalist society.

[TimG]

This is a red-herring. We live in a capitalist society, where co-ops are atypical. It is possible, regardless of whether I can dig up an example or not.

I tend to be a believer in evolution. We live in a capitalist society because other social structures could not deliver the same affuence to a large number of people. If co-ops were capable of that then we would have seen a society evolve that included a lot of co-ops.

[TimG]

If we had something like sound money which limits the amount of credit available in the market then these corporation could not get so large.

The vast majority of people live out their lives as serfs with no chance of escape in the days before fractional reserve banking and fiat currencies. The system we have now has many flaws but the one virtue is it makes credit more widely available. This means that people have an opportunity to improve their lives that they never had before. It also means people can destroy their lives by making bad decisions but that is price that I can live with. Edited October 8, 2011 by TimG

[punked]

I tend to be a believer in evolution. We live in a capitalist society because other social structures could not deliver the same affuence to a large number of people. If co-ops were capable of that then we would have seen a society evolve that included a lot of co-ops.

Correct me if I am wrong but Co-Ops or Credit Union actually have a huge foothold in Canada. Desjardins is one of the fasting growing banks in Canada. In Quebec 70% of the population use a credit union or Banking Co-op Heck 60% in Sask. People seem pretty happy with the service I belong to one and they are great.

[TimG]

Correct me if I am wrong but Co-Ops or Credit Union actually have a huge foothold in Canada. Desjardins is one of the fasting growing banks in Canada. In Quebec 70% of the population use a credit union or Banking Co-op Heck 60% in Sask. People seem pretty happy with the service I belong to one and they are great.

And what goods does a banking co-op produce? What technological innovation has come out of a banking co-op?

[Moonlight Graham]

Fuck Wall Street, and fuck The Man. He lives to bite you in the ass so he can feed himself. Yum!

There's nothing inherently wrong with capitalism, it's all what people make of the system. We wouldn't need government regulation, police, or militaries if people weren't a-holes.

[punked]

And what goods does a banking co-op produce? What technological innovation has come out of a banking co-op?

That is a weird question. I was just pointing out 1 in roughly 3 Canadians belongs to a credit union, with 11 Million Canadians having themselves a membership. That is quite a lot of people involved in the Co Op banking movement, there must be a reason.

So your summation that if there was a Need for Co Ops we would see a society with a lot of them is a bit silly because you live in a country with A lot of Co Ops. At least in the Banking sector.

I would also point out the Canola plant which is one of the largest Cash crops in Canada came from a government program. It was created after WW2 to find a use for all the Rapeseed the farmers were growing because while the oil was great WW2 it wasn't good for eating. It was not a Capitalist program in the least it was a government funded money losing program for the better good of farmers. Guess what it worked. Capitalism isn't the end all and be all.

Edited October 8, 2011 by punked

[TimG]

So your summation that if there was a Need for Co Ops we would see a society with a lot of them is a bit silly because you live in a country with A lot of Co Ops. At least in the Banking sector.

When you jump into an ongoing conversation you need to go back and look at the context. My comments about co-ops were in support of a previous comment where I claim that all of the modern conviences of society (cars, electronics, clothing, etc) were produced by corporations and it is unlikely that these things would have a arose without a structure like the corporation. The co-op was given as a counter example. The existence of banking, agricultural distribution or other service based co-ops does not refute that point.

[punked]

When you jump into an ongoing conversation you need to go back and look at the context. My comments about co-ops were in support of a previous comment where I claim that all of the modern conviences of society (cars, electronics, clothing, etc) were produced by corporations and it is unlikely that these things would have a arose without a structure like the corporation. The co-op was given as a counter example. The existence of banking, agricultural distribution or other service based co-ops does not refute that point.

And I pointed out that one of the Largest Cash crops in Canada was created not by Corperate money but Government money in a program that was seen as something for the greater good.

Candu reactors not the invention of large Corporations but Crown Corporations which were funded with GOVERNMENT money.

[Shady]

And I pointed out that one of the Largest Cash crops in Canada was created not by Corperate money but Government money in a program that was seen as something for the greater good.

Candu reactors not the invention of large Corporations but Crown Corporations which were funded with GOVERNMENT money.

Government money is just money taken from the private sector by said government.

[TimG]

And I pointed out that one of the Largest Cash crops in Canada was created not by Corporate money but Government money in a program that was seen as something for the greater good.

The government is not a coop which needs match revenues to expenses. Co-ops are what my comment applied to. If you want to talk about governments we can. But the argument is different.

We have had two massive examples of societies (USSR and China) where the government tried provide the organizational structure to manage the production and distribution of goods. They failed spectacularly.

In our society the government does periodically invest in original research which does pay off after this research is handed to private corporations that can exploit it. So my comment about developing technology does not apply to governments. But governments are unable to expoit these technologies on their own. They need corporations to make them useful.

[Michael Hardner]

TimG ... These things are true today, but nor necessarily forever.

[TimG]

TimG ... These things are true today, but nor necessarily forever.

A truism. Nothing is forever. But at this point in time we don't have any reason to believe we will find something better than a private corporation as a vehicle to manage the production and distribution of goods.

[bush_cheney2004]

...Candu reactors not the invention of large Corporations but Crown Corporations which were funded with GOVERNMENT money.

CANDU reactors were not solely developed by government or government money.

[punked]

Government money is just money taken from the private sector by said government.

And the private sector exists because of a public that supports it. So what?

[TimG]

And the private sector exists because of a public that supports it. So what?

There are things the government does well. There are things the government cannot do well. The production and distribution of goods is one of those things which the government cannot do well. We need corporations for that. Edited October 8, 2011 by TimG

[punked]

There are things the government does well. There are things the government cannot do well. The production and distribution of goods is one of those things which the government cannot do well. We need corporations for that.

We can agree a mixed system where the government can keep the Private sector honest is the best system then?

[Shady]

And the private sector exists because of a public that supports it. So what?

What do you mean by a public?

[Shady]

We can agree a mixed system where the government can keep the Private sector honest is the best system then?

Yes, if anyone can keep people honest, it's the government.

[TimG]

We can agree a mixed system where the government can keep the Private sector honest is the best system then?

Yep. Government sticks to regulation and being a provider of some of "insurance" services. Private sector does the rest. The real debate is in the details because the just like "free speech" requires that one accept that the freedom will be abused the "free market" requires that one accept the freedom will be abused. The government cannot and should not try to stop every possible abuse before it happens.

[Wild Bill]

TimG ... These things are true today, but nor necessarily forever.

I'd be willing to bet on forever, Michael! Government enterprises are run by political factors, not economic. The way for an employee to advance is not through higher productivity.

I just don't see how you could change that! Look at the crown corporations we've had throughout our history. Can you cite ANY of them as shining examples of cost-efficiency? Instead, they had to respond to political forces. Governments had them pad the payroll to give more people work. They bought supplies from more expensive sources because they were domestic, keeping the money in Canada but making the final product uncompetitive on the world market.

If you know of a way to get around these problems I'd like to hear it!

[punked]

I'd be willing to bet on forever, Michael! Government enterprises are run by political factors, not economic. The way for an employee to advance is not through higher productivity.

I just don't see how you could change that! Look at the crown corporations we've had throughout our history. Can you cite ANY of them as shining examples of cost-efficiency? Instead, they had to respond to political forces. Governments had them pad the payroll to give more people work. They bought supplies from more expensive sources because they were domestic, keeping the money in Canada but making the final product uncompetitive on the world market.

If you know of a way to get around these problems I'd like to hear it!

Seriously you don't think crow corporations can work better then private ones. Just look at the power industry.

[TimG]

Seriously you don't think crow corporations can work better then private ones. Just look at the power industry.

An industry which provides a service. It does not produce or deliver goods.