3 ms·

"That isn't socialism, but boy does it feel like workers being more efficient when they seize the means of production—the compiler—rather than being coerced or

by rick888 16y ago

"That isn't socialism, but boy does it feel like workers being more efficient when they seize the means of production—the compiler—rather than being coerced or exploited." How are workers being "exploited" just based on the fact that they working for someone else? We all have choices in this world. If you feel you aren't getting paid enough, leave. "They argue that this creates an unequal society that fails to provide equal opportunities for everyone to maximise their potential." If I have more money than you, it instantly makes our opportunities "unequal". This is the problem with socialism. It creates "equality" by limiting everyone's success. This works well for people that aren't interested in succeeding. I think of it like those group projects in school where 2 people of 5 would get stuck doing all the work, while the rest took the same amount of credit. "I have no idea if the folks laid off from auto-makers want to do that, but I do know that I and many of the programmers I know seem happy with the idea of working in small teams in a collaborative and egalitarian manner" I see people talking about this every couple of years. If you really want to start something like this, don't talk about it, do it. Many people in history have tried exactly what you are proposing and this crazy thing called human nature gets in the way every time. The idea of a group owned collaborative sounds great on paper, until you actually attempt to do it. Who decides how much each person gets paid? If it's based on performance, what kind of performance? How many widgets or made? You mentioned a "co-operative workers' councils". How is this any different than a president/ceo of the company? These "councils" will have more power over the regular workers, so it doesn't really make everyone "equal". I've worked at a few companies that were run by committee. Even small decisions were very painful to make.

raganwald 16y ago
Are you presenting this as an argument with my article? I am confused, as you seem to be arguing most of the time with other people's words and not my own. I will respond to one thing you wrote, That does not mean I agree with or even understand anything else in your comment. How are workers being "exploited" just based on the fact that they working for someone else? We all have choices in this world. If you feel you aren't getting paid enough, leave. Is exploitation incompatible with freedom? You seem to be saying that exploitation does not exist since people appear to have choices. That isn't my understanding of what the word "exploitation" means. If I'm wrong, please suggest the word that describes what I am thinking, and I'll update the essay.
- rick888 16y ago
  "Are you presenting this as an argument with my article? I am confused, as you seem to be arguing most of the time with other people's words and not my own." You seem to like to add other people's words in your article as to convey a certain message. When I argue against that message, you tell me that you are confused. If you don't want anything to do with the thoughts you quoted, why put them there at all? You should stand by your opinions. "Is exploitation incompatible with freedom? You seem to be saying that exploitation does not exist since people appear to have choices." No. Some people are truly exploited. You laid it out there as a blanked statement. As if everyone is exploited in the current system.
  - raganwald 16y ago
    I think you have certain ideas. I'm fine with your opinions just as they are, I honour you for that. However, in an essay where I start by saying that I'm erroneous in describing myself as a Socialist and end by saying that I'm a socialist for sufficiently libertarian values of socialism, what are we to make of my quoting a generic definition of Big S Socialism in the middle? I stated what I believe quite clearly. What I suggest you do is carry on arguing against Big S Socialism. Nothing wrong with disputing it. And if you like, you can say things like "Reginald quotes Wikipedia as saying that Socialism is ____. This is clearly a bad idea because _____." Now as to "standing by my opinions," ask your friends in the neighborhood about me. They will tell you I have no problem standing by my opinions, even when they are unpopular. But I should make something perfectly clear: This essay describes what I like. At no time do I claim that you or anybody else will be better off if things go this way or that way, just that I will like it. So really, there is very little value to your trying to persuade me that the world will be worse off if Health Care is nationalized or what-not. I am not writing an essay about how to make the world a better place, just about how to make my world a better place. I believe the best you can do to oppose my views is to convince me that I personally wouldn't like working on small, self-organizing software teams. Have at it.

by rick888 16y ago

raganwald 16y ago

Are you presenting this as an argument with my article? I am confused, as you seem to be arguing most of the time with other people's words and not my own. I will respond to one thing you wrote, That does not mean I agree with or even understand anything else in your comment. How are workers being "exploited" just based on the fact that they working for someone else? We all have choices in this world. If you feel you aren't getting paid enough, leave. Is exploitation incompatible with freedom? You seem to be saying that exploitation does not exist since people appear to have choices. That isn't my understanding of what the word "exploitation" means. If I'm wrong, please suggest the word that describes what I am thinking, and I'll update the essay.

rick888 16y ago
"Are you presenting this as an argument with my article? I am confused, as you seem to be arguing most of the time with other people's words and not my own." You seem to like to add other people's words in your article as to convey a certain message. When I argue against that message, you tell me that you are confused. If you don't want anything to do with the thoughts you quoted, why put them there at all? You should stand by your opinions. "Is exploitation incompatible with freedom? You seem to be saying that exploitation does not exist since people appear to have choices." No. Some people are truly exploited. You laid it out there as a blanked statement. As if everyone is exploited in the current system.
- raganwald 16y ago
  I think you have certain ideas. I'm fine with your opinions just as they are, I honour you for that. However, in an essay where I start by saying that I'm erroneous in describing myself as a Socialist and end by saying that I'm a socialist for sufficiently libertarian values of socialism, what are we to make of my quoting a generic definition of Big S Socialism in the middle? I stated what I believe quite clearly. What I suggest you do is carry on arguing against Big S Socialism. Nothing wrong with disputing it. And if you like, you can say things like "Reginald quotes Wikipedia as saying that Socialism is ____. This is clearly a bad idea because _____." Now as to "standing by my opinions," ask your friends in the neighborhood about me. They will tell you I have no problem standing by my opinions, even when they are unpopular. But I should make something perfectly clear: This essay describes what I like. At no time do I claim that you or anybody else will be better off if things go this way or that way, just that I will like it. So really, there is very little value to your trying to persuade me that the world will be worse off if Health Care is nationalized or what-not. I am not writing an essay about how to make the world a better place, just about how to make my world a better place. I believe the best you can do to oppose my views is to convince me that I personally wouldn't like working on small, self-organizing software teams. Have at it.