2 ms·

Specifically, one of the businesses Berkshire Hathaway invested heavily in is the BNSF Railroad. Railroads take a lot of capital - tens of thousands of miles o

Specifically, one of the businesses Berkshire Hathaway invested heavily in is the BNSF Railroad. Railroads take a lot of capital - tens of thousands of miles of track, thousands of locomotives (at $2 million each), railroad cars, and so on. Were the employees going to buy all that? No, they were not - they didn't have the money. So you need some people with money - some capitalists. Do you expect them to work for free? If so, good luck - you can expect all you want, but they aren't investing in your business. We can have a conversation about how much of the rewards should flow to investors and how much should flow to the workers. But "anything that doesn't go to the workers is theft" shows a complete lack of understanding. If labor can get the money and buys the tools, then sure, they get the rewards that flow to labor and the rewards that flow to capital. That's perfectly fair. But at that point, they're not just "labor" any longer - they're at least petit bourgeoisie.

AndrewKemendo 3y ago
Oh, I fully understand it. You just seem to think that there is no other way for some reason How can you just wave away the narcissistic psychopathy of capital return requirements? On what philosophical principle are you basing your position on? I’m not really sure how you can stand on any kind of principal here when all you’re doing is capitulating to the existing power structures “It’s just the way it is” isn’t a branch of ethics
- AnimalMuppet 3y ago
  "I demand that it be this other way" isn't a branch of ethics either. And labeling some aspect of the existing way as "theft" doesn't make your argument any stronger. Neither does labeling it "narcistic psychopathy". If we're going to live a better life than in the stone age, we need tools that are better than stones. The more sophisticated tools are beyond the ability of one person to both make and use them - they take too much time to make. So we wind up with a specialized economy where different people make the tools and use the tools. And they both deserve to be rewarded - the tools enable much more to be produced; those who made that possible deserve to share in the rewards. But we're a money economy rather than a barter economy, because barter doesn't scale all that well. Well, in a money economy, if someone is going to use a tool they didn't build, then someone has to buy the tool - either the tool user or an investor. If the tool user doesn't have the money, then it has to be an investor. Do you demand that the investor do so for free? That doesn't sound fair. (It also doesn't sound like it will actually happen - why should the investor invest if there is no expectation of a return?) So now we have three people who need to share in the rewards - in tool maker, the tool user, and the tool buyer. And it is perfectly fair that all three share in the rewards. It is unfair to expect the investor to invest for free. Like I said, we can have a conversation about the amounts that different ones receive. But that's a completely different conversation from "everything that goes to the investor is theft".
  - AndrewKemendo 3y ago
    Your response doesn’t make any new claims or derive any new principles, you’re simply regurgitating capitalist propaganda. In fact this trope about the “stone age” tells me you have a eurocentric idea of the history of humanity - eg: “people are fundamentally selfish, things were bad, then society developed and now things are better” Which is just a totally fabricated history All your questions will be answered by reading, chapter 4 of Prudhon “What is property?” Except in extremely rare cases, hoards of wealth come from inequitable deals - that is, someone chooses a bad deal for themselves under duress If you want things to be better than the stone ages then stop acting like “might makes right” is an ethical position, its “stone age” philosophy that needs to end https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/pierre-joseph-proudhon-what-is-property-an-inquiry-into-the-principle-of-right-and-of-governmen#toc18 https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/pierre-joseph-proudh...
    - AnimalMuppet 3y ago
      > All your questions will be answered by reading, chapter 4 of Prudhon “What is property?” Here's one question that it won't answer: Why should I believe Proudhon? Sure, he may sound correct. Lots of other people sound correct, too. What is your basis for saying that I should listen to Proudhon rather than all these other people? > If you want things to be better than the stone ages then stop acting like “might makes right” is an ethical position, its “stone age” philosophy that needs to end I did not advocate that as an ethical position - you're imputing that to me. I deny you the right to tell me what my ethical position is. And you should stop trying, not just because you don't have the right, but also because you're lousy at it. I'm done with the conversation, since you seem quite clearly to be uninterested in listening. I will leave you the last word if you want it.
      - AndrewKemendo 3y ago
        >What is your basis for saying that I should listen to Proudhon rather than all these other people? My suggestion is to read them all and come to your own conclusions
- tomcam 3y ago
  Can you give an overview of labor would obtain the resources to buy and operate a railroad?
  - AndrewKemendo 3y ago
    Some way anyone raises money: Go ask people with money The difference is that the people you ask will be the people who are doing the work and as a result they become the owners I haven't started a railroad so I can't tell you how to fund that I have started a residential trash cooperative which is 100% bootstrapped by the employees and needed ~100k to start I have also started multiple software startups and those are cheap as hell to start and run if you're not trying to waste money on marketing

AndrewKemendo 3y ago

Oh, I fully understand it. You just seem to think that there is no other way for some reason How can you just wave away the narcissistic psychopathy of capital return requirements? On what philosophical principle are you basing your position on? I’m not really sure how you can stand on any kind of principal here when all you’re doing is capitulating to the existing power structures “It’s just the way it is” isn’t a branch of ethics

AnimalMuppet 3y ago
"I demand that it be this other way" isn't a branch of ethics either. And labeling some aspect of the existing way as "theft" doesn't make your argument any stronger. Neither does labeling it "narcistic psychopathy". If we're going to live a better life than in the stone age, we need tools that are better than stones. The more sophisticated tools are beyond the ability of one person to both make and use them - they take too much time to make. So we wind up with a specialized economy where different people make the tools and use the tools. And they both deserve to be rewarded - the tools enable much more to be produced; those who made that possible deserve to share in the rewards. But we're a money economy rather than a barter economy, because barter doesn't scale all that well. Well, in a money economy, if someone is going to use a tool they didn't build, then someone has to buy the tool - either the tool user or an investor. If the tool user doesn't have the money, then it has to be an investor. Do you demand that the investor do so for free? That doesn't sound fair. (It also doesn't sound like it will actually happen - why should the investor invest if there is no expectation of a return?) So now we have three people who need to share in the rewards - in tool maker, the tool user, and the tool buyer. And it is perfectly fair that all three share in the rewards. It is unfair to expect the investor to invest for free. Like I said, we can have a conversation about the amounts that different ones receive. But that's a completely different conversation from "everything that goes to the investor is theft".
- AndrewKemendo 3y ago
  Your response doesn’t make any new claims or derive any new principles, you’re simply regurgitating capitalist propaganda. In fact this trope about the “stone age” tells me you have a eurocentric idea of the history of humanity - eg: “people are fundamentally selfish, things were bad, then society developed and now things are better” Which is just a totally fabricated history All your questions will be answered by reading, chapter 4 of Prudhon “What is property?” Except in extremely rare cases, hoards of wealth come from inequitable deals - that is, someone chooses a bad deal for themselves under duress If you want things to be better than the stone ages then stop acting like “might makes right” is an ethical position, its “stone age” philosophy that needs to end https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/pierre-joseph-proudhon-what-is-property-an-inquiry-into-the-principle-of-right-and-of-governmen#toc18 https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/pierre-joseph-proudh...
  - AnimalMuppet 3y ago
    > All your questions will be answered by reading, chapter 4 of Prudhon “What is property?” Here's one question that it won't answer: Why should I believe Proudhon? Sure, he may sound correct. Lots of other people sound correct, too. What is your basis for saying that I should listen to Proudhon rather than all these other people? > If you want things to be better than the stone ages then stop acting like “might makes right” is an ethical position, its “stone age” philosophy that needs to end I did not advocate that as an ethical position - you're imputing that to me. I deny you the right to tell me what my ethical position is. And you should stop trying, not just because you don't have the right, but also because you're lousy at it. I'm done with the conversation, since you seem quite clearly to be uninterested in listening. I will leave you the last word if you want it.
    - AndrewKemendo 3y ago
      >What is your basis for saying that I should listen to Proudhon rather than all these other people? My suggestion is to read them all and come to your own conclusions
tomcam 3y ago
Can you give an overview of labor would obtain the resources to buy and operate a railroad?
- AndrewKemendo 3y ago
  Some way anyone raises money: Go ask people with money The difference is that the people you ask will be the people who are doing the work and as a result they become the owners I haven't started a railroad so I can't tell you how to fund that I have started a residential trash cooperative which is 100% bootstrapped by the employees and needed ~100k to start I have also started multiple software startups and those are cheap as hell to start and run if you're not trying to waste money on marketing