4 ms·

> The owning class will use it to reduce payroll costs Of course. That's been going on since the invention of the plow. That's why today we can do more interes

> The owning class will use it to reduce payroll costs Of course. That's been going on since the invention of the plow. That's why today we can do more interesting things than turn over the earth with a pointy stick all day every day. > economic democracy, where average people regain control over their lives History shows us that this inevitably means people lose all control over their lives, because the state will make your decisions for you and assign you your job. For example, let's say the color of cars produce by car companies is determined by democracy. 59% vote for the cars to be green. And if you want a red car? Too bad. What if you want a 4 seat car? No dice, 53% voted for 2 seaters to be made. What if you didn't want a car stereo? You're stuck paying for it anyway, as 73% voted for it.

schmidtleonard 1y ago
I have a whole list of things I'd like from my car that the market does not provide because it is more profitable not to. Why do I get the feeling that instead of seeing this as a horror story you would scold me for unreasonable expectations, even though it is the identical mirror form of the horror story you just told?
- derektank 1y ago
  My take would be to scold you to start your own company that provides the features you want from your car if it's not already being provided by the marketplace
  - schmidtleonard 1y ago
    I'd have more luck petitioning the Central Car Design Committee because > it is more profitable not to ...and if anyone thinks this is ridiculous, I'd ask them if they are for or against repealing all of our current motor vehicle regulations. If "for," they have admitted to being a hopeless libertarian, and if "against," they have acknowledged that important reasonable features can be incompatible with the profit motive of a free market and it no longer seems so strange that I might have a list which is more of the same.
    - jack_h 1y ago
      > I'd have more luck petitioning the Central Car Design Committee because Highly doubtful. Command economies have far less variety in what they offer. This isn't theoretical either just look at western cars vs Soviet cars. There's this mistaken belief that if the free market can't provide some good then a command economy could, but the reality is that if a free market can't provide a good then the chance that a command economy could is even more doubtful. Command economies tend to be very bad at allocating resources efficiently as outlined by Hayek in "The Use of Knowledge in Society".
- stego-tech 1y ago
  Because Mr. Bright has a long, storied comment history of neolibertarian fantasies being wielded as a cudgel against anyone who dares envision a future that does not align with his own. Speaking from experience with them in another thread. Your best bet is to ignore the bait and move on to more fruitful discussions.
  - vinoveritas 1y ago
    [dead]
  - WalterBright 1y ago
    I merely point out that economic history shows that economic freedom works better than any other system. Besides, I enjoy debate, like other people enjoy playing football. If you don't, why are you here?
    - fragmede 1y ago
      With all due respect, and I mean that sincerely as you've accomplished far more than I have, you aren't here for debate. Your viewpoint is stuck in the cold war mentality where Soviet communism was a failure (it did, but that doesn't mean that everything they touched was bad) and America and its brand of Free Market capitalism is perfect (it isn't) and responding to your comments is like talking to a brick wall for all the "debate" that actually occurs. Other long time posters here know better than to engage, but hey, you caught me waiting on Claude.
      - WalterBright 1y ago
        All attempts at communism failed. Did you know that there have historically been 20,000 communes founded in the US? I wonder what happened to them! I never said American free markets were perfect. They certainly aren't. But they are very successful. > responding to your comments is like talking to a brick wall I could say the same of the people I respond to! I don't expect to change anyone's mind here. The average stay at a commune is about 2 years, after which the members leave, cured of the notion that communism is better. I encourage you to join one.
- WalterBright 1y ago
  Mass production reduces costs by standardizing things. But still, car companies offer a wide range of options if you're willing to wait for your order. If Ford doesn't provide what you want, there's GM, Toyota, Hyundai, etc. There's no shortage of variety. There's also a small cottage industry of people who will make fully custom cars for you. They're pretty expensive, though, as they don't benefit from economies of scale.
brendoelfrendo 1y ago
This happens anyway, lol. Go to a car lot and you will see the majority of cars available are black, white, silver, and maybe red. Your car will have a stereo. Your car will probably have 4 seats, not 2. Dealers stock the most common configurations and, maybe this is not your experience, but my experience is that they will twist themselves into knots to avoid helping customers make custom orders for exactly what they want, even though the manufacturer has a fancy configurator page where you can do exactly that.
- WalterBright 1y ago
  I've never had trouble ordering what I wanted from the options list. That usually means needing to pay more, though. If you want custom leather seats, you can drive your car off the lot into one of many shops that offer such services, or other customizations. Me, I drove to the stereo shop to put a better stereo in (back when the factory ones were terrible). There are many reality shows on TV featuring shops what will custom build a car to your specifications.
asmxyz 1y ago
There are _other options_! You're argument is that the only two alternatives are that the ruling class and owning class be separate groups of people, or the same group of people. And either way the labor class if F'ed. You're right that having the ruling class and the owning class being the _same people_ is terrible. That's what we're living in right now! But what about the labor class being the owning class? What if Amazon was owned by the people who work at Amazon? Instead of Bezos?
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- WalterBright 1y ago
  The labor class is free to form collectives and cooperatives. There's no law against it. Bezos started Amazon with $300,000. I'm sure it wouldn't take too long for workers to raise that kind of money, after all, $300,000 to buy a house is considered cheap. On the other hand, the history of businesses being confiscated and handed over to the workers has not been a successful one.
  - azemetre 1y ago
    The labor class should also advocate for workplace democracy to fight back. Workers should be able to vote for their bosses. Democratic societies are good for human flourishing. The only way to flourish is to have a thriving middle class. Workplace democracy would be a boon for labor.
  - whatshisface 1y ago
    But startups are worker-owned, insofar as the founders are able to profit from it.
    - WalterBright 1y ago
      Some startups are worker-owned through stock grants, but those grants are rarely evenly distributed. The founders hold the majority as long as they can. It is a good practice for companies to include stock as part of the pay package. It encourages alignment of the company with the employees. Very, very successful companies follow this model, such as Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Google, etc.
whatshisface 1y ago
That's kind of a silly example, your congressman could write a bill allocating 53% of cars to the two seater lobby and 47% to the four seat lobby.
- WalterBright 1y ago
  And what if 62% wanted two seaters? Back in the 70s, the Department of Energy was tasked with allocating gas to the gas stations. A gas station had to apply for an allocation, and the DoE doled out the gas. The DoE doled out gas based on the previous year's usage patterns. Sounds smart, right? What happened is that gas consumption varies year to year due to a number of factors, like weather patterns, population changes, etc. The result was massive misallocation by the DoE - Californian had shortages of gas, Florida had gluts. That sort of situation has never happened before. All that nonsense disappeared literally overnight when Reagan repealed all gas price and allocation controls with his very first Executive Order. I remember than wonderful day very well - at last I could drive right up to the pump and get gas, rather than wait in line. The gas lines never returned. What you're suggesting is called "central economic planning". It is constantly tried again and again, and it never ever works. (The failures of it are always classified as "unintended side effects", though they are entirely predictable.)
  - ta1243 1y ago
    > I remember than wonderful day very well - at last I could drive right up to the pump and get gas, rather than wait in line. The gas lines never returned. Not in the UK, due to a fragile supply chain. https://news.sky.com/story/supply-crisis-catastrophic-panic-buying-of-fuel-going-to-get-worse-says-industry-expert-12417689 https://news.sky.com/story/supply-crisis-catastrophic-panic-... We saw it when the Evergiven closed the Suez. We see it whenever irational consumer behaviour caused unpredicable behaviour. The Randian world you are so enamoured with is one of fragility, because buffers and margins reduces profit. Or are those "unintended side effects"?
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - 1y ago
const_cast 1y ago
It's kind of a meme at this point that any kind of economic control for laborers = communism. That's not just a jump you're allowed to make, sorry. There are a plethora of nations outside the US which have stronger protections for labor, and they're doing quite well. It's not 1965 anymore, we have to start making real big boy arguments.
gnulinux996 1y ago
> Of course. That's been going on since the invention of the plow. That's why today we can do more interesting things than turn over the earth with a pointy stick all day every day. Are you suggesting that suppression of wages is what gave us "more interesting things" to do? > History shows us that this inevitably means people lose all control over their lives, because the state will make your decisions for you and assign you your job. How is this different from the "free market" assigning me a job? > For example, let's say the color of cars produce by car companies is determined by democracy. 59% vote for the cars to be green. And if you want a red car? Too bad. What if you want a 4 seat car? No dice, 53% voted for 2 seaters to be made. What if you didn't want a car stereo? You're stuck paying for it anyway, as 73% voted for it. Concessions are the price to pay for living in a civilized society.
kevincox 1y ago
The problem isn't reducing payroll costs and increased productivity, it is the consolidation of wealth. If we can do twice as much with half of the labour people should work 20h weeks, not be unable to afford a home.

schmidtleonard 1y ago

I have a whole list of things I'd like from my car that the market does not provide because it is more profitable not to. Why do I get the feeling that instead of seeing this as a horror story you would scold me for unreasonable expectations, even though it is the identical mirror form of the horror story you just told?

derektank 1y ago
My take would be to scold you to start your own company that provides the features you want from your car if it's not already being provided by the marketplace
- schmidtleonard 1y ago
  I'd have more luck petitioning the Central Car Design Committee because > it is more profitable not to ...and if anyone thinks this is ridiculous, I'd ask them if they are for or against repealing all of our current motor vehicle regulations. If "for," they have admitted to being a hopeless libertarian, and if "against," they have acknowledged that important reasonable features can be incompatible with the profit motive of a free market and it no longer seems so strange that I might have a list which is more of the same.
  - jack_h 1y ago
    > I'd have more luck petitioning the Central Car Design Committee because Highly doubtful. Command economies have far less variety in what they offer. This isn't theoretical either just look at western cars vs Soviet cars. There's this mistaken belief that if the free market can't provide some good then a command economy could, but the reality is that if a free market can't provide a good then the chance that a command economy could is even more doubtful. Command economies tend to be very bad at allocating resources efficiently as outlined by Hayek in "The Use of Knowledge in Society".
stego-tech 1y ago
Because Mr. Bright has a long, storied comment history of neolibertarian fantasies being wielded as a cudgel against anyone who dares envision a future that does not align with his own. Speaking from experience with them in another thread. Your best bet is to ignore the bait and move on to more fruitful discussions.
- vinoveritas 1y ago
  [dead]
- WalterBright 1y ago
  I merely point out that economic history shows that economic freedom works better than any other system. Besides, I enjoy debate, like other people enjoy playing football. If you don't, why are you here?
  - fragmede 1y ago
    With all due respect, and I mean that sincerely as you've accomplished far more than I have, you aren't here for debate. Your viewpoint is stuck in the cold war mentality where Soviet communism was a failure (it did, but that doesn't mean that everything they touched was bad) and America and its brand of Free Market capitalism is perfect (it isn't) and responding to your comments is like talking to a brick wall for all the "debate" that actually occurs. Other long time posters here know better than to engage, but hey, you caught me waiting on Claude.
    - WalterBright 1y ago
      All attempts at communism failed. Did you know that there have historically been 20,000 communes founded in the US? I wonder what happened to them! I never said American free markets were perfect. They certainly aren't. But they are very successful. > responding to your comments is like talking to a brick wall I could say the same of the people I respond to! I don't expect to change anyone's mind here. The average stay at a commune is about 2 years, after which the members leave, cured of the notion that communism is better. I encourage you to join one.
WalterBright 1y ago
Mass production reduces costs by standardizing things. But still, car companies offer a wide range of options if you're willing to wait for your order. If Ford doesn't provide what you want, there's GM, Toyota, Hyundai, etc. There's no shortage of variety. There's also a small cottage industry of people who will make fully custom cars for you. They're pretty expensive, though, as they don't benefit from economies of scale.

brendoelfrendo 1y ago

This happens anyway, lol. Go to a car lot and you will see the majority of cars available are black, white, silver, and maybe red. Your car will have a stereo. Your car will probably have 4 seats, not 2. Dealers stock the most common configurations and, maybe this is not your experience, but my experience is that they will twist themselves into knots to avoid helping customers make custom orders for exactly what they want, even though the manufacturer has a fancy configurator page where you can do exactly that.

WalterBright 1y ago
I've never had trouble ordering what I wanted from the options list. That usually means needing to pay more, though. If you want custom leather seats, you can drive your car off the lot into one of many shops that offer such services, or other customizations. Me, I drove to the stereo shop to put a better stereo in (back when the factory ones were terrible). There are many reality shows on TV featuring shops what will custom build a car to your specifications.

asmxyz 1y ago

There are _other options_! You're argument is that the only two alternatives are that the ruling class and owning class be separate groups of people, or the same group of people. And either way the labor class if F'ed. You're right that having the ruling class and the owning class being the _same people_ is terrible. That's what we're living in right now! But what about the labor class being the owning class? What if Amazon was owned by the people who work at Amazon? Instead of Bezos?

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
WalterBright 1y ago
The labor class is free to form collectives and cooperatives. There's no law against it. Bezos started Amazon with $300,000. I'm sure it wouldn't take too long for workers to raise that kind of money, after all, $300,000 to buy a house is considered cheap. On the other hand, the history of businesses being confiscated and handed over to the workers has not been a successful one.
- azemetre 1y ago
  The labor class should also advocate for workplace democracy to fight back. Workers should be able to vote for their bosses. Democratic societies are good for human flourishing. The only way to flourish is to have a thriving middle class. Workplace democracy would be a boon for labor.
- whatshisface 1y ago
  But startups are worker-owned, insofar as the founders are able to profit from it.
  - WalterBright 1y ago
    Some startups are worker-owned through stock grants, but those grants are rarely evenly distributed. The founders hold the majority as long as they can. It is a good practice for companies to include stock as part of the pay package. It encourages alignment of the company with the employees. Very, very successful companies follow this model, such as Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Google, etc.

whatshisface 1y ago

That's kind of a silly example, your congressman could write a bill allocating 53% of cars to the two seater lobby and 47% to the four seat lobby.

WalterBright 1y ago
And what if 62% wanted two seaters? Back in the 70s, the Department of Energy was tasked with allocating gas to the gas stations. A gas station had to apply for an allocation, and the DoE doled out the gas. The DoE doled out gas based on the previous year's usage patterns. Sounds smart, right? What happened is that gas consumption varies year to year due to a number of factors, like weather patterns, population changes, etc. The result was massive misallocation by the DoE - Californian had shortages of gas, Florida had gluts. That sort of situation has never happened before. All that nonsense disappeared literally overnight when Reagan repealed all gas price and allocation controls with his very first Executive Order. I remember than wonderful day very well - at last I could drive right up to the pump and get gas, rather than wait in line. The gas lines never returned. What you're suggesting is called "central economic planning". It is constantly tried again and again, and it never ever works. (The failures of it are always classified as "unintended side effects", though they are entirely predictable.)
- ta1243 1y ago
  > I remember than wonderful day very well - at last I could drive right up to the pump and get gas, rather than wait in line. The gas lines never returned. Not in the UK, due to a fragile supply chain. https://news.sky.com/story/supply-crisis-catastrophic-panic-buying-of-fuel-going-to-get-worse-says-industry-expert-12417689 https://news.sky.com/story/supply-crisis-catastrophic-panic-... We saw it when the Evergiven closed the Suez. We see it whenever irational consumer behaviour caused unpredicable behaviour. The Randian world you are so enamoured with is one of fragility, because buffers and margins reduces profit. Or are those "unintended side effects"?
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- 1y ago

const_cast 1y ago

It's kind of a meme at this point that any kind of economic control for laborers = communism. That's not just a jump you're allowed to make, sorry. There are a plethora of nations outside the US which have stronger protections for labor, and they're doing quite well. It's not 1965 anymore, we have to start making real big boy arguments.

gnulinux996 1y ago

> Of course. That's been going on since the invention of the plow. That's why today we can do more interesting things than turn over the earth with a pointy stick all day every day. Are you suggesting that suppression of wages is what gave us "more interesting things" to do? > History shows us that this inevitably means people lose all control over their lives, because the state will make your decisions for you and assign you your job. How is this different from the "free market" assigning me a job? > For example, let's say the color of cars produce by car companies is determined by democracy. 59% vote for the cars to be green. And if you want a red car? Too bad. What if you want a 4 seat car? No dice, 53% voted for 2 seaters to be made. What if you didn't want a car stereo? You're stuck paying for it anyway, as 73% voted for it. Concessions are the price to pay for living in a civilized society.

kevincox 1y ago

The problem isn't reducing payroll costs and increased productivity, it is the consolidation of wealth. If we can do twice as much with half of the labour people should work 20h weeks, not be unable to afford a home.