ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Economics, Business and Finance
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags socialism , worker cooperatives

Reply
Old 1st November 2017, 03:15 PM   #361
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trakar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 12,208
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Sure.

Tell me: If three individuals get together and decide one them should be mayor, and agree pool their votes behind their candidate, is that an illegal political party...
No, as each one is voting independently and privately, so that the agreed pooling is without meaning or merit. As long as they are not donating more than an individual donation limit in money or resources, or in the case of a non-matching funds type of public election financing, not providing resources that would abrogate public finance election rules, then it doesn't matter whether you are talking 3 individuals or 300 million individuals. this type of discussion and decision among any size group would not constitute a political party, to my considerations.

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What if they go door to door, and buy advertising, encouraging others to vote for their candidate?
As stated, that would probably venture too far if they were soliciting donations or buying advertising in a way that exceeded individual donation limits, or in non-matching funds public financing systems.

But if all they are doing is talking to their neighbors and community members and promoting their candidate's qualities and policy ideas, again, this would not be stepping across the line from individual advocacy into a political party situation.

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What if someone else steps up, arguing that they are a better representative of the group's values than the original candidate?
Then I would hope that these individuals would openly and critically assess both (or all) candidates and their individual characteristics and then individually decide which candidate actually best represents their individual perspectives and public policy preferences and then decide individually whether or not to stick with their original agreed upon vote pooling, if they do, fine, if they don't that's fine as well.

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What if these citizens, associating freely, agree among themselves on a process for deciding which contender will enjoy the endorsement of the group?
If they decide that they would like to vote for the same candidate that is fine, if not, that is fine as well, whether it is three people or three hundred million people, but one person should not be limited in their selection, support and ability to vote by two people merely because those two have been in the Group longer and they don't like one of the candidate's or their policy preferences.

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Do you even understand what a political party actually is?...
A gate-keeping organization designed to raise money and support from the donor class while limiting candidates' policy preferences and the choice of the electorate, so that they can consolidate the personal power among a small group of individuals to promote their particular public policy preferences while gaining as much electoral support as they can by any means necessary (hook or crook). What is your understanding of a political party?
__________________
Trakar
"By doubting we come to inquiry, and through inquiry we perceive truth." Peter Abelard
"My civilization can do anything!" - David Brin (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i275AvgVvow)

Last edited by Trakar; 1st November 2017 at 03:29 PM.
Trakar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st November 2017, 03:33 PM   #362
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trakar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 12,208
Originally Posted by Tippit View Post
Is your first impulse always tyranny?...
Are you still beating the dead horses of your own imagination?
__________________
Trakar
"By doubting we come to inquiry, and through inquiry we perceive truth." Peter Abelard
"My civilization can do anything!" - David Brin (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i275AvgVvow)
Trakar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st November 2017, 05:02 PM   #363
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38,078
Wow, this thread seems to have attracted a lot of really crackpot political ideas.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2017, 12:54 AM   #364
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 3157'S 11557'E
Posts: 12,216
Originally Posted by Trakar View Post
Are you still beating the dead horses of your own imagination?
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2017, 02:30 PM   #365
Tippit
Master Poster
 
Tippit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,699
Originally Posted by Trakar View Post
Are you still beating the dead horses of your own imagination?
You want to ban political parties, which are synonymous with free speech, and you accuse me of having the "imagination"? Do you have anything to say about Duverger's Law, instant runoff voting vs. plurality voting, and the influence of endless fiat money on politics?
__________________
"The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the banks."
- Lord Acton
Tippit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2017, 03:24 PM   #366
JJM 777
Illuminator
 
JJM 777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,051
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
if you want to incent people through ownership yet protect them, a likely solution would be to have them invest a certain dollar amount in their own company and another dollar amount in a more general retirement fund.
Or even more stably, into a national fund that owns tons of companies. The more the more stale (and the more equally the profits and losses here and there get distributed).

Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Are there examples of systems that began as Marxist revolutions and then progressed through reforms to reach a standard of living comparable to Scandinavia?
Apparently no. Chine is rising, if you measure average income, but not so awe-inspiringly if you measure the poorest 10%.

Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
The attention needs to be paid to the working poor.
Plus the unemployed against their own will. Who would like to work but no jobs are available for them.

Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Anything that can be automated frees up people to be productive in other ways.
True. Or as some theorize, robotization and AI will eventually become so productive that humans can start working less, if at all. Then it is crucial that ownership of the robotized production is equally distributed among population.
JJM 777 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2017, 05:26 PM   #367
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trakar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 12,208
Originally Posted by Tippit View Post
You want to ban political parties, which are synonymous with free speech, and you accuse me of having the "imagination"? Do you have anything to say about Duverger's Law, instant runoff voting vs. plurality voting, and the influence of endless fiat money on politics?
In your imagination, I'm sure political parties equate to "free speech," that has not been my experience over the last half century or so.

"Duverger's Law" is probably relevant to third-party systems in the U.S., but is completely irrelevant to an election system that forbids and does not allow political parties to participate. Unless you have some reason why you think it is particularly relevant and applicable.

"instant runoff voting vs. plurality voting," - IRV would probably lend itself well to a party-less election system, particularly with public-funding limitations and restrictions. You would probably still need a "primary" of sorts, just to reduce the number of candidates to a handful for a final election. Probably need a plurality vote to end that contest but it might be best to go back to the original U.S. Constitutional mechanism of having the winner become President and the runner-up becoming the Vice President, just to maintain a strong system of checks and balances.

As to money in politics, I've already established that all elections should be publically funded. While I have been open to some private individual limited donations, and matching public funds, it is very easy for such to make things unnecessarily complicated and prone to abuse, So it may well be best to make elections fully dependent upon public financing and resources.
__________________
Trakar
"By doubting we come to inquiry, and through inquiry we perceive truth." Peter Abelard
"My civilization can do anything!" - David Brin (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i275AvgVvow)

Last edited by Trakar; 7th November 2017 at 05:29 PM.
Trakar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2017, 01:25 AM   #368
JJM 777
Illuminator
 
JJM 777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,051
Originally Posted by Trakar View Post
private individual limited donations (...) prone to abuse, So it may well be best to make elections fully dependent upon public financing and resources.
I support this idea too, tough public financing is not exactly fair and transparent and free from abuse in all cases.
JJM 777 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2017, 11:59 AM   #369
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 9,393
How did we get from "worker owned economy" to "no political parties"?
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2017, 12:12 PM   #370
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 3157'S 11557'E
Posts: 12,216
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
How did we get from "worker owned economy" to "no political parties"?
Some people manage to work their own personal agenda into any discussion.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2017, 03:38 PM   #371
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trakar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 12,208
Originally Posted by JJM 777 View Post
I support this idea too, tough public financing is not exactly fair and transparent and free from abuse in all cases.
Agreed, only pie-in-the-sky fantasists expect any complex interactive system to function well (yet alone perfectly) absent oversight monitoring, robust regulation and continuous adjustment. Transparency and external review feedback would seem to be key essentials to all public/civil systems.
__________________
Trakar
"By doubting we come to inquiry, and through inquiry we perceive truth." Peter Abelard
"My civilization can do anything!" - David Brin (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i275AvgVvow)
Trakar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2017, 04:17 PM   #372
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trakar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 12,208
In the following post you responded thus to my summary of why it is difficult to come to a societal consensus on what actions should be accomplished by a given society.

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Yup. That's the crux of the debate in a nutshell. Now I just wish I had an answer for any of it.
I responded with:

Originally Posted by Trakar View Post
Well, most ideologies provide a range of solutions addressing the problems societies face within the confines of the manner in which they define these problems. Unfortunately, the ideological definitions allow almost no overlap of "needs" or "wants," between ideologies so that there are almost never any acceptable solutions across the span of differing ideologies...
Which attracted Jim's response:

Originally Posted by JJM 777 View Post
Conflict of interests is a basic feature of politics. Its only effective solution would be legal autonomy of political parties, within their own geographic regions of the country. Then they would be able to define their wants and needs as they want.
which led to my follow-on expression of my alternative to Jim's proposal, and my subsequent responses and clarifications to others who commented on the following:

Originally Posted by Trakar View Post
IMO, an easier solution that would bring greater benefit to electorate and nation, would be to simply outlaw political parties, institute and regulate a publically-financed election system and a judicially controlled voting district mapping system...
Hope that helps,...however, if you are simply wanting to refocus back to a different area of the discussion, the more effective route to that end would probably involve simply posting your thoughts and discussing the area you are more interested in.
__________________
Trakar
"By doubting we come to inquiry, and through inquiry we perceive truth." Peter Abelard
"My civilization can do anything!" - David Brin (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i275AvgVvow)
Trakar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 01:44 AM   #373
JJM 777
Illuminator
 
JJM 777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,051
Idunno if a worker owned and managed economy can work. On-topic discussion thereof has proven challenging.
JJM 777 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 05:41 AM   #374
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,719
Originally Posted by JJM 777 View Post
Idunno if a worker owned and managed economy can work. On-topic discussion thereof has proven challenging.
It's easy to imagine worker ownership, many companies do that already but mostly through employee stock ownership that leaves the management structure in place.

One could argue that any democracy already has an element of worker management of the economy, at least by proxy, as they vote for their representatives in governmentthat who play that role.
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Economics, Business and Finance

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:27 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.