Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
User Journal

Journal Marxist Hacker 42's Journal: The rights of a man 72

Journal by Marxist Hacker 42
Here are the basic rights I believe in. Some seem to be endlessly confused about it:

1. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights compromises the first 30 rights I believe in- but 21-30 I believe to be incomplete. Three more rights are needed to achieve the ideals in 21-30.

31. Every worker has the right to a Just Wage- a living wage that provides for himself and his family, as outlined in Article 23(3). If this is achieved, Article 23(4) becomes unneccessary.

32. Every conumer has a right to a Fair Price- the cost of materials plus the just wage of the laborer, and no more. This holds down inflation.

33. Every worker has the right to own, as private property, the means of production- the tools of his trade. This eliminates the need for an investor class or renting.

Anybody have any problem with that? How about the ACs who have plagued me today?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The rights of a man More

The rights of a man

Comments Filter:
  • How is your 31 different from 23,3 in substance?

    Re: 32 Who decides what is the 'price' of goods? An accountant is a liar with a spreadsheet.

    Re: 33 What exactly do you mean? What's to stop, say, my brother-in-law, a construction worker, from owning a hammer?
    • How is your 31 different from 23,3 in substance?

      I'm not at all sure that it is different in substance- when I first posted this I thought it was the practical vs the theoretical application of 23,3, but I'm begining to think that 23,3 covers it nicely.

      Re: 32 Who decides what is the 'price' of goods? An accountant is a liar with a spreadsheet.

      The concept of the Fair Price reduces the calculation down to a simple labor & parts calculation that can be done by anyone- doesn't need an accountant with

      • An accountant is a liar with a spreadsheet

        Ob. accountant joke:

        Q: How much is 2 + 2?
        A: How much do you want it to be?

        What happens if there are 2 people, one who is quicker than the other? Rather than both being free to work towards a price they negociate, we now penalize the faster worker, or we ensure the slower worker has zero work, because his output is slower, so it costs more? Unions, by ensuring the same wage for everyone doing the same work, helped eliminate this disparity between the newcomer and

        • ...back at a factory I was working at. Been working there a long time, wanted a fifty cent raise, boss sez "like to, but can't..wage controls..." etc. I quit on the spot, he re hires me under a different job title, went back to work with my raise.

        • We went through wage and price controls 3 decades ago, and, while it was useful as an exercise to respond to a temporary crisis (OPEC), it's not something I would like to live with long-term. Price controls also mean that prices don't drop quickly in response to gluts in supply or advances in tech - think computers and tvs, for example.

          Ok, where's the liberal tom hudson, and what galaxy is the pod person living inside his body from? :-)

          Seriously though- what would be so bad with prices NEVER changing? Y

          • Where's the liberal tom hudson, and what galaxy is the pod person living inside his body from

            Ouch! (Yeah, I know :-)

            It's just that people in the 3rd world have to eat, too, and if we let them make the lower-tech stuff cheaper, we all come out ahead, that's all. To do otherwise is to treat everyone else the way the British treated their colonies when they were an empire - just a source of raw materials and a captive market - rather than as equals.

            I seem to remember a tea party that was held in Boston har

            • It's just that people in the 3rd world have to eat, too, and if we let them make the lower-tech stuff cheaper, we all come out ahead, that's all.

              2 points towards this:

              They were able to eat before we interfered with their internal population and economic controls.

              Making low-tech stuff for the first world means NOTHING if they do not have the right to own the means of production and the right to a Just Wage. Without those two rights, they'll only continue to be abused.

              To do otherwise is to treat everyo

      • Let me see if I get you right here.

        I build product X and I can only charge for the amount of time spent and the cost of the parts used with a small profit factor in it.

        Now, if I can build product X in half the time that it takes the other guy to build it then I have to charge less and thus make the same amount of profit. Suppose I can only build it in half the time because my tools are twice as expensive? If my profit is constrained then the payback time for the investment in the tools is quite long. W
        • Your right to own the means of production means you're not in competition with the other guy- at all. Since you own the means of production in a given area with a set of consumers, it doesn't matter one whit what the OTHER guy does- or what the guild has set HIS living wage to- he's not allowed to take your customers and you're not allowed to take his, or else you'd be depriving him of part of his means of production. Your incentive for improving production techniques is artistry, not efficiency- as is hi
          • Wow, we're skipping past Marxism and heading back to the wonderful world of feudalism.

            So here's a question: How do you apprentice for something that doesn't exist at the time of your apprenticeship? What do you do if some advance makes your skill useless?

            Who runs these guilds and decide on who gets to buy from someone and what the wage is? Who pays these people? What's a fair wage for running a guild?

            Worst of all, what to do with a full market? If it's so tightly controlled that another person can't
            • Wow, we're skipping past Marxism and heading back to the wonderful world of feudalism.

              In a way, it's what Marx was wishing for- there's a reason why all of his works were tinged with morality.

              So here's a question: How do you apprentice for something that doesn't exist at the time of your apprenticeship?

              By apprenticing in it's precursor, of course. Human advances usually have a precursor of some sort. That's one of the things that always bugged me about Star Trek- I can see the precursor of the Ent
              • How the heck do you get freedom from a system where there is a person at top deciding what market you can sell to what work you can do and when new technolgies are adopted?

                What if you don't WANT to change?
                Look at the small/splinter markets for old-fashioned techniques like wood carving and iron working. These markets ONLY exist because of luxury spending.
                • How the heck do you get freedom from a system where there is a person at top deciding what market you can sell to what work you can do and when new technolgies are adopted?

                  Because you don't? Guilds have a tendency to be democratic- no one person decides anything at all.

                  What if you don't WANT to change?

                  Then chances are your customers won't want to change either.

                  Look at the small/splinter markets for old-fashioned techniques like wood carving and iron working. These markets ONLY exist because of luxu
  • You are, in essence, purporting socialism as a fundamental right.

    The practical impossiblity of this hurdle aside, how do you plan on the world functioning without the regulating power of the market force? Heck, how do you plan on figuring a "fair wage" when you set the price?

    FWIW, there are two better methods to this.

    1: A right not to live in poverty. All human beings should be able to eat, live under a roof, and enjoy some of their culture's heritage--which is of course another way of saying "occasion
    • You are, in essence, purporting socialism as a fundamental right.

      I would say distributism- after all, the essence of a right to sell at a fair price is that you have somebody you can sell to. And the essence of being allowed to own one's own means of production is a right to private property. Neither of these are available under classic socialism.

      The practical impossiblity of this hurdle aside, how do you plan on the world functioning without the regulating power of the market force?

      By going back t

    • You are, in essence, purporting socialism as a fundamental right.

      How are you going to pay for your own police department and fire protection? Don't you dare expect me to pay for the man to protect your butt or put out fires in your apartment because you were careless.

      Pay as you go. Also applies to sewage service, voting services, access to any park, streets/bridges/tunnels/freeways, FDA inspections, DHS strip searches (you need to pay the man a fiver when he pulls you out of the line for "more intensive

      • How are you going to pay for your own police department and fire protection?

        That's a matter that I will discuss with my neighbors and the fellow citizens of whatever country I happen to inhabit. Maybe we'll go with a pay-as-you-go. Maybe we'll use taxes. Maybe we'll just draft 26 folk to be "fireman" for two weeks a year for every full-time fireman we'd need.

        There is a difference between good ideas and fundamental rights.
        • There is a difference between good ideas and fundamental rights.

          Which is exactly why the local economic system should be under local control- and why goods should be produced as close to the consumer as possible instead of being regulated to "the free hand of the global marketplace" forcing solutions that don't work locally on local populations.

          By limiting trade to only those items that are NEEDED- as oppsed to items that are merely WANTED- we protect the right of the local craftsman and merchant to sell
          • By limiting trade to only those items that are NEEDED- as oppsed to items that are merely WANTED

            So, you're setting up at the highest level of society a decree that they cannot have what we do not want them to have?

            If Campbells can provide food to a billion people better than a billion seperate farms and kitchens, they why should we prevent them? At most, we should ensure that the billion can turn away from campbells and grow their own food and make their own soup.
            • So, you're setting up at the highest level of society a decree that they cannot have what we do not want them to have?

              No- nothing is inhibiting the flow of information- just of goods. Want something from a few towns over? Write to the craftsman and ask for the source code...Open Souce Baby, it's where it's at.

              If Campbells can provide food to a billion people better than a billion seperate farms and kitchens, they why should we prevent them? At most, we should ensure that the billion can turn away fro
              • Which is my point- because at current time, they can't.

                Cool. Good point.

                But what about those that DON'T want to make their own soup? Requiring "fair wages" and "fair prices" means that you're deciding that everyone HAS to make their own soup.

                • Requiring "fair wages" and "fair prices" means that you're deciding that everyone HAS to make their own soup.

                  Not at all- after all, you COULD go down to the market, pay the fair price for the soup from the soup maker, who in turn paid fair price from the farmer. There's just no profit for anybody in the chain is all- the cost of one man's labor becomes the next man's cost of materials, on up the chain. No middlemen doesn't mean that you can't build a chain- no middlemen means that there's nobody in the
                  • So... what's your basic economic unit?

                    Is one man's labor more valuable than another's? Does that mean that a slothful soup-maker can sell their soup for more?
                    • No basic unit can work over multiple localaties in the present framework of nations. That's the main point in all of this- the point that the globalists and Multinational Corporations like to take advantage of to make money off of normal people. Until such a time that mankind is truly ready for one world government- LOCAL people selling to other LOCAL people must be the standard. This fights the mortal sin of sloth because the local soup maker has to answer to the hungry soup eater directly, face to face
                    • So, you're arguing for a kind of anti-capitalism because you think it'll reduce SLOTH?

                      Sloth -- the desire of man to do his work quicker and rest more -- may be responsible for every effeicent innovation. Ever. You may as well argue against eliminating jealousy with your "working wage" system.

                      Trying to change human nature just won't work. (And, I'll note that you never said how you'll differentiate between two soup-makers.)
                    • Not two soup makers- a soup maker and a soup seller- the first actually produces as much as he can sell himself- the second steals from both ends by buying at a discount and selling at a markup. It's the second that is the parasite on the system, not the first.
                    • He does not "steal", as everything he earns is from the consent of those he deals with.

                      Consent to be taken in by a con man does not equal legality- just as perception does not equal reality.
                    • It is no "con": no-one is being cheated.

                      Then why won't the middle man tell his customers how to buy wholesale, and what the wholesale price was?

                      Everyone involved knows what they are getting into: there is no cheating, rip-off, or tricks.

                      Really? How about the Customer- do they know they could come to you and get a 20% discount over what the e-bay business would charge?

                      That's a big part of the point: many people are not able to do, don't want to do, or are too lazy to do the services offered by thes
                    • Then why won't the middle man tell his customers how to buy wholesale, and what the wholesale price was?

                      Because he's not working for them. He's working for the producer.

                      Everyone and their brother is aware of this. No con is involved.
  • 32. Every consumer has a right to a Fair Price- the cost of
    materials plus the just wage of the laborer, and no more.

    This presupposes that the location in which the work is done has no cost or maintenance, the tools necessary to production have no cost or maintenance, and that there is no need for any sort of promotion to let the consumer know a product is available. Charge only a just wage and the price of materials - you'll quickly fail. You may be including these in materials, but many consumers woul
    • "Universal Declaration of Human Responsibility"

      Dang Straight! Preach it! ..hope ya write it! hehehehehehehe wanna read it...do it do it do it mr subliminal sez do it

      on the various pricing schemes, I like what ben and jerrys ice cream used to do (they might still don't know), the head cheeses..err creams... whatever.. only got x times (small number)pay what the lowliest employee got. I forget the ratio, 7 times, 16, something like that. That was a self regulated maximum wage.

    • Note: Due to a limitation of the English language, the male pronoun is used in this case to refer to people of either gender.

      1. Each person is responsible for his own actions or inaction.
        • Sometimes natural events cause human misery. No government, corporation, religious body, or other organization is responsible for preventing such events.
        • Every person is responsible for learning about the risks of living in a certain area and taking reasonable precautions to mitigate the damage/appropriate action to sur
      • Note: Due to a limitation of the English language, the male pronoun is used in this case to refer to people of either gender.

        Considering that the original was written in 1948- I'd say that is a reasonable assumption. Other than that- I like this as a start to a Universal Declaration of Human Responsibilities to go along with the Rights. Two sides of the same coin, so to speak.
        • Sounds like a plan. What would you add/change?
          • Don't have time right now- but best would be to go through all 30 Articles of the Rights and put down the coresponding responsibilities. For every right, there are responsibilities that need to happen to make that right possible; so best would be to simply go in order.

            For instance, Article 2 is do not discriminate based on certain criteria, the coresponding responsibility is to treat people as equally as possible and to disregard those criteria when making judgements.
    • This presupposes that the location in which the work is done has no cost or maintenance, the tools necessary to production have no cost or maintenance, and that there is no need for any sort of promotion to let the consumer know a product is available. Charge only a just wage and the price of materials - you'll quickly fail. You may be including these in materials, but many consumers would not think that way.

      This comes back to the other two rights- the right to a Just Wage and the right to Ownership of Me
      • Under guild economics- there are no promoters and no need for promoters. The craftsman is a guy who is your next door neighbor- you know what he does, you say hi to him in the grocery store, and when you need something you go to him *because* there's a pre-existing human relationship. You're still thinking in terms of goods produced in factories- when this is far more low-key than that.

        Actually, I'm not thinking only of goods produced in factories. I'm thinking with the sheer size of our population and t
  • Because you could still get a living wage, but be forced to work EA-like hours (18/6 + 12 on Sunday).
    • Because you could still get a living wage, but be forced to work EA-like hours (18/6 + 12 on Sunday).

      True- didn't think of that- by having a lower "living wage" per hour worked, that situation could occur. Not sure why it would though in a situation where human labor is in surplus...
  • Whenever you refer to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, I read all the articles. I believe all ought to be taken for granted by all the people, country, but at the same time I take it to be a declaration, so it's good, and it might be good as a programme code - a declaration of something we humans are eager to achieve.

    Admitting that all 30 are OK to accept, more than 30 are over our capacity, asking too much, next time, agreed?

    • The additional three are a practical way to achieve the initial 30, was the idea- pointing towards distributism, and local control of production, as a means to achieve the economic rights.

Slashdot Top Deals

Invest in physics -- own a piece of Dirac!

Close