[kj] OT-ish: Top 10 Conspiracy Theories (one ofJaz's faves ison here)

sade1 saulomar1 at yahoo.com
Sun May 31 19:47:21 EDT 2009



> ...in fact the capital could come from a collective whether that be tribe or government or co-op or whatever…

 
True - but in practice, up to a point: morality aside**, when's the last time you've seen a collective of some sort achieve the same economic results as a similar business/entrepreneurial analogue? Keeping in mind that a business venture has to be - and remain in perpetuity 1) profitable, and 2) an ongoing concern, which in today's conditions leads to an endless set of necessities and goals.

** I say 'morality aside' because I find it nonsensical for anyone to
   condemn an inanimate idea, construct, or concept for a quality that
   is uniquely human, so I leave that out.

For example,can the unions or tribes duplicate the same results on an equal scale as the Big 3 car companies did (before the stupid shitnanigans began) 1) per employee, 2) per unit produced, and 3) also achieving the same long term goals and measures as the Big 3? Maybe they can, maybe not, but my question and bias is, "when's the last time anyone saw that done?" and, how likely is it to happen at any given moment.

There's a lot to be said, and plenty of justification for, 1) a private, centralized, and economically oriented effort to get things done (w/in reason and morals, of course), and 2) specialization and concentration of efforts and abilities as bundled in a business, NGO, a gov't., union, or similar groupings. You're right, it may not be "inherently necessary," but without it, it's hard to see other existing examples that give the same results.
The thing wrong with Big Business and capital per se' are the abusive a-holes who ride it roughshod over the people, but then that's now a moral issue, not a business issue.  How can an inanimate idea/thing/construct/quality(i.e. "profit," budget cuts,etc.) be morally judged ("profit is bad," "tax oppresion is good", etc.)

P.S. And aren't tribes, governments, etc. (co-ops or unions.. not so much) jsut as often hijacked by the same type of a-hole morality that Big Business is? So how can one assume any additional safety in them? Or maybe I am just too distrustful.




... ... ... ... ... ...

[looking at the current state of things..]
 
'Save me...
  save me from Tomorrow..
    I don't want to sail in this Ship Of Fools...'  





________________________________
From: Brendan Quinn <bq at soundgardener.co.nz>
To: A list about all things Killing Joke (the band!) <gathering at misera.net>
Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 7:56:37 PM
Subject: Re: [kj] OT-ish: Top 10 Conspiracy Theories (one ofJaz's faves ison here)


To the extent that a capitalist can provide these vitals for the worker, he is entitled to profit from it.
 
The assumption in this is that the capitalist providing the capital is inherently necessary, when in fact the capital could come from a collective whether that be tribe or government or co-op or whatever…in which case, theoretically, the total reward of production is distributed amongst the participants, perhaps evenly. Capitalist companies are forced through competition to compete as effectively as possible, meaning the lowest possible wages, to create the highest profit / profitability / market share etc (whatever combination will make the company more powerful and competitive). This leads to capital heading to countries that have the lowest standard of living of workers. China and India . It can therefore be argued that capitalism and the profit motive are negative and result in modern day slavery…at least without proper regulation / controls.
 
And the issue with those controls is that capitalists use lobby groups, media / PR, bribery, anti-competitive behaviour, illegal behaviour etc to reduce ‘natural’ Ayn- Rand-perfect-self-correcting-market competitiveness, i.e. Intel recently being busted for 1.4B Euros for making deals with customers to only stock their products. So that’s another problem with capitalism…it’s inherently monopolistic. Look at a lot of the rich lists…there is an over-representation of people / companies who have a) sewn up one particular market or a good chunk of it. Then they can milk it for ‘superprofit’…the ultimate goal of capitalism.
 

________________________________

From:gathering-bounces at misera.net [mailto:gathering-bounces at misera.net] On Behalf Of sade1
Sent: Sunday, 31 May 2009 12:28 p.m.
To: A list about all things Killing Joke (the band!)
Subject: Re: [kj] OT-ish: Top 10 Conspiracy Theories (one ofJaz's faves ison here)
 

> profit means how much of what you produce profit means how much of what you produce someone else TAKES from the people who produced it. it.

 
That use of the word  "profit" is off a bit.
Profit is also when either 1) all factors (including pay) being equal, extra product/service/cash is produced, or when extra gain is had over an increase in costs (usu. to create said gain).  Profit "after payroll" is a separate, though related, item, and it doesn't need someone else to "take" it from someone in order to define it as such; it can also stay w/the original producer and still be profit, so, Profit per se' is not bad at all. To condemn it, demand it back or even to "take' it from someone who may never have "taken" (read, stolen) it from you in the first place makes a person a thief. 
 

> ..profit means how much of what you produce someone else TAKES from the people who produced it.

 
..the way you wrote it made profit sound intrinsically evil and only as the result of someone stealing from someone else. "Ill-gotten gains," etc.
 

>  I think people are more productive when less is taken from them.

 
Yes but only to a point; there is a practical "floor" to that. There are indispensable, minimum necessities and conditions that need to be met that cannot be met by the average worker alone (plant, tools, proper management, etc.) in order for the worker to produce, even if only to his usual level of satisfaction (meaning, pay/benefits as profit of the worker). To the extent that a capitalist can provide these vitals for the worker, he is entitled to profit from it.
 

> in fact a large part of what we do or make is legally stolen by the boss/owner.

 
How can one gauge what is legitimate profit for the boss/owner, and at what point the rest of it just robbery?
 

> Don't you feel more productive when working for yourself..

 
Yes, but to a point, depending.  I've had well paying jobs where I've forgone the opportunity to work for myself because after comparing the two, at that time, my employer offered me better conditions and facilities to earn a living, so again, it depends**. Peopel are not universally "forced" to work for others.
 
**it's not always better to work for yourself.
   Think "safety in numbers," "economies of scale," unionizing, lobbying, etc.etc.et.c.
 
 
   So I get what you're saying and I agree more than I don't, but as you present these things, a lot of people would feel entitled to lash out and fuck people up and take more than was taken from them "just because..." There's a fallacy among  the unwashed Masses, the vulgar Rabble (j/k of course) that "because I am oppressed, i am therefore 1) entitled to act-out 'however' I want, and 2) I can do NO WRONG."
 
   My own "boots on the ground" p.o.v.: when we had riots here in Los Angeles and people were eyeing both my dad's business and my family's home and cars to see what they can, um,  'get away with' (because, ya know, they were 'downtrodden and oppresed' ergo entitled), if my dad still owned his set of guns, I would've taken one or two and gone to the rooftop of his office or our home and start popping off any of those "entitled" types who would've dared break in and threaten us, most of all because 1) I do know that my fam' has worked hard and honestly for those things, and 2) because the way they were "understanding**" the issue of their 'oppression' wasn't gonna leave much room for them to give a fuck about my family's safety. 
 
**meaning, how the issues are misstated and misconstrued.
  
   Yet to a lot of htose rioters the simple fact that my folks hadhonestly profited from both Business and Labor (theirs and others'), nevertheless automatically made my family capitalists, Robber Barons, Landed Aristocracy, whatever sounds right to beat up on.
 
   Shit this ran on too long. D'Oh!
 
... ... ... ... ... ...

[looking at the current state of things..]
 
'Save me...
  save me from Tomorrow..
    I don't want to sail in this Ship Of Fools...'  
 
 
 

________________________________

From:GREG SLAWSON <gregslawson at msn.com>
To: gathering <gathering at misera.net>
Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 6:31:54 PM
Subject: Re: [kj] OT-ish: Top 10 Conspiracy Theories (one ofJaz's faves is on here)

It sounds like you're confusing profit and productivity. Productivity means how quickly/efficiently you produce stuff (goods and services); profit means how much of what you produce someone else TAKES from the people who produced it. I think people are more productive when less is taken from them. The trick here is that when we work for a wage it seems like we're getting something, when in fact a large part of what we do or make is legally stolen by the boss/owner. Don't you feel more productive when working for yourself (fixing your house up), friends (helping someone move), or family (cooking at home, reading to your kids) than working for your fuckhead boss?
 

________________________________

Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 16:18:03 -0700
From: saulomar1 at yahoo.com
To: gathering at misera.net
Subject: Re: [kj] OT-ish: Top 10 Conspiracy Theories (one ofJaz's faves is on here)

> all the more need to end profit and just produce things simple for USE.

But Profit per se' aka productivity is indispensable and justified. We'd never have
gotten out of the caves without it, if you think about it (even though we may very well
be forced back into the caves because of (also our sociopathic immaturity towards)it.).

If all we only did was replace what we use, we never would've come out of the caves in the first place.
 
..just sayin'.....
 
 
 
in local news.. damn, someone's backyard party is blasting, yep, Lady Gaga's "Poker Face". Must notify Brendan.
 
 
... ... ... ... ... ...

[looking at the current state of things..]
 
'Save me...
  save me from Tomorrow..
    I don't want to sail in this Ship Of Fools...'  
 
 
 

________________________________

From:GREG SLAWSON <gregslawson at msn.com>
To: gathering <gathering at misera.net>
Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 12:30:11 PM
Subject: Re: [kj] OT-ish: Top 10 Conspiracy Theories (one ofJaz's faves is on here)

Bankers? Actually, the "ruling class" is made up of all kids of people who usually serve in government, private industry, academia, and sit on all kids of boards of directors, belong to major think tanks (Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commision, etc). And you got the point about business moving on to more profitable things right--so all the more need to end profit and just produce things simple for USE.
 

________________________________

Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 19:34:50 +0100
From: ade at the-lab.zetnet.co.uk
To: gathering at misera.net
Subject: Re: [kj] OT-ish: Top 10 Conspiracy Theories (one ofJaz's faves is on here)
Revolution. Who do you suggest we start killing first?
 
Take the profit out of oil & big business will move on to something else with a larger profit margin.
 
-----Original Message-----
From: gathering-bounces at misera.net [mailto:gathering-bounces at misera.net]On Behalf Of GREG SLAWSON
Sent: 30 May 2009 18:30
To: gathering
Subject: Re: [kj] OT-ish: Top 10 Conspiracy Theories (one ofJaz's faves is on here)
The main way to affect climate change is not the bullshit we hear in the media about everyone turning off a light, but by forcing the capitalists (who care nothing about the planet, only about making immediate short-term profits) to abandon their oil, gas, and coal industries and switch to solar, wind, etc. And since that it not immediately profitable for them to do this, the only way to get this done is through revolutions!

 

________________________________

From: stephen.l at live.com
To: gathering at misera.net
Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 12:43:06 +0000
Subject: Re: [kj] OT-ish: Top 10 Conspiracy Theories (one of Jaz's faves is on here)

to all those concerned about climate change just try not to contribute to it in whatever way and however small that contibution may be
 

> Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 00:49:21 +0100

> From: ade at the-lab.zetnet.co.uk

> To: gathering at misera.net

> Subject: Re: [kj] OT-ish: Top 10 Conspiracy Theories (one of Jaz's faves is on here)

>

> Can't say I'm not concerned about ice-fields full of methane & defrosting permafrost...

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: gathering-bounces at misera.net

> [mailto:gathering-bounces at misera.net]On Behalf Of B. Oliver Sheppard

> Sent: 30 May 2009 00:44

> To: A list about all things Killing Joke (the band!)

> Subject: Re: [kj] OT-ish: Top 10 Conspiracy Theories (one of Jaz's faves

> is on here)

>

>

> Even if one thinks Al Gore and/or his movie are full of crap, that

> doesn't mean climate change is. Al Gore and climate change are obviously

> two different things. The idea of climate change isn't false just

> because Al Gore's movie might suck. (I wouldn't know, I haven't seen

> it.) I hope I am preaching to the converted! :D

>

> -Oliver

>

>

> Darren A. Peace wrote:

> >

> > Oh, just read Crichton’s State Of Fear for an eminently reasonable,

> > non paranoid expose of the fallacy that is global warming...

> >

> > Actually, it’s a pretty perfect example of thrusting your own head so

> > far up your arse you can’t hear or see a thing.

> >

> > Darren

> >

> > Hungerford , UK

> >

> > *From:* gathering-bounces at misera.net

> > [mailto:gathering-bounces at misera.net] *On Behalf Of *sade1

> > *Sent:* 29 May 2009 8:52 PM

> > *To:* A list about all things Killing Joke (the band!)

> > *Subject:* Re: [kj] OT-ish: Top 10 Conspiracy Theories (one of Jaz's

> > faves is on here)

> >

> > OK, I'll bite: why is Al Gore's movie (incovenient truth?) crap?

> >

>

> _______________________________________________

> Gathering mailing list

> Gathering at misera.net

> http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> Gathering mailing list

> Gathering at misera.net

> http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering


________________________________

Windows Live Messenger just got better. Find out more!

________________________________

Hotmail® goes with you. Get it on your BlackBerry or iPhone.
 

________________________________

Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync. Check it out.
 

________________________________

Hotmail® has a new way to see what's up with your friends. Check it out.
 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.46/2144 - Release Date: 05/30/09 17:53:00




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://four.pairlist.net/pipermail/gathering/attachments/20090531/d5b8c4e3/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Gathering mailing list