Dubai's Labor Under-Class Riots--at my Dad's construction site!

[man_slut]

And that phenomenon explicitly and necessarily contradicts and disproves the "free market" ideology. It's an illusion--a ver convenient one that allows an entire international construct to be developed specifically to ensure the permanent and increasing strength of pwerful actors and the weakness of weak ones.

Hey... I got your back on this!

 

[man_slut]

the statesman who should attempt to direct private people in what manner they ought to employ their capitals would assume an authority which would nowhere be so dangerous as in the hands of a man who had folly and presumption enought to fancy himself fit to exercise it.

(Adam Smith)

John Maynard Keynes -

"[Capitalism] is not a success. It is not intelligent, it is not beautiful, it is not just, it is not virtuous -- and it doesn't deliver the goods. In short, we dislike it, and we are beginning to despise it. But when we wonder what to put in its place, we are extremely perplexed."

 

[man_slut]

alright I'm getting a little crazy with the smiley faces.

 

[judge wopner]

John Maynard Keynes -

"[Capitalism] is not a success. It is not intelligent, it is not beautiful, it is not just, it is not virtuous -- and it doesn't deliver the goods. In short, we dislike it, and we are beginning to despise it. But when we wonder what to put in its place, we are extremely perplexed."

ha!

failure in socialism is labeled unsocialistic by left wingers and any failure in capitalism is labeld evidence that capitalism doesnt work.

at the end of the day, the most open and tolerant and multicultural societies happen to be liberal minded capitalistic nations with some socialistic sentiments, like canada and scandinavia and even the UK.

regardless of whatever theoretical framework one chooses, the idea of them existing exlusive to eachother is wrong, we are a nation that has flaws like all others but stands as a good example of this amalgum approach non?

 

[man_slut]

regardless of whatever theoretical framework one chooses, the idea of them existing exlusive to eachother is wrong, we are a nation that has flaws like all others but stands as a good example of this amalgum approach non?

For sure! I've been digging parecon as my favourite amalgum.

 

[deafplayer]

the statesman who should attempt to direct private people in what manner they ought to employ their capitals would assume an authority which would nowhere be so dangerous as in the hands of a man who had folly and presumption enought to fancy himself fit to exercise it.

at the end of the day, the most open and tolerant and multicultural societies happen to be liberal minded capitalistic nations with some socialistic sentiments, like canada and scandinavia and even the UK.

then 'liberal minded capitalistic' economies must be responsible for the good stuff!

Maybe you should read more Adam Smith, who considered himself a "moral philosopher", and find out what he was suggesting about markets and 'free markets' how they would benefit people is not what the "liberal minded capitalistic nations with some socialistic sentiments" developed at all

and that those "liberal minded capitalistic" economies' markets were created and maintained through ever-growing state "interference"...statesmen who "attempt to direct private people in what manner they ought to employ their capitals" aren't necessarily recognized as such, depends on whos toes they step on

 

[judge wopner]

then 'liberal minded capitalistic' economies must be responsible for the good stuff!

Maybe you should read more Adam Smith, who considered himself a "moral philosopher", and find out what he was suggesting about markets and 'free markets' how they would benefit people is not what the "liberal minded capitalistic nations with some socialistic sentiments" developed at all

and that those "liberal minded capitalistic" economies' markets were created and maintained through ever-growing state "interference"...statesmen who "attempt to direct private people in what manner they ought to employ their capitals" aren't necessarily recognized as such, depends on whos toes they step on

hence the reason why i favour an amalgum of all different approaches that include liberal/tolerant people (freedome of speech, multiculturalism, freedom of the press) coupled with freedom for people to choose their profession and do business with some regulation by goverments over certain things.

you quote me but cut out the socialistic part in order to attack it, i dont get that.

adam smith like marx makes sound points with others i dont totally agree with, but the quote i noted rings true to me: absolute power corrupts absolutely, state control over human direction is a matter of opinion, not black and white.

 

[deafplayer]

ill read more into it, though my point about not hearing much about in the media is pretty fair. these riots in dubai were on CNN and the CBC, the 3 points you referenced were ignored or vaguely referenced, dont you find it kind of odd.

If you're actually interested in this, there is a lot of research about exactly this of question, and the answers it gives are pretty obvious.... its coverage is correlated with economic investment, government relations, and "past" colonial relationships
Maybe if those riots in India were located very close to an enormous and very important US military installation and at major centres of trade (that also happen to be very famous and prestigious as Dubai is)
and Dubai was in a mainstream spotlight very recently (the buying of American ports deal).....
...anyway what is "ironic" about the choice of attention?

 

[deafplayer]

you quote me but cut out the socialistic part in order to attack it, i dont get that.

I quoted the "socialistic" part, didn't I? I just didn't comment on it specifically

adam smith like marx makes sound points with others i dont totally agree with, but the quote i noted rings true to me: absolute power corrupts absolutely, state control over human direction is a matter of opinion, not black and white.

Smith also noted how if allowed to do so, ie, unless they are stopped, businessmen would inevitably destroy humans, degrade them to the most pathetic and inhumane state (and through the otherwise blessed "division of labour", at that)

the quote wasn't about 'absolute power' it was about a very particular power picking on people in a particular way: state power telling people what to do with their capital

I picked on the liberal etc part because, like state power, there is a pretty objective difference between market liberalism and socialism, and in the interests they very visibly serve... relating to your stated concern about power and domination / human direction

 

[janiecakes]

ill read more into it, though my point about not hearing much about in the media is pretty fair.

It's not fair at all - it's totally ridiculous.

 

[SellyCat]

[Hi Jane!]

The "liberal minded capitalism" must necessarily and constantly be distinguished from "neo-liberal capitalism" which is a linguistic abasement meant to confuse the issue entirely. "Liberal is good right, mommy?"

Neo-liberalism simply means "Everybody shut the fuck up, we're going to do whatever we want, and you're going to buy stuff and we're going to teach you that you wanted this all along...and that 'the people' built this themselves...IT'S NATURE!"

And I also think it's not the best idea to endlessly quote thinkers from centuries past. DeafPlayer is totally right that Adam Smith would shit a brick if he saw how his ideas were contorted to mean "all restrictions must be removed, period". That wasn't his philosophy at all... We *must* compare his writings to the systems that were implace AT THE TIME, not those that currently function today. Neo-liberals take it so far they advocate the uselessness of governments, which I find to be very frightening. Especially because they are lying--they want governments to support business and stop supporting the public. They seek to leverage the unique tools available only to governments--such as professional violence and diplomatic power--against their competitors.

"Free markets" are supposed to be all about competition, and yet it is obvious that competition is anathema to the goals of big business today. They spend such vast sums of capital on advertising specifically so they don't have to compete over the objective quality of their products and services. And the consume smaller rivals to eliminate them as competitive rivals. "Free Market Capitalism"--as it is currently manifested--is about monopoly.

I support the idea of drawing on a wide range of perspectives for the purpose of reforming and restraining the problematic trends currently unfolding. Deafplayer and I were going to write a treaties called "On The Current Bullshit Prevailing In The West".

Reform--in my opinion--is preferable to revolution, because revolutions have to seek unanimity--which is impossible--and because differing opinions threaten revolutionary goals, violence becomes the language of discourse used in "persuading" disagreeable segments of the population it aims to save, help or enrich. (more on this later.)

 

[Colm]

The ghost of Karl Polanyi stalks this thread.

 

[judge wopner]

I quoted the "socialistic" part, didn't I? I just didn't comment on it specifically
Smith also noted how if allowed to do so, ie, unless they are stopped, businessmen would inevitably destroy humans, degrade them to the most pathetic and inhumane state (and through the otherwise blessed "division of labour", at that)

the quote wasn't about 'absolute power' it was about a very particular power picking on people in a particular way: state power telling people what to do with their capital

I picked on the liberal etc part because, like state power, there is a pretty objective difference between market liberalism and socialism, and in the interests they very visibly serve... relating to your stated concern about power and domination / human direction

you left it out of your first part and proceed to point out errors in capitalism, even though im admitting to it and proposing that differnt approaches can be used in tandem to limit their weakeness of either one,

again adam smith said alot of things, wealth of nations alone is epic, doesnt mean he was always right, just like marx non?

yes it was about absolute power, it was the absolute power of the state or the head of state directing the economic activities of its people.

big business run amock doesnt tell me capitalism is a failure any more than russia's rampant corruption tells me socialism is a failure, they tell me that human beings have devious and selfish tendencies among other qualities non?

 

[judge wopner]

[Hi Jane!]

The "liberal minded capitalism" must necessarily and constantly be distinguished from "neo-liberal capitalism" which is a linguistic abasement meant to confuse the issue entirely. "Liberal is good right, mommy?"

Neo-liberalism simply means "Everybody shut the fuck up, we're going to do whatever we want, and you're going to buy stuff and we're going to teach you that you wanted this all along...and that 'the people' built this themselves...IT'S NATURE!"

And I also think it's not the best idea to endlessly quote thinkers from centuries past. DeafPlayer is totally right that Adam Smith would shit a brick if he saw how his ideas were contorted to mean "all restrictions must be removed, period". That wasn't his philosophy at all... We *must* compare his writings to the systems that were implace AT THE TIME, not those that currently function today. Neo-liberals take it so far they advocate the uselessness of governments, which I find to be very frightening. Especially because they are lying--they want governments to support business and stop supporting the public. They seek to leverage the unique tools available only to governments--such as professional violence and diplomatic power--against their competitors.

"Free markets" are supposed to be all about competition, and yet it is obvious that competition is anathema to the goals of big business today. They spend such vast sums of capital on advertising specifically so they don't have to compete over the objective quality of their products and services. And the consume smaller rivals to eliminate them as competitive rivals. "Free Market Capitalism"--as it is currently manifested--is about monopoly.

I support the idea of drawing on a wide range of perspectives for the purpose of reforming and restraining the problematic trends currently unfolding. Deafplayer and I were going to write a treaties called "On The Current Bullshit Prevailing In The West".

Reform--in my opinion--is preferable to revolution, because revolutions have to seek unanimity--which is impossible--and because differing opinions threaten revolutionary goals, violence becomes the language of discourse used in "persuading" disagreeable segments of the population it aims to save, help or enrich. (more on this later.)

every time i see your post i think of that "smelly cat" song from friends,

anyway i agree in a general sense, though you are reducing the issue quite a bit non?

studying the past helps us to form sound policy for the future, but only a zealot would propose the past economic thinkers had all the answers. i think adam smith would shit his pants just as much as marx would if they saw what their philosophies were abused in the name of.

equally nitechze when the nazi's hijacked his concept of the superman.

does the errant direction of the capitalist system render the ideas of smith useless and dated, unworthy of study? no, and same fo rmany past thinkers.

neo this and neo that i agree are misnomers. seems like everything is neo liberalism, neo-colonialism, or neo-conservatism, im nto even sure what it means beyond the google search results.

like i said before i always thought canada was a good example not just of universal health care or human rights as much as an emaple that a society can have capitalistic tendencies with the potential for prosperity opportunity brings while still providing basic nesescities and being a tolerant society with free expression.

 

[SellyCat]

...absolute..state power...[and]...big business run amock...

There's the rub. Big business run-amock = the corrolary to absolute state power! The more they concentrate ownership of capital, the more they resemble the absolute state that arbitrarily directs capital...the same manner of entity criticised by Smith in the first place. The more economic power they accrue, the more economic power they CAN accrue. So it becomes a spiral of increasing gravity. That's why restraints and restrictions are necessary.

DeafPlayer and I have a mutual acquaintance who went to the Schulick school of business and we learned through him just how this stuff is taught in school. The curriculum LITERALLY declares that any form of governmental intervention in the form of consumer protection ultimately hurts the consumer. It's taught like a commandment, leaving no room for restraint. It's not uncommon for 'free market' capitalists to say that greed is the only way to enrich EVERYONE! DeafPlayer knows of some famous economist that preaches against welfare because, he says, it does terrible harm to poor people. (Seriously).

 

[SellyCat]

...does the errant direction of the capitalist system render the ideas of smith useless and dated, unworthy of study?

No no, I meant that they shouldn't be taken too literally. For inspiration or insight yes, but not the THE answer or solution.

seems like everything is neo liberalism...or neo-conservatism.

Neo-Liberalism and Neo-Conservatism are actually virtually indistinguishable. From an economic policy perspective anyway. And if some marketing expert was involved in coming up with these names--or a private think tank--then that is fucked up beyond belief. It would be incredibly 1984

like i said before i always thought canada was a good example not just of universal health care or human rights as much as an emaple that a society can have capitalistic tendencies with the potential for prosperity opportunity brings while still providing basic nesescities and being a tolerant society with free expression.

Yup. I agree. It's a good example of balance, BUT not nearly as good as other examples like Finland or its Scandinavian friends. When Harper--MY FAVORITE--derided Canada as being too much like "the worst northern european welfare state", all I could think was "we're not ENOUGH like them, and you wanna take it away....Eat a Dick, Harper."

 

[judge wopner]

No no, I meant that they shouldn't be taken too literally. For inspiration or insight yes, but not the THE answer or solution.

Yup. I agree. It's a good example of balance, BUT not nearly as good as other examples like Finland or its Scandinavian friends. When Harper--MY FAVORITE--derided Canada as being too much like "the worst northern european welfare state", all I could think was "we're not ENOUGH like them, and you wanna take it away....Eat a Dick, Harper."

yeah i quote adam smith and people jump down my throat as if i just quoted the koran.hA!!!

i think canada has a distinct advantage over scandanavian nations becasue we are more multicultural and tolerant i think, the cartoons being published there is indicative not of a richly wild press but of a deep underlying rascist sentiment brewing there that i dont think would ever see the same sunlight here in canada.

 

[SellyCat]

yeah i quote adam smith and people jump down my throat as if i just quoted the koran.hA!!!

i think canada has a distinct advantage over scandanavian nations becasue we are more multicultural and tolerant i think, the cartoons being published there is indicative not of a richly wild press but of a deep underlying rascist sentiment brewing there that i dont think would ever see the same sunlight here in canada.

A UofT paper published a cartoon FAR more offensive than the original mohammed cartoon. The published a sketch of Mohammad and Jesus FRENCH KISSING on a little canoe going into "the tunnel of tollerance" And the editor said that the cartoon was meant to foster debate for the sake of encouraging "tollerance" Also, don't forget that Canada has organised hate groups, like Heritage Front. And the Silver Cross (I think it's Silver) organization in Hamilton, which was named after the Romanian para-military organization that rounded up and executed Romanian Jews for the Nazis...Over 100,000 I believe. No country is fully tollerant.

And yes, there is a great deal of intollerance in Europe, especially towards Muslim, because there is such a massive Muslim presence in those countries.

That said, let's keep this thread about the Situation in Dubai and the related socio-economic questions.

 

[judge wopner]

A UofT paper published a cartoon FAR more offensive than the original mohammed cartoon. The published a sketch of Mohammad and Jesus FRENCH KISSING on a little canoe going into "the tunnel of tollerance" And the editor said that the cartoon was meant to foster debate for the sake of encouraging "tollerance" Also, don't forget that Canada has organised hate groups, like Heritage Front. And the Silver Cross (I think it's Silver) organization in Hamilton, which was named after the Romanian para-military organization that rounded up and executed Romanian Jews for the Nazis...Over 100,000 I believe. No country is fully tollerant.

And yes, there is a great deal of intollerance in Europe, especially towards Muslim, because there is such a massive Muslim presence in those countries.

That said, let's keep this thread about the Situation in Dubai and the related socio-economic questions.

i totally agree canada has all sorts racial issues, i just believe they are that much better chanelled and aired out than in europe whre there is a stronger acceptance for openly rascist views. hence why i dont always consider european's critisms of other states fair considering their issues.

funny about schulisch, a good friend of mine is almost finished and he is totally pro-markets.

anyways back to dubai, so how many could i have if i was upper middle class there?

 

[fleaflo]

i totally agree canada has all sorts racial issues, i just believe they are that much better chanelled and aired out than in europe whre there is a stronger acceptance for openly rascist views.

If you believe that Canada's issues about race are 'channelled and aired out' then I have to believe that you don't know what you are talking about. Canadians are the silent racists.

 

[janiecakes]

DeafPlayer knows of some famous economist that preaches against welfare because, he says, it does terrible harm to poor people. (Seriously).

Who is it?

[Hiii Dan!]

 

[AdRiaN]

The Libertarian Party in the United States, as well as the Libertarian Party of Canada, both advocate a complete elimination of state-supported welfare programs.

 

[judge wopner]

If you believe that Canada's issues about race are 'channelled and aired out' then I have to believe that you don't know what you are talking about. Canadians are the silent racists.

ha ha!!

too bad im not saying there is no racsim or that all our racsim is out in the open, re read my post home slice before you attack people.

im saying at least in my own observation that we are better at openly and reasonably addressing rascism that europeans in general who i find to simply be overtly rascist and/or ethnocentric.

 

[janiecakes]

The Libertarian Party in the United States, as well as the Libertarian Party of Canada, both advocate a complete elimination of state-supported welfare programs.

For the same reason mentioned earlier?

 

[AdRiaN]

For the same reason mentioned earlier?

Yup. From the Libertarian Party of Canada:

Poverty and Welfare
The welfare state, supposedly designed to aid the poor, is a growing and parasitic burden on all productive working people, and injures rather than benefits the poor themselves. We propose the elimination of all government involvement in welfare and relief programs. Any aid to the poor should be conducted on a voluntary basis.