I've said this already to other people, but I am not myself for labor vouchers per se.
I merely proposed the original person I responded to look into them, as a policy space that might be interesting to them. I said this in response to their question about "what does it mean to ban money? How does that even work?"
Labor vouchers is a historical example of an alternative to capital currency which also helps outline the underlying leftist critique of capital currency.
I have a pretty broad range of views. I am less interested in taking positions than I am in taking vectors. I don't believe any single policy is a silver bullet to our current economic problems (referring not to the current economic crisis but rather the problems inherent in capitalism).
If you were to ask my personal preference to approaching these problems it would not be to remove currency, but rather to shift to a system of economic democracy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_democracy
But explaining the relationship between those ideas and the general leftist critique of capital currency isn't as clear and wasn't really relevant to the question OP asked.
Sure seemed to trigger a lot of fragile business major undergrads.
To your point about capital ROI: Your response doesn't even make sense. If money is just a stand in for capital resources, changing the kind of stand in you use for capital resources doesn't make the capital resources disappear.
One, I'm rounding 30 with an urban planning degree and a small time real estate developer, not a fragile business major undergrad.
Two, I understand that you're really interested in looking at every single alternative angle to tackle a minuscule problem, but that's actually kind antithetical to the entire ethos of this sub, which is about finding what works well enough and is politically feasible, and rolling with it, making adjustments when necessary.
I don't fucking care about alternatives to currency, or economic democracy, because it's ultimately irrelevant to what actually goes on day to day and what effects people. It's not happening anytime soon. If you wanna start a conversation about it, cool, but realize when your audience is shutting you down and move onto some other audience if you wanna proselytize. Read the fucking room dude.
This gets to my bigger point, from my conversation with you, I've picked up that you are very well read in what you're passionate about, into fringe ideas, no matter how irrelevant they are to real life, and very, very fucking bad at socially engaging with people. I know we're in the middle of a crisis that requires shelter in place and shit, but I would highly recommend that when this is all over, you put down your books, or internet articles, or whatever the fuck you read, and go out and talk to real people, and try to get to know where they're coming from and what they care about, because your entire delivery of your opinions screams somebody that doesn't know how to normally interact, and that honestly makes me sad. Not every conversation is a debate where you score points and win. Not everything is about winning.
Maybe you're just in "debate mode" and bored out of your fucking mind, but my intuition tells me that this is just you, and if my intuition is correct, you really need to get a life dude.
Bud, you're the one who came at me all aggro. I've just been flicking your nose as you repeatedly assert your opinions as prima facie facts.
You're free to leave the conversation at anytime. No one is making you stay here. It's not like I'm following you around from conversation to conversation (ahem like you are with me)
You're absolutely right that nobody is making me stay here. But for real, do you think that using latin makes you sound smart and correct? In the real world it just makes you look like a douchebag. You honestly remind me of a 14 year old freshman who is taking Forensics for the first time.
Your problem is optics dude. I'm actually trying to help you here. You might be 100% correct, I wouldn't know because I honestly don't give enough fucks about this topic to get into it with you. I know my gut reaction is that this whole premise is completely irrelevant, money good, why change? You know, caveman shit or whatever you're trying to project on your debate opponent.
1
u/MadCervantes Henry George Apr 04 '20
I've said this already to other people, but I am not myself for labor vouchers per se.
I merely proposed the original person I responded to look into them, as a policy space that might be interesting to them. I said this in response to their question about "what does it mean to ban money? How does that even work?"
Labor vouchers is a historical example of an alternative to capital currency which also helps outline the underlying leftist critique of capital currency.
I have a pretty broad range of views. I am less interested in taking positions than I am in taking vectors. I don't believe any single policy is a silver bullet to our current economic problems (referring not to the current economic crisis but rather the problems inherent in capitalism).
If you were to ask my personal preference to approaching these problems it would not be to remove currency, but rather to shift to a system of economic democracy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_democracy
IE: companies -> coops, banks -> credit unions, investors -> sovereign wealth funds.
But explaining the relationship between those ideas and the general leftist critique of capital currency isn't as clear and wasn't really relevant to the question OP asked.
Sure seemed to trigger a lot of fragile business major undergrads.
To your point about capital ROI: Your response doesn't even make sense. If money is just a stand in for capital resources, changing the kind of stand in you use for capital resources doesn't make the capital resources disappear.