People's businesses.

[Mealla]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Dogmatizing economic systems is bullshit, it oppresses workers and hinders productivity. If a doctor and a clerk have a beef with their payment, let them fix it together with everyone that works with them. Why should they have to settle with whatever wage was given to them by above? Why do you think people can't solve the problems of their industry by themselves? You seem to think that the only alternative to top-to-bottom capitalism is top-to-bottom bureaucratism.
This is collectivism, not communism.

But if a person doesn't believe she is being paid enough, she'll still have to settle on that wage if it is what her coworkers think is fair for her, whether it is nor not.

I think people can't solve the problems of their industry by themselves because I don't trust people to do the right thing. At least a leader is plainly visible. I you have a beef with him, you can settle it with him. If she is being unfair, you can have her removed from her position. You have someone to blame, you have someone you can fight against. You can look at the choices and put someone forward who has demonstrated a concern for others, someone who has demonstrated honest practice in the past. Having a whole community of people equally in charge can lead to mob mentality, which is rarely logical, and the "leadership" is essentially anonymous.

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Yeah, but what of it?
LEGALLY you can poison crops with lead and mercury and sell it.
LEGALLY you can't smoke pot.
LEGALLY you can't treat any pet (from dog to pig to chicken to vole) 'inhumanely'
LEGALLY you can eviscerate while they're still alive these same animals if it's for industry.

I can agree that the current system isn't perfect, but society would not function without some form of legal framework because people are inherently flawed. While there are many people out there who do care about others, a majority of the human species is selfish and greedy. Though it is best when it is not overly restrictive, a legal system of some sort tends to limit what people can get away with to some degree.

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Uh... yeah it does.
"Two people will **** you and stab you to death. Two people will beat you unconscious. Choose one of these scenarios"
"Hmm... I can't, they're both bad, which means neither is a better choice."

In that case, there is a better option, but if someone says "Do you want to be stoned to death or burned alive?" there isn't really a better choice. Both are slow and painful, and you wind up dead in both scenarios.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by Mealla

But if a person doesn't believe she is being paid enough, she'll still have to settle on that wage if it is what her coworkers think is fair for her, whether it is nor not.

As opposed to having no chance for a mature settlement by just shutting up and sucking it to the manager?

I think people can't solve the problems of their industry by themselves because I don't trust people to do the right thing.

Why do you trust the boss to do the right thing?

At least a leader is plainly visible. I you have a beef with him, you can settle it with him.

No you can't. He'll just fire you. Fuck if he cares about you enough to compromise his own welfare for yours.

If she is being unfair, you can have her removed from her position.

No you can't. It's her business, not yours, remember?

In that case, there is a better option, but if someone says "Do you want to be stoned to death or burned alive?" there isn't really a better choice. Both are slow and painful, and you wind up dead in both scenarios.

So you believe workers having the democratic decisions of their industry is just as bad as their submission to heavy hours and shitty pay? I can't understand how your mind works.

[CptSternn]

Currently, this system exists throughout the world, in a similar form. In the EU (Ireland/UK to be precise) if you make less than the poverty level the government supplements your income with a check each week.

So if you work at a chipper (fast food) and make only a few bob an hour, you will get a check from the government that puts your salary on par with people who make more.

I like this. Everyone here is happy with it. Works well.

[Mealla]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

So you believe workers having the democratic decisions of their industry is just as bad as their submission to heavy hours and shitty pay? I can't understand how your mind works.

My logic is that it's easier to deal with one person disagreeing with you than fifty people disagreeing with you.

Originally Posted by CptSternn

Currently, this system exists throughout the world, in a similar form. In the EU (Ireland/UK to be precise) if you make less than the poverty level the government supplements your income with a check each week.

I like this. Everyone here is happy with it. Works well.

Well, of course. Who's going to be unhappy about getting extra cash? I don't think it's a good thing to cultivate such a dependency on the government, though.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by Mealla

My logic is that it's easier to deal with one person disagreeing with you than fifty people disagreeing with you.

See, this is one of the things I hate most about people.
As soon as it's not a despotic government, they stop seeing all other individuals as human beings and see them as a fucking mob.
Did you ever stop to think that if fifty people are so intent in stopping you is because you are actually affecting them much worse than you pretend they will affect you with their 'mob rule'?
If there's fifty human beings, just as valuable as you, telling you "no, we refuse to tolerate with your whims", why the fuck would you be a martyr rather than a villain?

[Mealla]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

See, this is one of the things I hate most about people.
As soon as it's not a despotic government, they stop seeing all other individuals as human beings and see them as a fucking mob.
Did you ever stop to think that if fifty people are so intent in stopping you is because you are actually affecting them much worse than you pretend they will affect you with their 'mob rule'?

I do see individuals as human beings, and there have been a number of times in my personal experience throughout my life when I was not affecting anyone in a negative way and people still chose to affect my life in a negative manner.

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

If there's fifty human beings, just as valuable as you, telling you "no, we refuse to tolerate with your whims", why the fuck would you be a martyr rather than a villain?

Honestly, it could go either way depending upon the people involved and the situation. Sometimes disagreement is warranted, but the fact that fifty people disagree with you doesn't automatically make you a villain. Case in point, far over fifty people voted to outlaw gay marriage in my state. That's the majority telling two men who love and want to show their dedication to one another "No, we refuse to tolerate your whims."

[Godslayer Jillian]

Yeah, so you believe that instead of letting people choose for themselves and decide for themselves even if they make a mistake or twice, and actually getting their fair share of the fruits of their labor, you would rather have them submitted to the whim of one sole person taking away their money and giving them no voice?

I believe you haven't actually thought through your whole system and are just afraid of something different.
"Away with democracy! A multitude of rulers is not a good thing. Let there be one ruler, one king." - Herod
Seriously?

[Mealla]

It's not an either-or situation. There are far more choices than just straight out Democracy or totalitarian Dictatorship. Mistakes have occurred far more than once or twice in both models, both throughout history and in my personal experience.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by Mealla

Honestly, it could go either way depending upon the people involved and the situation. Sometimes disagreement is warranted, but the fact that fifty people disagree with you doesn't automatically make you a villain. Case in point, far over fifty people voted to outlaw gay marriage in my state. That's the majority telling two men who love and want to show their dedication to one another "No, we refuse to tolerate your whims."

Nobody has to accept discrimination, whether it's majority-enforced or not, but such an occurence isn't an anarchist creation, it could happen in any political system.