I find of interest some aspects of Marxist theory and the scientific aspirations of Marx, but I think George Henry rightly called him "the prince of muddle-headed." Before studying Proudhon (and in the history books of political thought is still treated as a socialist utopia, however, or pre-scientific or unscientific) I had the prejudice that only Marx and Engels, there was the introduction of scientific methods (and mostly typical methods of science economic) in socialist thought. I invite everyone to study Proudhon directly from his writings. You will realize the enormous difference between what that has been written about him and what he wrote.
I find most interesting analysis today of Professor Luigi De Marchi. The latter writes that the class of exploiters is not the capitalist class, but the bureaucrats in the public and the exploited workers are not only so, but all workers in the private sector. I think there is much truth in this idea. I'd rather see the company that is presented as complex in its economic-political practice and I get so very simple. Who pays those who work in public? All, through taxation, which by definition coercive. Who pays those who work in private? All through the market, which should be freely negotiated. Politicians have played that role in any democracy real? Everywhere have increased public spending in particular have increased the bureaucracies of government and in some countries (eg Italy) have made the immovable public sector employees by creating a class unwilling to change, innovation and risk . All this in order to maintain a strong and stable consensus. True that at the same time have drugged the market of certain sectors rather than others and also some individual companies rather than others, but in fact companies like this can be called private? Deprived of the opportunity to compete on the open market for sure! The Moloch of the public has such close relations with large corporations "private" and creating a class of bankers that ultraprivilegiati also be removed from office and that together, and most of the politicians decide the fate of the world.
Conclusion: not casual or temporary workers of private contractors or employees (the real ones who pay taxes and have no public support) are the real exploiters and those who exploit them is the bureaucratic class in the public sector, through the imposition tax fund itself and its friends. In this context, I have not put the issue of public and private debt, an instrument of bankers and politicians to further oppress those who risk every day on his skin. In the face of everything I say it is possible to stop such perverse mechanisms Abolish all taxation that does not affect who takes possession of natural resources (or limits access to or pollute) and redistribute the proceeds of rent such as mothers (or who cares for the children) up to a certain age of the child.
With regards the acquisition of consensus, certainly not enough to be right, but you have to convince others of it. I think that this can not be implemented in a timely brief, but I do not think that should be limited to the study, since the policy, otherwise it can only deteriorate more and more. I think that the pursuit of social justice by going for and not against, for and not against the company and rocked the rent and financial speculation. The state minimum that would be more successful than what the prospectus of the monster we have today to hit then monopoly abuses which disrupt the free market competition. The equalization compensation, therefore, a good eye only in the current situation CREATED by a highly unfair. The basic income I think it's a good idea and I would be giving it to those who do not take possession of natural resources (and not restrict access, and does not pollute) and not just the unemployed. Mothers (or who takes care of children) it would give a larger share.
0 comments:
Post a Comment