Destroying "the market" via shorting

[Macchendra]

Markets are being destroyed all around us.

Mostly by the greed of the capitalists.

The destruction of the Thai Baht and the Mexican Peso are examples of this vicious greed.

It is an ancient game.

The people who play this game tend to prefer the commodity of "guarantees". This is a commodity that they can generate with their very wealth.

Let me first remove part of the cloud they obscure themselves with by stating: All stocks, bonds, bank notes, currency, etc. are future guarantees of an item, they are distinct only in what laws apply to them. In the open market, these are traded freely.

Here is how their game is played:

Sell future guarantees of a given item at a reduced value, using your reserves of wealth to back your guarantee.
The availability of these guarantees at a reduced price decreases the demand for the item.
The reduced demand lowers the price.
Sometimes, the sudden drop in price causes panic selling, collapsing the market.
When the price is lowered, buy the items needed to cover your guarantees.
The value of an item may be defended if a person has the resources to buy it back up to keep demand stable or increasing. Thus the side with the most resources eventually wins.

In this manner can (and often does) a future guarantee attack any other source of value, including other future guarantees.

After destroying a market, they often pit the labor of the affected people against the labor of their own country saying: "after all, we need to be competitive"

Well, labor united has more power to guarantee future value than all of the moneychangers combined!

Why center an economy around the commodity of gold? Why not force them down by centering a new economy around labor.

According to the Labor Theory of Value we should win, right??? We can go toe to toe and win, right??? I'd say so.

Let them eat their gold! They choose that commodity precisely because it require no labor to maintain its value. Let them swim with it. They will drown.

[redstar2000]

Once again, I have grave doubts as to the appropriateness of your post in this forum.

Since the days of Proudhon, there have been occasional proposals to "use" the economic mechanisms of capitalism to "liberate" the working class in a "gradual" fashion.

As if slavery as an institution could have been "abolished" by simply encouraging slaves to purchase their freedom.

As such schemes have never amounted to a puddle of warm spit, I think you are talking to the wrong people here.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Macchendra]

We are the source of value, they merely exploit us.

They have no wealth. Do you not believe in the value of labor? Well, I do. The capitalists are penniless and bankrupt. Just like an overpriced stock. They are caught with their pants down.

I think the continual targeting of Unions by the Right-wing is a sure sign that Unions are doing something good. The idea has just not been carried far enough. They need to replace the monetary system with a labor-based system. This may need a representative currency until capital is destroyed, take the "New Democracy" of Maoism for example.

The "schemes" of unions have prevented a great deal of oppression from carrying over from the industrial age. The increasing decadance we see now could realistically be attributed to their decline.

Whether you want to admit it or not, revolution is incremental. A revolutionary base has to be built up before any revolution is possible. This is not a light switch. Demonstrating the value of labor, and the value of being united as labor, helps perpetuate our cause. Also, these means are much more popular with the masses.

The benevolent Vanguard fantasy, that is what has never amounted to a puddle of warm spit. I think all of the anarchists here will agree.

Peace!
David Bright Morning

[Nicky Scarfo]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2006, 06:59 AM
Once again, I have grave doubts as to the appropriateness of your post in this forum.

Since the days of Proudhon, there have been occasional proposals to "use" the economic mechanisms of capitalism to "liberate" the working class in a "gradual" fashion.

As if slavery as an institution could have been "abolished" by simply encouraging slaves to purchase their freedom.

As such schemes have never amounted to a puddle of warm spit, I think you are talking to the wrong people here.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif
The other "schemes" being trumpted by people here haven't amounted to much either. If that's your standard, none of the posts in Theory are "appropriate" in this forum. I think any idea geared towards the elimination of class society and grounded in socially progressive principles should be considered "appropriate" in a revolutionary leftist forum. Then the different currents can argue ad infinitum about whether it makes sense or not.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Nicky Scarfo
The other "schemes" being trumpeted by people here haven't amounted to much either.

Fair enough...but they have at least some things, however few, to suggest that they could be "onto something".

What we try to do here is figure out what might be the best way to proceed...and there's "argument" to spare over that.

Proposals that are absurd on their face...well, what should we do with them?


I think any idea geared towards the elimination of class society and grounded in socially progressive principles should be considered "appropriate" in a revolutionary leftist forum.

So someone comes hear and suggests that we should all "pray for socialism" and it will "really happen". :lol:

To make progress, the first step is to eliminate the flatly impossible...such as schemes to "use" capitalist institutions for "anti-capitalist" purposes.

This is not a forum for wacko ideas. :o

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Nicky Scarfo]

This is not a forum for wacko ideas.

Coulda fooled me. I read some really good stuff here, but plenty of dumb shit too.

[anomaly]

Originally posted by RS2K
Fair enough...but they have at least some things, however few, to suggest that they could be "onto something".
The anarchists in Spain and the Paris Commune come to mind.

[Nicky Scarfo]

Originally posted by anomaly+Apr 28 2006, 02:49 AM--> (anomaly @ Apr 28 2006, 02:49 AM)
RS2K
Fair enough...but they have at least some things, however few, to suggest that they could be "onto something".
The anarchists in Spain and the Paris Commune come to mind. [/b]
Agreed.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Nicky Scarfo
I read some really good stuff here, but plenty of dumb shit too.

True, alas. :(

And probably inevitable, given the way message boards work.

But shouldn't we try to get rid of the self-evident nonsense? It may never be eliminated, but surely it would be helpful to reduce its frequency, would it not?

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Macchendra]

Try debating it properly if you have an argument against it.
So far all I have heard from you is:

Argument by authority.
Argument ad hominem.
Argument by intimidation.
and
Argument by guilt-by-association.

Why don't you try argument by logic?

Peace!

[redstar2000]

How about "argument by moving thread" to Opposing Ideologies?

Maybe the cappies will be interested. :lol:

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Macchendra]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2006, 03:12 PM
How about "argument by moving thread" to Opposing Ideologies?

Maybe the cappies will be interested. :lol:

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif
Chickenshit.

[encephalon]

This is not only a crackpot idea because it simply states "let's center a new economy around labor instead of another commodity (or commodities)" without giving the slightest hint of how we might do that while the capitalists control it all, but also because (and as a result of the previous, perhaps) it suggests reformism. As far back as I can remember, this has always been revleft, not refleft (except when it was che-lives).