Only problem is that the government can't value the land value, and it will lead to unnesecarry and uneffiecient buecracy. And it is difficult to get enough revenue from this taxation without causing land abondoment.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
Actually this would be more the equivalent of a council tenant having the right to buy the property they have rented for decades. And yes, it would be a right for the employees to be able to compulsory purchase it.
Worker-run businesses are more productive and more equitable. Why should we accept an unmeritocratic elite at the head of businesses when we removed that an unmeritocratic elite from political power decades ago?
We already have a land registry office and council inspectors to assess the rates liable to be paid by each household. Converting that to land value assessment instead would be no more bureaucratic than the current system and could be done using the same staff currently employed.
So should the construction workers who built your house, be able to buy your house just because they can? How is it fair that they can force others to give up their property? Shouldn't one be able to keep their own property? And the employees are working for the owner(s). They lend out their property and services (work) in return of money. That doesn't justify them taking over their property. And you can't really call others for elitists, you've shown yourself to be one of the biggest elitists
I find it intriguing that you choose to completely ignore every point I made about how wages work...
Selecting superior Anglo-Saxon reading mayhaps? Choose to ignore what the obnoxious foreigners write, they are foreigners after all, so they must be uneducated about the proper virtues of Antonines true theory of the value of labour.
You cannot force private individuals to sell their property. That is akin to a schoolbully mandating that the others have to do what he wants them to do; otherwise he will resort to violence to reach his aims.
The employees can buy their employer out even now if they both can agree on the right sum. Surely they alone know the true value of the enterprise better than some government bureaucrat sitting in his ivory tower?
Because employers are literally tired of the crap they have to put up with due to whining workers demanding this and that, they seek more ways to automatize their firms. Businesses will be able to survive with the minimal amount of labour required once the incentive to such choice becomes strong enough. What you are promising is exactly such a strong incentive.
What if the firms want to outsource their production rather than have it stolen from them? Are you going to stop the free movement of resources and capital by pointing guns at them and preventing free trade in the name of the 'greater good'?
Funny you mention classical liberalism. It begun as a ideology that concentrated on opposing everything the government did; for they knew the government never had the citizens best interests in their minds. The government represented the ruling elite, not the common men. So that is why they started their struggle for more individual liberties, as opposed to increased liberties of action for the governing elite.
Liberalism opposes big government. It aims to restrict the expansion of a large state, it defends individual liberties of the common people.
Maybe you should ask yourself Antonine, how LIBERAL you truly are?
How many times do the founding fathers of liberalism have to spin around in their graves upon reading about your 'liberal' policies?
So should the construction workers who built your house, be able to buy your house just because they can? How is it fair that they can force others to give up their property? Shouldn't one be able to keep their own property? And the employees are working for the owner(s). They lend out their property and services (work) in return of money. That doesn't justify them taking over their property. And you can't really call others for elitists, you've shown yourself to be one of the biggest elitists
No they shouldn't because their employer already sold it to me. On the other hand, if they'd wished to buy out their employer and her assets prior to it being sold to me then it would be fair enough if they then decided not to sell it to me.
We already have a firmly established principle that you should not be able to always keep your property - I happily pay a proportion of my income in tax and am not allowed to do otherwise.
The fact is that, without skilled labour, a factory would grind to a halt and the business would go bankrupt - that is why strikes are so effective. Ultimately, once a factory is built, it requires the workers in order to remain a viable business but does not require the owner. So it is fair enough if the owner is forced to sell it for a fair price.
Furthermore, I am not an elitist. I got here by hard work and through the will of the voters who have the right to sack me at any time. I am, however, morally superior on account of adhering to a morally superior ideology
No they shouldn't because their employer already sold it to me. On the other hand, if they'd wished to buy out their employer and her assets prior to it being sold to me then it would be fair enough if they then decided not to sell it to me.
We already have a firmly established principle that you should not be able to always keep your property - I happily pay a proportion of my income in tax and am not allowed to do otherwise.
The fact is that, without skilled labour, a factory would grind to a halt and the business would go bankrupt - that is why strikes are so effective. Ultimately, once a factory is built, it requires the workers in order to remain a viable business but does not require the owner. So it is fair enough if the owner is forced to sell it for a fair price.
Furthermore, I am not an elitist. I got here by hard work and through the will of the voters who have the right to sack me at any time. I am, however, morally superior on account of adhering to a morally superior ideology
If this does not scare you away from Antonines 'Liberals' I'm not sure what will...
Welcome to the Commune of Britain, everything you own is now common property, yet everything Supreme Peoples Commissar Antonine owns is His. Sharing is caring, and you all should and actually have to share everything with the government.
Because employers are literally tired of the crap they have to put up with due to whining workers demanding this and that, they seek more ways to automatize their firms. Businesses will be able to survive with the minimal amount of labour required once the incentive to such choice becomes strong enough. What you are promising is exactly such a strong incentive.[/QUOTE
So you agree that the existence of worker run businesses will increase productivity and speed up modernisation then?
If firms want to outsource their production then they are welcome to do so - that is the principle of free trade after all. But I doubt they will find themselves as competitive as they think they will be against employer-run enterprises. Besides which, this would be a brilliant situation for entrepreneurs - they apply their talents to start a business, make it profitable and are then bought out, making a profit on their work in exactly the way that most entrepreneurs hope to do.
Funny you mention classical liberalism. It begun as a ideology that concentrated on opposing everything the government did; for they knew the government never had the citizens best interests in their minds. The government represented the ruling elite, not the common men. So that is why they started their struggle for more individual liberties, as opposed to increased liberties of action for the governing elite.
Liberalism opposes big government. It aims to restrict the expansion of a large state, it defends individual liberties of the common people.
Maybe you should ask yourself Antonine, how LIBERAL you truly are?
How many times do the founding fathers of liberalism have to spin around in their graves upon reading about your 'liberal' policies?
Classical Liberalism was based around the idea that all that was necessary for liberty and freedom was for the government to be opposed so it could not oppress individuals. However, people still lacked freedom and liberty once it was implemented due to poverty traps, lack of education, exploitation by the wealthy and a myriad of other ills which it has only been possible to tackle with government intervention.
Classical Liberalism was the future once. But it has now evolved into Social Liberalism which is far better adapted for the world we live in.
But yes, liberalism is indeed about opposing big government - it is about opposing the concentration of power in the hands of a minority wherever possible. Unlike you, however, I recognise that concentrating power in the hands of economic elites is just as bad as concentrating it in the power of political elites.
I support legislation to disburse political power through community democracy. And the same should be applied to power within the market as well. That is what workplace democracy is all about.
If, however, you have a better suggestion for how it could be implemented then I am all ears.
Ummm, apparently you can't. It's still very much the same size as his text was.
You missed the Liberal votes of jeeshadow and Thoctar. Broken promises!
Also, you were asking for suggestions how to organize workplace, right? Well, I have this book right here, I wrote it. It's title is "Dogma of Violence and Terror", in Chapter 17 I write about workplaces and how to "organize" them.It looked bigger when it was in caps before it was auto-corrected
I would like to thank my ex-wife for inspiring this book. Without her, none of it would've ever happened.
Pole-Poll time!
Total Vote: 40
Tories: 16
Liberals: 6
Labour: 11
CPGB: 7
%s:
Tories: 40.0%
Liberals: 15.0%
Labour: 27.5%
CPGB: 17.5%
Weighted:
Tories: 48
Liberals: 6
Labour: 22
CPGB: 7
Seats:
DUP: 1
Tories: 357
UUP: 8
Liberals: 45
Irish Nats: 3
Labour: 164
CPGB: 52
Result: Conservative and Unionist Glorious Victory
Amusingly, the Tories remain right at 40% again. The Liberals have managed to coax out a few more votes, rising up beyond obscurity, though they're still hurting terribly. As it stands, Labour drifts further and further away from being able to stop the Tories, and the Liberals and Communists are, at this point, unlikely to overtake Labour as opposition, meaning a Tory victory is probable.
Total Vote: 40
Tories: 16
Liberals: 6
Labour: 11
CPGB: 7
%s:
Tories: 40.0%
Liberals: 15.0%
Labour: 27.5%
CPGB: 17.5%
Weighted:
Tories: 48
Liberals: 6
Labour: 22
CPGB: 7
Seats:
DUP: 1
Tories: 357
UUP: 8
Liberals: 45
Irish Nats: 3
Labour: 164
CPGB: 52
Result: Conservative and Unionist Glorious Victory
Amusingly, the Tories remain right at 40% again. The Liberals have managed to coax out a few more votes, rising up beyond obscurity, though they're still hurting terribly. As it stands, Labour drifts further and further away from being able to stop the Tories, and the Liberals and Communists are, at this point, unlikely to overtake Labour as opposition, meaning a Tory victory is probable.
No they shouldn't because their employer already sold it to me. On the other hand, if they'd wished to buy out their employer and her assets prior to it being sold to me then it would be fair enough if they then decided not to sell it to me.
We already have a firmly established principle that you should not be able to always keep your property - I happily pay a proportion of my income in tax and am not allowed to do otherwise.
The fact is that, without skilled labour, a factory would grind to a halt and the business would go bankrupt - that is why strikes are so effective. Ultimately, once a factory is built, it requires the workers in order to remain a viable business but does not require the owner. So it is fair enough if the owner is forced to sell it for a fair price.
Furthermore, I am not an elitist. I got here by hard work and through the will of the voters who have the right to sack me at any time. I am, however, morally superior on account of adhering to a morally superior ideology
Yes, and the owner of a workplace already bought it from someone else. Therefore the employees/state should not be able to take it over against their will. Yes it require the owner. Do you know who invested in it? Do you know who run it? Do you know who emply people? The owner, and lot more. On average the owner and supervisors actually work more and have often used their own capital in the factory. According to your logic it is no use for politicians and buerecrats, as it is the people who can run it all once the government is here. Your line of thought make no sense, unless you have it from a socialist/communist point of view of course.
And do tou seriusly want investors and entrepneurs to set up industries and bussinesses for you to take it over since they "did nothing"? What baiut creating thek in the first place? What will be the incentives for creating workplaces and productivity when the state will seize it at once? And how can you defend the supervisors doing nothing? Wihtout them the workers wouldn't be employed, or wouldn't get tasks. Seems like you have fallen into the logical fallacy that profits and capitalists = bad, while profits for workers = good no matter what. Respect the workers, but also the white collar workers and supervisors.
And you're elitist in the sense that you believe you are superior to the poor and foreigners. You have alrady said outright that poor people and foreigners are ignorant and stupid. And the fact that you say you are morally superior reek of self rightosness and elitism
I urge everyone to set up camps in Antonines house, and make petitions for the government to force him to "sell" his hous and all his property to the workers who built his house and possessions. He clearly have no use of it, he only owns it
It is in no way his right to decide over his property. Your policies are even more socialist than the Labour, why don't you try to make a career there?
Last edited:
It is quite clear from all recent polling figures that any votes for either the Communist or "Liberal" parties will lead to a Tory landslide. I call on all voters who wish to see the fascist-loving Powellite Tories kept out of office to vote for the Labour Party, the only party capable of defeating the blue menace.
And I vote for Tories to keep out the red menace
Seem like we think similar, but still so different.
And I vote for Tories to keep out the red menace
Funnily enough, a vote for Powell will do little to end world communism. A vote for Labour will do something to end world fascism. The fight against extremism begins now.
- Status