2012 Edition: What’s your raise this year?

[CA renter]

Once again, since you still don’t understand what socialism is (and isn’t):

……………….

“6. In recent years the peoples in the underdeveloped areas of the world have been finding Socialism a valuable aid in the struggle for national freedom and higher standards of life. Here different forms of democratic Socialism are evolving under the pressure of different circumstances. The main enemies of Socialism in these areas are parasitical exploitation by indigenous financial oligarchies and colonial exploitation by foreign capitalists. The Socialists fight for political and economic democracy, they seek to raise the standard of living for the masses through land reform and industrialisation, the extension of public ownership and the development of producers’ and consumers’ cooperatives.

7. Meanwhile, as Socialism advances throughout the world, new forces have arisen to threaten the movement towards freedom and social justice. Since the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, Communism has split the International Labour Movement and has set back the realisation of Socialism in many countries for decades.

8. Communism falsely claims a share in the Socialist tradition. In fact it has distorted that tradition beyond recognition. It has built up a rigid theology which is incompatible with the critical spirit of Marxism.

9. Where Socialists aim to achieve freedom and justice by removing the exploitation which divides men under capitalism, Communists seek to sharpen those class divisions only in order to establish the dictatorship of a single party.

10. International Communism is the instrument of a new imperialism. Wherever it has achieved power it has destroyed freedom or the chance of gaining freedom. It is based on a militarist bureaucracy and a terrorist police. By producing glaring contrasts of wealth and privilege it has created a new class society. Forced labour plays an important part in its economic organisation.

11. Socialism is an international movement which does not demand a rigid uniformity of approach. Whether Socialists build their faith on Marxist or other methods of analysing society, whether they are inspired by religious or humanitarian principles, they all strive for the same goal — a system of social justice, better living, freedom and world peace.“

http://www.socialistinternational.org/viewArticle.cfm?ArticleID=39

[bobby]

[quote=sdrealtor]I’ll tell you on 12/31/12 when I know[/quote]

me too… being a SBO, you don’t really know until Dick Clark sings….

[bobby]

double post….

[5yes]

This year as a high school teacher I have attended school on my own dime to improve my knowledge of autism, I have attended volunteer workshops to improve district curriculum, and I am expecting a severe decrease in salary (effective as soon as next month). Over the last year, my husband has received a 10%+ decrease also, despite attending classes to improve his career. However, we are happy to have jobs, even though we are taking sabbatical leaves for a year to move to Haiti and build an orphanage. It has been really enlightening to step outside of the race to make money and examine what is really important to us: taking care of kids who are in need.

[scaredyclassic]

Marcel duchamp, famous artist anout a century ago, quit the art world at the apex of his career to devote the remainder of his life to playing chess. Kind of comparable to lady gaga chucking it all for chess.

[CA renter]

[quote=5yes]This year as a high school teacher I have attended school on my own dime to improve my knowledge of autism, I have attended volunteer workshops to improve district curriculum, and I am expecting a severe decrease in salary (effective as soon as next month). Over the last year, my husband has received a 10%+ decrease also, despite attending classes to improve his career. However, we are happy to have jobs, even though we are taking sabbatical leaves for a year to move to Haiti and build an orphanage. It has been really enlightening to step outside of the race to make money and examine what is really important to us: taking care of kids who are in need.[/quote]

Sorry to hear that you are both slated for salary drops, but so glad to hear about your upcoming work in Haiti. Told my DH about you guys the other week, and we both agree that you are awesome for venturing that far outside your comfort zone to help others. It’s especially difficult with a family, too. Please keep us informed as you progress through this journey.

Best wishes to you and your family!

[CA renter]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=CA renter]The “private market” cannot function successfully all by itself for any length of time. It never has, and it never will.[/quote]

Another straw man dances past. Nobody ever said private market means “no government.” Nobody but you.

How much was the government involved in the first 100 years of US history and innovation? How many government scientists were employed? Who did all the inventing back then?

Before 1900, the government was less than 5% of the US economy. Almost all of that was defense spending. How’d we do up to that point?

Did the government invent the steam engine, or the sewing machine, or the cotton gin, or any of the other dozens of transforming technologies of the 19th century?

[quote]And did you seriously miss the posts explaining how the GOVERNMENT was involved in the development of computers and the internet.[/quote]

And did you seriously miss the other 99% of the history of computers and the internet that has nothing to do with government?

Did the government invent the transistor, the microprocessor, the PC, the programming languages, the database, the network router, the fiber-optic cable, …

Did Steve Jobs and Bill Gates ever work for the government?

Did the government invent the LCD display that you are staring at right now?

Did the government invent the search engine that you are so fond of using to prove how smart you are?

In your world, the thousands of engineers and scientists who work at IBM, Microsoft, Intel, Cisco, Google, and Oracle, etc. spend their days just waiting for the government to invent things.

Ever drive past the Qualcomm buildings? If your arguments are correct, then nothing has ever been invented inside there. All those engineers working there (some of them are Piggs) just sit around waiting for the next government development to come along so they can sell it. Apparently they don’t actually invent anything (and yet they file thousands of patents…)

But of course you don’t understand any of this. You have this bizarre, simple-minded notion that only people who get paychecks from the government actually do anything. The other 90% of the economy is just dead weight.

You use lists of “famous scientists” to prove your point. Your depth of knowledge is no more than a 4th grader writing a report on how science works.

So let me take it down to your level:

What government agency did Thomas Edison work for?[/quote]

Let’s start with some of your very own examples, shall we?

History of LCD:

“Friedrich Richard Reinitzer (25 February 1857 in Prague – 16 February 1927 in Graz) was an Austrian botanist and chemist. In late 1880s, experimenting with cholesteryl benzoate, he discovered properties of liquid crystals (named later by Otto Lehmann).

Reinitzer was born into a German Bohemian family in Prague. He studied chemistry at the German technical university in Prague; in 1883 he was habilitated there as a private docent. In 1895 (or even 1901)[1] he moved to the technical university in Graz. During 1909 – 1910 he served as the rector of the university.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Reinitzer

……………

“The Graz University of Technology (German: Technische Universität Graz, short TU Graz) is the second largest university in Styria, Austria, after the University of Graz. Austria has three universities of technology – in Graz, in Leoben, and in Vienna[1]. The Graz University of Technology was founded in 1811 by Archduke John of Austria. TUG, as the university is called by its students, is a public university.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graz_University_of_Technology

……………
“Vsevolod Konstantinovich Frederiks (V-sev-oh-lod Khan-stan-tin-ovich Fred-eriks) (Russian: Всеволод Константинович Фредерикс) (April 29, 1885, Warsaw – January 6, 1944, Gorkiy) was a Russian/Soviet physicist. His primary contribution to physics was in the field of liquid crystals. The Frederiks transition was named after him.

After high school Frederiks attended Geneva University and for one semester attended the lectures of Paul Langevin in Paris. After defending his thesis and obtaining his PhD, Fredericks decided to continue his studies at Göttingen University. He was there for more than eight years, and with the outbreak of World War I he became a civil prisoner. During that period he became personal assistant to David Hilbert.

In the summer of 1918 Frederiks returned to Russia, and worked at the Institute of Physics and Biophysics in Moscow. In 1919 he became a lecturer at the University of Petrograd.” [from a COMMUNIST country, no less! – CAR]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vsevolod_Frederiks

………..

Institute of Physics and Biophysics in Moscow

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=Institute+of+Physics+and+Biophysics+in+Moscow&gbv=2&oq=Institute+of+Physics+and+Biophysics+in+Moscow&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_nf=1&gs_l=hp.12…2359.2359.0.3250.1.1.0.0.0.0.297.297.2-1.1.0.uCtbuxTKFoU

—————————————————

“Johann Heinrich Wilhelm Geißler (May 26, 1814, Igelshieb – January 24, 1879) was a skilled glassblower and physicist, famous for his invention of the Geissler tube, made of glass and used as a low pressure gas-discharge tube.

Geissler descended from a long line of craftsmen in the Thüringer Wald and in Böhmen.[1] He found work in different German universities, eventually including the University of Bonn. There he was asked by physicist Julius Plücker to design an apparatus for evacuating a glass tube.

Plücker owed his forthcoming success in the electric discharge experiments in large measure to his instrument maker, the skilled glassblower and mechanic Johann Heinrich Wilhelm Geissler. He learned the art of glassblowing in the duchy of Saxe-Meiningen…. He finally settled down as an instrument-maker in a workshop of his own at the University of Bonn in 1852.[1]

Geissler made a hand-crank mercury pump, and glass tubes that could contain a superior vacuum.

The future value of Plücker and Geissler’s research ‘toy’ – apart from neon lighting – would be fully realized only 50 years later when Lee De Forest invented the Audion vacuum tube in 1906 … creating the entire basis of long-distance wireless radio (and TV) communications.

Geissler was awarded an honorary doctorate in 1868.[1]”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Geissler

………..

The University of Bonn

“The University of Bonn (German: Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn) is a public research university located in Bonn, Germany. Founded in its present form in 1818, as the linear successor of earlier academic institutions, the University of Bonn is today one of the leading universities in Germany. The University of Bonn offers a large number of undergraduate and graduate programs in a range of subjects. Its library holds more than two million volumes. The University of Bonn has 525 professors and 27,800 students. Among its notable alumni and faculty are seven Nobel Laureates, two Fields Medalists, twelve Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Prize winners, Pope Benedict XVI, Heinrich Heine, Friedrich Nietzsche and Joseph Schumpeter. In the years 2010 and 2011, the Times Higher Education ranked the University of Bonn as one of the 200 best universities in the world.[2][3]”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Bonn

————————————————–

I could literally go on for years about the role of public funding and public institutions in science, but know that I’d be wasting my time with you. You need to do more research before you spout off…your ignorance is frightening.

[CA renter]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=sdrealtor]Finding bubble articles about the dot com and Silicon Valley is such easy fodder. Problem is the area has been one tech boom after another for the last 40+ years and its not about to change anytime soon. [/quote]

Of course that’s logical.

But I once found an article about the great depression.

It serves as indisputable proof that capitalism has never created any value for anyone, the US has never experienced any economic growth, and that all technology has been developed by the government (only Europe, because they are socialist, has ever had a functioning economy.)

It’s a FACT because I found an article on the internet that sorta implies all of this.

The forward PE ratio of AAPL is 11. Overvalued maybe, but hardly a bubble.

Bubbles come and go, but the long term trend is always up. As long as our government doesn’t turn into North Korea (aren’t they socialist, btw?) people will always wake up in the morning ready to work hard and create more. It’s an unstoppable force.[/quote]

Pri,

One more time, you keep misquoting me and twisting my words. Is it your lack of reading comprehension skills, your inability to debate intelligently, or just a desire to troll and bait other posters that causes you to continue to do this?

For a lesson on communism vs. socialism, refer to the above post with the quote from none other than the largest Socialist organization in the world.

FYI, North Korea is under communist rule; they are not socialists. Look it up.

[Anonymous]

[quote=CA renter]I could literally go on for years about the role of public funding and public institutions in science, but know that I’d be wasting my time with you. You need to do more research before you spout off…your ignorance is frightening.[/quote]

Wow. I don’t know what to say. You have proven me completely wrong. I completely lost this debate.

You are correct. Europe is socialist. Capitalism never created anything. Your post above proves it. Your handful of cut and paste references to a few European scientists – many who did their work before socialism even existed – is irrefutable proof of your claim that socialist Europe is the driver of all innovation. I have no counter for your logic.

Your brilliance is staggering.

Nevermind that the US government didn’t even start funding scientific research until the mid 20th century.

Nevermind that you conviniently left out all the names of the private companines that were involved in your LCD example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_crystal_display#Brief_history

RCA, Marconi, Samsung, Westinghouse, BBC, Hatachi, Toshiba, NEC, LXD, …

(Lots of Japanese names there – is Japan socialist also?)

Nevermind that 2/3 of university research is funded by corporations and only 10% is funded directly by government: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funding_of_science

Nevermind the facts. The government invented everything! Your list, full of selective omissions, proves it!

BTW, if you really cared about the Piggs, you would tell all the engineers here to stop going to work every day. Poor flu spends his days at Broadcomm thinking he’s innovating when you have proven that it is impossible. If he really wants to create any value for society, he needs to go work for the government!

But wait…you still can’t name a single socialist country in Europe!

And until you do. I win.

(does a little victory dance…)

[all]

Did you guys define what ‘socialist country’ is? One with the word ‘socialist’ in the name, or one where the ruling party is a member of Socialist International? Or something completely different?

[Anonymous]

[quote=captcha]Did you guys define what ‘socialist country’ is? [/quote]

Do we really have to do that? Seriously?

The only credible and accepted definition of ‘socialist country’ is one where the majority of economic activity is controlled by the state. Specifically:

– Most industry is owned by the state
– Private property ownership is nonexistent or an uncommon exception
– Most of the workforce is employed by state-owned organizations

And the definition of capitalism is essentially the opposite (e.g. most industry is owned and controlled by private individuals.)

Of course almost all countries have a few state-owned enterprises, but there are no countries in the developed world where the majority of economic activity is controlled by the state (aside from a few, truly socialist exceptions – e.g. North Korea) There is no nuance or even semantic debate here; the United States, Europe, Japan, Korea, and the majority of industrialized Asia are all unqualified capitalist economies.

But there are still a few die-hard ‘socialists’ who are making desperate and convoluted attempts to redefine a “socialist” economy as any country with a government (see up-thread for examples.) In other words, their distinction between socialism and capitalism is wish-washy, subjective, and can be changed on a whim to suit the argument and as a means of clinging to the idea that socialism is somehow not a colossal failure.

In any case, here is the gem that started this debate:

[quote=CA Renter]If you’re right, then where are these “free market” countries with all the innovation and creativity? Are they in no/low-tax countries with no/few social safety nets, or are they in places where there is a stable government, rule of law, and safety nets for those who are less fortunate — along with the relatively high taxes required by those systems?[/quote]

The claim in the quote above is that there are no capitalist countries with innovation and creativity, that social safety nets are a requirement for innovation, high taxes are necessary for a growing economy, and that without “socialist” institutions there would be no innovation or economic progress.

The claim is bogus. There is no evidence of correlation between state-controlled industry, “safety nets,” and taxes vs. innovation. The overwhelming historical evidence is that countries with dominant socialist institutions innovate less (obvious example is the list of Soviet innovations vs. American in the 20th century.)

Someone wants to believe that there was no economic progress in all of history until Karl Marx and/or government research grants came along. It’s a complete fantasy. Cutting and pasting the names of obscure European scientists and a few government research projects does not make that fantasy a reality.

[an]

To add on top of pri_dk’s point, it’s more than just the initial invention/discovery. Innovation comes at all stages, just the the initial discovery. Xerox invested the mouse and GUI. But who here thinks OSX, Windows, Android, iOS, etc. won’t exist without Xerox initial innovation. Xerox invented it, but they didn’t have the vision and the execution to bring that invention to the masses. Microsoft did that with Windows. They took the initial invention and found innovative ways to use that initial invention to bring PC to the masses and changed the whole landscape. Even after a product get released, innovations continue to occur. After all, iOS wasn’t the first mobile smartphone OS, but who here thinks Apple wouldn’t have come up with iOS if Microsoft didn’t come up with Windows Mobile or Palm with PalmOS? The smartphone market wouldn’t be where we are today if Apple didn’t innovate and came up with iOS. Now, Android have taken over the torch. Bottom line is, innovation happens everywhere and all the time at every stage of the development. It not just about the initial discovery.

[bearishgurl]

pri_dk, I’d just like to ask you a couple of $64M questions. Of course, you are free to choose to answer them . . . or not.

1. Are you against “big government” and all their “socialist programs” i.e. health and human services, etc?

2. Have you or any member of your immediate family ever benefited from any Federal or State programs at little or no cost to you??

I’ve been wondering this for awhile now …..

[sheilawellington]

[quote=walterwhite]Marcel duchamp, famous artist anout a century ago, quit the art world at the apex of his career to devote the remainder of his life to playing chess. Kind of comparable to lady gaga chucking it all for chess.[/quote]
Except that artists in Duchamp’s time did not make nearly as much money as celebrities/pseudo artists of today do.

[sheilawellington]

[quote=pri_dk]Of course almost all countries have a few state-owned enterprises, but there are no countries in the developed world where the majority of economic activity is controlled by the state (aside from a few, truly socialist exceptions – e.g. North Korea)[/quote]
North Korea is part of the developed world? I don’t think too many people would agree.

[Author]

Posts