Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site frog.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!frog!tdh
From: tdh@frog.UUCP (T. Dave Hudson)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: requests for carnes (Re: Overlooked Contributions of the Rich)
Message-ID: <150@frog.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 24-Feb-85 22:54:46 EST
Article-I.D.: frog.150
Posted: Sun Feb 24 22:54:46 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 28-Feb-85 01:14:55 EST
References: <792@utcsri.UUCP>
Organization: Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA
Lines: 18
Keywords: labor_theory_of_value,surplus_value,socialism

>From: vassos@utcsri.UUCP (Vassos Hadzilacos)
>The auto manufacturer pays wages and gets cars. The cars he
>[the (floating) rich] gets are worth more than the wages
>he pays (otherwise he would have long ceased to be an auto manufacturer).
>Therfore [sic], not only does he not "redistribute wealth" but in fact
>appropriates the wealth created by the labour power he hires.

1) I could have sworn someone claimed that socialism had progressed
   beyond this stupidity (even overlooking who really owns the auto
   manufacturers).  Didn't you?

2) What I have heard called "democratic socialism" here sounds an
   awful lot either like guild socialism or like syndicalism.  The
   former is where the "workers" in an industry vote somehow to
   control their organization.  The latter is where the "workers"
   own their organization, sort of a guild socialism without the
   socialism.  Both of these were covered in von Mises' *Socialism*.
   Would you care to differentiate the one from the others?