Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 5/3/83; site ukc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!mcvax!ukc!ncg
From: ncg@ukc.UUCP (N.C.Gale)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Capitalist production
Message-ID: <4985@ukc.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 18-Mar-85 05:55:59 EST
Article-I.D.: ukc.4985
Posted: Mon Mar 18 05:55:59 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 21-Mar-85 03:22:24 EST
References: <370@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP> <5252@utzoo.UUCP>
Reply-To: ncg@ukc.UUCP (Nigel Gale)
Organization: Computing Laboratory, U of Kent at Canterbury, UK
Lines: 34
Summary: 


No, Laura, you got the story wrong.

JoSH didn't borrow the money, he inherited it.
And having got so much money in the first place, he can inevitably
borrow more than the bloke in the next town.

So JoSH starts off by building a factory, fully automated with
one employee to watch the coloured lights flash.
The cottage industry in the next town never has a chance.

Overall, the <product> is being made faster, better & cheaper.
But no-one can compete unless they have the big money to start with.
                                            ~~~


Giving the lower social groupings the supposed possibility of
advancement, while in fact providing no real means of doing so,
is distinctly remnicient of Dark Ages European libertarianism.
The nobleman owned the land. The peasants needed to use the
land in order to live. They were quite free (sometimes) to move
away onto someone else's land, and pay someone else rent.
But the only peasants who ever advanced from 'peasant' status
were those who joined the army and got some money or the favour
of their liege lord from battle.

Nowadays, there are no battles to get plunder from.
(sorry, there are no battles from which to get plunder)

This really does look like libertarianism in practice, to me.
Please flame me.

-Nigel Gale