SegwayChat
Home . Old Gallery

Go Back   SegwayChat > Other Topics > General Discussion

Notices

General Discussion Miscellaneous topics and for general social, non-Segway discussions.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-19-2012, 01:18 PM   #1
Rolacoy
Member
Rolacoy will become famous soon enough
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East Texas
Posts: 602
5 yr Member
Default "Bankrupt A123", Brought something to mind.

A couple of weeks ago some of us men were working at our church. Now this is political story so some of you will be upset, but this is in the "General Discussion". One of the men had brought his three boys and a friend of the boys. I am in charge of this building project so I told the boys that if they would dig up a bunch of bricks that were an old patio I would pay them. The boys are 8 to 12 years old.

I thought I would try to teach them something about politics. I told them that I would pay them .05 per brick if they would stack them over by the fence. I said now here is the difference between Capitalism and Socialism. If each one of you stacks your bricks in your own pile, i will pay each of you .05 per brick, this is Capitalism. If you stack all of the bricks in one pile you will split the money equally.

They were not all present when I explained the job to a couple of them at the start. The other two were off playing someplace. When I noticed that the other two were working I also told them the deal. I should have gotten them all together at one time, but it's hard to round up four boys who are playing in a large area. The first boy that I talked with wanted the whole job for himself so he would get all of the money, but one joined him in the work almost immediately. He knew the deal.

A little later they were all working, a later only two were working. My goal was to get the bricks stacked, I was busy working with the men. I re-emphasisd the difference between Capitalism and Socialism several times during the morning. I had told the other men what I had told the boys, there Dad was "with me" on the deal. We quit shortly after noon and it was time to pay. All of the bricks were stacked in one stack. The Dad and I called them together, we went over the deal again with them. As it turned out the first boy, not the oldest, had became the boss. He was always on the job, the others came and went.

His Dad and I had decided that the politics had evolved. They didn't know how many bricks they had. We showed them how to count them. There was 12 rows tall and 30 on the top. We made them do the math. And a nickel each how much money. They came up with $18.00. We decided that we would give the first boy the money A couple of weeks ago some of us men were working at our church. Now this is political so some of you will be upset, but this is in the "General Discussion". One of the men had brought his three boys and a friend of the boys. I am in charge of this building project so I told the boys that if they would dig up a bunch of bricks that were an old patio. The boys are 8 to 12 years old.

I thought I would try to teach them something about politics. I told them that I would pay them .05 per brick if they would stack them over by the fence. I said now here is the difference between Capitalism and Socialism. If each one of you stacks your bricks in your own pile, i will pay each of you .05 per brick, this is Capitalism. If you stack all of the bricks in one pile you will split the money equally.

They were not all present when I explained the job to a couple of them at the start. The other two were off playing someplace. When I noticed that the other two were working I also told them the deal. I should have gotten them all together at one time, but it's hard to round up four boys who are playing in a large area. The first boy that I talked with wanted the whole job for himself so he would get all of the money, but one joined him in the work almost immediately. He knew the deal.

A little later they were all working, a later only two were working. My goal was to get the bricks stacked, I was busy working with the men. I re-ephised the difference between Capitalism and Socialism several times during the morning. I had told the other men what I had told the boys, there Dad was "with me" on the deal. We quit shortly after noon and it was time to pay. All of the bricks were stacked in one stack. The Dad and I called them together, we went over the deal again with them. As it turned out the first boy, not the oldest, had became the boss. He was always on the job, the others came and went.

His Dad and I had decided that the politics had evolved. The Dad and I called them together so I could pay up. The first boy did most of the work so we decided to let him decide how to divide the money. They didn't know how many bricks they had. We showed them how to count the them. They had 12 rows and 30 bricks on top. They did the math and came up with 360 bricks. They didn't know how much money I owed them. They did the math and came up with $18.00, I gave the boy 10 one's and two 5's.

A variation of Socialism came forth. The boy decided that he had done most of the work and should get most of the money. He said his oldest brother did little and he would only get one dollar. I told him, now wait a minute, tomorrow you want to be friends with the other boys so you have to be fair. His Dad told me that in the end he gave one boy six dollars, himself six dollars, the other two got four each. They were all happy, went to the store and spent all of the money. Everyone was happy.

I know I didn't follow the original contract, but their Dad and I discussed it and decided that was the best way to handle the situation. Was it socialism, seems to me it was, maybe. As I understand socialism all are to share the work and rewards equally. It seems like a good idea, but it just never works out that way. Some won't do their share of the work and someone always gets to live in the big house and tell everyone else what to do.

I expect a tongue lashing from you all, but I thought it was a funny story and there are more bricks and another day for them to work.
Rolacoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 03:29 PM   #2
SegNerd
Member
SegNerd will become famous soon enoughSegNerd will become famous soon enough
 
SegNerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Portland
Posts: 672
5 yr Member
Default

I'm not taking any position on socialism here, but it kind of bothers me when someone says "I like/dislike something" when the truth is they do not understand the thing. The fact is that there is at least one major flaw in your understanding that makes your scenario not socialism.

In capitalism, you can say each brick is worth five cents - but in socialism, you don't get to choose the price of the brick. You have to figure out the exact value of their labor and pay them 100% of it. You don't get to make any profit off of the deal.

By making your workers follow socialist principles but skimming profits for yourself, honestly I think you were acting more like a Communist dictator than a real socialist.

There is also the question of whether you were violating child labor and minimum wage laws... no matter what system you were "playing" with, in the US you have to follow US law.
SegNerd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 05:21 PM   #3
Rolacoy
Member
Rolacoy will become famous soon enough
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East Texas
Posts: 602
5 yr Member
Default

I don't remember expressing a like or dislike. This was a totally voluntary "job" for them, I simply gave them a chance to make a very little bit of money to buy sodas and candy, which they did. I made no money, nor will I make any money. I plan to use the bricks to build a fireplace or grill outside the youth room so they can make "Smores" or cook a wiener sometime.

Many of us do voluntary work around the church adults and kids. They would have done the work without me offering them money. But I expected differences of opinion and some good education about the differences between Capitalism, Socialism and Communism, thanks for your input. John may take this off pretty quickly so I have made a copy to show the kid's dad tonight, he will get a kick out of it. If it remains I will keep him updated.

Last edited by Rolacoy; 12-19-2012 at 05:29 PM..
Rolacoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 05:45 PM   #4
Binski
Junior Member
Binski is on a distinguished road
 
Binski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Southern California, High Desert
Posts: 41
5 yr Member
Default

This is a Segway forum. I read it to learn about Segways and Segway related News. I don't read it for overly simplistic theory about capitalism and socialism. Jeesss!
Binski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 05:56 PM   #5
Bob.Kerns
Advanced Member
Bob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of lightBob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of lightBob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of lightBob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of lightBob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of lightBob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of light
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Marin County, CA
Posts: 3,783
5 yr Member HT/PT Owner
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SegNerd View Post
I'm not taking any position on socialism here, but it kind of bothers me when someone says "I like/dislike something" when the truth is they do not understand the thing. The fact is that there is at least one major flaw in your understanding that makes your scenario not socialism.

In capitalism, you can say each brick is worth five cents - but in socialism, you don't get to choose the price of the brick. You have to figure out the exact value of their labor and pay them 100% of it. You don't get to make any profit off of the deal.

By making your workers follow socialist principles but skimming profits for yourself, honestly I think you were acting more like a Communist dictator than a real socialist.

There is also the question of whether you were violating child labor and minimum wage laws... no matter what system you were "playing" with, in the US you have to follow US law.
I don't see this as socialism or capitalism, but just an example of an unclear, loosely-followed contract. I'm glad it worked out well. In this case, the faults may have worked to your advantage by forcing the kids to consider the issues a bit more deeply.

But after doing a spot of research about SegNerd's point regarding child labor laws, to my surprise, it's trickier than I expected.

I think it's unfortunate, as I don't believe this really falls within the purpose of child labor laws. I suspect they're drawn this way because of the potential for abuse -- but it's still open to abuse.

If this had been an agricultural job, or part of a family business (and not hazardous), or a movie/film job, you'd have been OK.

Generally speaking, children below 14 aren't allowed to work, and below the age of 16, there are significant restrictions, both with regard to safety and hours, fewer restrictions for those over 16.

Aside from safety, the goal is to protect a child's opportunity to get an education before entering the workforce. Somehow, work isn't being considered as an educational opportunity itself.

But anyway, in the end, it appears to hinge on that tricky line between employment vs contract. From your description, it sounds like they had sufficient independence as to how and when the job was done, etc, to be independent contractors. But adults are miscategorized on this all the time, so it's something to be careful about.

Speaking as a parent of a 12-year-old, regardless of your politics, I'd have been perfectly happy to participate in your little lesson.

I don't think either of you have accurately described socialism -- nor capitalism, for that matter. How is capital even involved here? But incorrect labeling wouldn't detract much from the sort of lesson that would be learned here.
__________________
Bob Kerns:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Obviously, we can't have infinite voltage, or the universe would tear itself to shreds, and we wouldn't be discussing Segways.
Bob.Kerns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 07:51 PM   #6
SegNerd
Member
SegNerd will become famous soon enoughSegNerd will become famous soon enough
 
SegNerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Portland
Posts: 672
5 yr Member
Default

Not every aspect of capitalism directly involves capital. I don't claim to be an economics expert, and my description was not meant to be comprehensive, but nonetheless I'm not sure what part of my description you're claiming was inaccurate.

I was not alleging a child labor law violation, just raising it as a question.

I still feel like you missed my main point, which is that for you to simply dictate any price for the work means it is not socialism. Socialism means you pay the exact value - nothing more, nothing less.
SegNerd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 08:28 PM   #7
Bob.Kerns
Advanced Member
Bob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of lightBob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of lightBob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of lightBob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of lightBob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of lightBob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of light
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Marin County, CA
Posts: 3,783
5 yr Member HT/PT Owner
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SegNerd View Post
Not every aspect of capitalism directly involves capital.
Ah, but an exchange of wages for labor is hardly unique to capitalism either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SegNerd View Post
I don't claim to be an economics expert, and my description was not meant to be comprehensive, but nonetheless I'm not sure what part of my description you're claiming was inaccurate.

I was not alleging a child labor law violation, just raising it as a question.

I still feel like you missed my main point, which is that for you to simply dictate any price for the work means it is not socialism. Socialism means you pay the exact value - nothing more, nothing less.
Ah, I wasn't saying you described capitalism inaccurately. You hardly described it at all, so I wasn't criticizing your depiction, but rather Rolacoy's.

I do not at all agree with your description of socialism. It's certainly not about pricing policy. 100% of the value of the labor? What does that even mean? How do you set that price? Market? Fiat? Vote?

But my criticism there is that your statements are too vague to constructively disagree with, and I doubt either of us would be enlightened by trying for a better definition. I really don't find socialism all that interesting, and I suspect you're more interested in a notion of "fairness".

But really, the point of my response was that the issue you raised of child labor, I found interesting enough to do some digging. And was somewhat surprised by what I found. Certainly, it was not to criticize or disagree with your bringing it up!

By pointing out the flaws in Rolacoy's (and your) description of the political systems, I was trying to say that the educational value here wasn't about political philosophy at all. (Note: I'm agreeing it wasn't socialism!) The role of work, and basic ideas of fairness, perseverance, deferring pleasures to obtain a goal...I'll argue that these lessons are not political philosophy at all, but life lessons.

I will grant, however, that these life lessons OUGHT to inform political philosophies, though at times, they seem ignored.
__________________
Bob Kerns:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Obviously, we can't have infinite voltage, or the universe would tear itself to shreds, and we wouldn't be discussing Segways.
Bob.Kerns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 12:28 AM   #8
SegNerd
Member
SegNerd will become famous soon enoughSegNerd will become famous soon enough
 
SegNerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Portland
Posts: 672
5 yr Member
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob.Kerns View Post
I do not at all agree with your description of socialism. It's certainly not about pricing policy. 100% of the value of the labor? What does that even mean? How do you set that price? Market? Fiat? Vote?
Really? Value and the labor theory of value were fundamental aspects of Marxism.

But this has gotten too far off-topic for a Segway forum, so I think I'm just going to let other folks debate this one...
SegNerd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 12:34 AM   #9
KSagal
Glides a lot, talks more...
KSagal has much to be proud ofKSagal has much to be proud ofKSagal has much to be proud ofKSagal has much to be proud ofKSagal has much to be proud ofKSagal has much to be proud ofKSagal has much to be proud ofKSagal has much to be proud ofKSagal has much to be proud of
 
KSagal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Pelham, NH, USA.
Posts: 10,356
5 yr Member HT/PT Owner SegwayFest Attendee
Default

First off, I agree that Rolacoy's descriptions were overly simplistic, but feel I understand what he was trying to express, as I feel it likely that others understood as well, regardless of other nuances expressed in their responses...

The simplistic definition of the rewards for all work done is evenly distributed regardless of individual input being socialistic, is reasonable in my opinion.

The simplistic definition of the rewards for all work done directly responding to the amount of individual input and effort by each singular worker to be more like capitalism is also reasonable in my opinion.

Neither is textbook accurate, but understandable.

Just to throw my own opinion into the mix, as I read the posting, I considered it reflected more more like my understanding of Marxism. The idea of each contributing to the level they were able, (with age and distractions accounted for) and each received a level that each required to make them happy (for soda and candy).

If I were the kid that did the most of the work, and did not get more of the money than anyone else, I would be unhappy. However, they did not stack the bricks in a manner that would have allowed for easy payment commensurate with individual effort. It also may have been more efficient to have one person prying with a shovel, another pulling the brick from the sand, a third transporting them to the pile area, and a fourth stacking them. All like bees in a hive, all small parts, but great things get done efficiently that way.

If I were the kid that played most of the time, but got a 2/3 share relative to the kid who did most of the work, I would be happy, but would have learned that I can play, while others work, and still get paid almost as much. That is pretty socialistic in my mind.

As far as contracts and whatnot, the rules seem to have been clear at some point in the mind of Rolacoy, but the kids all stacked in one pile, and therefore the contract required equal payment. Yet, administering this was delegated to the hard worker, who felt that equal to all was unfair, and it was. His solution was closer to his understanding of capitalism, payment directly related to what he felt each kid did. However, it was delegated, and then someone seems to have stepped on his decisions, and that also sounds communistic/socialistic to me.

I did not do the child labor law consideration at all. The church did not seem to hire these kids, a volunteer seems to have offered a prize or bonus for effort from kids. It may be contrary if it was done to their detriment, but it was not. And, they were not paid for the work they did. As I see it, three kids got more than they earned, and one got less than he earned. Since the three were over compensated relative to their work, and one got screwed, there are other labor laws that may come to play. As two got more than contracted (equal pay for all if bricks are in one pile) and two got less than contracted, again, fairness in labor laws may apply. I suppose breach of contract may be in order either way.

But, this is like giving a 3 year old a ticket for riding his bike on the sidewalk. It may be illegal, but is hardly appropriate.

Interesting debate. Thanks Rolacoy, engaging post.
__________________
Karl Ian Sagal

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"Well done is better than well said." (Ben Franklin)
Bene factum melior bene dictum

Proud past President of SEG America and member of the First Premier Segway Enthusiasts Group and subsequent ones as well.
KSagal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 04:08 AM   #10
Bob.Kerns
Advanced Member
Bob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of lightBob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of lightBob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of lightBob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of lightBob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of lightBob.Kerns is a glorious beacon of light
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Marin County, CA
Posts: 3,783
5 yr Member HT/PT Owner
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SegNerd View Post
Really? Value and the labor theory of value were fundamental aspects of Marxism.

But this has gotten too far off-topic for a Segway forum, so I think I'm just going to let other folks debate this one...
I don't think either of us are trying to debate socialism, but since you've clarified your intent, I can clarify a bit as a result.

First, let me note that Marxism and Socialism are not one and the same. Socialism is a much broader category, generally defined by the concept of "social ownership".

But the Labor Theory of Value is hardly a defining characteristic of either socialism nor Marxism. It was first proposed by Adam Smith, in The Wealth of Nations! Yes, it is an important concept, and yes, it was important to Karl Marx's philosophy...

But it also isn't what you described, though I can see now that it was your intent. Let me see if I can capture your intent: Marxism would require payment based on the amount of labor, rather than a price set by fiat or negotiation, and in a currency whose value itself is determined by labor.

The problem is, we don't have any such currency, certainly not USD. Barter would be your only option. This undermined your attempt at injecting the issue of profit -- which indeed, would be important to distinguishing between socialism and capitalism.

I don't think you can teach economic or political philosophy in a lesson like this; I think the lesson is more foundational. You can't really grasp the labor theory of value (let alone more nuanced notions of value) unless you appreciate the value of labor!

I think, though, he did teach about the problem of dogmatism, just by the struggle to work out what was fair!

So what would be a "fair price" for Segways under such a system? Is there a difference in the value of skilled vs unskilled labor? Focused vs lackadaisical labor? Labor performed by the young and physically fit vs old and infirm? Does it matter if the labor is being performed by people living in an environment requiring 90% of their waking hours just to eke out survival against the environment?

But even in the simplest model -- how many man-hours go into producing a Segway? You have to include a pro-rated (how?) share of the man-hours producing the machinery, transport of materials, even mining. How do you set the value of that ore, in finite supply? By the labor price of substituting some renewable material?

I'm pretty certain that Segways would not exist under a Marxist world order, but whether they COULD exist if the pricing were based purely on hours of labor, monitized, is much less clear to me.

Anyway, thank you Rolacoy, for an interesting story, and SegNerd, for bringing up interesting points.
__________________
Bob Kerns:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Obviously, we can't have infinite voltage, or the universe would tear itself to shreds, and we wouldn't be discussing Segways.
Bob.Kerns is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:17 PM.
Copyright © 2002-2023 SegwayChat.org.
All rights reserved. Not affiliated with Segway Inc.

FreshBlue vBulletin skin by
VayaDesign
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SegwayChat Archive