http://www.nashvillescene.com/pitw/archives/2012/04/17/former-snl-cast-member-victoria-jackson-takes-on-murfreesboro-mosque Comments On: Former <i>SNL</i> Cast Member Victoria Jackson Takes on Murfreesboro Mosque by Jack Silverman en-us Copyright 2013 Nashville Scene. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, Nashville Scene readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact Nashville Scene. wil@desert.net (Nashville Scene Webmaster) Sat, 18 May 2013 00:00:01 -0500 Sat, 18 May 2013 20:15:00 -0500 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Posted by my 2 cents]]> Wed, 08 May 2013 09:21:33 -0500 Nashville Scene Posted by BIGJR9]]> Sun, 29 Apr 2012 12:42:10 -0500 Nashville Scene
But I am not advocating that chimeric beast, the Free Market. The existence of any society places some restrictions on the market because all societies have other values that result in limits on economic decisions.
Posted by Mark Rogers]]> Wed, 25 Apr 2012 11:38:13 -0500 Nashville Scene Posted by rorohonda]]> Wed, 25 Apr 2012 09:31:59 -0500 Nashville Scene
"And Mark, I'm not going to respond to your last response because I'm worn out."

Don't you care who plays you on Broadway or in the movie? Don't blame me when Min casts Carrot Top as you.
Posted by Mark Rogers]]> Mon, 23 Apr 2012 15:04:06 -0500 Nashville Scene Posted by Pete Wilson]]> Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:50:02 -0500 Nashville Scene Posted by Pete Wilson]]> Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:34:19 -0500 Nashville Scene
And Mark, I'm not going to respond to your last response because I'm worn out. Call it a technical knockout if you wish.
Posted by Pete Wilson]]> Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:23:25 -0500 Nashville Scene Posted by BattleCat]]> Sat, 21 Apr 2012 18:57:25 -0500 Nashville Scene
Nonsense. This calls for Grand Opera.
Posted by Min]]> Fri, 20 Apr 2012 15:25:44 -0500 Nashville Scene
As long as you promise to not exploit the workers too much. I would not want that on Pete's conscience.
Posted by Mark Rogers]]> Fri, 20 Apr 2012 14:44:43 -0500 Nashville Scene
I'm contemplating publishing all of your back and forth discussion here as a sort of "My Dinner With Andre" about the the politics of economics.

Either that, or I may put some of it to music for a Broadway stage show.

If all goes well, I promise to cut you in for a share.


Posted by Jack]]> Fri, 20 Apr 2012 14:24:51 -0500 Nashville Scene
"I think the worker is in a sense exploited. In an employment situation (as opposed to an independent artisan situation), his work becomes just another input of production.
Posted by Mark Rogers]]> Fri, 20 Apr 2012 13:42:50 -0500 Nashville Scene Posted by Pete Wilson]]> Thu, 19 Apr 2012 15:07:56 -0500 Nashville Scene
Yes. In one sense that is correct.
Posted by Mark Rogers]]> Thu, 19 Apr 2012 14:26:45 -0500 Nashville Scene
"In economics, the difference between the sale price and the production cost of a product is the value added per unit"--Wikipedia.
Posted by Pete Wilson]]> Thu, 19 Apr 2012 14:21:31 -0500 Nashville Scene Posted by Pete Wilson]]> Thu, 19 Apr 2012 14:19:22 -0500 Nashville Scene
Let's say you own Pete's Fine Furniture. You invested your money in the plant, materials, taxes, wages etc. The average cost to you of any piece of furniture is $95 before any profit for you.
Posted by Mark Rogers]]> Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:40:12 -0500 Nashville Scene Posted by Pete Wilson]]> Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:11:34 -0500 Nashville Scene
"If we define surplus value as the difference between what the workers are paid and what their work is worth to a business, then how do workers benefit from the surplus value of their products?"

But we know that Marx was wrong {or perhaps 'disingenuous'} about that because the real issue is the cost of producing an item {call that X} and the price at which it sells {call that Y}. True 'surplus value' is the difference between X and Y.

For all his brilliance {and Karl is funnier than Zeppo and Gummo but not Harpo, Chico and Groucho}, Marx had a vested interest in casting the lot of the worker in a negative light.
Posted by Mark Rogers]]> Thu, 19 Apr 2012 12:43:39 -0500 Nashville Scene Posted by Pete Wilson]]> Thu, 19 Apr 2012 11:25:59 -0500 Nashville Scene Posted by Pete Wilson]]> Thu, 19 Apr 2012 11:21:28 -0500 Nashville Scene Cuba: Marxist economy: Blazing failure.
Communist China: Marxist economy - Engineers make seventeen dollars a day and seventy percent of the workers have no health coverage. (Actually, the government has relented, allowing capitalism while exercising much control.)
Vietnam: Allowing private enterprise while trying to escape stigma of economic failure of communist regime.
Question: In light of the world wide failure of Marxism, why would anyone sight it as a source of anything except failure?

Posted by xray]]> Thu, 19 Apr 2012 05:46:19 -0500 Nashville Scene
"But capitalism does pay workers less money than their work is worth to a firm. The difference between what the workers are paid and what their work is worth is what Marx called "surplus value."
Posted by Mark Rogers]]> Thu, 19 Apr 2012 01:11:49 -0500 Nashville Scene
They are entrepreneurs, they are students, they are taxpayers and neighbors.
Posted by mattintn]]> Wed, 18 Apr 2012 14:59:50 -0500 Nashville Scene