From: abaddon@purgatory.org.invalid   
      
   Here is an oldie but goodie article:   
      
   *Why do we need the rich?*   
   /by Dan Russell   
   explains how Marxists answer the common objection to taxing the rich./   
      
   "THE RICH put their hard-earned wealth to use for the rest of us by   
   making investments and creating jobs--this is perhaps the most common   
   defense raised by conservatives against the idea of taxing the wealthy,   
   let alone the socialist case that workers should run society themselves,   
   without capitalists.   
      
   But is it "their" money in the first place? And do we really need the   
   rich for the economy to operate?   
   Before answering these questions--in the negative, on both counts--I   
   think it's important to understand what we mean by "rich."   
      
   Earlier this year, hapless Republican National Committee Chair Michael   
   Steele had the nerve to say that a million dollar salary isn't a lot of   
   money. After taxes, of course, these folks will only be taking home   
   $600,000 and some change each year. I wonder how they manage?   
   The reality is that only a fraction of 1 percent of the population   
   "makes" that much money. For Marxists, however, how much someone makes is   
   less important than how they make it.   
      
   I work in a high-tech industry with highly skilled, experienced workers   
   who may make far more than many small business owners. However, these   
   workers don't own the office they work in, nor the factory that will turn   
   their designs into an end product. They have much more in common with the   
   lower-paid workers who manufacture, assemble, package, ship, repair and   
   service the products they design, rather than the owners who profit at   
   every step of the way.   
      
   These owners of large companies or corporate executives can earn millions   
   upon millions of dollars simply because they are in a position to buy the   
   labor of all these workers--by offering to pay them wages. Most workers   
   aren't forced into a particular job, but for the majority that isn't in a   
   position to employ or provide for themselves, the alternative is   
   starvation.   
   Even those workers lucky enough to make a comfortable living from their   
   wages are only employed because their labor, together with other workers,   
   ultimately produces returns--or profits--for the capitalists. So   
   "creating" jobs is hardly a charitable act.   
   This is the most basic reason that the property and money of capitalists   
   isn't really "theirs." It was produced by workers in the first place.   
      
   THE CAPITALIST class earns profits because it owns and controls what Karl   
   Marx called the means of production--from the factories, offices and   
   stores, to the machines and technology, to the land and raw materials.   
   The system of private property is the legal means for the tiny minority   
   to ensure that it controls what is produced using the means of   
   production, not the majority that does the work.   
      
   More than being in a position to steal a portion of the workers' labor   
   through profits, the capitalists are also able to dictate how and what is   
   produced.   
   Capitalist competition tends to concentrate the means of production in   
   fewer and fewer hands, too--as the acquisition of failed automakers and   
   banks by their competitors during the current crisis demonstrates.   
   Capitalists also use their economic power to bend governments to their   
   will and ensure favorable legislation--they exercise far more political   
   power than workers, flouting the democratic principle of "one person, one   
   vote."   
      
   Then there are the even more insidious ways that capitalist society   
   constrains and cripples the horizons and potential of working-class   
   people, constantly reinforcing the notion that owner and worker, rich and   
   poor, are necessary and timeless relationships.   
   We're told that all this is more than fair--that actually, workers ought   
   to be grateful that the capitalists create jobs for them. Which is why we   
   can't tax these parasites--that would keep them from creating jobs or   
   making the investments that produce the technologies which benefit   
   everyone.   
      
   Again, capitalists only create jobs when it is profitable for them to do   
   so. They are quick to destroy or relocate jobs and leave workers' lives   
   in shambles in their scramble to pay the lowest possible wages and   
   consequently make higher profits.   
   Alternatively, governments faced with pressure from below can "create"   
   jobs, such as with the New Deal policies during the Great Depression of   
   the 1930s. Similarly, it was not the private sector, but government   
   programs and institutions, that were responsible for many of the most   
   important technological advances of the 20th century--the polio vaccine,   
   microprocessors and the Internet, to name a few.   
      
   Workers are collectively every bit as capable of making the decisions   
   that capitalists make about society and the economy, but they are   
   prevented from doing this by their subordinate position. A socialist   
   society would resolve that contradiction. Workers would democratically   
   plan and control production, providing everyone with meaningful work in   
   accordance with what's needed to meet the needs of all.   
   The private ownership of the means of production--the bedrock of   
   capitalist society--is the real reason that we don't have enough jobs,   
   not high taxes. Capitalists overwork part of the population and leave the   
   rest chronically underemployed as a constant threat to those "lucky"   
   enough to have a job.   
      
   A socialist society would instead allocate work and produce goods on the   
   basis of what society needs. Food would be produced to feed all, homes to   
   house all, education to make sure that everyone is able to reach their   
   greatest potential and play a meaningful role in their own lives and   
   society.   
   In a world where a small fraction of the population remains in control of   
   the economy, the vast majority will always have to suffer and fight for   
   even basic things. But there is an alternative. When workers fight   
   collectively and strike for a larger piece of the pie--whether for higher   
   wages or higher taxes on the rich to pay for social or employment   
   programs--they demonstrate that their labor is what drives the economy,   
   and they begin to march down a path toward a different society."   
      
   ~~~~    ~~~~    ~~~~   
      
   Suck it up Google Groups sociopatic capitalist conservatice lie-bertarian   
   propaganda wanker!   
      
      
   --   
   Ördög, without any apologies   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)