cooooooooool ti je post........i blog naravno... aj svrati do mene i komaj
06.10.2007. (03:02)
-
-
-
- - promjene spremljene- uredi komentar - obriši komentar - prijavi ovaj komentar kao spam - zabrani komentiranje autoru ovog komentara- učitavam...
josip
Nema dvojbe: i ovako 'ad hoc' citano jasno je da imas pravi diskurs, zavidnu razinu promisljanja, dobar analiticki slijed itd, ali to vec i sam znas. Mala zamjerka na pravopis (ako nisu lapsusicalami i jedna opservacija na zadnji dio. Pokojni J. Fucak, prevoditelj biblije i jeruzalemski prof., mi je iznio interpretaciju pomenutog cuda: u to vrijeme vazio je nepiusani zakon da zidov mora ponijeti dva obroka sa sobom (ne lako pokvarive hrane, zamotane u krpu, spremljeno pod habit) uvijek kada ide na put (kao tada za Isusom). Kad je doslo vrijeme objeda, vecina je imala klopu sa sobom, skrivenu ispod habita, ali su se bojali pokazati je zbog straha da ce tada oni ostati gladni. Svojim govorom na gori, on im je "otvorio srca - odagnao strah-oslobodio" i posljedica je kosare pune hrane preostale kad su se svi najeli. Ovim tumacenjem ucinak 'cuda' nije promijenjen i sukladniji je tvom pisanju. pozdrav
06.10.2007. (11:10)
-
-
-
- - promjene spremljene- uredi komentar - obriši komentar - prijavi ovaj komentar kao spam - zabrani komentiranje autoru ovog komentara- učitavam...
.
While I was in Portland, Oregon, I went to collect my laundry. I mentioned to the laundryman the alarming figures of Communist advance. He had enough intelligence to be alarmed. He said, "We must do something! We must do something!" He thought for a moment and then said, "We must feed them. No man ever became a Communist on a full stomach."
Under capitalism production must be sold for product to be turned into value. Unsold production must be destroyed to make way for new production. ("If we were foolish enough to run every shoe factory twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, we Would soon have more shoes than the nation could possibly buy, a surplus of shoes that would have to be destroyed, or given away, or sold at prices far below the cost of production. That simple law of supply and demand equally affects the price of all our major crops." - F.D.Roosevelt)
"... But you ask why it is not possible for capitalism to be forced (or persuaded) to redistribute its surplus to the working class, presumably for nothing or for next to nothing. If that were to happen capitalism would be finished, since such philanthropy would lead to a collapse in prices and then profits. That's why capitalism prefers to throw unsold products away rather than give them away. It would rather destroy food than feed the starving millions, even though it has more than enough means to assuage human hunger on a world scale.
Capitalism is only interested in hungry mouths if they are connected to deep pockets - and most of them aren't. It lacks solvent buyers to realise the profit contained in its products. Giving them away free or selling them at prices below their value would not in any away resolve its crises of realisation or overproduction.
This brings us to an aspect of the original problem of overproduction: the working class can't buy back all that it produces because it is only paid the price of its labour power: capitalism 'withholds' - as you put it - the surplus value that workers create.
Capitalism therefore can't redistribute the fruits of workers' labour - as the left and leftists would have us believe. It is increasingly forced to [B]waste[/B] them. The liberation of the productive forces demands capitalism to be overthrown. " (hahaha)
06.10.2007. (12:04)
-
-
-
- - promjene spremljene- uredi komentar - obriši komentar - prijavi ovaj komentar kao spam - zabrani komentiranje autoru ovog komentara- učitavam...
haha2
oho, naziru li se to metodologijske pukotine, ili samo testiramo sofizam? najme,kaj (j.v.:)) ukoliko kvantificiramo razlicite kategorije, cini se pogrjeska, ma kako ona genijalna bila (prijedlog hdzeju: umjesto obvezne srednje skole, uvesti humanistima obvezu regula prirodnih znanosti - nista bez mogucnost dvostrukog potvrdjivanja - rezultiranja- pa niti spekulacije, hipotetske analize ... :)
06.10.2007. (13:35)
-
-
-
- - promjene spremljene- uredi komentar - obriši komentar - prijavi ovaj komentar kao spam - zabrani komentiranje autoru ovog komentara- učitavam...
Red Hot Chili Pepperssssssss
cooooooooool ti je post........i blog naravno...
aj svrati do mene i komaj
06.10.2007. (03:02) - - - - - promjene spremljene- uredi komentar - obriši komentar - prijavi ovaj komentar kao spam - zabrani komentiranje autoru ovog komentara- učitavam...
josip
Nema dvojbe: i ovako 'ad hoc' citano jasno je da imas pravi diskurs, zavidnu razinu promisljanja, dobar analiticki slijed itd, ali to vec i sam znas. Mala zamjerka na pravopis (ako nisu lapsusicalami i jedna opservacija na zadnji dio. Pokojni J. Fucak, prevoditelj biblije i jeruzalemski prof., mi je iznio interpretaciju pomenutog cuda: u to vrijeme vazio je nepiusani zakon da zidov mora ponijeti dva obroka sa sobom (ne lako pokvarive hrane, zamotane u krpu, spremljeno pod habit) uvijek kada ide na put (kao tada za Isusom). Kad je doslo vrijeme objeda, vecina je imala klopu sa sobom, skrivenu ispod habita, ali su se bojali pokazati je zbog straha da ce tada oni ostati gladni. Svojim govorom na gori, on im je "otvorio srca - odagnao strah-oslobodio" i posljedica je kosare pune hrane preostale kad su se svi najeli. Ovim tumacenjem ucinak 'cuda' nije promijenjen i sukladniji je tvom pisanju. pozdrav
06.10.2007. (11:10) - - - - - promjene spremljene- uredi komentar - obriši komentar - prijavi ovaj komentar kao spam - zabrani komentiranje autoru ovog komentara- učitavam...
.
While I was in Portland, Oregon, I went to collect my laundry. I mentioned to the laundryman the alarming figures of Communist advance. He had enough intelligence to be alarmed. He said, "We must do something! We must do something!" He thought for a moment and then said, "We must feed them. No man ever became a Communist on a full stomach."
Under capitalism production must be sold for product to be turned into value. Unsold production must be destroyed to make way for new production. ("If we were foolish enough to run every shoe factory twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, we Would soon have more shoes than the nation could possibly buy, a surplus of shoes that would have to be destroyed, or given away, or sold at prices far below the cost of production. That simple law of supply and demand equally affects the price of all our major crops." - F.D.Roosevelt)
"... But you ask why it is not possible for capitalism to be forced (or persuaded) to redistribute its surplus to the working class, presumably for nothing or for next to nothing. If that were to happen capitalism would be finished, since such philanthropy would lead to a collapse in prices and then profits. That's why capitalism prefers to throw unsold products away rather than give them away. It would rather destroy food than feed the starving millions, even though it has more than enough means to assuage human hunger on a world scale.
Capitalism is only interested in hungry mouths if they are connected to deep pockets - and most of them aren't. It lacks solvent buyers to realise the profit contained in its products. Giving them away free or selling them at prices below their value would not in any away resolve its crises of realisation or overproduction.
This brings us to an aspect of the original problem of overproduction: the working class can't buy back all that it produces because it is only paid the price of its labour power: capitalism 'withholds' - as you put it - the surplus value that workers create.
Capitalism therefore can't redistribute the fruits of workers' labour - as the left and leftists would have us believe. It is increasingly forced to [B]waste[/B] them. The liberation of the productive forces demands capitalism to be overthrown. " (hahaha)
06.10.2007. (12:04) - - - - - promjene spremljene- uredi komentar - obriši komentar - prijavi ovaj komentar kao spam - zabrani komentiranje autoru ovog komentara- učitavam...
haha2
oho, naziru li se to metodologijske pukotine, ili samo testiramo sofizam? najme,kaj (j.v.:)) ukoliko kvantificiramo razlicite kategorije, cini se pogrjeska, ma kako ona genijalna bila (prijedlog hdzeju: umjesto obvezne srednje skole, uvesti humanistima obvezu regula prirodnih znanosti - nista bez mogucnost dvostrukog potvrdjivanja - rezultiranja- pa niti spekulacije, hipotetske analize ... :)
06.10.2007. (13:35) - - - - - promjene spremljene- uredi komentar - obriši komentar - prijavi ovaj komentar kao spam - zabrani komentiranje autoru ovog komentara- učitavam...
pooka
hahaha, konacno netko :) vrijedan novog posta :))))))
07.10.2007. (13:10) - - - - - promjene spremljene- uredi komentar - obriši komentar - prijavi ovaj komentar kao spam - zabrani komentiranje autoru ovog komentara- učitavam...