>
>
>CB: Thanks Justin, I agree we should approach this topic now as a
>discussion , not debate.
>
pay
>a sort of assets sex, . . .
>
>(CB: I take it you mean "tax". )
>
>
A genuine Freudian slip!
>>
>In this model: productive assets are publically owned, except for income
>stream flowing from their use, which goes to the workers, There are no
>capitalists. Investment is planned, and does not depend on the animal
>spirits of the coupon-clipping class, there si no rentier class.
>Enterprises
>are democratically managed; bosses are elected and accountable. Workers are
>not employees but cooperators, they receive profit shares, not wages. But
>the firms compete in a market, trying to make profits and vying for market
>share.
>
>Anyway, that is one way to imagine markets without private property.
>
>jks
>
>^^^^^^^^
>
>CB: Again thanks. If this is "market socialism" , then I would choose to
>support it in real life , and not quibble over my own thought that it is
>not " the market" in any sense that is "the market" that communists oppose.
>I would think you would be open to a complete system of social welfare
>benefits and rapid reemployment for those unemployed by bankruptcies
Absolutely.
jks
>
>
_________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com