Knee-jerk liberalism. I was talking about the cars from a given factory.
> > But what about as an investor? When should
> >financing be pulled from a car factory that produces lemons? What's
> >the threshold and who decides?
>
> When you judge it to be unprofitable I suppose. If its still
> profitable to make lemons, then you'll keep doing it.
>
> That's the problem for those who confuse markets with democracy,
> there's an irreconcilable conflict of interest between profit value
> and use value. You can't have it both ways.
No, I'm talking about when the use-value of the cars produced ina socialist factory go down - what do you do?
> >As a saver who voted (wither with
> >wallet or ballot) to support a car factory, how do you remove your
> >support if things are not done properly?
>
> A "saver"? You mean a capitalist? People don't invest their money in
> a factory to "save", they can save money into a bank account with no
> risk. People invest in car factories to make a profit, that is in the
> hope of qualifying for a share of the unearned wealth created by
> selling lemons and ripping off the workers who make them.
>
> When I hear such people being referred to as "savers" it rings a
> bullshit-alarm in my head. Why don't we just call a spade a spade.
This is just untrue and confused. People who save their money in banks (which accounts certainly do have risk) are lending their money to car factories, home builders, home buyers, etc., by proxy.
If it's true that "people invest in car factories to make a profit," why do socialists invest in car factories?
There is no question that a socialist society has savings and there is no question that they invest those savings.
Clearly people who believe in socialism have to give this fact a little more thought.
boddi