march for the alternative, anti-cuts protest

[Seth]

You assume that the productive class is the class that OWNS things

Yes, that's a valid presumption. The productive class actually...well...PRODUCES things, and those things belong to them.

Take the British Royal Family, for instance. They produce?.....

They aren't part of the productive class, they are part of the dependent class.

[Seth]

You assume that the productive class is the class that OWNS things

Yes, that's a valid presumption. The productive class actually...well...PRODUCES things, and those things belong to them.

The dependent class produces nothing, it just consumes.

you assume that managers,ceos , bankers, stock brokers and futures traders, tax consultants etc PRODUCE rather than parasitize .

Yes, that's a valid presumption. They fill a free market demand for services, and therefore they are producing wealth. Without bankers, stock brokers, future traders

Ah, yes - ENRON springs to mind....

This is known as the "biased sample" fallacy. Try again.

[Seth]

Yup. And that's both reasonable and prudent, given the fact that food production is a strategic military resource

So you accept that your 'business' survives by taking money of taxpayers, there isnt anything wrong with that its only hypocracy when you start going on about the evils of socialism and government. There is no difference between that and being a postman, a teacher or a soldier all public employees most of whom do a good job

No, I accept that certain resources are strategic ones that all nations must protect against expropriation or interference with by other, hostile nations to some degree, in order to allow the free markets to function and the people of the nation to survive. Such strategic considerations only come into play when control of the resource is vested in potentially hostile nations, or damage, destruction or shortages of the resource threaten basic survival or economic stability. Outside of those conditions of necessity, free markets are the best surety for a stable and vibrant economy.

This strategic resource concept has nothing to do with interference in the markets intended to pick domestic winners and losers in the markets or to achieve social engineering goals, which are the typical goals of Progressive interference.

[MrJonno]

The only thing strategic about supporting farmers these days is buying votes and wealth distribution (poor to rich). The West has stupid amounts and in the unlikely event there was a shortage due to war there is something known as rationing.

As for picking winner and losers the only one losers when it comes to farming is the tax payer

[JimC]

The only thing strategic about supporting farmers these days is buying votes and wealth distribution (poor to rich). The West has stupid amounts and in the unlikely event there was a shortage due to war there is something known as rationing.

As for picking winner and losers the only one losers when it comes to farming is the tax payer

It is probably a little risky to generalise. The economic situation of farmers in a variety of developed countries, and even within the different types of farming within a given country, will vary enormously.

[egbert]

You assume that the productive class is the class that OWNS things

Yes, that's a valid presumption. The productive class actually...well...PRODUCES things, and those things belong to them.

Take the British Royal Family, for instance. They produce?.....

They aren't part of the productive class, they are part of the dependent class.

This is known as the "biased sample" fallacy. Try again.

[MrJonno]

It is probably a little risky to generalise. The economic situation of farmers in a variety of developed countries, and even within the different types of farming within a given country, will vary enormously.

Nowhere in the first world are there too many farmers, in fact nowhere in the 3rd world either. They have too many inefficient farmers combined with poor infrastructure, war and weather