[Leninist]

The whole notion of value is subjective.

That's fair. I should have said they have little value for society as a whole, in the context of being useful.

Not really. High unemployment is bad for an economy as it is under-utilizing skills that could be used to increase efficiency, therefore the economy is producing within its PPF. I've never heard a mainstream economist say the contrary. Same with lack of healthcare, lost production due to sick workers costs an economy billions. Corporations don't have magic power to get rid of these problems, they're providing a good or service and that's all.

Actually from an employer's standpoint you want a surplus of workers because you can get away with paying them less. I don't care what mainstream economists say. They're the ones who we've been listening to to try and fix the economy and all that's happened is we created another bubble. As for healthcare, if the corporations get replaced by single payer they will lose cash. And corporations do have magic powers, its called capital, and they can do just about anything with it if they wanted to.

[BATIK]

Actually from an employer's standpoint you want a surplus of workers because you can get away with paying them less.

No corporation *wants* high unemployment. Ultimately, the condition of an economy determines employment levels. Corporations don't sit discussing how to wreck the economy to increase surplus labor. And wages are not pegged down by corporations in such a malicious way -- you have to ask why, structurally, wages are stagnant. Again, it's the condition of an economy that determines this, not a group of monocle-swirling capitalists.

I don't care what mainstream economists say.

I meant, like, economics 101. I've never seen an economist describe how high unemployment is good for business and, by extension, the economy. Any economics textbook will describe the detrimental effect. You pinpoint the opposition to single-payer as an example of how corporations are supportive of keeping the idea of healthcare for everyone at bay -- well, that's not something inherent of capitalism, but rather a clash between ideological factions within a liberal democracy. I agree that we should import the European model for healthcare -- the fact that it hasn't happened yet is not solely due to corporations -- public opinion is divided on this issue, and party platforms are modeled, in liberal democracies, on public opinion. Public opinion seems to be shifting, and I believe universal care will be introduced within a few years, especially if the Dems rack up some consecutive campaigns in the years to come, forcing the GOP to change their platform, and allowing the left-faction of the Democrat Party to capitalize.

[Leninist]

No corporation *wants* high unemployment. Ultimately, the condition of an economy determines employment levels. Corporations don't sit discussing how to wreck the economy to increase surplus labor. And wages are not pegged down by corporations in such a malicious way -- you have to ask why, structurally, wages are stagnant. Again, it's the condition of an economy that determines this, not a group of monocle-swirling capitalists.

Love the imagery. But the fact is that the economy, even without government intervention, is never really "free" or independent. Corporations and wealthy individuals are always in a position to alter the economy, as they are the pillars upon which it is built in the capitalist system. The thing is that the corporations don't need to sit around discussing how to destroy the economy, the simple fact that they must, legally MUST, pursue a profit first and all other thing second means that in a situation where the company is taking hits, one of the first things to go are low level wages. This in turn, if enough corporations have been negatively effected, will lead to further problems as the general populations' purchasing power will begin to decline, causing problems for MORE corporations and the cycle continues. I don't know if most of the people who made money off the recent recession organized together or not, but the fact is that in capitalism, they don't have to. If it is profitable for a corporation to pursue something, no matter the long term effects, some will. And as they make a profit other corporations will give into the profit incentive and join them in that pursuit. This is how bubbles are created. Then the long term effects start to happen and you've got an economic crash.

I meant, like, economics 101. I've never seen an economist describe how high unemployment is good for business and, by extension, the economy. Any economics textbook will describe the detrimental effect. You pinpoint the opposition to single-payer as an example of how corporations are supportive of keeping the idea of healthcare for everyone at bay -- well, that's not something inherent of capitalism, but rather a clash between ideological factions within a liberal democracy. I agree that we should import the European model for healthcare -- the fact that it hasn't happened yet is not solely due to corporations -- public opinion is divided on this issue, and party platforms are modeled, in liberal democracies, on public opinion. Public opinion seems to be shifting, and I believe universal care will be introduced within a few years, especially if the Dems rack up some consecutive campaigns in the years to come, forcing the GOP to change their platform, and allowing the left-faction of the Democrat Party to capitalize.

Well of course most economists don't say that unemployment is a good thing. What would the public think if the capitalists just came out and said, "sorry, but the fact of the matter is a lot of your lives just have to be crappy so that a few people can be very rich"? As to your statement about the "ideological divisions in a liberal democracy", who do you think funds those divisions? The Tea party, one of the most vocal anti-healthcare reform groups, is funded primarily by corporations. The same is true about both the democrat and republican parties. The current Obamacare plan is literally designed to make sure everyone has to pay insurance companies. They are getting more out of it than the average person. The dems will not move to a single payer system because some of their biggest backers cash-wise are insurance corporations. At the end of the day, liberal democracy is not actually accountable to the people, but rather money, and whoever has the most of it.