TechGoblin
@techgoblin.bsky.social
I'm a web developer but I make Godot games on the side.
I hope to one day create a cooperative game studio/tech company.
Follow me if you're interested in Godot and how to make the world a better place.
I hope to one day create a cooperative game studio/tech company.
Follow me if you're interested in Godot and how to make the world a better place.
The end of this article was super interesting! It reminds me of @moneyontheleft.bsky.social's article about democratic public finance.
It's been interesting seeing the layers of the global economy peel back to show how it has always been intertwined with politics
moneyontheleft.org/2025/10/10/d...
It's been interesting seeing the layers of the global economy peel back to show how it has always been intertwined with politics
moneyontheleft.org/2025/10/10/d...
Democratic Public Finance: A Radical Vision for Mamdani’s New York City
Summary This document elaborates an emerging economic paradigm that is already latent in Zohran Mamdani’s plans and practices. The paradigm, which we call Democratic Public Finance (DPF), reframes …
moneyontheleft.org
November 10, 2025 at 8:43 PM
The end of this article was super interesting! It reminds me of @moneyontheleft.bsky.social's article about democratic public finance.
It's been interesting seeing the layers of the global economy peel back to show how it has always been intertwined with politics
moneyontheleft.org/2025/10/10/d...
It's been interesting seeing the layers of the global economy peel back to show how it has always been intertwined with politics
moneyontheleft.org/2025/10/10/d...
Deciding if something is a want or a need is another can of worms though.
November 10, 2025 at 7:35 PM
Deciding if something is a want or a need is another can of worms though.
Yeah it's this kind of stuff that's so tough because labor hours are highly variable based on the work performed, whether the thing produced by the work is in high demand, and how needed the thing is
One of the main issues with capitalism is treating desires the same as needs in terms of valuation.
One of the main issues with capitalism is treating desires the same as needs in terms of valuation.
November 10, 2025 at 7:32 PM
Yeah it's this kind of stuff that's so tough because labor hours are highly variable based on the work performed, whether the thing produced by the work is in high demand, and how needed the thing is
One of the main issues with capitalism is treating desires the same as needs in terms of valuation.
One of the main issues with capitalism is treating desires the same as needs in terms of valuation.
Thanks for sharing, I'll be reading some more.
Maybe I'm more of a Marxist than I previously thought.
Maybe I'm more of a Marxist than I previously thought.
November 10, 2025 at 7:28 PM
Thanks for sharing, I'll be reading some more.
Maybe I'm more of a Marxist than I previously thought.
Maybe I'm more of a Marxist than I previously thought.
From what I understand people have gotten close to a solution for this with cybernetics.
It's pretty interesting stuff but it gets into the weeds of unpredictability of the economy and the difficulty/impossibility? of controlling them centrally.
It's pretty interesting stuff but it gets into the weeds of unpredictability of the economy and the difficulty/impossibility? of controlling them centrally.
November 10, 2025 at 7:26 PM
From what I understand people have gotten close to a solution for this with cybernetics.
It's pretty interesting stuff but it gets into the weeds of unpredictability of the economy and the difficulty/impossibility? of controlling them centrally.
It's pretty interesting stuff but it gets into the weeds of unpredictability of the economy and the difficulty/impossibility? of controlling them centrally.
Central planning shouldn't be built upon the idea of objective economic values for that reason.
November 10, 2025 at 7:26 PM
Central planning shouldn't be built upon the idea of objective economic values for that reason.
I'm talking about economic value which isn't necessarily price but if someone values something more than the currency that it costs then they will be willing to buy it.
The value to price/cost ratio for the consumer is subjective and varies greatly depending on the product, consumer, and situation.
The value to price/cost ratio for the consumer is subjective and varies greatly depending on the product, consumer, and situation.
November 10, 2025 at 7:26 PM
I'm talking about economic value which isn't necessarily price but if someone values something more than the currency that it costs then they will be willing to buy it.
The value to price/cost ratio for the consumer is subjective and varies greatly depending on the product, consumer, and situation.
The value to price/cost ratio for the consumer is subjective and varies greatly depending on the product, consumer, and situation.
I always try to learn as much as I can but saying that I can't have an opinion if I don't know everything about a topic is nonsense.
November 10, 2025 at 7:12 PM
I always try to learn as much as I can but saying that I can't have an opinion if I don't know everything about a topic is nonsense.
Despite that many Marxist economics rely on the objective labor theory of value and entire centralized planning systems have been developed based on it.
Building on top of something that isn't true is not a good idea which was my point.
I agree with Marx on many other things from what I've read.
Building on top of something that isn't true is not a good idea which was my point.
I agree with Marx on many other things from what I've read.
November 10, 2025 at 7:12 PM
Despite that many Marxist economics rely on the objective labor theory of value and entire centralized planning systems have been developed based on it.
Building on top of something that isn't true is not a good idea which was my point.
I agree with Marx on many other things from what I've read.
Building on top of something that isn't true is not a good idea which was my point.
I agree with Marx on many other things from what I've read.
I admit I haven't read everything Marx has ever written and maybe I should but saying I know nothing about the subject isn't accurate.
Marx utilized Adam Smith's labor theory value against him and rightly so but the whole theory has been shown to be inaccurate because no economic value is objective
Marx utilized Adam Smith's labor theory value against him and rightly so but the whole theory has been shown to be inaccurate because no economic value is objective
November 10, 2025 at 7:12 PM
I admit I haven't read everything Marx has ever written and maybe I should but saying I know nothing about the subject isn't accurate.
Marx utilized Adam Smith's labor theory value against him and rightly so but the whole theory has been shown to be inaccurate because no economic value is objective
Marx utilized Adam Smith's labor theory value against him and rightly so but the whole theory has been shown to be inaccurate because no economic value is objective
Also I was wrong, I agree with Marx that labor is always necessary for production but the value of labor does dwindle with further automation which Marx also acknowledges.
November 10, 2025 at 6:01 PM
Also I was wrong, I agree with Marx that labor is always necessary for production but the value of labor does dwindle with further automation which Marx also acknowledges.
I could've worded my disagreement better.
I disagree with his economic calculation, that economic value is objective (can be calculated concretely with a formula rather than being subjective/a matter of preference).
I disagree with his economic calculation, that economic value is objective (can be calculated concretely with a formula rather than being subjective/a matter of preference).
November 10, 2025 at 6:01 PM
I could've worded my disagreement better.
I disagree with his economic calculation, that economic value is objective (can be calculated concretely with a formula rather than being subjective/a matter of preference).
I disagree with his economic calculation, that economic value is objective (can be calculated concretely with a formula rather than being subjective/a matter of preference).
That's true, Marx himself never advocated for it. The closest he got to it was advocating for a "dictatorship of the proletariat."
I always took that to mean that society should be run by the workers though rather than advocating for a democratic centralism or a vanguard party.
I always took that to mean that society should be run by the workers though rather than advocating for a democratic centralism or a vanguard party.
November 10, 2025 at 5:15 PM
That's true, Marx himself never advocated for it. The closest he got to it was advocating for a "dictatorship of the proletariat."
I always took that to mean that society should be run by the workers though rather than advocating for a democratic centralism or a vanguard party.
I always took that to mean that society should be run by the workers though rather than advocating for a democratic centralism or a vanguard party.
In terms of workers being entitled to the fruits of their labor and having a hand in managing production to reduce alienation, because none of it would be possible without them, I fully agree with Marx on that.
November 10, 2025 at 5:09 PM
In terms of workers being entitled to the fruits of their labor and having a hand in managing production to reduce alienation, because none of it would be possible without them, I fully agree with Marx on that.
Yes on that I mostly agree with him but there are other inputs that create value and value is subjective so it cannot be calculated in precise terms from inputs the way he proposed.
The objective theory of value actually came from Adam Smith and was the dominant idea at the time.
The objective theory of value actually came from Adam Smith and was the dominant idea at the time.
November 10, 2025 at 5:09 PM
Yes on that I mostly agree with him but there are other inputs that create value and value is subjective so it cannot be calculated in precise terms from inputs the way he proposed.
The objective theory of value actually came from Adam Smith and was the dominant idea at the time.
The objective theory of value actually came from Adam Smith and was the dominant idea at the time.
Plus historical materialism is a very useful tool and we'd be lost without it, same with a lot of other things Marx came up with.
November 10, 2025 at 5:04 PM
Plus historical materialism is a very useful tool and we'd be lost without it, same with a lot of other things Marx came up with.
I think the libertarian socialist/anarchist ideas of no hierarchy without accountability and complex systems analysis applied to social structures are good for Marxists to learn about for that reason.
I think it's good to look at all the socialist traditions without being too dogmatic.
I think it's good to look at all the socialist traditions without being too dogmatic.
November 10, 2025 at 4:56 PM
I think the libertarian socialist/anarchist ideas of no hierarchy without accountability and complex systems analysis applied to social structures are good for Marxists to learn about for that reason.
I think it's good to look at all the socialist traditions without being too dogmatic.
I think it's good to look at all the socialist traditions without being too dogmatic.
2: Democratic centralism tending towards unity of thought because that isn't democratic at all and not holding leaders accountable to bad ideas is foolish.
Democracy and decentralization aren't perfect but I tend towards them because once power is centralized it is rarely given up.
Democracy and decentralization aren't perfect but I tend towards them because once power is centralized it is rarely given up.
November 10, 2025 at 4:56 PM
2: Democratic centralism tending towards unity of thought because that isn't democratic at all and not holding leaders accountable to bad ideas is foolish.
Democracy and decentralization aren't perfect but I tend towards them because once power is centralized it is rarely given up.
Democracy and decentralization aren't perfect but I tend towards them because once power is centralized it is rarely given up.
Basically I agree in principle with Marx on the labor theory of value but disagree on the specific economic calculation.
Post Keynesian economics is much less dogmatic on that front but still has Marxist roots and provides a more accurate view of the political economy in my opinion.
Post Keynesian economics is much less dogmatic on that front but still has Marxist roots and provides a more accurate view of the political economy in my opinion.
November 10, 2025 at 4:56 PM
Basically I agree in principle with Marx on the labor theory of value but disagree on the specific economic calculation.
Post Keynesian economics is much less dogmatic on that front but still has Marxist roots and provides a more accurate view of the political economy in my opinion.
Post Keynesian economics is much less dogmatic on that front but still has Marxist roots and provides a more accurate view of the political economy in my opinion.
I know you didn't ask but I disagree with a few things in Marxism but there's a lot to learn from it.
I have two main disagreements.
1: Objective economic value from the labor theory of value because despite labor being the most necessary input, they aren't the only input that creates value.
I have two main disagreements.
1: Objective economic value from the labor theory of value because despite labor being the most necessary input, they aren't the only input that creates value.
November 10, 2025 at 4:56 PM
I know you didn't ask but I disagree with a few things in Marxism but there's a lot to learn from it.
I have two main disagreements.
1: Objective economic value from the labor theory of value because despite labor being the most necessary input, they aren't the only input that creates value.
I have two main disagreements.
1: Objective economic value from the labor theory of value because despite labor being the most necessary input, they aren't the only input that creates value.
Leaders/natural aristocrats are good because they have knowledge and experience to lead others but oligarchy is not, a system by and for natural aristocrats will inevitably give way to artificial aristocracy/oligarchy and eventually fascism or a return to feudalism.
November 9, 2025 at 12:59 AM
Leaders/natural aristocrats are good because they have knowledge and experience to lead others but oligarchy is not, a system by and for natural aristocrats will inevitably give way to artificial aristocracy/oligarchy and eventually fascism or a return to feudalism.
That is why the founding fathers that address these concerns systemically like Thomas Paine are worth reading.
Systems that address wealth inequality and the downfalls of capitalism while maintaining rights and democracy like democratic socialism are a natural progression of American ideals.
Systems that address wealth inequality and the downfalls of capitalism while maintaining rights and democracy like democratic socialism are a natural progression of American ideals.
November 9, 2025 at 12:59 AM
That is why the founding fathers that address these concerns systemically like Thomas Paine are worth reading.
Systems that address wealth inequality and the downfalls of capitalism while maintaining rights and democracy like democratic socialism are a natural progression of American ideals.
Systems that address wealth inequality and the downfalls of capitalism while maintaining rights and democracy like democratic socialism are a natural progression of American ideals.
The issue is that capitalists of his time like Adam Smith and himself were too idealistic and didn't foresee that the wealth created by these aristocrats is corrupting and would lead to an eroding of civil society and democracy in favor of systems that benefit the aristocracy more given enough time.
November 9, 2025 at 12:59 AM
The issue is that capitalists of his time like Adam Smith and himself were too idealistic and didn't foresee that the wealth created by these aristocrats is corrupting and would lead to an eroding of civil society and democracy in favor of systems that benefit the aristocracy more given enough time.