Dear Poirot,

Yes. Owen advocated a reduction in the working day to twelve hours, the prohibition of child labour (under ten years) and elementary education of the masses. It is interesting that he has a textile producer.

In India, Ram Mohan Roy is something of an unsung hero with regards establishing schools.

With regards education, at the other end of the nineteenth century, we have Dewey and the progressive movement prevailing well into the twentieth century (e.g., Dalton System). (sorry, off topic)

Correction of above:

"A 'Limited' company becomes an artificial whipping boy, so the capitalist will NOT assume FULL risk and WILL avoid liquidation.

Poirot “…the Industrial Revolution in Britain…."

That was then and this is now and lets face it the tyranny of USSR and associated collectivist models of common poverty, is far fresher and in living memory

You know Poirot

Where the collectivist government, modeled on Marx theories, used murder, starvation and intimidation to ensure

The inequality of the “haves” versus the “have-nots”

Was superseded with what the retarded consider the far fairer system of

The “have-nots” and the “have-nots”

Actually, Oliver

Reference to “limited” in the context of a company refers to the limiting of liability to the subscribed value of “share” the liability of the investors, from whom the entrepreneur would raise capital to fund his venture.

In this arrangement, the entrepreneur would be more capable of financing his venture to the alternative, unlimited liability (the sort which the “names” at Lloyds insurance and the members of a partnership or sole trader have).

The liability of the entreprenuer may well be broader than the investor, especially if any fraud or criminal misconduct is involved

And the term “share” originally refered to the investors’ “share” of the profits of the venture, as it still does today.

I have already explained to Foxy, previously on this thread that such financing arrangements started around the 13th century (Société des Moulins du Bazacle ) but really got off the ground in 1602 with the Dutch East India company and about the same time the English East India Company and the principle, of limited liability has been used effectively ever since, not to avoid capitalist liability but to protect the investor from any excesses by the capitalist and this has been adopted by many civilized nations since.

Although, some less civilized pretend such arrangement are detrimental and insist on stupid state ownership and other ineffectual collectivist institutions.

"... limiting of liability to the subscribed value of 'share' the liability of the investors, from whom the entrepreneur would raise capital to fund his venture."

- Stern

I accept this definition. Nonetheless, I recall, once, for legal reasons, having to pull a Dunn & Bradstreet on a pretty impressive "appearing" car detailer. The company had a paid-up capital of $12 amd a net worth of $10,000, while profiting from transactions in the millions of dollars per annum. Leased premises, floor plan. It folded.

I feel that Marx would not have seen USSR and Communist China fitting the mould of his noneteenth century political economy based on stages of progression (Hegel). In fact, the Russia refer to the Chinese as "margarine Marxists", withiut seeing that they themselves were not exactly butter.

Failing Marxian theory on the basis of the atrocrities of "margarine" Communism would seem to be argumentum ad misericordiam. Instead, Marxiam failed because its predictions were wrong; whereas, so called communist states failed, because of their dictatorships, their disregard for their people and the counter-balance of the West. Neither worked, but for different reasons.

Stern,

When Elizabeth I and other rulers created monopolies this was under the flag of Merchantilism which extended as you say from c. 1602 until at least the Gunboad Diplomacy of the Opium Wars in China. Albeit, capitalism was starting make headway a century beforehand.

Mertantilism tended to be more protectionist than is market capitalism.

I wholeheartedly support Marxism http://www.spurgeonworld.com/blog/images/groucho.jpg

AND........

Leninism http://gryphonscry.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/john_lennon.jpg

LONG LIVE THE REVOLUTION!