- 4,819
- 691
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2004
interesting read
Economist predict the end of Capitalism and the Fall of America...
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by hueyp in louiev,
- Start date
- 2,829
- 12
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2008
*Looks at avy.
al audi
Banned
- 29,810
- 4,562
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2009
posting to read later.
- 1,425
- 12
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2007
I have read a lot from Marx, some from the other two. Remember that Marx understood how important a price system was for the well being of society. He disliked private ownership and profits but you need some degree of private property for prices to even matter and profits and losses or some other incentives to make people respond to the information contained in a price system. Without private property and incentives for economizing on resources, the price system is not able to function and without functioning price system, that economy will fail because even if people are committed to work hard and try to serve the state run economy (either out of patriotism or fear of punishment), without prices there will be massive inefficiencies.
The fact that Soviet producers consistently made too much of some things and too little of others is a major reason why the USSR had such a low standard of living despite churning out a fairly large GDP per capita. It also had to use a lot more material and capital to make something because the bureaucrats who ran the factories would be compensated for the size of the operation and not for it efficiency. In a profit and loss capitalist system, owners generally do not want to have valuable machinery sitting and rusting outdoors or having to use twice as much electricity, steel or cement to make the same amount of output as other factories. While there are bad social outcomes that comes from a profit and lose system, they can be nullified or at least cushioned through social services for low paid or displaced worker.
In the Rawlsian way of thinking, I would still design my society as a Capitalist one for three reasons. One is that workers in communist societies were treated just as poorly as a worker in capitalist society and in many cases, they were treated much worse. My second reason is that under a Capitalist system, ordinary people even poor people have goods that are almost non existent in countries that are hostile to markets. By the 1980's things like blue jeans, refrigerators and televisions were available to most working class people the Capitalist countries but were luxuries in the USSR, the wealthiest communist country in history. My third reason is that because of the wealth created in capitalist economies, there is enough wealth to fund various social insurance and social services.
your right in your analysis of Marx, but you must also understand comparing Marxist communism to any communism besides Che Guerrar's(?) isn't fair. All the other communisims in the world came out of dictatorships, yet Marx' is a natural evolution out of a capitalistic society. We are the only society in the world that can move towards Marxism and it work like Marx predicted it would work, and so far all of his "predictions" have come true in a sense.
- 1,153
- 123
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2004
right on, right on, right on. hope and change for everyone.Originally Posted by HOVKid
Obama will fix this
Oh, my bad....he actually takes money from these horrible Wall Street execs when fundraising........
Obama will SAY he'll fix this and win a prize for fixing it before he does.
- 2,406
- 10
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2007
I have read a lot from Marx, some from the other two. Remember that Marx understood how important a price system was for the well being of society. He disliked private ownership and profits but you need some degree of private property for prices to even matter and profits and losses or some other incentives to make people respond to the information contained in a price system. Without private property and incentives for economizing on resources, the price system is not able to function and without functioning price system, that economy will fail because even if people are committed to work hard and try to serve the state run economy (either out of patriotism or fear of punishment), without prices there will be massive inefficiencies.
The fact that Soviet producers consistently made too much of some things and too little of others is a major reason why the USSR had such a low standard of living despite churning out a fairly large GDP per capita. It also had to use a lot more material and capital to make something because the bureaucrats who ran the factories would be compensated for the size of the operation and not for it efficiency. In a profit and loss capitalist system, owners generally do not want to have valuable machinery sitting and rusting outdoors or having to use twice as much electricity, steel or cement to make the same amount of output as other factories. While there are bad social outcomes that comes from a profit and lose system, they can be nullified or at least cushioned through social services for low paid or displaced worker.
In the Rawlsian way of thinking, I would still design my society as a Capitalist one for three reasons. One is that workers in communist societies were treated just as poorly as a worker in capitalist society and in many cases, they were treated much worse. My second reason is that under a Capitalist system, ordinary people even poor people have goods that are almost non existent in countries that are hostile to markets. By the 1980's things like blue jeans, refrigerators and televisions were available to most working class people the Capitalist countries but were luxuries in the USSR, the wealthiest communist country in history. My third reason is that because of the wealth created in capitalist economies, there is enough wealth to fund various social insurance and social services.
But see the only examples of "Communism" we have experienced have been those that were forced, like the USSR. They had none of the preconditions forwhat was explained by Marx as the revolution, meaning, they were not an advanced Capitalist society with a large proletariat and a strong industrialfoundation. This led to Lenin coming in and fundamentally changing everything about Marx's ideas about Communism. The more he said he was a strict Marxistthe more he strayed away from the base of the ideology. Martov seemingly had the right idea. He stated that the structure of Lenin's idea of the partywould basically turn into a dictatorship, and there should be no party, just the proletariat like Marx described, and in retrospect that is exactly whathappened. The ruling council of the Bolsheviks turned into a dictatorship. Then, you have Stalin come in and force the economy into industrialization, howeverthere was still the dictatorship. It was not a dictatorship of the proletariat in the Marxist sense, but a dictatorship OVER the proletariat.
In essence, we haven't seen a true execution of Marxist principles. It is possible that with this collapse could come the collective mass of peoplerealizing that they are being swindled by the top 5% of the country who hold most of the wealth and we may finally see this happen. However it will need tohappen with a drastic change in ideology as well because it will basically be:
[h1][/h1]
- 21,365
- 812
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2003
Originally Posted by retr0sxual
*Looks at avy.
- 11,513
- 51
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2007
[Hank Hill]Heh, America...[/Hank Hill]
- 12,264
- 51
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2007
Revolution in America? I'll believe it when I see it.
- 9,530
- 91
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2003
- 2,406
- 10
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2007
Apathy is only temporary.
- 382
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2006
Not dismissing what some of ya'll have said but after all is said and done they are just predictions. I mean when 9/11 happened many people were cryingNostradamus and Bible and seeing Demons in the smoke. Seriously? People say many things and if something happens to come true it may appear to be a clairvoyantstatement but it is just a prediction.
America is in trouble but does that mean forever, I don't believe so. In addition, do you really think that there are "super powers" in aglobalized society. I mean as globalization increases the reliance of nations on each other does as well so if one collapses it will affect others.
China this, China that - - China has their own problems, i.e. growing population, putting food in each mouth, poverty just to name a few I doubt they cansustain their population and continue to grow.
My speculation: The West has been running it for a very long time now, Greek, Roman, British Empires so I don't know if they will just willy-nilly give uppower.
America is in trouble but does that mean forever, I don't believe so. In addition, do you really think that there are "super powers" in aglobalized society. I mean as globalization increases the reliance of nations on each other does as well so if one collapses it will affect others.
China this, China that - - China has their own problems, i.e. growing population, putting food in each mouth, poverty just to name a few I doubt they cansustain their population and continue to grow.
My speculation: The West has been running it for a very long time now, Greek, Roman, British Empires so I don't know if they will just willy-nilly give uppower.
- 12,264
- 51
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2007
In America? Naw. Apathy is in our culture.
- 2,406
- 10
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2007
Apathy is a part of this generations culture. It will take something quite serious to snap us out of it, but I think when 20% of the population is jobless andhomelessness is on the rise while the top 1%-5% control an overwhelming amount of the wealth it may be just enough to do it.
We're in this state because we think we have everything we need. We have homes, televisions, cars, and luxury, however as these things become harder andharder to attain people will become restless.
general johnson
Banned
- 4,570
- 13
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2009
Anyone watching?
I'm on part 5 right now. Very interesting to say the least. Thoughts?
Any of you NT economist wanna give it a review and break it on down for us slow folks.
I'm on part 5 right now. Very interesting to say the least. Thoughts?
Any of you NT economist wanna give it a review and break it on down for us slow folks.
- 87,847
- 50,351
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
We just need to do what we did when monopolists like Rockefeller and Carnegie were taking over. Sad thing is times might have to be as bad as they were thennow for people to start putting the right ppl in Congress and the White House.
- 2,406
- 10
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2007
- 408
- 12
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2007
I'm sorry but I can't do anything but laugh at almost everything in this post besides certain things Rex said. Its clear who understands notfundamentals of economics, but fundamentals of basic evolution and human existence.
I don't even know where to start with this and if even should, I guess I'm just doing to let people who can't form their own outlooks on thesethings an alternative and more realistic viewpoint.
1. THIS HAS ALL BEEN SAID BEFORE! HELLO, SOME OF YOU PEOPLE ARE ACTING LIKE THE SAME THINGS WEREN'T SAID DURING THE GREAT DEPRESSION AND OTHERS BEFORE IT.There was a tulip bulb bubble in the Nederlands in the 1600s, people then said that capitalism is over, yet somehow people still need to live and still spendmoney on things they need and want, boom, the economy is back up and running again.
Capitalism is simply freedom. Its the freedom anyone has to create a product from their point of view. I don't like a movie, I can make my own if I want. Idon't like any shoes out there, I make my own. No one is saying its easy to do, but its possible. No one is going to stop you. Corporate giants look outfor their interests but are still really too big to maneuver to block you. Capitalism=finding solutions to real problems, anything else=finding solutions toself created problems, meaning anything else can't work.
Now, socialism to capitalism is apples and oranges. Since socialism is big government, there are more roadblocks b/c of regulations to bring your vision tomarket, but in the day and age of massive populations and peoples need to retain power, socialism is needed to prevent useless revolutions that just disruptthe flow of capital. However, socialism needs capitalism to bankroll it. China can never have communism or full blown capitalism, b/c with such a largepopulation, the spirit of revolution is a dangerous thing, so full blown, unregulated capitalism can't function, but capitalism is nevertheless needed topay to keep the masses sedated. Socialism is really a counter-revolution, just a devolution really. Insurance so that the population can be sedated.
2. The world right now is SO underdeveloped that in reality there is still so much money to be made, and so much human talent and so many natural resources toexploit. How could we have possibly reached any sort of bubble right now.
3. The whole energy will skyrocket is really a moot point because fossil fuels are finally being seen as primitive and energy will be decentralized. Thissounds really metaphysical and I don't dig all that religion/folklore w/e but what have always been the 4 basic elements of life as perceived by people forthousands of years?
Wind = wind power
water = hydroelectric
earth = geothermal
fire = solar and finally to trump all forms of energy, fusion, like on the surface of the sun.
Everything we need is right here on this earth. Each and every person can have their own solar, geothermal, and wind energy systems, in their own home orperhaps in a urban environment, a semi-decentralized grid where stations (not gas but stations collecting solar/wind/geothermal/hydro energy) feed whatsimmediately near them.
Vertical farming is starting to materialize....solutions for hunger...
I mean its just so much to talk about and so much optimism that the crash of any system or economy WILL NEVER HAPPEN.
I don't think obama will do much interesting with anything other than promoting green energy...the insurance co's have him in their back pocket so ifreal health care reform will happen, he lied about it being in the first 4 years, maybe in the last 8 and thats a huge maybe.
Honda already has hydrogen powered cars being leased out in Cali to celebs....240 range, 0 emissions....of course they cost 300,000 but are being subsidized to600/mo. Obama tried to cut hydrogen funding out of what seems to be pure spite for the previous administration since it was a bush administration pet project,but hydrogen is back on track along with electric which was obamas preference.
Like I said, there's just too much optimism in the air for anything to collapse....
Also, anyone bringing religion into this please do a system restore on your brain and try to boot again, and keep doing it until you abandon your sillysuperstitions. Jesus existed in the same fashion as other great philosophers (Buddha, Kung Fu'tze, etc) did and his teachings were awesome but if he sawwhat he was being sold as nowadays he would puke.
In the grand scheme of things none of this matters anyway...money, power, skin color, status...we're all just amoebas in the big picture....
also edit:
1. anyone who wants a revolution/collapse or would really participate in one has no talent or anything positive to contribute to this world other than physicallabor which will be replaced by machines...they are people with no ideas, no talent, no hopes, and no vision.
2.
"Communism is described by Marx, in the Critique of the Gotha Programme, as a society in which each person should contribute according to theirability and receive according to their need"
Which basically makes a case for capitalism. Again.
No matter how hard I try, I can never play basketball well enough to play in the NBA. I just don't have the talent. No matter what happens, I don'thave that talent. If I DID have that talent, should I feel sorry for myself that I do? People that have the ability to make money, make it, those thatdon't, don't. If you have the money, your need is whatever you set it to be. Need is such an arbitrary thing, who is to say what one needs anddoesn't. The basic needs as told by maslow, more specifically safety and physiological needs, can only really be organically met through capitalism and NOother system.
Edit #2
Rex said:
"For me it means a system where most of the means of production are owned privately"
To me its really the same thing worded differently, or rather backwards. Its not about means of production being private (although its inferred), but ratherthe means to create a solution are private, or can be tapped by private citizens.
I don't even know where to start with this and if even should, I guess I'm just doing to let people who can't form their own outlooks on thesethings an alternative and more realistic viewpoint.
1. THIS HAS ALL BEEN SAID BEFORE! HELLO, SOME OF YOU PEOPLE ARE ACTING LIKE THE SAME THINGS WEREN'T SAID DURING THE GREAT DEPRESSION AND OTHERS BEFORE IT.There was a tulip bulb bubble in the Nederlands in the 1600s, people then said that capitalism is over, yet somehow people still need to live and still spendmoney on things they need and want, boom, the economy is back up and running again.
Capitalism is simply freedom. Its the freedom anyone has to create a product from their point of view. I don't like a movie, I can make my own if I want. Idon't like any shoes out there, I make my own. No one is saying its easy to do, but its possible. No one is going to stop you. Corporate giants look outfor their interests but are still really too big to maneuver to block you. Capitalism=finding solutions to real problems, anything else=finding solutions toself created problems, meaning anything else can't work.
Now, socialism to capitalism is apples and oranges. Since socialism is big government, there are more roadblocks b/c of regulations to bring your vision tomarket, but in the day and age of massive populations and peoples need to retain power, socialism is needed to prevent useless revolutions that just disruptthe flow of capital. However, socialism needs capitalism to bankroll it. China can never have communism or full blown capitalism, b/c with such a largepopulation, the spirit of revolution is a dangerous thing, so full blown, unregulated capitalism can't function, but capitalism is nevertheless needed topay to keep the masses sedated. Socialism is really a counter-revolution, just a devolution really. Insurance so that the population can be sedated.
2. The world right now is SO underdeveloped that in reality there is still so much money to be made, and so much human talent and so many natural resources toexploit. How could we have possibly reached any sort of bubble right now.
3. The whole energy will skyrocket is really a moot point because fossil fuels are finally being seen as primitive and energy will be decentralized. Thissounds really metaphysical and I don't dig all that religion/folklore w/e but what have always been the 4 basic elements of life as perceived by people forthousands of years?
Wind = wind power
water = hydroelectric
earth = geothermal
fire = solar and finally to trump all forms of energy, fusion, like on the surface of the sun.
Everything we need is right here on this earth. Each and every person can have their own solar, geothermal, and wind energy systems, in their own home orperhaps in a urban environment, a semi-decentralized grid where stations (not gas but stations collecting solar/wind/geothermal/hydro energy) feed whatsimmediately near them.
Vertical farming is starting to materialize....solutions for hunger...
I mean its just so much to talk about and so much optimism that the crash of any system or economy WILL NEVER HAPPEN.
I don't think obama will do much interesting with anything other than promoting green energy...the insurance co's have him in their back pocket so ifreal health care reform will happen, he lied about it being in the first 4 years, maybe in the last 8 and thats a huge maybe.
Honda already has hydrogen powered cars being leased out in Cali to celebs....240 range, 0 emissions....of course they cost 300,000 but are being subsidized to600/mo. Obama tried to cut hydrogen funding out of what seems to be pure spite for the previous administration since it was a bush administration pet project,but hydrogen is back on track along with electric which was obamas preference.
Like I said, there's just too much optimism in the air for anything to collapse....
Also, anyone bringing religion into this please do a system restore on your brain and try to boot again, and keep doing it until you abandon your sillysuperstitions. Jesus existed in the same fashion as other great philosophers (Buddha, Kung Fu'tze, etc) did and his teachings were awesome but if he sawwhat he was being sold as nowadays he would puke.
In the grand scheme of things none of this matters anyway...money, power, skin color, status...we're all just amoebas in the big picture....
also edit:
1. anyone who wants a revolution/collapse or would really participate in one has no talent or anything positive to contribute to this world other than physicallabor which will be replaced by machines...they are people with no ideas, no talent, no hopes, and no vision.
2.
"Communism is described by Marx, in the Critique of the Gotha Programme, as a society in which each person should contribute according to theirability and receive according to their need"
Which basically makes a case for capitalism. Again.
No matter how hard I try, I can never play basketball well enough to play in the NBA. I just don't have the talent. No matter what happens, I don'thave that talent. If I DID have that talent, should I feel sorry for myself that I do? People that have the ability to make money, make it, those thatdon't, don't. If you have the money, your need is whatever you set it to be. Need is such an arbitrary thing, who is to say what one needs anddoesn't. The basic needs as told by maslow, more specifically safety and physiological needs, can only really be organically met through capitalism and NOother system.
Edit #2
Rex said:
"For me it means a system where most of the means of production are owned privately"
To me its really the same thing worded differently, or rather backwards. Its not about means of production being private (although its inferred), but ratherthe means to create a solution are private, or can be tapped by private citizens.
- 408
- 12
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2007
I think you've asked me that before, but rhetorically, and as you can plainly see, I do.
Whatever, its always interesting to see you come out every so often...though you remind me of that putz Niccolo Machiavelli..I won't hold it against you.
Anyway, in regards to your rant...
You say "capitalism is a freedom", but the freedom is being blocked and convoluted by government intervention (in various forms) with what appears tobe more of a socialist agenda than any thing else.
The "freedom" cannot survive and has been killed off and morphed into a different version. Fundamentals of economics are one thing, the practice isanother.
Anyway, in regards to your rant...
You say "capitalism is a freedom", but the freedom is being blocked and convoluted by government intervention (in various forms) with what appears tobe more of a socialist agenda than any thing else.
The "freedom" cannot survive and has been killed off and morphed into a different version. Fundamentals of economics are one thing, the practice isanother.
- 385
- 74
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2008
CO f'n SIGN
I been waiting for The Venus Project to finally happen anyways...
- 5,704
- 2,698
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2006
Hey_
Julius F. Wrek
Julius F. Wrek
- 408
- 12
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2007
LazyJ, I didn't mean to come off as rude, if I did I apologize.
I think people confuse myself and NM because we both speak a certain European language and we're both from Pennsylvania. He's from Pittsburgh, I'mnot. I can't take anyone seriously who's materialistic and obnoxious lifestyle is funded by his well educated parents, and when people use my screenname in the same sentence as his, its a bit annoying to be honest, but I've learned not to care more or less.
Anyway, I understand entirely where you're coming from in regards to the freedom bit, but try starting a company anywhere else in the world where thereisn't a 1st world capitalistic society. Here in the USA if you wanted LazyJ10, you could this very day go out and start a toothbrush company that perhapshelps people better clean their teeth, and the market decides if you fail or not. I see financial service firms as parasites to capitalism (yet they are seenas the purest form of it). They are pretty much entirely responsible for this mess, and yet its only they who can get us out of it to an extent. Also to beclear, I think I remember you being an accountant, and just to be clear I mean investment banks(and some retail)/private equity, etc more so than anythingelse. They don't create anything, just leach off of the trading of companies and assets that do (bud fox's father in wall street said it best). Andyet, they are so necessary to fund companies' growth and development. Just like lawyers, I guess. They can protect the evil but also uphold justice...
edit:
My thoughts are not at all based on Jacque Fresco's work (mentioned here as the venus project), but he embodies my emotions on our existence pretty well...
edit 2:
for those saying they cant wait for the venus project to start,
The Venus project has no official start or end point per say, its just a philosophy of life/existence which is being put into practice by many architects,designers, entrepreneurs, etc. more and more each day...if we all refused to eat fast food starting today and demanded more healthy and sustainable food, allthe fast food spots would need to either evolve or go out of business simple as that...
I think people confuse myself and NM because we both speak a certain European language and we're both from Pennsylvania. He's from Pittsburgh, I'mnot. I can't take anyone seriously who's materialistic and obnoxious lifestyle is funded by his well educated parents, and when people use my screenname in the same sentence as his, its a bit annoying to be honest, but I've learned not to care more or less.
Anyway, I understand entirely where you're coming from in regards to the freedom bit, but try starting a company anywhere else in the world where thereisn't a 1st world capitalistic society. Here in the USA if you wanted LazyJ10, you could this very day go out and start a toothbrush company that perhapshelps people better clean their teeth, and the market decides if you fail or not. I see financial service firms as parasites to capitalism (yet they are seenas the purest form of it). They are pretty much entirely responsible for this mess, and yet its only they who can get us out of it to an extent. Also to beclear, I think I remember you being an accountant, and just to be clear I mean investment banks(and some retail)/private equity, etc more so than anythingelse. They don't create anything, just leach off of the trading of companies and assets that do (bud fox's father in wall street said it best). Andyet, they are so necessary to fund companies' growth and development. Just like lawyers, I guess. They can protect the evil but also uphold justice...
edit:
My thoughts are not at all based on Jacque Fresco's work (mentioned here as the venus project), but he embodies my emotions on our existence pretty well...
edit 2:
for those saying they cant wait for the venus project to start,
The Venus project has no official start or end point per say, its just a philosophy of life/existence which is being put into practice by many architects,designers, entrepreneurs, etc. more and more each day...if we all refused to eat fast food starting today and demanded more healthy and sustainable food, allthe fast food spots would need to either evolve or go out of business simple as that...
Similar threads
