Moore's Capitalism: A Love Story....

[38816]

it seems we're coming closer to a common ground.

i know democratic communism can't exist, which is why its so funny that the word was thrown around at Obama....


as far as democratic socialism.....you, yourself claim that "practically all of europe is democratic socialist"

and they're murdering us in quality of life, right? ( meaning every tangible measure of "quality" of the country....employment, economy, health, education, etc.)

im honestly asking.


(btw, what you all are saying isnt different from what ive been saying at all. IN THEORY, capitalism is great, just like democracy....but the flaw of man, and the evil that men do corrupt these theories from ever working in reality.....correct? can we agree on that?)

and honestly, for all intents and purposes, this is what moore was saying in the film.....within the first 10 mins, he and this comedian (i forget dudes name) are talking about how, in theory, in its purest form, capitalism is awesome...its great....

but throughout the movie, he shows how the hearts of men have exploited the have nots, through a supposed capitalist society, which isn't capitalist at all....in fact, its stacked against us...

we have our labor taxed......to provide billionaires with welfare...

and people have the audacity to sit on even message boards like NT and denouce people on welfare in this country? people who are barely EATING are lazy and dragging society down...

but billionaires asking for more money to replace the money they swindled out of the banks into their own pockets are bosses, right?

and taxing them proportionately to THEIR income would be unfair and unconstitutional....

a guy making 60k has to pay like 10k in taxes......leaving him with 50k to live off..which is "middle class", fine, dandy....

but a dude making 100 million doesnt have to give up 90 million.....

yes, its not proportionate....but neither is the compensation he recieves....

HE STILL HAS 10 MILLION IN HIS POCKET, THO...thats not middle class...you're not missing meals....nor car service to and from work...nor your private helicopter to the opera.....seriously, what are you missing out on, 10 million a year, 20 million a year, 30 million a year....when does the bottom 95% of america smarten up and say "yo, yall arent that much more important than us....you dont really do anything that much better than anyone else to have all that wealth" i don't mean bill gates, or steve jobs...you know, dudes who are rich because of their contributions to society....im talking about the dudes paying off congressmen with interest free loans so they can loanshark people like the mafia used to do in the 20s....im talking about the CEOs who signed off on the mortgage-backed securities then pocketed all the bonus money off the deals.....then, paid off congress to get 700 billion handed right over to them to replace the money they pocketed....

you will have shelter, food and clothing....you will be able to educate your children and raise them...if you get sick, you can be treated.....

seriously...what cant you do with 10 million that you could do with 12 million (this is a rhetorical question)





SOMETHING needs to change.

yall tell ME what it is, since yall so smart

(i went into a rant, this post is all over the place)

 

[38816]

it seems we're coming closer to a common ground.

i know democratic communism can't exist, which is why its so funny that the word was thrown around at Obama....


as far as democratic socialism.....you, yourself claim that "practically all of europe is democratic socialist"

and they're murdering us in quality of life, right? ( meaning every tangible measure of "quality" of the country....employment, economy, health, education, etc.)

im honestly asking.


(btw, what you all are saying isnt different from what ive been saying at all. IN THEORY, capitalism is great, just like democracy....but the flaw of man, and the evil that men do corrupt these theories from ever working in reality.....correct? can we agree on that?)

and honestly, for all intents and purposes, this is what moore was saying in the film.....within the first 10 mins, he and this comedian (i forget dudes name) are talking about how, in theory, in its purest form, capitalism is awesome...its great....

but throughout the movie, he shows how the hearts of men have exploited the have nots, through a supposed capitalist society, which isn't capitalist at all....in fact, its stacked against us...

we have our labor taxed......to provide billionaires with welfare...

and people have the audacity to sit on even message boards like NT and denouce people on welfare in this country? people who are barely EATING are lazy and dragging society down...

but billionaires asking for more money to replace the money they swindled out of the banks into their own pockets are bosses, right?

and taxing them proportionately to THEIR income would be unfair and unconstitutional....

a guy making 60k has to pay like 10k in taxes......leaving him with 50k to live off..which is "middle class", fine, dandy....

but a dude making 100 million doesnt have to give up 90 million.....

yes, its not proportionate....but neither is the compensation he recieves....

HE STILL HAS 10 MILLION IN HIS POCKET, THO...thats not middle class...you're not missing meals....nor car service to and from work...nor your private helicopter to the opera.....seriously, what are you missing out on, 10 million a year, 20 million a year, 30 million a year....when does the bottom 95% of america smarten up and say "yo, yall arent that much more important than us....you dont really do anything that much better than anyone else to have all that wealth" i don't mean bill gates, or steve jobs...you know, dudes who are rich because of their contributions to society....im talking about the dudes paying off congressmen with interest free loans so they can loanshark people like the mafia used to do in the 20s....im talking about the CEOs who signed off on the mortgage-backed securities then pocketed all the bonus money off the deals.....then, paid off congress to get 700 billion handed right over to them to replace the money they pocketed....

you will have shelter, food and clothing....you will be able to educate your children and raise them...if you get sick, you can be treated.....

seriously...what cant you do with 10 million that you could do with 12 million (this is a rhetorical question)





SOMETHING needs to change.

yall tell ME what it is, since yall so smart

(i went into a rant, this post is all over the place)

 

[boilermaker x]

MrBen23 wrote:

---

When people are trading freely and striving to succeed in a capitalistic society two things happen. The quality of life improves for all and the competition for your dollar forces manufacturers/businesses/sellers to create better products/services/etc for cheaper prices. In the end, we do win. It isn't until government steps in that we lose the freedom of free enterprise.


More than two things happen in unchecked capitalism.  While there may be a creation of value at all levels, true free market capitalism places no limits on economic abuse.  The dime store capitalist ethos is based on the notion that A) if you are improving your economic situation then what you are doing is good and B) the market should be permitted to determine price.  Therefore, it's only right to charge as much as the market will bear for food and gas.  It would be morally wrong to not start a private company that charges homeless people in large metropolitan areas for the water they need to live (think South America).  Health care?  Education?  Infrastructure?  Don't make me laugh.  If you can increase profits by charging $8 for a gallon of gas and turning away uninsured bleeding people from emergency rooms, then IT IS YOUR DUTY TO DO SO.  Because you are a dyed-in-the-wool free market capitalist.  Sure, not everyone will be able to afford to live in this idyllic system (and certainly not like they do now) and we can only speculate as to the social upheaval this will bring about, but if a certain percentage of the populace has to die in order for me to make more money than I do now under these artificial and restricting rules, then so be it.  Because in the end, we do win!  As long as you're one of the very few on top of this bottom-heavy society.

The problem with unchecked capitalism is that when given time to fully mature it leads to an extremely small number of parties controlling all the wealth, with no impetus or reason to sustain anyone else unless they continue to generate more wealth for them.  (Sounds suspiciously like feudalism, no?)  However, those societies that have attempted true capitalism (or libertarianism) have faltered very rapidly and the ones that endure under the disingenuous monaker of capitalism  (US, Europe, etc.) are never real capitalist or libertarian societies.  However, it's easy to identify silly lesser economic theories like communism and socialism which are obviously inferior because they have only sustained societies for a few generations at a time.  Meanwhile, the ideal version of capitalism that so many people glean from one glancing read of some undergraduate economic textbook or Milton Freedman essay has shown to be either utterly unsustainable or repugnant to the notion of human dignity.  So here’s to all the slack-jawed, golly gosh, Amurican Tea Partying Libertarians: Eat cake. 

 

[boilermaker x]

MrBen23 wrote:

---

When people are trading freely and striving to succeed in a capitalistic society two things happen. The quality of life improves for all and the competition for your dollar forces manufacturers/businesses/sellers to create better products/services/etc for cheaper prices. In the end, we do win. It isn't until government steps in that we lose the freedom of free enterprise.


More than two things happen in unchecked capitalism.  While there may be a creation of value at all levels, true free market capitalism places no limits on economic abuse.  The dime store capitalist ethos is based on the notion that A) if you are improving your economic situation then what you are doing is good and B) the market should be permitted to determine price.  Therefore, it's only right to charge as much as the market will bear for food and gas.  It would be morally wrong to not start a private company that charges homeless people in large metropolitan areas for the water they need to live (think South America).  Health care?  Education?  Infrastructure?  Don't make me laugh.  If you can increase profits by charging $8 for a gallon of gas and turning away uninsured bleeding people from emergency rooms, then IT IS YOUR DUTY TO DO SO.  Because you are a dyed-in-the-wool free market capitalist.  Sure, not everyone will be able to afford to live in this idyllic system (and certainly not like they do now) and we can only speculate as to the social upheaval this will bring about, but if a certain percentage of the populace has to die in order for me to make more money than I do now under these artificial and restricting rules, then so be it.  Because in the end, we do win!  As long as you're one of the very few on top of this bottom-heavy society.

The problem with unchecked capitalism is that when given time to fully mature it leads to an extremely small number of parties controlling all the wealth, with no impetus or reason to sustain anyone else unless they continue to generate more wealth for them.  (Sounds suspiciously like feudalism, no?)  However, those societies that have attempted true capitalism (or libertarianism) have faltered very rapidly and the ones that endure under the disingenuous monaker of capitalism  (US, Europe, etc.) are never real capitalist or libertarian societies.  However, it's easy to identify silly lesser economic theories like communism and socialism which are obviously inferior because they have only sustained societies for a few generations at a time.  Meanwhile, the ideal version of capitalism that so many people glean from one glancing read of some undergraduate economic textbook or Milton Freedman essay has shown to be either utterly unsustainable or repugnant to the notion of human dignity.  So here’s to all the slack-jawed, golly gosh, Amurican Tea Partying Libertarians: Eat cake. 

 

[rocky437]

 

[rocky437]

 

[essential1]

The biggest problem with people saying "well Moore makes millions off capitalism as he is slandering it"

The 1 problem is like most people who are called socialist.. They believe in a co-oped economic system.. Capitalism & Socialism. That allows for consumer choice AND consumer protection..

No one wants government in the business of making our cereal (not even the Socialists that republicans seem to vilify). They are just trying to make sure there are no poisons in our Fruity Pebbles. And make sure the workers are not forced to work 15hours a day. And employ 11 year olds to "fix" malfunctioning equipment.. Which was what was happening before the damn government got it's hands on the "free market"

A "Totally Free Market" leads to exploited workers & consumers... A well regulated capitalist market (which is now what socialism is to people who know no better) gives sed protection on both sides of the coin.

 

[essential1]

The biggest problem with people saying "well Moore makes millions off capitalism as he is slandering it"

The 1 problem is like most people who are called socialist.. They believe in a co-oped economic system.. Capitalism & Socialism. That allows for consumer choice AND consumer protection..

No one wants government in the business of making our cereal (not even the Socialists that republicans seem to vilify). They are just trying to make sure there are no poisons in our Fruity Pebbles. And make sure the workers are not forced to work 15hours a day. And employ 11 year olds to "fix" malfunctioning equipment.. Which was what was happening before the damn government got it's hands on the "free market"

A "Totally Free Market" leads to exploited workers & consumers... A well regulated capitalist market (which is now what socialism is to people who know no better) gives sed protection on both sides of the coin.

 

[rashi]

as far as democratic socialism.....you, yourself claim that "practically all of europe is democratic socialist"

and they're murdering us in quality of life, right? ( meaning every tangible measure of "quality" of the country....employment, economy, health, education, etc.)

im honestly asking.

I don't think the older the age and "good" quality of life correlate in Europe. Europe has a lot more younger people, which can fudge statistics because they need less care as far as health care is concerned. Employment is always between 8-10% and very high amongst the youth. Labor is heavily unionized, thus it prevents employers from firing employees with less than average production. This discourages hiring in Europe because if you cannot get rid of workers when you want, why hire or why try to expand?

Europe as a whole went through what we went through and in my prediction, the European Union will be forced to collapse eventually. Individual countries in the Union are slowly but steadily recovering faster than we are because they are drastically cutting spending (which we are increasing).

(btw, what you all are saying isnt different from what ive been saying at all. IN THEORY, capitalism is great, just like democracy....but the flaw of man, and the evil that men do corrupt these theories from ever working in reality.....correct? can we agree on that?)

and honestly, for all intents and purposes, this is what moore was saying in the film.....within the first 10 mins, he and this comedian (i forget dudes name) are talking about how, in theory, in its purest form, capitalism is awesome...its great....

What's great about Capitalism is that it regulates itself. In a Free Market predatory lending or producing could not survive because you cannot make profit or even last as a business if you are screwing people. Case in point GM, they made a bad product and they over invested. In a Free Market they would have went out of business, this did not happen. They were bailed out by government mainly because they had a voter demographic to "save" i.e. Unions. On the opposite end you had Ford, they also made a bad product they made decisions based on consumer demand. They regrouped, got a new CEO, downsized and now are making a better product competing with foreign makers. They did this without a bail out.

JP Morgan and Rockefeller conspired with this government to create the Federal Reserve for this reason. They wanted a Central Bank so they could have easy access to credit, they didn't want to compete. They wanted the ability to be bailed out.

we have our labor taxed......to provide billionaires with welfare...

and people have the audacity to sit on even message boards like NT and denouce people on welfare in this country? people who are barely EATING are lazy and dragging society down...

but billionaires asking for more money to replace the money they swindled out of the banks into their own pockets are bosses, right?

You won't  get any argument from me. I hate Wall Street just as the next man, but Wall Street is in bed with government. This is nothing but an oligarchy, this is the way it was planned. The U.S. Constitution was made based on a creating a new tax jurisdiction. When the Articles of Confederation was written, it was claimed that "it could not last because there was no central authority". This was BS, the people who signed the Constitution were mostly public creditors, commodity speculators, and people who had interests in shipping, manufacturing, and merchandising. The document was made in a purely economic interest.

a guy making 60k has to pay like 10k in taxes......leaving him with 50k to live off..which is "middle class", fine, dandy....

but a dude making 100 million doesnt have to give up 90 million.....

yes, its not proportionate....but neither is the compensation he recieves....

I guarantee it more it more than 1/6. Because you pay for taxes when you go to the store, pay for gas, pay for electricity, ect.

Also, the person making $100 million a year doesn't earn that as a salary, they make that off dividends. They make money of stocks and investments, which Capital Gains is only around 15%.

SOMETHING needs to change.

Remove government, simple as that.

More than two things happen in unchecked capitalism.  While there may be a creation of value at all levels, true free market capitalism places no limits on economic abuse.  The dime store capitalist ethos is based on the notion that A) if you are improving your economic situation then what you are doing is good and B) the market should be permitted to determine price.  Therefore, it's only right to charge as much as the market will bear for food and gas.


Only the market can determine prices efficiently. Like I mentioned earlier, a company cannot survive if they are charging ridiculously high prices, unless they are a monopoly, and monopolies cannot exist in a Free Market. The only way it can is by government approved monopolies or coercion of competition.

If you can increase profits by charging $8 for a gallon of gas and turning away uninsured bleeding people from emergency rooms, then IT IS YOUR DUTY TO DO SO.

Try running a gas station charging $8 a gallon while everyone else charges lower than you and see how long you last. Hospitals don't turn away people bleeding, by federal law they have to be treated.

The problem with unchecked capitalism is that when given time to fully mature it leads to an extremely small number of parties controlling all the wealth, with no impetus or reason to sustain anyone else unless they continue to generate more wealth for them.

What is wealth? Wealth is a subjective value.

Meanwhile, the ideal version of capitalism that so many people glean from one glancing read of some undergraduate economic textbook or Milton Freedman essay has shown to be either utterly unsustainable or repugnant to the notion of human dignity.  So here’s to all the slack-jawed, golly gosh, Amurican Tea Partying Libertarians: Eat cake.

Milton Friedman is a Socialists himself. Negative Income Tax, Progressive taxation, Central Banks, manipulating currency. I would think people like you would like Professor Friedman.

A "Totally Free Market" leads to exploited workers & consumers... A well regulated capitalist market (which is now what socialism is to people who know no better) gives sed protection on both sides of the coin.

You can't have regulated markets and Capitalism, they are opposites. When the government makes the rules, they are controlling and dictating the method of production. That is not Capitalism.

 

[rashi]

as far as democratic socialism.....you, yourself claim that "practically all of europe is democratic socialist"

and they're murdering us in quality of life, right? ( meaning every tangible measure of "quality" of the country....employment, economy, health, education, etc.)

im honestly asking.

I don't think the older the age and "good" quality of life correlate in Europe. Europe has a lot more younger people, which can fudge statistics because they need less care as far as health care is concerned. Employment is always between 8-10% and very high amongst the youth. Labor is heavily unionized, thus it prevents employers from firing employees with less than average production. This discourages hiring in Europe because if you cannot get rid of workers when you want, why hire or why try to expand?

Europe as a whole went through what we went through and in my prediction, the European Union will be forced to collapse eventually. Individual countries in the Union are slowly but steadily recovering faster than we are because they are drastically cutting spending (which we are increasing).

(btw, what you all are saying isnt different from what ive been saying at all. IN THEORY, capitalism is great, just like democracy....but the flaw of man, and the evil that men do corrupt these theories from ever working in reality.....correct? can we agree on that?)

and honestly, for all intents and purposes, this is what moore was saying in the film.....within the first 10 mins, he and this comedian (i forget dudes name) are talking about how, in theory, in its purest form, capitalism is awesome...its great....

What's great about Capitalism is that it regulates itself. In a Free Market predatory lending or producing could not survive because you cannot make profit or even last as a business if you are screwing people. Case in point GM, they made a bad product and they over invested. In a Free Market they would have went out of business, this did not happen. They were bailed out by government mainly because they had a voter demographic to "save" i.e. Unions. On the opposite end you had Ford, they also made a bad product they made decisions based on consumer demand. They regrouped, got a new CEO, downsized and now are making a better product competing with foreign makers. They did this without a bail out.

JP Morgan and Rockefeller conspired with this government to create the Federal Reserve for this reason. They wanted a Central Bank so they could have easy access to credit, they didn't want to compete. They wanted the ability to be bailed out.

we have our labor taxed......to provide billionaires with welfare...

and people have the audacity to sit on even message boards like NT and denouce people on welfare in this country? people who are barely EATING are lazy and dragging society down...

but billionaires asking for more money to replace the money they swindled out of the banks into their own pockets are bosses, right?

You won't  get any argument from me. I hate Wall Street just as the next man, but Wall Street is in bed with government. This is nothing but an oligarchy, this is the way it was planned. The U.S. Constitution was made based on a creating a new tax jurisdiction. When the Articles of Confederation was written, it was claimed that "it could not last because there was no central authority". This was BS, the people who signed the Constitution were mostly public creditors, commodity speculators, and people who had interests in shipping, manufacturing, and merchandising. The document was made in a purely economic interest.

a guy making 60k has to pay like 10k in taxes......leaving him with 50k to live off..which is "middle class", fine, dandy....

but a dude making 100 million doesnt have to give up 90 million.....

yes, its not proportionate....but neither is the compensation he recieves....

I guarantee it more it more than 1/6. Because you pay for taxes when you go to the store, pay for gas, pay for electricity, ect.

Also, the person making $100 million a year doesn't earn that as a salary, they make that off dividends. They make money of stocks and investments, which Capital Gains is only around 15%.

SOMETHING needs to change.

Remove government, simple as that.

More than two things happen in unchecked capitalism.  While there may be a creation of value at all levels, true free market capitalism places no limits on economic abuse.  The dime store capitalist ethos is based on the notion that A) if you are improving your economic situation then what you are doing is good and B) the market should be permitted to determine price.  Therefore, it's only right to charge as much as the market will bear for food and gas.


Only the market can determine prices efficiently. Like I mentioned earlier, a company cannot survive if they are charging ridiculously high prices, unless they are a monopoly, and monopolies cannot exist in a Free Market. The only way it can is by government approved monopolies or coercion of competition.

If you can increase profits by charging $8 for a gallon of gas and turning away uninsured bleeding people from emergency rooms, then IT IS YOUR DUTY TO DO SO.

Try running a gas station charging $8 a gallon while everyone else charges lower than you and see how long you last. Hospitals don't turn away people bleeding, by federal law they have to be treated.

The problem with unchecked capitalism is that when given time to fully mature it leads to an extremely small number of parties controlling all the wealth, with no impetus or reason to sustain anyone else unless they continue to generate more wealth for them.

What is wealth? Wealth is a subjective value.

Meanwhile, the ideal version of capitalism that so many people glean from one glancing read of some undergraduate economic textbook or Milton Freedman essay has shown to be either utterly unsustainable or repugnant to the notion of human dignity.  So here’s to all the slack-jawed, golly gosh, Amurican Tea Partying Libertarians: Eat cake.

Milton Friedman is a Socialists himself. Negative Income Tax, Progressive taxation, Central Banks, manipulating currency. I would think people like you would like Professor Friedman.

A "Totally Free Market" leads to exploited workers & consumers... A well regulated capitalist market (which is now what socialism is to people who know no better) gives sed protection on both sides of the coin.

You can't have regulated markets and Capitalism, they are opposites. When the government makes the rules, they are controlling and dictating the method of production. That is not Capitalism.

 

[essential1]

Well if regulation means it is not Capitalism anymore..

Then Capitalism is just as bad as Communism..

Neither are bad in theory, but both are DISASTERS.

 

[essential1]

Well if regulation means it is not Capitalism anymore..

Then Capitalism is just as bad as Communism..

Neither are bad in theory, but both are DISASTERS.

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by Essential1

Well if regulation means it is not Capitalism anymore..

Then Capitalism is just as bad as Communism..

Neither are bad in theory, but both are DISASTERS.

Capitalism doesn't need to be regulated, it regulates itself. If people are buying faulty goods or being told lies or losing money, why would you continue to do business. Business wouldn't last by screwing people. All regulations do is protect bad business.

Communism doesn't sound remotely good in theory no matter how you twist it. Everyone is the same, everything is stagnant. I can come over to your house and use your things, ect. No private property by any means. How can you spin that to sound good even in theory?

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by Essential1

Well if regulation means it is not Capitalism anymore..

Then Capitalism is just as bad as Communism..

Neither are bad in theory, but both are DISASTERS.

Capitalism doesn't need to be regulated, it regulates itself. If people are buying faulty goods or being told lies or losing money, why would you continue to do business. Business wouldn't last by screwing people. All regulations do is protect bad business.

Communism doesn't sound remotely good in theory no matter how you twist it. Everyone is the same, everything is stagnant. I can come over to your house and use your things, ect. No private property by any means. How can you spin that to sound good even in theory?

 

[cocolicious]

I saw this documentary before and it was a eye opener. I had no idea about Walmart and the dead peasants thing. Crazy stuff.

 

[cocolicious]

I saw this documentary before and it was a eye opener. I had no idea about Walmart and the dead peasants thing. Crazy stuff.

 

[essential1]

Originally Posted by rashi

Originally Posted by Essential1

Well if regulation means it is not Capitalism anymore..

Then Capitalism is just as bad as Communism..

Neither are bad in theory, but both are DISASTERS.

Capitalism doesn't need to be regulated, it regulates itself. If people are buying faulty goods or being told lies or losing money, why would you continue to do business. Business wouldn't last by screwing people. All regulations do is protect bad business.

Communism doesn't sound remotely good in theory no matter how you twist it. Everyone is the same, everything is stagnant. I can come over to your house and use your things, ect. No private property by any means. How can you spin that to sound good even in theory?

Your first statement is %%%**+$%..

Forcing companies to not use lead based paint  was bad for ALL OF US.. God damn government....

Forcing companies to not make little kids climb into "stuck" machinery... God damn government....

I wonder what we call the health insurance industry.. THEY DON'T SCREW PEOPLE AT ALL..

Or the Financial Industry.. They don't screw people at all...

Capitalism has no morals.. Because bottom-line the only thing important to capitalism is money.. Money has NO MORAL COMPASS..

Unchecked capitalism ALWAYS leads to what capitalism hates most lack of competition, and lack of choice..



It's the exact opposite of communism, and has a similar fate... Leads to exactly what the economic theory hates the most.

 

[essential1]

Originally Posted by rashi

Originally Posted by Essential1

Well if regulation means it is not Capitalism anymore..

Then Capitalism is just as bad as Communism..

Neither are bad in theory, but both are DISASTERS.

Capitalism doesn't need to be regulated, it regulates itself. If people are buying faulty goods or being told lies or losing money, why would you continue to do business. Business wouldn't last by screwing people. All regulations do is protect bad business.

Communism doesn't sound remotely good in theory no matter how you twist it. Everyone is the same, everything is stagnant. I can come over to your house and use your things, ect. No private property by any means. How can you spin that to sound good even in theory?

Your first statement is %%%**+$%..

Forcing companies to not use lead based paint  was bad for ALL OF US.. God damn government....

Forcing companies to not make little kids climb into "stuck" machinery... God damn government....

I wonder what we call the health insurance industry.. THEY DON'T SCREW PEOPLE AT ALL..

Or the Financial Industry.. They don't screw people at all...

Capitalism has no morals.. Because bottom-line the only thing important to capitalism is money.. Money has NO MORAL COMPASS..

Unchecked capitalism ALWAYS leads to what capitalism hates most lack of competition, and lack of choice..



It's the exact opposite of communism, and has a similar fate... Leads to exactly what the economic theory hates the most.

 

[wawaweewa]

Originally Posted by Boilermaker X

MrBen23 wrote:

---

When people are trading freely and striving to succeed in a capitalistic society two things happen. The quality of life improves for all and the competition for your dollar forces manufacturers/businesses/sellers to create better products/services/etc for cheaper prices. In the end, we do win. It isn't until government steps in that we lose the freedom of free enterprise.

More than two things happen in unchecked capitalism.  While there may be a creation of value at all levels, true free market capitalism places no limits on economic abuse.  The dime store capitalist ethos is based on the notion that A) if you are improving your economic situation then what you are doing is good and B) the market should be permitted to determine price.  Therefore, it's only right to charge as much as the market will bear for food and gas.  It would be morally wrong to not start a private company that charges homeless people in large metropolitan areas for the water they need to live (think South America).  Health care?  Education?  Infrastructure?  Don't make me laugh.  If you can increase profits by charging $8 for a gallon of gas and turning away uninsured bleeding people from emergency rooms, then IT IS YOUR DUTY TO DO SO.  Because you are a dyed-in-the-wool free market capitalist.  Sure, not everyone will be able to afford to live in this idyllic system (and certainly not like they do now) and we can only speculate as to the social upheaval this will bring about, but if a certain percentage of the populace has to die in order for me to make more money than I do now under these artificial and restricting rules, then so be it.  Because in the end, we do win!  As long as you're one of the very few on top of this bottom-heavy society.

The problem with unchecked capitalism is that when given time to fully mature it leads to an extremely small number of parties controlling all the wealth, with no impetus or reason to sustain anyone else unless they continue to generate more wealth for them.  (Sounds suspiciously like feudalism, no?)  However, those societies that have attempted true capitalism (or libertarianism) have faltered very rapidly and the ones that endure under the disingenuous monaker of capitalism  (US, Europe, etc.) are never real capitalist or libertarian societies.  However, it's easy to identify silly lesser economic theories like communism and socialism which are obviously inferior because they have only sustained societies for a few generations at a time.  Meanwhile, the ideal version of capitalism that so many people glean from one glancing read of some undergraduate economic textbook or Milton Freedman essay has shown to be either utterly unsustainable or repugnant to the notion of human dignity.  So here’s to all the slack-jawed, golly gosh, Amurican Tea Partying Libertarians: Eat cake. 

Can't say it much better than this.

The truth is, the best system is one which finds a balance between capitalist and collective elements. 

I'm a libertarian but even if you have an IQ of 70 and have a general understanding of the darker side of the human psyche, one can put 2 and 2 together and realize that Capitalism, in it's purest form, is unsustainable (as Boilermaker stated). 

 

[wawaweewa]

Originally Posted by Boilermaker X

MrBen23 wrote:

---

When people are trading freely and striving to succeed in a capitalistic society two things happen. The quality of life improves for all and the competition for your dollar forces manufacturers/businesses/sellers to create better products/services/etc for cheaper prices. In the end, we do win. It isn't until government steps in that we lose the freedom of free enterprise.

More than two things happen in unchecked capitalism.  While there may be a creation of value at all levels, true free market capitalism places no limits on economic abuse.  The dime store capitalist ethos is based on the notion that A) if you are improving your economic situation then what you are doing is good and B) the market should be permitted to determine price.  Therefore, it's only right to charge as much as the market will bear for food and gas.  It would be morally wrong to not start a private company that charges homeless people in large metropolitan areas for the water they need to live (think South America).  Health care?  Education?  Infrastructure?  Don't make me laugh.  If you can increase profits by charging $8 for a gallon of gas and turning away uninsured bleeding people from emergency rooms, then IT IS YOUR DUTY TO DO SO.  Because you are a dyed-in-the-wool free market capitalist.  Sure, not everyone will be able to afford to live in this idyllic system (and certainly not like they do now) and we can only speculate as to the social upheaval this will bring about, but if a certain percentage of the populace has to die in order for me to make more money than I do now under these artificial and restricting rules, then so be it.  Because in the end, we do win!  As long as you're one of the very few on top of this bottom-heavy society.

The problem with unchecked capitalism is that when given time to fully mature it leads to an extremely small number of parties controlling all the wealth, with no impetus or reason to sustain anyone else unless they continue to generate more wealth for them.  (Sounds suspiciously like feudalism, no?)  However, those societies that have attempted true capitalism (or libertarianism) have faltered very rapidly and the ones that endure under the disingenuous monaker of capitalism  (US, Europe, etc.) are never real capitalist or libertarian societies.  However, it's easy to identify silly lesser economic theories like communism and socialism which are obviously inferior because they have only sustained societies for a few generations at a time.  Meanwhile, the ideal version of capitalism that so many people glean from one glancing read of some undergraduate economic textbook or Milton Freedman essay has shown to be either utterly unsustainable or repugnant to the notion of human dignity.  So here’s to all the slack-jawed, golly gosh, Amurican Tea Partying Libertarians: Eat cake. 

Can't say it much better than this.

The truth is, the best system is one which finds a balance between capitalist and collective elements. 

I'm a libertarian but even if you have an IQ of 70 and have a general understanding of the darker side of the human psyche, one can put 2 and 2 together and realize that Capitalism, in it's purest form, is unsustainable (as Boilermaker stated). 

 

[Betonblck]

Originally Posted by Boilermaker X

MrBen23 wrote:

---

When people are trading freely and striving to succeed in a capitalistic society two things happen. The quality of life improves for all and the competition for your dollar forces manufacturers/businesses/sellers to create better products/services/etc for cheaper prices. In the end, we do win. It isn't until government steps in that we lose the freedom of free enterprise.

More than two things happen in unchecked capitalism.  While there may be a creation of value at all levels, true free market capitalism places no limits on economic abuse.  The dime store capitalist ethos is based on the notion that A) if you are improving your economic situation then what you are doing is good and B) the market should be permitted to determine price.  Therefore, it's only right to charge as much as the market will bear for food and gas.  It would be morally wrong to not start a private company that charges homeless people in large metropolitan areas for the water they need to live (think South America).  Health care?  Education?  Infrastructure?  Don't make me laugh.  If you can increase profits by charging $8 for a gallon of gas and turning away uninsured bleeding people from emergency rooms, then IT IS YOUR DUTY TO DO SO.  Because you are a dyed-in-the-wool free market capitalist.  Sure, not everyone will be able to afford to live in this idyllic system (and certainly not like they do now) and we can only speculate as to the social upheaval this will bring about, but if a certain percentage of the populace has to die in order for me to make more money than I do now under these artificial and restricting rules, then so be it.  Because in the end, we do win!  As long as you're one of the very few on top of this bottom-heavy society.

The problem with unchecked capitalism is that when given time to fully mature it leads to an extremely small number of parties controlling all the wealth, with no impetus or reason to sustain anyone else unless they continue to generate more wealth for them.  (Sounds suspiciously like feudalism, no?)  However, those societies that have attempted true capitalism (or libertarianism) have faltered very rapidly and the ones that endure under the disingenuous monaker of capitalism  (US, Europe, etc.) are never real capitalist or libertarian societies.  However, it's easy to identify silly lesser economic theories like communism and socialism which are obviously inferior because they have only sustained societies for a few generations at a time.  Meanwhile, the ideal version of capitalism that so many people glean from one glancing read of some undergraduate economic textbook or Milton Freedman essay has shown to be either utterly unsustainable or repugnant to the notion of human dignity.  So here’s to all the slack-jawed, golly gosh, Amurican Tea Partying Libertarians: Eat cake. 

  Response.  These types of posts keep me on here.

My additional contribution to the thread:

The free market results in monopolies.  Companies get big and they either merge or acquire competitors.  There used to be Standard Oil and I think the Bell Telephone companies before they were broken up.  Deregulation of the financial industry allowed big banks to merge and become "too big to fail"

A true free market means there is no government to enforce things like copyright laws, patents, etc. 

 

[Betonblck]

Originally Posted by Boilermaker X

MrBen23 wrote:

---

When people are trading freely and striving to succeed in a capitalistic society two things happen. The quality of life improves for all and the competition for your dollar forces manufacturers/businesses/sellers to create better products/services/etc for cheaper prices. In the end, we do win. It isn't until government steps in that we lose the freedom of free enterprise.

More than two things happen in unchecked capitalism.  While there may be a creation of value at all levels, true free market capitalism places no limits on economic abuse.  The dime store capitalist ethos is based on the notion that A) if you are improving your economic situation then what you are doing is good and B) the market should be permitted to determine price.  Therefore, it's only right to charge as much as the market will bear for food and gas.  It would be morally wrong to not start a private company that charges homeless people in large metropolitan areas for the water they need to live (think South America).  Health care?  Education?  Infrastructure?  Don't make me laugh.  If you can increase profits by charging $8 for a gallon of gas and turning away uninsured bleeding people from emergency rooms, then IT IS YOUR DUTY TO DO SO.  Because you are a dyed-in-the-wool free market capitalist.  Sure, not everyone will be able to afford to live in this idyllic system (and certainly not like they do now) and we can only speculate as to the social upheaval this will bring about, but if a certain percentage of the populace has to die in order for me to make more money than I do now under these artificial and restricting rules, then so be it.  Because in the end, we do win!  As long as you're one of the very few on top of this bottom-heavy society.

The problem with unchecked capitalism is that when given time to fully mature it leads to an extremely small number of parties controlling all the wealth, with no impetus or reason to sustain anyone else unless they continue to generate more wealth for them.  (Sounds suspiciously like feudalism, no?)  However, those societies that have attempted true capitalism (or libertarianism) have faltered very rapidly and the ones that endure under the disingenuous monaker of capitalism  (US, Europe, etc.) are never real capitalist or libertarian societies.  However, it's easy to identify silly lesser economic theories like communism and socialism which are obviously inferior because they have only sustained societies for a few generations at a time.  Meanwhile, the ideal version of capitalism that so many people glean from one glancing read of some undergraduate economic textbook or Milton Freedman essay has shown to be either utterly unsustainable or repugnant to the notion of human dignity.  So here’s to all the slack-jawed, golly gosh, Amurican Tea Partying Libertarians: Eat cake. 

  Response.  These types of posts keep me on here.

My additional contribution to the thread:

The free market results in monopolies.  Companies get big and they either merge or acquire competitors.  There used to be Standard Oil and I think the Bell Telephone companies before they were broken up.  Deregulation of the financial industry allowed big banks to merge and become "too big to fail"

A true free market means there is no government to enforce things like copyright laws, patents, etc. 

 

[stateofsingularity]

No such thing as a "happy medium"

You can't be a little bit socialist.

Thats tantamount to arguing that you are "a little big pregnant"

You either are or are not.

 

[stateofsingularity]

No such thing as a "happy medium"

You can't be a little bit socialist.

Thats tantamount to arguing that you are "a little big pregnant"

You either are or are not.

 

[essential1]

Originally Posted by stateofsingularity

No such thing as a "happy medium"

You can't be a little bit socialist.

Thats tantamount to arguing that you are "a little big pregnant"

You either are or are not.

Utopia doesn't exist.. Never has never will..

Never ONCE  was America a successful  FREE MARKET CAPITALISM system, as you guys describe it.