capitalism
- Started
- Last post
- 458 Responses
- ********0
I'd let the bull of economic prosperity tea-bag me any day.
- Well then we know what you are, we're just arguing about price now, aren't we?TheBlueOne
- Not everything is about money, TBO.********
- ********0
100% correct, hotroddy.
Finally someone with a little sense here.
- ********0
Can we PLEASE have a discussion without sequoia or horp or anyone spamming it with "hedge, hedge, hedge"
Please.
- that would be like having a conversation with you not being an ass..plash
- ********0
apple is bad capitalism - walmart good capitalism
but still the idea of capitalism is hard to attain when gov is involved. the rules distort the idea of capitalism, and when shit goes sour the politicians who are usually involved in it point fingers at capitalism and free markets which really don't exist, especially in the areas that involve big recessions. and other politicians ge ton the band wgon and blame it too, becuase its so much easyier to blame an imaginary rich fatcat with a cartoonish evil grin and big bags of money then a senator no one knows.
- oh and 1 or 2 specific regualtions can cause mroe market disturabance then 50 other ones. more regulation doesnt = good********
- doesnt = good.********
- oh and 1 or 2 specific regualtions can cause mroe market disturabance then 50 other ones. more regulation doesnt = good
- locustsloth0
The quagmire we are in right now is du partly to what happens to capitalism when the government is NOT involved. Left to their own devices, people will seek to make the most amount of money with the least amount of effort. THis creates a greater ROI, which is what capitalism is all about.
What capitalism has nothing to do with is the actual people embroiled in it. To the idea of capitalism, the people are an abstraction, a bunch of stats on a spread sheet, potential funders. And so, those who practice capitalism to it's fullest don't give a flying fuck if they're jeopardizing peoples' nest egg, so long as what they're doing has the potential to make them rich.
Not to say that all capitalists act this way, but without judicious, meaningful regulation from the government, those who will profit at any cost, will and can.- so capitalism has no problems its the greedy peopel takign advantage of... the system(gov) CDOs, interest rates, lobbyists********
- that gov is not involved is argueable. it does matter in the context. fannie mae + low interest rates very bad********
- im a believer in free market mentality will regulate itself, unless monopolization of nec material by a greedy fuck********
- of course the market isnt free and hasnt been forever with subsidies to certain sects and not other based on lobby dollars********
- its all jsut blanket shit to blame a whole. and is great to take attention away from those being elected controlling and makign the rules********
- making rules who think they can plan for any and also instances. yes they can boost econ in times but for every unnatural boost********
- unnatural boost there is a larger longer crash********
- so capitalism has no problems its the greedy peopel takign advantage of... the system(gov) CDOs, interest rates, lobbyists
- BusterBoy0
If anyone is remotely interested, take a read of THE BIG SHORT by Michael Lewis. That'll give you an idea of how sleazy business can be and how much of Wall St was just a massive pyramid scheme.
- i hate wallstreet. i dont like public owned companies. the ceos become lke politicians and make bad decisions to secure there pay and dont care about a company********
- get pay and dont care about the company/product and longevity or balance********
- if my raise is based on profit margin ill fire more people, charge more. its jsut a job if i get fired ill run another company********
- comapny those kind of shitty risks vs lowering profit margins and raising everyones state and growing slowly with everyone********
- but capitalism isnt represent of greedy fuks, theyre jsut greedy fuks. people need to understand that or theyre fucked********
- fucked********
- i hate wallstreet. i dont like public owned companies. the ceos become lke politicians and make bad decisions to secure there pay and dont care about a company
- akrokdesign0
socialism = you, care for the country and it's people
capitalism = you, don't give a shit about anything except cash- see that ignorance only promotes more ignorance********
- socialism is for insects. were collective is goal, and individual is to be sacrificed. its beneficial for those who rule********
- or for gangs and such. capitalism is civil way to compete without minds and not gangs on individual level********
- you can make great money in a socialism country. just ask the ceo of H&M.akrokdesign
- *with minds or ability, and not to have others use you liek slaves. slavery is good for socialism********
- im all down for having a free labor from a certain race or affiliation if its not me...heh********
- oh i believe the peopel who run a socialist nation make top dollar. while others suffer. i dont go for that suffering by force********
- i know this tv person, who has it own production company. he make a shit load of cash too. sure he pays alot of tax. still has a nice cut.akrokdesign
- a nice cut.akrokdesign
- force. im against slavery. and support equal rights********
- eh. MIDDEL CLASS OF AMERICA IS THE SLAVES.akrokdesign
- hey the rich support us. they provide us livelihoods. think like the top 10 percent pay 90% of taxes********
- naw middle class is people getting a living in a symbiotic relatioship to those who get rich, for most cases********
- NO NO. YOU GOT IT WRONG. ITS THE MIDDEL CLASS WHO PAYS MOST IN AMERICA.akrokdesign
- look it up. no they dont the tax bracket breaks down to the rich covering most. and they should they have most to gain********
- now tax breaks and gov law may tweak things, but thats gov********
- see that ignorance only promotes more ignorance
- akrokdesign0
deathboy, i know we won't agree on this issue. that's okay. on the plus side, we do get to argue for FREE. lol.
- locustsloth0
It's funny, deathboy, that you argue for capitalism in it's "ideal" state, ignoring all human factors involved when you tout it, but denegrate socialism FOR the human factors involved, rather than what it should be like at it's ideal.
Neither of these will ever be seen in a vacuum, and should not be regarded as such. Some people in a capitalist society will always use the system to accrue as much wealth as they possibly can, regardless of the consequences to other. Some people in a socialist soceity will ride on the hard work of others or attempt to guide the communal society for their own benefit.
So the difference is the intent behind the ideal of each of these systems. Capitalism focuses on individuals and corporations either making it or failing. This success is measured in growth and share in the marketplace, requiring that companies increase their profits continually. In essence, greed; getting as much as you can.
Socialism, in it's ideal, is treating the whole of a society as an organism, one that depends on all segments to work for the benefit and survival of a whole. And it's absolutely true that the ability to gain wealth is stifled in this model, but that's looking at going from a capitalist society to a socialist society, and thatt is quite a leap.But think f it this way. Think of society as your body. Would you allow your arms to get infinately stronger at the cost of neglecting your legs? Would you allow your pinky fingers to atrophy and fall off so you could save the blood that flows to them for appendages that are deemed more productive?
So again, no system will ever operate in it's ideal state. But the message to it's citizens dictates where that society goes and how it grows. If the US moved to a socialist state, yes, there would be upheaveal and EVERYONE's lives would change,. But i believe (naively, perhaps) that we need to set a course in that direction, as it's the only way, socially, that we can survive as a people.
- He's a fucking moron. Stop arguing with him. He can't even master grammarTheBlueOne
- He doesn't even understand the difference between systems of ownership and systems of distribution.TheBlueOne
- Like most internet educated libertarian idiots. Nor do they understand scale or externalities.TheBlueOne
- im not arguing for it, im just stating what it is. anticapitalism is propaganda to promote collectivism. and in most cases capitalism has nothign to do with it********
- capitalism has nothing to do with it. just like the home fiasco.********
- an ideal socialist type setting i think would be like in huxleys island.********
- hedge0
locus, the one problem with that state of socialism is incentive. And it's a big problem.
No monetary gain, no incentive. No incentive, no ingenuity. No ingenuity, no progression in industry. No new products, theorems, services, or break-throughs.
- A 5 month year old response?organicgrid
- Interesting that you think material gain is the only incentive worth acting upon.TheBlueOne
- When capital is made by risk. So I'd say the incentive is risk and not the gain.TheBlueOne
- Which is why you capitalists misread shit all the time. You're risk junkies thinking your in it for common sense reasons...TheBlueOne
- When in fact you're emotionally unbalanced, sociopathic human aberrations.TheBlueOne
- Making it real easy to say "You'll be gone, I'll be gone" and leave others to pick up your mess.TheBlueOne
- Oh, and Hi JK..ooops. I mean Orbit.TheBlueOne
- locustsloth0
i never said that we should flip a switch and become a socialist system overnight. That would never work. And you're wrong, the big problem isn't incentive, it's greed. Incentive in a collective society will eventual derive from the social pressure of everyone working for a common good. If you're the odd man out, not keeping your end of the deal up, you'll be ostricized or cut out of the deal.
With greed, if you are taking more resources, you are, in the same way, not holding up your end of the bargain, but also have an advantage because of the extra resources, which makes it more dangerous.
and i would argue that while there may not be as MANY innovations due to the lack of material motivation, the quality of those fewer innovations would be greater, as there would be no drive to increase profit margins by cutting cost. People would do their best because that's what everyone needed.
And certainly there would be (and are, already, in a capitalist society) people who take with no intention of ever giving back because they can operate that way and have no incentive to do otherwise. But, again, you have to look at a long term strategy as far as the ideal way for a society to grow and progress. As we can plainly see, the endgame for capitalism is less people accruing more of the wealth and, in turn, power to manipulate the system to their own gain. It is ultimately unsustainable for a people as a whole (those at the top will obviously do fine).
If people were able to manage the balancing act of working for the common good, ideally, the system is infinitely sustainable. Unfortunately it would take a whole society changing from a self-centered way of thinking to an other-oriented way of thinking, and that's extremely hard to do. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try and find a way to it.
If you are hungry and there's a pile of shit in a clearing next to you, but a banquet on the other side of a seemingly impenetrable forest, do you just eat the shit, or try to find a way to what you really want and need?
- drgs0
Technological singularity is predicted to hit in the beginning of 2030's, revealing us all secrets of science
Discussions about progression in industry or break-throughs will be obsolete, and all societies will inevitably convert to true communism- Predicted by.... you?hedge
- scientific community, the ones behind progression in industry and break-throughsdrgs
- Link then.hedge
- and I doubt it's a majority consensus.hedge
- the singularity needs no consensusreinitialize
- hedge0
Well, my first issue is your saying that the odd man out will be simply ostricized. That isn't really socialism. You're not providing for all citizens in that case.
"Incentive in a collective society will eventual derive from the social pressure of everyone working for a common good"
This is my main issue. I think it's very unrealistic and naive to believe that people will be motivated in this system out of the common good. Humans care about their fellow human, but only to a limited extent. In our current economic system, workers and owners alike get up everyday and go to work because there's a paycheck at the end of it. You can say materialism is a morally reprehensible way to live, but that doesn't change the fact that material goods are an integral part of human life. That won't ever change. All humans want a better life for themselves and their families. If there's nothing to work towards besides "common good," why work? You don't get a better life individually from it.
- drgs0
>Well, my first issue is your saying that the odd man out will be simply
>ostricized. That isn't really socialism. You're not providing for all
>citizens in that case.This is really socialism. True socialism demands and ostracizes more than any other political theory.
Socialism is often defined as equal distribution of goods, which is only half way correct. It is also equal distribution of work (people are forced to work, example Gulags and labor camps in SU). Unemployment rates in USSR were 1-2% and at any time were lower than anywhere else in western europe. This is confirmed by americans who interviewed jewish immigrants from USSR. European welfare states is something completely different...
True socialism places the individual as second, below the primary, organic, collective reality. Individuals are only details, serially stamped products. The society is not built from these parts, i.e. does not rely on them, but creates them and establishes them as a continuation of itself as something secondary...
The bourgeois philosophy on the other hand puts the individual in center, and all forms of organizations are considered as products of atomic agglomeration of individuals. Hence the idea of a nation, a state,or a country as something bureaucratic, a paper contract or an agreement.
In socialism, terror is an essential right of the society to be executed upon each of its individuals who refuse to recognize themselves as part of it. In other words, socialist terror is directed not against some random groups in general, but against autonomous individuals who have deviated from the colony. A perfect socialist society is a coherent living organism, a human ant colony which never dies. Only its parts, individuals replace themselves from time to time. Sometimes the society gradually adapts and changes itself in this process, but as a whole it is eternal.
"The problem that I set here is not what shall replace mankind in the order of living creatures (--man is an end--): but what type of man must be bred, must be willed, as being the most valuable, the most worthy of life, the most secure guarantee of the future.
This more valuable type has appeared often enough in the past: but always as a happy accident, as an exception, never as deliberately willed. Very often it has been precisely the most feared; hitherto it has been almost the terror of terrors ;--and out of that terror the contrary type has been willed, cultivated and attained: the domestic animal, the herd animal, the sick brute-man--the Christian..."
Friedrich Nietzsche
- locustsloth0
"You don't get a better life individually from it."
That's because you are still thinking of it in a self-oriented way. Particularly a self who has the ways and means to pay for whatever kind of life they have.
i believe the net benefit for society as a whole would be beneficial. And again, i'm not saying that this is a 3 or 5 or 10 or even twenty ear process. You are right, humans want a better life for themselves and their families. But if you can get people to see others (neighbors, friends, strangers) as part of an extended family, they will see when all boats go up, theirs goes up too.
- ********0
- ********0
- terrible TERRIBLE waste of everything involvedlocustsloth
- why is this in every threadscarabin
- hedge0
You shouldn't taint a thread with actual valuable discussion by posting spam.
Not cool.
- ********0
people will always hate capitalism since the icons of success are few. of all the people only so many can stand on the podium. and those on top reflect to the rest of the populace as inadequency. ... unless of course those others have enough self respect to not care about the how theyre perceived, and other stand others views are worthless compared to your own...
Or people think of capitalism as greed. But the cartoon guy with dollar sign bags is jsut blown out of proportion. Especially by those who don't want wealth, but the ability to raise enough of a mob to control those who creates wealth. they know they cant create the dollars, so might as well try to overpower those who can with law and pull. hell how easy is it to for me to gain favor by saying all rich anyone with X amount of dollar sis criminal knowing the X amount is the minority. and saying those people are greedy bastard and should share. I'm sure i would have supporters and i could snake my way up and profit with power by preaching selflessness.
its nothing new. ... and dont forget that peoples motives vs wealth are a driving factor. not all rich are good folk. but the simple philosophy/drive to make things better based on a capitalistic system that all have a vote by civil supply and demand/survival of the fittest is whats important. anything else is jsut someone running a mob for own self interest, while spouting altruistics views.
- dont be blinded by the simple fox news negative side of the ideology. it really is a simple********
- philosophy that will enable more freedom and rights albeit with limited governement
********
- i guess case in point being rich deosnt equal evil nor should they forcefully share********
- we try to first try to villianize them so then we can make ridiculous demands on them and say its virtue
********
- You talk too fucking much.DrBombay
- Leave it to a liberal anti-capitalist to try to restrict free speech.hedge
- dont be blinded by the simple fox news negative side of the ideology. it really is a simple