capitalism
- Started
- Last post
- 458 Responses
- TheBlueOne0
drgs has something there. Whenever I try to tell my wife I'm feeling depressed she doesn't get it...the Japanese just don't think that way. And if they do get really down, they tend to be rather successful in just committing suicide. They don't muck about with the whole drug dependency thing. Very efficient.
- drgs0
clinical depression, ie true depression, lasts several months and is the only type of depression which needs treatment.
it is absolutely normal and healthy to feel down from time to time, in a way, feeling happy or sad works as body's system of reward and punishment, steering the choices we do in life in the right direction, guided by our instincts, whichever these are.
depression is a mental disorder, which makes you unable to feel pleasure at all. so if you feel sad today, but was comparably happy yesterday, chances are youve done something stupid and sorting your shit out would prove to have a better effect on your mental health than taking a pill- cocaine seems to do the trickTheBlueOne
- ...and hookers.TheBlueOne
- ********0
/\ enter drug companies convincing millions of people to do drugs rather than deal with their emotions. Tom Cruise knows.
- TheBlueOne0
And systemic depression is merely a symptom of the worker class sense of anomie due to being powerless in face of the systemic violence of capitalism.
See what I did there. I flipped it back and went all Marxist and shit.
- ********0
coericion exists amoungst massive corporate entities to deprive the masses of basic nutrients via commercialized junkfood creating neurosis and vitamine deficiencies subsequently making millions more susceptable to mind control tactics via mass media and entertainment and an ever swelling medical industry. we are weak and scared. : ]
- see what i did i there went all tin foil hat********
- *yawn*hedge
- go to sleep then sheep man********
- see what i did i there went all tin foil hat
- TheBlueOne0
- this was incoherent in many places for me anyway as much as i wanted to be persuaded********
- I agree. The author seemed to be a bit full of himself as well...TheBlueOne
- I found it very persuading—great insight into the inner workings of govt. and utilitiesSoler
- this was incoherent in many places for me anyway as much as i wanted to be persuaded
- TheBlueOne0
"To establish and sustain a free market system, one needs to institute quite a lot of systemic violence. In these modern 'free market democratic' systems you usually have two political parties, whatever they call themselves, painted by whatever passes as the media in these societies as being diametric opposites, and one is quite comfortable to use systemic violence to establish free markets where there are none, and these tend to be called 'liberals' and there are those that utilize violence to keep the system exactly where it as, and these are called 'conservatives'. But one merely advocates violence at the front end, the other the back end, and it's usually all about who gets to control the monopoly."
- and who controls the perceptions shaping culture.********
- and who controls the perceptions shaping culture.
- hedge0
I'm still waiting for a response from utopian and anyone else who fits the bill, for that matter. It's like an anarchist that lives in society and reaps all the benefits while verbally rejecting that same system. I'd say that's a bit hypocritical and cowardly, wouldn't you?
- I'd say the anarchist is being opportunistic. Odd that a capitalist such as your self would call someone on such a principle basic to one's own beliefs.TheBlueOne
- No, what's odd is that you'd call that being opportunistic. That says a lot about your mentality.hedge
- And capitalists aren't opportunistic? And an anarchist living off the failed model of capitalism is simply survival.TheBlueOne
- And I see, I engaged your argument directly and you called into question my mental character. Nice one.TheBlueOne
- My mistake. By "your," I was more targeting the group of people that would justify such behavior. Not you individually.hedge
- its like unemployed saddo who sits on internet forums all day pretending he is richdrgs
- Apology after the fact. Trial lawyer and Fox News 101.TheBlueOne
- Misconstruing words and generalizing. Liberalism 102. See that?hedge
- And somehow finding fault in an apology.hedge
- Look brother I'm not a fucking liberal so get off your fucking script.TheBlueOne
- To answer your question, yes capitalists are opportunistic. That's hardly the same thing as the hypocritical behavior I previously mentioned.hedge
- ...previously mentioned.hedge
- TDIDDY0
enough said
- locustsloth0
Unfortunately, unlike yourself, we don't have the capital to pick up and move to another country and establish ourselves (and possibly our families) there. And/or perhaps there are some of us who believe there is value in the core idea of America, who don't like the way things are run, and want to try to change it for the better. After all, if you don't like a radio station, you don't throw away the radio, you just change the channel.
- TheBlueOne0
Interestingly, I am not "anti-capitalist" although hedge is far too narrow minded and concrete in his idelogy (whether real or imagined) to notice. He's content to follow the script embedded in hos troll like cranium. Sad that he's a wanna-be and probably thinks that a lear jet and a lexus is some sort of paradise for him.
- Wait, now you're not anti-capitalist? Make up your mind.hedge
- Please, when did I ever say I was anti-capitalist? I am critical of it, but so are Bill Gates and Lee Iacoccoa...TheBlueOne
- You're either for or against the very core of capitalism. Which is it?hedge
- shut up dummy.mrdobolina
- mrdobolina0
hedge is from fucking canada.
- LOL********
- Why do you think this?hedge
- he is, he moved to nyc like a year or so ago, no shit, ask 2cents.mrdobolina
- dude, you know that we know who you are, cut the shit.mrdobolina
- I really don't think I know who you think I am.hedge
- it was proven you dumb bitch.mrdobolina
- Well, then let me in on the secret.hedge
- 2cents already did you dishonest bastid.mrdobolina
- Then tell ME who you think I am!
lol.hedge - it is not my place to do so. I agree with 2cents. why don't you just fuck off already?mrdobolina
- You don't know who I am because I don't have another name here. Enough.hedge
- the gig is up, dinky, seriously.mrdobolina
- So you do think I'm dinky. I am not. Hear me now.hedge
- LOL
- mrdobolina0
hedge, you are not a 60 year old white man, you fucking creepy split personality having motherfucker.
- TDIDDY0
Hedge, Is your bio posted somewhere. I'd like to do some digging. I am under the impression you are a free-market facist of some sort.
- TheBlueOne0
Hedge: Please define your working definition of the "core of capitalism".
Keep in mind I know full well that you are not a financial adviser and merely a troll. I find your attempts to pass yourself off as one both amusing and a bit sad, though mostly amusing. I willingly entertain a discussion of the ideas of capitalism however, so again, what is your formulation of the "core" of capitalism...
- The principles and ideals that constitute free market capitalism.hedge
- great. Awesome. Define please. A freshman in poly sci 101 can do it, surely a captain of finance such as yourself can enlighten meTheBlueOne
- you used the term capitalism to define the core of capitalism. you're a dipshit.mrdobolina
- me with your understandings of the fundamentalsTheBlueOne
- Blue, if you don't understand capitalism, then you can't have a reasonable opinion for or against it.hedge
- it is pretty easy to see that you don't understand it.mrdobolina
- TDIDDY0
Insofar as there is a dominant belief in our society today, it is a belief in the magic of the marketplace. The doctrine of laissez-faire capitalism holds that the common good is best served by the uninhibited pursuit of self-interest. Unless it is tempered by the recognition of a common interest that ought to take precedence over particular interests, our present system -- which, however imperfect, qualifies as an open society -- is liable to break down.
I want to emphasize, however, that I am not putting laissez-faire capitalism in the same category as Nazism or communism. Totalitarian ideologies deliberately seek to destroy the open society; laissez-faire policies may endanger it, but only inadvertently. Friedrich Hayek, one of the apostles of laissez-faire, was also a passionate proponent of the open society. Nevertheless, because communism and even socialism have been thoroughly discredited, I consider the threat from the laissez-faire side more potent today than the threat from totalitarian ideologies. We are enjoying a truly global market economy in which goods, services, capital, and even people move around quite freely, but we fail to recognize the need to sustain the values and institutions of an open society.
The present situation is comparable to that at the turn of the past century. It was a golden age of capitalism, characterized by the principle of laissez-faire; so is the present. The earlier period was in some ways more stable. There was an imperial power, England, that was prepared to dispatch gunboats to faraway places because as the main beneficiary of the system it had a vested interest in maintaining that system. Today the United States does not want to be the policeman of the world. The earlier period had the gold standard; today the main currencies float and crush against each other like continental plates. Yet the free-market regime that prevailed a hundred years ago was destroyed by the First World War. Totalitarian ideologies came to the fore, and by the end of the Second World War there was practically no movement of capital between countries. How much more likely the present regime is to break down unless we learn from experience!
Although laissez-faire doctrines do not contradict the principles of the open society the way Marxism-Leninism or Nazi ideas of racial purity did, all these doctrines have an important feature in common: they all try to justify their claim to ultimate truth with an appeal to science. In the case of totalitarian doctrines, that appeal could easily be dismissed. One of Popper's accomplishments was to show that a theory like Marxism does not qualify as science. In the case of laissez-faire the claim is more difficult to dispute, because it is based on economic theory, and economics is the most reputable of the social sciences. One cannot simply equate market economics with Marxist economics. Yet laissez-faire ideology, I contend, is just as much a perversion of supposedly scientific verities as Marxism-Leninism is.
The main scientific underpinning of the laissez-faire ideology is the theory that free and competitive markets bring supply and demand into equilibrium and thereby ensure the best allocation of resources. This is widely accepted as an eternal verity, and in a sense it is one. Economic theory is an axiomatic system: as long as the basic assumptions hold, the conclusions follow. But when we examine the assumptions closely, we find that they do not apply to the real world. As originally formulated, the theory of perfect competition -- of the natural equilibrium of supply and demand -- assumed perfect knowledge, homogeneous and easily divisible products, and a large enough number of market participants that no single participant could influence the market price. The assumption of perfect knowledge proved unsustainable, so it was replaced by an ingenious device. Supply and demand were taken as independently given. This condition was presented as a methodological requirement rather than an assumption. It was argued that economic theory studies the relationship between supply and demand; therefore it must take both of them as given.
As I have shown elsewhere, the condition that supply and demand are independently given cannot be reconciled with reality, at least as far as the financial markets are concerned -- and financial markets play a crucial role in the allocation of resources. Buyers and sellers in financial markets seek to discount a future that depends on their own decisions. The shape of the supply and demand curves cannot be taken as given because both of them incorporate expectations about events that are shaped by those expectations. There is a two-way feedback mechanism between the market participants' thinking and the situation they think about -- "reflexivity." It accounts for both the imperfect understanding of the participants (recognition of which is the basis of the concept of the open society) and the indeterminacy of the process in which they participate.
GEORGE SOROS on capitalism
- Nice George Soros copy/paste.hedge
- uhh yeah, he said that at the end of it. you are slipping, D.mrdobolina
- Quotation marks. Use them, you plagiarizer. ;-)hedge
- HEDGE - you haven't defined anything yet. Soros is so PAID it's awful. Thanks for a cool post, no matter what your beliefs! CheersTDIDDY
- If one gives credit for a quote (quotation marks or not) it's not plagarism, feeblocustsloth
- Improper citation.hedge
- They teach these things in college.hedge
- You should talk Mr. pass off an Andy Rooney rant as my own words (that Andy Rooney didn't even say, BTW)locustsloth
- I have an MBA.hedge
- It's more likely you have an STD, but whateverlocustsloth
- TheBlueOne0
Define: Working definition of the "core of capitalism".
Hedge: "The principles and ideals that constitute free market capitalism."
Tau*tol"o*gy (?), n. [L. tautologia, Gr. &?;: cf. F. tautologie.] (Rhet.) A repetition of the same meaning in different words; needless repetition of an idea in different words or phrases; a representation of anything as the cause, condition, or consequence of itself
FAIL
- kotakmancis0
that suck!
- hedge0
I'm not going to sit here and run through a textbook definition of capitalism for you, Blue. I'm sorry. The markets don't even close for another 30 minutes, I'm rather busy. There are plenty of resources online to help you out.
- you tried to a few posts up and got your 60 year old white man ass handed to you.mrdobolina
- what market, the store on the corner? Get me some yoohoo and some dingdongs.mrdobolina
- That wasn't a textbook definition.hedge
- you're an idiot and obviously a 30 year old douchebottle and not some millionaire hedge fund manager, now jump out your window.mrdobolina
- into traffic.mrdobolina
- Why such anger, dobs?hedge
- TheBlueOne0
"Blue, if you don't understand capitalism, then you can't have a reasonable opinion for or against it.
-Hedge"
Interesting. I merely asked you, O Captain of Finance, to give me your working definition of capitalism. You gave me a tautology in response and then claimed I didn't understand it.
I wonder, what university did you get your MBA at?
Furthermore, you assume my response will be to either be "for" or "against" it, trying to pre-emptively frame the debate.
You sir are, so far, a simple rhetorician, and an unimaginative one at that. I await your concepts that form the "core of capitalism" as you call. You may keep your response to monosyllabalic words if you must.
- I like you blue.hedge
- all monosyllables. Well done. Touche.TheBlueOne