capitalism
- Started
- Last post
- 1,312 Responses
- utopian1
Wage gap between top employees and everyone else is 'off the chart'!!!
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/w…
#Greed is Good
#USA #1
#MAGA- The more hours you work the more you make.robotron3k
- ^LOLformed
- https://dqydj.com/in…robotron3k
- This is for the capitalism thread, I don't think work more/earn more applies to socialism. Higher earners tend to be more educated as well. Boom!robotron3k
- How many hours does someone have to work to make a million dollars every 30 days, just like the CEOs?utopian
- It's pure, selfish greed at the expense of everyone else. It's unsustainable. Eventually the pendulum will swing waaaay back to make up for this abuse.formed
- No it won’t. The market sets and sustains the salaries. You can see the trend is upwards like all the other results. Getting all worthy...Morning_star
- Politicians of certain stripes here in Aus also love that guff; you're not a millionaire because you're lazy.MrT
- ...and socially responsible about this is just daft. There is nothing you can do. Why not help out feeding the homeless or do some volunteer work. Don’t focus..Morning_star
- ...the rich, help the poor instead.Morning_star
- Ah, I see, just shrug off the blatant robbery and destruction of the middle class. 'Work more you lazy slob!' Wow.formed
- and yeah, the pendulum will swing. We'll have GMI soon enough and that will be paid for by the wealthiest. If not, eventually, they'll be taken down.formed
- The other lazy argument always rolled out is per capita growth. Look it's OK because we're richer as a group. It's the distribution that's fucked.MrT
- whoa whoa again before trying to blame "capitalism" which is private enterprise trading value for value voluntarily... for inequality is a bit jumping the shardeathboy
- k in any understanding of the systems involved. 1) if inequality is created in such a system its good because both still seem to find value. If not it wouldn'tdeathboy
- because people wouldn't trade. However our markets are hardly laissez faire. and here is where inequality has meaningdeathboy
- special privilege and crony capitalism, lobbyists, and politicians trying to broker power of trade amongst individuals, and on top of that monetary policydeathboy
- which is manipulated by political forces and poor policy of fool individuals. have you ever truely considered the idea of 2% inflation as noble goal?deathboy
- "capitalism" by definition is used as a fall guy by central figures who want even more control blaming error on an abstract idea than failure of predecessors.deathboy
- Wealth inequality by monetary policy is a bad thing. I hoped Powell would have continued QT and rate increases to shrink assets prices (wealthy own most assets)deathboy
- and at the same time increase the value of paper people hold that inflation is ruining. But something is wrong. Powell isn't a bernanke/yellen goondeathboy
- He's smart and spooked, And his 60 minute piece was fluff besides the "we have a plan this time to let banks fail" not sure who he was telling though...deathboy
- .. but anyways the biggest wealth inequality driver is central banking systems and politics. capitalism will create inequality but only if it is beneficialdeathboy
- and with far less errors or swings than the CB/GOV attempts of controldeathboy
- @formed. You've perceived a problem, what's your solution to it?Morning_star
- Ha @formed seems to support more his captors. Doesn't realize he supports everything that best kills middleclass and grows inequalitydeathboy
- Let's face it...the system is rigged from top to bottom. Always was....always will be!utopian
- but that isn't a failure of capitalism utopian. Capitalism is a free system, free for people to take advantage of through politics... crony capitalismdeathboy
- the alternative is crony capitalism on roids were there is nothing free and everything decided on whims of rulersdeathboy
- if you had to choose a system to follow do you choose on leader or on principle. get rid of capitalism and we can claim trump supreme rulerdeathboy
- let him decide, because hes so great, what people want and valuedeathboy
- or we retain freedom and the all dynamics it involves even sometimes shitty ones... tesla... let markets decide, let freedom bedeathboy
- the problem to such freedom is monetary standards and regulations. since there is none and its all fictional involving global systems with the only controldeathboy
- by us with petrol dollar. and countries getting smarter about the con and doign their own versions its hard to have any "free" marketsdeathboy
- btu again not a product of capitalism a product of gov. do you blame the child that convinces their parents to buy them beer? or the parents. gov are gatedeathboy
- keepers to the power.deathboy
- utopian1
- "The System is Rigged"utopian
- Your video shows a rigged system of gov? what does that have to do with capitalism?deathboy
- And again I'd like to point out every anti-capitalist is about growing gov control. ignoring who might control that gov too.deathboy
- anarchists?kingsteven
- Don't mention anarchy Kingsteven, that's worse than socialism! :-)PhanLo
- anarchy makes no sense. chaos only creates desire for socialism. even anarchy to upset the western order would only set it back. its how we destabalize nationsdeathboy
- think of how many countries we have freed to be ruled by some dictator. divide and let anarchy have its hay day and people unite under tin pot dictator. anarchydeathboy
- its not even a system. its kind of a joke to be even included as such a thing. think mostly because fooled repeat the notion its comparable. its the scientologydeathboy
- in landscapes of religiondeathboy
- "chaos only creates desire for socialism"
— i think you just made that up.Nairn - "think mostly because fooled repeat the notion its comparable."
— lol, wut?monospaced - chaos, or anarchy creates a situation to leverage control through numbers. ppl are largely scared by uncertainty. creating desire for tribes and leadersdeathboy
- if you were too weak to protect yourself from said chaos. what alternatives would you have to strengthen? shit is mad max 101deathboy
- why anarchy stupidity only strengthens desire for collectivism, tribalism, socialismdeathboy
- western thinking and rule of law allows individuals freedom from collectivism. pursue own goals, trade value. an ideology and social structure of no slavery todeathboy
- others whims. surprisingly the idea of anarchy as an alterative to socialism is a joke. its the primordial predessor. If you want to create dictatorship anddeathboy
- easy control (because free people hard to control) promote revolution and anarchy. historically look at US history doing such thingsdeathboy
- we destabalize and hope to unite regions under our rule for support. its just interesting finally our own tactics are being used against usdeathboy
- internationally ( for ad revenue) some general espionage and domestically for own individual ( some collective) gains. We stlll forget arab springdeathboy
- pionnered sock puppets on social mediadeathboy
- but none of this is poitned to the original post. a fake attack on capitlism or "free" enterprise. and the intentions of groups promoting this are hoping todeathboy
- simply deceive you and control you by playing to your base desire of envy, or greed.deathboy
- Keep your head buried in the sand.
#MAGA Nationutopian - haha funny whos head is in the sand to think a #maga nation means shit for argument sake.deathboy
- anarchy =/= chaos. anarchy is lack or government.cannonball1978
- formed4
Nice to see one of Wall Street's most successful standing up to the growing inequality problems in America. Even better is the $100million of his own money he's donating to Connecticut public education.
It's rather hilarious when we hear people trying to defend "capitalism" as meaning "more gov" or even more pathetic, "lazy folk talk". Try a little harder, please.
Dalio makes perfect sense, but, sadly, logic doesn't seem to be a prerequisite for any discussions about the wellbeing of America's citizens.
- Currently the USA has 1 million more available jobs than workers, so we haven't peaked...robotron3k
- There's the education gap we have. Thankfully people like Dalio are putting their money to their values vs. the current admin cutting everything they possiblyformed
- can that benefits average American's.formed
- Vocational education also badly needed.robotron3k
- How many of those 1 million available jobs are part-time, and or offer no to little benefits?utopian
- he actually didn't say anything of value...deathboy
- everything was conjecture. this article was more than likely written by a bot, or someone who will soon be replaced by onedeathboy
- first of all for your well being of america's citizens how do you think fed interests rates have helped them?deathboy
- has our monetary policy of 2% inflation and low interest rates done anything but help create an wealth gap? despite intentionsdeathboy
- I guess you just want to ignore reality then and choose to not care about the point of the article. No surprise.formed
- I said he said nothing of value. Not ignoring reality. That is the reality. Perhaps your understanding is different and would like to explain wha you took fromdeathboy
- the article. I have a feeling you took the "feeling" it was targeted and created for. Hit enough triggers to be spread.deathboy
- But prove me wrong. Show me you didn't get baited by your prejudices being gamed.deathboy
- I don't get the confusion. It's pretty simple: Wall Street tycoon, arguably a poster child for capitalism, says "capitalism is not working, it must 'evolve orformed
- or die." Further, that both extremes are bad and people must work together to fix the wealth divide. It's not that complicated.formed
- The significance is who said it. Basically the opposite of what Dimon just said. It's pretty important when you have WS titan's pushing for wealth change.formed
- no its not. just shows their positionsdeathboy
- think he'd lose willingly lose money to support his position?deathboy
- and no reason just conjecture on capitalism. this is where i believe you got hung up on the click bait supporting what you prefer to believedeathboy
- I'd love for you to explain in your own words how capitalism has benefited only a single party. wealth aside its like a remora, in mutual benefitdeathboy
- it is simply a a process of trading value with others freely outside regulation and to mutual benefit of both partiesdeathboy
- that is capitalism, or definition of it. maybe you think it means something elsedeathboy
- But be wary of these guys double speak. Tigers don't change stripes and just means they're positioning next targets to fleece.deathboy
- utopian1
GAWD BLESS MURICA
AMEN HALLELUJAH
- NBQ000
Never enough
- utopian0
- Gawd Bless Murica!utopian
- stop buying pink things thencannonball1978
- ^ exactly.Gnash
- shapesalad1
Fascinating:
- Very interestingyuekit
- Some great history here, although I'm starting to get the impression the guy is a bit of a right-wing nutcase.yuekit
- sum it up into whats fascinating. i have a this hunch that it might be hard to do.deathboy
- and why would the guy be a right wing nutcase? does he choose a stance to support that, or one that you ,might not likedeathboy
- despite the lengthy historical references of such stancesdeathboy
- lets get really into it and not half stepdeathboy
- This podcast and the newspaper he writes for seem to exist primarily for the purpose of being against China, as far as I can tell.yuekit
- It was founded by the Falun Gong, which is a new age spiritual movement that was persecuted by the Chinese government. They may have good reason to hate Chinayuekit
- and hate communism, just saying it is not exactly a neutral source.yuekit
- a right wing nutcase is the definition to one who opposes chinese gov?deathboy
- Are you just here to ask random contrarian questions? Read a bit about it and you'll see what I mean. https://rationalwiki…yuekit
- i only skimmed the cast. but i didn't pick up on any cult shit. what i skimmed seemed like capt wow reason. he did seem opposed to communismdeathboy
- by pointing out reasons why such systems always fail... more than likely skimming i missed something. or at least where you are coming fromdeathboy
- true it's bias - but then the opposite of Chinese news papers is true, they are all owned by Chinese government. Read both, get a balanced indirect view.shapesalad
- is it bias that his arguments make absolute rational sense? i read a lot about china. the bias and the not. need all sides to see the big picture.deathboy
- i don't see any irrational bias standing out in what i heard. Perhaps you can display such bias as example from the clip?deathboy
- I've fact checked him on the origins of "communism" and the "pornographer" guy was actually anti-communist. Coined the term criticizing a french philosopher.sarahfailin
- https://en.wikipedia…sarahfailin
- ?deathboy
- NBQ000
- We should be working less by now.
Not more.PhanLo - Yep. Look at how 1950's viewed 2000's we were supposed to be working way less and having robots assisting us.. plus flying cars....shapesalad
- i would work less for flying cars!api
- We should be working less by now.
- utopian-1
- fun. I love vice newssarahfailin
- Geez, the Chinese aren't playing ball? Shocking.zarkonite
- the Taiwanese are Chinese. and that lady is almost as big as a house.shapesalad
- NBQ00-1
- too long and boring! who cares about these tech bros and their ails.sarahfailin
- That better than ever life.PhanLo
- colin_s1
- KILL THEM ALLcolin_s
- There always exists that line where tragedy becomes comedyT-Dawg
- no link to the article just an image? id want to see if there is substance or rational argument to back the headlinedeathboy
- Here...
https://www.nytimes.…Morning_star - What is the big deal with personal data tracking. What is the worst that can happen? Personalized web ads?drgs
- In a top 10 list of all the shit you face in life, where do you place personalized web ads?drgs
- #1 :) but to go on, privacy is a large component of freedom. On the other end of it, you get things like China's social credit system.T-Dawg
- Web ads aren't the worst thing, but it's going to start creeping into other aspects of life.T-Dawg
- Mostly for the purpose of getting people to part with their money.T-Dawg
- Or political influence like we saw with Cambridge AnalyticaT-Dawg
- Classifying people by categories based on their data. "Sorry, you're in the Category A832, we can't provide that service to you sir"Bennn
- If you are easy to influence, the problem lies with you, although considering that 90% of people are idiots and have the right to vote, I can sort of see the indrgs
- -tent. This reminds me when I was in school, one of the subjects was religion. The suggested the class would have a visit from Jahovah's witnesses.drgs
- The class protested, afraid of being brainwashed. This is something similar, a self declaration of immaturity, that you are not able to navigate in this life bydrgs
- yourselfdrgs
- I can understand that reasoning, but I think putting the responsibility entirely on the individual opens the gates to their exploitation.T-Dawg
- The individuals using these platforms includes everyone from kids to technologically unsavvy seniors.T-Dawg
- I think there's gotta be someone looking out for the folks who aren't reading the 10 page disclaimers and who don't necessarily understand their implications.T-Dawg
- Myself being one of them :)T-Dawg
- Privacy is huge to to freedom but those who willingly choose to give it up probably don't deserve it. The question wether they have the freedom to act in adeathboy
- destructive manner that may effect those around them... well that is a bit anti-vaxxer. a price we pay for society if we want to remain freedeathboy
- but people should be more concerned since so many choose to be fed info. publicis bought epsilon who promises profiles based on over 70 data point of 250 milldeathboy
- ion people. Such info can be weaponized by people who have far better understanding than those profiled of themselves. Whcih goes much farther than productsdeathboy
- and consumerism. Larger goal being conditioning by ones in power. Breaking them up doesnt help but stall. Probably better let it be and see what happensdeathboy
- might be a painful lesson. but afterwards far better for those who learned than have someone protect them, while fighting them the whole time.deathboy
- The issue I have with the 'let it happen and people will learn' approach is that people don't necessarily learn or forget the past by the time the issue reappeaT-Dawg
- Breaking the big boys up isn't necessarily the solution i'd go for, but it's currently the threat that the gov is using to make them act more seriously on privaT-Dawg
- Yup. Cant say im right in they will learn. that is just one of those gut/principled gray areas. No one knows. leaning towards more freedom could be more harmdeathboy
- depending on the audience. or vice versa. One of those areas you need to reflect upon that futurama bender god epsiodedeathboy
- im down to fall in line with a leader to make a decision if i think he believed principally in one way and understood it was his best guess and had no lildeathboy
- dick issues if it didnt pan out, learn from it and try a new approach. i cant stand double downing on bad policy and ppls egos involveddeathboy
- by the way tdawg you are not that one dude i had like 200 side chats with? terrible with name but think it started with a d doc or something?deathboy
- Possibly, not sure which exact one you're thinking of but we've gone down a few threads of discussions.T-Dawg
- And I appreciate that even with a difference of opinions, we've gotten through it without finger pointing and name callingT-Dawg
- well the whole point of discussion starts from a point of reference with room to grow.trying to understand others and error check oneselfdeathboy
- comes down to name calling someone is not discussing properly and needs to sit at a childs tabledeathboy
- shoes0
2019
2016
- deathboy-3
im sure a lot people hate ayn rand, but her words are so straight to the point. hard to see anyone find falseness in it. Might not like the reality of it but not find falseness.
“So you think that money is the root of all evil?” said Francisco d’Anconia. “Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can’t exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?
“When you accept money in payment for your effort, you do so only on the conviction that you will exchange it for the product of the effort of others. It is not the moochers or the looters who give value to money. Not an ocean of tears not all the guns in the world can transform those pieces of paper in your wallet into the bread you will need to survive tomorrow. Those pieces of paper, which should have been gold, are a token of honor–your claim upon the energy of the men who produce. Your wallet is your statement of hope that somewhere in the world around you there are men who will not default on that moral principle which is the root of money, Is this what you consider evil?
“Have you ever looked for the root of production? Take a look at an electric generator and dare tell yourself that it was created by the muscular effort of unthinking brutes. Try to grow a seed of wheat without the knowledge left to you by men who had to discover it for the first time. Try to obtain your food by means of nothing but physical motions–and you’ll learn that man’s mind is the root of all the goods produced and of all the wealth that has ever existed on earth.
“But you say that money is made by the strong at the expense of the weak? What strength do you mean? It is not the strength of guns or muscles. Wealth is the product of man’s capacity to think. Then is money made by the man who invents a motor at the expense of those who did not invent it? Is money made by the intelligent at the expense of the fools? By the able at the expense of the incompetent? By the ambitious at the expense of the lazy? Money is made–before it can be looted or mooched–made by the effort of every honest man, each to the extent of his ability. An honest man is one who knows that he can’t consume more than he has produced.’
“To trade by means of money is the code of the men of good will. Money rests on the axiom that every man is the owner of his mind and his effort. Money allows no power to prescribe the value of your effort except the voluntary choice of the man who is willing to trade you his effort in return. Money permits you to obtain for your goods and your labor that which they are worth to the men who buy them, but no more. Money permits no deals except those to mutual benefit by the unforced judgment of the traders. Money demands of you the recognition that men must work for their own benefit, not for their own injury, for their gain, not their loss–the recognition that they are not beasts of burden, born to carry the weight of your misery–that you must offer them values, not wounds–that the common bond among men is not the exchange of suffering, but the exchange of goods. Money demands that you sell, not your weakness to men’s stupidity, but your talent to their reason; it demands that you buy, not the shoddiest they offer, but the best that your money can find. And when men live by trade–with reason, not force, as their final arbiter–it is the best product that wins, the best performance, the man of best judgment and highest ability–and the degree of a man’s productiveness is the degree of his reward. This is the code of existence whose tool and symbol is money. Is this what you consider evil?
“But money is only a tool. It will take you wherever you wish, but it will not replace you as the driver. It will give you the means for the satisfaction of your desires, but it will not provide you with desires. Money is the scourge of the men who attempt to reverse the law of causality–the men who seek to replace the mind by seizing the products of the mind.
“Money will not purchase happiness for the man who has no concept of what he wants: money will not give him a code of values, if he’s evaded the knowledge of what to value, and it will not provide him with a purpose, if he’s evaded the choice of what to seek. Money will not buy intelligence for the fool, or admiration for the coward, or respect for the incompetent. The man who attempts to purchase the brains of his superiors to serve him, with his money replacing his judgment, ends up by becoming the victim of his inferiors. The men of intelligence desert him, but the cheats and the frauds come flocking to him, drawn by a law which he has not discovered: that no man may be smaller than his money. Is this the reason why you call it evil?
“Only the man who does not need it, is fit to inherit wealth–the man who would make his own fortune no matter where he started. If an heir is equal to his money, it serves him; if not, it destroys him. But you look on and you cry that money corrupted him. Did it? Or did he corrupt his money? Do not envy a worthless heir; his wealth is not yours and you would have done no better with it. Do not think that it should have been distributed among you; loading the world with fifty parasites instead of one, would not bring back the dead virtue which was the fortune. Money is a living power that dies without its root. Money will not serve the mind that cannot match it. Is this the reason why you call it evil?
“Money is your means of survival. The verdict you pronounce upon the source of your livelihood is the verdict you pronounce upon your life. If the source is corrupt, you have damned your own existence. Did you get your money by fraud? By pandering to men’s vices or men’s stupidity? By catering to fools, in the hope of getting more than your ability deserves? By lowering your standards? By doing work you despise for purchasers you scorn? If so, then your money will not give you a moment’s or a penny’s worth of joy. Then all the things you buy will become, not a tribute to you, but a reproach; not an achievement, but a reminder of shame. Then you’ll scream that money is evil. Evil, because it would not pinch-hit for your self-respect? Evil, because it would not let you enjoy your depravity? Is this the root of your hatred of money?
“Money will always remain an effect and refuse to replace you as the cause. Money is the product of virtue, but it will not give you virtue and it will not redeem your vices. Money will not give you the unearned, neither in matter nor in spirit. Is this the root of your hatred of money?
“Or did you say it’s the love of money that’s the root of all evil? To love a thing is to know and love its nature. To love money is to know and love the fact that money is the creation of the best power within you, and your passkey to trade your effort for the effort of the best among men. It’s the person who would sell his soul for a nickel, who is loudest in proclaiming his hatred of money–and he has good reason to hate it. The lovers of money are willing to work for it. They know they are able to deserve it.
“Let me give you a tip on a clue to men’s characters: the man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it.
“Run for your life from any man who tells you that money is evil. That sentence is the leper’s bell of an approaching looter. So long as men live together on earth and need means to deal with one another–their only substitute, if they abandon money, is the muzzle of a gun.
“But money demands of you the highest virtues, if you wish to make it or to keep it. Men who have no courage, pride or self-esteem, men who have no moral sense of their right to their money and are not willing to defend it as they defend their life, men who apologize for being rich–will not remain rich for long. They are the natural bait for the swarms of looters that stay under rocks for centuries, but come crawling out at the first smell of a man who begs to be forgiven for the guilt of owning wealth. They will hasten to relieve him of the guilt–and of his life, as he deserves.
“Then you will see the rise of the men of the double standard–the men who live by force, yet count on those who live by trade to create the value of their looted money–the men who are the hitchhikers of virtue. In a moral society, these are the criminals, and the statutes are written to protect you against them. But when a society establishes criminals-by-right and looters-by-law–men who use force to seize the wealth of disarmed victims–then money becomes its creators’ avenger. Such looters believe it safe to rob defenseless men, once they’ve passed a law to disarm them. But their loot becomes the magnet for other looters, who get it from them as they got it. Then the race goes, not to the ablest at production, but to those most ruthless at brutality. When force is the standard, the murderer wins over the pickpocket. And then that society vanishes, in a spread of ruins and slaughter.
“Do you wish to know whether that day is coming? Watch money. Money is the barometer of a society’s virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion–when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing–when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors–when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you–when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice–you may know that your society is doomed. Money is so noble a medium that is does not compete with guns and it does not make terms with brutality. It will not permit a country to survive as half-property, half-loot.
“Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money is men’s protection and the base of a moral existence. Destroyers seize gold and leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. This kills all objective standards and delivers men into the arbitrary power of an arbitrary setter of values. Gold was an objective value, an equivalent of wealth produced. Paper is a mortgage on wealth that does not exist, backed by a gun aimed at those who are expected to produce it. Paper is a check drawn by legal looters upon an account which is not theirs: upon the virtue of the victims. Watch for the day when it bounces, marked, ‘Account overdrawn.’
“When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good. Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished and looting rewarded. Do not ask, ‘Who is destroying the world? You are.
“You stand in the midst of the greatest achievements of the greatest productive civilization and you wonder why it’s crumbling around you, while you’re damning its life-blood–money. You look upon money as the savages did before you, and you wonder why the jungle is creeping back to the edge of your cities. Throughout men’s history, money was always seized by looters of one brand or another, whose names changed, but whose method remained the same: to seize wealth by force and to keep the producers bound, demeaned, defamed, deprived of honor. That phrase about the evil of money, which you mouth with such righteous recklessness, comes from a time when wealth was produced by the labor of slaves–slaves who repeated the motions once discovered by somebody’s mind and left unimproved for centuries. So long as production was ruled by force, and wealth was obtained by conquest, there was little to conquer, Yet through all the centuries of stagnation and starvation, men exalted the looters, as aristocrats of the sword, as aristocrats of birth, as aristocrats of the bureau, and despised the producers, as slaves, as traders, as shopkeepers–as industrialists.
“To the glory of mankind, there was, for the first and only time in history, a country of money–and I have no higher, more reverent tribute to pay to America, for this means: a country of reason, justice, freedom, production, achievement. For the first time, man’s mind and money were set free, and there were no fortunes-by-conquest, but only fortunes-by-work, and instead of swordsmen and slaves, there appeared the real maker of wealth, the greatest worker, the highest type of human being–the self-made man–the American industrialist.
“If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans, I would choose–because it contains all the others–the fact that they were the people who created the phrase ‘to make money.’ No other language or nation had ever used these words before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity–to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted or obtained as a favor. Americans were the first to understand that wealth has to be created. The words ‘to make money’ hold the essence of human morality.
“Yet these were the words for which Americans were denounced by the rotted cultures of the looters’ continents. Now the looters’ credo has brought you to regard your proudest achievements as a hallmark of shame, your prosperity as guilt, your greatest men, the industrialists, as blackguards, and your magnificent factories as the product and property of muscular labor, the labor of whip-driven slaves, like the pyramids of Egypt. The rotter who simpers that he sees no difference between the power of the dollar and the power of the whip, ought to learn the difference on his own hide– as, I think, he will.
“Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction. When money ceases to be the tool by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of men. Blood, whips and guns–or dollars. Take your choice–there is no other–and your time is running out.”
" An honest man is one who knows that he can’t consume more than he has produced." this is also a goodline not being preached where the idea of capitalism is involved. debt growth is and the endless bonfires robbins mentions in woodpecker as metaphor at greed for its sake as an inherant lesson of capitalism that was lost while bashing the only moral society mechanism known to western man.
- bummer also rands writings gave game plans for the bernie sanders type to achieve powerdeathboy
- lol deathboy you do realize that rand is the archetype for reaganism / the complete opposite of "bernie sanders" type right?colin_s
- and there are many ways to find falseness in it as it's a subjective diatribe as to the nature of money as it relates to morality, which is moroniccolin_s
- well some aspects of rand can be attributed to reaganism. however for the bernie types i was more speaking of the toohey type charactersdeathboy
- and no its not really subjective at all involving morality, based on normal cultural moral standards.deathboy
- i actually think u miss the whole point of money as a moral standard or simply deny it. it is real. if not argue it.deathboy
- show assumptions or reasoning in the diatribe that are incorrect. you do see calling it moronic as only arguement seems well a bit moronicdeathboy
- Just pick something from it that doesn't add up and state why? If you can't it could be its true...deathboy
- literally every part of this can be seen as an equation that money is objective value and not subjective - that a person's wealth equates to their human valuecolin_s
- which is how warmongers and capitalists often write off people as statistics, as collateral damage, not individuals stuck in oppressive systemscolin_s
- executive pay is so high for doing so little work compared to the common farmer - the idea that labor and wealth can be truly equated by moneycolin_s
- is false, especially in a system which promotes greed - "to make money" becomes the precedent above any sort of humanity ... it's disgustingcolin_s
- yes money is objective value in a system of trade that supports real freedom. i dont see it as subjective at all. Maybe subjective in MSRP, but other than thatdeathboy
- all objective. as far as human value goes. this makes no mention of such a thing. im curious how you would even define that concept. sounds extremely arbitrarydeathboy
- and what system exists that doesn't award greed? https://www.youtube.…deathboy
- im not suggesting all should live life trying to stack paper. there is more to life than that. but many who do end up making our lifes easierdeathboy
- but people quickly confuse the symbol of money with things. its a tool and how we use it truely says a lot about us.deathboy
- look at some of your politicans who are rich and yet take views that such people shouldnt be free to pursue or get gainsdeathboy
- they are fine others are not but i think it comes down to them not valuing money. being pissed money gave them no happinessdeathboy
- at the end of the day what they wanted was power, and not all money can by power, but a political system can trump money for power.deathboy
- this excerpt really without a doubt helps highlights subsets of people based on values in regard to money. and im not suredeathboy
- or pretty sure nothing about it is objectively false. chic was cray cray in personal life but her writing was legitdeathboy
- i also think her words spoke to a lot others one thing bugs me is this. “If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans, I would choose–because itdeathboy
- contains all the others–the fact that they were the people who created t the phrase ‘to make money.’ No other language or nation had ever used these words befordeathboy
- men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity–to be seized, ... in relation to the fed and our post wwII leverage/positionsdeathboy
- Sociopathy pays well.i_monk
- what of this speaks of sociopathy? Or you making more of a remark upon elon musk types who are cronie capitalist liars?deathboy
- https://www.google.c…i_monk
- haha. are you trying to say the writing is junk because of views of the author? id stick with debasing the writingdeathboy
- as far as author goes. she was a very strong woman for her time, from her place. she'd be a feminist celeb now except she honestly loved the cock. and to bedeathboy
- controlled. and sex and her value structure was well hers, and doesnt have anything to do with her writing or the value of the words.deathboy
- so imonk what is it about the passage that has anything to do with sociopathy?deathboy
- Other than reducing people to categories by their functional value? And mapping value to monetary utility? It's the philosophy of a sociopath.i_monk
- https://rationalwiki…i_monk
- so what your saying is imonk we shouldn't focus on value? to focus on value is sociopathydeathboy
- a lot of people believe in unconditional love. or promote it. i think love is best based on values. a conditionaless is fleeting.deathboy
- and hardly helps society. values however are important and produce better herd think.deathboy
