• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

This is part of the reason I have a problem with capitalism

BSM1

What? Me worry?
What "bait"? I was just pointing out that we already have a history of price controls in this country.

But it wasn't just to control the price of commodities during the war. It was wage and price controls, as well as rent controls. The reason it came about was because capitalism just wasn't cutting the mustard in terms of harnessing the nation's resources and organizing industries to gear towards defense.

It just goes to show that capitalism is more of a fair-weather ideology, whereas if you really need to get something done, socialism is superior.


So why was it left to die on the vine?
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
And the socialists' position is better?

That's beside the point.

The thing is, it's mostly the capitalists who are out there railing against socialism. We see it here, and any time the subject is brought up, the same cheerleaders from capitalism come out to rail against socialism and just how horrible, evil, dirty, and smelly socialist regimes can be.

So, if socialism is soooooo bad, why don't capitalists learn the lessons of history so as to understand the best ways of avoiding and preventing socialism from rearing its ugly head? Why is it that so many capitalist are like the guy in the OP article? They simply don't care about the consequences of what they're doing to society as a whole. They only care about themselves.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
This is all just victim-blaming in defense of greed. But I doubt your bias will ever allow you to recognize that.
So, someone who disagrees with you has ¨bias".

Of course, you are totally objective and non biased.

I think not.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
China is better off by far, since the adoption
of capitalism

I am not qualified to attempt a treatise on
Chinese capitalism, but it is far from without
fault, and It may all come crashing down yet,
for reasons similar to what happened to Japan
in the 80s. Or something else.
Certainly corruption and waste is on a vast scale.

At what point did they actually adopt capitalism?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
That's beside the point.
Oh, really?
You condemn one system with criticism which applies to all.
This necessitates broadening things in order to show the
meaninglessness of such critisism.
The thing is, it's mostly the capitalists who are out there railing against socialism.
Again, we see socialists "out there railing against" capitalism.
We see it here, and any time the subject is brought up, the same cheerleaders from capitalism come out to rail against socialism and just how horrible, evil, dirty, and smelly socialist regimes can be.
And of course, the "same cheerleaders from" socialism anguish
over "how horrible, evi, dirty, and smelly" capitalism is.

This is not whataboutism.
It is illuminating how human nature (for better or worse)
will pervade & affect every system we design.
In the real world, which system has the best record in
accommodating the range of human behaviors?
As I see it, a distributed system with more individual
autonomy appears best...fewer famines, more prosperity,
less oppressive government.
So, if socialism is soooooo bad, why don't capitalists learn the lessons of history so as to understand the best ways of avoiding and preventing socialism from rearing its ugly head? Why is it that so many capitalist are like the guy in the OP article? They simply don't care about the consequences of what they're doing to society as a whole. They only care about themselves.
Those advocating socialism replacing capitalism would
do well to compare the histories of such systems.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
The thing is, it's mostly the capitalists who are out there railing against socialism.

They simply don't care about the consequences of what they're doing to society as a whole. They only care about themselves.


Are you not a socialist, railing against capitalism?

The parts in bold are echoes of the sayings of Mao.
 
Last edited:

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Believe what you will; I'm just calling it as I see it.

What I'm not clear on is why there's so much denial coming from the capitalist camp. They believe that capitalists can do no wrong, while believing that socialism is some horrible, ultimate evil that just pops up out of thin air to prey upon weak, helpless, innocent capitalists.

I'm just not sure if they take this approach for propaganda reasons, as a way of playing the victim card and playing on people's emotions. Or if they really do believe such malarkey.
Interesting. I am an absolute capitalist anti socialist. Yet I am not in a state of denial.

There are significant flaws in the capitalist system yet I support it over every other economic system.

Would you say I am denial because I believe in capitalism, or because I reject the alleged wonders of socialism ?
 

BSM1

What? Me worry?
That's beside the point.

The thing is, it's mostly the capitalists who are out there railing against socialism. We see it here, and any time the subject is brought up, the same cheerleaders from capitalism come out to rail against socialism and just how horrible, evil, dirty, and smelly socialist regimes can be.

So, if socialism is soooooo bad, why don't capitalists learn the lessons of history so as to understand the best ways of avoiding and preventing socialism from rearing its ugly head? Why is it that so many capitalist are like the guy in the OP article? They simply don't care about the consequences of what they're doing to society as a whole. They only care about themselves.

You may have a point seeing that there have been countless uprisings against Capitalism throughout history....oh, wait...
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Interesting. I am an absolute capitalist anti socialist. Yet I am not in a state of denial.

There are significant flaws in the capitalist system yet I support it over every other economic system.

Would you say I am denial because I believe in capitalism, or because I reject the alleged wonders of socialism ?

IS there such a thing as "absolute" capitalism, or absolute socialism?
The free market capitalism exported and
sometimes insisted on by the USA is not
practiced in the US.
And where it has been adopted it has not
gone well for anyone but the thin upper crust
of military /political leaders.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Of course that is how you see it, I was pointing
out that it is an unevidenced belief. You do
appear to be picking "capitalists" out as uniquely
inclined to base and ignoble behaviour; it is
not a reasonable nor nuanced position.

It's the system we currently live under. It appears to be the proximate cause of most of America's problems at present. The trouble is when people try to compartmentalize issues and make them appear disconnected, while falling all over themselves to avoid the elephant in the room.

"Believe what you will", friend, is better applied
to yourself! :D

"They believe that capitalism can do no wrong"
REALLY? Come now. I dont say that. Shmog
does not say that. Trump doesnt. Nobody does.
It is plain absurd, on the face of it.

Well, when you use adjectives such as "undemonstrated" and "unevidenced," it seems as if you are unconvinced and skeptical that there's anything wrong with capitalism. Unless you'd like to clarify your meaning.

Capitalism and democracy are both horribly flawed,
but as Churchill noted, better than any alternative.

Maybe Churchill was wrong.

As for propaganda, such hyperbolic rhetoric
as...horrible, ultimate evil that just pops up out of thin air to prey upon weak, helpless, innocent capitalists.
really does not help anyone.

We've had this discussion before. I've heard this kind of talk all my life - all the horrible atrocities committed by evil socialists and their minions (I think even you brought up Mao and described images of capitalists being hung from lightposts). Do you think that helps? Does that really address anything? Or is it just an appeal to emotion?
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
What a crock of garbage.
Look at Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Germany,
Singapore, for examples, after WW2.

Totally devastated. They tried that worthless
trick of "working hard". Oh, and "capitalism".

You know why the Americans came up with an
"Asian exclusion act"? The Chinese were working
too hard.

They came as peasants, no education, no money,
no nothing but a strong culture and willingness to
work. Their descendants are now among the
best educated and most prosperous in America.

Of course just working hard dont cut it. You have
to work hard, smart. Of course the average
person does not get rich. A) it isimpossible
for everyone to be rich and B) your average
joe dont work smart.

So naturally it is best to blame anyone smarter
and harder working for one's own failure.

Why would you blame anyone, you are responsible for yourself. It also doesn't matter if you work smart, only luck or moral ambiguity are the only ways to break into the Upper Echelon. My complaint about Capitalism is not because of my middle class monetary range but because people claim it to be way better than it is and don't even think of other options. Even in your description of how to make it, you are ruling out people genetically that have physical, mental aliments that prevent them from working hard or smart and you are also abandoning those that didn't get an education from no fault of there own. Capitalism assumes that everyone has equal abilities and those that don't use there abilities to the fullest are themselves to blame for there role in life.
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
Odd.
I'm a fire breathing capitalist, but have never heard that from any other capitalist.

Why would they state that it is a negative view. What capitalist says we need to provide money, livable employment or education for the physically, mentally ill or for the uneducated. Capitalism is all about using your ability to make money there is no reward for those without ability which is why socialism took off.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Why would they state that it is a negative view. What capitalist says we need to provide money, livable employment or education for the physically, mentally ill or for the uneducated. Capitalism is all about using your ability to make money there is no reward for those without ability which is why socialism took off.
Actually, something took off which was far more successful than socialism,
ie, social welfare programs in a capitalist economic system.
Actual socialism has been dismal, eg, USSR, N Korea, Cuba, especially
for the disadvantaged groups you've listed....& for the political opposition too.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Why would you blame anyone, you are responsible for yourself. It also doesn't matter if you work smart, only luck or moral ambiguity are the only ways to break into the Upper Echelon. My complaint about Capitalism is not because of my middle class monetary range but because people claim it to be way better than it is and don't even think of other options. Even in your description of how to make it, you are ruling out people genetically that have physical, mental aliments that prevent them from working hard or smart and you are also abandoning those that didn't get an education from no fault of there own. Capitalism assumes that everyone has equal abilities and those that don't use there abilities to the fullest are themselves to blame for there role in life.

"I" am abandoning those who...?
"Capitalism assumes"
"only luck or moral ambiguity are the only ways to break into the Upper Echelon"

Nonsense. Garbage.

people claim it to be way better than it is and don't even think of other options.


Perhaps some do. To generalize so is not
helpful or realistic, but bespeaks only prejudice.

you are ruling out people

Nonsense.
YOU have been ruling it out that anyone could
make it via hard work. Or, connections
and / or immorality.

I appreciate that you agree that it is not really
so, and that working hard can bring success.*

I am not ruling out anyone. There are those
who are not going to make it though. The
reasons are many, the quick fix is not apparent.

don't use there abilities to the fullest are themselves to blame for there role in life.

Thus the term "wastrel". Many people find they
reap what the sow.

Again there are many reasons why people fall
through the cracks.
Smart capitalism recognizes this, and those who
are "differently abled" etc. It is enlightened self
interest, tho not universally observed, to take
care thro' welfare, jobs programs etc to keep
those needing such from forming a permanent
rebellious underclass.


*
Now, I am I suppose, one of those awful
capitalists who got lucky. My family has
major areal estate holdings in HK, among
other things-so it all just falls in my lap.

BUT-I have also traveled and visited
fairly extensively in third world countries.

I am well aware of the flood of would-be
immigrants to the USA from many such
countries. They'd love to face the system
here, for all its imperfections.

I know people from Asia who came to the
US penniless and are now doing very well.

Some perspective on one's sad lot in the USA
might be gained by seeing how bad off we really
are here, compared.
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
Actually, something took off which was far more successful than socialism,
ie, social welfare programs in a capitalist economic system.
Actual socialism has been dismal, eg, USSR, N Korea, Cuba, especially
for the disadvantaged groups you've listed....& for the political opposition too.

Social welfare program's are not part of Capitalism they are a side cart a fill in for the problem with capitalism. I am not a socialist either but it was the response to the pure indulgence of the Royal and Wealthy capitalist society being overturned by the proletarians. I know it is currently referred to as feudalism but if you follow history its where capitalism began. It has been tweaked to allow more ownership rights.

Personally I want to do away with all monetary systems or massively adjust the current one; whereas, money has a time limit on it. Forcing investment or loss of money. Kinda like with bartering. If you bartered for food or with food you had a limited window of opportunity.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Personally I want to do away with all monetary systems or massively adjust the current one; whereas, money has a time limit on it. Forcing investment or loss of money. Kinda like with bartering. If you bartered for food or with food you had a limited window of opportunity.

What on earth do you think rich people do with
their money?

Hint:this aint it.

scrooge money bin - Google Search:
 
Top