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

bobhikes · Jun 25, 2019

Audie said:
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.

I glad we agree this is the failure of capitalism and there is no apparent fix so it uses welfare programs to try and stop a rebellious underclass from forming.

Revoltingest · Jun 25, 2019

bobhikes said:
Social welfare program's are not part of Capitalism....

Social welfare isn't inherent in the definition of socialism or communism either.
And in real world application of these systems, we observe that they can be
far far more brutal & abusive of their population than capitalists.

Whether capitalism, socialism, communism, feudalism or even hunter gatherer,
social welfare is independent, & stems from culture & governance.

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.

There are good reasons we abandoned bartering.
It's horribly inconvenient.
And placing time limits on using resources sounds like returning to
hunter gathering lifestyles. You can have that. I'll stick with capitalism,
social welfare paid for by it, & money as a means of exchange.

bobhikes · Jun 25, 2019

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

Hint:this aint it.

scrooge money bin - Google Search:

I did not fully explain the option. Its pretty detailed, trying to accomplish several things but the one thing would be every 5 years the monetary supply would be changed. There would be an exchange rate for a period of time say a couple months. If you didn't exchange the money buy the end of the exchange period it would be lost.

I know this is radical and there is a lot more to it but for me the current system is messed up badly and there is no current solution available.

Audie · Jun 25, 2019

bobhikes said:
I did not fully explain the option. Its pretty detailed, trying to accomplish several things but the one thing would be every 5 years the monetary supply would be changed. There would be an exchange rate for a period of time say a couple months. If you didn't exchange the money buy the end of the exchange period it would be lost.

I know this is radical and there is a lot more to it but for me the current system is messed up badly and there is no current solution available.

Ok... but you are going to need a lot more
education in economics before you come
up with sensible solutions.

I kind of doubt you have invested in, say,
a construction project. An apartment complex,
say. It can take a long freaking time to go
through, and your time limit would be
crippling.

You have not btw identified any way that the
"current system" is "messed up" that would
not be true for any society at any time.

The weak dont get to be top monkey in monkey
society.

Audie · Jun 25, 2019

bobhikes said:
I glad we agree this is the failure of capitalism and there is no apparent fix so it uses welfare programs to try and stop a rebellious underclass from forming.

You skipped a lot of what I said .

Including that this is and has been
"the failure" of every society, ever. It is hard wired
into the nature of biological reality.

Capitalism is what changed a poor fishing village into
this: Do you wish to deny that, or feel that "poor fishing
village" is somehow preferable?

hong kong - Google Search:

PureX · Jun 25, 2019

Stevicus said:
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.

It is pretty surprising, as I doubt that the capitalist system has served everyone here so well.

I think the reason behind all this absurd auto-defense is that hardly anyone here knows what capitalism even is. They think it's just another word for "free market economy", and even then, they have no idea what a free market actually is, either. So really all they're thinking is that it has something to do with freedom, but they don't really know what, exactly. And they've been told a thousand times by now that everything but "capitalism" is evil, forced, horrific, "communist socialism" where everyone gets exactly the same pay no matter what they do or how well they do it. And because most humans are happy being ignorant so long as their ignorance make it appear to them that they are right and/or superior, most don't ever bother to consider that this may be wrong. So they just regurgitate it ad nauseam like a blind parrot.

Stevicus said:
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.

Well, the ones that have a lot of money clearly believe every word of it, because for them, capitalism has been just a 'dandy' system. For everyone else, who knows? There are all sorts of reasons that people side with their oppressors, and abusers. You wouldn't think so, but it's true, nevertheless.

Cooky · Jun 25, 2019

Stevicus said:
Every time I read the standard arguments in support of capitalism (and usually against socialism), I think of the plethora of examples where capitalists behave badly - such as in this article here:

Former Minnesota grain elevator manager sentenced to 8 years in prison for bilking small farmers

I would wager that, at some point during this man's life, he very likely has had discussions about the merits of capitalism, and no doubt he would argue that capitalism is the superior system because it "rewards hard work." Yet this guy is a thief, an embezzler, a swindler, and a tax cheat. Not to mention the fact that he's a big game hunter - someone who hunts endangered species just for trophies.

This guy had been doing this since 2003, well over a decade before he finally got caught.

The article also mentioned that he had paid big bucks for big game safaris in Africa, New Zealand, and Alaska.

If the truth of his dirty dealings had not come out, then other capitalists would look at this guy and say "Yes, he is wealthy solely due to his hard work, and he is undoubtedly worth every penny he has received."

But...he's a crook - and the fact that he was able to get away with it for as long as he did would indicate that there are probably many other crooks out there who fly under the radar and haven't been caught yet.

Of course, someone out there may chime in and say "But, not all capitalists are crooks!" Yes, there are some honest and ethical ones out there. Yet still, ideologically, they'll still protect and run interference for those who are dishonest and crooked. There is minimal, lax enforcement, along with ridiculously light sentences for white collar crime and other crimes involving fraud, misrepresentation, cheating, along with various other forms of flim-flammery. This is why it happens.

This is just a typical example, and such things seem to happen quite a bit.

My beef with capitalism is not so much on a theoretical level (which is how most capitalists argue their position), but it's that they're far too quick to turn the blind eye to this sort of thing - or treat it with a nod and a wink. All this crooked BS goes on because capitalists resist enforcement and/or any real punishment for these kinds of crimes.

I also take issue with the general pattern of dishonesty when capitalists say some highly-paid executive is "worth it," yet they refuse to show the math which leads them to that conclusion.

You'll find corruption everywhere, sometimes even worse in socialism.

...Some say that socialism guarantees high levels of corruption.

Audie · Jun 25, 2019

PureX said:
rot.
Well, the ones that have a lot of money clearly believe every word of it, because for them, capitalism has been just a 'dandy' system. For everyone else, who knows? There are all sorts of reasons that people side with their oppressors, and abusers. You wouldn't think so, but it's true, nevertheless.

Re the first in bold, you made that up.

As for the second, "oppressors", are we.
Mao would have made you a lieutenant.

Members of my family in HK escaped that,
the ones in china who had any property at all were
robbed, beaten, killed. "Oppressor" was one
of the crimes for which they paid.*

Now, it is true, that some do side with oppressors.
Various reasons, including stockholm syndrome

For those who side with capitalism despite being
aamong the have-nots, of course there are
various reasons for that too.

One is probably a kind of simple minded
prosperity gospel way of thinking.

More charitably, maybe some people would
prefer a system that has worked well so far,
raising all ships, to some untested new whack at
social engineering. There have been some very
noted flops.

Maybe they'd like to be in a system where they at
least they have a chance to prosper?

Successes of social engineering projects to
make everyone equal?

1
2
3
?

* an acquaintance fresh from China told
me of how the landlords used to get a row
of virgin girls to lie across, for their mattress.

I asked her to think a bit, how impossible
it would be to sleep that way.

Oh, um, maybe that is just a story, she said.

shmogie · Jun 25, 2019

bobhikes said:
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.

It would seem to me that our capitalist system does pretty well for the group you cite. Social security disability and SSI exists for those who are mentally or physically limited so they cannot work.

The uneducated, are uneducated by their choice, or they came from a country without and education system. K-12 education is provided, at the largesse of the American property owner and their taxes, primarily, but other Americans have contributed by paying their taxes as well.

If these uneducated, want to improve their lot, the American tax payers have provided them, at no cost to them, educational opportunities to do so.

A high percentage of those who ¨without ability¨ are in that condition because their choices placed them there.

Taxes are robbery, they take what is mine to give to someone else. I and most Americans ameliorate this robbery by agreeing to it. We want the country to be defended, roads and other infrastructure to me developed and maintained, a basic healthcare safety net for our non productive fellow citizens who must use our money to pay for medical treatment. Finally, we agree to being robbed to pay for education.

The socialists promise free college, free medical, erase student loans. free free free.

Of course,nothing is free, and the government does not produce one single dollar, except for printing them.

So, the robbery will be amplified, more of what I worked for, my retirement savings, my retirement income, will be stolen from me, without my permission, and given to those who did nothing for it. Those who took government money, i.e. taxpayer money, as a loan for college, and promised to pay it back, will receive taxpayer money to absolve them of their debt, the robbery from me will be part of that.

No one said they had to go to college, I know many successful people who did not. No one forced them to sign on the dotted line for a loan, which will become just another handout.

I happily give to a number of charities regularly. One for kids overseas, one for wounded soldiers, a number of animal welfare charities, The Soroptomist club for abused women, Shriners hospitals, etc.

When they socialists take over, and begin their shakedown, I will be unable to support charities, since my freedom of choice will disappear, as they rob me to give to others who did nothing for me for which they are owed by me.

The socialist states of Scandinavia are touted as ideal societies, really ? Check out what government robbery has done to the individuals freedom.

You make or are given money, but huge sales taxes are levied on everything, You want to buy a car, you pay 50% more than what it is worth, even food is taxed. So like a good little drone, you live in your taxed apartment, ride your highly taxed mo ped, and at the end of the month you might be able to save a few kroner, and in 15 years you can afford a car. At the same time, in this equal society, there is someone, many, doing nothing but taking, they are equal to you and both of you are imprisoned in a system that gives you little economic freedom.

shmogie · Jun 25, 2019

Audie said:
Re the first in bold, you made that up.

As for the second, "oppressors", are we.
Mao would have made you a lieutenant.

Members of my family in HK escaped that,
the ones in china who had any property at all were
robbed, beaten, killed. "Oppressor" was one
of the crimes for which they paid.*

Now, it is true, that some do side with oppressors.
Various reasons, including stockholm syndrome

For those who side with capitalism despite being
aamong the have-nots, of course there are
various reasons for that too.

One is probably a kind of simple minded
prosperity gospel way of thinking.

More charitably, maybe some people would
prefer a system that has worked well so far,
raising all ships, to some untested new whack at
social engineering. There have been some very
noted flops.

Maybe they'd like to be in a system where they at
least they have a chance to prosper?

Successes of social engineering projects to
make everyone equal?

1
2
3
?

* an acquaintance fresh from China told
me of how the landlords used to get a row
of virgin girls to lie across, for their mattress.

I asked her to think a bit, how impossible
it would be to sleep that way.

Oh, um, maybe that is just a story, she said.

Heck, I just bought a new mattress, i f I had known........................... I don´t think my wife would go for it.

Audie · Jun 25, 2019

shmogie said:
It would seem to me that our capitalist system does pretty well for the group you cite. Social security disability and SSI exists for those who are mentally or physically limited so they cannot work.

The uneducated, are uneducated by their choice, or they came from a country without and education system. K-12 education is provided, at the largesse of the American property owner and their taxes, primarily, but other Americans have contributed by paying their taxes as well.

If these uneducated, want to improve their lot, the American tax payers have provided them, at no cost to them, educational opportunities to do so.

A high percentage of those who ¨without ability¨ are in that condition because their choices placed them there.

Taxes are robbery, they take what is mine to give to someone else. I and most Americans ameliorate this robbery by agreeing to it. We want the country to be defended, roads and other infrastructure to me developed and maintained, a basic healthcare safety net for our non productive fellow citizens who must use our money to pay for medical treatment. Finally, we agree to being robbed to pay for education.

The socialists promise free college, free medical, erase student loans. free free free.

Of course,nothing is free, and the government does not produce one single dollar, except for printing them.

So, the robbery will be amplified, more of what I worked for, my retirement savings, my retirement income, will be stolen from me, without my permission, and given to those who did nothing for it. Those who took government money, i.e. taxpayer money, as a loan for college, and promised to pay it back, will receive taxpayer money to absolve them of their debt, the robbery from me will be part of that.

No one said they had to go to college, I know many successful people who did not. No one forced them to sign on the dotted line for a loan, which will become just another handout.

I happily give to a number of charities regularly. One for kids overseas, one for wounded soldiers, a number of animal welfare charities, The Soroptomist club for abused women, Shriners hospitals, etc.

When they socialists take over, and begin their shakedown, I will be unable to support charities, since my freedom of choice will disappear, as they rob me to give to others who did nothing for me for which they are owed by me.

The socialist states of Scandinavia are touted as ideal societies, really ? Check out what government robbery has done to the individuals freedom.

You make or are given money, but huge sales taxes are levied on everything, You want to buy a car, you pay 50% more than what it is worth, even food is taxed. So like a good little drone, you live in your taxed apartment, ride your highly taxed mo ped, and at the end of the month you might be able to save a few kroner, and in 15 years you can afford a car. At the same time, in this equal society, there is someone, many, doing nothing but taking, they are equal to you and both of you are imprisoned in a system that gives you little economic freedom.

The laffer curve shows that if you tax 100% of income, there
will soon be no income to tax, and govt tax revenue drops to zero.

If you tax 0% there is no govt revenue either.

So there must be a sweet spot in between,
or what in other fields is called a maximum
sustained yield.

shmogie · Jun 25, 2019

Audie said:
The laffer curve shows that if you tax 100% of income, there
will soon be no income to tax, and govt tax revenue drops to zero.

If you tax 0% there is no govt revenue either.

So there must be a sweet spot in between,
or what in other fields is called a maximum
sustained yield.

Art Laffer is a great economist, and has been showed to be right time after time.

Audie · Jun 25, 2019

Stevicus said:
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.

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.

Maybe Churchill was wrong.

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?

If it appears to you that capitalism is the
proximate cause of all probs,well it does.
Speaking of compartmentalizing, tho,
honestly? One compartment?

I have made it very clear that capitalism
is far from perfect. i dont know how well
you read, but so far,not very.

Churchill, what did he know.

As for Mao, I said nothing of lamposts.

We have seen attempts at radical
social engineering,power to the proles,
and they have gone badly.

You are the one going emotional.
"Mnions","evil" "horrible atrocity"

Audie · Jun 25, 2019

shmogie said:
Art Laffer is a great economist, and has been showed to be right time after time.

Even if he is a dufus, the curve is rather obviously true.
Finding the sweet spot is the prob.

bobhikes · Jun 25, 2019

shmogie said:
It would seem to me that our capitalist system does pretty well for the group you cite. Social security disability and SSI exists for those who are mentally or physically limited so they cannot work.

The uneducated, are uneducated by their choice, or they came from a country without and education system. K-12 education is provided, at the largesse of the American property owner and their taxes, primarily, but other Americans have contributed by paying their taxes as well.

If these uneducated, want to improve their lot, the American tax payers have provided them, at no cost to them, educational opportunities to do so.

A high percentage of those who ¨without ability¨ are in that condition because their choices placed them there.

Taxes are robbery, they take what is mine to give to someone else. I and most Americans ameliorate this robbery by agreeing to it. We want the country to be defended, roads and other infrastructure to me developed and maintained, a basic healthcare safety net for our non productive fellow citizens who must use our money to pay for medical treatment. Finally, we agree to being robbed to pay for education.

The socialists promise free college, free medical, erase student loans. free free free.

Of course,nothing is free, and the government does not produce one single dollar, except for printing them.

So, the robbery will be amplified, more of what I worked for, my retirement savings, my retirement income, will be stolen from me, without my permission, and given to those who did nothing for it. Those who took government money, i.e. taxpayer money, as a loan for college, and promised to pay it back, will receive taxpayer money to absolve them of their debt, the robbery from me will be part of that.

No one said they had to go to college, I know many successful people who did not. No one forced them to sign on the dotted line for a loan, which will become just another handout.

I happily give to a number of charities regularly. One for kids overseas, one for wounded soldiers, a number of animal welfare charities, The Soroptomist club for abused women, Shriners hospitals, etc.

When they socialists take over, and begin their shakedown, I will be unable to support charities, since my freedom of choice will disappear, as they rob me to give to others who did nothing for me for which they are owed by me.

The socialist states of Scandinavia are touted as ideal societies, really ? Check out what government robbery has done to the individuals freedom.

You make or are given money, but huge sales taxes are levied on everything, You want to buy a car, you pay 50% more than what it is worth, even food is taxed. So like a good little drone, you live in your taxed apartment, ride your highly taxed mo ped, and at the end of the month you might be able to save a few kroner, and in 15 years you can afford a car. At the same time, in this equal society, there is someone, many, doing nothing but taking, they are equal to you and both of you are imprisoned in a system that gives you little economic freedom.

The tread is about Capitalism not American Democracy that use a sort of Capitalism. You are combining the 2 and yes the American system has its problems as well.

Revoltingest · Jun 25, 2019

bobhikes said:
The tread is about Capitalism not American Democracy that use a sort of Capitalism. You are combining the 2 and yes the American system has its problems as well.

When discussing the effects of various economic systems,
this cannot be done without considering how they affect &
are affected by government.

shmogie · Jun 25, 2019

bobhikes said:
The tread is about Capitalism not American Democracy that use a sort of Capitalism. You are combining the 2 and yes the American system has its problems as well.

America is a capitalist society, I simply compared capitalism to socialism

What is a sort of capitalist society ?

Is a capitalist society you envision one where there is total economic freedom , and market forces control every aspect of life ? A society where you sink or swim based upon your ability, and pure voluntary giving supports aid to the needy ? Sorta like America circa 1795 ?

PureX · Jun 25, 2019

I noticed that no one answered the question in post #29. If exploiting each other's weaknesses and misfortunes for personal gain (greed) is so reasonable and acceptable, ... and you believe, defensible, why are there laws enforcing limits on this, at all? I mean, if it's OK to cheat someone out of a few thousand dollars because they weren't up on the latest classic car prices, and we are, why not sell bridges and summer homes on Mars to whomever is dumb enough to buy them? Or why not sell unsafe foods and medicines to anyone who isn't knowledgeable enough to determine that they are not safe? Or how about selling phony cures for diseases? After all, it's all commerce based on competition, and the rewards (profits) go to those who know how to get the most and give the least in the commercial exchange, regardless of how it effects anyone else. So why do we have to limit our capitalist greed at all? ... I mean if greed is such a virtue good, and all.

shmogie · Jun 25, 2019

PureX said:
I noticed that no one answered the question in post #29. If exploiting each other's weaknesses and misfortunes for personal gain (greed) is so reasonable and acceptable, ... and you believe, defensible, why are there laws enforcing limits on this, at all? I mean, if it's OK to cheat someone out of a few thousand dollars because they weren't up on the latest classic car prices, and we are, why not sell bridges and summer homes on Mars to whomever is dumb enough to buy them? Or why not sell unsafe foods and medicines to anyone who isn't knowledgeable enough to determine that they are not safe? Or how about selling phony cures for diseases? After all, it's all commerce based on competition, and the rewards (profits) go to those who know how to get the most and give the least in the commercial exchange, regardless of how it effects anyone else. So why do we have to limit our capitalist greed at all? ... I mean if greed is such a virtue good, and all.

Pure hyperbole, guilt by association, and irrational musings. Do you wander around berating supermarkets for greed because you find they have items priced more than one supermarket you have found ? Are these supermarkets consumed by greed and avarice ? How about car dealers, they are real ******** because they sell a car to someone for more than the dealer across town is selling the same car. And sin of sins, joe accepts their price, and pays them, while Bill negotiates and gets the same car for less, who is the greedy SOB then ?

Get real, laws exist to make society safe, thatś why there are laws about food, and drugs, and other things.

Your jihad against what you label greed is nonsensical and only has two solutions, humanity as a perfect entity, or a government oppressing everyone to eliminate the laws of supply and demand.

Economic freedom is free, you choose where to spend your money on what. You choose who to buy from. You choose what you consider an acceptable price. In all things regarding buying and selling you are free to choose as you will. No one forced your guy with the classic car to sell, he chose to. No one forced him to accept an offer without determining if it was acceptable by current value estimates, he decided it was acceptable and took the money.

A buyer wants to save money, a seller wants to make money, very simple, logical, and has been in place for at least 6,000 years. For the most part it has worked very well.

Who are you that your personal bugaboo is more important than the wisdom of all those thousands of years ?

Stevicus · Jun 25, 2019

Audie said:
Are you not a socialist, railing against capitalism?

The parts in bold are echoes of the sayings of Mao.

I'm actually more of a Keynesian than an out-and-out socialist. But my point was that capitalists often rail against socialism, and many threads here lately have lamented the fact that so many younger people tend to gravitate more towards socialism. Many seem legitimately worried about so-called "socialist" candidates for public office (nevermind that they're not really socialists in the strictest sense). Some have even expressed a certain level of fear of socialism (particularly in bringing up imagery of Stalin, Mao, or others in that particular rogues gallery).

So, that being the case, it seems it should be in the capitalists' best interests to address the flaws and weaknesses of their system.

That's why FDR is viewed as one of America's greatest presidents, since he was able to implement programs to address the concerns of the lower classes without resorting to full-blown communism as was the case in the USSR or the PRC. It's because the capitalists back in those days were reasonable enough to accept compromises. Now, that no longer appears to be the case, and many laissez-faire capitalists of today are railing against FDR's New Deal and similar programs designed to improve the standard of living for the poor and working classes.

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

Nondetermined

Pragmatic Libertarian

Nondetermined

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Nondetermined

Pragmatic Libertarian

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member