1. 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!

Eat the Rich

Discussion in 'International Politics' started by Secret Chief, Sep 20, 2021.

  1. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    195,989
    Ratings:
    +70,626
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Yours is an extreme view. I see free markets with
    regulation that benefits capitalism by preventing
    monopolies, curbing fraud, & ensuring competence
    in critical fields, eg, medicine, real estate, law.

    "Free" shouldn't be seen as singularly some extreme
    doctrinaire thing, ie, without any limitation...total anarchy.
    I see it as including "mostly", "good enuf", "more than the
    realistic possible alternatives". I don't do purity.
     
    #141 Revoltingest, Sep 20, 2021
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2021
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Stevicus

    Stevicus Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2011
    Messages:
    23,030
    Ratings:
    +14,803
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    I agree that it's wrong when government supports the rights of one group (or one class) over another.

    I'm not sure how much influence money has on our government, unless we're assuming some level of corruption or conspiracy. Theoretically, money should have no influence over government at all, since no one working in government would be allowed to keep any money for themselves (other than their salary). But if that's not the case, then that would be a good argument for tighter controls on government, but in my experience, I've observed that any proposals for real government reform fall on deaf ears. The primary reason for this has to do with the fact that tighter government controls would entail greater citizen and voter power, which many people are afraid of.

    Socialism can fix some of these problems. Ideally, they would ensure a more equitable distribution of resources. From each, according to their abilities; to each, according to their needs.

    The main trouble seems to come in when people feel they deserve more than what can be rationally and logically proven. This was a key point I raised in a thread I started a while back called "A challenge to capitalists," specifically addressing the compensation packages received by CEOs and other giants of capitalism - even in companies which were driven into the ground (such as Sears). How do they justify this? I asked if anyone could cite a specific mathematical formula or some logical, rational justification for paying someone such an obscenely high salary when they showed nothing but abject failure. No one could really rise to the challenge, which was somewhat disappointing, but not surprising. It confirmed what I've known all along, that the ways and means of capitalism are decided more through whimsy and frivolity, not through any actual logic or science (even though capitalists seem to view economics as a hard science, as they don't seem to know that economics is actually a social science).
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Stevicus

    Stevicus Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2011
    Messages:
    23,030
    Ratings:
    +14,803
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    One thing that capitalists don't seem to understand about economics is that it's a social science, not a hard science like physics or chemistry. Their lack of understanding on this point is the reason why there is so much misunderstanding and misinformation.
     
  4. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    195,989
    Ratings:
    +70,626
    Religion:
    Atheist
    The dictatorship is "the people". Countries will have governments,
    be they democratic, monarchic, or dictatorships. All attempts at
    socialism have resulted in such authoritarian regimes, eg, China,
    Cuba, USSR. They go hand in hand historically & theoretically.
    The latter is due to the necessity of an authoritarian government
    to enforce socialism & prevent free economic association. This
    naturally devolves to social authoritarianism...historically.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  5. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    195,989
    Ratings:
    +70,626
    Religion:
    Atheist
    That misses my point. Judge different systems by the
    same standard....not the best of one, & worst of the other.
     
  6. Nakosis

    Nakosis Time Efficient Lollygagger
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2011
    Messages:
    18,923
    Ratings:
    +9,174
    Religion:
    Atheist Libertarian
    But, I think you'd use the same government that caused the problem in the first place. Socialism may change the mechanism slightly but not the people.

    They only get what they can get other people to agree to give them. Why these other people agree? :shrug:
    The Art of the Deal.

    [​IMG]

    I make what I make now because I was able to get someone else to agree to pay me this much.

    Actually I did research and asked for the average being made for my job.

    Why these CEOs get offered so much? IDK, something not within the realm of my understanding.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Guitar's Cry

    Guitar's Cry Verisimilitudinous

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2006
    Messages:
    13,582
    Ratings:
    +3,217
    Religion:
    Panreligious mystical paganism
    Yeah, ok, I can see it being "socialistic" rather than full-fledged socialism, since that would involve the whole state.

    For what it's worth, I think mixing the economy and politics TOO much leads to similar outcomes as mixing religion and politics. I approve of the state having Democratic influence on economic welfare and regulatory power to maintain the general welfare, but having too much economic interest as a politician and political influence as an economic actor is a major problem in my opinion.

    This is why I typically support some of the concepts behind Democratic socialism, whether it is really socialism or not.
     
  8. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    195,989
    Ratings:
    +70,626
    Religion:
    Atheist
    A social welfare system financed by capitalism?
     
  9. Guitar's Cry

    Guitar's Cry Verisimilitudinous

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2006
    Messages:
    13,582
    Ratings:
    +3,217
    Religion:
    Panreligious mystical paganism
    And regulated by a Democratic process based on adequate data?
     
  10. F1fan

    F1fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2021
    Messages:
    2,712
    Ratings:
    +1,930
    Religion:
    Buddhist
    Hey man, that's OK, because that's what Democrats want to copy, not the Soviets, not venezuela, not Cuba. But conservatives can't win that debate. They have to pin "Socialism" in all it's communism hysteria onto Democrats and explain how horrible it is, and how great the greed that's ruining America is awesome Capitalism.

    Conservatives NEVER refer to Sweden or Denmark when the goals of democrats are being discussed as "socialist". Just look through this thread. It's all straw man agruments from conservatives, and totally inaccurate and misrepresented.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    195,989
    Ratings:
    +70,626
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Sure.
    But I'll add understanding to the process.
     
  12. lewisnotmiller

    lewisnotmiller Grand Hat
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    21,625
    Ratings:
    +14,562
    Religion:
    atheist
    It's worth noting that automation (and in a different way, off-shoring) impact on far more than just 'low-skill' jobs.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. lewisnotmiller

    lewisnotmiller Grand Hat
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    21,625
    Ratings:
    +14,562
    Religion:
    atheist
    If people are willing to pay for it, why wouldn't they offer it?
     
  14. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    195,989
    Ratings:
    +70,626
    Religion:
    Atheist
    True dat.
     
  15. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    8,259
    Ratings:
    +7,296
    Religion:
    none
    I have a suspicion that the capitalists understand economics - they just lie about it so that we don't.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Stevicus

    Stevicus Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2011
    Messages:
    23,030
    Ratings:
    +14,803
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    Well, ultimately, it'll be up to the people to decide. If the millennials and generation z are moving more towards socialism, then "the people" may be of a different mold in the next generation or two. It's not just political or generational changes either, but also demographic and cultural changes. This doesn't have anything to do with socialism or capitalism, but more just a matter of the people themselves in a state of transition.

    Sometimes, change doesn't always come easily, and this seems to be a root cause of much internal dissension of late. I think the key thing is to have a political and economic system which is flexible and adaptable enough to be able to adjust to the changes which are happening both within America and around the world.

    I understand the basic Capitalism 101 answer. There are many answers one could give to that question, but ultimately, it as you say, someone agreed to pay that much. But as I said earlier, economics is a social science, and as such, it's intricately tied in with political science, philosophy, sociology, and psychology. What people do, what choices they make and why - that can be difficult to predict at any given time.

    Economics is really not all that much different from politics, when you really think about it. When people talk about "capitalism vs. socialism," they're really talking about political systems, not really "economic systems."

    I don't think that anyone has to worry about "socialism" in the same sense as China or North Korea, at least not in the U.S. I mentioned earlier (either in this thread or another thread) that the US and other Western liberal democracies were spared communist revolutions precisely because the capitalists were willing to make compromises and allow for better wages and working conditions. Things got much better for working people after WW2, as the period is considered one of huge economic growth and an overall increase in standard of living across the board. When people think of all the great things about capitalism, it's this period and beyond which they'll mainly look at.

    Nixon and Khrushchev had their famous "kitchen debate" where they were comparing the two systems, and that seems to be the crux of the entire issue between capitalism and socialism. In the end, it usually comes down to "well, we just have more stuff than they do." And that may be true overall, but then there are some who have no stuff at all. That, coupled with the knowledge that much of the "stuff" we have comes from overseas by people working in sweatshops and other such low-wage facilities under horrid conditions, then the question becomes even more complicated.

    So, sure, it does work for many people here in America, because...well, we're America, and it just seems to work out well for us, as well as a few other countries closely linked to our economy. That is, it works out for the upper classes, but it never really trickles down as much as one might expect. But overall, it really isn't that bad here.

    I just think it would be wise to mindful of the overall situation, both within America and around the world where we do business. As I mentioned earlier, we need to have a system which is flexible and adaptable to a changing world.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. Saint Frankenstein

    Saint Frankenstein The Uncuckable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2012
    Messages:
    34,649
    Ratings:
    +20,019
    Religion:
    Christian
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Stevicus

    Stevicus Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2011
    Messages:
    23,030
    Ratings:
    +14,803
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    I don't know. @Revoltingest was relating an account about a woman whose degree was in international diversity studies, and she was saying that she was trying for hundreds of jobs and getting nowhere. Why no one was offering her a job with that degree is unclear, although it seems that it didn't fit in with whatever skill set employers are seeking. But I don't know what was going on with this person or why she couldn't find a job.

    Such a degree is probably similar to what some people would get when I was in college, but usually called "general studies," or some might call it "liberal arts." I think there may have been a time when a college degree in itself (regardless of what major it was in) was a sign of intelligence and refinement which would be an asset to any organization - and someone young enough who can be trained and molded into what they might call "executive material." Even better if they come from the right families.

    But it's not really like that anymore, and employers are looking for more specialized skills than just "general studies."
     
  19. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    8,259
    Ratings:
    +7,296
    Religion:
    none
    Globalism and corruption are inevitable results of capitalism and crony money worship is its mantra.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. ADigitalArtist

    ADigitalArtist Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2015
    Messages:
    9,016
    Ratings:
    +13,703
    Religion:
    Irreligious Agnostic Atheistic Apatheist
    In fairness to liberal arts or social studies degree holders, millenials grew up being told by their parents that they had to have a degree, any degree to get by. The college experience is what counts.

    Now that classified ads call for a masters degree and two years experience for pretty much anything paying over $10 an hour, the narrative has shifted to 'oh you should have gotten a trade degree or something practical'

    The real problem is that wages aren't keeping up with inflation, so higher education won't land you a high paying job or help pay your student loan (which has grown to ridiculous proportions since gen x and Boomers were in school.)

    Thus leading to more millennials and genz sticking with generational homes and and refusing to work the abusive service industry very long. To them it's just part of the scam.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
Loading...