Capitalism is just fine, Redwave

[LovetoGiveRoses]

But you have problems. Teachers do a valuable job, but teaching is a non-profit profession for the most part. Policemen, nurses, doctors and firemen, too. These are people who are not payed enough, and deserve more. Only through socialism can they be paid. Unless they are privatised and become a pay-service ("give us twenty pounds to stop your house burning down"), then wealth must be distributed to them.

It is up to individual communities to decide how much they will pay for fire, police and other services. The firemen, for example, in many California communities are paid very, very well. When slots open up, thousands and thousands of people compete for the the few open slots. The people that are firemen in California are top, top notch and they are paid accordingly.

Teachers are paid well in California also.

Teachers in my community are not paid as well as California, but they are paid well enough that there's never a shortage of qualified applicants, all the jobs are filled.

 

[teddybear4play]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stuffed not OK . . .

Hey TB4p . . . it must be difficult . . . you never do it . . . (bit careful with the arse-kissing . . . ) Alternatively, if a six year old can do it, why can't you??

See, that's just the thing.

If you want to say I'm stupid because of what I believe, that's one thing. You and I have traded barbs over it. But at least we've come to our conclusions through a mixture of rational thought and real-world experience. Misguided though I think you may be, I can't fault you for your beliefs, and I'm sure you feel likewise.

But REDWAVE could be a computer-programmed bot for all we know. All his posts are the same, all his retorts are taken from a standard-issue list (which others have covered quite nicely), and he shies away from honest debate the way someone who's intellectually timid and morally bankrupt would. Perhaps the programmer steps out from behind the curtain to make a post every now and again about great literature or somesuch, but honestly, most of his posts are either cut-and-paste jobs, linked stories, or logic a first-year philosophy major would sneer at (United Airlines is bankrupt, therefore the capitalist system is crumbling).

In an I.Q. test between REDWAVE and a dirty diaper, I'd spot the diaper 20 points, even though they're both full of shit.

TB4p

 

[Unclebill]

Originally posted by LovetoGiveRoses
...Most of the people who are "poor" in the US are "wealthier" than most middle class people were 100 years ago. The "poor" in this country aren't threatened with starvation, in fact, they're much better off than the were in earlier times. The difference is that more people are becoming wealthy, largely because of our capitalist system. Is that a bad thing?

And the sad truth is, there are so few vestiges of capitalism remaining in the U. S. economic system, yet it still outstrips the rest of the collectivist world.

Imagine the wealth and standard of living we would enjoy were it not for the statist thugs who blame capitalism for their idiotic blundering.

Originally posted by teddybear4play
... Misguided though I think you may be, I can't fault you for your beliefs, and I'm sure you feel likewise...

TB4p

But you should, especially when his beliefs, specifically collectivism, are founded in irrational fallacies which are demonstrated to be the most ill-informed and malicious side of the human experience.

There is no moral or intellectual integrity involved in the advocacy of collectivism. In fact, if one chooses to advocate collectivism, they must of necessity abandon rational thought and moral and intellectual integrity. They must ignore and evade reality and somehow try to sound sane and reasonable in the process.

Thus, their arguments can only be carried or defended with the ad hominem attack for there is no intellectual merit or integrity.

 

[teddybear4play]

But you should, especially when his beliefs, specifically collectivism, are founded in irrational fallacies which are demonstrated to be the most ill-informed and malicious side of the human experience.

There is no moral or intellectual integrity involved in the advocacy of collectivism. In fact, if one chooses to advocate collectivism, they must of necessity abandon rational thought and moral and intellectual integrity. They must ignore and evade reality and somehow try to sound sane and reasonable in the process.

Thus, their arguments can only be carried or defended with the ad hominem attack for there is no intellectual merit or integrity.

REDWAVE is a good example of that.

I agree with everything you say. I think Don K Dyck is misguided, led astray by intoxicating antiestablishment propaganda (which, I notice, is every bit as conformist as so-called "mainstream propaganda") and buffered by misleading statistics.

I think he's wrong, yes. But I won't say he's stupid. We can debate the merits of what he brings to the table, but at least he comes with something.

For REDWAVE, open the thesaurus.

TB4p

 

[Don K Dyck]

Look Out, UncleBill . . .

And the sad truth is, there are so few vestiges of capitalism remaining in the U. S. economic system, yet it still outstrips the rest of the collectivist world.

Imagine the wealth and standard of living we would enjoy were it not for the statist thugs who blame capitalism for their idiotic blundering.But you should, especially when his beliefs, specifically collectivism, are founded in irrational fallacies which are demonstrated to be the most ill-informed and malicious side of the human experience.

There is no moral or intellectual integrity involved in the advocacy of collectivism. In fact, if one chooses to advocate collectivism, they must of necessity abandon rational thought and moral and intellectual integrity. They must ignore and evade reality and somehow try to sound sane and reasonable in the process.

Thus, their arguments can only be carried or defended with the ad hominem attack for there is no intellectual merit or integrity.

Take off your myopic glasses UncleBill . . . the U$ economy is failing because of corporate executive greed, cartel pricing, ginormous government subsidies to the arms industry, protection for inefficient primary industries, a simple lack of knowledge about the inter-relationships between multi-national corporations at an Administration level, and a an oil-based resources policy that is running out of U$ oil reserves.

Your term, "collectivism" is far too broad to be realistic . . . in Oz we have a mixed economy dominated by multi-national corporations . . . is that "collectivist"??

We don't evade reality in Oz . . . we realise that the U$ causes most of the world's political and economic problems is a desperate attempt to stave off the inevitable economic crash . . .

 

[Don K Dyck]

REDWAVE is a good example of that.

I agree with everything you say. I think Don K Dyck is misguided, led astray by intoxicating antiestablishment propaganda (which, I notice, is every bit as conformist as so-called "mainstream propaganda") and buffered by misleading statistics.

I think he's wrong, yes. But I won't say he's stupid. We can debate the merits of what he brings to the table, but at least he comes with something.

For REDWAVE, open the thesaurus. TB4p

Hi TB4p . . . "misguided"? . . . I don't think so . . . "anti-establishment"? . . . probably . . . "misleading statistics"? . . . no, frequently the ones provided by the government itself . . .

The best way to form an opinion is to read as widely as possible, from as many divergent sources as you can get . . . include the writings of your opponents because they just might have a point . . . the "establishment" are frequently acting for their own benefit rather than the community's benefit . . . it is niave to think that those interests are always the same . . . (the pending U$-Iraq War for the Control of Undeveloped World Oil Reserves is a classic case in point).

 

[Rex1960]

Re: Great Work

Great parable, Rex . . . we have the same problem here . . .

Well done Never . . . Rex, you have to look at this piece as a whole world picture . . . with all the world problems occurring simultaneaously "around" the subject, these were beyond their immediate perception . . . and so totally irrelevant to the subject's immediate needs . . . which was paying for the sandwich . . .

Maybe others would look deeper . . . at the excesses of U$ society . . . a society run on credit because it has expended all its capital . . . the egocentricity of the subject, lucky to be borne into a thriving community where diverse foods are available and totally oblivious to the "starving hordes of Africa or Asia" . . . the subject's only concern is personal satisfaction of their immediate personal needs . . .

Regardless . . . it is a good piece of writing, thank you for sharing, Never . . .

Thanks Don, I appreciate your clearification.

And yes, a society running on credit causes trouble.
But that works for either capitalism and socialsm/communism, no matter that they don't exist - like they ever have - in their purest form.

IMHO the greatest problem is lack of responsibility. I can start in my very own family and community, and it definately works in my state, even supranational.
I'd like to borrow a JFK phrase:
Don't ask what your [....] can do for you, ask what you can do for your [....]

Second greatest problem is, we can't just turn back time.

 

[teddybear4play]

Hi TB4p . . . "misguided"? . . . I don't think so . . . "anti-establishment"? . . . probably . . . "misleading statistics"? . . . no, frequently the ones provided by the government itself . . .

The best way to form an opinion is to read as widely as possible, from as many divergent sources as you can get . . . include the writings of your opponents because they just might have a point . . . the "establishment" are frequently acting for their own benefit rather than the community's benefit . . . it is niave to think that those interests are always the same . . . (the pending U$-Iraq War for the Control of Undeveloped World Oil Reserves is a classic case in point).

Well, rarely do people think they're misguided without changing their opinions. "Hey, shit, I'm misguided! Oh well, fuck it . . . "

As for "misleading statistics," perhaps I was a little hasty in saying that. Sometimes, such as that little tiff we had over U.S. military expenditures in REDWAVE's "Cannon Fodder" thread about a month ago, we have nearly identical statistics but drew different conclusions. You were wrong on that one; no big deal, as it was, for the most part, quibbling over semantics.

The important thing is to realize that no matter how sure you are that you're right, you could be wrong. I'd like to think I have open eyes; perhaps you're right and there is a multinational corporate conspiracy, a.k.a. "the establishment," and I just haven't seen it yet. You choose to believe; I choose to believe otherwise. C'est la vie.

TB4p

 

[Unclebill]

Re: Look Out, UncleBill . . .

Originally posted by Don K Dyck
Take off your myopic glasses UncleBill . . . the U$ economy is failing because of corporate executive greed, cartel pricing, ginormous government subsidies to the arms industry, protection for inefficient primary industries, a simple lack of knowledge about the inter-relationships between multi-national corporations at an Administration level, and a an oil-based resources policy that is running out of U$ oil reserves.

Your term, "collectivism" is far too broad to be realistic . . . in Oz we have a mixed economy dominated by multi-national corporations . . . is that "collectivist"??

We don't evade reality in Oz . . . we realise that the U$ causes most of the world's political and economic problems is a desperate attempt to stave off the inevitable economic crash . . .

You can attribute the economic problems to whatever you wish but reality disagrees with you. The more centralized control exercised over and economic system, the more the system is at risk for two reasons. First, the economic incompetence of the vast majority of politicians and second, bureaucratic inertia which cannot respond quickly enough to avert tragic consequences.

This was essentially the cause of the 1929 market crash. The Federal Reserve tried to alleviate the capital market of the natural controls of the capitalist system. In so doing, it created wildly speculative investments and by the time someone in the bureaucratic system woke up and tried to insert a corrective measure, they merely exacerbated the problem and accelerated the crash. So the fact is, government meddling caused the initial collapse that started the Great Depression and Roosevelt's socialistic meddling and perpetually changing the rules of the marketplace prevented a timely recovery of the nation's economic health. You might read an article titled Common Fallacies about Capitalism by Nathaniel Branden originally published in the '60's.

Why is the term collectivism too broad? It is a generic term that subsumes the variety of manifestations which are philosophically essentially a single set of ideas which are supposedly segregated and distinguished by their varying propaganda and rhetoric.

The truth is, all are a form of slavery. Individual rights and freedoms are denied, truth is whatever advances the collective and the end justfies the means are a set of common tenets woven through them all, whether it be Socialism, Communism, Fascism, Naziism, or other variant.

Originally posted by teddybear4play
... perhaps you're right and there is a multinational corporate conspiracy, a.k.a. "the establishment," and I just haven't seen it yet. You choose to believe; I choose to believe otherwise. C'est la vie.

TB4p

Of course there is; it's a subsidiary of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy that was out to get Clinton.

 

[miles]

The problem with debating 70/30, pp, redwave, and donkey is that their posts are illogical rhetoric and completely baseless.

 

[HeavyStick]

The problem with debating 70/30, pp, redwave, and donkey is that their posts are illogical rhetoric and completely baseless.

When we have monkies on Mars shooting walnuts from their ass, you'll realize redwave,ppman and donkey predicted it.

 

[Don K Dyck]

Myopic Mules

The problem with debating 70/30, pp, redwave, and donkey is that their posts are illogical rhetoric and completely baseless.

And that encyclopedia of knowledge known as Mules adequately demonstrated his limited and myopic view of the world on the Western Literature thread by refusing, or more likely, being unable to name a mere three (3) books that have influenced Western society . . . thank you, Mules . . . your views will be ignored . . . as usual.