Why capitalism doesn't and can't work

[REDWAVE]

I don't like cold weather.

 

[70/30]

OH please..... Canada is replete with socialism. Go there. In the words of Lance, paraphrased, they are all inclusive up there and I am sure would love to have you......

Hey that particular post was about 80% palatable, give him some credit. Everyone fighting for themself leaves the world in a very bad place. Unrestricted capitalism will give consumers no rights and citizens will be poisoned from pollution with zero recourse. I have little respect for strict members of the Libertarian Party and people that think California shouldn't be closely regulated. The LP's live in a fantasy world, 99% of corporations don't care about the welfare of the public. As for California, it is very crowded-it shouldn't exist considering its sparse access to fresh water. They have and will continue to have extreme environmental concerns. As America grows and turns fully into a land of concrete, California will be the model on how to slow down the inevitable.

 

[REDWAVE]

Meet half way, maybe?

Yeah, Desert Rose, in my last post I was trying to establish some common ground with the defenders of capitalism. Can you bend a little too, and admit that there are some serious problems with capitalism?

 

[A Desert Rose]

Hey that particular post was about 80% palatable, give him some credit. Everyone fighting for themself leaves the world in a very bad place. Unrestricted capitalism will give consumers no rights and citizens will be poisoned from pollution with zero recourse. I have little respect for strict members of the Libertarian Party and people that think California shouldn't be closely regulated. The LP's live in a fantasy world, 99% of corporations don't care about the welfare of the public. As for California, it is very crowded-it shouldn't exist considering its sparse access to fresh water. They have and will continue to have extreme environmental concerns. As America grows and turns fully into a land of concrete, California will be the model on how to slow down the inevitable.

My own thoughts are that 95% or more of the population of the US can do just fine without the "help" of the federal government.

Unrestricted capitalism gives consumers all the freedom in the world. I am not sure you understand what you wrote there. Less governement regulations translates to more growth. More growth creates more jobs. And on and on it goes....... More jobs means less taxes and less entitlement programs.

What you are seeing now in the US is a challenge to that theory. There are more and more politicians striving to provide more "free services" to more and more people. Even with our robust economy such a scheme cannot stand for long.

 

[A Desert Rose]

Re: Meet half way, maybe?

Yeah, Desert Rose, in my last post I was trying to establish some common ground with the defenders of capitalism. Can you bend a little too, and admit that there are some serious problems with capitalism?

I never said that capitalism is without flaws. In fact, I have said before that while it is, in my opinion, the best system so far developed, there are and always will be areas for improvement. I cannot take the hard line against it that you are taking. I have been a business owner. I am a card carrying capitalist. I admit that there are excesses and criminal activities in big business. I am not, however in the mode to toss it out for a socialist form of government. And I never will be.

~smiling~

 

[70/30]

My own thoughts are that 95% or more of the population of the US can do just fine without the "help" of the federal government.

Unrestricted capitalism gives consumers all the freedom in the world. I am not sure you understand what you wrote there. Less governement regulations translates to more growth. More growth creates more jobs. And on and on it goes....... More jobs means less taxes and less entitlement programs.

What you are seeing now in the US is a challenge to that theory. There are more and more politicians striving to provide more "free services" to more and more people. Even with our robust economy such a scheme cannot stand for long.

I understand exactly what I wrote, you happen to live in fantasy land. How many people do you think can fit in California? How many in BosWash? There won't be a clean anything, anywhere if no corporate regulations are left. There are too many HUMANists like yourself that fuck shit up and have no awareness(or care) that they are doing anything detrimental. Your basis of freedom is "growth", I'm not redwave and I'm not an anticapitalist. I believe growth needs to be cautious, smart and steady.

In many areas I wish Conservatives were closer to Nixon and educational opportunities need to be equally offered, today it is no where close. Discrimination and the wrongs of our country's history need to be remembered, that means not trusting man's free will for a while. 95% of americans can do without government assistance, HA! Go to a couple of inner city public schools. Maybe 95%, the other way around. Teachers that work in suspect schools need more money, it is an infinitely harder job than in suburbia land.

http://www.americanpresident.org/kotrain/courses/RN/RN_Domestic_Affairs.htm snip from
The Nixon Presidency: Domestic Affairs

"But many of Nixon's policies were less conservative than they were pragmatic, and even liberal. He increased Food Stamp funding from a few million dollars to many billions. He nationalized three welfare programs (for the blind, the disabled, and the elderly) and expanded coverage and benefits. He proposed a plan to scrap welfare and replace it with "Family Allowances" that would benefit far more people, but the Senate refused to pass it. Spending for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, increased greatly during his tenure. Nixon won passage of "bloc grants" to replace specific federal funding of variety of programs, and enable the states to spend money on their own priorities. He also won passage of "revenue sharing" to provide $5 billion annually to state governments from the U.S. Treasury. He created the Council on Environmental Quality, and the Environmental Protection Agency, and won passage of several new environmental measures. Although he gave lip service to balanced budgets he ran large deficits, much of which went to domestic spending."

 

[A Desert Rose]

Start a new thread, how about gun control?

This is fucking boring. No one is convincing anyone of anything. All we are doing is posting to show how smart we are. Or to show that we think we are smarter than someone else.

 

[lavender]

 

[70/30]

Start a new thread, how about gun control?

This is fucking boring. No one is convincing anyone of anything. All we are doing is posting to show how smart we are. Or to show that we think we are smarter than someone else.

Not trying to convince, satisfied with showing a different perspective. If extreme Libertarianism or extreme Socialism became a political reality, bad things would happen. History has thoroughly given evidence.

 

[Dick thick]

Redwave....

I bet you suck cock better than understand politics.

 

[Unclebill]

Re: Bump!

I'll reiterate a question I've asked before: where is there a capitalist economy on this globe? I listen to a bunch of people pontificate righteously about the evils of capitalism but I have yet to have one respond and identify a capitalist economy for me. Put up or shut up.

What they do is observe the problems that result from a controlled economy and blame those problems on capitalism even though it doesn't exist. What we have in America today is more like Fascism than any other form of collectivism.

Originally posted by Aquila
Most of the economic burden of taxes is doled out to the MIDDLE class, not the upper class because of tax breaks and loopholes. is why they made more and more.. however I say more power to em. if you can make it Go for it.

And why do you suppose that is? Perchance because the majority of legislators are in the high wealth category and are protecting their wealth at the expense of us lesser beings who can't afford to buy them off?

Originally posted by Velius
Umm...no not really. Capitalism doesn't "inherently" breed any of that. Most of the current racism, sexism and homophobia are left overs from the Christian church. Capitalism is a flawed system, but any halfwit with eyes can see that.

Capitalism is the only economic system that will eradicate most such problems in society. I doubt any system will eliminate human stupidity, the root of such irrational ideas. You may opine that capitalism is a flawed system, but the truth is, capitalism is the ONLY system that conforms to the nature of man's life and supplies the incentives to progress and advance mankind as a whole rather than just enrich a few at the expense of others as does every form of collectivism.

Socialism is a variant of collectivism. Collectivism is an ideology based on altruism, the philosophy of slavery. So anyone who champions collectivism in any form champions slavery, i. e. the sacrifice of one human to another.

Originally posted by A Desert Rose
Jesus Christ....... Government does not produce those things, you dolt.

Tax dollars are provided for them and they are bid on by private enterprise and then contructed by private enterprise.

You are amazing.....ly dumb.

Doesn't a statement like that remind you of the old adage, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool . . ."?

Originally posted by A Desert Rose
REDWAVE, please never, ever leave and never stop posting threads.

You make me feel so fucking smart. It does great things for my self image and ego. ~smiling~

Based on what he posts, he'd make a plant look smart.

Originally posted by REDWAVE
. . . On construction projects, for instance, the general contractor farms out the work to subcontractors.

There is one significant difference: the general contractor doesn't steal the money to pay for the project.

Originally posted by Sandia
. . . REDWAVE: The US is not a capitalist state, it has a mixed socialist/capitalist economy. Programs like Medicare, social security, unemployment, worker's comp., minimum wages, etc. etc. etc. are all socialistic programs, designed to prevent poverty and alleviate the exploitation of the poor by the rich. The mixed nature of the American economy is the reason for it's success.

Actually, it is the mixed nature of this economy that causes the severe boom/bust cycles and the hobbling of its growth. Without the stagnating controls of government regulation, the cycles would be less severe because the economic managers would correct much more quickly than do government regulators who are subject to political influence and bear no accountability for their actions or decisions.

Originally posted by Sandia
Ishmael, the idea that people are paid what they're worth is ridiculous. I think we've been through this before, but again: How much was the CEO of Enron worth when he took half a billion dollars out of the company while guiding it into bankruptcy? How much is a tort lawyer worth (your opinion) who sues McDonald's over hot coffee* and collects several million dollars out of the settlement? How about a boy-band singer who collects millions lip-syncing and swivelling his hips at thirteen year old girls? A teacher? A firefighter? A policeman? How about a private in the US Marines? Does he get paid what he's worth? . .

Actually, Ishmael is much closer to being right than are you. You commit the typical fallacy of correlating the criminal and the capitalist. The cases you cite as your examples in inequity in pay are in fact examples of theft. In the case of Enron, fraud and the MacDonald's lawsuit, extortion albeit it legalized.

The fallacy doesn't sell to a thinking man.

Originally posted by JazzManJim
Don't have a substantive argument, then?

Didn't think so.

Has he ever offered one?

Originally posted by A Desert Rose
I am guessing darling, that you do not work in the private sector. Wealthy companies produce jobs for people. The less money companies have (as in heavy taxes) the less money they have to pay employees so, they have to cut back or lay off people.

How do companies get wealthy? They provide goods or services that consumers purchase. If their products are substandard or not competitive in the market place, that company will fold.

Same is true of wages. If a company provides competitive wages, comparable with other companies, they will attract the best employees.

It's a market driven society that we live in. No one is romantising capitalism. Especially me. I personally find it to be the best system developed up to this point.

Hey, Rose, honey, you neglected to point out that corporations don't pay taxes. They are the unpaid middleman who collects the taxes from their customers who see the taxes in the form of higher product/service costs. The greatest benefit the collectivist has is the ignorance of his victim.

Originally posted by REDWAVE
. . . At any rate, Social Security provides a mere pittance, and is woefully inadequate. It should be called "Social Insecurity."

Yes, but let's not point out that the reason it's going tits up now instead of in thirty or forty years is because the politicians you worship stole the money collected which was supposedly invested and pissed it away on other of their socialistic fantasies. Now the chickens are coming home to roost. The same money invested in the stock market, even in consideration of the drop over the past year would yield 3-10 times what social security is offering. It's the collectivist system you laud that has swindled the people for whom it was touted as a savior. Just more lies.

Originally posted by christo
. . . I mean, General Electric doesn't take a vote of its employees and shareholders to decide whether they should build 1000 or 1500 jet engines . . . but capitalism is much more complicated than supply and demand. The idea that the market should be allowed to operate without any govermental supervision is wrong, as is the idea that no regulation means a more efficent, stronger economy. If you don't have rules, you have anarchy. The trick is, how many rules should you have? How intrusive?

First, GE is looking at a market appraisal and planning to meet the market demand, pure and simple. Their experience gives them a basis on which to project but no certainty that their projections are correct.

As far as regulation by government, that is the most damaging blow to capitalism you can offer. Bureaucratic inertia precludes timely response to changing marketplace demands. Regulation is crippling. Further, it invariably leads to abuses by politicians who are given the power of life or death over a company for no good reason. This enable the less than 100% scrupulous and honest man to exploit that power and corrupt the entire system.

A corporation, despite what many fools will tell you, has no arbitrary power or authority. It can only offer a product or service in the market and try to entice you to purchase that product. This gives the consumer the power, literally. A business that fails to attract and please its customers ceases to be a company; it dies economically.

Originally posted by christo
Cycles of regulation and deregulation come and go just like boom and bust cycles. The Enron and WorldCom disasters never would have happened (or allowed to become so huge) had there been proper legislation governing financial reporting, conflicts of interest among stock analysts, and oversight of accounting firms who also do consulting work.

Actually, it was precisely because of givernment bureaucracy and regulation the Enron, Global Crossing and others were able to perpetuate their frauds as long as they did and hence to cause the economic damage they did. Bureaucratic inertia and political meddling prevented timely government detection of the problem.

Likewise, government regulation insulated the investment capital community (bankers, et al) from responsibility to oversee the employment of their capital which would have been imperative in an unregulated economy. By obviating the capitalist oversight, the fraud was concealed far longer than it would have been and the economic harm was permitted to reach extravagent proportions. Yet no one is willing to say the truth with very few exceptions.

The problem is unaccountable politicians and bureaucrats who keep their jobs whether or not they do them or achieve any benefit for society.

Originally posted by christo
. . . People bitch about taxes and government, often with just cause. There is too much waste, too much inefficiency. That's what's shameful, the waste, because every dollar lost in pointless bureacracy is a dollar that could be used to renovate schools, provide health care to the elderly, or build aircraft carriers. But bureaucratic waste isn't limited to government, as anyone who's every worked for a large corporation can attest.

Redwave was right when he said that government has produced great things. The national highway system, the Apollo missions, the Manhattan project were all funded and run by the government. Government DOES produce these things. General Dynamics didn't just decide to start building F-15's in the hope that someone would buy them. The goverment decided it wanted a new fighter, looked over the bids from different aerospace companies, and picked the one they thought was best. Government created the demand and provided the funding. No government leadership, no sexy fighter planes. Or men on the moon. Or Head Start programs.

Government does not and has never nor will it ever produce anything. Government steals extravagant sums of money from the rightful owners and squanders it on outlandish pie-in-the-sky projects for the benefit of some politican's constituency to get the politician reelected. Government projects are always underestimated on cost to get approval and always run over budget and often yield an inferior product when all is said and done. Private enterprise will always give you a better project at a cheaper price.

For a perfect example, look at the California rebuilding after the Northridge earthquake a few years back. Who rebuilt the freeways damaged? CalTrans (California Department of Transportation)? No. It was done by private contractors. It was done far cheaper then Caltrans could do it and in about 1/4 the time CalTrans projected. And when all was said and done, the private contractor finished BEFORE the specified contract date. To date, I don't think CalTrans has ever completed a project on time, much less ahead of schedule.

There was good reason why the founders put severe limits on the authority of the government they designed. If you note, they specifically excluded the authority of government to in any manner regulate business or personal behavior.

The egregious system we have today is due entirely to politicians who have no respect for the laws constraining them nor for the people of America otherwise they would not continue to create ever more abusive and restrictive and intrusive laws and simultaneously seek to set themselves above these same laws.

 

[Unclebill]

Originally posted by A Desert Rose
Start a new thread, how about gun control?

This is fucking boring. No one is convincing anyone of anything. All we are doing is posting to show how smart we are. Or to show that we think we are smarter than someone else.

You can lead a man to knowledge but you can't make him think.

 

[A Desert Rose]

Could you please clarify your statement about corporations not paying taxes?

Also, which won of us is the fool? Me or REDWAVE? Or both?

And by the way, your pm box is full.

 

[70/30]

Why am I still awake, I actually read UncleBill's post. Great and fine, somehow I don't trust giving rich people more money while taking money from the poor. It's like BazarroRobinHood, someone should make a movie about it.

 

[70/30]

True capitalism won't cause pollution and consumers don't need the pesky government demanding recalls. Racism doesn't exist. Everybody has an opportunity to go to a quality public school. The people in various ghettos won't riot when they don't get their welfare check. When congress relinquishes power, the president won't seize any. The military will magically decide to downsize. We'll all live in a perfect world.

 

[A Desert Rose]

Re: Redwave....

I bet you suck cock better than understand politics.

I edited this.... it was inappropriate of me. Sorry. I think I am just getting tired.

 

[Unclebill]

Originally posted by A Desert Rose
Could you please clarify your statement about corporations not paying taxes?

Also, which won of us is the fool? Me or REDWAVE? Or both?

And by the way, your pm box is full.

I referred to the post you cited (REDWAVE's post). Yours was quite sanguine, I thought. And my PM box os no longer full.

As to the taxation issue, it's really quite simple.

What determines the market price of a product or service? The businessman incurs certain costs in producing a product or providing a service. Raw materials, manufacturing facility, energy, labor, capital (interest on loans), etc. All these things figure into the cost of his commodity sold.

If he owns the manufacturing facility, the maintenance is part of his cost. If he must pay a fee or property taxes for fire and police services, that is part of the cost figured into the expense of creating whatever he sells. If he rents it, then he pays rent to the owner sufficient to maintain the property.

In order to support his own livelihood, he must make a profit. The total cost of his commodity is derived from the aggregate total of the expenses plus the necessary profit margin to support himself and perpetuate the business and perhaps expand it.

Add corporate taxes, and there is another expense incurred. If the profit margin drops or vanishes, the business may not survive, i. e., if he cannot make a sufficient sum of money in his estimation to warrant perpetuating the business, then he closes it.

Thus, taxes are an increase in operating cost just as is a hike in raw materials cost or energy cost or transportation or anything else that affects the delivery to market costs.

As cost to produce rises, so does cost to the end consumer who in truth pays the tax. The businessman just collects it and like a middleman, passes it along to the government.

And another cost few people actually grasp emerges when dealing with a multilevel taxation system. The imposition of local, state and federal taxes means that taxes require accounting just as do other business functions. The more complex the taxation system, the more costly to administer and the businessman bears that expense also. And who pays? Right again: the consumer because it just raises the cost to produce that much farther.

Because its so well hidden and there is such pathetic education regarding the fundamentals of economics, very few people actually understand the insidious nature of taxation and the real truth that you, the consumer, truly pay them all.

 

[Coolville]

Anthropologists have determined that man is inherently communist. Not in the nasty Soviet way, but as a group of people working together for the common good and taking care of each other along the way.

The individualistic elements of captialism go against our inherent genetic instincts as flock animals.

Which explains why socialism, or democratic socialism as it is called, flourishes in the western world in every country apart from the States.

It's in the genes.

See the BBC documentary.

 

[Ishmael]

Anthropologists have determined that man is inherently communist. Not in the nasty Soviet way, but as a group of people working together for the common good and taking care of each other along the way.

The individualistic elements of captialism go against our inherent genetic instincts as flock animals.

Which explains why socialism, or democratic socialism as it is called, flourishes in the western world in every country apart from the States.

It's in the genes.

See the BBC documentary.

Not true.

There are collectivist aspects of tibal societies. ie. The caring for the old, infirm, etc. The significant difference is that it is a societal burden volutarily shouldered. It is not imposed by a tribal leadership that goes around and forcefully takes away from some to re-distribute to others. Plots of land were farmed by the individual families. Goods manufactured were traded for other goods by the individual families. All trade was quo quid pro, and unregulated. Pointing to social structures and equating that to government is disengenuous.

Ishmael

 

[Mad_Jack_Rabbit]

Capitalism works.

It just works better on somedays than others.

 

[Ishmael]

Myths

This thread is replete with myths. Lets explode a few.

Corporations and Companies pay taxes

UB has done a good job on that in this thread. I have expounded the same on other threads. UB, I think that we should collaborate on a single paragraph and post the same answer in any thread where this lunacy comes up. And it seems to come up so often. Whoever sees this falacy posted replies with the boiler plate. Perhaps between the two of us we can come up with a simple enough model that most will understand.

The bottom line is that reported profits are 'after-tax' profits. That means that the cost of the taxes was amortized into the price of the product to begin with. People continuously mistake book-keeping and funds transfer with the actual paying of taxes. Only individuals pay taxes. Only individuals have ever paid taxes.

Labor produces product, not capital

This is an easy one to fall into and is at the heart of the collectivist tool kit of rhetoric to justify their particular idea's. That idea being that there is a dichotomy between labor and capital. The fact of the matter is that labor and capital are synonomous. They are the same thing. Labor is the investment that is made in many singular enterprises. As an employee, I am trading my skills (labor) for some other form of capital (in most cases, money). It is a trade just like anyother trade. In larger projects an investment maybe required. The purchase of certain raw materials or finished goods inorder to produce that which the customer has either ordered or in the form of 'risk' we believe that he/she will order. In each and every instance capital is the single entity that has made the product/service available. Labor is just another form of capital and is truly inseperable from it.

I own a piece of land that a portion I use for farming and another portion I use as a woodlot. I invest my time (labor) apportionately between the two. I expect a return on my investment. Therefore I will invest my time according to that which I believe will yeild the greatest return for my capital (labor) investment. I may have to invest other forms of capital, money for instance, for items that I will need inorder to use my time (labor capital) in the most efficient manner. Obvioulsy I'll need seed, and an axe. It might be nice to have a plow and a horse too. These items that I need are the products of other peoples capital investments. Capital in the form of labor or an other form of capital.

My crop is in. I tradc a portion of my wheat (capital) to the millner for ground flour (capital). Some for bacon, coffee, salt, etc (all capital), and perhaps some for money (another form of capital).

Labor in it's simplest form of capital is called "sweat equity".

"Capitalism requires government requlation"

No it doesn't. I think that we can agree that the worst form of capitalism is the monopoly. Monopolies being the extreme manifestation of the restraint of free trade. A situation whereby a singular entity can set prices regardless of supply and demand. That is not capitalism. It is the antithesis of capitalism and in most instances it's called 'government'. The incredible thing about this line of thought is that the collectivists want to insinuate governement as a replacement for the very evil that they perceive in capitalism. The argument being that this is what 'might' happen (and it's real bad) so we'll step in and make sure that it does happen (we did it so it must be good).

Monopolies cannot occur without the concurrence and support of government.

Ishmael

 

[Mad_Jack_Rabbit]

Re: Re: Bump!

(Re: Discrimination)
... Capitalism is the only economic system that will eradicate most such problems in society. I doubt any system will eliminate human stupidity, the root of such irrational ideas.

LMAO!!!!!!!!!

 

[SadnonMage]

Someone else who is deluded

Aquila: the rich pay most of the taxes in the US, which is fair, since they have most of the money.

Another mistake of the bugeous zee attitude of those who REALLY NEED TO PAY ATTENTION.

wealthy approx. 12% of the population

Middle Class approx. 75% of the population

Lower Class approx. 13% of the population


* class denotation is for demonstration purposes only*

Now, if those in the upper 12% are paying 35% of their income in taxes,
And 75% are paying 28% of their income in taxes,
And the remaining 13% pay no income tax, simply because their income isn't high enough to tax.

Whom in this example is carrying the tax burden, Hmmmm???


IF the answer doesn't smack you in the face you really need to examine the %ages a little closer.


SM

The answer will tell you why the wealthy never complain about minor changes in tax laws. Because they don't really affect that 12% or so of the population.

 

[SadnonMage]

RE: self-employed

I'm self-employed.

Corporations get rich by paying their employees as little as possible while charging as much as possible for their products.

So do you pay your "fair share" of the tax burden or do you under-report your income to avoid paying the double tax that is laid on the self-employed?

See, the way it works in most states in the Union is that since you are self-employed, you must pay a "self-employment tax" since their is not an employer who is kicking into the tax pool for you as well as your own income tax withholding.

Funny how these thing work, isn't it.

 

[SadnonMage]

Re: Capitalism was progressive

However, early capitalism also had its dark side. Huge numbers of people were forced off the land, and they flocked into the new, rapidly growing cities, where the only work available for most of them was in the capitalists' factories. People worked twelve, fourteen hours a day, six or seven days a week, for bare subsistence wages. And the technological advances, while in many ways making life easier for people, also had negative side effects, mainly pollution and environmental devastation.

THen along came a couple of organizations that tried to fix all of that:

The American Federation of Laborers

You know the AFofL part of AFofL CIO

Unions started to form at factories and other places of business in the early part of the twentieth century.
It was ugly, it was bloody and for some of the people involved it was deadly.

People died to get better, cleaner working comditions and fair wages.

A fair days work for a fair days pay is still the slogan adhered to by the Teamsters.