Capitalism is not the only American way.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: deadlyhope

You are defending cronyism and corporatism.

What capitalism allows is the following:

A farmer produces milk. Someone is lactose intolerant, so the milk isn't good for them. Someone else notices that and figures out how to produce milk that does not have lactose in it. They bring that to market.

The person who wants milk but cannot tolerate lactose is happy and the person who figured out how to fill that need makes money.

But ... there is someone else who does not want all the fat in milk.

Soooo, someone figures out how to produce milk with varying degrees of fat in it. Now those people are happy, and the person who figured that out makes money.

But ... there is someone who would like milk, but does not like how it exploits cows. Soooo, someone figures out how to make something very like milk out of almonds or soy or other plant-based products.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

This is what a free market allows for and what capitalism at its best does. It lets innovators figure out how to supply what people want.

Are you saying those things cant happen without capitalism? wow, how did we ever survive and EVOLVE before we INVENTED a piece of paper called money...??? must have been magic...

a reply to: M5xaz

America and the West in general is not socialist, by definition.
What is it you don't understand ?

"In General", the definition is written by the same propaganda machine that wants to paint the we are better than them picture. Thats the part you don't get. The state needs enemies to maximize profits form Nationalism and military arms production. A war would be even better. Look around at all the arms productions and all the wars going on right now.

They need you to buy into the ideology 'us vs them' so you also buy the weapons. The cycle of construction, destruction and reconstruction presents the most profitable model.

Its thats simple, everything else is spin. You can't accept that because its too simple, you have been conditioned away from your reasoning to believe all that stuff they been force feeding you from the teachers desk, the podium, the pulpit and news desk, alll your life.

The state, in either theirs or our social construct is the corporation, the government is the puppet, the people the slave.

Now tell me how free you are to conform or not?

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: M5xaz

America and the West in general is not socialist, by definition.
What is it you don't understand ?

"In General", the definition is written by the same propaganda machine that wants to paint the we are better than them picture. Thats the part you don't get. The state needs enemies to maximize profits form Nationalism and military arms production. A war would be even better. Look around at all the arms productions and all the wars going on right now.

They need you to buy into the ideology 'us vs them' so you also buy the weapons. The cycle of construction, destruction and reconstruction presents the most profitable model.

Its thats simple, everything else is spin. You can't accept that because its too simple, you have been conditioned away from your reasoning to believe all that stuff they been force feeding you from the teachers desk, the podium, the pulpit and news desk, alll your life.

The state, in either theirs or our social construct is the corporation, the government is the puppet, the people the slave.

Now tell me how free you are to conform or not?

I am an engineer, and thus a non conformist.

NOBODY controls me or can condition me - good luck with that.

However, I do operate with the scientific method, observation-data-modeling-conclusion.

State-owned means of production or distribution have failed everywhere, which is why I oppose it

originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: ChuckNasty

My apologies, let me explain so I can be more clear.

Let's refer to my original title "Capitalism is not the only American way. "

Capitalism- an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

Now, free market-- an economic system in which prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses.

Capitalism and free market are the same thing.

Every first world nation has systems in place that go contrary to these definitions, and the nations with the highest quality of living have systems in place that go beyond what the USA has in place. I am advocating we emulate countries with better GDP's, quality of life, better education, better life expectancy, lower pollution.. etc. - To do so we would have to further put in place systems in which go against the above definitions. We have many Americans which seem to blindly advocate for unrestricted, uncontrolled, unregulated markets without realizing such mentalities of a free capitalistic market brought us to the Oligarchy we had today. Where billionaires exist, politicians are bought.

To emulate countries with a better GDP, quality of life, etc...we would have to be that country. You can't just copy another country's way and expect it to work elsewhere at the same level. The world doesn't work that way.

I see far too many threads/posts that advocate that capitalism is the only way for us - But it hasn't been for years, and likely never will be - So I guess my title could have also stated " Capitalism is not/was not/should not be the American way"

It has been that way since America was America...and even before.

Far too many people don't realize just what they would lose, what things would go wrong if a true capitalistic/free market society existed. Huge monopolies over things like roads, prisons, police, no FDA, USDA, etc...... No thanks.
( Though I do admit I don't trust the FDA/USDA anyways, but without them - companies could put whatever poison they want in whatever foods )



Also, I don't know the word for what I'm explaining is. Socialistic and Democratic socialist are what I've seen used, but I do not advocate the state owning very many businesses, nor much land.

If the state owned a business, I'd think it would be a good thing. For example: New Hampshire seems to not allow hard liquor to be sold by citizen stores. Instead the state runs stores selling hard liquor. The prices in these stores were rock bottom low - low as buying stuff at a military installation class six. To top that off, since they already added the liquor tax to the price, you didn't have to pay a sales tax. I'm guessing they had the monopoly on the booze, so instead of jacking prices up, they kept them reasonable. I could only imagine if they had a system like that for groceries.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

so even under a social program theres a chance for capitalist corruption looking to monopolize the services offered.

Which kind of destroys the idea of difference between the two systems. In both cases a chain of bureaucracy ends up adding to cost, cheapening product and potential corruption. Regardless at the end is still some guy with a shovel and some gravel.

Keeping it local keeps the quality and competition local for the best materials, quality of work and the cheapest price.

Governments aren't really necessary, their only job being providing for the common defense so I can get about my business. Washington is thousands of miles from here, somebody tell them to mind their own business.

well the biggest hurdle I think in this debate here and in other threads is mixing up socialism with communism. they arent the same if they were one of them wouldnt exist as it would be superflourious and confusing. communism is supposed to lead to a socialist ideal. the problem is no country as of yet has managed to complete the goal thus birthing communism instead of the socialist utopia intended. this is also why utopia gets labeled as an unattainable ideal.

china stopped short in the plan and paused on communism. after the people gave the power to the government to fairly distribute power equally but instead of distributing and equalizing power by giving it back to the people? the government kept it. the capitalist and free market system is what we used to have... so its understandable people want that to continue... the problem was all manner of snake oil salesmen just after profit needed to be regulated to protect people. so the FDA was born, same with all of the other big government institutions, some in place to make sure the quality of life meet the standards set by the central government.

states that meet the standards get federal tax incentives for complance and those that dont must handle it on their own. this is partly why in some places there are toll roads and free to public roads in others and the drinking age 21 for government kickbacks.

the totally capitalist and free market system without government interference has already occured and the only reason government is as big and pork barreled as it is... is to protect us from capitalism and free trade where profit is number one and even above life itself. socialism isnt much different except people not profit is number one... everyone has a face instead of just being another wallet.

the problem of course is when political represenatives represent the profit machines face instead of peoples. this has gone on for quite some time transforming us into a cold corporatocracy that will sooner crush a social program than create one unless they can manage to get a monopoly on the service.

the key used to be, find a need and fill it for success. but with some industries as large as they are? you wont even get your foot in the door to compete... and if you do somehow manage to get large enough, the competition will just buy you out. there are only so many oportunities under such a system and they come at a very step price and take a tremendous amount of effort and resources beyond the grasp of the average person... even the educational cost to be a well paid cog comes with a debt thats more than a house and brand new car combined before youve made your first dollar in the field of study.

how anyone thinks this system is sustainable is beyond me... its understandable to think it is when youve already been through it when the opportunties were much greater than they are now.

a reply to: deadlyhope

Yeah well, remember that it was "progressive democrats" in Congress and the Senate, under a "progressive democrat President", Woodrow Wilson, who gave the financial power of the United States to the rich global bankers, and set up the IRS, as it exist now, back in 1913...

Whomever controls the economy of a nation, controls that nation no-matter who is in power...

Once you control the economy of an entire nation, with time you can buy most people in seats of power and corrupt the entire political system of such country.

originally posted by: NoFearsEqualsFreeMan

Are you saying those things cant happen without capitalism? wow, how did we ever survive and EVOLVE before we INVENTED a piece of paper called money...??? must have been magic...

Gee, I don't know...Let's see...

The Incas used gold powder as tender coin. Others used beans, and other seeds to trade with other tribes. While others used tender coins such as the "WAMPUM ... America's First Currency" used by many native American tribes even before the white man came the the "New World". Other tribes simply traded goods for other goods... You know, old fashion capitalism?...

a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

Now if we can only get rid of greed corruption and propaganda.

Its only my opinion of late that all systems present themselves as the best model to their populace, garnering nationalistic sentiment in order to maintain control, when in reality the differences are semantic.

You can label a city in Malaysia, Russia, China or South America any pleasing sounding ideology you want, the cities are identical looking, urban sprawl to hi towers in the center, operated similarly as to distribution of goods and services, maintained the same and policed the same. People go to work for paychecks, shop, pay rent, drive cars, etc,etc.

They even get to vote on stuff, and if you believe for a minute nowadays that that matters anymore…

The world is one big global business operated the same all over, if the cities didn't exist everywhere with airports and power grids, ports, mayors and ghettos, I might listen to arguments about political ideology.

I also agree theres the way it is and the way it should be.

a reply to: ChuckNasty

Capitalism and free market are the same thing.

Not quite, here this guy puts it rather neatly


www.investopedia.com...

What is the difference between a capitalist system and a free market system? By Steven Nickolas

A capitalist system and a free market system are economic environments where supply and demand are the main factors of price and production of goods and services. Although the two economic systems are based on the law of supply and demand, these systems are different. Capitalism is an economic system based on ownership of the factors of production. Some key features of capitalism are competition between companies and owners, private ownership and motivation to generate a profit.
The production and pricing of goods and services is determined by the free market, or the supply and demand. A free market system is an economic system based solely on demand and supply, and there is little or no government regulation. In a free market system, a buyer and a seller transact freely only when they voluntarily agree on the price of a good or a service. For example, suppose a seller wants to sell a toy for $5 and a buyer wants to buy that toy for $3. A transaction will occur when the buyer and the seller agree on a price.
Capitalism is focused on the creation of wealth and ownership of capital and factors of production, whereas a free market system is focused on the exchange of wealth, or goods and services. A free market system is based solely on supply and demand and leads to free competition in the economy, without any intervention from outside forces. On the other hand, a private owner in a capitalist system can have a monopoly on the market and prevent free competition.

a reply to: intrptr
im with you there, ive held ideology being poison for a couple of years now. people make up civilization and how civilized someone is to others same government or not is up to the individual to be civilized despite what their civilization has taught them otherwise. as ideology be it religious, political, personal or a combination thereof is the only thing separating all of humanity. quite a few know this and quite a few exploit ideology to slow humanities progression to increase profits due to this separation no matter the government type doing so is a capitalist idea. the type the people have to live under as every country operating their capitalist agendas varies... some easier on the populous and some harder, being slaves to the central regardless? its in the populations best interest to force its government to share the spoils... aka social programs and infrastructure to better inhance the quality of their lives.

the people against this are curious... would they rather trillions going to war corruption and infrastructure building in other countries theyll likely never see a single tax dime benefit them? or trillions going back into our communities for better chances of opportunity and better over all quality of life... sometimes I think hold outs to such things are like a older sibling jealous of a younger one, like I didnt get any special treatment and its too late for me now that ive already been through it, so no I dont think those going through it should have an easier time because I didnt.

human behavior and ration is pretty pathetic for progress sometimes.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

When broken down like that....

The only Free Market left is at a Flea Market.

a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

Yah, Exxon keeps all its proceeds, returning only that which maintains or increases their profit margin. They don't put anything back into planes, trains or automobiles, roads, bridges or tunnels, they keep it all.

And are the biggest polluters, putting as little as possible into cleaning up spills, waste, and infrastructure . Thats why refineries explode, platforms sink, and ships sink.

Meanwhile we all drive and fly around, our engines burning oil polluting the atmosphere and the oceans.

They make billions, the people get the tax to maintain the roads and clean up the mess.

originally posted by: Edumakated

Um, the US is the largest economy in the world at 18 trillion in GDP. Switzerland is like 700 billion. Switzerland is also barely the size of NYC, so to compare it to the entire US economy is a bit of a stretch. It is also ironic you pick Switzerland which is very capitalistic and given a large part of their economy is banking which is the very antithesis of progessives.

While these small European countries with some socialist tendencies look good on paper, you can't necessarily extrapolate their success to the US. They have smaller homogenous populations with limited immigration and less individualistic cultures. They also depend on the US to play the world's police force so they don't need nearly as much military expenditures.

FWIW, the U.S. also has high levels of debt: something like $15 trillion in consumer debt, higher for public debt, around $30 trillion for corporate debt, and over $200 trillion in unfunded liabilities.