Capitalism is the Crisis

Here's one of many for you:

Originally posted by orbitbaby
The problem with capitalism is that someone ALWAYS loses. For there to be a winner
there HAS to be a loser. If you want more you'll have to take it from someone else,
leaving them with less...
People will look back and say "capitalism doesn't work, just look what happened to
Amerika.", same way they do now when they talk about Russia and communism or
Germany and socialism or the fall of Rome.

Every place had the ego parasitic power pyramid (but some had it limited and not so obvious) and it does not work. You can call Russia communism how every much you want but still it had the power pyramid.

Originally posted by TheMindWar
reply to post by AlexIR

 

Thats not the fauot of capitalism, thats greed, plain and simple.

Consider the facts, if you get rid of capitalism for say communism it wont solve our problems, greed will still exist, period.

Greed is the root of the problem and its greed that leads people to push for monopolies. If someone has a monopoly on something thier wealth is not at risk.

In every society its always greed and the lust for power that feeds the problems.

No there is not greed in all society if you do not allow it. It's very easy if a flock throws out or punishes the people who are gredy with not giving them any resources at all. You can make being ego a suicedal behaviour because you will not get any food if your greedy and you will quickly get everybody very egoless. The problem is that you are not alowed to let anybody go over the line of what is ego because it is a slipery sloop toward total corruption (as we can see in the current state on earth). But you need people to keep equlity at one level to be able to do this.With the right philpsophy this would be easy but we are not there yeet. In a hundred years that generations will call us stupid unenligthened apes for what we have done and I will agree with them because that is what I call humanity right now. But with suprising potential. But even apes evolves sometimes.

reply to post by AlexIR


what is the alternative ????
Figure that one out without socialism and you get a prize.

reply to post by rebellender


Create a big think tank to invent a new system? You know we have many other alternatives not just the basics, in my opinion democracy, capitalism, socialism, national socialism, monarchy and tirany has failed us so much that we should put them in the bin and go for other solutions.

Poverty is created just because some greedy ass bankers want more for themselves and don't think of others (sociopathic behavior much?), so if we can make everyone pretty much equal for the basic needs it will become better. By basic i mean clean fresh water, food and some basic health care, for the rest you have to work.

reply to post by AlexIR


Ha,ha , yeah, guessing you do not live in the USA. Because those 3 you mention we do have, and that is a fact .

Originally posted by Americanist

Originally posted by Dragoon01
Wrong OP.
Capitalism is not the crisis.
There is a crisis in Capitalism.

The Crisis is the collusion of government with business. When segments of business can purchase such a high level of influence they will use that infulence to secure their business position. Only the government can keep a monopoly in place. Only the government can use the power of force to strangle competition and only government can mitigate the fluctuations of true market forces. Entrenched business does not like competition and uncontroled innovation. Capitalism functions on market forces and continued innovation. Only private ownership of resources and production allow market forces to truely function.

For the record Chomsky is a dolt and could not last a single round with Ludwig Van Mises.

Deregulation keeps monopolies in place... Politics and government out of business as I'm sure you've heard the pitch before. The power of purchase is victorious in such an environment. What you allude to is Keynesian economics. What we've witnessed is far from it. Capitalism is an illusion like the majority of other models designed to funnel wealth and hard assets to oligarchs. Their private ownership means you're forced to buy what they're selling until you can't borrow enough to afford basic necessities.

Hold up, I'll find you the number for T. Boone Pickens, so you can reserve your water ration before the big rush is near!

For the record, there's a sucker born every minute.

Deregulation keeps monopolies in place????
Lets hear your explination for that line please.
As for Keynesian, no its actually from the Austrian School.
Von Mises is a different guy than Keynes.

For the record there's a usefull idiot stepping up to trash Capitalism every other thread.

Originally posted by Dragoon01

Originally posted by Americanist

Originally posted by Dragoon01
Wrong OP.
Capitalism is not the crisis.
There is a crisis in Capitalism.

The Crisis is the collusion of government with business. When segments of business can purchase such a high level of influence they will use that infulence to secure their business position. Only the government can keep a monopoly in place. Only the government can use the power of force to strangle competition and only government can mitigate the fluctuations of true market forces. Entrenched business does not like competition and uncontroled innovation. Capitalism functions on market forces and continued innovation. Only private ownership of resources and production allow market forces to truely function.

For the record Chomsky is a dolt and could not last a single round with Ludwig Van Mises.

Deregulation keeps monopolies in place... Politics and government out of business as I'm sure you've heard the pitch before. The power of purchase is victorious in such an environment. What you allude to is Keynesian economics. What we've witnessed is far from it. Capitalism is an illusion like the majority of other models designed to funnel wealth and hard assets to oligarchs. Their private ownership means you're forced to buy what they're selling until you can't borrow enough to afford basic necessities.

Hold up, I'll find you the number for T. Boone Pickens, so you can reserve your water ration before the big rush is near!

For the record, there's a sucker born every minute.

Deregulation keeps monopolies in place????
Lets hear your explination for that line please.
As for Keynesian, no its actually from the Austrian School.
Von Mises is a different guy than Keynes.

For the record there's a usefull idiot stepping up to trash Capitalism every other thread.

Deregulation

Energy, telecom, banking, and our MSM. I can name three corporate entities that have their hands in most everything because they were allowed too. On the flip side we have no-bid contracts, if you've ever heard of those. The lingering question is how many decades on this Earth up to 2008 have you not been paying attention? I'll let you off the hook for failure to spell check, but if you think your one-liner is going to stick... Think again.

Only the government can use the power of force to strangle competition and only government can mitigate the fluctuations of true market forces. Entrenched business does not like competition and uncontroled innovation.

Our governments have been a middleman at best. The banking cartel and the industries custom fit for the expanse of consumerism have held the power to control our World economies. Their business model entails stifling all competition/ opposition along with buying assets at pennies on the dollar subsequent to orchestrating downturns in finance.

For the record...

Why don't (why don't) you teach me something new.
We're all (we're all) just babies in my view,
So crawl baby...
Crawl baby.

reply to post by Americanist



You dont understand the definition of deregulation. I work in telecom and worked for one of the big three for 4 years, its one of the most heavily regulated utilities in the country. I addressed the use of the government to maintain business positions. True deregulation would mean NO REGULATIONS. What we have however is not deregulation. You may have been alluding to that but I will let you off the hook for not coming off that way.

I have explained this on several threads. Business uses its money to purchase influence. Influence comes in the form of government agents (politicians and regulators). If Government had no power to regulate or tax it would have no ability to implement that influence. Business is doing what it naturally can do to be top of the heap. The problem lies in the government.

Originally posted by Dragoon01
reply to post by Americanist

 

You dont understand the definition of deregulation. I work in telecom and worked for one of the big three for 4 years, its one of the most heavily regulated utilities in the country. I addressed the use of the government to maintain business positions. True deregulation would mean NO REGULATIONS. What we have however is not deregulation. You may have been alluding to that but I will let you off the hook for not coming off that way.

I have explained this on several threads. Business uses its money to purchase influence. Influence comes in the form of government agents (politicians and regulators). If Government had no power to regulate or tax it would have no ability to implement that influence. Business is doing what it naturally can do to be top of the heap. The problem lies in the government.

Bravo, you've conducted a circular debate. I cite true deregulation. As such, AT&T would have purchased T-Mobile. Then what? I'll tell you... Cornering the market.

Business uses its money to purchase influence.

You reiterated my point:

The power of purchase is victorious in such an environment.

Our Government borrows from the private banking sector (at interest) plus sells debt with yields attached, and who has the power again? Do you realize what the IRS collects for? Perhaps what the IRS is exactly? Jump on it...

Banking spurs business regardless of the conditions, so companies such as the one you possibly worked for are allowed to stay on top. Mind you with the same players involved... Unless the system is heavily regulated of course. Hence, the general theme of my statements.

Influence is the problem.
Influence buys regulations
So we fix this problem of influence by...
MORE REGULATION.


Genious. There's a circular debate for you.

Originally posted by Dragoon01

Influence is the problem.
Influence buys regulations
So we fix this problem of influence by...
MORE REGULATION.


Genious. There's a circular debate for you.

Receivership and better regulation, yes (e.g. banning insider trading in Congress). Nothing tainted of course.