Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > Capitalism      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 EarlzP
Joined: 12/9/2007
Msg: 51
view profile
History
CapitalismPage 3 of 14    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14)

forgot a caveat Earlz

define your standard of ignorance.


I have no standard or need to define ignorance, people find happiness in various ways. I know some pretty hard workers that live pretty simple and uncomplicated lives, money does not define success to them.
 sd_matt
Joined: 7/9/2006
Msg: 52
Capitalism
Posted: 10/12/2009 5:43:27 PM
Yes..play loose with your definitions to avoid an head on argument.....another old tactic.
 CountIbli
Joined: 6/1/2005
Msg: 53
Capitalism
Posted: 10/17/2009 12:48:07 AM


Capitalism for most is a failure.


Are most Americans starving, naked, and homeless? Do most Americans have Internet access, personal computers, food, clothing, shelter, cell phones, and healthy children? In what way has capitalism been a failure for most?
 laxref41
Joined: 7/20/2008
Msg: 55
Capitalism
Posted: 10/18/2009 8:42:19 AM
"Are most Americans starving, naked, and homeless? Do most Americans have Internet access, personal computers, food, clothing, shelter, cell phones, and healthy children? In what way has capitalism been a failure for most? "

I don't think I've ever agreed with countibli but, I will here. In general across the population board, capitalism has certainly served Americans well. Does that mean we don't have a lot of room for improvement, of course not.


"The wealth continues to migrate to the top. In time, the lucky few will have it all. "

This comment is really not about capitalism but about our laws and government regulations and, in fact recently, meddling in business. Over the last 28 years, 3% of total wealth has been transferred from the poorest 20% of the population to the wealthiest 5% of the population. This simply can't happen and most assuredly can't continue without an ultimate revolution. If anything, we want the scale tipped slightly toward the poor (i.e. TRUE trickle down). However, this transfer is not the result of "capitalism" but it is the result of government laws (e.g. deregulation, taxation) that enabled the wealthiest to take a greater percentage of wealth.
When the financial institutions and other companies teetered on failure, true capitalism would have let them fail. Bailouts only maintain the status quo... and the people with money retain their wealthy status... that's not capitalism.
 laxref41
Joined: 7/20/2008
Msg: 56
Capitalism
Posted: 10/18/2009 8:50:13 AM
"Sure, if you are an American without substantial debt and a secure income, with non-obese, non-asthmatic, non-diabetic children, GREAT! But I guess my point is that we're living in a bit of a paper castle, which can get blown away pretty easily. OUR lifestyles and means of acquiring THINGS (but not wealth,for the majority) has made us very vulnerable....to the extent that one lay off or serious illness, and a whole family's lifestyle can go BUST in a minute, of which we have ample and frequent proof."

A Bit Nomadic is correct here too but, I don't see this as the fault of "capitalism." I'm fortunate enough to have a job that lands me in countries all over the world fairly often. From what I've seen and realized about Americans is that, for the most part, we are in general "wealthy adolescents." Immature, selfish children with money... and so A Bit Nomadic is right... we live in a paper castle and, if we're not careful, if we continue to believe we can always have our way by ourselves, sooner or later it will get completely blown away.
 CountIbli
Joined: 6/1/2005
Msg: 57
Capitalism
Posted: 10/18/2009 6:37:44 PM

I don't think I've ever agreed with countibli but, I will here. In general across the population board, capitalism has certainly served Americans well.


I new you'd see the light some day


Does that mean we don't have a lot of room for improvement, of course not.


I guess it's my turn to agree with you. There are a multitude of things that we could be doing better. I suspect, though, that we disagree on what those things are.



While many COMPLAIN about our safety nets, in reality we have very few. CREDIT is not wealth, and it sure isn't security (and neither is health insurance). What I find remarkable is the absolute determination of so many to prevent the kinds of reforms that could save THEM. Too often, it's only when the worst has happened to THEM that people see how fragile their own foundations are.


I agree. Americans are addicted to easy credit and when we can't get our fix the economy goes into withdrawal.
 Cdn_Iceman
Joined: 12/1/2010
Msg: 58
Capitalism
Posted: 3/6/2011 8:13:51 AM
Long live capitalism, Only if Obama can understand that ..sigh....
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 59
Capitalism
Posted: 3/6/2011 12:42:20 PM
In the grand scheme, Obama is a capitalist. People who say otherwise do not see, or refuse to see the larger picture-- and they have a disturbing tendency to use the word socialism as a kneejerk pejorative rather than as the name for a specific type of economic and political model.

As so many have been trying to get across on this thread, extremes should be avoided. There is a middle ground to be had. Positing the need for regulation does not make someone a socialist. Pure capitalism doesn't really even exist outside of the black market and the illicit drug trade-- not exactly models that a civilized society should aspire toward.
 Cdn_Iceman
Joined: 12/1/2010
Msg: 60
Capitalism
Posted: 3/6/2011 1:14:35 PM

In the grand scheme, Obama is a capitalist. People who say otherwise do not see, or refuse to see the larger picture-- and they have a disturbing tendency to use the word socialism as a kneejerk pejorative rather than as the name for a specific type of economic and political model.
Ahhhh No he's a socialist, perhaps listen to some of his speeches about taking from the rich to give to poor, war against big businesses, helping out his Democratic Wall street friends and punishing Republican Main Street Bankers, oh that TARP money really help out the Financial Institutions too, yeah I see that Wall Street is back to it old tricks with record amount of bonuses.

There is no capitalist system, Americans lives in a Mixed economy system of Capitalism, socialism and statism. Too much government is part of the problem, more regulations isnt going solve the problem, the more regulations Washington or Central banks comes up with the more the lawyers of the industries that its affecting comes up with ways to get around it, example basel I and II and now we have Basel III, The Volcker rule etc.

 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 61
Capitalism
Posted: 3/6/2011 2:00:13 PM
Ahhhh No he's a socialist...

Perhaps there is no polite way to say this, but there really is no getting around it: your position would be better served if you learned more about what socialism really is. I am no expert on it myself, but I know enough not to make the flimsy claims and assumptions you are.

oh that TARP money really help out the Financial Institutions too, yeah I see that Wall Street is back to it old tricks with record amount of bonuses.

Again, you are making your case poorly. This is flawed in many ways:

-you're criticizing Obama, yet Bush signed the TARP bill
-bailing out capitalist entities does not equal the installation of socialism
-if you are being sarcastic, TARP did help the financial sector
-I guess you don't remember Obama limiting the bonuses awarded when companies received government aid, and how right-wingers (free marketers) revolted at his "overreach"
-TARP has been largely repaid, and companies that have done so can award bonuses as they see fit-- that's the free market in action. Yet you seem to point it out as a failing on the part of this "socialist" president.

By your reasoning, the people who instituted federally funded freeways and roads and created automobile safety standards are socialists. For that matter, anyone who isn't in almost complete lockstep with "Atlas Shrugged" is a socialist.

Too much government is part of the problem

The popular, simplistic, Reaganesque refrain, but not exactly rooted in the grim reality of the situation we have in the US, at least-- this "too much government" is handpicked, bought, and influenced by large corporate interests-- also known as the hallmarks of capitalism. The fox is guarding the henhouse, and some are too busy regurgitating black and white political ideological rhetoric to notice.
 Cdn_Iceman
Joined: 12/1/2010
Msg: 62
Capitalism
Posted: 3/6/2011 3:59:10 PM

Perhaps there is no polite way to say this, but there really is no getting around it: your position would be better served if you learned more about what socialism really is. I am no expert on it myself, but I know enough not to make the flimsy claims and assumptions you are.
I can see you've never owned a profitable business, you work for a living and receive a pay cheque right?

Again, you are making your case poorly. This is flawed in many ways:

-you're criticizing Obama, yet Bush signed the TARP bill
-bailing out capitalist entities does not equal the installation of socialism
-if you are being sarcastic, TARP did help the financial sector
-I guess you don't remember Obama limiting the bonuses awarded when companies received government aid, and how right-wingers (free marketers) revolted at his "overreach"
-TARP has been largely repaid, and companies that have done so can award bonuses as they see fit-- that's the free market in action. Yet you seem to point it out as a failing on the part of this "socialist" president.
Bailing out capitalist entities okay I will bite, bailing out failed companies isnt free market, it was a truly free market poorly management companies would fail.

By your reasoning, the people who instituted federally funded freeways and roads and created automobile safety standards are socialists. For that matter, anyone who isn't in almost complete lockstep with "Atlas Shrugged" is a socialist.
dont put words in my mouth sport... Federally funded freeways and roads, okay... where do you think this money comes from for the government to spend?


The popular, simplistic, Reaganesque refrain, but not exactly rooted in the grim reality of the situation we have in the US, at least-- this "too much government" is handpicked, bought, and influenced by large corporate interests-- also known as the hallmarks of capitalism. The fox is guarding the henhouse, and some are too busy regurgitating black and white political ideological rhetoric to notice.
Good lord, spoken like a true socialist, maybe you need to take a political science course and a economic course and we can have a discussion.

IMO ,We dont need more regulations, but rather laws – properly formulated, to protect the individual rights of everyone. The fundamental distinction is one between the proper concept of laws, and the concept of regulations.

If Properly constituted, laws are binding rules designed to protect individual rights. Philosophically speaking, man has four basic rights: those to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness.

In contrast with proper laws, regulations (which are also called ‘laws' to package-deal them with proper laws) do not protect individual rights.

An example is they order a business to follow certain procedures when conducting their affairs. For example, some regulations may tell businesses how to value their assets when doing their accounting.

If regulations do not protect individual rights or make businesses' products safer or otherwise better, then why are they passed – and why do they proliferate? The truth is that regulations allow governments to effectively take control of businesses, along with their revenues and productive talent thereby.
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 63
Capitalism
Posted: 3/6/2011 6:31:57 PM

I can see you've never owned a profitable business

Non sequitor. Big time. So... if I run out and run a successful business, I will develop as big a misconception of socialism as you have?

bailing out failed companies isnt free market, it was a truly free market poorly management companies would fail.

You are refuting a point I didn't make. If you look back, I said (and you later echoed the claim) that pure capitalism does not exist-- outside of organized crime, at least. Again, something less than a truly free market does not socialism make.

dont put words in my mouth sport...

I just call 'em like I see 'em. I noticed that instead of setting me straight, you just offered a rather unprofound rhetorical question... at least I hope it was rhetorical.

Good lord, spoken like a true socialist, maybe you need to take a political science course and a economic course and we can have a discussion.

Again, this does not constitute a rebuttal/refutation/counter-evidence/counterpoint. Instead, you merely (predictably, as proven by my earlier prediction) strike back using the word socialism as a pejorative accusation. To me, it is akin to a bartender being accused of being a blacksmith-- wholly incorrect but not seen as an offensive label. That said, what exact courses should I take before I come to the conclusion that campaign finance reform ISN'T needed?

And since you bring it up, I, too, hope to find educational discussion here, most hopefully from those I may not agree with. All too often, I am disappointed with what I find instead from the opposition.
 Cdn_Iceman
Joined: 12/1/2010
Msg: 64
Capitalism
Posted: 3/6/2011 6:47:43 PM
Just like I thought Flyguy,and you're doing the same thing mate.
Second Organized crime isn't capitalism, neither is Wall street/Bay Street ( In Canada) etc.
Perhaps research what capitalism really means? Im betting you're one of the academics with all the wonderful theories but has no facts or true understanding of economics.

The only thing you and I agree on ( minus the organized crime part) is True Capitalism doesn't exist.

I was having a discussion with a posters about unions, he thinks Unions are good, and I think they are evil, Im looking at it from a business owner/investor's point of view and he's looking at it from " workers" point of view so my point is most people who do work for a living believes Socialism is a good thing for them, vs people like me, who owns businesses and investments dont care for it .
 4rumninja
Joined: 11/30/2009
Msg: 65
Capitalism
Posted: 3/7/2011 6:32:52 AM

Perhaps there is no polite way to say this, but there really is no getting around it: your position would be better served if you learned more about what socialism really is. I am no expert on it myself, but I know enough not to make the flimsy claims and assumptions you are.

I couldn't agree more thanks to this thread I have been doing a lot of reading about Socialism, based on Obamas policies, statements he has made, etc..I am inclined to conclude that he adheres to the Socialist ideology...

Offer some evidence that proves that Obama does not have Socialistic tendencies...it is easy to attack a poster, try staying on topic and addressing the arguments and not the poster..I have read the posts by those asserting that Obama is not a Socialist and have seen no evidence that proves he is not.Would it make you feel better if we call him a Socialist/Marxist?

"Community Organizing " is the beginning and an important part in the move towards Socialism...Obama touts his time as a Community Organizer....
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 66
Capitalism
Posted: 3/7/2011 7:39:15 AM
A thread was revived from 18 months ago to bash Obama. I looked at it and couldn't be bothered to respond - it's just loopy.

However, now we're seeing Socialism being defined in incredibly weird ways. Community organizing is now socialism apparently. I guess that means that your Founding Fathers were socialists; the Tea Baggers are socialists.

We can vote in this country for real socialists. We also have a Liberal and a Conservative party. Our main right wing news outlet (The National Post) recently compared our Conservative Prime Minister to your President - Stephen Harper is farther left than Obama on pretty much every issue.

Barrack Obama is really far right - both by our standards here and by your own standards historically. He's also farther right than Nixon. You pretty much have to go the world of elves, unicorns and bridge trolls to consider Obama a socialist. Here in the real world, he's just trying to do very minimal things to fix a massive mess.
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 67
Capitalism
Posted: 3/7/2011 8:32:24 AM

I am inclined to conclude that he adheres to the Socialist ideology...

Wow... imagine my shock reading this admission knowing your posting history here, insolent1/etourdi/4rumninja.

Offer some evidence that proves that Obama does not have Socialistic tendencies

This is known as "shifting the burden of proof"-- and it's naughty. I have rebutted assertions and "evidence" that he is a socialist. And if your "research" has revealed that Obama is a socialist, you may very well be beyond being convinced otherwise.

try staying on topic and addressing the arguments and not the poster...

I have been addressing the arguments. But when one decides to make up new definitions for words, that needs to be brought to one's attention. If you disagree, feel free to report me to the mods. As you can see, I have survived here quite a few years quite well...
 Cdn_Iceman
Joined: 12/1/2010
Msg: 68
Capitalism
Posted: 3/7/2011 9:05:44 AM

I am no expert on it myself, but I know enough not to make the flimsy claims and assumptions you are.-flyguy
that was your quote right? did I misread that? if you're not a expert why comment?

I'm not a expert on many subjects and I wont or dont pretend to have knowledge on certain subjects that I have little to no Knowledge of.

I have a degree in political science and have been in the Financial sector for over 25 years, working in the banking sector, private sector, working with governments, and Ive been a business owner for the last 10 years so I do understand more than you're giving me credit for, If you think I throw around words( socialism) and not understand it full meaning , then we are going to have a issue and keep going round n round like a merry go round

I'm going to say this, you're going to say that... blah blah blah, you're going to say I violated some fallacy law, I'm going counter with you dont understand economics blah blah blah. You're a academia and I'm not , I'm a capitalist and you're not , so what next?
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 69
Capitalism
Posted: 3/7/2011 10:59:05 AM
That's really, really disheartening.

You have a degree in Political Science. You should know better. Socialism is a pretty wide spectrum, but no definition of socialism could possibly include a conservative like Barrack Obama. Unless you subscribe to a really radical dogma like Ayn Rand. And pretty much every politician in every democratic nation on earth would be a socialist by that whacked out philosophy.
 .dej
Joined: 11/6/2007
Msg: 70
view profile
History
Capitalism
Posted: 3/7/2011 11:17:28 AM
I would not call Barack Obama a conservative.
 Cdn_Iceman
Joined: 12/1/2010
Msg: 71
Capitalism
Posted: 3/7/2011 11:19:54 AM
Good lord, did I say every friggen politician is a socialist we're talking about Obama FFS.

Oh I get it now, so people like Rand, Freidman,Krugman among others has whacked out philosophies? I see now gotcha, and you do what for a living?

Obama is a socialist, he has socialist tendencies, you cant see it because you think Socialism is what Cuba,North Korea is and former Soviet Union was based on.

Obama believes that when The government redistributes wealth, "it's good for everybody." They do not realize that wealth redistribution is no substitute for wealth creation. Look at today's Young people ,they are never taught that the only way to create wealth is for an individual to combine his/her energy and intellect with resources to produce a product that improves his/her life, or for which someone else is willing to pay.

Private property, the accumulation of personal prosperity and individual achievement are anathema to socialism. Socialism sees the individual as nothing more than a cog in a government-run machine designed to ensure equity for all.

Capitalism seeks prosperity; socialism seeks equity. Freedom increases as prosperity increases. In a socialist system, there can be neither.

 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 72
Capitalism
Posted: 3/7/2011 1:29:23 PM
if you're not a expert why comment?

Why? As I said in the quote: "I know enough not to make the flimsy claims and assumptions you are [regarding socialism]." That is why.

But much more fundamental than that, if only experts could comment, this world would be a very quiet place. More likely, countless self-appointed experts would suddenly pop up.

I'm not a expert on many subjects and I wont or dont pretend to have knowledge on certain subjects that I have little to no Knowledge of.

Hmmm... seems as though you are trying to insinuate something here...

I'm a capitalist and you're not...

I'm actually not that ideological anymore. First and foremost on these matters, I am for what is best for the country-- yes, that is intentionally vague because I am not that ideological. The mixed market capitalism we have suits me.

so what next?

Next for me would actually involve some backtracking here--

These are all statements you made:

Long live capitalism


There is no capitalist system, Americans lives in a Mixed economy system of Capitalism, socialism and statism.


Organized crime isn't capitalism, neither is Wall street/Bay Street ( In Canada) etc.


True Capitalism doesn't exist.

The last three don't really go with the first. Capitalism seems to be a very exclusive concept with you. What is the sort of capitalism (examples) that does exist that you want to live long?

Regarding Obama and socialism, here's an article I found that explains my POV quite well-- which probably means you will find it very disagreeable

http://www.examiner.com/civil-rights-in-new-orleans/obama-and-socialism-is-he-or-isn-t-he?cid=parsely#parsely
 Cdn_Iceman
Joined: 12/1/2010
Msg: 73
Capitalism
Posted: 3/7/2011 1:32:27 PM

The last three don't really go with the first. Capitalism seems to be a very exclusive concept with you. What is the sort of capitalism (examples) that does exist that you want to live long?<
the one that makes me money and my business/investments profit.
 .dej
Joined: 11/6/2007
Msg: 74
view profile
History
Capitalism
Posted: 3/7/2011 1:35:44 PM
Obama is a socialist, he has socialist tendencies, you cant see it because you think Socialism is what Cuba,North Korea is and former Soviet Union was based on.

This is just not so. He is more of a wealth distributor than some of his Republican (and even Democratic) counterparts, but he is certainly no socialist.

For one, he is a huge advocate for a large and powerful government, in stark contrast to socialism's traits of a reduced bureaucracy and decentralized common ownership and exercise of wealth and power. He is quite liberal, but a socialist he is not. Try talking to someone who is a self-proclaimed socialist. They will tell you their views are almost very contrasted to Obama's.
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 75
Capitalism
Posted: 3/7/2011 1:51:42 PM
cdn iceman, that actually sheds no additional light whatsoever upon your previous statements I quoted.

I hope you don't evade your taxes in the same manner you evaded that question.

dej, it is really heartening to see a poster of the more right-wing persuasion with at least a rudimentary knowledge of what socialism is-- and isn't.
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > Capitalism