Yeah - Capitalism

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: FyreByrd

Maybe the property damage is a crime.

Confusing.

Maybe - private property is the crime.

Then would destroying public property be a crime ?

If so, who does the "enforcement" ?

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: StalkerSolent

originally posted by: rickymouse
We should only have to work about thirty hours a week to support our families. Anything after that should be for things we want. Right now, most people have to work over forty hours a week and they still need the food stamps if they have a family.

I'd submit this is largely because, in our consumerist society, we spend a lot of money on things we don't actually need. If you're working 40 hours a week and have a television, Netflix, air conditioning, go to the movies AND have food to put on the table, a roof over your head, and basic transportation, you're getting what you want and what you need. Perhaps not as much as you want, but certainly more than you need.

Don't get me wrong, I love air conditioning, washing machines and the Internet, and want pretty much everyone to have it. I just feel compelled to point out they aren't strictly needs. Not very long ago, the average farmer probably worked 60 hours a week to achieve a similar standard of living: get next years crops, pay for house and transportation, send the kids to school, and buy a few more cows. And this was before air conditioning. We've got it much better now.

Working forty hours a week at ten bucks an hour does not supply what a family needs in today's society. It seems that schools are making it so the kids need internet service and modern computers so the kids can do their homework. This is not bad, because it can save the school money, but it shifts the costs to the parents.

Society dictates what clothes are acceptable each year to be accepted. This is a consumer based scam to make everyone buy new school clothes for their kids or they feel out of place. Styles change, a tactic of consumerism, and this is conditioned into people.

Gaming on computers means you need a good computer and also fast internet service. In the lower middle class, the big cable packages have become a sign of social class. So people have been led to believe they are well off by the amount of channels they have on their package. Another conditioning that has been targeting the middle class. Many people buy these bigger packages just so they can get football games. Along with this is the huge expensive television. No wonder we are getting blind, we don't need to even squint our eyes or distinguish between the colors that blur our vision giving the colors texture. Instead they give us ultra clear high definition TV that targets what our eyes see best, then real life looks blurry. We are conditioned to see only what they want us to see. In another few generations our eyes won't be able to see many things. We will only pay attention to what sticks out and triggers the sensors most. People won't see things when they are driving and soon we will all lose our licenses to drive.

You are right, we are being sold things we do not need, but we think we need them.

Society has so many fundraisers nowadays it is getting ridiculous. These come through the schools many times. Others are to raise money to fund research in medicine, we are giving more money to the ones who already make good money. Instead of fundraising to stimulate the economy, fund-raise to directly help people in need. Make sure they understand the difference between need and wants before giving them money. The medical industry already knows many of the chemicals that REALLY causes cancer and the companion chemistry that is needed to keep it from happening. But it would be non-beneficial for their workers job security to tell us the whole truth. Instead they leave out hints that most people can't completely understand.

I get calls and see things all the time about treating kids with major illnesses to trips to places their families cannot afford. One recent one is going to take this kid and family all over the world to see things. Now, wouldn't it be better if they could take their kid to the beach somewhere or let him experience nature instead of the pyramids and England tourist sites? Maybe if the kid got into a tranquil natural setting he would get better. Instead they stimulate the economy with donations, none of which actually helps the kid. If I had a kid with these problems, I would find a good lake with a bunch of small sunfish in it and let the kid have a ball catching them and playing with the fish. Nature is usually the cheapest thing there is.

But all that points back to the warped priorities of the individual and lack of individual responsibility. There are many people, and I see them all the time, who complain about a $3 Medicaid copayment or buying pencils and paper for their kid at the beginning of the school year but spend hundreds of dollars a month on cigarettes and beer.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: simpelmatter

In just 2012, 100 of the richest men in world paychecks were enough to get the worlds economi to stand strong. There would be enough money for every single person in the world to live in a normal class starndard x4!!

Then why didn't the other 7 billion people take it away ?

[/quote/ Don't you think that is a dum question??

a reply to: simpelmatter

no.

but it might help to show the proof.

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

You could say that, you would be begging the question.

Capitalism makes products and services, perversion and abuse happen after that.

Are cars responsible for distracted driving?

No - Capitalism doesn't make any products or provide any services. Workers make the products and provide the services; Capital well supplies the input resources, workers transform those resources into profit. Captial and Workers should both benfit from the transformation. Econ 101.

Capitalism is the machines that the workers use to make the products and provide the services.

The person who invests in the machine is gambling that enough money will be made to turn a profit.

The worker gets paid whether the machine makes a profit or not.

The only motivation to gamble on buying a new machine is the additional money that can be gotten from the investment.

Socialism eliminates that motivation.

a reply to: Semicollegiate

Go back and read what I wrote again.

originally posted by: FyreByrd
a reply to: Semicollegiate

Go back and read what I wrote again.

Semantics?

Capitalism (technology) hasn't made anything because the workers aren't technology?

What can be made with hands alone?

Socialism is "Invasion of the Body Snatchers"

a reply to: FyreByrd

Most people don't realize that all free market systems end in ruin. At first there is good competition among many businesses, but soon certain businesses win the competition or buy out their competitors. Free market systems evolve into monopolies and fascism. Regulation and antitrust law are only way to artificially extend the life of a free market system.
Monopolies are constantly trying to erode these to gain even bigger profit.

a reply to: fripw

Regulation and antitrust law are only way to artificially extend the life of a free market system.

And we know how those work out.

originally posted by: fripw
a reply to: FyreByrd

Most people don't realize that all free market systems end in ruin. At first there is good competition among many businesses, but soon certain businesses win the competition or buy out their competitors. Free market systems evolve into monopolies and fascism. Regulation and antitrust law are only way to artificially extend the life of a free market system.
Monopolies are constantly trying to erode these to gain even bigger profit.

A monopoly is not always bad. John D. Rockefeller had a monopoly in oil refining, but he had to keep his selling price low or else new start up refiners would take some of his business away. The threat or possibility of a new competitor entering the market is more important than governmental regulation. The free market always regulates (keeps down) prices better than artificial rules.

Regulations disproportionately burden new start up companies and every cartel (the actual bad monopoly situation) needs the government to keep its domination of the market.

Regulations are fixed costs, and fixed costs are always proportionately smaller for bigger companies.

Capitalism is destined to fail and fail badly at some point, there are far more losers than winners in capitalism, so if your on the winning side you have all the material wealth to prolong the status quo.
A new system is needed to benefit ALL of humanity, including those third world countries we currently give aid to, a system that everyone can contribute to and get equal returns for their efforts.
The current system is so one sided it amazes me that revolutions are not common place, especially in educated countries in the west. If the people of the world knew nothing of capitalism, then were told of its consequences on todays society, and were given a vote as to the system they could choose, capitalism would not be seen as a good idea.
It is the people who benefit from capitalism who praise it, since they have all the platforms and positions of authority then the voice of capitalism is the only voice other than communism which is not a good alternative.

I am self employed and have a business on two continents, yet i say that the very system that I have benefited from is so unjust and unfair towards the vast majority of the worlds population.

a reply to: redeyeblue

Capitalism is destined to fail and fail badly at some point

How do you know that. Please explain.

Everyone one will win more through capitalism because everything necessary to life will become less expensive. Any raise in price brings more businesses into the market, and the prices go back down through competition. All increases in price come from artificial distortions of the market process.

Bread could have been like free ad papers or condiments and napkins are now.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
a reply to: redeyeblue

Capitalism is destined to fail and fail badly at some point

How do you know that. Please explain.

Because endless and eternal growth of markets (which assume endless raw resources) is impossible and capitalism needs and never ending growth model to survive.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: FyreByrd
a reply to: Semicollegiate

Go back and read what I wrote again.

Semantics?

Capitalism (technology) hasn't made anything because the workers aren't technology?

What can be made with hands alone?

Socialism is "Invasion of the Body Snatchers"

Oh do you really believe that nothing can be made by hands alone.

I'll start with a simple one - that requires no capital whatsoever. A simple scarf.

You dog sheds, you brush and save the fur.

Spin the fur into yarn.

Made knitting needles from two small branches.

Knit sweater.

Just because you can't make anything by hand or understand how to - doesn't mean that others don't. I suppose you have a pan that scrambles your eggs for you (oh that's right - you have a mommy bot to do it).

Argh - the karma hit. Bummer.

Mankind makes everything by hand.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: FyreByrd

Maybe the property damage is a crime.

Confusing.

Maybe - private property is the crime.

Then would destroying public property be a crime ?

If so, who does the "enforcement" ?

Generally, people take care of the things they are responsible for (with the exception of 'stupid young people' and sociopaths). If people truly felt ownership of the planet, they would take care of it.

Enforcement - would be minimal and local. Mediation is always required. And rotation of authority teaches responsibility and respect.

I can see it - sorry that more people can't. Not perfect, nothing is.

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
a reply to: redeyeblue

Capitalism is destined to fail and fail badly at some point

How do you know that. Please explain.

Because endless and eternal growth of markets (which assume endless raw resources) is impossible and capitalism needs and never ending growth model to survive.

Growing markets are nice, but capitalism needs only voluntary exchange.

The manditory growth meme comes from inflationist Keynesianism.

I never thought about capitalism as being a "trickle down" system until Reagan. It use to work before that idea started. Before the 80's, I believed that hard, hard work would get you a decent wage and life. What is wrong with wanting that life instead of being rich? We are all fish in a lake being enticed with the same bait so that the rich man can eat us and our families.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

Growing markets are nice, but capitalism needs only voluntary exchange.

The manditory growth meme comes from inflationist Keynesianism.

Capitalism requires growth for very obvious reasons. That is, the capital put into businesses come from profits, returns on investment, or newly created credit which can only have value if more resources and energy are turned into goods and services.

originally posted by: FyreByrd
Just love laizze faire capitalism, it's so good for everyone. Everyone is motivated to work hard, be honest and you'll get ahead. Yay!!

Well, it doesn't work so well if you make under $100/hour.

From:

www.nelp.org...

Which was reported upon here:

www.commondreams.org...

Robert Kuttner, writing for the American Prospect, notes that "one manifestation of job insecurity is extremes of inequality as corporations, banks, and hedge funds capture more than their share of the economy's productive output at the expense of workers."

"The shift in labor markets, from an economy where regular payroll employment is the norm, to one where more of us are performing odd jobs, or have regular jobs with indeterminate schedules, ought to be the top domestic political issue," Kuttner writes.

I blame capitalism for this - and it's bought and paid for lackeys in the Executive, Legislative and especially Judicial branches of government at all levels in the USA. It is not, however, just a US problem as this Austerity, Trickle Down, Reagan-nomics, Chicago-School Business Model is being spread through out the globe.

P.S. This covers the period 2009 - 2013. The so-called recovery period from the last crash. Blame whomever you want but deregulation of the financial system and financialization of all big business is the root cause.

That's why in a free society, you are free to go and start your OWN business. Then YOU can be the one reaping the rewards and assuming the risk.

When you CHOOSE not to assume the risk of failing as a business and instead choose to work for someone else and take that security, then you don't reap as big a reward....

Funny how that works.

Jaden

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: FyreByrd

Maybe the property damage is a crime.

Confusing.

Maybe - private property is the crime.

Then would destroying public property be a crime ?

If so, who does the "enforcement" ?

Generally, people take care of the things they are responsible for (with the exception of 'stupid young people' and sociopaths). If people truly felt ownership of the planet, they would take care of it.

Enforcement - would be minimal and local. Mediation is always required. And rotation of authority teaches responsibility and respect.

I can see it - sorry that more people can't. Not perfect, nothing is.

Interesting as that is.

But an answer would nice.

Then would destroying public property be a crime ?

If so, who does the "enforcement" ?