It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Socialism Doesn’t Pay: Britain is Poorer Than Any US State But Mississippi

page: 13
22
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Semicollegiate

Capitalism is slavery dressed up real pretty and full of false promises. There has to be a bottom to exploit in capitalism otherwise goods aren't made at little to cost for labor.

Just reading some of your other posts... do you honestly think privatized roads are a good idea? I can't imagine continuing this conversation if so.




posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 09:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Semicollegiate

Capitalism is slavery dressed up real pretty and full of false promises. There has to be a bottom to exploit in capitalism otherwise goods aren't made at little to cost for labor.

Just reading some of your other posts... do you honestly think privatized roads are a good idea? I can't imagine continuing this conversation if so.


Yes. It is a good idea. A state toll turnpike near me is privatized and works great (for me). The government can't run ANYTHING well.



posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 09:35 AM
link   



posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: jjkenobi

I don't even... know where to start. If you want to open a restaurant on a road that is privately owned and say it's the main street in your town but the owners don't like you or don't like the type of food you want to serve or are buddies with the owners of another restaurant, you're screwed. If a hospital/doctor/clinic is on a private road and you're in need of emergency services but can't pay the toll... I mean just... really? It's a good idea? LOL.

Resembles feudalism way too much. Kings roads, merchants roads, lords roads.... good grief.
edit on 8/27/2014 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: jjkenobi
The rather obvious reason is that government provides the vast majority of roads so private companies only provide ones they can make a profit on.
Privatise all roads and you better like cities cause every where else will rely on dirt tracks.



posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: PurpleDog UK
May actually just have wet myself a little. V funny post.



posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: PurpleDog UK
Very funny but for British Capitalism I would have "you have two cows, one is mad but you shoot them both to be on the safe side"



posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Semicollegiate

Sorry, how in hell would the various police and fire brigade departments compete? That sounds like a recipe for them to become gangs offering 'protection'.
No. Your perfect world would become a perfect nightmare pretty damn fast.



posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 10:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: jjkenobi

I don't even... know where to start. If you want to open a restaurant on a road that is privately owned and say it's the main street in your town but the owners don't like you or don't like the type of food you want to serve or are buddies with the owners of another restaurant, you're screwed. If a hospital/doctor/clinic is on a private road and you're in need of emergency services but can't pay the toll... I mean just... really? It's a good idea? LOL.

Resembles feudalism way too much. Kings roads, merchants roads, lords roads.... good grief.


Wow, you went waaaaaaay off on a tangent with that made up story. Your world of "what if's" must drive you crazy. Right now I'm dealing with GOVERNMENT owned streets that are nearly un-drivable with the potholes and cracks.

Meanwhile in reality a government run organization (IRS) is doing what you described by targeting people it doesn't like (TEA PARTY). And you're worried about what a private business *might* do.



posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: uncommitted
a reply to: PurpleDog UK
Very funny but for British Capitalism I would have "you have two cows, one is mad but you shoot them both to be on the safe side"


Fairpoint HOWEVER……

"American Capitalism'' so true so very true…….. milk it and milk it and squeeze it and pump it until there's nothing left……… then look for something else to exploit………
Look at the water situation in California………. utterly amazing that a requirement for human life has been wasted and used beyond capacity in pusuit of greed, money and luxurious living without thinking about the future……….

The more i see things the more i feel that America is NOT the land of the free BUT more the land of the few GREEDY and the rest too Dumb to see otherwise……

Regards

PDUK



posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: jjkenobi
And you can't think of any examples of private companies doing anything immoral or illegal?
Private run toll roads will be well maintained and run where there is sufficient demand to make them profitable.



posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: jjkenobi

You have simply GOT to be writing satire ... you're going to cite another member for a "made up story" when your whole schema is nothing but pure fantasy? Please point to one successful nation-sized area on this planet where allowing the so-called "Free Market" to rule and eliminating the Rule of Law (i.e. anarcho-capitalism, see Von Mises) has been successful.

The closest you will come is current day Somalia ... is that your idea of a good time?

Hogwash. You, Semi and a few others are merely fronting for a different flavor of IDEALISM and UTOPIAN FANTASY.

No thanks.



posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 01:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Semicollegiate
Ok so we have now established socialism doesn't happen at taxation but when tax is spent. How about if the rate of tax is 90% but I all spent on private companies, is that ok?
Also
Are private monopolies better than state ones?
How do you pay what you use for police,defence?
Who regulates against fraud/poor performance.
Who decides who gets what contract?




Socialism happens when the government claims ownership of everything. Whatever the government can tax or legalize about, it owns. All taxes and laws pertaining to more than non-aggression are socialist. The non-aggression principle is that the aggressor is always wrong, self defense is a right, anything that hurts no one else is legal.

Private monopolies must worry about new start ups. That keeps them honest. Government monopolies tax as much money as possible, have no reason to perform above a minimum, and can kill you.

Police, fire, emergency services, water, power, garbage, legal, computer maintenace are hired by customers. Competition would keep costs down or provide better service.

World wide communication exposes fraud or incompetence.



posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Semicollegiate
So how are property rights protected in your pure form of capitalism. No taxes mean no courts or police. No military to defend from threats abroad.
Sounds more like anarchy than capitalism.



Courts provide a service and are paid for by those who use them.

Police are paid for by their customers.

The military will go the way of the barbarians. War is not economically feasible without socialism.



edit on 27-8-2014 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Semicollegiate

I don't even know what to say here. You keep going on with your own American re-write of what socialism is without any consideration of what it actually means and to what degree it has ever been applied historically. And it's not like you haven't been told in this thread. There is a serious lack of any world/historical awareness in this country that really, really gets old. And if it's old to me, as an American, it must really get old to people in other countries who look at us with a constant eye roll.

Socialism, by definition, is public ownership of the means of production. Get it? The people. Not the state. Not the corporations. See where you are getting this completely backwards? I don't mean to sound blunt, but there it is, staring you right in the face.

On top of that, realistically, by any world standards, there is no real left in the United States. Not that is actively involved in politics, by any measurable degree. Our democratic party is center-right, at best… and that's me being nice. I'm not sure what you are afraid of. Capitalism is alive and well. Well, perhaps not well. More like in it's final throes of corporatocracy.
edit on 27-8-2014 by okrian because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: okrian


Socialism is, by definition, is public ownership of the means of production. Get it? The people. Not the state. Not the corporations.


How can that be without massive authorities keeping things straight?




posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Semicollegiate
Again we are working with you own definition of socialism and capitalism. With that in mind
Monopolies arise in unregulated capitalism, economies of scale mean they have little to worry from competitors ir can fix prices with other large companies.
What if you next door neighbour doesn't hire these services. Garbage piles up raw sewage in you garden and uf there is a fire!
Oh and world wide communication I only possible dye to government. The internet started a military and state funded research. Satellites only possible due to government.
Some things are best done by government some by private enterprise. Anyone who believes one or the other is always best is a deluded.



posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: Kali74

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: Kali74
Even the Nordic countries aren't really Socialist, they're more redistributive capitalism. Any nation that is claimed to be Socialist but does not have an economic model in which workers own the means of production... is a false claim. Billionaire puppeteers sure do love those muddy waters.


A Capitalistic government would not have the power redistribute anything, because it would have no legal claim to anything.

Any government that can claim ownership of the property of its citizens is socialist/totalitarian.


A democratic government with a capitalist economic model can have redistribution, in fact it must or the economy will fail unless you're willing to consistently kill off those who fall to the bottom, which is an inevitability. The combination is what allows for taxes to be implemented, through voting in politicians that will propose taxes to Congress and then how those taxes will be used.


Redistribution is about government, not capitalism.

Capitalism makes things as available as is humanly possible for the poorest people. Everything that one person gets must be made by another. The only alternative to capitalism is slavery. Some one giving to poor people without payment.


That's not capitalism, the clue is in the word, it's to gain capital to the seller which equals profit. Why do you think it's about making things as available as possible to the poorest person? Walmart may adopt that approach, but even then, through bulk buying and minimum wages they still turn the profit. That's what capitalism is, why try and make it into something it is not?


Poor people are a market like any other in the sense that the lowest price will make the most sales.

Capitalism brings costs of production and prices down. In the 1970's a mathematical calculator, that only did arithmetic, cost $4000. Now that calculator cost $4 and can do trigonometry and statistics.



posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: PurpleDog UK

Canadian Capitalism
2 cows producing exceptionally well. Govt steps in, penalizes u for producing, effectively and efficiently.
then orders u too dump the milk onto the ground,
then forces u too sell one cow so a Govt set milk quota is maintained.

true story.



posted on Aug, 27 2014 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Semicollegiate
A hand held calculator would cost less a 100£ in the 70s. Even adjusted that is only about 800£.
The fact that cost has came down in partially driven by supply and demand (present in any market economy not just your definition of capitalism) and partly technological advance.
Unregulated capitalism can drive wages and consumption down therefore stiffiling growth and technological advancement.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join