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.

 

Capitalism is not the only American way.

page: 5
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 28 2015 @ 09:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
All Authoritarianism is Left Wing.

Nothing else "works" does it.

Sorry but the right=freedom is a bunch of BS. Besides, it doesn't work either.




posted on Dec, 28 2015 @ 10:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: SPECULUM
Philanthropy remains The Capitalistic Spirit and that's all that is needed

I have always seen philanthropy as a gesture of "I got so over on everyone that I can toss them crumbs because that is all they need". I have never equated that to the american spirit.

Maybe I am wrong.
Its Charity, and we all know that not everyone is a financial success, but the welfare state is destroying the US, because its putting us in financial ruin, and it was never suppose to happen. Aggressive Competitive Capitalism is what makes the world go around...History shows anything else ends up in failure



posted on Dec, 28 2015 @ 10:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: SPECULUM
Aggressive Competitive Capitalism is what makes the world go around...History shows anything else ends up in failure

Really? When was that last seen?



posted on Dec, 28 2015 @ 10:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: SPECULUM
Aggressive Competitive Capitalism is what makes the world go around...History shows anything else ends up in failure

Really? When was that last seen?

Apparently you haven't been paying attention to the world around you



posted on Dec, 28 2015 @ 11:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: SPECULUM
Apparently you haven't been paying attention to the world around you

Actually I have. I have seen a whole bunch of corporate push to enforce things like copyright and patents. It isn't new either even the US constitution has a clause built in. So much for aggressive competition.
edit on 28-12-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2015 @ 11:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

I've always imagined a combination of different ideas would work, putting emphasis on having a nation lead by the people... My seasonal benefits account is currently linked to my Facebook, and the government doesn't even talk to me to know how much I made or anything, it's all electronic. If such networking exists, why can't we use said technology to create a political model that more directly represents the masses? Not exactly Facebook accounts voting, but some type of .gov account.


"A nation lead by people" is exactly what the US was founded on with the "We the people" and Lincoln's "Government of the people, by the people, for the people. It was pretty clear who the US government was meant to benefit when it formed from exactly as you state a combination of different ideas.

The people that organized a coup to form the US against the British rule was to create a government that eased oppression on the new world society made up of a melting pot of peoples from all over the world... free from the tyranny of the crown and free from te religious right that controlled the crown or was essentially the government working for the crown. it wasnt formed to turn around and do the exact same thing... yet thats eventually what occured as wealthy european industrialists began to modernize the new world as a model taken from european industrialization... it was only a matter of time until the same practices evolved under the new government with wealth holding the crown instead of a family, where wealth spoke and got heard instead of the people. eventually evolving into a a corporatacracy and elite class with castles called corporate empires and elites family and children of those industrialists the aristocracy.

the warning shot over the bow that the corportacracy was coming had been long fired before they decided among the elect that supposidly represent we the people, made corporations people... in doing so it embued corporations the rights of people but as an entity no one can be prosecuted for a crime in certain corporate structures. they just step down or resign plying ignorance of the scam using compartmentalization as a excuse for not knowing or being in on it. when this happens under some corporate strutures thhat have no oversight and dont want to give an oversight they find a patsy to blame it on.

money being the main force in politics and its voice... corporations that are to big to fail etc have written themselves in as people. being people allows them a voice in politics, these conglomerates having more money and voice than actual people? we lose our collective voices in te process of super pacs and citizens united that actively appoint who as been groomed well enough to be a croney in these schemes while dangling the carrot of joining the elite class as incentive.

that all plays well and good until the capitalist society it rests on starts falling apart because profit is the reason for governments being and no longer an agency to benefit the people. as actual people start collapsing under the profit system the more people see that the government has been going rogue reliving itself from any responsibility to the people, and politicians become the diplomats to smooth things over with the public and military becomes a tool for foreign resource stabilization for current industries as the police force becomes a riot squad at every public assembly that protests the errosion or denial of human rights afforded by the constitution and other documents of founding... always being altered and interptreted to cherry pick a meaning to fit in new laws tat no living breathing public is even asking for.

so we have 3 ways to really go... take the government back into the hands of the people to rebalance and redistribute power. or the repressive who cares about foreign collapase and people in a corporate version of manifest destiny, or one that says hey we cant be as extreme as we have been being in reguards to people in globalisation efforts. it seems thats the point of the UN countries agreeing to a one world government and they make sure countries trying to modernize other countries do so by humanitarian rules... and those resisting get called rebels and those paid to keep the conflict going terrorists etc. please note terrorist and rebel are interchangible depending on ones side.

so heading to a one world globalized government ran by a UN senate and a bunch of statehoods it can either be lets be humanitarian and explain to everyone what the agenda is and slice the pie a lot, bloody and ignorant slice the pie the least, or just enough blood and ignorance to not disturb te staus quo still not as equal slicing as everyone moving together but not as totalitarian and remorseless as war just taking it.

technology can help make many things easier... but ever be in a store during a blackout? no cashier can bust out a piece of paper and make change it seems. so if such a system went down? where it was all digital dollars... economical chaos and societal chaos... at least thats what ive been told by every math teacher/professor saying no calculators allowed during my whole educational carreer.



posted on Dec, 28 2015 @ 11:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: SPECULUM
Apparently you haven't been paying attention to the world around you

Actually I have. I have seen a whole bunch of corporate push to enforce things like copyright and patents. It isn't new either even the US constitution has a clause built in. So much for agressive competition.
That's a defeatist attitude, and that's another reason we are failing. The object is to create your own niche and build your success and wealth before any competition can get a foothold



posted on Dec, 28 2015 @ 11:15 PM
link   
a reply to: SPECULUM

No, that is a realist telling it like it is. Doing that doesn't mean you can't try to do what you say but, many are busy keeping others from gaining a foothold and that is not innovation.
edit on 28-12-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2015 @ 11:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: SPECULUM

No that is a ralist telling it like it is. Doing that doesn't mean you can't try to do what you say but, many are busy keeping others from gaining a foothold and that is not innovation.
Stay out of markets that are heavily controlled by the machine...Investors only pay 15% in income tax, Find an aggressive investment. Create an investment, sell it to your LLC and become an investor



posted on Dec, 28 2015 @ 11:26 PM
link   
a reply to: SPECULUM

That doesn't change the game, it is only advice on how to play it.



posted on Dec, 29 2015 @ 12:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: SPECULUM

That doesn't change the game, it is only advice on how to play it.
Its only a game



posted on Dec, 29 2015 @ 01:55 AM
link   
a reply to: SPECULUM

Then why care about "Capitalistic Spirit"? After all, it's just a game.



posted on Dec, 29 2015 @ 07:11 AM
link   
a reply to: M5xaz


so·cial·ism (sō′shə-lĭz′əm)
n.
1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.


Any of Various Theories, it says. Thats somewhat disingenuous. Large cities aren't theoretical, just about every country has them. People don't "collectively own them", either. Thats a ruse, people don't actually "own" the city sidewalks, just use them collectively and their combined tax pays for their upkeep. How is that different from a "collective" in a "communist" country? The difference is what we are taught. Our cities our collectives our social infrastructure is 'better' than theirs.

The big corporations own everything in the city and the people pay for it. Most people rent, pay tax and fees to do anything.



posted on Dec, 29 2015 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: SPECULUM

Give me a link showing how the biggest, or best economies in the world are capitalistic.

Is China a free market and capitalistic ? No. But the quality of life also is not amazing so let's move on.

Switzerland and new Zealand have some of the world's best economies... Socialistic.

Most first world nations are socialistic.

Where do people get this "capitalism is the world's way" crap anyways?



posted on Dec, 29 2015 @ 11:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: deadlyhope
Hello ats, I realize this is going to be a heated topic but I feel I need to speak my mind on an issue. I am here to discuss, debate, and learn. Realize that while I have a position, any statistics or proof will not be ignored by myself, and I ask that others approach this with an open mind themselves.

I am here to argue that capitalism is not the only economic system for the USA. That we could certainly emulate, even do better than other countries when considering adopting aspects of socialism.
We already do adopt aspects of socialism in our economic system. We highly regulate everything related to our economics. We bail out companies so they can stay afloat. We do the same with our banks. Corporations are taxed out of the wazoo to allow funding for social welfare systems and the such.

We have amendments guaranteeing certain rights such as property ownership, and the founding fathers certainly were against a large government - but I have yet to see anything in the Constitution mentioning capitalism, and certainly not sustaining the form of crony capitalism we practice in these days, alongside a huge federal government.

Where unlimited power and riches are a possibility, unlimited corruption is a certainty.

Personally I believe in a government literally ran by the people, where public and national forums and boards and meetings exist, a system in which we are taught from a young age how to participate in political processes and taught that we shape and form our lives - not just a few men in DC.
When was the last time you went to a town hall meeting or attended any local govt meeting? No one goes to these things, so how would your government even function? You'd end up voting some poor sap to attend these meetings in your place. We have a system like that now - if you choose not to know your local rep, don't blame crony anything for your lack of involvement.



I honestly believe you do not infringe upon the American dream when you limit the scope and corruption of corporations, when you ensure business and politics stay away from each other, when you ensure rights such as health, food, and shelter to all people willing to work and fuel the economy and be a part of this nation.
We limit corporations all the time. Remember when AT&T was forced to break up its company? The government did that. As for rights such as health, food and shelter - that is called socialism. We have that too! If you are to poor to live, the govt gives you free money! That money is used to pay for rent, food, medicine, etc. People profit from the poor people spending the free govt money. In a small part, it fuels local economy.



I honestly believe you are ensuring life, liberty, and happiness when you look out for everyone, and when looking out for everyone is guaranteed, not just hoped for. Hoping that a cut throat business man will look out for the "lowest" people in our society is just a justification of an economic ideology, not an actuality.
Dan Price might of thought the way you did. When you stop awarding effort, people won't care and you won't be able to move forward. If you don't work hard, why should you get treated as such? Looking out for everyone and having everyone look out for you is great and all, but that is a very childish outlook on life. It won't happen as long as we are individuals who can think for themselves.



If it were an actuality, we wouldn't have more empty houses and bedrooms than we do homeless people. If it were an actuality, the richest family in the world wouldn't have a huge amount of workers on food stamps and other forms of government assistance.
You can't eliminate homelessness and poor people unless you regulate population growth or move to a pure Socialist state. The supply and demand for cheap labor favors people not making what they should.



I argue that it is not a right to threaten another's ability to have their health, shelter, and food - not when they are willing to work. Not when they are willing to be the most important part of any economy - the working class.
So in your mind, everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others?



There's a lot about the current system I argue, including that you can't have your cake and eat it too. I don't believe there's some pure and true form of capitalism that could rise up and make the nation and world a better place. I don't believe that capitalism is the only American way - in fact, looking at mass psychology and economics, I argue that it inherently denies life, liberty, and happiness. When profit margins are more important than people, you will never be encouraging life, liberty, and happiness for the majority.
Our current system made everyday people billionaires! Look at the start of Microsoft or Amazon. A person's effort, when applied at the proper time, will equal a nice outcome. The founders of those companies now are inherently responsible of employing hundred of thousands people. Working at Amazon starts out at 13 an hour. Not bad for someone of little or no skill.



Why do we have so many people defending the rich class? No, we don't owe them anything for "creating jobs", we don't owe them patents that discourage a free market, we don't owe the rich anything. I'd argue that you have to be nearly sociopathic and anti altruistic to become rich these days, and these are not the people I believe should be determining the quality of life the average person has.
So you believe people who think like you should determine the quality of life for the average person? I know you didn't state that, but with that comment, one can come to that conclusion. People who worked hard to make a company that can pay you money...so you can live and raise a family...get no credit? Bonkers - totally bonkers.



Anyways, I'd like to hear from others, what they have to say. Please give constructive feedback as I would actually like to see any well formed thoughts supporting or denying my post.

Happy Holidays, members!

Deadlyhope


As your thought process goes from one ideal to another, it is apparent that you are against any form of free market. You favor a socialist one. I enjoy freedom. I work hard for my money. Sorry if you don't do the same.



posted on Dec, 29 2015 @ 12:12 PM
link   
a reply to: ChuckNasty

Can anyone at all counter the fact that the best quality of life in overall happiness, poverty levels, Healthcare, etc comes from socialistic nations? Not one person has shown me how a capitalistic nation with a free market gives the best situation for the most people.

People keep spouting their opinions on America's free market talking about hard work and getting good money off that hard work... No, more and more low level jobs are being created all the time, the type you have to work sixty hour work weeks to support a small family, or you can choose to work thirty so you're "poor" enough for government benefits .

That is not the American dream. Can anyone tell me that it is indeed the American dream? To work two jobs to barely make ends meet? Or to work less and need government assistance? Such situations are only on the rise. Look up cost of living ratios over the years, we are doing awful compared to decades ago.



posted on Dec, 29 2015 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: SPECULUM

Then why care about "Capitalistic Spirit"? After all, it's just a game.
Because its a Winning Spirit



posted on Dec, 29 2015 @ 12:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: SPECULUM

Give me a link showing how the biggest, or best economies in the world are capitalistic.

Is China a free market and capitalistic ? No. But the quality of life also is not amazing so let's move on.

Switzerland and new Zealand have some of the world's best economies... Socialistic.

Most first world nations are socialistic.

Where do people get this "capitalism is the world's way" crap anyways?
You are referring to tiny WEALTHY countries, that can afford their Tiny populations.

There is no way for it to work with Vast populations, because there is no way to pay for it.

Unless the world gives up their war machines, and seeks Peace as a Universal Ideology...Nothing will change, except our Extinction



posted on Dec, 29 2015 @ 01:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: ChuckNasty

Can anyone at all counter the fact that the best quality of life in overall happiness, poverty levels, Healthcare, etc comes from socialistic nations? Not one person has shown me how a capitalistic nation with a free market gives the best situation for the most people.
That was the lure of the Communist ideas - that no one would go without a place to live and food to eat. The top countries that rank the happiest are not socialist. They are free market countries.... So, as you request, here is a list of countries that gives the best situation for the most people: Switzerland, Iceland, Denmark, Norway, Canada...etc.



People keep spouting their opinions on America's free market talking about hard work and getting good money off that hard work... No, more and more low level jobs are being created all the time, the type you have to work sixty hour work weeks to support a small family, or you can choose to work thirty so you're "poor" enough for government benefits .
Now I see your true agenda - you want something for nothing. Families are working a total of 90hrs plus a week to live. One reason for that - the unexpected happened..that or they live outside their means. You can't prevent the unexpected, but you can plan better in your life. Example: If you can't afford to have 4 kids - don't; If you can't really afford that 220 a month phone bill, just get a house phone; If you think a credit card is free money - it isn't.



That is not the American dream. Can anyone tell me that it is indeed the American dream? To work two jobs to barely make ends meet? Or to work less and need government assistance? Such situations are only on the rise. Look up cost of living ratios over the years, we are doing awful compared to decades ago.


Cost of living ratios are on the rise..mainly in certain areas of the country. If you can't afford to live in your area then move. At the same time - our quality of life has increased. We get bigger and better crap at an unbelievable falling cost. I remember when 50inch flat screen TVs (plasma) were going for $10,000. Now you can get a superior lcd one for 300 bucks. Cars - the standard items included now were luxury items 2 decades ago. You had to pay extra for AC, extra for the radio that could play tapes, extended warranties, etc.

Sorry that your outlook on life is an askew one.



posted on Dec, 29 2015 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: SPECULUM
Because its a Winning Spirit

None of this makes your original statement true.
edit on 29-12-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join