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.

 

Stop Blaming Capitalism

page: 2
13
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Willingly

Here's the thing, if everyone "owns" the land and I see the perfect spot to grow a bunch of vegetables, and I take the time, effort, initiative and lay out all the monetary expenditure needed to further make those vegetables productive ... and at every stage, I ask for people to help me offering to let them share in the rewards, but no one does ... then with your vision of socialism ...

Because "everyone" has owns the land and what's made on it, if everyone decides that even though they didn't do a thing to help produce those vegetables, they "own" them anyhow. They can move in and take them. Even though I did all the work and spent all the capital needed to create them, I have no right to them.

So why, under such a system, would anyone bother to take any initiative?

There is no private ownership recognized.




posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 09:23 AM
link   
The main problem with this world, in fact the root cause of ALL monetary issues, and by extension most social issues, is the international banking cartel. You can dress it up in any way you want, give it any -ism ending you like, but whilst the banks control the money, they control EVERYTHING.

Why should the banks control people's ability to live? What gave them this right? Who made them be what they are?

They control everything and everyone, and just because they have little offices on the high street and you know Bob, the bank manager, don't think that that makes them your friend.

There is a saying that is attributed to the Rothschilds, apocryphal maybe, no one can prove the source but it goes like this: "Let us control the money of a country and we care not who makes its laws."

It doesn't matter if this is a Rothschild maxim or not, the fact is that it is the banks who make and break our systems.




posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 09:29 AM
link   
Capitalism has never been the problem
unregulated untethered GREED is what
has done us all in.

Not the 1% but the .0001% have 24.99 pieces of a 25 piece pie
and say "look out those commies minorities immigrants
and women want your crumbs !!! and we fall
for this unadulterated BS every time.

None listed above are your enemy including millionaires.
1 per center? Great have fun, you may have even earned it.
Millionaires we should have no problem with..
Now if you are one of the 1200 billionaires on the planet
we have a problem, and we might be coming to get you.
I'll bring bbq sauce.



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 09:39 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

I have to admit that I have difficulties to understand what you are saying here. But I try to explain what I mean and how it can work anyway.




Here's the thing, if everyone "owns" the land and I see the perfect spot to grow a bunch of vegetables, and I take the time, effort, initiative and lay out all the monetary expenditure needed to further make those vegetables productive ... and at every stage, I ask for people to help me offering to let them share in the rewards, but no one does ... then with your vision of socialism ...


Angebot und Nachfrage regulates the market-place. That means, if there is a demand, there for sure will be a supply, naturally. If you are the one who is interested in planting something nobody wants, then that's not benefitting for anybody. Not for you and not for those who demand something. If, for example, there is a demand for potatos, and you are interested in planting and farming, and you plant and farm tomatos, although nobody wants to eat them, you're not serving the community but your own interests only. So, to make it beneficial for both ends of the equation, you better plant and farm potatos. And if you do that, you call sell them, because there was a demand for them and you delivered what was demanded.




Because "everyone" has owns the land and what's made on it, if everyone decides that even though they didn't do a thing to help produce those vegetables, they "own" them anyhow. They can move in and take them. Even though I did all the work and spent all the capital needed to create them, I have no right to them.


Why do you think that that would be the case?

That is not how a free-market economy works. It works by satisfying particular demands. Like I said. And if there is no poverty in your community, why and what for would anybody steal your products anyway?

The good old rule would be: Everybody does what one can do best and is best suited for. And in a well educated and non-abusive society-structure, everybody does what one prefers to do. It regulates itself naturally. But the so called capitalists want to make us beliefe a market MUST be controlled by them, otherwise it will collapse. And that's just not true. The market now, the global market-place is causing a lot of problems everywhere in the world. On an environmental level, socially, politically and physically for all those who live in such spoiled and messed up system.

Who is realy healthy here? Mentally, emotionally and spiritually? We have all sorts of physical and mental illnesses in the western world we have to deal with. How comes? Where do they steam from?

And the term depression, which is what we have now, on many levels, already says it: Something is de-pressed.

The constant need for expansion and so called groth, for a company the be considered as healthy in a capitalistic economical system is causing all of these problems. Because at some point there no further expansion possible anymore.



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 09:54 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy




Market needs, a persons ability to meet those market needs, is what determines success in capitalism.


No. Market needs are artificially created by advertising products nobody realy needs. THAT is what we deal in right now.

What you are talking about, that actual needs are met by the market, is only possible in a free-market economy. The capitalistic system does not care if a company reached the end of its possibilty to expand and further grow. For example, a company that produces hoola-hoop-rings reaches the end of its life-span when all humans have ONE hoola-hoop-ring. And then it just dies, somehow. But in a capitalistic system, like we have now, it comes up with advertisments for the sake of making beliefe that everybody needs more than one, instead of leaving it like it is and doing a different buisness instead.



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Winstonian




Welfare: A tool used to keep the poor weak, and another excuse to steal people's money, and weaken the middle class.


That is THE typical neo-liberal fake-conservative statement, that needs to be proven as realy being the case. And it is a mere assumption, not a fact!

The question is: Why, how comes that people need welfare anyway? How comes that people can not support and sustain themselfs? That is what the neo-liberal party-line never actually talks about, because if they would, they have to point fingers at themselfs.




posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 10:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Willingly
a reply to: DBCowboy




Market needs, a persons ability to meet those market needs, is what determines success in capitalism.


No. Market needs are artificially created by advertising products nobody realy needs. THAT is what we deal in right now.

What you are talking about, that actual needs are met by the market, is only possible in a free-market economy. The capitalistic system does not care if a company reached the end of its possibilty to expand and further grow. For example, a company that produces hoola-hoop-rings reaches the end of its life-span when all humans have ONE hoola-hoop-ring. And then it just dies, somehow. But in a capitalistic system, like we have now, it comes up with advertisments for the sake of making beliefe that everybody needs more than one, instead of leaving it like it is and doing a different buisness instead.





This is why they invented planned obsolescence.


Planned obsolescence is when a product is deliberately designed to have a specific life span. This is usually a shortened life span. The product is designed to last long enough to develop a customer’s lasting need. The product is also designed to convince the customer that the product is a quality product, even though it eventually needs replacing. In this way, when the product fails, the customer will want to buy another, up to date version.


Planned obsolescence article


Planned obsolescence or built-in obsolescence in industrial design and economics is a policy of planning or designing a product with an artificially limited useful life, so it will become obsolete, that is, unfashionable or no longer functional after a certain period of time.[1] The rationale behind the strategy is to generate long-term sales volume by reducing the time between repeat purchases (referred to as "shortening the replacement cycle").[2]


Planned obsolescence wiki




posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Winstonian




The list goes on. There is not a single law,service,program, etc. that is designed for the sole purpose of serving or helping the average citizen. There is ALWAYS an ulterior motive. ALWAYS.


Yes. Let's talk about who (or what) has what kind of motives and why. That would actually be interesting. But I assume that's not what you're up to.

Who, which groups of interest, have what kind of motives to install and propagate what kind of concepts?

Please elaborat, if you can.


edit on 10-4-2016 by Willingly because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 12:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: Winstonian

People that can't contribute to society in a meaningful way or that don't have the necessities to take care of themselves will always blame Capitalism for their own failures...

These are sick, weak individuals with no sense self-esteem or confidence.


I'm assuming this is satire. It is satire right?



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 01:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Winstonian
Is the solution to an out of control, wasteful, dangerously massive government, to give this same system even more control and money?


No. The solution is to ban currency.

Money renders ALL systems vulnerable to the greed and corruption of those who can amass the most of it.

Start there, then let's talk about how to move forward.



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: NateTheAnimator

The solution at hand is to make massive cuts to our government. Cut all of the bloated alphabet agencies and return the federal government to it's very limited constitutional powers. Disband the IRS CIA FBI DEA DHS etc etc. Replace the IRS with a temporary flat tax across the board until we can get rid of all the debt. Shrink the legislation on the books to the bare minimum. Repeal any and all laws making lobbying and campaign financing the problem that it is today. Legalize all victimless crimes. Return power to the states, and the people. Reduce our military to a manageable state, and stop getting involved in wars that are not in actual defense of the country. Streamline the immigration process and the vetting of immigrants. Get the government out of social contracts all together IE marriage etc. The list goes on and on, but it is possible to fix things but people need to stop putting up with this crap and buying into the lies.



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Winstonian

No. We are not going backwards anymore. That is why there is A Trump in the republican party, people are sick fixing things for the last guy.



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Winstonian




The solution at hand is to make massive cuts to our government.


Well...that could be a secondary solution, but first one has to look at the cause, the reason why, every western nation's national economy is in dept. Isn't that strange? Who do they owe the money? And i'm not talking about they owe it to the banks. Sure, but what kind of banks? Who owns the banks, all western national economys are in deep dept by.

Someone, some kind of entity, some kind of group, must be in charge for allowing or not, that that can be the case. And only a healthy government can pose the right questions, regarding that issue. Who is "above" whom? That is the main and most important question to be answered. Only a heathy government can say, "we're not paying for that anymore. We just can't!"




Cut all of the bloated alphabet agencies and return the federal government to it's very limited constitutional powers. Disband the IRS CIA FBI DEA DHS etc etc.


They are also merely secondary regarding the issue at hand.




Replace the IRS with a temporary flat tax across the board until we can get rid of all the debt.


No! Don't tax certain incomes at all! THAT is one step. And the next one is: To re-claim ones own country as being owned by the people, who live in it. All who have invested their money into any kind of forgain projects have to be declaired as loosers. That can only be done when all governments of all western nations agree to say NO to the dept they have.

For example: Every us-american economical entity, a person or a cooperation has automatically lost all rights of owning any kind of Anteile (parts of a company) in forgain countries. Period. And that goes for all nations.




Return power to the states, and the people. Reduce our military to a manageable state, and stop getting involved in wars that are not in actual defense of the country.


Yes, agreed.




Get the government out of social contracts all together IE marriage etc. The list goes on and on, but it is possible to fix things but people need to stop putting up with this crap and buying into the lies.


Yes, but that's all secondary also. First things first.



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 06:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Winstonian

So Minarchism essentially?
I could get behind that,however there is still the issue of the state regaining it's power over the people.
I don't see the use of force by the people being an option even if you were to make military spending cuts to an already bloated military budget.
How would you keep a government like that in check?

I'm not implying that you need to have all the solutions to all the problems that are currently an issue with government in order to criticize the state.
As I said in my previous post,I've seen a lot of these types of threads(not just from those whom advocate libertarian ideals but also form those whom advocate socialism) and there is almost always a lack of attempting to formulate ideas to tackle these issues.

edit on 4pm30America/Chicago3006America/Chicagopm414 by NateTheAnimator because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 08:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Willingly

I beg to differ. Socialism is the control of the means of production, IE private and public businesses. Bernie Sanders is our current champion of socialism. Please read up on the voice of Socialism in the United States: Democratic Socialists Of America Before you try and pick apart my post, you should do your own research and fully understand what you are arguing for and against.

The corruption in government perverted the original intent of the system we are supposed to be governed under. Like most of the socialist/communist supporters, you disregard the facts and the bottom line.

More money and more control to government = the worse off the people are.
Socialism = more money and more control to government.

Also, if you believe that socialism is this amazing system, then you believe that violently stealing from people without their consent is moral and just. Just because you vote to steal from people does not make it "okay."



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Willingly

I don't have the time to really go over every single thing needed to get things back to basics, but getting currency controls out of the hands of private banksters needs to happen regardless of anything else. Power has to be decentralized across the board, and the way you do that is to restore the constitution. Those two items would be at the top of my list.



posted on Apr, 11 2016 @ 07:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Winstonian




Socialism is the control of the means of production, IE private and public businesses.


Sure. Why not defining it like this. But the question is: Who is controlling it and by what kind of means/methods.




Please read up on the voice of Socialism in the United States: Democratic Socialists Of America Before you try and pick apart my post, you should do your own research and fully understand what you are arguing for and against.


I'm a member of the german social democratic party (SPD) for almost 25 years by now, companiero. (Not active anymore for more than 20 years, because....just because.)

So, don't try to tell me what that is, a social democratic party. We europeans invented that concept.




The corruption in government perverted the original intent of the system we are supposed to be governed under. Like most of the socialist/communist supporters, you disregard the facts and the bottom line.


I'm not a socialist nor a communist, like I said before. And if you study political science and/or economy somewhere in the USA right now, tell your professors to teach you european political and economical history.

And what indeed are facts or just assumptions and guess-work, that we try to figure out. All of us. You too.




More money and more control to government = the worse off the people are. Socialism = more money and more control to government.


Is that what you learn in us-american economy/political science class? No wonder you have no clue.




Also, if you believe that socialism is this amazing system, then you believe that violently stealing from people without their consent is moral and just. Just because you vote to steal from people does not make it "okay."


This is the end of my participation in your OP. Because you seem to not understand what I'm talking about. Have you even read what I posted? Why don't you "refute" certain parts of what I said? Too much hustle? Is it more easy to just post that kind of stuff?

A plain lie is something one can deal with. Half-truth is what is nasty and difficult to take apart.

Thanks for trying to lecture me. I prefer to be lectured by experts, who realy know their buisness.



posted on Apr, 11 2016 @ 08:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

if you want us to stop blaming capitalism for the problems, may I suggest you stop blaming socialism for them...

it isn't socialist or capitalist, it's like the op said, an oligarchy, or maybe fascist.. but it certain isn't a free market, there's too much gov't meddling going on. can't really call it socialist when most of the socialist programs are benefitting the corporate world instead of the people, and it isn't capitalist, since well those big corps have been given to the power and approval of the gov't, along with the funds to go around and eat up all those small business owners for breakfast, lunch, dinner and well, another for dessert, and then let's not forget the bedtime snack!!!




People that can't contribute to society in a meaningful way or that don't have the necessities to take care of themselves


you use your refrigerator everyday, don't you? Is it meaningful to you? Could you live without it? The reason I asked was because I used to cut parts that are in some of those refrigerators..... for minimum wage....
What about those jets that the navy has flying around? Aren't you happy that they are up there flying and not falling down on your head?? The reason why I am asking is that not only I have cut the gaskets that went into some of those jets, but I also printed some of the training manuals that are used in training the pilots.... couldn't make enough to live on in that printing job either!
How about the bus driver who comes and picks up your kid everyday? Is he doing something meaningful for you? Are you happy that he is providing this service, or that he isn't driving his bus off a cliff somewhere? I've known bus drivers who had to resort to getting gov't assistance.
Now tell me, please, just how those in this country that are earning insane amounts of money are playing any meaningful role in your life whatsoever? Would you even recognize the owner or ceo of that grocery store you visit every week if you passed him on the street like you might the cashier that cashes out your groceries?



posted on Apr, 11 2016 @ 04:25 PM
link   
a reply to: NateTheAnimator

The problems we are faced with are HUGE. I wish I had all the answers, but I do not. At this point all I can do is try and wake people up one at a time. Most people are slumbering in comfort, without really understanding the real problems that plague this country and world.



posted on Apr, 11 2016 @ 04:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Willingly

I think you might be misreading my tone. I am not trying to lecture you or disrespect you in any way. I am assuming you are alluding to the Rothschilds/Rockafellers/World Bank/Etc. I am not sure exactly which entity you are pointing to. If you would just come out and say it, I am sure that we would be in agreement. Your posts were broken up throughout the thread, as were mine, so I am sorry if I came across disrespectfully, as that was not my intent.




top topics



 
13
<< 1   >>

log in

join