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.

 

I hate capitalism

page: 2
18
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 18 2017 @ 11:40 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

This lullaby you have written to sooth the bedtime qualms of the easily impressed is just that, a generalized and criminally short definition of capitalism. So simple, just good guys trading with good guys and everybody is happy. Good night discussion over. Pull up the blankets and dream sweet dreams.




posted on Mar, 18 2017 @ 11:53 PM
link   
As with all economic models, imo the issue is the implementation, and logical extremes.

Free enterprise, opportunity, and competition breeding rapid iteration and improvement to the benefit of all sounds sublime... until it inevitably leads to rampant corporatism and greed dominating virtually every facet of society and policy, and something analogous to a pseudo-oligarchy emerges from the industrial and financial complex.

Workers owning the labor they produce, and distributing wealth so that all are supported sounds fantastic... until it inevitably leads to choice being taken from individuals, oppressive management of those processes, and eventually, outright tyranny to control that system as some attempt to break away from it.

I've long suspected that some degree of compromise between those systems, with healthy checks and balances, would be to the greatest benefit to the largest number of people. Preserve the opportunity and competition of capitalism, but reign in its darkest underbellies and logical extremes such that more of those benefits end up in the hands of those far below the top of the pyramid. Introduce some of the social welfare aspects of the other end of the spectrum, but tightly monitor and control who exploits them, and how, and enforce constitutional checks and balances on using those facets to impose a form of tyranny disguised as compassion.

Balance.

But if you advocate for anything short of Laissez-faire and support social welfare and some regulation, you're a dirty pinko commie socialist fascist, and conversely if you advocate anything short of outright Marxism you're the bourgeoisie or a capitalist pig, racist, selfish, greedy, etc. Hyper polarity and black or white thinking will destroy us in time if we let it.

As always, just my two cents farting into the wind that is the internet, just as smelly as anyone else's, and no more valid.

Peace.



posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 12:43 AM
link   
How about we throw away the "-isms" and just try and create a system that results in the healthiest society.



posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 12:52 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope


I hate capitalism.







posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 03:10 AM
link   
I don't hate capitalism.

But I suspect that it should not be applied in all areas of life.
It should not apply in areas like medical care. It should not apply in necessities for survival.

Healthy people are not profitable for pharmaceutical or medical businesses. People who have an accident, a disaster in their environment, or a disease, are not profitable for insurance companies.

Yet such business are supposed to exist exactly to answer to their needs - it is a contradiction that necessitates dishonest and unethical practices for them to flourish in capitalism.

I think, ideally, there could be a balance between a private and public sector of business.

I kinda wonder sometimes, when I hear someone who is against things like gay marriage or adoption ("a child needs both a mother and father") ALSO feel that a society needs ONLY capitalism, ONLY individualism and competition, Only those masculine/Yang forces.



edit on 19-3-2017 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 06:31 AM
link   
We do not have a true capitalist system and never have. As has already been said our is a corporate, or monetary system. One where money itself is traded as a commodity rather than being the means by which goods and services are transferred and conveyed. Our is a debt creation scheme and nothing more, by deliberate and cynical design.



posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 06:31 AM
link   
Capitalism was built to be corrupted. It sound so good on paper until you look how easily it is corrupted to create a power pyramid. And then we have state controlled "communism by name" (capitalism) that was implemented as a power pyramid in the Soviet and China.

You can create systems where Power pyramids are not allowed to trickle up power and control. What you need is an equalized market (not a free market since that will be corrupted) where all people have equal knowledge on the technical knowledge and information is not allowed to be hindered. With Itil based version handling of society where technical people think very deeply instead and build for stability we can lower the number of hours spent on work.




posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 06:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: starwarsisreal
a reply to: deadlyhope

Do you mean corporate capitalism?

I think the real problem here is corporate capitalism. I'm fine with capitalism as long as it's about mom and pops stores.


Don't you think that 99% capitalism is now corporate? Do you understand the meaning of capital. Are there still Mom and Pop stores?

Corporate capitalism is a logical evolution of capitalism. Multinationals are a logical evolution of Corporate capitalism as companies seek to control raw materials beyond their national boundaries and also seek new markets to sell their goods and services.



posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 06:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: deadlyhope

Here's the rub - capitalism has always existed as long as there have been people who needed to exchange goods and services. The label hasn't existed that long, but that's essentially all it is. It's when I have too much of something and you need some, so we work out a mutually beneficial trade where you get what you need and I get something I need in exchange.

Oh no! Capitalism happened.


Rubbish! Capitalism is maybe three hundred years old. before that there was feudalism and the rights of royals who held slaves/serf.

Please check your history!
edit on 19-3-2017 by Tiger5 because: Add in more text



posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 06:59 AM
link   
a reply to: AceWombat04

In short you are proposing a mixed economy. Fair enough. There has to be a social safety net. Even business people fail from time to time and some even suffer massive reversals of fortune.



posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 07:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Tiger5

Same power pyramid. Different way to brainwash the masses.




posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 07:37 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

No trade is capitalism by definition is where the means of production is owned and controlled privately. At the very basic level, that is the individual which encompasses one to one trade.

It's convenient for socialists and communists and fascists and other statists to assign capitalism always a much larger context so that they have something to rail against when they push their own systems and state/government control. But in the end, what they are always advocating is ultimately state control of you and your own means of production and ability to own your own means of production ... for the greater good, of course.

They dupe you into this by pointing out the larger entities like big business that they know they can make you hate.

But meanwhile, they pass laws, ordinances, etc., that prevent you, the individual, from doing things on your own with your own personal capital like setting up corner lemonade stands or feeding the homeless with what you have.



posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 07:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tiger5

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: deadlyhope

Here's the rub - capitalism has always existed as long as there have been people who needed to exchange goods and services. The label hasn't existed that long, but that's essentially all it is. It's when I have too much of something and you need some, so we work out a mutually beneficial trade where you get what you need and I get something I need in exchange.

Oh no! Capitalism happened.


Rubbish! Capitalism is maybe three hundred years old. before that there was feudalism and the rights of royals who held slaves/serf.

Please check your history!


Even in those times, people who had something arranged to trade it with others.

Even in the worst communist places, you have black markets that are capital being exchanged.

You could legally outlaw all private ownership of everything tomorrow in this country and there would still be black market capitalism whereby people would find a way to get what the state can't or won't provide.

Basically, the only part of history that needs checking is the part where someone created a name to go with activities that were and had been already occurring.
edit on 19-3-2017 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 09:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Tiger5

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: deadlyhope

Here's the rub - capitalism has always existed as long as there have been people who needed to exchange goods and services. The label hasn't existed that long, but that's essentially all it is. It's when I have too much of something and you need some, so we work out a mutually beneficial trade where you get what you need and I get something I need in exchange.

Oh no! Capitalism happened.


Rubbish! Capitalism is maybe three hundred years old. before that there was feudalism and the rights of royals who held slaves/serf.

Please check your history!


Even in those times, people who had something arranged to trade it with others.

Even in the worst communist places, you have black markets that are capital being exchanged.

You could legally outlaw all private ownership of everything tomorrow in this country and there would still be black market capitalism whereby people would find a way to get what the state can't or won't provide.

Basically, the only part of history that needs checking is the part where someone created a name to go with activities that were and had been already occurring.


OK So sloppy terminology is your thing. We can now call cats" Dogs". OK However the communist countries are not actually communist. And here is big differentiator - do individuals hold capital? If they do then they cannot be communist. Even in Russia the rule of private capital has led to some political scientists declaring word the economy to be "State Capitalist" as the apparatchniks control the bulk of the state capital....

Barter predates capitalism.



posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko




It's convenient for socialists and communists and fascists and other statists to assign capitalism always a much larger context so that they have something to rail against when they push their own systems and state/government control. But in the end, what they are always advocating is ultimately state control of you and your own means of production and ability to own your own means of production ... for the greater good, of course.


Very well said....



they pass laws, ordinances, etc., that prevent you, the individual, from doing things on your own with your own personal capital like setting up corner lemonade stands or feeding the homeless with what you have.


The full force of the law will come down on a kid selling lemonade without the paperwork.....

The full force of the Military will kill millions in the middle East to install A Rothschild controlled Central Bank - without paperwork!



posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 10:12 AM
link   
As others have said - it's really Corporatism that you rail against. And when government helps them do it, it's Fascism. That's where we are at now in the modern epoch.



posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

I don't think you really hate "capitalism," which is just a neutral term for the means of production and distribution of goods, from the raw materials to the human labor. In that sense, all economic systems are "capitalist" in that all economic systems control how goods and services are produced and distributed. forgive me if it sounds like I'm just playing semantics. I really don't mean to. But there are important distinctions to be made. It's the how, not the what.

The problem is that what we are supposed to practice is free market capitalism, in accordance with natural law and natural rights. But what we have is anything but free market! Our free market has been destroyed by government control and regulation, from incorporation charters to intellectual property patents and copyrights to licensing and taxation -- and all in the name of "our own good" of course.

For example, the original Boston Tea Party was just as much an act of rebellion against corporate monopoly as it was against the crown. Those Sons of Liberty weren't just protesting the tax placed upon the tea, they were also protesting the government granted monopoly of the tea trade in the British colonies to the East India Company. In a free market, in accordance with our inalienable natural rights, we have every right to the fruits of the earth freely given by nature and Nature's God -- including tea -- and to obtain our tea from any/all consenting adults, in exchange of goods or services of our choosing (or simply as a gift), or to grow it ourselves.

Originally, incorporation charters were granted for specific temporary time periods, and only for those projects/services that served the greatest good of the people. Likewise, patents were granted only for temporary time periods in order to encourage and promote innovation and technology for the greater good of the people. The founding fathers understood that we all have an inherent right to all the gifts of the earth, that NO ONE brings anything to the planet -- they can only work with what's already here, which belongs equally to everyone. Therefore, corporations and patents and such were to be used as tools for developing/establishing wider distribution and availability of those goods/services for the masses. NOT so that the few could massively profit from the many by unfair government regulation, eliminating any/all competition, much less by limiting civil/criminal liability for wrongdoing. The same ends are achieved when unreasonable licensing and certification laws.

Big Pharma in specific, and the medical industry in general, perfectly exemplifies the result when these tools are misused, abused, and otherwise corrupted. It has now reached the point where people truly believe that we do not have an inherent inalienable right to healthcare!!! That it is okay to criminalize the use of medicinal plants, as well as life-saving research into those plants... or any/all substances. While it's true that we do not have a right to demand healthcare from others, we have every right to provide our own healthcare, and/or obtain our healthcare needs from other consenting adults. It is only under color of law and the barrel of a gun that we are denied our rights to do so.

I'm sorry for going on ad nauseum. I hope I've given you a little different perspective though.



posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

If you're interested, here's a couple links that explain how the founding fathers' original vision of corporations and their role has been corrupted in the present:

10 Founding Fathers Quotes That Will Make Conservatives’ Heads Explode

What The Founding Fathers Thought About Corporations



posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 10:58 AM
link   
At this very moment it is laughable to say capitalism exists. You exist in a world of creditism. A sort of quasi socialist false reality that allows people to have unlimited debt (or so they believe it is unlimited).



posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

Anyone that is an anarchist




top topics



 
18
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join