Capitalism (or communist) on its own.

Do you truly think that capitalism could work on its own (or communism, or socialism or other, for that matter).

If there was no subsidies of any kind (like agricultural subsidies or back door subsidies to industry via a military project or tax shelter, etc.) or money given to lobbies of any kind, do you think that capitalism could stand on its own two feet’s ?

What do you think ?

Ideal capitalism or communism would work perfectly on its own. However there is no such thing as 'perfect' so in real terms, no , no platform would be fully self supporting

Of course capitalism can stand on its own, it has.
The real question should be: Why does Capitalism work?





seekerof

No, the question is, if it can stand on its own, why isn't it being allowed to?

[edit on 3-7-2005 by Jamuhn]

And your indications that it is not, are what, Jamuhn?
Capitalism is nothing but a glorified merchantile/mercantile system.
Remember mercantilism in your academic studies?
It can stand alone, and again, has.





seekerof

[edit on 3-7-2005 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by Seekerof
Of course capitalism can stand on its own, it has.
The real question should be: Why does Capitalism work?

seekerof

Of course capitalism can stand on its own, it has.
it has so far, but its about to collapse.

The real question should be: Why does Capitalism work?
Because the dollar was made the world reserve currency, one day that wont be the case anymore and it (America) will fail.


To fairly compare the two in reality, they both need to make the first step, which is always the hardest, which is for a nation, capitalist or communist, to control their money and economy.

Capitalism could do fine on its own...it has the potential to be fair in theory

But the days of money being backed by services / materials are long gone.

When you create money out of nothing, (the banking system / Federal Reserve / Financial Institutions), a system that is stable in theory becomes a huge weight hanging precariously over a ledge.

This may be the reason that we see the current system as one that has failed us, because people have found a way to cheat a fair system, cause it to collapse, and claim the REAL prize, absolute power over those who depended on it (not money).

Erm, question, AdamJ:
As mentioned, capitalism is a glorified mercantile system. As such, was America a nation when this system was being implemented or in its early stages of implementation.....was the dollar around then...was it the world currency?

I understand your point. Do you understand mine. Your argument or position revolves around what you think applies today, whereas, mine does not. Capitalism, in its earlist form, worked and stood alone, long before America was even a nation, and long before the dollar became the world reserve currency....





seekerof

[edit on 3-7-2005 by Seekerof]

For any proposition to work coherently, rationaly, logicaly, and successfully in practice, it must work in theory; A must always equal A. Communism is an example of B trying to equate with A. It's horrible praxeology.

Capitalism, in it's truest sense, does not work when one takes into account the centraliztion of goverment. Goverment activity shall always impede true capitalism.

Luxifero.

Originally posted by Seekerof
And your indications that it is not, are what, Jamuhn?
Capitalism is nothing but a glorified merchantile/mercantile system.
Remember mercantilism in your academic studies?
It can stand alone, and again, has.

I'm sorry Seekerof, I was never able to fully achieve any academic studies, i'm still working on my GED.

For some reason, I thought capitalism in the truest sense was without government interference. I guess we aren't talking about the same thing then. Maybe it's just my brain that's been fried by all that cornbread i've been eating.

I think Luxifero and I are on the same page here. Seekerof, you say it can stand on its own, and my question still remains, if it can stand on its own, why isn't it in America?

Capitalism, in it's rawest form, starts to resemble feudalism after a while.

Market economies do work better than any wholly artificial system of distribution, they can adapt to changing environments (and an economic environment is always changing) in ways that planned economies cannot.

That said, capitalism seems to work best in a "tamed" form, where the state serves to regulate the most predatory & destructive aspects of the market, without impeding it's general freedom. The most successful economies on the planet all mix capitalist and socialist ideology to some extent. Without one exception.

The US was largely lasseize-faire up until the early part of the last century, the labor abuses of the gilded age trusts, and then the market collapse in 1929, ended that phase pretty much permanently.

"Pure" lasseize faire capitalism doesn't work any better than "pure" socialism, on any level larger than that of a small town, at least not very long.

Originally posted by Seekerof
Erm, question, AdamJ:
As mentioned, capitalism is a glorified mercantile system. As such, was America a nation when this system was being implemented or in its early stages of implementation.....was the dollar around then...was it the world currency?

q1. no, q2. no, q3. no

I understand your point. Do you understand mine. Your argument or position revolves around what you think applies today, whereas, mine does not. Capitalism, in its earlist form, worked and stood alone, long before America was even a nation, and long before the dollar became the world reserve currency....

Yes, i agree.
But it is not clear what is ment by capitalism and how that applies to government. At least not to the common uneducated person.

Ultimately whether something 'worked' or 'stood alone' will always be subjective depending on how and where you define working and not working.

Capitalism is only good when it is controlled in some form or another, a absolute laissez-faire (wow a french word those damn socialists ) economy would not be in the best interests of society. Even economics god for the neo-laissez fairists and neo-capitalists Adam Smith wasn't a laissez-faire doctrinaire and believed in some regulation of the economy, public works projects at the expense of society and socialized education.

Anyways, I dont think there are many out there who are of the laissez-faire school anymore and I dont think there would be anyone on this board who is against all social policies undertaken by the government.

thanks,
drfunk

Oh, I forgot to mention, Capitalism is the exploitation of men by men, Communism is the other way around,

America's pseudo capitalist society vs USSR's pseudo communist society? And we already know who won.

Originally posted by Frosty
America's pseudo capitalist society vs USSR's pseudo communist society? And we already know who won.

everyone loses in war, even cold ones.

Yeah, which is why USSR no longer exist and, I an American, have a rap sheet of jokes related to this.

Originally posted by Frosty
Yeah, which is why USSR no longer exist and, I an American, have a rap sheet of jokes related to this.

Russia still exists, Communists still exist. Think Putin is your best buddy? dosent look like it to me. America is 7 trillion dollars in debt and worried about their economy collapsing. As the head of the world bank said in April "no catastrophe is anticipated in the comnig six to nine months,"
Bullish words indeed. Hey buddy put you social security in the Dow Jones, after all you won the cold war whats going to stop it going to 50,000.
good luck

Of course capitalism can stand on its own, it has.
The real question should be: Why does Capitalism work?

I beg to differ, remmber the great depression? The only reason we got out of that slump is because a healthy dose of socialism, capitalism would just continue to eat itself without that.

Originally posted by Jamuhn
No, the question is, if it can stand on its own, why isn't it being allowed to?

[edit on 3-7-2005 by Jamuhn]

Because with a true capitalism, the politicians are more limited in their powers over the people, compared to this hybrid they have created.