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 Hampers our civilization from going past type 0 Civilization

page: 2
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by mithrawept
It's not capitalism which gets in the way.

It's greed.

"Free Market" Capitalism is the kind of system where greed is valued above anything else




posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by lucid eyes
Nonsense. Whatever works best at any given time period is used by humanity to the fullest. At the moment capitalism works best and makes the most progress. They day free energy really is discovered it will quickly and naturally replace capitalism. But right now, capitalism is a great tool of progress and should not be "taken down" on the basis of undemonstrated speculation.


Really? You think free energy doesn't yet exist? Check here and be amazed:

SUPPRESSION OF FREE ENERGY DEVICES - INVENTORS & MOTHER EARTH BEWARE!

U.S.Patent Office Free Energy Devices

Tesla invented a way that every American home and factory could in fact have free electricity, and he proved it worked. I would submit that all kinds of free energy devices have not only been invented, but have been suppressed in favor of oil and coal, and yes, nuclear power. Money is the key here. If the Banking Cartel cannot make money, it is suppressed and put aside in favor of things that will make money.

For instance, I recently went to a great deal of trouble to order a pre-built HHO reactor for my van, and an electronic device that will allow me to hack the MAP sensor's default settings. I cannot buy these things at Walmart, or even at Autozone. I had to go on a hunt for them. If every car had one of these installed, Big Oil would be brought to their knees in a very short time. They would beg us to but their fuel at a very low price. Think about it, if we ran our cars and trucks on Hydrogen, we would not need to drill for oil at all. Hydrogen/Oxygen is produced by electricity introduced into distilled water with a little baking soda...


HHO is Hydrogen + Hydrogen + Oxygen. How does the HHO system work? When the HHO systems splits water (H2O) into its components the h2o to HHO conversion takes place. HHO is also known as Green Gas, Hydroxy, Di-Hydroxy, and Water gas. The electrolysis of water produces a burnable Green Gas. HHO is a green gas that is the wave of the future. HHO auto conversion creates a hybrid car, which are now water powered cars using the technology of HHO.

The HHO gas generator for cars is an environmentally friendly car modified with HHO technology, which allows users to increase their mileage, save money on gasoline, costs and drastically reduces car emissions. An HHO water hybrid car uses the HHO gas to assist combustion. So if you are asking the question, does HHO work in cars, the answer is yes, HHO technology for a waterpower car dramatically increases you miles per gallon. HHO as a fuel also reduces air pollution, decreases oil imports and fuel consumption, reduces the trade deficit and produce American jobs. If a mere 10% of automobiles nationwide were powered by an HHO gas fuel system, regulated air pollutants would be cut by one million tons per year and 60 million tons of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide would be eliminated. HHO is derived from a renewable source, water, thus the emissions will be nothing but water vapor. You can't get more environmentally friendly than that.

HHO is water gas. HHO Systems are known to help an engine run cleaner with less carbon buildup. A water-powered car improves emissions with an increase in horsepower, which equates to fewer trips to the gas station. With today's gas prices, everyone is looking for alternative car fuel. You can build your own HHO converter and make your car a hybrid car.

hhoproducer.blogspot.com...



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 09:47 AM
link   
I stopped reading the OP after about two sentences because it was essentially an incomprehensible word salad.


SUPPRESSION OF FREE ENERGY DEVICES - INVENTORS & MOTHER EARTH BEWARE!

U.S.Patent Office Free Energy Devices

Tesla invented a way that every American home and factory could in fact have free electricity, and he proved it worked. I would submit that all kinds of free energy devices have not only been invented, but have been suppressed in favor of oil and coal, and yes, nuclear power.

The first link did not contain any evidence.

The second link did not contain anything to do with free energy.

The longer people believe in fairy-tails the longer workable solutions are suppressed.

Where do you get the electrical energy to produce HHO?

I bet you oil companies love things that don't work. They detract from things that actually work. I've seen oil companies do it many times.

[edit on 5/6/2010 by C0bzz]



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 09:55 AM
link   
When it comes to car engines I know very little. If HHO is so good then how come no-one has made a commercial business out of supply and fitting as they have with liquid gas?



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 10:29 AM
link   
Well, if it was not for capitalism I would not be typing on my keyboard. Capitalism enhances innovation, industrial production and scientific development. Without capitalism we would be in the Dark Ages because there would have been no reason to innovate and develop.

Without capitalism who would make my keyboard and have it shipped all the way from China? I want a car and the freedom to travel and I want to be paid for my skills.

Anyway, apart from crack-pot YouTube videos and websites full of tat, is there any REAL evidence that perpetual motion machines exist (free energy) and that there are “tons of other Black op Technologies like Anti Gravity Technologies and UFO Related technologies(other than mundane and Mediocre ones)” out there? No?

Please, I am a rational person and rely on fact rather than fantasy.

Regards



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 10:45 AM
link   
The capitalist system is slavery and thats the truth.

If you disagree then try living without money, The system will kill you. You will be homeless hungry and not allowed to have any kind of home. If you even try the pigs will remove you from the system.

"Love" is coming? NO if you think that your as asleep as the capitalists.

Live in love and remove your mind from the system, Let the asleep stay asleep.



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by paraphi
Well, if it was not for capitalism I would not be typing on my keyboard. Capitalism enhances innovation, industrial production and scientific development. Without capitalism we would be in the Dark Ages because there would have been no reason to innovate and develop.

Please, I am a rational person and rely on fact rather than fantasy.

Regards


Do you really believe that we would still be in the dark ages if it weren't for capitalism?

Do you really think that the profit motive is the only motive for development in the entirety of the human race? Frankly, I think that if the profit motive were removed from the equation, humanity would still continue to invent. would we produce less? most likely. Would this be a bad thing? Absolutely not.



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tamale_214Do you really believe that we would still be in the dark ages if it weren't for capitalism?

Do you really think that the profit motive is the only motive for development in the entirety of the human race? Frankly, I think that if the profit motive were removed from the equation, humanity would still continue to invent. would we produce less? most likely. Would this be a bad thing? Absolutely not.


Well, yes. Although the “profit” motive is not the only driver I do think that without capitalism and the promise / prospect for personal enrichment, prestige and power we would be stuck in the proverbial Dark Ages. In fact, we would not be as we are today.

Trace all science, innovation and development back through time and you will see that money, wealth and power is the driving force. I know that individual genius provides the framework for scientific discovery and advancement, but without the inclination and motivation to “profit” from science nothing would happen.

For a start the Industrial Revolution was based on commerce and commerce is capitalist. I know that in some hippie commune idyll we would all work for the common good, but human nature will always result in one hippie being the boss and specialist hippies coming to the fore. It would not be long before hippie X says to hippie Y “I do more work than you, therefore I have more value”! George Orwell’s “Animal Farm” springs to mind when considering a lesson in human nature.

The Vikings would not have advanced ship building (longboats) if England did not have rich monasteries and good looking slaves and the Roman Empire would not have worked without money. In fact, some form of capitalism has been in place before even recorded history – the manufacture and exchange of a bronze axe head for a few pots, a sad chicken and a wicker hat is capitalism!

Regards



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by masonicon

Originally posted by mithrawept
It's not capitalism which gets in the way.

It's greed.

"Free Market" Capitalism is the kind of system where greed is valued above anything else


This is simply incorrect.

Capitalism is the idea that anyone can provide a product or service and require another person to compensate them for the resources consumed to provide that product or service.

In a free market capitalist society, you make a product and you get paid for it if - and only if - it is something someone needs/wants and it is at a price they consider reasonable. If you demand unreasonable compensation that too many people find unfair - then you will not sell anything (and not make any money).

If two people can make equivalent products, then he who has the lowest priced product of the same quality will (assuming a relatively informed consumer base) sell more of his product, and make more money (even if he makes a 3% profit instead of 5% - it is rare for any business to make more than 5% profit at the end of the day; most goods and services are sold for a net deficit and new products bought by the evil wealthy people end up bearing the burden of putting the net sales in the black).

The belief that we have everything we need to become a Class1 society is simply silly.

First off - Humans have no experiences with any civilizations but those established and run by humans. You can cry conspiracy all you want - it doesn't give you a whole lot of cultural experience to believe the U.S. has underground alien bases.

So, we really don't know what will ultimately make a "good" civilization versus a "bad" civilization.

Instead of criticizing developed nations for not doing enough to help the impoverished nations - how about lecturing them about not continuing tribal wars and killing aid workers who come to help them? You can't help cultures that do not want to be helped.

I'd say the same about many homeless people, too - but the majority of them have some serious mental issues that even benevolent socialist and communist societies deal with by placing into psychiatric institutions.

And, finally - what often ends up happening in socialist societies is a lack of productivity. Productivity and development are two things that are supposed to be the indicators of class-1 societies, correct? Europe is moving away from socialized programs because they end up spending into a deficit to cover the expenses of the nation - which is not providing enough productivity to cover the overhead of 'free' health-care and other services.

"But, Aim, the banks in America!"

Were operating under federal regulations that promised financial assistance to the banks who gave loans under the "equal housing" act and other social programs aimed at providing for a raised minimum standard of living. Everyone deserves a nice house, correct? Not when you can't pay the loan. Why did the banks do it? Well - part of it was greed, yes - but the reason they did it in the first place was because the Federal Government essentially said: "If these people qualifying for these programs default on the loan, then we'll print money out of the federal budget to cover your expenses."

Which, in essence, gave private banks the ability to print money and removed accountability from the housing industry. No one was being responsible because no one was required to be responsible due to the federal government undermining the principles of a free market system (which dictate poor business practices lead to death of the business and replacement by competent and responsible businesses).

Sure - the banks were exploiting a way to make their stocks go up in value and please their share-holders, and it was unethical - but they wouldn't have done it if they were the ones who had to pick up the tab when mortgages they approved defaulted.

"Okay, Aim, but we should still all work together."

Yes, it's a nice sentiment that works well in small groups and communities when you know the people around you. You know the farmer and know the blacksmith - so you all just do what is necessary for each other to survive, because it's in your mutual best interest and have no need for money as you just consider yourselves always even (or always in each others' debt, depending upon what motivates you).

But when you don't know the guy who walks in your pub, how do you know he's not a moocher - that he's earning his keep and will ultimately return the favor of you feeding him (IE - ultimately be helping you survive, as well)? You can't unless he offers compensation on the spot - bartering with items/goods or with a standard value currency. Money and bartering arise in larger systems where your "personal sphere" is only a fraction of the total society at work. We use these metrics to identify people who are helping out society as a whole by being productive.

"But what about the people making millions on the stock market?"

There are also quite a few people losing millions on the stock market. In either case - stock is ownership of a company. A company offers up the right to make decisions for a cash investment to be used to help further develop the company. When you invest in a business, you are helping it to grow and to purchase equipment, facilities, etc that it would normally not be able to purchase with only a 3-5% profit margin. Those new businesses and facilities hire more people, who are able to be more productive, and further advance society.

Yes, there are bad apples in every bunch - Capitalism, however, is the most practical in that it allows self-interest to further the common interest, as well as allowing for malicious and abusive segments to be naturally phased out by market preference (if enough people stop buying from unethical businesses, then those businesses will close or have to alter their practices to survive).



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 10:32 PM
link   
The error made here is assuming that our current economic and financial system is capitalism. Its not, in fact its very far from it.

What we have is a form of economic imperialism, where the arbitrary rules and laws created by governments drive market behaviour and limit free markets. Where you see a monopoly you usually see a regulation that has created that monopoly.

The area of the economy that is most like capitalism is actually the internet, which is so new that there are hardly any rules governing internet business models or stifling innovation. You can see in that environment how the internet has thrived and destroyed a large number of old business models while creating new ones. It has driven massive technological improvement in a short space of time that otherwise would not have occurred.

I suggest that before blaming capitalism for all our woes that some of you guys actually do a bit of study as to what capitalism is, and how it differs to the current economic system in place. Because we aint a capitalist society.



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 11:38 PM
link   
The best example of the free market is computers and the internet, agreed.

No government had to mandate USB as a connection standard, or IEEE communication standards/protocols. All of that was established by independent businesses who said "why should I try to sell a proprietary connection when I can sell a computer that will allow all different types of devices from different companies to work with it? That way someone can buy my computer knowing that there will be a device that does what they want that will connect to it."

The rate and pace of computer development is unlike any other industry ever seen due to its very nature, and due to it evolving faster than the government can even begin to address issues.

Most issues that Congress has attempted to address on the internet have been worked out far in advance of Congress even delegating an investigation into the matter. The free market just grows and adapts at, honestly, a frightening rate when it is networked.

Of course - there are also bad things - viruses, phishing, scams, "I will kill the bunny unless you donate x$" types of things - but a bit of common sense addresses most of those - and for those that are harder to crack; lots of laws governing criminal activity automatically encompass a variety of internet scams, intentional damage/theft (viruses, malware, etc) that many community and professional groups work to counter-act on the internet (all formed out of businesses or 'common interest' volunteers).



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 12:42 AM
link   
How sad and brainwashed so many are these days. Socialism has and is responsible for some of the greatest misery in the world, including widespread mass murder. Ever heard of Stalin or Pol Pot?

Socialism in europe and the US has bankrupted those countries and stagnating their economies.

The bankruptcy can be tied directly to the notion of throwing away the public treasury on poverty programs. These create programs that make the poor forever dependent on welfare.

Most of all welfare payments end up increasing poverty. This in part by design. A case in point was the toxic mortgages that sunk all those banks. Those mortgages were created by misguided government bailouts, wherein money was lent to people who could never pay it back.

The scheme of lending money to people who can't pay so that they end up enslaved or their collateral is seized is a time honored tradition of the banksters. The IMF and world bank are run this way and have riddled the third world with debt that can never be repaid. Europe and America are next. Their own governments collude with these evil banksters, who by the way favor world wide socialism, under a one world government, under their control.

In the end Thomas Jefferson was correct. "The government that governs best, governs least."



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 03:33 AM
link   
reply to post by SevenThunders
 


I think there is confusion with the word "socialism". It is not helped that in different countries the term "socialism" has different connotations. In the UK, socialism is often about greater government involvement in social matters, like welfare and this is how the term is commonly used. There are politicians who describe themselves as socialists, but they are not communists or Stalinists. Of course, socialism also refers to communism and other extremes and it seems to me that this is how our US cousins often see it. We all know truly socialist countries fail, look to the Soviet Union, Maoist China and that bag of worms that is North Korea as your socialist exemplars.

All governments need to maintain a degree of socialism (as in “intervention in society”), be it a welfare safety net so you don’t have the unemployed starving to death or some form of health coverage etc...

I think a nation which removed all “socialism” would rapidly become dysfunctional, fragmented and fail, which is why a truly capitalist society could not work and why governments exist to ensure social cohesion and continuity. If a government fails to run its social programmes (e.g. welfare) with due diligence and governance (leading to welfare dependency) then that is a failure of government and not of the principle of “socialism” / social responsibility.

Of course, I am referring to developed nations. Some nations (e.g. most in Africa) have very little of anything where it is a dog eat dog world (very little health, no welfare, no social services etc). In these societies you die young and probably spend your life being expolited.

Regards

Edit to correct typo

[edit on 6/6/2010 by paraphi]



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
The best example of the free market is computers and the internet, agreed.

No government had to mandate USB as a connection standard, or IEEE communication standards/protocols. All of that was established by independent businesses who said "why should I try to sell a proprietary connection when I can sell a computer that will allow all different types of devices from different companies to work with it? That way someone can buy my computer knowing that there will be a device that does what they want that will connect to it."

The rate and pace of computer development is unlike any other industry ever seen due to its very nature, and due to it evolving faster than the government can even begin to address issues.

Most issues that Congress has attempted to address on the internet have been worked out far in advance of Congress even delegating an investigation into the matter. The free market just grows and adapts at, honestly, a frightening rate when it is networked.

Of course - there are also bad things - viruses, phishing, scams, "I will kill the bunny unless you donate x$" types of things - but a bit of common sense addresses most of those - and for those that are harder to crack; lots of laws governing criminal activity automatically encompass a variety of internet scams, intentional damage/theft (viruses, malware, etc) that many community and professional groups work to counter-act on the internet (all formed out of businesses or 'common interest' volunteers).

The Problems is: the Free Market that implemented in the Today's globalization isn't that free because world's richest people controls everything restrictively

[edit on 7/6/2010 by masonicon]



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by lucid eyes
At the moment capitalism works best and makes the most progress.


Lmao. It's attitude like this that are destroying the future.



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 07:31 PM
link   
Without creating a long post i'm just gonna say ...

"Capitalism favours the ruthless and the corrupt"



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 08:00 PM
link   
Sorry, I can't agree with the premise.

Capitalism allows you to pursue your dreams. I have started two businesses and I've worked in the music industry. Capitalism is not about greed, it's about freedom. Go to North Korea or Cuba and see how many people are protesting for a cause or pursuing their dreams.

The problem isn't capitalism, it's Government. Governments are bought and paid for and they are corrupt. This is why I say Governments should be stripped of the power to control resources and people's money and they shouldn't be able to start wars.

If you made governments throughout the world basically volunteer jobs and you ban lobbying, then capitalism will flourish even more until we reach a technological point that will make money useless. Something like nanotechnology, artificial intelligence or claytronics.

So, capitalism is fine. The myth is that government is there to look out for you. The truth is government are controlled by Corporations and politicians are put in place to give the appearance that they are going after these crooks. They are not.

Strip governments of their power and things will get a lot better.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 01:37 AM
link   
reply to post by paraphi
 


Unfortunately it's becoming increasingly clear that even the mini-socialism that you are referring to is rather destructive and in fact perpetuates poverty.
The US has spent $10 trillion on welfare programs and there are more poor than ever before and things are just getting worse.

The best way to help the poor is to improve the economy. Nothing grows economies like true free market capitalism. The sort of crony capitalism that we have now, run by a few elite banksters does not qualify by the way. it is still a form of socialism, or even fascism.

China has freeer markets than most of the Western worlds and their economy is still expanding.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 02:37 AM
link   
i kind of agree. i'm not a communist either, but i think capitalism is not about rewarding the hard working, i mean that is absurd as the hard working are the poor and the rich are the people who find ways to squeeze money out of others.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 04:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 





The problem isn't capitalism, it's Government. Governments are bought and paid for and they are corrupt.


Then you are admitting the Capitalism we have is Flawed.

I/you cannot print money.....Only a select few are allowed to do this.

I/you cannot buy or sell Drugs because of prohibition, For fear of prosecution.....Even though many have made Billions in this trade.

People considered to be "Internationals" escape from paying taxes.

Because of Stupid Patent and copyright laws....Fair competition is inhibited.
(If i had been the inventor and taken a patent out on the wheel and denied others its use, where would we be ?)

These are just a few instances that show we are playing a game where the Dice are Loaded.

I think maybe those who work with their hands should go on strike......Then see where Capitalism works for those who can only Exploit.

[edit on 8-6-2010 by ken10]



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join