Why Capitalism is Inherantly Destined to Fail Every Time

page: 4
16
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 




disagree, I think capitalism works but only for a period of time and our time is coming to an end. The trouble with capitalism is that it is all based on debt and the people who have the most to start with naturally get the produce of the debts. Capitalism is just a machine the slowly brings wealth from bottom to top. We need to be free people but we also need to learn to do things for each other rather than just doing things for ourselves and yes that is hypocritical coming from me.


"The trouble with capitalism is that it is all based on debt...


Where in hades did you ever come up with THAT???

You are describing the fractional Reserve Banking system. It is the economic system that KILLED capitalism deader than a door nail. Fiat Fairy Dust money will always drive out wealth based money and that is what we are seeing today.

To put in REAL simple terms that you can understand Capitalism is BARTER. Person A takes his wealth (seed ) and produces more wealth (bread) which he can trade for the wealth produced by person B and C etc. In all cases CAPITALISM depends on the individuals RIGHT to own property, the means of production AND the fruits of his own labor.




posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by crimvelvet
reply to post by michael1983l
 




disagree, I think capitalism works but only for a period of time and our time is coming to an end. The trouble with capitalism is that it is all based on debt and the people who have the most to start with naturally get the produce of the debts. Capitalism is just a machine the slowly brings wealth from bottom to top. We need to be free people but we also need to learn to do things for each other rather than just doing things for ourselves and yes that is hypocritical coming from me.


"The trouble with capitalism is that it is all based on debt...


Where in hades did you ever come up with THAT???

You are describing the fractional Reserve Banking system. It is the economic system that KILLED capitalism deader than a door nail. Fiat Fairy Dust money will always drive out wealth based money and that is what we are seeing today.

To put in REAL simple terms that you can understand Capitalism is BARTER. Person A takes his wealth (seed ) and produces more wealth (bread) which he can trade for the wealth produced by person B and C etc. In all cases CAPITALISM depends on the individuals RIGHT to own property, the means of production AND the fruits of his own labor.


Well succesful capitalists that accrue large amounts of cash choose to maximise that cash by giving it back to the people they took it from except they have to pay it back plus interest. With inevitability eventually the interest charges add up yet there is no new money so in general those at the bottom have to keep on borrowing more just to keep the same level of lifestyle as in previous times. It is a cascade effect



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 




I disagree, I think capitalism works but only for a period of time and our time is coming to an end. The trouble with capitalism is that it is all based on debt and the people who have the most to start with naturally get the produce of the debts. Capitalism is just a machine the slowly brings wealth from bottom to top. We need to be free people but we also need to learn to do things for each other rather than just doing things for ourselves and yes that is hypocritical coming from me.


Here is a really good example of how "Progressive" legislation has really hurt the poor working class and completely KILLED capitalism.

It is darn hard to have "Capitalism" when the Federal Reserve bleeds it dry and "Progressive" legislation then embalms it in Red Tape.

When I was a kid in the 1950's, Mom worked and had a nice older lady who was in her sixties come in and take care of me and my eighty year old Granny. The woman got every dime of the money she was paid.

Compare that to today:
Now we have sixty more years of "progressive/liberal Federal laws to "Protect people" That business opportunity is GONE, completely disappeared as an easy business opportunity. You need Insurance, and Accountant for starters. The people hiring you have to fill out all sorts of tax paperwork because you are an "employee" They may be required to pay Workmen's Comp. too.

So instead of the Grandma who is doing the work, getting 100% of what her labor earned she now has to pay 10% of the gross to the Insurance company and anywhere from $500 to $2,000 to a tax accountant or she goes to work for a firm like the following and gives them about a 50% cut.




headline]Rent-A-Grandma? Nothing like 'experience,' firm says.
....A Los Angeles-based employment service that specializes in providing senior women for domestic staffing needs has just launched a national franchise program.....


The service provides carefully screened women age 50 and over for roles including child care, elder care, housekeeping, cooking, estate management, pet sitting and other domestic staffing jobs.... www.csmonitor.com...


Want to try any other small business???

GOOD luck!!! You better have lots of money to pay a lawyer to help you negotiate all the legal requirements. I am still waiting ten years later for my FOIA request from my state on the reqirements for a business I wanted to open.


Small businesses losing out to red tape



...cities and states stifle new small businesses at every turn, burying them in mounds of paperwork; lengthy, expensive and arbitrary permitting processes; pointless educational requirements for occupations; or even just outright bans. Today, the Institute for Justice released a series of studies documenting government-imposed barriers to entrepreneurship in eight cities. In every city studied, overwhelming regulations destroyed or crippled would-be businesses at a time when they are most needed.

Time and again, these reports document how local bureaucrats believe they should dictate every aspect of a person's small business. .... if that means that businesses fail, or never open, or can operate only illegally, or waste all their money trying to get permits so they have nothing left for actual operations, that's just too bad....

Along the way, the dreams of individuals are repeatedly crushed:

•In Chicago, Esmeralda Rodriguez tried to open a children's play center, paying rent month after month while she waited in vain for the government permits she needed to open her business. After a full year of bureaucratic red tape, she finally exhausted her life savings and closed down for good.....

•Los Angeles places enormous and pointless restrictions on home-based businesses... in Los Angeles, they had better make sure they don't use their garage, manufacture or sell any products, advertise or violate any of the other myriad laws. Many businesses end up operating illegally, scared to grow their business for fear that the next knock on the door could be a regulator.

•In Miami, an accidental loophole in state law allowed jitney van transportation services to flourish briefly. As soon as Miami-Dade County got the opportunity, however, it shut down the new jitneys and ensured no others would open by requiring any new business to prove it wouldn't hurt its competitors. It even allowed those competitors to object to any new businesses, which is like allowing Burger King to veto the building of a new McDonald's.

•In Milwaukee, Nasir Khan spent tens of thousands of dollars renovating an abandoned hot dog stand and getting permits, only to have them withdrawn when a local alderman intervened. The politician wanted something nicer than a hot dog stand at that corner, and apparently it was better to have no business than one he didn't like....



•In Washington, D.C., hundreds of people have waited more than a year to take the required class and test to become a taxi driver. Rather than encourage these individuals to create jobs for themselves, the city has simply stopped offering the class and test.

When governments actually get rid of barriers to entrepreneurship, new businesses open almost immediately. Indeed, removing even a single law can unleash entrepreneurial energy and create hundreds of jobs. Mississippi finally got rid of its requirement that African hair braiders get government-issued cosmetology licenses to practice or teach. The result? A single entrepreneur — Melony Armstrong — trained dozens of women to braid hair and open their own businesses.


America was once known as the Land of Opportunity. It could be again, but not until state and local officials get out of the way of entrepreneurs trying to fulfill their dreams of new business and new prosperity for themselves and their families.
www.usatoday.com...



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 




Well succesful capitalists that accrue large amounts of cash choose to maximise that cash by giving it back to the people they took it from except they have to pay it back plus interest.


You are still confusing a debt based Bank system for capitalism.

This is an example of Capitalism:

Ed and I decide to open a business. He "Donates" to the business a carriage, harness and two white Percherons. I donate to the business a truck, a trailer and a CDL so I can drive the rig. We share the cost of upkeep and all other expenses. Our partnership agreement states we each keep ownership of the equipment we donated and will sell and split the proceeds for any other equipment bought jointly.

We set up giving tours in the Hay Market Sq area for visitors to Boston MA. (The going rate is $30/ person and $5/ additional person for 15 mins.) To one up the competition, I give a talk on the history and point out historical points from my position as footman and we dress in "Colonial Costume" that I have sewn.

The business grosses about $100/hour. With two horses and a nice trailer we can switch animals and work ten hour days. grossing about $500/person per day.


Now where in that business is anyone " pay money back plus interest"
edit on 12-8-2011 by crimvelvet because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 


Capitalism has created the highest standard of living ever known on earth. The evidence is incontrovertible. The contrast between West and East Berlin is the latest demonstration, like a laboratory experiment for all to see. Yet those who are loudest in proclaiming their desire to eliminate poverty are loudest in denouncing capitalism. Man’s well-being is not their goal.THE PROBLEM IS CAPITALISM HAS BEEN PERVERTED AND ITS THE SOCIALIST COMMUNIST IDEALS THAT GET INTO THE MIX AND DESTROY IT



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 05:09 PM
link   
Seriously, after reading many of the comments on this thread, I am convinced that America is doomed. Where in the world are all of you capitalism-haters coming from? I feel like I am in some kind of alternate universe where black is white and up is down.

At no time in HISTORY has a country has so much prosperity as the United States of America in recent decades. YES, even today, with the economic struggles we are facing.

Look back 100 years. Even 50 years. We are MUCH better off overall and our standards of living have gone up. Even what is considered "poverty" now has dramatically changed.

Here is a snippet from www.econlib.org..., which talks about what has happened:


Despite these constraints, which worked sporadically and unpredictably, the benefits of capitalism were widely diffused. Luxuries quickly were transformed into necessities. At first, the luxuries were cheap cotton clothes, fresh meat, and white bread; then sewing machines, bicycles, sporting goods, and musical instruments; then automobiles, washing machines, clothes dryers, and refrigerators; then telephones, radios, televisions, air conditioners, and freezers; and most recently, TiVos, digital cameras, DVD players, and cell phones.”


Notice that what we think of as "necessities" now, used to be considered luxuries.

The problem isn't Capitalism. The problem is the something-for-nothing mentality. Also, the idea that we are all "slaves" because of Capitalism. Give me a break. WHEN in HISTORY have people NOT had to WORK to meet their basic needs?????

Also, the idea that we are all so altruistic that we would do what we LOVE for free. Come on, now, seriously???? I love my job, but I would NOT do it for free. I'd be a stay at home mom if I wasn't paid for my job. Or would stay at home moms be outlawed?

It's called FREEDOM, people.

The problem with our system is that we are not currently practicing pure Capitalism. Even my 13 year old can grasp these concepts.

There will ALWAYS be people with more wealth than others. Always. If we redistributed every asset in America and started over from scratch with a level playing field, some people would squander their assets and others would re-amass wealth.


“Capitalism,” a term of disparagement coined by socialists in the mid-nineteenth century, is a misnomer for “economic individualism,” which Adam Smith earlier called “the obvious and simple system of natural liberty” (Wealth of Nations). Economic individualism’s basic premise is that the pursuit of self-interest and the right to own private property are morally defensible and legally legitimate. Its major corollary is that the state exists to protect individual rights. Subject to certain restrictions, individuals (alone or with others) are free to decide where to invest, what to produce or sell, and what prices to charge. There is no natural limit to the range of their efforts in terms of assets, sales, and profits; or the number of customers, employees, and investors; or whether they operate in local, regional, national, or international markets.


Every one of you who thinks that we could do better in a different system is seriously naive. I would love for you to name an example of a system that has worked out better for everyone within the system. Go ahead.....crickets....

If we could go back to a nation that followed the Constitution and had a limited Federal government, with fewer handouts, more emphasis on personal responsibility, and less meddling by the politicians, we would all be better off.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by objectivist
reply to post by michael1983l
 


Capitalism has created the highest standard of living ever known on earth. The evidence is incontrovertible. The contrast between West and East Berlin is the latest demonstration, like a laboratory experiment for all to see. Yet those who are loudest in proclaiming their desire to eliminate poverty are loudest in denouncing capitalism. Man’s well-being is not their goal.THE PROBLEM IS CAPITALISM HAS BEEN PERVERTED AND ITS THE SOCIALIST COMMUNIST IDEALS THAT GET INTO THE MIX AND DESTROY IT


Hi objectivist...(first, I love your screen name for reasons you will soon understand)

The fantasy ideas expressed on this board are quite obscene. I wish everyone would realize that capitalism is not an economic policy or a philosophy of big business, it really is freedom. Don't be confused because the MSM and politicians say we live in a capitalistic society in America or elsewhere, we do not. We live in a pseudo-capitalistic society that has been run into shambles by the global elite bankers, corporations and politicians.

If anyone has the time, please read or read about Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal by Ayn Rand.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 

I completely agree with you.
This is exactly what I have been thinking as well.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by canselmi
I can see your point, but I have an issue with:
"Well those that get lucky..."
Luck may have a little to do with it, but hard work, determination and risk-taking play larger roles. Of the few rich people I know, none of them at this moment are sipping martinis on a yacht or at the golf course. They are at work. They were here before I got to work and will still be here by the time I get home.

The problem is that you inherit wealth or poverty. If you happen to be born in a poor low class family, then it might be extremely hard to ever get out of it.
Alot of the richest people today were born in high class families and never really had to work to get on-top of the pyramid.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by SirMike
reply to post by doctornamtab
 


Well, when you figure out something that doesn’t involve either of the two and lets people not work for necessities, let me know.

Maybe something in between?? Take the best from both worlds...
Either way something has to be done as the system is just not working as it is now.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 11:32 PM
link   
I have long been a proponent of capitalism. The funny thing about capitalism is that it has gone from a defining word of American existence, to a vulgar word used deceptively by left-leaning idiots (thanks, Michael Moore) or a device employed by insincere Republicans looking for popular support. I’d like to explain briefly what capitalism means to me, without devolving into a boring lecture on supply side economics vs. Keynesian hocus-pocus.

In broad terms, capitalism represents the freedom of consumers to select what goods they purchase from producers. The circle comes back around because these consumers are also the workforce driving the creation of said producers’ goods. Anyone who has taken basic macro knows this. However, this freedom to choose is much more than an economic tenet; it is also a moral necessity. The Great Wall and the Pyramids, while impressive, represent nothing more than the evil of monopolized power and economic control. And yet, civil rights-loving liberals are oddly content with ignoring the facts of their creation and instead focusing on the beauty of their appearance. Is this nitpicking? Perhaps. But I think it illustrates a large disconnect on the side of the left in ignoring history in favor of making surface-level generalizations about collective progress.

It is the height of irony that those who accuse conservatives of being racist, sexist, and ignorant oppose a system which, if implemented correctly, would solve many of the problems they claim it to cause. The evil in economics is not a system that is blind to all prejudices, save the ability to produce. The evil lies in supporting an ideology that artificially supports those who don’t contribute to society and brings down those who go beyond the call of necessity to produce products which make that society successful. I’m not supporting any particular legislation, nor am I endorsing a particular candidate. All I’m saying is that this is the American dream, and if one happens to take advantage of a free markert..May the best man win.
edit on 13-8-2011 by bo12au because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 01:43 AM
link   
Any political system is inherently destined to fail every time because humans are the ones who lead them. Humans are incapable of not corrupting a pure idea or ideal.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 01:49 AM
link   
reply to post by canselmi
 


Actually, no, no it does not. Hard work is not rewarded in the capitalist system; in fact the greatest rewards in capitalism go to those who do no work and produce nothing. The investor and financier classes basically have money that breeds more money without an ounce of effort or "dedication" on their part - like tribbles.

I know very few people who do not work hard. And I know very few people who are fabulously wealthy. The two are clearly unrelated.

I know lots of people who have worked their asses off and remain dirt poor, though. And I know this is because they are trapped in a system that is, by its very nature, based on the expansion of debt. A system that exists to relocate money from the broad bottom to the narrow top. That system is called capitalism.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 01:54 AM
link   
Capitalism has 1 important flaw in it that causes social breakdown:

Wealth Begets Wealth.


Though the advantage of having capital, property, and the workings of compound interest, those who are already ahead of the game gain more advantage at a more and more rapid pace as time goes on. Study any numbers regarding wealth distribution and you will see this trend spelled out every single time.

One very important way that you could turn this around is rather than having a tax on the poor and subsidy on the rich via: compound interest, turn the interest rate around. Make banks, instead of paying interest on money, CHARGE interest on storing it. The more money you lock up, the higher the interest you pay. This would get money moving, and work to balance the natural tendency of power and wealth to bring more power and wealth.

Why would we want this? Because extreme differences in wealth distribution is dangerous and destructive.

I'm not talking about punishing hard work. But I think we can all agree that no human being works 10,000 times as hard as another hard-working human being. Wealth gaps should never get so large.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 01:59 AM
link   
The corporate form of Capitalism and Democracy we see today has it's roots in Communism starting from the early 1900's These two ideals were never meant to be staples of the USA and our forefathers were dead set against them. They instituted a Republic with principles and a Constitution. Government was For The People By the People, not the form of democracy that allows capitalism to flourish in the corporate sector to the point is has today. This has given the corporate sector the power to bring fascism ( the corporate sector making laws that rule the people through lobbyist, money greed and power) into the country replacing the republic we once had. No longer is the Peoples will the dominant force in government, this has been stolen by the corporate sector. That's Fascism.

Make no mistake about it folks, we are a fascist country now. Democracy and Capitalism are the mechanisms used to bring about that change right under our noses.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 02:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl
At no time in HISTORY has a country has so much prosperity as the United States of America in recent decades. YES, even today, with the economic struggles we are facing.


Prosperity for who, based on what standards?


Here is a snippet from www.econlib.org..., which talks about what has happened:


Despite these constraints, which worked sporadically and unpredictably, the benefits of capitalism were widely diffused. Luxuries quickly were transformed into necessities. At first, the luxuries were cheap cotton clothes, fresh meat, and white bread; then sewing machines, bicycles, sporting goods, and musical instruments; then automobiles, washing machines, clothes dryers, and refrigerators; then telephones, radios, televisions, air conditioners, and freezers; and most recently, TiVos, digital cameras, DVD players, and cell phones.”


Oh, I see. You're one of those people who thinks ownership of a color TV means you're not poor, aren't you?

well, fact is, you can't eat a color TV. You can't use a bicycle for paying the bills. A tennis raquet will not educate your children. A DVD player will not improve your health.

"Things" and "gadgets" are not an accurate measure of prosperity. Health, security, and well-being are. And thanks to people like you who parade around saying that because someone has shoes they must not be poor, measures to provide these core measures of prosperity are failing and dying.

Yes, we have more video game consoles; we also have a higher infant mortality rate than we have i nthe last 50 years. Sure, we have many more cars on the road, but we also have an educational standard that makes Cameroon look appealing. And yes, we have plenty of little doodad phones, but 14 million Americans are without a job and nearly 100 million Americans have no access to any sort of health care. These are not the marks of a "prosperous nation," they're marks of a nation being colonized as a place to dump surplus merchandise..


The problem isn't Capitalism. The problem is the something-for-nothing mentality. Also, the idea that we are all "slaves" because of Capitalism. Give me a break. WHEN in HISTORY have people NOT had to WORK to meet their basic needs?????


From the moment someone came up with the notion of "interest rates" and a debt-based economy. do you understand how our system works at all? I imagine that like most Americans, you understand that labor and production are the core sources for wealth - thus the "work hard, get payoff" rhetoric. well. it doesn't actually work that way, because the way the system is set up, labor and production are drastically undervalued in order to secure profits for the investor class. They then do exactly what it says on the tin - invest. if ewnough of them invest, the market "looks good" and the value of hte investment increases - effectively making money out of thin air.

The system is constructed in such a way to continually degrade the productive value of the worker, in order to depress wages, thereby securing an ever-increasing debt that is required for the entire scheme of credit to actually work. That is, you are being exploited so that someone else higher on the pyramid has more money for less effort.


Also, the idea that we are all so altruistic that we would do what we LOVE for free. Come on, now, seriously???? I love my job, but I would NOT do it for free. I'd be a stay at home mom if I wasn't paid for my job. Or would stay at home moms be outlawed?


it's my firm belief that stay-at-home parents should be economically compensated for their efforts in raising younger members of our society. Sure, that macaroni-and-construction paper doodiddle is charming, but it'd be nice to have the actual value of the service represented in cash nevertheless, don't you think?


It's called FREEDOM, people.


Buzzwords in all-caps won't help make your position any less wrong. Debt and poverty are not freedom. They are in fact a form of oppression.


The problem with our system is that we are not currently practicing pure Capitalism. Even my 13 year old can grasp these concepts.


Actually, we are, in fact, practicing pure capitalism. Please don't confuse capitalism and market theory, the two are actually quite different. This is a pretty common obfuscation / confusion that gets made.


There will ALWAYS be people with more wealth than others. Always. If we redistributed every asset in America and started over from scratch with a level playing field, some people would squander their assets and others would re-amass wealth.


well, how about we give this a shot? The big change would be the "level playing field." While we're at it we could add a few other changes here and there, like removing the reliance on debt and the obsession with eternal growth. if possible it would be a positive to strip from our culture the notion that "things" equal "prosperity." Judge on real value, not the hyperinflation and debt-spiral standards of our current sydstem that requires exponential consumption to break even.



“Capitalism,” a term of disparagement coined by socialists in the mid-nineteenth century, is a misnomer for “economic individualism,” which Adam Smith earlier called “the obvious and simple system of natural liberty” (Wealth of Nations). Economic individualism’s basic premise is that the pursuit of self-interest and the right to own private property are morally defensible and legally legitimate. Its major corollary is that the state exists to protect individual rights. Subject to certain restrictions, individuals (alone or with others) are free to decide where to invest, what to produce or sell, and what prices to charge. There is no natural limit to the range of their efforts in terms of assets, sales, and profits; or the number of customers, employees, and investors; or whether they operate in local, regional, national, or international markets.


Again, capitalism and market theory are different things. Think of it this way. Market theory is basically saying "markets work this way" while things like socialism, communism, capitalism, etx, are all different efforts to figure out why the market works that way amd how to get the best results from it.

It's also entirely possible that market theory is flawed; we've been updating Darwin's work in the last hundred years, but Smith apparently gets to go unchallenged for three hundred. Go figure.


Every one of you who thinks that we could do better in a different system is seriously naive. I would love for you to name an example of a system that has worked out better for everyone within the system. Go ahead.....crickets....


Democratic socialism
Communo-anarchism
Localism
Subsistence
Cuban eco-socialism
...Should I go on?

Of course, as I've pointed out, my standards are slightly different from yours; I hold that "benefit" is defined by human well-being and sustainability of the society's lifestyle. You apparently adhere to the circular argument that the system that lets you have more stuff is best because it lets you have more stuff and is therefore best.


If we could go back to a nation that followed the Constitution and had a limited Federal government, with fewer handouts, more emphasis on personal responsibility, and less meddling by the politicians, we would all be better off.


If we had fewer numbskulls who cited Adam Smith and the constitution while clearly never having read either, instead using them both as personal self-gratification tools, like some sort of pseudo-intellectual RealDoll, we'd be better-off.

Adam Smith would be abjectly horrified by the crap people like you peg onto his name. And the constitution blatantly allows the government to collect taxes to spend for the welfare of the entire population.

Oddly what the constitution doesn't allow for is definition of corporate personhood, unilateral executive decisions on the subject of war, and so much else that I often see supported by people who scream about welfare so loudly.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 02:24 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnPhoenix
 


Actually the corporatist system - wherein chartered corporations are effectively "persons" - has been a part of our national paradigm since before many of the "Founding Fathers" were dead - it started in 1818 with Dartmouth College v. Woodward. It was reinforced five years later in Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts v. Town of Pawlet.

Communism has jack all to do with it.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 02:56 AM
link   
Seriously, I don't see how capitalism can't end bad. Greed kills it has a viable form of economic society, there is no way that free capitalism won't end up exactly like it is today.

And the arguments I hear over and over on why is socialism is bad and evil are always the same 2 things.
First, humans are lazy.
Second, people that work hard can't stand out.

Ok, so for the first...well maybe if humans would put something else then money has being the number one thing ever in life, it would be a start. Ever heard of honor and duty?
Why can't people have honor in their values, or country, or family? Oh yeah, money.

If people knew that they HAVE to work to make their system go on and build it's meaning around honor and duty might help. Also, in an intelligent system where you don't waste time with capitalism's only way of being free and accomplished.... (money),people might not HAVE to work 40 hours a week. In a world where there is an other omega then getting money, why would someone work 40 hours a week when they don't want to AND don't need to.
In the world we have today, the most lazy make the most money. Think of the people on top, the elite...they ain't changing anything in their ways to make the world better they just take take and take, and they are freakin lazy because if I was them, I would find another way then oil to rip us off.

Second! Most of you anti-socialist think you can't do what you really want in anything else then capitalism. Well, let me tell you. Do you imagine how many humans out there will never do anything to their full capacity because they simply don't have money and can't get money because they start with nothing at all in life? Potentially the best bankers, best teachers, best musicians, best politicians will never ever do what they are the best at, because they don't have money.
Yeah capitalism gives us soooo many choices, has long that you are rich and manipulative enough.

We should find ways to make people do what they are born to do.
We should work towards ways of making more in society with less resources, material and human resources.
We should wake up and see that money is not freedom, it's only painting your chains in a new color every week.
We should make integrity, honor, competition, self awareness, spirituality, accomplishment, pushing our limits part of our daily lives.

Everything is taken away because of the capitalism system, eventually only the few will have access to this so called freedom. Money, greed kills everything that is good in us and everything that we could do better.

I totally agree that plain cold socialism sucks, it's flawed.
But there are plenty ways to make it better and just call in another word if some are so afraid of it.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 04:24 AM
link   
reply to post by crimvelvet
 





Here is a really good example of how "Progressive" legislation has really hurt the poor working class and completely KILLED capitalism.


Progressive legislation in no way killed capitalism. Capitalism killed itself when it degraded into corporatism.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 04:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by CherubBaby
reply to post by michael1983l
 


You know Michael Capitalism may have it's problems but can you give an example of a better system ?
Also I think the crooks and cheats have degredated the system and it isn't Capitalism's fault completely.


The same excuse used too often now a days. Well yes, Capitalism isn't good, but show me something that is good. That is just absurd, maybe you should sit back, gather couple of your Conrad and come up with something better. People have stopped thinking.

It is like saying, well, this car obviously doesn't work, and it keeps crashing in the middle of the street. When someone says hey, look, your car is stuffed, you say go to hell man, show me a car better than this. It is arrogance speaking right there. Instead of admitting the fact that your car is evidently stuffed, and either trying to fix it or build a whole new car, you claim my car is the best, and I'm keeping it full stop.





top topics
 
16
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join