Economist speculates that Marx was right, capitalism will destroy itself

Originally posted by sageofmonticello
lol, capitalism is destroying itself?

Perhaps Nouriel Roubini would like to tell me where anyone is actually practicing capitalism? Not in the USA, that is for sure.


ETA:
Capitalism = An economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners.

So is Nouriel Roubini suggesting that trade and industry is not under government control? lol? and people listen to this guy?

Yea, Marx has been proven right time and time again, huh? Yep, Laos, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam and China are all shining examples of prosperity.....

Russia sure did a bang up job.... yep Marx gets proven right, I concede, Nouriel Roubini, save us with your immense intellect

Free Market Capitalism = A free market is a market in which there is no economic intervention and regulation by the state, except to uphold private contracts and the ownership of property.

Now this is something that might actually help a bit. Add in a dash of government, to protect 3rd parties and you have the recipe used to create the greatest amount of prosperity in the history of the world.

edit on 15-8-2011 by sageofmonticello because: ETA

And People on the left would say that China, the USSR, etc. didn't practice pure Marxism. Mr Roubini Has a PhD from Harvard in international economics and correctly predicted the Housing market crash. I'm curious where your economics PhD is from that you can dismiss this man's opinion so casually?

epic fail here

social security is the epitomy of marxism

apple is the epitomy of capitalism

ones broke and begging for money the other has more money than the government.

capitalism failed? i think not

reply to post by sageofmonticello


I was not talking about planned economy. In fact I lived under planned economy for 13 years. It sucks. No toilet paper, no bananas. Now I live under "capitalism" for 23 years. It sucks. No money to buy toilet paper and bananas (yeah ... it is great exaggeration).

I was talking about power: capital is power and power should be restricted by some way. Marx said that capital produce more capital i.e. more power. It is nature of capitalism to horde means of production to single hand. As I said: Smith's free market is perfectly possible on small scale. In fact it is the best system. But it DO NOT WORK on global scale. I'm not sure if Marx said something about planned economy. He said: if the capitalism will go forward we will end where we are now.

BTW I'm anarchist so government is not my best friend

Accumulation of initial capital is primarily driven by development of society as whole. Without schools, law and law enforcement, or culture, it will not be possible. Even the smartest capitalist can not live without society. I know few entrepreneurs and I have big respect to them. I'm sorry ... work is calling. I'll try to finish my idea tomorrow.

reply to post by Buddha1098


You touched on the fundamental problem right there. I agree 100%, they did not practice it in whole or correctly, though that is the exact problem with a system as such. It relies on the right people doing the right thing.

The system I push, relies on every person doing the right thing for that person. Nobody has the power to mess it up.

That is a favorite argument, this guy has X so how can you say that you not having X have a valid counter point.
I could give you a list of PhD's who would echo my sentiments, so since people with PhD's disagree than the PhD argument holds no weight.

Could I maybe trump him with a PhD and a nobel peace prize in economics? That would be Milton Friedman, though you could always go find a PhD with a nobel prize that dis-agrees with him.

Do you see the fallacy in that?

reply to post by zeddissad2


Thank you for the discussion. You mentioned

It is nature of capitalism to horde means of production to single hand.

Now what do you mean by horde?

I would take it to mean that these people are taking that money and doing nothing with it. That just does not make sense to me. It would be my best reasoning that this money is used to create new factories, hire new workers, build and design new products, etc...

I am pretty close to you on the role of government, I don't so much push for capitalism, which can be both bad and good, I am a much bigger fan of free markets. I regard free markets as taking the power from the few and giving it to the many.

It has been a awhile since I have read Marx but I believe the centralization of the economy by means of putting the credit into control of the state was a driving theme of his.

ETA: My whole problem with Marx is that he trust the government to be always just and without self interest. That is never the case. I see it as a good man who gave a new tool to bad people. Kinda like a idea that society can never be ready for.

I agree, the results right now are everyone is f'd. I just see that as a failure of government though.

I see all the Marxists have come out to support their belief in the Communist Manifesto.

I was not talking about planned economy. In fact I lived under planned economy for 13 years. It sucks. No toilet paper, no bananas.

reply to post by zeddissad2


Was that Cuba? Cause they had a toilet paper shortage a couple years ago.

Reuters) - Cuba, in the grip of a serious economic crisis, is running short of toilet paper and may not get sufficient supplies until the end of the year, officials with state-run companies said Friday.

Officials said they were lowering the prices of 24 basic goods to help Cubans get through the difficulties provoked in part by the global financial crisis and three destructive hurricanes that struck the island last year.

Cuba's financial reserves have been depleted by increased spending for imports and reduced export income, which has forced the communist-led government to take extraordinary measures to keep the economy afloat.

www.reuters.com...


Cuba 2009
yah communist/marxist cuba doing great

Gotta go with the general consensus here in that even the most fool proof system can be systematically dismantled due to greed. The love of money is the root of all evil. It proves to be true over and over again. The greed factor creates a highly unstable environment.

Originally posted by neo96
epic fail here

social security is the epitomy of marxism

Marxism (in your loose terminology) is the means of production being controlled by the workers and laborers as opposed to the individual owner. Whenever you see the term 'co-op' on farms or 'employee owned' on business advertisements, that's marxism.

apple is the epitomy of capitalism

ones broke and begging for money the other has more money than the government.

capitalism failed? i think not

Social security has lots and lots of money. In fact, it has enough money to sustain itself without assistance for another 30 years. Apple, on the other hand, has exploited low income nations around the world to make shiny new toys for you.

Exploitation of the lower and middle class is the failure.

reply to post by links234

I know you were replying to somebody else but

I agree with you about Apple, what a crappy crappy company. I remember seeing photos of the net they had to put up around their factory in China because so many workers were jumping off to commit suicide.

I don't think capitalism can be blamed for Apple though, I think one has to blame that on a failure of government and a failure of the free press.

Also, where are you getting your data to make the following statement?

Social security has lots and lots of money. In fact, it has enough money to sustain itself without assistance for another 30 years.

I would love to see valid data that proves SS is liquid for 30 years... would make me feel much better about my parents futures.

All I can find is the opposite.

As of 2009, the estimated unfunded liabilities for social security were $17.5 trillion per the National Center for Policy Analysis. From what I understand, SS taxes mix with all other taxes and Congress just cuts a check for whatever they decide the cost of living is, that certainly can't be sustained.

I like the idea of some sort of safety net for the elderly who couldn't save for retirement but it would seem like SS doesn't really do that very well. The checks will of course keep going out but I worry about what that money will be worth, the cost of living goes up much higher than SS payments rise.

source:
www.ncpa.org...

Originally posted by sageofmonticello
lol, capitalism is destroying itself?

Perhaps Nouriel Roubini would like to tell me where anyone is actually practicing capitalism? Not in the USA, that is for sure.


ETA:
Capitalism = An economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners.

So is Nouriel Roubini suggesting that trade and industry is not under government control? lol? and people listen to this guy?

Yea, Marx has been proven right time and time again, huh? Yep, Laos, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam and China are all shining examples of prosperity.....

Russia sure did a bang up job.... yep Marx gets proven right, I concede, Nouriel Roubini, save us with your immense intellect

Free Market Capitalism = A free market is a market in which there is no economic intervention and regulation by the state, except to uphold private contracts and the ownership of property.

Now this is something that might actually help a bit. Add in a dash of government, to protect 3rd parties and you have the recipe used to create the greatest amount of prosperity in the history of the world.

Marx?

I am thinking Smith

I think capitalism is gonna eat my people because the Moral basis Adam Smith referenced, cannot be adhered to by a bodiless, soulless, mindless corporation. Just look at the ratio of negotiable contracts you agree into, less
a simple purchase... The ratio in modernity is ridiculous, in the past it was not this way... Now there is very little option to assert a legal position in a contract, anyone think they can get their phone company to strike a line that is in a form contract???

If you can and you can prove I'll pay pal you $100.

Can you strike a term here on the ATS T&C?

nope, I can't

again, this condition is new to history

Originally posted by neo96
epic fail here

social security is the epitomy of marxism

apple is the epitomy of capitalism

ones broke and begging for money the other has more money than the government.

capitalism failed? i think not

You make the perfect point about how greed is contributing to high unemployment, Neo. Apple's products aren't manufactured here in the U.S. These "shiny toys" as you put it, that you enjoy so much are being built in China. They're being put to work solely for profit.
- Wouldn't you rather the United States get back to manufacturing our products at home?

Apple gets ludicrous tax breaks in the deluded scam hope that it will create more jobs and help the nation's economy. Sadly, the production costs are next to nothing in China, while their loopholes and corporate tax breaks keep their profits at a max. It's an exploit and nothing more. This is why Apple has more money than the federal government. You always suggest that corporations need not be taxed in the name of trickling down to American workers. This isn't the case here. It's a case of greed exploiting the system.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
I see all the Marxists have come out to support their belief in the Communist Manifesto.

I haven't seen them

I have seen the Idiots who have come out to support their belief in the Idiot Manifesto.

If I see any Commies I will send em your way

reply to post by Janky Red


I agree with you 100% except where you blame the corporation and contract law as a problem of capitalism. It is a product of the failure of governments.

What people don't understand is that corporations are not part of capitalism, they are a tool of tyranny.

The Untied States fought a revolution to end the control of corporations and early USA had many many many restrictions on corporations that are not around today. It wasn't just about "the king and Taxes" as many are taught. There were many factors involved that one has to research to know what really was going on.

Take for instance, the Boston Tea Party, The most well known example. That wasn't a revolt against the King, it was a revolt against the Large, Multi National Corporation, the East India Company. They saw corporations as the tool of tyrants, much as corporations are today. Corporate infiltration of government is no new thing. It has been around for as long as corporations have been.

The early USA had severe restrictions on corporations, for good reason, as today is evidence. restrictions such as, who could start them, how long they could operate, they could be shut down by state governors on a whim, they had to provide a demonstrated public good, etc...

That has been erased by a failure of governments, specifically, the USA government in my case. Court decisions, lobbies, idiots in power, they are the ones to blame for corporations having so much power.

Blame the right thing.

The truth is, even Benjamin Franklin once stated that the colonies would of been all to happy to pay taxes and live under the Kings rule, they didn't get upset until they could no longer use their own money the colonial script. They fought the war over the poverty being caused by large corporations and their collusion with the British government, they were otherwise quite happy with the King and their freedom.

I would be happy to give you many links so you can research this for your self. I have always had a thing for that time period in history and know the details of it all quite well through my self interest pursuing studies.

The problem is, with Marx system, that is always the same case. In practice, it has only given the select few in power more opportunity to rape the people. any political system will by its own nature corrupt and do harm, that is why I support a government that gives the least amount of power to the few that get charged with seeing things through. Unfortunately, a real capitalist society with real free markets and a strong, small, people run, government to take care of 3rd parties and contracts has never existed, at least not for very long.

History always has the do-gooders come in and bloat the government into a corrupt all powerful being.

I was laughing at Nouriel Roubini because it is obvious that he is simply pushing an agenda by not blaming the obvious problems and using the word capitalism to mean something different than the book definition.