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.

 

America Is Not a Capitalist Country!

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2012 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik

Originally posted by hawkiye
When government intervenes in the market and stifles market forces the means of production are no longer private they are government controlled.

This is where you are wrong. Government isn't the only thing that can stifle market forces. Private parties (provided that they have the means) can also manipulate and stifle those same forces yet they remain private. This is where those other types of capitalisms come in because they are privately owned and they do away with your laissez-fair.


No so called private business only have such power to intervene through government force in their favor. They got their power by being politically connected not by earning it in a free market. Government intervention has always been the problem while marxist continue to blame private free enterprise that does not exist anymore. if business uses government to protect their markets they are no longer private now are they. This is what the Marxist have used to label their insidious philosophies as capitalism.

The younger generation cant fathom the thought that their romantic ideals of socialism are complete BS lies fed to them through media propaganda grow up and face the truth!

According to you guys N Korea is a capitalist country since they dump billions into their military...



edit on 10-6-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 10 2012 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye
No so called private business only have such power to intervene through government force in their favor. They got their power by being politically connected not by earning it in a free market. Government intervention has always been the problem while marxist continue to blame private free enterprise that does not exist anymore. if business uses government to protect their markets they are no longer private now are they. This is what the Marxist have used to label their insidious philosophies as capitalism.

Wrong, private business can influence the market in many ways, like making exclusive deals with suppliers or buying out smaller competitors. Government is not needed for these types of manipulations.


The younger generation cant fathom the thought that their romantic ideals of socialism are complete BS lies fed to them through media propaganda grow up and face the truth!

Don't know about the younger generation because I'm not one of them. You seem to be the one having trouble with the truth.


According to you guys N Korea is a capitalist country since they dump billions into their military...

Care to point out where either of us even mentioned the military?


edit on 10-6-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye
Capitalism keeps power with the people allowing them to dictate which businesses stay viable based on the quality of products or services they produce...

You mean that other system that has never been implemented?

Sure sounds nice, too bad it isn't real.



edit on 10-6-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


When government intervenes in the market and stifles market forces the means of production are no longer private they are government controlled. We can split hairs on by what degree but it amounts to the same thing. America is not a capitalist country! And your description of America is outdated by about 80 years!

And the bigger it gets, the more people it stifles.

The Bretton Woods Conference of July 1944 was held in New Hampshire by 44 nations. It tied all currencies to the US dollar and set up the IMF, which most in the Third World and increasing numbers of Greeks, Irishmen, Italians and many other Europeans would agree are blood sucking imperialists.

I prefer the word imperialist to socialist or even fascist. Blood sucking imperialists literally rule the world and all of its people. So they don't care what little chits of paper are in circulation, or what they're called, as long as they control what anyone does with them through their "lending" practices and the ham fisted control of production/export/import rules by the world trade organization.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 03:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik

Originally posted by hawkiye
Capitalism keeps power with the people allowing them to dictate which businesses stay viable based on the quality of products or services they produce...

You mean that other system that has never been implemented?

Sure sounds nice, too bad it isn't real.



edit on 10-6-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)


Try studying some American history.... Maybe start with Murray Rothbards A History Of Money and Banking in the US



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


I have and have done so objectively which brings me to the truth and not a romanticized version.

President Washington used a group of armed men larger than any that he had led during the revolution to collect a tax on whiskey which skewed the market in favor of the eastern farmers. Can you please explain to me how that equals free markets? I mean that is the only definition for capitalism that is being accepted.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 01:15 PM
link   
Of course it is.

If the USA is not a capitalist country, give me an example of a country that is capitalist...



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by hawkiye
 


I have and have done so objectively which brings me to the truth and not a romanticized version.

President Washington used a group of armed men larger than any that he had led during the revolution to collect a tax on whiskey which skewed the market in favor of the eastern farmers. Can you please explain to me how that equals free markets? I mean that is the only definition for capitalism that is being accepted.


Where did I say that equals free markets? I have said it is not and has not been perfect. I am not sure if we have ever had 100% free markets like we should. However we came closest after the civil war and up to about 1913 and those were our most prosperous times and they definitely proved that free market capitalism works well and is the blue print for success.

Incidents like the whisky rebellion are sad forays into idiocy by government and even our founding fathers but they are not representative of the bar of freedom the AC and constitution set which is the goal. Maximum freedom always facilitates prosperity. But the banking cartels would have you believe it is the root of all our problems. When people are free and happy they are most productive that is just common sense reason and logic. The so called robber barons are always facilitated by government force period history has proven that for thousands of years. Government intervention is and has always been the problem from the monarchs to the modern oligarchs people call democracy!



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by GLontra
Of course it is.

If the USA is not a capitalist country, give me an example of a country that is capitalist...


There are none today The US abandoned it at least 80 years ago.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye
Where did I say that equals free markets? I have said it is not and has not been perfect. I am not sure if we have ever had 100% free markets like we should. However we came closest after the civil war and up to about 1913 and those were our most prosperous times and they definitely proved that free market capitalism works well and is the blue print for success.

You said it earlier in the thread:

Originally posted by hawkiye
There is no other form of capitalism then free market anything else becomes centrally managed and monopolized and ceases to be capitalism.

when I pointed out that there are other forms of capitalism.

Post civil war to 1913 was the height of the robber barons in the US, which you accuse of being in cahoots with government. So you are praising in one paragraph and denouncing in the next.


Incidents like the whisky rebellion are sad forays into idiocy by government and even our founding fathers but they are not representative of the bar of freedom the AC and constitution set which is the goal.

I hope that you extend the same courtesy when someone uses the same argument for the Communist Manifesto, because it's goals where not represented by the real world implementations.


Maximum freedom always facilitates prosperity. But the banking cartels would have you believe it is the root of all our problems.

I don't listen to what the banking cartels have to say because they are not to be trusted.


When people are free and happy they are most productive that is just common sense reason and logic. The so called robber barons are always facilitated by government force period history has proven that for thousands of years. Government intervention is and has always been the problem from the monarchs to the modern oligarchs people call democracy!

You have just proven my point that, out side of small communities and even that is not guaranteed, free markets don't exist.


edit on 11-6-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye
There are none today The US abandoned it at least 80 years ago.


We have a world wide capitalist system, period.

This is what globalization is all about. Capitalist interests.

What you are calling nationalism is simply capitalists using the government to their advantage. Bail-outs was not the government controlling markets, it was capitalist interests within government taking care of their own.

I don't understand all these excuses people make for capitalism, you don't realise that it's simply your conditioning coming into play. You have been conditioned to believe capitalism is freedom, so if it appears to be restrictive then you want to believe it's not capitalism. But capitalism has no set of rules, other than restrictions placed on it by the state. Capitalism is simply "the private ownership of the means of production", if that is the case it doesn't matter what the state does, it is still capitalism. Capitalism is not government, it is economy, and there are no guarantees that capitalism cannot be totalitarian. Have you ever read 1984, or Brave New World?



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by hawkiye
There are none today The US abandoned it at least 80 years ago.


We have a world wide capitalist system, period.

This is what globalization is all about. Capitalist interests.

What you are calling nationalism is simply capitalists using the government to their advantage. Bail-outs was not the government controlling markets, it was capitalist interests within government taking care of their own.

I don't understand all these excuses people make for capitalism, you don't realise that it's simply your conditioning coming into play. You have been conditioned to believe capitalism is freedom, so if it appears to be restrictive then you want to believe it's not capitalism. But capitalism has no set of rules, other than restrictions placed on it by the state. Capitalism is simply "the private ownership of the means of production", if that is the case it doesn't matter what the state does, it is still capitalism. Capitalism is not government, it is economy, and there are no guarantees that capitalism cannot be totalitarian. Have you ever read 1984, or Brave New World?


Capitalism cannot exist without freedom. As soon as government intervention granting monopolies is implemented it cease to be capitalism. That is why I said in my OP:


Now I know a bunch of posters are going to jump on here and want to do some drive by postings about the evils of capitalism etc. Please don't if you want to argue against it then refute the points and links with evidence logic and reason instead of unsubstantive anti-capitalist talking points from some website or media outlet.


Thanks for your cooperation...



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye

Capitalism cannot exist without freedom. As soon as government intervention granting monopolies is implemented it cease to be capitalism. That is why I said in my OP:


Nonsense. Capitalism gives no guarantee of freedom, other than for capitalists.

Capitalism certainly isn't freedom for the workers, it is exploitation. The worker is not free to do with what he produces as he sees fit. A worker is required to produce more than they are paid for, and has no say on what happens to that product. In a true free system the workers would be able to demand the full fruits of their labour.
What keeps workers from doing that is private ownership of the means to produce for their needs. Capitalists produce for their own needs, as in they produce profits by taking the surplus value created by the worker.

I know what you said, and as I have explained government intervention does not stop private ownership, it intervenes it does not OWN.

As long as industry is privately owned that is capitalism, no matter what the state does, and the state is always going to be controlled by whomever has the economic power.


edit on 6/11/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 09:59 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 



Nonsense. Capitalism gives no guarantee of freedom, other than for capitalists. 

No one said capitalism guarantees freedom. Nothing guarantees freedom except the morality of the people to not oppress their neighbor. What capitalism does do is gives incentive to promote freedom by maximizing opportunity for all.


Capitalism certainly isn't freedom for the workers, it is exploitation. The worker is not free to do with what he produces as he sees fit. A worker is required to produce more than they are paid for, and has no say on what happens to that product. In a true free system the workers would be able to demand the full fruits of their labour. 

You describe socialism/corporatism/fascism beautifully! No one who contracts his labor to another is free to keep all the fruits of his labor based on what he agrees to be compensated by his employer. This is true in any system it has nothing to do with Capitalism. In a free system one has the freedom to chose whom he contracts his labor too or to not contract his labor and work for himself in whcih case he gets to keep all the fruits of his labor.


What keeps workers from doing that is private ownership of the means to produce for their needs. Capitalists produce for their own needs, as in they produce profits by taking the surplus value created by the worker.
 
This is perhaps the crux of the matter here. Name me one public owned business where the workers are able to keep all the fruits of their labors? You can't!!! Do you hear that you can't !!!

This is where you argument is completely destroyed! It boils back down to what I said above in contracting ones labor. The only reason any business public or private exploits any worker is because government has rigged the game limited the competition and thus limited the choices of the workers to chose the best business that do not exploit the workers and made it difficult or impossible for one to start their own business in the same field


As long as industry is privately owned that is capitalism, no matter what the state does, and the state is always going to be controlled by whomever has the economic power. 

It doesn't matter if it is publicly or privately owned if the state is intervening then for all practical purposes it might as well be state owned.

Free markets are proven successful they regulate themselves. If a company does not put out a good product or service the people vote with their feet and wallets and the company will go out of business. This minimizes corruption and shoddy products as companies now have incentive to put out the best product they can treat and pay their workers well to produce superior products so they can stay in business in the free market.

A soon as government steps in and favors their politically connected cronies over others then all this is lost as the cronies will have no incentive to produce superior products since they know they have no competition and will be bailed out if they fail even then. This also limits the choices of workers and stifles incentive for new business to challenge the shoddy business. This is how monopolies are created! Every monopoly can be traced back to being politically connected and using government intervention and force to gain their monopoly.

That is not in any way shape or form capitalism! That is what the bankers want you to think so they can protect their meal ticket. And they have succeeded wildly in brainwashing a whole generation it seems...



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye
reply to post by ANOK
 

Free markets are proven successful they regulate themselves.

Please, you haven't even proven that free markets have ever existed. All you are presenting is theory.


That is not in any way shape or form capitalism! That is what the bankers want you to think so they can protect their meal ticket. And they have succeeded wildly in brainwashing a whole generation it seems...

You want to force us to use your definition of capitalism but if we do that then Capitalism has never and probably can never exist, so what is the point?
edit on 11-6-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik

Originally posted by hawkiye
reply to post by ANOK
 

Free markets are proven successful they regulate themselves.

Please, you haven't even proven that free markets have ever existed. All you are presenting is theory.


That is not in any way shape or form capitalism! That is what the bankers want you to think so they can protect their meal ticket. And they have succeeded wildly in brainwashing a whole generation it seems...

You want to force us to use your definition of capitalism but if we do that then Capitalism has never and probably can never exist, so what is the point?
edit on 11-6-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)


No proof LOL Here is your proof USA 1879 to 1913! Minus some wars and government debacles and despite its short comings the most prosperous freest nation on earth with the highest living standards in history was built on free markets

Apparently you have never heard of the 19th century? it was our freest period and more most prosperous time except for the civil war especially the last half.

The free market era of the 19th century in America was a time of relative peace and prosperity except for the civil war period. Prices actually went down slightly over this time. It was really the most prosperous time in history The technology and capital investment that was built up in the 19th century really laid the groundwork for all of the new great things that came out of the 20th century.

Oh and it is only in recent years the definition of capitalism has been hijacked to what you think it means.


edit on 12-6-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 01:27 AM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 

You already refuted that proof. It was the time of robber barons and government working together. It doesn't fit your strict definition and since you have already stated, and I quoted, that anything other than free markets is not capitalism, you seem to be arguing both sides.


Oh and it is only in recent years the definition of capitalism has been hijacked to what you think it means.

The word was coined by William Makepeace Thackeray in his novel, The Newcomes.

Thackeray saw how capitalism and imperialism with their emphasis on wealth, material goods, and ostentation had corrupted society and how the inherited social order and institutions, including the aristocracy, the church, the military, and the foreign service, regarded only family, rank, power, and appearance.

Sorry but you are the one who is using a revised definition.


edit on 12-6-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 03:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by hawkiye
 

You already refuted that proof. It was the time of robber barons and government working together. It doesn't fit your strict definition and since you have already stated, and I quoted, that anything other than free markets is not capitalism, you seem to be arguing both sides.


Oh and it is only in recent years the definition of capitalism has been hijacked to what you think it means.

The word was coined by William Makepeace Thackeray in his novel, The Newcomes.

Thackeray saw how capitalism and imperialism with their emphasis on wealth, material goods, and ostentation had corrupted society and how the inherited social order and institutions, including the aristocracy, the church, the military, and the foreign service, regarded only family, rank, power, and appearance.

Sorry but you are the one who is using a revised definition.


edit on 12-6-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)


Gezuz christ you people are a real piece of work. I have said now in several posts it has never been perfect. According to you It's like saying if a race car driver makes a couple mistakes or doesn't win every race he is not a race car driver. I even said minus wars and government debacles... Sigh


For the most part we have been a free market economy up until 1913 when things began to shift and it still took many years to wipe most of it away. We still have some remnants of the free markets but so few it cannot be called that any more.... No system has ever been implemented to the satisfaction of its strict definition! However up until 1913 this country was 80-95% (and sometimes more) free market most of that time minus wars and a few government debacles here and there and it accounted for most prosperous nation with the highest standard of living for the most people in the history of the world despite its problems and faults. That is not even arguable so please cut the propaganda it is getting ridiculous.

The Robber Barons were facilitated by government force pure and simple as I said government debacles.

The origin of the word Capitalism from Thackery has little to do with the cultural us of the word for the last 150 years. Its Cultural meaning became cemented in the 19th century and associated with the principles of freedom and liberty America was founded on and has been used in that vein ever since, until recently that is. Marx assigned his own meaning to it different from Thackery. Adam Smith is called the father of Capitalism and his philosophy is also that of freedom and liberty of which the founders revered and pulled from heavily. That is how it has been defined by the majority until now, that is its traditional cultural definition.

The attempt to change the meaning of Capitalism is really an attack on freedom. The enemies of freedom are relentless. It is just amazing to me that anyone would even consider more freedom being bad or wrong. It is a loser mentality that has been cultivated by marxists and others. hat worse is its proponents. are the ones saying we need more choice... Sigh! The are cutting off their noses to spite their face.

To students of the Founders, the philosophy of capitalism is the only moral system that defines to man his individual liberty, and therefore the only valid political, economic, and social standard for pursing freedom prosperity and peace.
edit on 12-6-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-6-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 03:30 AM
link   
but..

are they

still

a

republic ??



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 03:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye
Gezuz christ you people are a real piece of work. I have said now in several posts it has never been perfect.

Your the one pushing the all or nothing definition. You can't have your cake and eat it too.


For the most part we have been a free market economy up until 1913 when things began to shift and it still took many years to wipe most of it away. We still have some remnants of the free markets but so few it cannot be called that any more.... No system has ever been implemented to the satisfaction of its strict definition! However up until 1913 this country was 80-95% (and sometimes more) free market most of that time minus wars and a few government debacles here and there and it accounted for most prosperous nation with the highest standard of living for the most people in the history of the world despite its problems and faults. That is not even arguable so please cut the propaganda it is getting ridiculous.

Not true. I even offered the whiskey rebellion as proof that the government was intervening in the markets from the start and you agreed. 80-95% free markets? Got anything to back that up?


The Robber Barons were facilitated by government force pure and simple as I said government debacles.

And since they operated in the US during the time that you claim to be full of free markets, I can't help but notice the contradiction.


The origin of the word Capitalism from Thackery has little to do with the cultural us of the word for the last 150 years. Its Cultural meaning became cemented in the 19th century and associated with the principles of freedom and liberty America was founded on and has been used in that vein ever since, until recently that is. Marx assigned his own meaning to it different from Thackery. Adam Smith is called the father of Capitalism and his philosophy is also that of freedom and liberty of which the founders revered and pulled from heavily. That is how it has been defined by the majority until now, that is its traditional cultural definition.

You wish but:

‘Capitalism’ was a word and a phenomenon neither used by, nor known to, Adam Smith. Capitalism was a wholly late 19th-century experience.



The attempt to change the meaning of Capitalism is really an attack on freedom. The enemies of freedom are relentless. It is just amazing to me that anyone would even consider more freedom being bad or wrong. It is a loser mentality that has been cultivated by marxists and others. hat worse is its proponents. are the ones saying we need more choice... Sigh! The are cutting off their noses to spite their face.

So the person that coined the term has no say in what it means? That is illogical.


To students of the Founders, the philosophy of capitalism is the only moral system that defines to man his individual liberty, and therefore the only valid political, economic, and social standard for pursing freedom prosperity and peace.

The founders never even had the term to contemplate, so you can't say that it was what they had in mind.







 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join