Capitalists - you really don't see a problem?

a reply to: Puppylove

You can't be saying that lazy people make good hunters and farmers, can you?
That's who I was talking about. weak minded people who would rather complain than do something to change their situation.
People who would complain about rabbits being too fast to chase, compared to the ones who figured out how to make a trap.

originally posted by: o0oTOPCATo0o
a reply to: luthier

Yeah, I agree Jay-Z isn't the most wholesome example, he was just the first 'rags to riches' type, well known figure.
Good point on the digression by the way... black youth does not have very many good role models these days.

I mean no offense one of my degrees is philosophy so it's just my nature to argue this way. I completely appreciate your tone and ability to reason.

I just want to put it out there we have some systemic issues that need to be dealt with rather quickly. Saying calitalsim is the best form so far is not a solution. Nor does it mean everything should be free.

We as people should be as free as possible to be mobile and have access to a decent life. If someone wants to just have a good family life and punch a clock it may be worth saving lesser manufacturing jobs through higher tariffs at the expense of 5 dollar mp3 players.

a reply to: Puppylove

None the less the required skill sets for hunter and gatherer society are still analogous to current living, contribute or wash out.

Addendum: where is charity is fine and good and all because it is voluntary, socialism uses all manner of language to disguise its self as charity when in fact if it is forced it is tantamount to thievery.

a reply to: o0oTOPCATo0o

Lazy people are the ones who figured out traps in the first place, the non lazy ones kept chasing the rabbits and would have kept doing so if some lazy # who didn't want to chase rabbits hadn't said, "there's got to be an easier way to do this."

Lazy people are the innovators because they don't want to work, they want everything to be easy and are constantly looking for ways to make it so. Lazy people don't just roll over and die, they have the same survival instincts as everyone else, difference is they don't believe in hard work, in fact they hate it with a passion. Work smarter not harder.

originally posted by: sycomix
a reply to: Puppylove

None the less the required skill sets for hunter and gatherer society are still analogous to current living, contribute or wash out.

At what point though would you consider that idea isnt working? If the job market shrinks to a nominal level where only 50 percent of the population even has a job available would you consider the idealism may not have worked?

It's like parenting. I could believe I am right and the effects of my parenting actually create an undisered unintended effect. It should be an evolutionary process of introspection. That way you can see if your ideals match reality.

a reply to: Puppylove

At this point it's no longer a thought of work smarter not harder it has devolved shamelessly into an idea of don't work let. somebody else do it for you.

a reply to: sycomix

So you're willing to throw everyone to the curb based on a few bad apples? Not everyone who is struggling is looking for a handout, they are looking for a helping hand to get them back on their feet though.

a reply to: luthier

That would be a failure upon the further generation when they are required to act in the capacity of a useful contributing adult, after the young leave the nest so to speak the parent is no longer the responsible party.

a reply to: sycomix

Sounds like the corporate world to me. They expect everyone to do work for them so they can buy that second or third private jet then complain when someone wants to afford groceries.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Not entirely true if you don't want to be under the bus get out of the street.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Or you could have the initiative to succeed and become more than the sum of your parts. Climb the ladder earn the raise. Be more.

a reply to: sycomix

Such a simple analogy for such a complex subject. Good job, if it only it were so easy.

a reply to: sycomix

People aren't meant to work as much as we do, it's not natural or healthy. This is why this is becoming so common, hell we work more today than serfs did in the middle ages. You're chastising people because they can't compete in an environment we aren't even built for. You're again super ultra rare, you're one of the few who've adapted, most of the human race has not.

a reply to: o0oTOPCATo0o

I'm not doing any of that. There are plenty of places that YOU can go and look at both sides of the argument.

You did say that capitalism is a free-market system (baby).

I'm not here to prove anything.

You made a positive claim, that capitalism is a free-market economical system. Therefore you have to prove that that is the case. I just denied it.

Only to give my opinion on things, then take the responses, consider what is said in them, then rethink my position on the issue.

And yes, indeed, good you admit it: the capitalistic economical system being a free-market system is a mere opinion.

what you said does not allow me to do that at all. It's only mocking me and that's it. How does this help anybody?

It was not my intention to mock you. I just made a point. If you felt mocked by me making an argument, I apollogize for making you feel mocked although that wasn't my intent at all.

a reply to: sycomix

That's right, climb the ladder so you can do less work and earn more while those under you struggle for doing more work. That's the corporate world for you, riding on the backs of their minimum wage slaves and acting like the world owes them something.

a reply to: sycomix

Your response doesn't make sense. Can you explain. If I as a parent push my child away and fail at nurturing because of idealism it's my failure.

The same goes for a market. If you don't adapt your idealism to the reality it's in you. The fact that robots will take all your jobs including those you mentioned is a problem. The fact that even outsourcing has limited the available jobs meaning there are not physically enough to go around is a problem. If it doesn't get corrected natural insurrection will happen. All you have to do is pick up a history book to see it.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

No one has a very good reply to this... They are just wade in circles, hoping their arguments will somehow stick and that others will agree with them. They think this thread is personally about them, and take it very personally and get defensive of THEIR MONEY as if I give a damn about 99% of ATS who probably make less than 100k a year

If you are reading this, it's likely this thread is NOT ABOUT YOU.

a reply to: Willingly

According to what I've been reading, capitalism and a free market are very similar in practice. Both rely on the exchange of goods and services to produce money. Both (ideally) have limited, to zero gov't influence and both rely heavily on supply and demand.
Maybe you can show me where I'm going wrong and explain the difference between the two. I am having trouble finding big differences between capitalism and a free market.

a reply to: deadlyhope

I am trying my best to bring everybody to the table. Ultimately it's on us to fix the problems. Can't do it divided.