Capitalism is killing our morals, our future

Capitalists have already captured the state , look EUrocrats and the donors behind US elections.
Public opinion can be manipulated once or twice but universal participation in day to day policy making eliminates interest groups .
Profits always go to the capitalists so the majority are not familiar with them in the first place also in none of my posts i spoke against personal property or freedom to start business.
People are not greedy , this is a silly argument and against all reality . In several of my posts i said that citizens will own their work , you work for $10 you get $10 , in capitalism you work for $10 and you get $4 because capitalists want to make profit .
There is nothing voluntary in capitalism , either you have connections with the puppet state or you don't and you have to compete against fellow working class people on who will make the plutocrat happier.
There is no market economy , hot air derivatives are tenfold the real global GDP , wake up please. How you are satisfying human needs when a big chunk of mankind lives under poverty and tens of millions of children die every year? You mean you can satisfy YOUR special needs at the costs of other's basic ones , you are not satisfy the masses but your very small circle of customers while (*)(*)(*)(*)ing millions of others.
Of course capitalism is a pyramid scheme , look how many locals stores have closed down by walmart , yes you can open one yourself and have the same fate . And you can not achieve infinite growth with finite resources...


In any case your views are old and obsolete and they are based in non facts and crazy assumptions .
I see where you coming from and i do understand that change scares you but we really need to move over , if anything better than socialism becomes an option i will be the first to support it but so far there is none.

 

i

The war fare state is the result of having a State it self. Mostly the warfare comes in after the welfare bankrupted the country. To keep the people from uprising and keep them in they luxury the state goes out to loot foreign nations for they resources to satisfy it's own citizens instead of letting the recession take it's course. War is the health of the state it transfer all power from the people to the state under the pretext of emergency..

 

You just calling Capitalism anything you want.. You have no scientific definition what is Capitalism. You just don't like the word. Individuals who use the State as a Club are who captured the State and not Capitalism. So if you not speak against personal property then how come is your system not Capitalistic? If you voluntarily making a choice for how much you are going to work and for who isn't that owning your labor? How is the collective can make a better choice for you then your self? You keep forgetting the fact that someone have to start up the business buy all the machines have to spend money to keep maintaining them and the building. LOL... How he is going to expend it's business put money away for harder times if he cannot make a profite? I don't want to get in business I just want to be free and travel around and freelance.. I am happy with 10$/hour because I just like to fish and fishing is not an expansive hobby. Why would you make to get in a complex relationship with a business?

 

As usual, you people give us a false choice. Ownership by the government is the same as ownership by the rich. Socialism is an intentionally false choice created by the children of the rich who feared democracy taking away their unearned hereditary power. They took advantage of the previous system's brainwashing of the excluded classes to choose "the rich on our side."

There were no unions in the Soviet Union. It was a union in Poland that overthrew Communism. Solidarnost exposed your lie that Capitalism is the only alternative to Socialism.

 

The most updated definition of capitalism is : where the means of production and the means of policy making are owned by individuals .
Communism is not against personal property , we already said that like 20 posts ago.
The collective dictates policy not the choices you make about yourself .
Working for others separates your labour from the product , you are not compensated properly and you have no word over it.
You can start a software business without any expensive machines , as you can start a construction office . I find this question very interesting since i can give you an insight over the use of technology : machines will be designed through open source projects and they will be modular , meaning that all their parts could be used to assemble different ones and reused thus bringing prices down. As for starting say a factory you can ask community to buy the machines , since you will provide employment and production growth it will be beneficial for citizens to finance you and your partners , a compensation can be agreed to be either monetary or in commodities. Instead of having a bank investing in you it will be the community , interest free.
The average worker will be happy with $10/hour as well since today they are getting like $8 and they do not fish , they are using food stamps.

 

Productive for whom? If the employees were the only owners, a productive person would produce more dividends for his fellow workers and be encouraged by being voted a higher salary. Why look up to the productive in this system if they are only Cash Cows for investors who do no work?

 

They already have employee owned companies. Employees can buy stock in most companies they work for. What do you mean? Nationalization and giving control to a worker board ruled by government? Even unions know better then that, that is why no unions start their own businesses. Better to leach off capitalists then be an owner of a socialist run enterprise.

 

The GOP doesn't believe in Laizze-Faire Caplitalism.

If the GOP suppored Laizze-Faire Capitalism they would oppose the Capital Gains tax loophole that provides tax breaks to those that don't "earn" their income and pay half the tax rates of those that "earn" income in America.

If the GOP supported Laizze-Faire Capitalism they would endorse envronmental legislation because pollution violates the Rights of the People and no entity has a Right to Pollute. Allowing pollution would have to be based upon a pragmatic necessity established by compelling arguments as opposed to having to make a compelling argument as to why pollution should be prohibited.

If the GOP supported Laizze-Faire Capitalism they would be opposing "fiat" Federal Reserve notes and demanding that all Federal Reserve notes be redeemed in Lawful Money (i.e. American Eagle coins that are Lawful Money' in the United States) as required by Title 12.

If the GOP supported Laizze-Faire Capitalism it would be advocating the collection of enough in tax revenues this year, and every year in the past, to pay for the authorized expendatures of government but it doesn't.

If the GOP supported Laizze-Fair Capitalism it would not support government intervention in determining economic outcomes in the United States and would not support US foreign interventionism in the Sovereign Affairs of Foreign Nations that drains the US economy for the benefit of the Military-Industrial Complex.

The GOP supports "Crony Capitalism" and not Laizze-Faire Caplitalism.

 

Get rid of equity investment. If the rich want to make more money, they should do it the same way they made it in the first place, by working. Such a parasitic system is another revelation that the whole system was created by unearned inheritance. Heirs don't make their own money, so there's no way they can increase it by working. We are never told that they must be the ones who invented this absurd system of making money simply by having money. The answer is whatever the ruling class is trying to hide. If we have to do it on our own, so must the children of the rich. But they would wind up nowhere, because they are nothing special. We must do our own thinking and reject the thoughts offered to us by those whose very positions of influence prove they are all flunkies of the ruling class.

Replace it with bank loans. If lending were parasitic, the bank would increase your mortgage if your house increased in value. But it doesn't. Only at the workplace are you screwed like that. If you own a man's work, you own the man. By an IPO, the entrepreneur is really practicing slavery. Hard work is easy money for such parasites, so there goes most of the motivation to work hard, except at brown-nosing so you'll get promoted. Because the workers don't have an immediate and normal incentive, their bosses see it as confirmation of their self-glorifying conceit that people who aren't bosses are too lazy and should probably be paid even less!

 

Capitalism allows the workers to own the means of production and distribution (i.e. socialism) but "socialism" doesn't allow "capitalism" although capitalism will exist in any economy even if its black market capitalism.

 

We've actually seen most heirs of wealth squander that wealth over time. Most of the wealthy today "earned" their own wealth, generally by favoritism under the tax codes, as opposed to inheriting it. Bill Gates is a perfect example. While he did earn wealth based upon being the co-founder and working as the CEO of Microsoft the vast majority of his wealth today is based upon unearned income where he paid 1/2 the tax rates under crony capitalism when compared to those top "income earners" (i.e. workers) being taxed under the "earned income" tax rates.

 

mod edit>>>flaming and insulting If we as a society don't pay people while they are in training, we will get people with either no talent or who learned poorly because they had to work their way through college and didn't have the time or energy to devote to learning. It's simple common sense that society gets what it pays for. Just because you make money doesn't mean you deserve to make money. We are getting cheated blind by people who get where they are by brown-nosing rather than brains.

 

You can just Google it: "Capitalism is an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market."
Personal property = private property. You are still trading in your system as a private citizen and the business are corporate ownerships so your system is still Capitalistic. Socialism and Communism is nothing more then a Forced Corporate ownership what payed by taxation or inflation fo the money supply.

Why would I want to own the product I produced for someone else. It's useless for me. I want the money for the exchange of my labor what I think it's my labor worth and I want to go on with my life. I want nothing to do with the product. Why should I care how much the business owner makes on it. You are free to ingage in a OpenSource economy in the current system. Some people find more beneficial for them to have a business owned product where they need reliability so they can make the business reliable if there is a mistake happens. I don't want to fly on and Airplane made through an open source. Don't get me wrong I like open source systems but it's good for only some products.

In your system I am forced to do what the public thinks is right in my system you are free to engage in what you think is good for you.

Well if the public infringe on my economic private life by making policies what violates my economic freedom isn't that restricting my personal choice. I didn't hert anyone, why should I feel like a criminal.. And what doest it make right what the public chooses to be the right choice. I rather have a single professional Accountant making decisions in my financial life over 100 bricklayers voting on it. That is one of the fullish thing you can do is let the public vote on your economic life. Your forget that most people are economically illiterate. It's not a crime to be economically illiterate cuz its a complex science, but those people shouldn't be given a choice making decisions over others people lives..

 

Let me refresh your distorted memory to the meaning of Laizze-Faire Capitalism. It simply means with no government interference.

So keeping in mind what Laizze-Faire means...why would the GOP or any Capitalist want to have the government interfere here with these capital gains?

How is pollution violating the rights of any people? Any and all environmental legislation as being derived and enacted by leftist socialists such as any proposed by algore extremists with this global warming myth are meant to increase taxes on the American people. So I say the GOP and or the capitalists and business owners will be well advised to keep their growth policies going by rejecting any and all further government interference with overbearing tax and regulations. BTW, its the tax and regulations and the looming expense from obamacare that are making businesses nationwide either sit on their ass-ets, or do buiness overseas.

Lets face facts, you can't stand to see American capitalism succeed, but you're more than willing to implement an obama form of socialism that is not only failing big time, but is destined to make us a third world nation or one that is comparable to the pathetic situation in Greece today.

Talk about a confusing contradiction of terms. So you're calling on the GOP to raise taxes to get more government revenues from the working stiff class, and in the same breath you say it would be to pay for your so-called authorized government expenditures. When is the bell going to ring in your head that signals to you that the GOP has always been against increasing taxes and supporting these useless entitlement govt programs?

Again, you're confused here. Since when has the GOP supported government intervention concerning our economy? HELLO!!!!!! Does the NEW DEAL, GREAT SOCIETY and OBAMACARE government boondoggles ring a bell with you? The GOP has always supported our military and all military missions as outlined or as written in our Constitution.

Wrong again, its obama who supports crony capitalism as seen with his many bailouts of corporations like GM (now called Government Motors) and with the green industry failures like Sylndra that went belly up and costing the taxpayers 1/2 billion. How would you classify obama's porkulus plans? Was that a form of crony capitalism or was that just another knife in the back of the working taxpayers?

 

Not a liberal and the CEO from Hostess is where I got my information. The workers didn't destroy the company, greedy executives who made stupid decisions did. The brain dead extremists make up the party partisans, both illiterate/ignorant sheeple that are so busy blindly following talking points they are too stupid to look at facts that contradict them. Didn't vote for either of the two party con artists, obviously you are the problem.

 

Why would I want to own the product I produced for someone else. It's useless for me. I want the money for the exchange of my labor what I think it's my labor worth and I want to go on with my life. I want nothing to do with the product. Why should I care how much the business owner makes on it. I don't want responsibility over the business.. Let the person who want to take risk to do it.

And what doest it make right what the public chooses to be the a right choice? I rather have a single professional Accountant making decisions in my financial life over 100 bricklayers voting on it. That is one of the fullish thing you can do is let the public vote on your economic life. You forget that most people are economically illiterate. It's not a crime to be economically illiterate cuz its a complex science, but those people shouldn't be given a choice making decisions over others people lives..

 

When you resort to personal attacks and getting in to grammar nazism that's when I know you have no scientific arguments.. I have been speaking English 15 years now, never learned it in school just at my work place, and yes my English grammar sucks. But I speak 3 other languages is hard to keep all perfect sorry and F U. You are just an angry tyrant inept who hates rich people and that is your all purpose to being here and these are my last words to you.

 

Yes but socialists will never be ok with people making their own choices. They can't have just a socialist state they need a socialist federal government too etc... Everyone has to belong to the collective. Since their will always be capitalism as you rightly point out, socialist will never be happy. Silly humans and their natural tendency towards doing what they want.

 

A republic means electing pre-owned politicians to do all your voting for you. If citizens were given the right to vote on legislation, then they wouldn't feel like nobodies and wouldn't be susceptible to brainwashing. Constitutionazis confirm their own lies when they point to how ignorant the citizens are. The truth is that there is really no point in learning much about the issues if we can't vote on legislation. Apathy is really rebellion against being excluded.

Once there was a situation where people were outraged at a Supreme Court decision. Media flunkies of the ruling class pointed out how few people could name even one Supreme Court justice. That doesn't prove any lack of knowledge of people who should be important. It shows how the citizens secretly resent being ordered around by 9 washed-up lawyers who aren't even elected and can practically never be removed from office, mainly because the same pre-owned politicians are the only ones who can impeach them. Constitutionazis, by asserting that our judicial dictators should be important, use that lie to prove that the citizens' not knowing the Justices' names proves (to them) that the citizens shouldn't be important.

 

I would suggest actually reading the definition of laizze-fair (laissez-faire) capitalism.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/laissez-faire

Let's look at "property rights" as laizze-faire capitalism has an obligation to protect those rights. In this regard let's addresse regulations related to pollution.

No individual own the land, the air or the water as those belong to all people. We have "property rights" related to using the soil (land), the air and the water but we don't have a right to destroy it for others. A coal-fired powerplant spewing millions of tons of pollution into our air is violating the "Right of Property" of every person that breaths that air. A person that pollutes the soil, especially if that pollution leaches into our water supply, is violating the Property Rights of anyone in the future that uses that soil or anyone that drinks that water. No person owns the soil, air, or water as these are communally owned by ALL People and, at best, we can establish the Right to Use the soil, air or water.

No individual has a Right to Pollute the soil, air, or water as that violates the Property Rights of ALL People that communally own the soil, air, and water but we, as society, do have compelling reasons for limited pollution and for allowing it. For example, we all need electricity so allowing a coal-fired powerplant to pollute based upon a compelling argument because of the need for electricity can be made. What can't be argued is that unlimited pollution should be allowed if that electricity can be produced with 40% less pollution for a minimal increase in the cost of the electricity.

We should minumize the amount of pollution and should only allow the pollution necessary to meet the needs of society based upon a compelling argument. Lacking that compelling argument no pollution should be allowed. Today we have "clean coal" technology (that isn't really clean) that's actually argued for by the coal industry because the technology exists to reduce air pollution from coal by up to 40%. Under laizze-faire capitalism we should require the reasonable "time-phased" implementation of clean coal technology because the increase in the cost of electricity produced is insignificant while the reduction in pollution is significant. There are no compelling arguments for why we should allow 100 year old technology that creates huge amounts of pollution to continue and the pollution is violating the Property Rights of ever Person in society.

We can also address the Property Rights of the Person related to their own body under Laizze-Faire capitalism which would mandate worker protection regulation such as OSHA. Virtually all OSHA regulations were first established as being cost effective by private industry where the protection of the worker was clearly established. Yes, there are exceptions but they are actually quite rare. Laizze-Faire capitalism requires regulation to protect the Property Rights of the Person and ALL Person's own their OWN bodies and allowing an enterprise to damage those "bodies" through negligence cannot be allowed under Laizze-Faire capitalism. Damaging a person's body is a violation of the Person's Right of Property as the Person owns their own body.

Laizze-Faire capitalism does remove many of todays regulations and interventionism in economic affairs by goverment while at the same time it imposes many new regulatory requirements to protect the Property Rights of the People. It is not representative of economic anarchy which some Republicans and Libertarians seem to believe. The US basically transitioned from economic anarchy in the 19th Century where the Property Rights of the Person weren't protected by regulation to crony capitalism in the 20th Century.

Laizze-Faire capitalism is between the two extremes. It requires regulation but that regulation targets protecting the Property Rights of all People in society while it prevents crony capitalism where the government, through favoritism, intervenes and determines economic outcomes.

The GOP does not endorse Laizze-Faire Capitalism but instead endorses Crony Capitalism. That is a FACT!

 

Venezuelan gov't tries to wipe your ass, fails

[video=youtube_share;Qui1Hg9C0k8]http://youtu.be/Qui1Hg9C0k8[/video]

 

It's not useless to you. Selling it is how you get paid. Why give it to somebody who will sell it for far more than he pays you? Make him your employee, your agent, your fellow owner. He is just a delivery boy. People are so intimidated into looking up to a self-promoting mediocrity that they don't ask, "What's so special about this guy? Couldn't most people do what our self-appointed leaders claim only the rich can do?"

This is most critical in the products that have the most value. A genius is brainwashed into thinking that just inventing something and getting a high salary is enough. He should be outraged on how much the inferior-IQ capitalists get on corporate patents. Your idolized economic bullies don't want workers and creative people to appreciate how much they are really worth. You let a gang of Greedhead parasites tell the individual what he is worth. Capitalism means giving Main Street citizens an inferiority complex and giving Wall Street parasites a superiority complex.

 

So maybe corporations should put all this excessive profit "away for a rainy day" then? Maybe 75 years worth of retirement funding like the right wing forced the US Postal service to do. Interesting take.

 

So, paraphrasing, we should all participate in the looting and grab what we can, and not worry about the long term consequences? Another interesting point of view.

 

At what point does incentive for "contributing to the economy" occur? If the "sky" is the limit, does that mean you can never have enough, no matter how much you have? Does it ever become an issue of greed, or is greed not possible?