Capitalism vs Socialism ~ MOD ALERT ~

Take Mitt Romney, for example. Outsource the job, and take the salary for yourself. That IS criminal, you're right.

 

Then there is no point to discuss it. It was a study and the researcher had no reason to falsify it, and the story about it was in a reputable print media.

 

Truth? What would the supremely wealthy know about that exactly? Life is one big casino, for them. To everybody else though, it's an economic nightmare.

 

You are obviously bitter for some reason, but you are wrong. Most businesses do invest in their labor force. But no business can keep employees on if they don't need the work done or the employees are unproductive. That is just facts of life.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually it is not criminal. Especially since as was well reviewed during the campaign that did not happen when he was in control.

 

I have never known a bitter person to succeed in business, in a job or even at life. There seems to be so much hate in your posts you likely don't have time for anything else.

 

Doesn't make it a fact. Outsourcing does NOTHING good for average Americans. Only the supremely wealthy, which, sadly, further screws everybody else that actually tries to work for a living. Sending good paying jobs to China, for pennies on the dollar, can't possibly be a good thing (unless you're supremely wealthy).

 

I'm bitter yes. Glad you picked up on that. I guess it all boils down to what one considers "investment" in the labor force. Many companies outsource and downsize SPECIFICALLY, and for the sole purpose of fattening up the portfolios of the big dogs, and for no other reason. There's some more facts for you. Romney? Whether or not he was in "control" is irrelevant, since he still cashed his checks as CEO.

You know..."technically", leeches are "efficient" too. Does that mean that leeches would make great CEO's? (humor me here).

- - - Updated - - -

I'm too old to succeed in the corporate world. I succeed in my own personal life, quite well, and without corporate pigs biting at my azz.

 

Because I do believe that and other studies, I don't agree with you. I do accept that some specific US employees lost, but others got jobs. Further, the creation of a much larger middle class in China and the over 300 million middle class in India is becoming a huge market for America.

 

Yeah, okay. Justify it any way you like but, outsourcing is bad for America. Simple math.

 

He was no longer CEO.

I do not believe that most CEOs are leeches, nor are corporate boards. They are doing their job, which is to increase the prosperity for the company and ultimately for the prosperity for the country.

Over the last 60 years of adult life I have lost my jobs, been successful, lost my shirt in a business, was drafted in the military, decided I liked it and lived through the poverty of the low ranks, worked my self up, invested in a home at every PCS, kept them rented them, retired over 25 years ago, got two graduate degrees, sold real estate to pass the time, invested in raw land that is now net leased to Burger King, sold all my real estate but the land, two rental homes and two mobile homes which I am giving to children for them to rent and get along better. There were tight times, there were flush times, but in every case, sticking my chin out helped me to recover. At almost 78 I am still active and doing quite well financially, not rich, but very comfortable. And I don't take crap off anyone.

 

Your math is incorrect.

BTW, I hope you realize that if people did what you suggest in your signature line, the real change would be, millions would be unemployed very soon.

 

Good for you, and you shouldn't take crap from anyone. Nor do I.

- - - Updated - - -

....and millions of fat cats going belly up too. WIN,WIN.

 

Capitalism is necessary for socialism to pay its welfare bills, in all economically sound countries it has a mixture of the two. For example Germany allows private enterprises to profit in its government welfare programs.

 

America's version of crapitalism has rerouted all the wealth to the very few, who hang out at the top tiers of life. The only "bills" that get paid are the champagne bills of the elite, compliments of the latest round of outsourcing, downsizing, and layoffs.

 

No, I'm making an observation. I know enough rich people, and enough ambitious, motivated, intelligent high achievers who aren't rich, to see the pattern.

"Behind every great fortune there is a great crime." -- Balzac

The larger the accumulation of wealth, the lower the probability that any significant fraction of it was earned by commensurate contributions to wealth production.

 

Is a business is organised according to socialist principles as in this scenario that business would be socialist, but at the same time it's in a capitalist system. Therefore we can draw the conclusion that socialism and capitalism isn't the polar opposites that they are usually portrayed as. If having a business run according to socialist principles is simply a lifestyle and not an economic system I don't know what is. Not all kinds of socialism require or want the state to act on behalf of the collective.

 

In most countries the economic model is fascism,,aka corporatism.

This is a system of private ownership but government control through regulation and taxation.

Government then distributes the work of some people to others in society who did not earn it.

 

what you are saying is rather musleading. corporatism and fascism isnt the same thing

 

I am not sure what you mean, now. Are you changing your position regarding socialism? Everybody already knows capitalism can be no form of government as we currently know it.

In any case, would you call the process or evolution of a firm being created through Statism, a form of Capitalism or a form of Socialism?

 

In the US, our federal Congress is supposed to be providing for the general welfare, which implies the general prosperity, which may require a positive multiplier effect on our economy.

Only the Right doesn't seem to know that.

 

100% agree, one of the best posts I have read on here in a long time.

 

I am going say something that nobody has said, I am quoting you for two reasons
1. It applies as a direct rebuttal
2. You seem intelligent and sensible to get it.

If you want to understand the rich and über rich, work for a business or own a business that has them as your customer. My father owned a small biz that did, I saw first hand how they treated him and those he employed. I could have walked into that business but after the years of seeing their behavior, there is not enough money in the world for me to deal with demanding, classless, entitled jerks who pay their bills when they feel like it all the while demanding first class service. Thar being said, there are some rich folks who are easy going and pay their bills without giving one a runaround.

 

I think America has a fairly good mix of capitalism and socialism. I don't think I would want to see us with 100% of either. Because we do have a duty to help those that can't help themselves. It would seem Liberals though are so stuck on what the rich has, they would like to see us go 100% socialism, where the government owns business and provides everyone their needs, like housing, health care, higher education etc. But that doesn't work. All that does is make everyone equally poor except those running the system. They pretend to pay you and you pretend to work and the country regresses.

 

No, the economic principle is the exact same, even if you don't understand the mechanics.

 

Capitalism is a system of stealing most of the value of people's labour, and socialism is political control by those exploited people. The state exists only to back the thieves, as we all know really.