Capitalism vs Socialism ~ MOD ALERT ~

Two of my children worked at Walmart at the beginning of their adult work life. One worked as a cashier while getting her degree. The other worked as a floor manager after he had been there about a year and he then became eligible for medical care and the profit sharing plan which was the purchase of stock with $1 given by the store to every $1 invested in stock options.

 

You can go on believing that if you want to, but "freedom" and "a system of objective laws" are contradictions in terms.

 

Freedom is relative. To maintain freedom in a society Objective laws must be created to protect the rights of the larger proportion of the population without creating a tyranny of the majority.

Objective Law as the Rule of Law http://business.clemson.edu/BBTCENTER/cci/capres/objectivelaw.html

The government in a capitalist system embodies the rule of law, not the rule of men. This means that the government must operate in accordance with objective laws.​

 

Bain Capital. The "outsourcing leaders". If you find nothing wrong with outsourcing, then, we have nothing else to discuss here.

 

I believe that out sourcing and off shoring have tended to increase prosperity in the US and the following study bears me out. Even other studies which determine that wages in the affected job types only decreased by 2.9%, not really a significant reduction.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/07/12/study-offshoring-creates-as-many-u-s-jobs-as-it-kills/

 

Going to a fish fry. BBL

 

Tell that to Marc Emery.

 

After I read this forum I decided not to join in the discussion because the same two geoists are destroying this discussion as did in the income inequality thread.

 

Both murder millions. Capitalism just does it slower and less obtrusively.

The problem is that right-wing apologists for privilege think "better than socialism" means "better than any possible system."

 

But somehow, recovery of publicly created value for public purposes and benefit does socialism make...?

ROTFL!! This, from the guy who reads "socialism" into the government revenue system that laissez-faire capitalist icon Milton Friedman called, "the least bad tax," and that many champions of liberty -- including David Nolan, founder of the US Libertarian Party, Winston Churchill, and many great economic thinkers -- have advocated.

Risible.

 

You know that is false. I have proved you objectively wrong, comprehensively and conclusively, on every single substantive claim you have made. Most of your tripe has been not only wrong but self-evidently absurd.

So when you claimed that LVT was socialism, you knew that claim was false. Check.

Refusing to know the fact that I have proved you wrong multiple times cannot alter that fact.

So now, just identifying absurdity, greed, dishonesty and evil as such is somehow "vulgarity"?

You have yet to identify a relevant fact, let alone one that proved me wrong.

I don't think proving erroneous claims false disrupts threads -- unless the thread is intended as a mere exercise in propaganda.

Crying to the mods to protect you against identification of the relevant facts again, eh, Smith?

 

Socialism is a requirement for States and statism to exist. It must be so due to the nature of the Social Contract involved since it is not a Capital Contract that creates States or Statism.

 

The subject of LVT was introduced into this thread by the OP, in post #46. Apparently, when geoists correct the objectively false claims of anti-geoists regarding LVT, that's called, "destroying the discussion." I suppose that's true if the purpose of the "discussion" is to provide an excuse for anti-geoists to tell each other the stupid, absurd, and dishonest fabrications they use to prevent themselves from knowing the facts that prove their beliefs are false and evil.

 

That is a belief you made up: i.e., a fabrication on your part. There is definitely private ownership of real estate in Hong Kong, and no one here has said otherwise. Just not of land. Real estate is defined as land and fixed improvements thereto. There is lots of private ownership of improvements in HK.

Your source has evidently mistaken long-term leasehold tenure for ownership. It is well known and not controversial that all land in HK is publicly owned, and has been for over 160 years.

Which is also a claim that you made up. HK has public ownership of land with leasehold tenure, not LVT. This is well known and not controversial. It is merely not known to you, because you do not know any relevant facts.

 

I read socialism into publicly owned land, just like the dictionary definition does. I believe first that landowners paid the taxes to create the infrastructure and continue to pay taxes justifying a continuing use of that infrastructure and that landowners are no more parasites than non-landowners. I also believe the most fair tax system of all is a progressive personal income tax system.

 

You have made many claims. You have proved absolutely nothing.

I claim publicly owned land is part of socialism, and I am correct.

You have made many claims, you have never proved ANYONE was wrong.

You have not identified anything but your self as absurd, and your means of calling everyone who owns land is vulgar.

You have proved yourself wrong. I don't have to do anything.

This is not a thread about LVT.

I don't have to cry to the mods. I noticed someone else stated it very clearly. What I will do, is watch you cut your own throat with your vulgar off topic posts. It is very obvious that you have stalked me in every thread I have been in. I suspect the mods will notice it . Do you plan on ruining this thread too?

 

You had the link in your response. Read it, you will learn something.

Nothing like the government web site to set things straight. The long term lease-hold is very little different than free hold and both can be ended with government condemnation by eminent domain. http://www.deacons.com.hk/eng/knowle...owledge_60.htm(B) Search of Land Records Land records are maintained by the Land Registry primarily for the purpose of facilitating property transactions. In every land transaction, it is important to ascertain who is the registered owner of the property in question and what incumbrances, if any, are registered against it. The required information can be obtained by conducting land search."]http://www.landreg.gov.hk/en/services/services_b.htm (B) Search of Land Records Land records are maintained by the Land Registry primarily for the purpose of facilitating property transactions. In every land transaction, it is important to ascertain who is the registered owner of the property in question and what incumbrances, if any, are registered against it. The required information can be obtained by conducting land search.

You may also note that Hong Kong does not use LVT as its basic tax system. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/canada-competes/hong-kongs-simple-low-taxes-dont-we-all-want-it/article13393877/

Those are startling figures – and they don’t even take into account that the former British colony – since 1997 a special administrative region (SAR) of China – has no goods and services tax, harmonized sales tax or value added tax.

Mr. Iliffe previously worked in Hong Kong from 1986 to 1991, and returned in 2011 after 12 years in Ottawa. He believes the SAR’s simple, flat, low-tax regime is the foundation of its renowned economic dynamism.

“Hong Kong keeps it very simple. There’s no capital gains tax, there’s no dividend tax, there’s no tax on interest, and you are only taxed on income earned in Hong Kong – not overseas. The system here makes people more entrepreneurial. Maximum personal tax is 15 per cent, but there are lots of allowances to get it lower, and corporate tax is set at 16.5 per cent –

“You need to be able to make a profit before you pay tax, so the entrepreneurial culture is not driven by tax alone.”

 

You're the one who's stalking, literally. And you can't resist replying in other threads and you even started your own thread on it from which you bailed without offering any rebuttals, meaning it was obviously just bait. And now you were the first one to randomly bring it up in this thread, as Roy pointed out (It's not off topic anyways as landowning is the major flaw of capitalism). It must bother you a lot with how much ease all your claims are refuted. You're a comedy gold mine.

 

See corrected link code above.http://www.landreg.gov.hk/en/services/services_b.htm

 

Roy is right. There is no private landowning in Hong Kong.

Next...

 

I opened a new thread about Capitalism vs Socialism. Then you two came in. I stalked no one.

Nope! It was beating my head against two brick walls.

You have made many claims, you have refuted nothing, and you have proved nothing.

- - - Updated - - -

Yet the land registry talks of it as "ownership." Cut and pasted from the HK land registry, "Land records are maintained by the Land Registry primarily for the purpose of facilitating property transactions. In every land transaction, it is important to ascertain who is the registered owner of the property in question and what incumbrances, if any, are registered against it. The required information can be obtained by conducting land search."

If you try real hard you may be able to explain the difference between the historically renewable long term lease-hold which a person owns and free-hold in which the government protects the holder except in cases of eminent domain.

 

But in fact, as you know, it doesn't. Your claim is logically equivalent to an equally false, stupid and dishonest claim that because the dictionary defines, "gunpowder" as consisting of saltpeter, sulfur and charcoal, each of those ingredients is also individually gunpowder. Such a claim is of course not only false and absurd, but stupid and dishonest. Like all your claims about LVT. One component is not the whole. You know this. Of course you do. You could with equal "logic" and "honesty" claim that oil is soap because it is one component of soap.

But that is false, and you know it. The taxes came from many sources, land tax almost always being a minor one, and the value of land simply measures how much more welfare subsidy the landowner is to be given than the taxes he is to pay.

LOL! So, what do you incorrectly and dishonestly claim everyone else's taxes are being spent on, hmmmmmm?

It is indisputable that landowners qua landowners are parasites: they take but do not contribute, as already proved. That is why you cannot answer The Question:

"How, exactly, is production aided by the landowner's demand that the producer pay HIM for what government, the community and nature provide?"

But like your other beliefs, you believe that even though you know all the relevant facts prove it is false.

 

Your misunderstandings are your problem.

"Virtually all land in Hong Kong is leased or otherwise held from the Government of the HKSAR."

http://www.landsd.gov.hk/en/service/landpolicy.htm

Next...

 

Roy your argument remains little more than that property taxes are too low and possibly that the federal government as well as the state, local, and county governments should benefit from it.

 

Wrong, from top to bottom. The most grievous error is that the government provides the infrastructure, when it is the landowner who pays the taxes to create the infrastructure.