Capitalism loses

[ginwilly]

And you read exactly zero pages of them.

Why do you have a cult leader and a fraud as your sig?
http://molyneux-cult-watch.blogspot.com/

 

[mr lovah]

in a land where:

private banks determine interest rates

private prisons house our non-violent criminals

large corporations pay a lower tax rate than any single working individual

elections are determined by $1 billion+ campaigns

the gateway to entrepreneurship is masked in red tape (licensing, permitting, insuring, etc)



you have something that in NO WAY RESEMBLES CAPITALISM. And to say it's socialism is bullshit too



Call it what it is- state + corporate power = FASCISM

 

[sheskunk]

The idea that you have done something successfully for the first time ever on this website is giving you delusions of grandeur but sadly, all you did was copy/paste half a wikipedia page that you didn't even read.

And you haven't stopped crying about it since.

 

[abandonconflict]

Why do you have a cult leader and a fraud as your sig?

Just to please you sweetheart.

 

[ginwilly]

Just to please you sweetheart.

Thanks hon, but you have strange heroes.

Seriously, do you realize what scum he is? By UB's standard, you support cults, fraud and theft just by quoting the man.

 

[abandonconflict]

Thanks hon, but you have strange heroes.

Seriously, do you realize what scum he is? By UB's standard, you support cults, fraud and theft just by quoting the man.

Thanks

 

[ginwilly]

Thanks

Any time man.

Figured you didn't know what a phony psycho he was or you wouldn't use his quote as a signature.

 

[abandonconflict]

Any time man.

Figured you didn't know what a phony psycho he was or you wouldn't use his quote as a signature.

I'm glad you like it.

 

[abandonconflict]

Okay, so Marxism was more of a rambling justification of dictatorship. Capitalism without checks and balances is equally destructive. Why does it have to be a 'pure' system? Some goods aren't really amenable to distribution by a capitalist model, like health care. No one goes shopping for the best hospital care in the state when they've broken their arm; they just call an ambulance.

I'm of the opinion that 'libertarianism' as espoused by the John Birch society is socially destructive, as it would lead us straight to classism.

I think that our nation should place a heavier tax burden on those who make vast sums, and any contrary suggestion reflects simple greed and selfishness. A fifty percent tax on ALL income earned in excess of the first million every year would go a long way to redressing the imbalance that has steadily grown wider since the Reagan administration.

I would eliminate taxation inequality based on the source of the income; all income would be taxed the same whether it's capital gains or day labor.

Taxes earned on income between zero and the first million would be progressive. Everyone gets their first twenty grand tax free, zillionaires too.

So you're a liberal...

 

[ttystikk]

So you're a liberal...

I am more than a label. Some liberal ideas make sense to me, others don't. Same with conservative ideas. The problem isn't so much the ideas, it's how they're manipulated on the way to the polling booth that screws things up!

I think that Birchian philosophy is childish, greedy, selfish and destructive to society as a whole. That alone doesn't make me any more liberal than commenting on how badly it will hurt if one jumps off a cliff.

 

[Dr Kynes]

And you read exactly zero pages of them.

you and Toby sure are experts on what other people have and have not read.

i might think maybe you two work for the NSA, if i thought either of you knew what work was.

 

[abandonconflict]

you and Toby sure are experts on what other people have and have not read.

i might think maybe you two work for the NSA, if i thought either of you knew what work was.

No kkkynes, this may come as a shock to you, but if you just read the books instead of swearing you did and quote mining and copy/pasting wikipedia, you might actually gain an understanding of what the guy was saying. Then you can really criticize him instead of looking like a complete moron.

 

[Padawanbater2]

you and Toby sure are experts on what other people have and have not read.

i might think maybe you two work for the NSA, if i thought either of you knew what work was.

You expose yourself every time you comment on something it's blatantly obvious you're ignorant of. The list so far is socialism, communism, marxism, climate change, Keynesian economics, supply side economics, economics in general, racism, politics, science, religion, morality, ethics, cars, education and affordable medical care

Instead of taking the time to actually learn about these things, you read right wing blogs that confirm your bias and regurgitate all of that unwelcome, tired information here

 

[Dr Kynes]

Okay, so Marxism was more of a rambling justification of dictatorship..

no. marxism was a wooly headed utopian daydream with no functionality, and no utility as a "philosophy". it's vagueness on issues, it's absolute insistence of authority on ethical and moral rightness, the huge idiot appeal of it's message promising a grand paradise if you follow it's teachings and needlessly florid prose made it an excellent tool for some assholes who really want to be dictators, but dont want to have to share their authority with a church, as previous dictators were forced to.

Capitalism without checks and balances is equally destructive..

"checks and Balances is a slogan pertaining to the american political system, NOT economics. economic systems are controlled by regulation. economic systems controlled by "checks and balances" from government would be Socialist systems.

Why does it have to be a 'pure' system?.

you would prefer a corrupt system? what makes you feel good isnt always the best choice. your PERSONAL preferences are not whats best for the entire country, and you cant always get what you think is "fair" thats why republics work, but democracies fail

Some goods aren't really amenable to distribution by a capitalist model, like health care. .

"healthcare is not a "good" to be "delivered" thats just madison avenue sales bullshit. "healthcare" is a SERVICE performed by people, highly trained people, who paid for that training, and worked their asses off, they got college loans to pay.
you FEEL that medical treatment is a "right", but the doctor who might treat you is not State Property, he is a free man, who's labour is his own. you cannot demand he give you anything for free, nor have you the right to insist he not charge more than a preset limit.

No one goes shopping for the best hospital care in the state when they've broken their arm; they just call an ambulance..

thats true.
but emergency care is not the issue.
it took me 4 weeks to finally get my MRI Scan, and my insurance company was charged like $4000 for it. if i had to pay for it myself, i would have shopped around (turns out i could have gotten it sooner and for ~$300 from a local clinic) why did my insurance company pay ~$4000 for a service i could have gotten sooner and for 1/16 the price? cuz the insurance company is a Deep Pocket and Deep Pockets are made to be picked.

I'm of the opinion that 'libertarianism' as espoused by the John Birch society is socially destructive, as it would lead us straight to classism.

and we dont have "classism" now? listen to any politician's speech, from either side of the aisle. odds are pretty good he will invoke "The Middle Class", and if he is a lefty he wil probably bring up "The 1%" or some such twaddle. "classes" exist only in opposition to other "classes" so we already have "classism".
the lefty schemes will result in a Caste system if they continue on their current course.

I think that our nation should place a heavier tax burden on those who make vast sums, .

yes. it already does. whats 30% of $300k? now whats 30% of $4 million? wow. thats a much bigger number. hoiw "heavy" should the tax burden be? if you listen to some of the crazier lefties, 80-90%. which is effectively a Maximum Allowed Wealth Cap, not a tax. taxes are for gaining revenue, not punishing those who are successful, thats part of the constitution, lefties only care about the constitution when they can use it as a bludgeon though, so fuck that shit. lets talk reality.

would you work 40 hours at your regular wage, then take on 10 hours of overtime if that oivertime was gonna be taxed at 90%, meaning you only get paid a couple cents instead of a couple bucks? fuck no you wouldnt. the cost benefit ratio is too low. in the same way, when you drop usury tax burdens on anyone who makes more than X, X becomes the Maximum Wage. nice job, you just killed capitalism.

and any contrary suggestion reflects simple greed and selfishness..

and thats why lefties cant debate, they lay out their Feels Based Position, and any disagreement is heresy.

A fifty percent tax on ALL income earned in excess of the first million every year would go a long way to redressing the imbalance that has steadily grown wider since the Reagan administration..

nope. it would simply result in new and clever ways to get paid without paying the usury tax.

I would eliminate taxation inequality based on the source of the income; all income would be taxed the same whether it's capital gains or day labor..

and youll need billions of tax assessors peeking in through everybody's window to ensure theres no black market bartering goin on... good one Stalin.

Taxes earned on income between zero and the first million would be progressive. .

you mean discriminatory...

Everyone gets their first twenty grand tax free, zillionaires too.

ooo twenty grand for free. yay. obviously you have never made more than $20k.

 

[abandonconflict]

I am more than a label. Some liberal ideas make sense to me, others don't. Same with conservative ideas. The problem isn't so much the ideas, it's how they're manipulated on the way to the polling booth that screws things up!

I think that Birchian philosophy is childish, greedy, selfish and destructive to society as a whole. That alone doesn't make me any more liberal than commenting on how badly it will hurt if one jumps off a cliff.

It wasn't any kind of jab. I observed that you seem to opine that "capitalism can be made to work".

Are you familiar with Noam Chomsky?

 

[abandonconflict]

 

[ttystikk]

It wasn't any kind of jab. I observed that you seem to opine that "capitalism can be made to work".

Are you familiar with Noam Chomsky?

Just by name.

 

[ttystikk]

@Dr Kynes that was an obviously well crafted and carefully versed response. Its length is breathtaking in its own right. I feel many of my statements were taken in ways not meant. On other points we're pretty much in agreement. By pure I meant purely capitalist vs purely socialist. Of course the system as it currently operates is stunningly corrupt, I'm just trying to find ways to remove abusive power from those who have taken it from the American People- no matter what the excuse. In any case, I'm already feeling a bit shouted down, so I'll let you have the floor.

 

[desert dude]

Capitalism, baby.

 

[Dr Kynes]

@Dr Kynes that was an obviously well crafted and carefully versed response. Its length is breathtaking in its own right. I feel many of my statements were taken in ways not meant. On other points we're pretty much in agreement. By pure I meant purely capitalist vs purely socialist. Of course the system as it currently operates is stunningly corrupt, I'm just trying to find ways to remove abusive power from those who have taken it from the American People- no matter what the excuse. In any case, I'm already feeling a bit shouted down, so I'll let you have the floor.

if you read my previous posts on any subject you care to examine, you will see no "shouting down".

i responded to your arguments AS MADE if you feel i misconstrued your arguments, then by all means feel free to clarify.

capitalism is best when regulated lightly, with most of the restraints coming from market forces, not politicians with agendas.
as regulation increases, capitalism becomes less capitalist, and more a government controlled market, which allows those in power to choose who wins and who loses based on their preference rather than the competitive environment.

"Pure Capitalism" has happened in the past, and yes, without a little regulation it becomes a mess. government should ensure that weights and measures are accurate and standardized, contracts are fulfilled in the least burdensome manner, always favouring the less powerful party to the contract when ambiguity is present, ensuring that regulations are applied evenly and without prejudice, and prosecuting fraud. if government kept it's nose out of the business of the people, the people would be more prosperous and happier. Note: Corporations are NOT people, and should be much more strictly regulated than persons or associations of persons, in fact corporations should be far more strictly limited in their power and scope than they are now, which i have stated before.

"Pure Socialism" has never existed, since socialism is a political and economic theory that must be implemented among people, and people are impure by their nature.
when given the extraordinary power over people and the economy Socialism provides, the resulting oppressive dictatorships are not only expected, but are in fact part of the plan.
"Socialism" can never be "Pure" because it was defined so loosely that any dickhead can claim his version is "Pure" and be just as correct as his mortal enemy who makes the same claim of "Purity".
Marxism (and it's subset Socialism) is not a philosophy. it does not exist in itself, it only presents as opposition to something else, and thus has no epistemological basis.

Marxism is at best, a hypothesis and at worst, a notion.

you will note i have taken a stand, ans at no time did i declare that disagreement is a sign of evil, stupidity or wrongness.

if you can make a case that Marxism fulfills the criteria for a Philosophy (beyond being called such), and i cannot refute your assertions then i will accept your conclusion.

the criteria to be an actual philosophy are a consistent and logical synthesis of:
Metaphysics
Epistemology
Ethics
Politics
Aesthetics.

in my opinion, Marx lacks all of it except politics


likewise if you can make a sufficiently solid argument for a "mixed economy" then i will consider your opinion, even if i disagree.

at no point shall i "shout you down" by endlessly posting memes (just a few, and only for teh lulz) or propaganda posters, nor shall i repeat the same trite slogans and specious non-questions over and over till you get bored, give up or put me on ignore.

thats the other side's move.

i may infuriate you, you may become severely butthurt, and you may even feel the need to call me names, but in the end, that shit is funny.