Capitalism loses

Which economic policy for the 21st century will win out

  • Total voters
    15
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
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.

Click to expand...
and you wonder why you so often get responses like meltdown, manifesto, tldr, diatribe...

nobody is interested in a book report done by a third grader who didn't read the book
 
Harrekin

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
and you wonder why you so often get responses like meltdown, manifesto, tldr, diatribe...

nobody is interested in a book report done by a third grader who didn't read the book
Click to expand...
It's actually the two guys who likes your post who seem to be in a permanent state of slow meltdown.

Do lefties not have mirrors to look in?
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Harrekin said:
It's actually the two guys who likes your post who seem to be in a permanent state of slow meltdown.

Do lefties not have mirrors to look in?
Click to expand...
His post is accurate. Kynes hasn't actually read any of the works he criticizes and it's apparent to anyone who has. It's like fundamentalist who don't accept the theory of evolution, they ask questions like "where's the missing link?" and "if evolution were true, why are there still apes?". Someone who has read Darwin's work doesn't ask those questions because the answers are found inside the works themselves. Those that have read Darwin's work know this.. It shines a spotlight on ignorance. It's a "wait, what?" moment..

His posted butchering of Keynesian economics shows that

His posted butchering of communism, socialism, capitalism, anthropogenic climate change and all the way down to cars shows that..

If he spent half the time learning about these things rather than reading right wing blogs he already agrees with only to confirm his bias, he wouldn't post such butcherings online for people like abandon, buck, chesus and me to make fun of

He's pretty clearly a dude who has been caught up in the context of his generation and hasn't moved past it

There are a handful of other members who share similar characteristics. It's exacerbated by their anger and emotion, enough to the point I don't even think half of them actually smoke weed, they just joined RIU to bitch about politics with people they truly hate. Test it yourself, compare each others posts. Buck spits venom in similar fashion, but it's easy to see it's just a game with him, others, like Kynes and Muyloco actually have real animosity towards those they disagree with politically and it's very clear to read between the lines in their posts to see it. I give credit to NoDrama and ginwilly as it's also clear they don't. Some people take this place way too seriously, and I'm beginning to think you do as well.


I can't wait to skim past Kynes' book report about this post, I'm sure it'll be entertaining
 
Harrekin

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
His post is accurate. Kynes hasn't actually read any of the works he criticizes and it's apparent to anyone who has. It's like fundamentalist who don't accept the theory of evolution, they ask questions like "where's the missing link?" and "if evolution were true, why are there still apes?". Someone who has read Darwin's work doesn't ask those questions because the answers are found inside the works themselves. Those that have read Darwin's work know this.. It shines a spotlight on ignorance. It's a "wait, what?" moment..

His posted butchering of Keynesian economics shows that

His posted butchering of communism, socialism, capitalism, anthropogenic climate change and all the way down to cars shows that..

If he spent half the time learning about these things rather than reading right wing blogs he already agrees with only to confirm his bias, he wouldn't post such butcherings online for people like abandon, buck, chesus and me to make fun of

He's pretty clearly a dude who has been caught up in the context of his generation and hasn't moved past it

There are a handful of other members who share similar characteristics. It's exacerbated by their anger and emotion, enough to the point I don't even think half of them actually smoke weed, they just joined RIU to bitch about politics with people they truly hate. Test it yourself, compare each others posts. Buck spits venom in similar fashion, but it's easy to see it's just a game with him, others, like Kynes and Muyloco actually have real animosity towards those they disagree with politically and it's very clear to read between the lines in their posts to see it. I give credit to NoDrama and ginwilly as it's also clear they don't. Some people take this place way too seriously, and I'm beginning to think you do as well.

I can't wait to skim past Kynes' book report about this post, I'm sure it'll be entertaining
Click to expand...
tl;dr

Cool post tho!
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
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.

Click to expand...
That's just it- I'm not here for a fight.

I think we have a serious problem with our country's socioeconomic and politic situation, and it needs solutions, not six page refutations to theoretical questions.

And as for the shouting down thing... 'brevity'. Fewer words carry far more weight.
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
That's just it- I'm not here for a fight.

I think we have a serious problem with our country's socioeconomic and politic situation, and it needs solutions, not six page refutations to theoretical questions.

And as for the shouting down thing... 'brevity'. Fewer words carry far more weight.
Click to expand...
dis·cus·sion
dəˈskəSH(ə)n/
noun
noun: discussion
the action or process of talking about something, typically in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas.

if you cant make an argument, dont join a discussion.

you might as well call your congressman and shout "Ba Ba Booey!" into the phone and expect him to get right on that, in the next legislative session.

state a position, explain why you hold that position, then respond to the responses.

if you cant stand having your opinions challenged, keep them to yourself.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
That's just it- I'm not here for a fight.

I think we have a serious problem with our country's socioeconomic and politic situation, and it needs solutions, not six page refutations to theoretical questions.

And as for the shouting down thing... 'brevity'. Fewer words carry far more weight.
Click to expand...
He thinks socioeconomic stratification is a myth.
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
He thinks socioeconomic stratification is a myth.
Click to expand...
another glorious chapter from the book Shit Nobody Ever Said, by Abandonconflict

"A Gripping Work Of Fiction That Really Makes You Think" ~Weekly World News
"A Tour De Force from a compelling young author" ~the crazy homeless guy who pisses in your garbage can every week
"It's hot! it's like something I might have written, only slightly dumber" ~Paris Hilton
"I couldnt have written a more pointless book if i tried"~Noam Chomsky
"I'm literally turning over in my grave!"~ George Orwell
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
dis·cus·sion
dəˈskəSH(ə)n/
noun
noun: discussion
the action or process of talking about something, typically in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas.

if you cant make an argument, dont join a discussion.

you might as well call your congressman and shout "Ba Ba Booey!" into the phone and expect him to get right on that, in the next legislative session.

state a position, explain why you hold that position, then respond to the responses.

if you cant stand having your opinions challenged, keep them to yourself.
Click to expand...
No.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
another glorious chapter from the book Shit Nobody Ever Said, by Abandonconflict

"A Gripping Work Of Fiction That Really Makes You Think" ~Weekly World News
"A Tour De Force from a compelling young author" ~the crazy homeless guy who pisses in your garbage can every week
"It's hot! it's like something I might have written, only slightly dumber" ~Paris Hilton
"I couldnt have written a more pointless book if i tried"~Noam Chomsky
"I'm literally turning over in my grave!"~ George Orwell
Click to expand...
Funny you quote all these people, as if you have ever read anything any of them wrote. You do have a habit of claiming to have read books you never did though as we all know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top