How Do You Think Unregulated Capitalism Would Turn Out?

Walmart is one of the crappiest companies out there. I can't think of a good thing to say about them.

 

Indeed but its easier for many consumers, while at the same time representing a public hazard borne through the death of the urban centres. It encourages a misguided public planning policy leading to an America that becomes on endless suburb. Europe too, but they have taken large steps to avoid such pitfalls and are all the better for it.

 

So you are ok with chemical manufacturer's dumping toxic waste into the rivers, aquifers, and streams that people depend on for drinking water? You are ok with those same corporations dumping toxic gasses into the atmosphere that will poison your children? So you are opposed to sensible regulations that require employers to offer their workers reasonably safe working conditions. So you are opposed regulations which try to prevent food processors from putting tainted food on the market? Or safe and effective medicines? You oppose regulations which require financial institutions from manipulating markets for their own benefit? From cheating their customers?

What a lovely world you want to live in.

 

Then all you will be left with is the very wealthy and the very poor. This has been the state of things throughout history, except for a short period from about 1950 through today, when the majority of people in the West have been what is described as middle class with a real stake in society. However the policies advocated by the political and economic right has caused that middle class to begin to deteriorate. The simple fact is that in the U.S. while the upper class has seen it's income increase by a factor of several hundred percent, the bottom 90% has seen it's income rise (adjusted for inflation) just $59 dollars since 1980.

 

Way to ignore the fact that in America those percentages are not the same people every time you take a census. In America, we have no set classes as in more Socialist countries where you need a certain specific demographic to stay in the worker class in order to produce revenue that fat-cat government types can re-distribute to the folks that always support them.

 

What does that even mean, unregulated capitalism? Is there such a thing? No more land ownership? No more patents? No more copyrights? Surely capitalists wouldn't want to get rid of those. It would cease to be capitalism if we got rid of private landownership. Well, I guess they could start making their own regulations for whatever areas they control. Some kind of backwards feudalist utopia.

 

You make it sound as though the rich can ever be more than a minority. There is a set demographic. You cannot have many rich. You can have more rich and thus more poor.

 

You misunderstand....In America one doesn't have to be in a 'set demographic' their whole life....As per the EVIDENCE I provided. In a forced altruistic society, a government entity has to make sure individuals stay at their particular level of society.

 

I think that laissez-faire capitalism could help stop monopolies. And I understand that a laissez-faire system still protects peoples' rights to help prevent human rights violations, theft, etc. But, what I don't understand is how the government would stop companies from, for example, dumping toxic waste into drinking water supplies? I can see how private companies, such as Underwriters Lab and Consumer Reports could help address things like mislabeled food and drugs, but how would we forcibly stop companies from dumping toxic waste, as provided in the example? This isn't a rhetorical question, I really want to know. I think the system could work, but I want to cover every exploitation that could be made.

 

People are useful or they are harmful. I have no qualms with the harmful being penalized, they are called criminals.

 

It is unavoidable that monied interests will eventually corrupt a state. That is the nature of the worst power- & wealth-seekers of our species. They invade both sides and instigate all sorts of corruption. It's like the systemic anomaly in the Matrix movies - it cannot be avoided. All we can do is try to be prepared for the eventuality, which is likely to take the form of revolution, collapse, rebuilding..

 

Capitalism is the only economic system that can lead to a nations greatness, Having said that, the inherent danger in Capitalism is the possible creation of a monopoly that acts to defeat competition. Government oversight is needed to avoid such a possibility. As with everything else the Government does, however, the likelihood they'll make things worse with the oversight is HIGH.

 

"One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation"

~ Thomas Reed

 

Buddy, historically speaking the USSR was a good thing for Russia. Quality of life rose dramatically over the days of semi-feudalism where people were starving on the street.

The collapse of the USSR was a horrible thing, shame on anyone who pretends it was a good thing. Life expectancy dropped by DECADES - it hasn't recovered to Soviet levels since. Now there is poverty, unemployment and the Rusian mafia.

What did Russia gain from the collapse of the USSR? Political freedom? There is less political freedom under Putin than there was under the USSR. I find your attitude disgusting.

 

I better not comment. I just finished watching Jamie Johnson's (of Johnson and Johnson family fame) classic 2006(!) documentary, "The One Percent". That was one helluva balzy documentary!

 

Oh. So then you're COMPLETELY delusional. Your chances of hitting the lottery are much greater than of doing that.

 

It's not really his attitude but rather his knowledge level. Conservatives are clueless about our own history. We can't expect them to know about anyone else's. You have to remember they've been exposed to a LOT of propaganda. And they don't even realize THAT!

 

And I find your acceptance of a brutal, all-controlling authoritarian government disgusting, so how 'bout shame on YOU?

 

Screw off, I don't support any damn authoritarian regimes.

You are unimaginably ignorant when it comes to history. My point is that while being authoritarian the USSR provided a good standard of living, while in comparison Putin's Russia does not. Pointing out the obvious, that an authoritarian regime with a good standard of living is better than an authoritarian regime with a low standard of living, does not mean that I support authoritarian regimes.

You are blind to the suffering of Russians under Tzarism, Stalinism and modern capitalism. You cannot appreciate their suffering when you maintain your cartoonish view where America and capitalism represent all that is good.

 

If the Soviet Union had succeeded in being all-controlling it would neither have collapsed nor degraded into poverty. But alas, it could not code for enthusiasm amidst corruption.

 

I don't care what the standard of living is, I'd rather be a poor free man than a well-off puppet of the Politburo. And how am I blind to the suffering of Russians under Stalin? You're talking like Stalin wasn't the dictator of the USSR. Tzarism sucked too, and capitalism in the late 19th century abused people - none of that justifies the Soviet Union.

 

Eventually, there would be only one corporation, and before too long all the shares in that corporation would be snapped up by one individual who would control ALL the means of production - if he felt like producing anything at all.

 

It your logic organ failing? You think the collapse of the Soviet Union was good because it was the end of an authoritarian regime, even when an even worse, more brutal regime took it's place? People lived better in the Soviet Union, and they didn't get bombed by their own government.

Why do you support Putin's Russia over the USSR? Supporting a more brutal authoritarian regime over a less brutal one doesn't make you a champion of freedom, it makes you an even more dedicated supporter of authoritarianism than the Stalinists!

 

Putin is a scumbag, but at least he doesn't execute people for looking at him funny and spy on everyone with his secret police.

 

Believe it or not, getting filthy-rich is not a prerequisite for happiness. Instead of getting jealous over people with more money than you, you'd do much better to concentrate on making an avocation your vocation.