Which makes you more of a monsterous hypocritical low life? I almost guarantee that whoever you personally are, you fit into one of these two terrible categories: 1. Socialists who benefit from capitalism. Most socialists complain that capitalism is, effectively, cronyism and hoarding and evil. Yet if it weren't for capitalism, most of their lives would not be remotely as convenient as it is today; it is true competition spurs innovation and gives incentives to be "productive", in the sense of giving others what they want or need. A socialist who makes their paycheck from a private company (which there are a couple I know of for sure in real life) is simply a hypocrite wanting to benefit themselves at the expense of what they think should apply to others. It's monsterous. 2. Capitalists who benefit from socialism. Most capitalists complain that socialism is, effectively, forced charity; theft. Yet many capitalists who believe that also benefit from socialist programs such as medicaid, subsidized education, and benefits for after retirement. I know of a guy who in the past at my college, mentioned numerous times that wealth redistribution to help the poor is theft and that capitalism is the most just economic system possible, yet he also accepted loans and even grants from the government to pay for his education; such money which is obviously, according to his very own ideals, stolen money that he should never have even considered accepting. A capitalist who benefits from any of the many socialist programs such as public roads, public schooling, food stamps, being paid by the military (which is of course funded by tax dollars), or in fact, a capitalist who even accepts payment for whatever goods/services they offer from someone who in turn is benefitting from a socialist program(s), is simply a hypocrite wanting to benefit from a program which they think shouldn't be offered to anyone, apparently, except for themselves, considering they're accepting such benefits. It's monsterous as well. The simple to present, but difficult to answer question is: who is the bigger monster?
Capitalists who benefit from socialism... Observe the bank bailouts. I really can't think of a worse leech than Wall Street.
Not much choice here. IMO its the low life ignorant fools who support the very ones that are screwing them and the USA over.
Personally, I flip a coin to decide which monster I'm going to be that day. Maybe I'm the biggest monster of them all!
I would go for the second option in the OP, but just what the heck is the option in the poll I have to vote for? Voted for option 2. Hope I'm right.
The person who assigns individuals binary labels and attributes a whole list of negative features to them on that basis alone. Socialism and capitalism aren't mutually exclusive except in hypothetical extremes and nobody in their right mind actually proposes either in extreme. All these apparent contradictions you perceive are just normal people getting on with their lives.
So there wouldn't have been a world wide economic collapse and depression had we not bailed out the banks? From what I understood it was either bail them or we die.
I would say that while I get your question, I think the implications are accurate. I would say you are implying that there are a lot of people who would be called "liberals" around here who you think call capitalism evil. So if that is a premise of your question, or at least an implication, you are wrong. Liberals do not think capitalism is evil at all, they just don't think it is perfect without some constraints. Right wingers will also constrain capitalism, with things like banning pollution from their drinking water. So unless right wingers also hate capitalism, debating about a few ways to harness capitalism is not the same as thinking it is evil. However, there is one right winger on here who was screaming about Obamacare and how awful it was, and then proclaimed it was not needed anyway because if you wanted free healthcare, just go to the clinic. Well his county provides free clinics, so he was getting free subsidized healthcare from others taxes while (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)ing about a few poor people getting free healthcare subsidized by others taxes. This is not a slight ideological dispute, but flagerant hypocrisy.
There isn't a single nation in the world that is purely socialist or capitalist. All have elements of another economic system. A pure socialist or capitalist nation could not function properly, at least not for long. So in your book, everyone is a hypocritical 'monster'.
IngridCold: "2. Capitalists who benefit from socialism. Most capitalists complain that socialism is, effectively, forced charity; theft. Yet many capitalists who believe that also benefit from socialist programs such as medicaid, subsidized education, and benefits for after retirement. I know of a guy who in the past at my college, mentioned numerous times that wealth redistribution to help the poor is theft and that capitalism is the most just economic system possible, yet he also accepted loans and even grants from the government to pay for his education; such money which is obviously, according to his very own ideals, stolen money that he should never have even considered accepting." I didn't vote because I thought the options were too superficial to be reasonable. That said, I'm old and I benefit from no "voluntary" government program. But, I would not feel hypocritical if I did. If a thug mugged me and as he ran off he dropped his wallet I wouldn't call to him and give his wallet back. Let's consider business bailouts. I would be totally oposed to them if business did not struggle under an incredible burden imposed by a government that hates business until it's time to stick their hand out. A company that wanted to run two modern ferries between Hawaiian Islands has just folded because they aren't allowed to start working until the seemingly neverending environmental impact study is done. Seriously, how much impact can two new ferries have in an ocean full of ships? To the government, that doesn't matter and neither does this or any other bankruptcy matter. Lastly, absolutely nothing involving the government is voluntary. Your best hope is benign neglect.
I'm not self-contradictory though; I flat out don't like humans period. They are by definition. Capitalists want everything from food to shelter to air to space being individually privately owned, and socialists want things being publicly owned.
The government and Big Oil are working hard together to make us dependent on oil. The government and big businesses often work together to hurt the majority in favor of themselves, whether anyone wants to admit that this suspicion is legitimate or not.
There would have been a depression, but bailing out the banks only postpones the depression - it doesn't eliminate its impending occurrence. The market has to eventually clear.
This is taken out of context a little. Us capitalists don't mind paying taxes if it is used wisely - if it is used as if we were to use it ourselves. Spending on things like excelling scholars, aid for schooling, roads, protection and foreign affairs is wise. Paying taxes when we know they will use it on loads of social programs to help people get in line for their "obama money" is wrong. You don't see lawyers or doctors in welfare lines.
I thought Obama actually largely reduced social programs, but other than that, I'd say there's only one thing I personally think taxation should be necessarily imposed on people for, and that is land occupation.
It's much cheaper to not pay taxes then settle on a percentage when the time comes. By rule of thumb, the more money wealthy people make they cease to pay taxes.
Oh, um well you largely thought wrong. There is this huge social program we didn't get to unfund that is generally known as "obama-care." Yeah we didn't get to unfund it yet because it became so unpopular, that the democrats knew they would lose their majority (and the bill to be unfunded by the people they lose the seats to), so they never passed the budget when they should have.
Only the stupid ones. Most capitalists want plenty of scope for private enterprise but recognise the need for a basic state structure while most socialists want a larger, centralised government but don't expect every single thing to be state owned.
Other than Obamacare, people's pensions after retirement, welfare etc. have definitely been reduced. I don't support forced insurance at all, btw.
I voted for option 2.. Because I want to support the military,schools..roads and bridges.. but NOT for roads to no where..airports in Murtha's back yard..and free stuff to non caring idiots who hate us...be it our own or other nations.
I've heard it said that Bankers were capitalists when it came to making money and socialists when it came to losing everything.
