Anti Capitalism

Capitalism....it has its critics and supporters. What is it? Many people often confuse capitalism with markets, this is an incorrect assumption.

Example A: I build a store and sell groceries, and make a decent profit, enough to live a decent life. This is NOT capitalism, but trade.
Example B: I am on the Board of Directors and will use my decision making power in the interest of major share holders, often at the expense of thousands and thousands of employees that use their labor to create what we well. This IS capitalism.

Critics of this system are calling attention to the ORGANIZATION of production, not the idea of making profits or buying and selling.

Many people do not realize this, so I felt it necessary to post this. The solution? Many people have many different ideas of varying success (and I have my strong opinions about what should come next), whether it's simple reform, political solutions aka democracy, unions, socialism, communism, anarchism, theocracy, etc. The one thing that brings all these together? A critique of capitalism, an understanding of this system not working for the majority of its people, and wanting to move to something better.

Monarchy -------> Feudalism ----------> Slavery ------------> Capitalism -------------> ????????

The above is the historical timeline of economic systems. I am looking forward to see what comes next, because clearly, capitalism is on its way out (especially if you live in the west).

 

No, it's Capitalism, since you acquired the cash Capital to build a store, and the store itself is Capital, which is owned by you and not government or any other agent of Socialism which owns or controls Capital.

That is not Capitalism, but it is Business Management.

The reason people purchase stocks, is to increase their Wealth, providing some measure of financial security in the Future (through the liquidation of the stocks). Thus, the majority of stock purchasers only buy stocks from those publicly traded corporations (which represent 3% of all businesses in the US) which maximize their profits. In order for publicly traded corporations to maximize their profits. it is often necessary to cut costs by seeking cheaper labor in overseas Markets.

Ndela in Sierra Leone makes the minimum wage of $0.03/hour. Fortunately for you, her country is still developing its 1st Level Economy. The good news is that wages generally double in developing- and emerging-States every 10 years, so that by the time Sierra Leone enters its 2nd Level Economy (which is manufacturing) Ndela will be making good wages between $0.60/hour to $1/hour.

Wanna explain how American workers are going to compete against her?

 

Example A: I and my neighbors build a store and sell groceries, and make a decent profit, enough to live a decent life. This is NOT socialism, but trade.
Example B: I am a political leader and use my decision making power in the interest of my political party, often at the expense of thousands and thousands of civilians that use their labor to create what we well. This IS socialism.

 

The interest of the major share holders is to make the most profit. Profit is how employees get paid. The beauty of the free market and capitalism is that employees are not tied (by government) to the free enterprise they work for and, when a company does not allow enough profit to be continually viable, the employee is free to leave.

 

What's your theory of anti-capitalist wealth creation?

 

Capitalism is private ownership. The market is where you buy and sell these privately owned goods and services. The means of production can be capitalism, as in having a robot that can make widgets. The robot can be your property, as can the products your robot produces.

What communists don't like is when the owners offer to pay people to participate in that process of production. The obvious solution to anybody with a brain is to refuse the job offer. For a communist, they believe that the means of production should not be owned by private individuals. This means of production also includes services that people can do, which is one of the reasons that communists are evil. They refuse to acknowledge private ownership of our very bodies, as well as the things we make with our own bodies.

 

Offer to work for less?

 

People are confused because it's a fairly new term coined by Marx in 1872. Prior to that, we have capitalist which comes to us from those cake eating peasants of the French revolution which means 'man of money'. So right away, you've got a problem because Marx's usage of 'ism' assumes there is some sort of political/economic system that those capitalists employ. In other words, he took those men of money and said that it's political, when in reality, a capitalist is just some guy who has something of value to others. Both the peasants and Marx viewed capitalists/capitalism/ in a negative light, whereas capitalists probably look quite favorably upon the wealth they have accrued over the years.

In other words, it's confusing to people because communists need to obfuscate the meaning in order to attach a negative connotation to something that is naturally seen as a good thing. It's old school PC nonsense.

Yes, that's the market, however, it helps to have groceries to sell. Who owns those groceries? If it's the collective, then it's a form of communist distribution, I guess. If it's the shop keeper, it's capitalism + the market.

How are those thousand and thousands of employees involved? They've been paid for their labor, so they're out of the capitalist loop as far as the decision making process goes. All they need to know is that they get paid for their labor.

That's a very well-made point. It's not the profits which communists hate, but rather how those profits are made.

So long as all those people with different ideas understand that one man's money is not their money, and that nobody cares what they think the solution might be, then have fun dreaming up solutions to a problem that is not a problem. Let the capitalists figure out what they do with their own wealth, and let the communists figure out what they want to do. So long as everybody realizes that private property is private property and communal property is communal property, then no problems.

How was the feudal system of Europe during the middle ages not all of those? The king owned the land, who used the feudal system to allocate land to various earls/lords who returned the favor by providing military strength to the king, and those lords would control the population within their earldoms. The serfs within an earldom were assigned land to work, who had to work a certain amount of time for their lord. It's basically a limited form of slavery. A serf can't decide to wander off somewhere or refuse to work the land he's been assigned. Peasants had the freedom to travel around and starve or prosper, although everybody had to pay their taxes.

How does that not embody all of those "economic systems"?

 

Get back to me when N'dela learns to program a CNC lathe...

 

What comes next? According to Marx:
1. Fascism - government control of business and capital. Eases the transition to Socialism.
2. Socialism - government ownership of business and capital. Eases the transition to Communism.
3. Communism - collective ownership of business and capital.

Capitalism is *not* on its way out. The Marxist Democrats thought it was when Obama instituted so much Fascism here in America.

Trump has quashed that. Capital still rules when it comes to creating jobs. That is *never* going to go out of style.

 

The meme of communism *always* leads to shared misery as no one "invests" in production. The means of production just wear out and are never replaced.

Capitalism is the best method the human race has developed to efficiently allocate resources and provide the most good to the most people!

 

I love it , So copy and paste moved his comedy act here. These are the main tenets of in the Communist manifesto written of course by Marx and Engles. Cut and paste says Communism isn't Marxism (funny) Considering Marx wrote the Comunist Manefesto and I don't think he knew that then or now. Copy and paste says that our country , the democrats, Obama or me are marxist.. Lets take a look at The united states through the eyes of cut and past,
"1. Abolition of property and land and application of all rents of land to public purposes
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax
3. Abolition of all right to inheritance
4. Confiscation of all property of all emigrants and rebels
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6.Centraliztion of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State, the bringing of cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of label. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of the population over the country,
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination with education and industrial production." Can anyone pick out one thing in this list that would suggest that he knows what he is talking about, Other then what 75% of the countries in the world do also. For instance Pregressive taxes are in every country but a few. But Cut and paste says that Marxism is all over this country. My favorite is copy and paste with the redistrobution of wealth in this country, with the fact that for over 35 years the massive increase in wealth during that time all went to the top few. So I always like to ask him if that makes the wealthy Marxist. Anyway copy and paste is a lot of fun.

 

I didn't say Communism isn't Marxism. I *said* Marxism isn't Communism. Marxism is a continuum from Fascism to Communism and everything in between! Did you ever go look up "continuum" to see what it means?

YOU CAN'T EVEN GET THIS SIMPLE THING CORRECT.

You profess Marxist beliefs. You don't even know what Marxism is so how would you know if you are a Marxist or not?

I already explained to you how each of these fit into the three main tenets of Marxism. Can't you remember anything longer than 5 minutes?

Bernie Sanders: ""How many yachts do billionaires need? How many cars do they need? Give us a break. You can't have it all."

Class warfare at its finest!

We spend two thirds of our annual expenditures on entitlement spending. And *YOU* think that isn't redistribution of wealth?

 

Every time copy and paste comments it supports what I say about him doesn't it??? This group, supports totally, that tax law and law written to transfers the total increased wealth of this country to a few people at the top. Which they have achieved for the last 35 years. This is what they want for this country. Copy and paste is so far of the mark , that he charges me with class warfare. Because I do not support this insanity. Simple point, the reason that capitalism is the best economic direction is the fact that it has a promise of the chance to get ahead. Something that they have taken away for the last 35 years. Without that potential Capitalism collapses. They don't care , they just want it all.
How stupid is this group, what I said above can hardly be argued but their economical proposals are all designed to transfer the wealth faster up the ladder. Does anyone want to argue my statement about the disparity of income over the last 35 years.
Copy and paste says that we spend to much on the old, the poor and the sick. He wants to stop that and so does his party but what they want is to be able to take that money and give it to the wealthy, this again can hardly be argued.

 

You are the one that just keeps cutting and pasting the same thing over and over. Don't project that onto me!

The tax law and policy doesn't "transfer" anything. It lets those that have made the money KEEP their own money. No one else has a claim to that money. If I invent widgetA and sell a billion of them and make millions off of doing so then those millions are *MINE*, not yours and not the "collectives". Letting me keep those millions is letting me keep *MY* money.

You see the economy as a zero sum game. If I make $1M selling widgetA then $900K of it was TAKEN from others that deserve it more, right? And the tax rate should be at least 90% so it can be redistributed to those who should have received it, right?

That's not how conservatives see it at all. We see the economy as an ever-growing pie. If I take a slice that doesn't mean someone else has to do without a slice. The pie can grow large enough that everyone can have a slice. The way to more and bigger slices is to grow the economy, not to tear down those who already have a slice!

As John Kennedy said, "a rising tide lifts all boats". A growing economy lifts everyone economically. I've given you the data that shows the average wage in the US has grown *more* than inflation since 1981. Those making the average wage today are *better* off than they were making the average wage in 1981! That's what a rising tide *does*!

But you can't have a rising tide when the meme becomes driven by class warfare, redistribution of wealth, and central planning of the economy. Those all work to suppress growth in the economy. The examples are legion. We've even seen it here over the past eight years!

The only ones that have taken away the promise of the chance to get ahead are those that advocate Marxist principles: 1. class warfare, 2. redistribution of wealth, and 3. central planning of the economy. "They don't care, they just want it all" *IS* class warfare. You indulge in class warfare and don't even recognize it as such!

Nothing gets transferred by letting people keep more of their own money. The income disparity has been caused by Marxist Democrat policies -- like the meme: "punish business, always and everywhere, just for being in business" BECAUSE THEY DON'T CARE, THEY JUST WANT IT ALL!

You *always* get less of what you punish. And the Marxist Democrat policies have punished job creation so much in America that we now have more business failures than business startups. It's the very same symptom seen in all Marxist nations. From the Soviet Union to Venezuela!

That money *came* from the wealthy. 50% of the households in this country pay *NO* federal income tax. The top 0.1% (.001) of earners pay 40% of all federal income taxes. My guess is that you think the top 0.1% should pay 90% of all federal income taxes, right? It would only be "fair". Just how much can they invest in creating jobs, right?

My guess is that you have no idea that 80% of the individual income tax filers in America pay more in FICA taxes than in income taxes, do you? And yet the Marxist Democrats want to raise the FICA tax to about 30% of wages in order to pay for nationalized health insurance. And yet they say they are for the "little" people.

 

But they really mean "they are for [control of] the "little" people."

 

Do you even read what you write. What a pile of crap. The same old few talking points. all of which don't say anything but suggest that you haters have the right idea. You don't. Your just pollution and offer nothing for this country except hate and me first. Pitiful.

 

The right wing of 2017 are something that just needs to be disposed of. Simple as that. To much hate, to much I want it all, and to evil. You will be disposed of, how do I know because every enemy of this great country has been disposed of since this country was created.

 

Maybe you single-handedly invented said widget, however the reason you achieved this could be because you were educated in schools, which are paid for by the tax-payers.

I am not saying inventors owe everything to the collectives. I am just trying to say that whenever someone is successful, very often the society is one factor behind it.

 

And society benefits from that invention. We now have electric lights and computers and adult fans of the my little pony TV series.

This doesn't mean that computers and brony costumes are free. It just means you can now purchase them from the people who make them.

 

I never claimed otherwise.

I never said they are free or should be free. What I am doing is point out that society often plays a part in the success of inventors.

 

Heinlein phrased it as "You can't railroad until you can railroad". What that means is that in order to build a railroad, you first need to have steel, you need the wheel, you need a way to turn that wheel, a power source, tracks laid, etc. etc. etc.

In other words, that's a big duh. We stand upon the shoulders of those who came before us. This doesn't mean that Elmer from down the street who has done nothing more than keep his wheelchair warm and his jug of whiskey always handy hasn't exactly contributed enough to get a ticket on that train. Sorry, but he'll just have to hoof it.

 

Not quite sure what you are trying to say here.

I already said that I didn't mean people should be able to get things for free just because they are a part of society.

 

So far the only hate I see here originates from leftists.

 

Okay the first thing is That Adam smith wasn't trying to create a new economic model when he wrote "Wealth of Nations". All he set out to do and what he did do was explain how trade works and the laws if any that govern economic success and failure. Mises, Hayek, and others refined his original findings and went in to more detail. What Marx Engels, et al have done is try to recreate reality in their own image, reality, however, being a rather stubborn customer bit them in the rear end. And will continue to do so. The systems they created became little more than an often murderous attempt at controlling people's people's dreams, desires, and aspirations. Suffice it to say Adam Smith tried to explain what is, Marx tried to create his own private fantasy world and it turned into a vast nightmare for everyone else.