Anti Capitalism

When Westinghouse invented the washing machine he did more to liberate women than all the women's studies programs ever created.

 

Uh no governments do not invest they shore up supporters and penalize detractors. Were it not for the fact that the government heavily subsidizes Tesla it would have gone broke years ago.

 

The subsidies that are paid for Tesla cars do not prevent it from running at a loss. Tesla is held aloft by private investment.

 

Really? You think that if the subsidies were removed that Telsa would still be in business?

 

Nonsense with out the subsidies No one else would be investing in a company that has been in operation for more than a decade without turning a profit without subsidies. What do you think blew up the Tech bubble?

 

You think the subsidies are what gets private investors to continue to give them money?

 

Didn't read thread. Collectivists coined the term "capitalism." It has never really meant anything other than a sly, casual pejorative for "that which is not controlled by the state." 50 years of collectivist-Complex media hegemony in the U.S. and prior open communist propagandizing through the latter 19th and up to the 1980s added "capitalism" to a long list of bogus, slanted terms and notions in its epithet toolbag against noncollectivists to the point where we lazily accept the term today despite it being bogus. It is also part and parcel of the completely and utterly debunked, discredited labor measure of value.

What capitalism is? Plain old ordinary trade under the rule of law and strong property rights. Other than that, it's vapor/hot air from the gov-edu-union-contractor-grantee-trial lawyer-MSM Complex and really always has been.

It's all part and parcel of -them- taking more of -your- money for -themselves- despite any whitewash of "social issues" or slanted weasel words like "capitalism" overlaid on that goal.

 

Social Security didn't exist in the Great Depression. But the conditions during the Depression resulted in its introduction, so we hopefully will never have to go through one again. Note that private charity was clearly insufficient during the Great Depression to abolish widespread suffering.

Man doesn't ALWAYS act in his own self interest. Note that Maslow later added to the top of the pyramid "self transcendence", meaning that, if all other needs are met, man likes to devote themselves to a goal greater than him/herself, which can include philanthropy and generally helping others. Unless, of course, they are sociopaths.

[/QUOTE]

The social network based on private charity is fine in a small community, in which everyone knows each other. In such cases, the fear of shaming usually makes people do the right thing, even if they don't want to. In a anonymous modern society, private charity is insufficient. That's where the government steps in, and it has worked remarkably well, unless you hate paying taxes.

 

It certainly is how employees get paid. Salaries come out of gross profit. You seem to be confusing net and gross profit. They are both profit and without it the company cannot survive and employees will lose their jobs. Non-profits are for tax purposes they DO make a profit.

 

YES!

 

Merriam-Webster's
Definition of capitalism

1. : an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, (as opposed to ownership by the state) by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.

And old professor many years ago pointed what happens when people start to see the state as a source of benefits:
From Alexander Tyler, history professor at the University of Edinborough in 1787, speaking about democracy over 2000 years:

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse over loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship."

"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage."

The American republic and democratic nation is now 240 years old. Consider our progress along the path Tyler describes. Dependence on others rather than ourselves is the surrender of our freedom and the right to control our own destiny. If we are not free to excel- we simply are not free, but slaves to those who demand the equality of mediocrity for all.

 

NASA developed technology is used everyday and is featured in many different products.

You don't need the government making shoes, but there is a place for investing in state of the art tech.

 

Sorry, that's a little confusing.

Sounds like you don't agree with regulations, but believe you need laws in place to help markets. Isn't that what regulations are?

Regulations can be too restrictive, but I believe there is common sense stuff that needs to be in place to keep things civil.

 

There is a difference in regulating businesses versus laws against bad actors. Regulating business is a form of micromanaging by government bureaucrats who 1. have no idea what they are doing and 2. try to make one solution fit all. It never works out well. It's why we have more business failures today than business startups.

Businesses do not do bad things, bad people use the business to do bad things. You'll never fix that with business regulations because the bad actors don't care about the regulations and just do their bad stuff regardless.

Who was the Clinton associate that used depositors money in the bank subsidiary to fuel his hedge fund? The guy got off scott-free. No regulations stopped him. But a law that was actually enforced would have made an example of him -- and examples are good deterrence!

 

Goldman Sachs used mass fraud as a business model. That can be seen as a business doing bad things. Using depositors money for failed investments is something that could have been prevented.

There is a classic example of the Ford Pinto being unsafe due to Ford not wanting to spend the money to fit the cars with proper protection at the rear of the gas tank. 27 people died as a direct result of this, but it was determined that the cost of lawsuits was more cost effective than making the car safer.

I don't find it unreasonable that people would expect a certain standard of safety when purchasing products.

 

Sorry I just can't believe you, considering that you and your party elected a hate candidate for president. There has never been a president that is crueler , more hateful, a me only mentally ill half wit as president scum bag. I bet you roll with those low life's all the time. They are just like you, groveling at the feet of scum.

 

Doesn't make it my friend, take the lies out and you have very little against her. I on the other hand can show you a hundred videos showing, right from the horses mouth, what a scum bag your president is.

 

Why would anyone invest in a company that distribute more money in executive bonuses then in dividends every year. Goldman Sachs was given 10 billion in bailout money to pull them out of the Bush disaster, they distributed more then that in bonuses. It equaled $770,000.00 for every man women and child that worked there. Of course it was distributed to the golden few. Taking that amount out and still being able to increase value or to distribute dividends. Means in effect that the the risk factor is twice what the real Div/value increase is.

 

I wouldn't argue against this (although I miss CRT TVs). I was merely pointing out that it's been far more than a decade since Japan started to go into decline. ww2 was probably the best thing to happen to both Japan and south korea since the old bloated governments were replaced with brand new ones.

Now they're old and bloated, just as ours is. Nothing government loves more than more government.

 

The private sector has gone so far beyond what NASA asked of it that it is barely recognizable. We are now at the point where NASA asks for x and the private sector gives it x plus.

 

Goldman Sachs did what exactly? How does a "business" do anything? There may have been bad actors at GS that did bad things. Did they pay a penalty for doing so? If not then exactly what deterrent was established to prevent other bad actors from doing the same thing?

Ford also stopped making the Pinto. Did any executives at Ford pay any kind of penalty? If not, then how is that a deterrent?

 

I think that if a company doesn't turn a profit in a decade that government subsidies in that company are the only reason to invest, Everyone remembers the East India company a largely funded largely successful government investment. They forget about a half a dozen other similar government investments in which private citizens also invested and eventually got taken to the cleaners resulting in a national panic that lasted more than a year.

 

GS paid that loan back with interest! And apparently GS pays out enough in dividends and interest to keep its investors happy. That's their choice, not *yours*!

(btw, once AIG paid off on its insurance policies, GS didn't actually lose that much!)

 

This is what a hate party member calls a intellectual comment. We don't have to worry about this level of intellect. Our energies are better spent on someone who has intellect.