Capitalism

[Pat494]

There's no profit for pharma in deceased patients and sick people too scared to go to a doctor. I can see why pharma would be risk-conscious when allocating R&D funds - in some stages of the cycle they might even need government incentives like tax breaks and grants as insurance - but nationalisation is a route back into a darker history.

It takes Govt. rules and regulations to force the pharmas and food industry to behave. In many 3rd world countries they do as they please and that is making loads of money for unscrupulous business men. The Govt. had to step in even to organise the food for animals. They were adding things like sawdust and chicken droppings. Yuk.

The GM lot were especially getting their scientists to produce GM seeds that would not reproduce from the grown crops, thus forcing farmers to buy more seed from themselves. Their greed is monumental.

Capitalism does produce cheaper goods like cars but at what cost to their workers on low wages. The modern world has forgotten humanitarian principles in their pursuit of profits.

The next big test will be AI robots to drive buses, trucks, cars and other jobs etc. What to do with millions more unemployed. In the past technology has compensated with other jobs but AI may be a step too far.

 

[tomorton]

Well of course unchecked Capitalism has nasty side-effects. But all systems will try to explore their regulatory boundaries for their own benefit - when they break through these boundaries it is a failing of the administrations concerned, not an inherent evil of the capitalist motive.

On the other hand, Capitalism's opposite is inherently evil, slavery by another name.

 

[Pat494]

On the other hand, Capitalism's opposite is inherently evil, slavery by another name.

Is it not just another form of slavery ? An economic one.
The Trumps of this world hog most of the wealth to themselves. They let a few crumbs fall from the table to keep the masses alive enough to do the donkey work.

The downside of Socialism is that it finds it hard to compete. But not impossible. The Coop is a good example. Had it not been for very bad management recently they would be stronger.

 

[tomorton]

Is it not just another form of slavery ? An economic one.
The Trumps of this world hog most of the wealth to themselves. They let a few crumbs fall from the table to keep the masses alive enough to do the donkey work.

The downside of Socialism is that it finds it hard to compete. But not impossible. The Coop is a good example. Had it not been for very bad management recently they would be stronger.

Capitalist relations between two parties are a bargaining process. Government should ensure that neither can control opportunities by means of cartel, monopoly or coercion but should otherwise keep out.

The Co-op was for decades a criminally under-valued retail enterprise. The best thing that could have ever happened to it would have been flotation onto the LSE, where its pathetic small-town financial management would have subject to effective scrutiny. This is no recent case of a bad apple or two, the whole structure was rotten by design. On top of which, it certainly wasn't competition with the lethargic Co-op that was responsible for the low prices we have all enjoyed in supermarkets, it was capitalist competition between the non-cooperative players.

 

[Atilla]

Is it not just another form of slavery ? An economic one.
The Trumps of this world hog most of the wealth to themselves. They let a few crumbs fall from the table to keep the masses alive enough to do the donkey work.

The downside of Socialism is that it finds it hard to compete. But not impossible. The Coop is a good example. Had it not been for very bad management recently they would be stronger.

Cuba is still with us. Despite being screwed by USA for best part of 50 years.

Costa Rica is also becoming a retirement destination with excellent quality of life and health care.

With increasing mechanisation and AI there will inevitably further polarisation between the haves adn have nots.

Next big challenge faccing humaity.

 

[barjon]

Capitalist relations between two parties are a bargaining process. Government should ensure that neither can control opportunities by means of cartel, monopoly or coercion but should otherwise keep out.

The Co-op was for decades a criminally under-valued retail enterprise. The best thing that could have ever happened to it would have been flotation onto the LSE, where its pathetic small-town financial management would have subject to effective scrutiny. This is no recent case of a bad apple or two, the whole structure was rotten by design. On top of which, it certainly wasn't competition with the lethargic Co-op that was responsible for the low prices we have all enjoyed in supermarkets, it was capitalist competition between the non-cooperative players.

The aim of the Co-op is not to maximise profit but to provide a reasonably priced service to its members/customers. Thus it's management must be seen in the context of delivering that aim and not whether it is maximising the its return on assets. Still been pretty poor, of course.

 

[darktone]

 

[tomorton]

The aim of the Co-op is not to maximise profit but to provide a reasonably priced service to its members/customers. Thus it's management must be seen in the context of delivering that aim and not whether it is maximising the its return on assets. Still been pretty poor, of course.

Then, Jon, the Co-op failed. It wasn't anywhere near the cheapest for its customers and the stock range and store experience has never been better than second-rate. No special points for customer service.

With a better return on investment, they could have done a lot better for their customers, but this is the result when you pollute and dilute profit motive with vaguer concerns.

The factors driving supermarket expansion, modernisations, enlargement and lower prices were all commercial. The Co-op trailed (trails) in every parameter.

 

[barjon]

Then, Jon, the Co-op failed. It wasn't anywhere near the cheapest for its customers and the stock range and store experience has never been better than second-rate. No special points for customer service.

With a better return on investment, they could have done a lot better for their customers, but this is the result when you pollute and dilute profit motive with vaguer concerns.

The factors driving supermarket expansion, modernisations, enlargement and lower prices were all commercial. The Co-op trailed (trails) in every parameter.

Go along with most of that, Tomo, but that doesn't alter that they have to have a different outlook than the Tescos of this world. Convenience stores have priority over out of town hypermarkets for example.

 

[tomorton]

Jon, just thinking of Tesco alone, from a standing start they long ago overtook the Co-op in the convenience store war. Only one-third of their national floor space is under superstore roofs, less than 1 Tesco location in 5 is a superstore.

 

[Onko]

As I see it, If PSOE pacts with the right wing government and Cs, then Podemos wil become the opposition party in Spain.

To me, a left-wing party as opposition is just the right thing. Not too much power to get the boat adrift, yet enough force to counter all too greedy corporate laws. In the end it's still people that make up a country.

 

[Pat494]

To me, a left-wing party as opposition is just the right thing. Not too much power to get the boat adrift, yet enough force to counter all too greedy corporate laws. In the end it's still people that make up a country.

It has always been the elite that formulate the laws. They just bias them for their own benefit. The so called socialists once in power also live in the same luxury as the previous lot. Union bosses living in rent free mansions paid for by the workers are a good example of their hypocracy.

 

[Splitlink]

To me, a left-wing party as opposition is just the right thing. Not too much power to get the boat adrift, yet enough force to counter all too greedy corporate laws. In the end it's still people that make up a country.

It sounds good, Onko, and it should be that way. but it won't be. I've lived long enough to know that things don't work out like that.

But, we'll have to live with what we have. As my son says, "es lo que hi!"

 

[Pat494]

Another point against money grubbing capitalism is the effects of cutting down the world's forests. The situation is so bad that many species have been driven near extinction. This combined with pollution and over population is playing havoc with the eco systems. So fat businessmen can put some more money in their fat accounts. Disgraceful really.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-ae25cd31-fdd8-45f8-a0f6-ae7ac1efb08a

 

[tomorton]

Businessmen are supposed to chase profit. If there was profit in planting trees, they'd be planting them left right and centre. The fault does not lie with them, they are driven by the system as water is driven to flow downhill. The fault lies with the politicians who set the controls (or in this case lack of) on the system.

 

[counter_violent]

Businessmen are supposed to chase profit. If there was profit in planting trees, they'd be planting them left right and centre. The fault does not lie with them, they are driven by the system as water is driven to flow downhill. The fault lies with the politicians who set the controls (or in this case lack of) on the system.

On the subject of trees.

Yesterday I visited Barjon and trees came into the conversation.

Instead of just talking endlessly about destruction of natural resources, how about the Govt mandates every citizen to plant 10 trees, or pay to have them planted on our behalf. For those not able to afford them, there is always the option of grow your own !

 

[barjon]

On the subject of trees.

Yesterday I visited Barjon and trees came into the conversation.

Instead of just talking endlessly about destruction of natural resources, how about the Govt mandates every citizen to plant 10 trees, or pay to have them planted on our behalf. For those not able to afford them, there is always the option of grow your own !

as you can see we have deep, philosophical conversations when we meet. None of this trading nonsense!

 

[counter_violent]

as you can see we have deep, philosophical conversations when we meet. None of this trading nonsense!

Well, given enough time, we could probably put the whole world to rights !

 

[Splitlink]

We have a lot of trees in Barcelona. They serve a purpose, in the summer, as the people have a lot of shade. When the leaves fall, though, it becomes a problem when it rains. The unwary , often elderly, people can slip on them. Here, we have a good road cleaning service, plus the residents keep the pavements clear. Also, they have to be trimmed, periodically, too. Barcelona would not be the same without them, though.

 

[Atilla]

Businessmen are supposed to chase profit. If there was profit in planting trees, they'd be planting them left right and centre. The fault does not lie with them, they are driven by the system as water is driven to flow downhill. The fault lies with the politicians who set the controls (or in this case lack of) on the system.

How can politicians effect plantation of trees?

Subsidise producers by collectively taxing consumers.

If there was money to be had farmers would become woodman. In fact as it happens woodman can't even build on their own woodlands due to planning regulations and permitted development laws.

To change those rules I think we need WWIII.

I considered buying woodlands but changed my mind as I can get the benefits of woodlands without parting with cash. Nothing you can do with them other than prune trees and collect wood for burning.

Pie in the sky unless you are up for some tax increases? Politicians voting for tax hikes