Capitalism

[Atilla]

It is clearly obvious to me who has won the argument. Atilla is a decent moderate while cowboy is a neo Nazi monster. Let's hope his type doesn't get to high office. Do the decent residents of Newport Beach realize they have this fellow living amongst them and just waiting to explode ?

Thanks Pat,

Also, my apologies for losing ones rag, et al.

The name calling with NT I accept was in jest and deliberate. Fair cop to NT as he has stopped and I was being OT. Thought I could get away with being cheeky and was half expecting NT to pick up on it.

However, this Nazi racist git with his Nietzsche and twisted Darwinism the jungle and capitalism inhabited by cheetahs and lions was simply just too much to put up with.

I may not be well refined and cultured as some of our esteemed colleagues here and have been told about being tactless but honesty of feelings and emotions always best going forward.

 

[barjon]

*grammer

*grama

 

[hhiusa]

*grammer

*grammar

 

[hhiusa]

typo

 

[hhiusa]

Thanks Pat,

Also, my apologies for losing ones rag, et al.

The name calling with NT I accept was in jest and deliberate. Fair cop to NT as he has stopped and I was being OT. Thought I could get away with being cheeky and was half expecting NT to pick up on it.

However, this Nazi racist git with his Nietzsche and twisted Darwinism the jungle and capitalism inhabited by cheetahs and lions was simply just too much to put up with.

I may not be well refined and cultured as some of our esteemed colleagues here and have been told about being tactless but honesty of feelings and emotions always best going forward.

Oh yes, Old Bean, it was just too much for those socialist ears to handle. Listening to ideas on unbridled capitalism must be oh so difficult.

 

[Atilla]

*grammar

Thanks Tar

I'm sure I've typed it correctly else where.

Don't mind being corrected as long as the subject is not one of distraction.

 

[hhiusa]

Beauty and intelligence
Miss Texas defends capitalism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaTKxTuJXLs

 

[new_trader]

The irony is the fact you made that statement with a face like this

What is ironic about it?

What are you advocating your position to be now? The new breed of Capitalist Anarchist?

WTF? Who said Capitalism is lawless? Its only the imbeciles who think Capitalism means anarchy, that's why they are terrified of it.

I'm bored.

I'd say boring.

 

[hhiusa]

What is ironic about it?



WTF? Who said Capitalism is lawless? Its only the imbeciles who think Capitalism means anarchy, that's why they are terrified of it.



I'd say boring.

What amuses me is how they keep bringing up contrived sob stories as evidence for anti-capitalist views whilst claiming to be capitalists.

Capitalists do not need to claim they are, people will know by their arguments. Successful capitalists do not need to tell others what a successful capitalist they are. If you have to convince someone you are successful, then you are probably not.

 

[Forexmospherian]

What amuses me is how they keep bringing up contrived sob stories as evidence for anti-capitalist views whilst claiming to be capitalists.

Capitalists do not need to claim they are, people will know by their arguments. Successful capitalists do not need to tell others what a successful capitalist they are. If you have to convince someone you are successful, then you are probably not.

You mean like multi millionaire Champagne socialists like Hilary Clinton.

I worked with Richard Branson for 3 yrs in the late 1980's - before he became a billionaire. A true Capitalist - he built up Virgin into a world wide conglomerate - but he also still believes in socialism.

You are really showing your bias - and its just so right wing - its frightening

I appreciate we will never change you - only time and experience and when you have your own family might that happen


Regards


F

 

[barjon]

Rather like the alternative of a totalitarian dictatorship or a benign dictatorship can mean the world of difference for those living under the regime, so can totalitarian capitalism or benign capitalism be very different. Call it unfettered capitalism or controlled capitalism or whatever words you choose.

You might like the concept of unfettered capitalism and undoubtedly it would make (and has made) a lot of those capitalists filthy rich and bring lots of economic benefits to society, too. Unfortunately, history shows that it also is apt to bring an awful lot of human misery in its wake as well.

The tobacco companies, for example, would never stop selling cigarettes of their own volition. Still haven't, of course, and continued to maintain for years that smoking posed no health risk. Similar Thalidomode. Similar Corvettes and "Unsafe at any Speed". Similar asbestosis. Similar - oh it goes on for pages.

So it's quite in order to be a capitalist and at the same time recognise the dangers for society that can accompany it. To do so doesn't make you a socialist.

 

[hhiusa]

Rather like the alternative of a totalitarian dictatorship or a benign dictatorship can mean the world of difference for those living under the regime, so can totalitarian capitalism or benign capitalism be very different. Call it unfettered capitalism or controlled capitalism or whatever words you choose.

You might like the concept of unfettered capitalism and undoubtedly it would make (and has made) a lot of those capitalists filthy rich and bring lots of economic benefits to society, too. Unfortunately, history shows that it also is apt to bring an awful lot of human misery in its wake as well.

The tobacco companies, for example, would never stop selling cigarettes of their own volition. Still haven't, of course, and continued to maintain for years that smoking posed no health risk. Similar Thalidomode. Similar Corvettes and "Unsafe at any Speed". Similar asbestosis. Similar - oh it goes on for pages.

So it's quite in order to be a capitalist and at the same time recognise the dangers for society that can accompany it. To do so doesn't make you a socialist.

Why should tobacco companies have to stop selling tobacco? if people are stupid enough to start and get addicted to it then it is nobody else's problem but their own. it is not capitalism's responsibility to make sure you don't get addicted to drugs.

By Race/Ethnicity

By Age

By Education

By Poverty Status

In the UK

Deaths in England in 2013 among adults aged 35 and over
In 2013, 17 per cent (79,700) of all deaths of adults aged 35 and over were estimated to be caused by smoking. This proportion is unchanged from 2005.

Smoking among adults and children
1. One in five adults (20 per cent) aged 16 and over were smokers in 2012.
2. Unemployed people (39 per cent) (not working but seeking work) were around twice as likely to smoke as those either in employment (21 per cent) or economically inactive (17 per cent) (for example, students or retired people).
3. 22% of youths aged 11 to 15 have smoked cigarettes. This is the lowest the figure has been since the 1980s.

In England in 2010
26% of women smoked in the 12 months before or during their pregnancy.

In England in 2014
12% of mothers were smokers at the time of their delivery.
People who were married were less likely to smoke than those cohabiting. 33% unmarried and 14% married.

People in high managerial positions were extremely unlikely to be smokers at a 9% prevalence versus low positions with a 30% prevalence.

Yorkshire and Humber have the highest number of smokers while the South East has the lowest.

http://www.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB14988/smok-eng-2014-rep.pdf

 

[new_trader]

What amuses me is how they keep bringing up contrived sob stories as evidence for anti-capitalist views whilst claiming to be capitalists.

Capitalists do not need to claim they are, people will know by their arguments. Successful capitalists do not need to tell others what a successful capitalist they are. If you have to convince someone you are successful, then you are probably not.

I agree with you 100%. There really are some insanely stupid opinions about capitalism in this thread. It would be wise for some people to understand their opponents position BEFORE trying to refute it. All I read are irrelevant anecdotes and straw man arguments that have absolutely ZERO to do with the debate between soicialism and capitalism. Keep up the good work, you are one of the few people in this thread who can form a cogent argument whilst the others engage in group hugs and puppy kisses to make themselves feel morally superior!

 

[Forexmospherian]

I agree with you 100%. There really are some insanely stupid opinions about capitalism in this thread. It would be wise for some people to understand their opponents position BEFORE trying to refute it. All I read are irrelevant anecdotes and straw man arguments that have absolutely ZERO to do with the debate between soicialism and capitalism. Keep up the good work, you are one of the few people in this thread who can form a cogent argument whilst the others engage in group hugs and puppy kisses to make themselves feel morally superior!

Hi n_t

Personally I feel i fully understand yours and hhiusa's positions with regards to Capitalism and Socialism.

In fact you have stated you detest or hate socialism - which is your opinion and of course you are entitled to have

Maybe you should both explain what the other 95% of contributors on this thread are failing to see - and why you two seem to think it's up there with the very best theories in the Universe - with apparently no real flaws

I look forward to being educated more

Regards


F

 

[barjon]

..."....Why should tobacco companies have to stop selling tobacco? if people are stupid enough to start and get addicted to it then it is nobody else's problem but their own. it is not capitalism's responsibility to make sure you don't get addicted to drugs."...........L]

I was merely pointing up an example how uncontrolled capitalism can bring some human misery in its wake. If you believe that is an acceptable price of capitalism then so be it. If, however, you believe that it is the responsibility of good government to lessen that misery then it leads to some control over capitalism - not socialism.

After all, the whole object of the exercise is to allow large numbers of humans to exist together in reasonable harmony and well being. Capitalism provides quite well for this since it is by far the best system for economic progress and wealth creation. There's more to it than just that, of course, which is why naked capitalism needs to be clothed.

 

[darktone]

Hi n_t

Personally I feel i fully understand yours and hhiusa's positions with regards to Capitalism and Socialism.

In fact you have stated you detest or hate socialism - which is your opinion and of course you are entitled to have

Maybe you should both explain what the other 95% of contributors on this thread are failing to see - and why you two seem to think it's up there with the very best theories in the Universe - with apparently no real flaws

I look forward to being educated more

Regards


F

Don't be silly F!
Its enough that your opinion may differ to ensure your membership to the fools and morons brigade. Understand that you hold another view therfore you are clearly wrong! These guys won't give a flying Dunning Kruger regardless of what you put forward.
As a tag nut clings to it owner, the merican is straight in there with a like. His ego eager to match itself to a similar entity. Naturally the match is well received as they stroke each other off before bedtime.
None so queer as folk mate, none so queer as folk.

 

[new_trader]

I was merely pointing up an example how uncontrolled capitalism can bring some human misery in its wake. If you believe that is an acceptable price of capitalism then so be it. If, however, you believe that it is the responsibility of good government to lessen that misery then it leads to some control over capitalism - not socialism.

After all, the whole object of the exercise is to allow large numbers of humans to exist together in reasonable harmony and well being. Capitalism provides quite well for this since it is by far the best system for economic progress and wealth creation. There's more to it than just that, of course, which is why naked capitalism needs to be clothed.

Jon,

By saying ‘controlled’ you are essentially saying that you want to restrict the choices of consumers to what is safe for a 10 year old child because you believe they cannot be trusted to make their own choices. Now I ask you, which one of us is treating human beings with the dignity they deserve; You, who wants to restrict the choices of adults, or me, who says that adults have the right to make their own choices as long as those choices don’t infringe on the rights of others?

In order to have things ‘controlled’ you have to have someone who is doing the controlling, right? Do you actually believe that the elected controller will be free from corruption and whose individual judgement is superior to the collective judgement of individual consumers?

Who elects the ‘controllers’? If you think that adults can’t be trusted to make the right choices when it comes to consumer goods, what makes you think they can be trusted to choose the most honest and impartial controller who cannot be corrupted? You are then left with the dilemma - “Who controls the controllers?”

Neither capitalism or socialism dictate how people should use a knife. A person can choose to cut vegetables, cut their own wrists or cut someone elses throat. The question is, which economic system gives the consumer the widest choices of knives at the lowest possible price?

Take another example. You might think that skydiving is a reckless and dangerous pursuit. Is this the fault of the manufactures of parachutes or the people who want to engage in the activity? If you were a ‘controller’, would you make manufacturing parachutes illegal to prevent people dying in accidents related to skydiving? This is the sort of tyranny you expect in 3rd world contries.

Finally, an anecdote of my own. My dad was a smoker and he eventually died of a heart attack. Whether this is directly attributable to the cigarretes is debateable. A few years ago, I saw a work colleague smoking outside. He had just recently recovered from a heart attack so I was surprised to see him smoking! Without any Government coercion I started talking to him about my father and he told me to mind my own business and to live my life the way I want and let others live the way they want. I never asked him if he was a capitalist or a socialist.

 

[hhiusa]

You bring up a good a point @new_trader. Plato even had a thought on this long before we did. "sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" Translation: "but who will watch the watchers?". It is his question as to how power will be held to account. Actually the quote can be extended ad infinitum to who watches the watchers of the watchers and so on. The Problem is if you have watchers then you have to have oversight over the watchers. How do you know that those in oversight will not be corrupt? "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely". This is why the US has banned the advertisement of cigarettes and not the production of cigarettes.

Secondly @barjon, capitalism did not create tobacco companies. You are stating a false cause fallacy and I cannot fathom why. As the fallacy suggests, people falsely associate a correlation between something that happens after occurence of something else. Tobacco predates the ideas of capitalism and; therefore, it cannot be its cause. Your argument states that cigarettes companies would somehow be less out of control in socialism. How will mixing socialism with capitalism do any better than the naked capitalism by which you call it?

Again, if you create an oversight committee to monitor tobacco companies, you are left with a who watches the watchers question. In fact, it is you who is saying that people too are stupid to make sound decisions for themselves, not I. True freedom is giving people the choice to do something and reap the consequences of their actions. This ties in with @new_trader's anecdote.

Additionally, we can all remember being children. When your parents told you not do something, it made you want to do it even more. Whenever the government tries to tell people not to do something that is bad for them, it is always met with resistance such as creating bootlegs and underground activities. If the government banned cigarettes tomorrow, it would only create a black market for them and that is not capitalism's fault.

What you speak has been tried many times and failed. The prohibition of the sale of alcohol was part of the temperaments acts to try and regulate behavior into what was socially acceptable. Some people actually believed that if you removed alcohol that people would behave better and wouldn't beat their wives. The government banned the sale of alcohol with the 18th amendment and then had to repeal it with the 21st amendment after the sale in the black market grew so big that it was out of control. Nobody wants a repeat of that sceanario. This brings up two very good quotes.

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
- George Santayana

“What's right isn't always popular. What's popular isn't always right.”
- Howard Cosell

This brings us back to what I had stated so many posts before, which is the tyranny of majority.

 

[jsc]

Capitalism doesn't have any inherent weaknesses, rather it's the natural outcome that you find distasteful. The fact that you think they both need to be 'controlled' shows that you don't even understand what this argument is about!

What is ironic about it?



WTF? Who said Capitalism is lawless? Its only the imbeciles who think Capitalism means anarchy, that's why they are terrified of it.



I'd say boring.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism


Never argue with an idiot.

 

[hhiusa]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism


Never argue with an idiot.

That is why he stopped arguing with you.


Citing an website is not an argument.