Capitalism sucks!

uscitizen said:
Yes our government intervenes, True free market capitalism takes advantage of the little people and causes suffering.
Thwe govt used to intervene more on the behalf of the little people. In more recent years it has been intervening on the behalf of business. Answering to the false cry of if it is good for business it is good for America.
Click to expand...

That's what I've been telling people for a long time what the neocon philosophy of economics is. What's good for us is what's good for the country or what I fecetously refer to as "The Milo Minderbinder Economic System" from the character in Catch-22.

For the uninitiated, Joe Heller was making fun of the former CEO of General Motors, Charlie Wilson, who said that "What's good for GM is what's good for the country." in a 1952 congressional hearing.
 
Mottleydude said:
That's what I've been telling people for a long time what the neocon philosophy of economics is. What's good for us is what's good for the country or what I fecetously refer to as "The Milo Minderbinder Economic System" from the character in Catch-22.

For the uninitiated, Joe Heller was making fun of the former CEO of General Motors, Charlie Wilson, who said that "What's good for GM is what's good for the country." in a 1952 congressional hearing.
Click to expand...

"Country First, and when I say country, I mean rich people" -- All politicians
 
Watermark said:
There have been two ideologies in modern times crazy enough to have a sincere belief that in the absence of government society would naturally form around their system. That would be anarcho-communism and anarcho-capitalism. In fact, in absence of state there is just chaos, and militias and fighting warlords become the primary means of acquiring goods.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing for eliminating the state. I agree that abolishing the state would simply result (eventually) in warring factions and, finally, other states.

Having the state around to provide things that the market does not naturally, such as courts, armies, police, child protection, roads, etc. but limiting it to such functions, would allow for a much more potent form of competition than currently experienced. Government depredations of the market on behalf of the most powerful corporations is what begins the march toward economic fascism, which I would describe as hyper-corporatism. Real market discipline in the form of competition and losses (without special protections), along with serious fraud and tort laws is primarily all we need to guard against such injustices.
 
ironhead said:
but limiting it to such functions, would allow for a much more potent form of competition than currently experienced.
Click to expand...

the fascists who call themselves free marketeers don't want real competition, they want monopoly power and to degrade other humans for their own profit margin.
 
ironhead said:
Don't mistake crony corporatism and quasi-fascism for true capitalism. A free market has little or no gov't intervention, which is completely unlike our system where the federal government has been intervening on behalf of the most well-connected corporations and special interests whilst parading as being "free market" - nothing could be further from the truth. A market economy is not even a system, really. It's simply how people trade goods and services without coercion.
Click to expand...

A "free market" free of government intervention doesn't exist and the history of the robber barons demonstrates why it doesn't exist nor should it. A totally free laissez-fare system doesn't exist anywhere in the world. Mixed economies, as is a mix of capitialism and socialism, will be the future.

The GIANT gaping hole in the concept of democracy is money, and those who have it control the democracy when their power and influence goes unchecked.

The nature of business is the bottom line .. "patriotism" is nowhere to be found in business .. evidenced by how quickly US jobs have gone overseas
 
ironhead said:
I'm not arguing for eliminating the state. I agree that abolishing the state would simply result (eventually) in warring factions and, finally, other states.

Having the state around to provide things that the market does not naturally, such as courts, armies, police, child protection, roads, etc. but limiting it to such functions, would allow for a much more potent form of competition than currently experienced. Government depredations of the market on behalf of the most powerful corporations is what begins the march toward economic fascism, which I would describe as hyper-corporatism. Real market discipline in the form of competition and losses (without special protections), along with serious fraud and tort laws is primarily all we need to guard against such injustices.
Click to expand...

But Ironhead, China is proof that state intervention of the economy at the expense of its people can benefit the economy. The question is, do we want to give up the humanity of our workers for faster economic growth? Of course not.

And I see nothing wrong with the state ensuring everyone has health care. That is the difference between social and classical liberals. Social liberals believe in freedom plus groceries. Of course, neither faction has much say in modern society. When someone says they are a liberal these days they usually mean social democrat or some other collectivist ideology. That's why I say that even with a huge amount of Democrats in congress weed won't be legalized - for every civil libertarian in the Democratic party, there are ten "for your own good" Democrats.
 
Last edited:
blackascoal said:
A "free market" free of government intervention doesn't exist and the history of the robber barons demonstrates why it doesn't exist nor should it. A totally free laissez-fare system doesn't exist anywhere in the world. Mixed economies, as is a mix of capitialism and socialism, will be the future.

The GIANT gaping hole in the concept of democracy is money, and those who have it control the democracy when their power and influence goes unchecked.

The nature of business is the bottom line .. "patriotism" is nowhere to be found in business .. evidenced by how quickly US jobs have gone overseas
Click to expand...


Well said, except that who knows what the future holds?
 
Watermark said:
He is a Christian socialist, and he's actually been on the board off and on for quite a while. I don't think you'd associate with him much besides on economics.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what a christian socialist is, but he appears to understand the gaping hole in capitialism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top