Does capitalism work?
- Thread starter lixluke
- Start date
You probably already have several of them, Nick ..in fact, you're wasting your time here at sciforums instead of working to pay for your computer and Internet connections and other luxuries that you use, huh? ...while millions of kids are starving and sick and homeless ...you're playing on the computer and complaining aobut them. Does that make any sense to you?
Baron Max
Where did I say i was complaining?
You really love your straw men Baron.
You really love your straw men Baron.
As I posted earlier, capitalism worked fine for perhaps 150 to 200 years, bringing a higher standard of living to the average person. by about 1900, the average worker was better off than all but the very elite prior to 1600-1800
Then the western technological cultures began to impliment government control & regulation, creating economies which were a mixtrue of capitalism and comunnist/socialist systems. From about 1915 on we have been going down hill.
The so called robber barons created jobs and produced products at affordable prices. Our current system favors a huge essentially non productive bureaucracy and a bucnh of politicians selling perks to those who finance their political campaigns. Tort Lawyers, merger experts, lobbyists, politicians, et cetera are the ones who currently make a lot of big bucks, but are essentially non productive. The entrepreneur and the large corporation must pay to play, creating additional overhead.
Politicians at the local, state, & federal level run the system very much like an organized crime protection racket.
Then the western technological cultures began to impliment government control & regulation, creating economies which were a mixtrue of capitalism and comunnist/socialist systems. From about 1915 on we have been going down hill.
The so called robber barons created jobs and produced products at affordable prices. Our current system favors a huge essentially non productive bureaucracy and a bucnh of politicians selling perks to those who finance their political campaigns. Tort Lawyers, merger experts, lobbyists, politicians, et cetera are the ones who currently make a lot of big bucks, but are essentially non productive. The entrepreneur and the large corporation must pay to play, creating additional overhead.
Politicians at the local, state, & federal level run the system very much like an organized crime protection racket.
I say what?
It's not my fault you worship the rich. The point is that the system clearly is ineffective. If it worked, we would not have all these problems. We would not have rich people running around doing whatever they want while we do the labor to support them. How about we say kiss my ass, and go do your own labor. Go work for your damn self, and let me sit around, and do nothing all day while you do all the work. How does that sound? The only reason poor people labor is so that the rich do not have to lift a finger. Poor people labor so that the rich can run around, and do nothing. Screw that.
You've just confirmed what Jeff said. Nice work.
Fair? To whom? Who decides? And what makes you think anything in life should be "fair"? Where is that written??
No one is forcing them to work, and that's something that you just can't seem to grasp!
Lixluke, everyone on this forum has the idea of "I'm right, you're wrong!", but you take it so far over the limit as to be fuckin' laughable!! Have you ever been wrong about any-fuckin'-thing in your life????
Baron Max
Well, it usually does tale a lot of work to become rich...
Of course, there are some people who are lucky but... they are not exactly the norm.
Still, the problem is that the income distribution is too uneven. That is an indication that capitalism is not a perfect system of resource allocation. You may say the money flows to those who use it better, but what does the uneven income distribution creates in social terms? It's not a healthy system for our civilization's psyche. Poverty can scar people for life and make them violent. And too much wealth can also be a problem. For instance, if you have enough money to become an alcoholic and you deal with a lot of stress, you might end up as an alcoholic. And that is not caused just by your personal circumstances- it's the entire culture. The western culture tends to have an abundance of freedom and a lack of self-discipline and humility, amongst other things.
So really... the issue is not the money itself. It is all the circumstances surrounding the system as well. You cannot treat capitalism as a separate independent system- it is not. It is one of the many systems we use. And all those systems relate to each other. And that's where capitalism really fails- in the bigger picture.
Of course, there are some people who are lucky but... they are not exactly the norm.
Still, the problem is that the income distribution is too uneven. That is an indication that capitalism is not a perfect system of resource allocation. You may say the money flows to those who use it better, but what does the uneven income distribution creates in social terms? It's not a healthy system for our civilization's psyche. Poverty can scar people for life and make them violent. And too much wealth can also be a problem. For instance, if you have enough money to become an alcoholic and you deal with a lot of stress, you might end up as an alcoholic. And that is not caused just by your personal circumstances- it's the entire culture. The western culture tends to have an abundance of freedom and a lack of self-discipline and humility, amongst other things.
So really... the issue is not the money itself. It is all the circumstances surrounding the system as well. You cannot treat capitalism as a separate independent system- it is not. It is one of the many systems we use. And all those systems relate to each other. And that's where capitalism really fails- in the bigger picture.
So where is it written that income distribution should be even? If Joe works harder than Mike, and Joe produces more goods/services than Mike, shouldn't he get more income than Mike? By exactly the same logic, if Andy forms a company which provides work for Joe and Mike, shouldn't he get more income than either of the two workers?
The idea of "fair" and "even income" is just ludicrous ...the world doesn't work like that in any way, shape or form. Humans are all different, some hard working, some lazy as hell, yet a few idealistic people act and/or think that they should all be compensated the same! Idiocy!
Baron Max
HELLO All
Following on from Maximus' comments it is fair that Andy pays himself more as he has an added responsibility. Perhaps Mike and Joe just work their 9-5 and go home while Andy probably lives, eats and sleeps his work.. Along with this i would imagine that Andy is actually being paid less per hour (depending on the situation of the company he has formed), as he would have to work very long days which are probably split like this
7:30am - 9:00am: Andy probably prepares for the day before the main production staff start working
9:00am - 5:00pm: Andy overseas the operations/production of his company and probably take a large amount of calls from cleints and suppliers, along with this he pobably just squeezes in a bit to eat while reading a report. along with thsi he will be proritising the jobs of the company for that day and managing any situation that arises.
5:00pm - 9:00pm (ish) Andy would porbably concerntrate on Stratwegy and plannign and look at wways in developing his company alomng with looking at the finances etc.. (he will either stay late or do this at home)
This guy i also providing work for the other 2 along with all the usualy crap from the governement (I dotn know about the US)
Anyway LixLuke - who do you define as rich - are we talking about the Bill gates' or just some guy with a family who has a good income...
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Take care
zak
Following on from Maximus' comments it is fair that Andy pays himself more as he has an added responsibility. Perhaps Mike and Joe just work their 9-5 and go home while Andy probably lives, eats and sleeps his work.. Along with this i would imagine that Andy is actually being paid less per hour (depending on the situation of the company he has formed), as he would have to work very long days which are probably split like this
7:30am - 9:00am: Andy probably prepares for the day before the main production staff start working
9:00am - 5:00pm: Andy overseas the operations/production of his company and probably take a large amount of calls from cleints and suppliers, along with this he pobably just squeezes in a bit to eat while reading a report. along with thsi he will be proritising the jobs of the company for that day and managing any situation that arises.
5:00pm - 9:00pm (ish) Andy would porbably concerntrate on Stratwegy and plannign and look at wways in developing his company alomng with looking at the finances etc.. (he will either stay late or do this at home)
This guy i also providing work for the other 2 along with all the usualy crap from the governement (I dotn know about the US)
Anyway LixLuke - who do you define as rich - are we talking about the Bill gates' or just some guy with a family who has a good income...
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Take care
zak
Irrelevant. The facts remain that the law caters to the rich. The poor are forced to do the labor so that rich people do not have to lift a finger.
Poor people do not get $500,000 per week that the rich leeches get. So you admit that this is not fair?
Nobody is talking about even income distribution. Income distribution is not even. If Andy starts a company he should most definitely not be getting more income than the people that actually do the work. That is just how inept and moronic capitalism is.
Capitalism ensures that the people that work the least get the most pay.
Those that work the hardest get the least pay. And when they are no longer of use if injured or disabled, they are thrown in the garabge.
ONLY AN IDIOT WOULD BELIEVE THAT A PERSON SITTING THERE DOING NO LABOR SHOULD GET MORE MONEY THAN PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY DO THE HARD LABOR. THIS IS NOT FAIR. IT IS THE BRAINWASHING OF EXTREMELY STUPID PEOPLE. STUPID PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT THOSE WHO DO HARD LABOR SHOULD GET LESS THAN THOSE WHO DO NO LABOR.
Hi Lixluke
did you read my post??
So if you gte paid $500,000 dollars a week you are rich? ok then at least not everyone can get insluted by your comments..
have you heard of risk and responsibiklity.....
Do you actually perosnally know someone who runs their own businss??
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
take care
zak
Nothing you are talking about has anything to do with the subject matter.
Your question about if I know anybody that runs their own business is extremely inept. Have you not been reading what I am writing?
What a dumb inept quesition.
Do you actually personally have a life?
Your question about if I know anybody that runs their own business is extremely inept. Have you not been reading what I am writing?
What a dumb inept quesition.
Do you actually personally have a life?
Dear Lixluke,
Thank you for your comments
There is no need to get yourself all worked up Lixluke, i was only asking a couple of questions and apologies if i have grabed the wrong end of the stick.
yes you are saying why should the guy (who i am assuming runs the compnay) get paid more than the proudction staff??
yes you are right capitalism can be quite unfair at times however usually the people who work hard get paid more, and the people with more useful skills get paid more too.
Take crae
zal
WRONG. Usually the people that work harder get paid the least.
Because of crap like capitalism, the people that work the hardest get paid the least.
People that do less work get paid more.
Capitalism is a backwards system that does not function in accordance with the rules of a functioning system.
Because of crap like capitalism, the people that work the hardest get paid the least.
People that do less work get paid more.
Capitalism is a backwards system that does not function in accordance with the rules of a functioning system.
