Is capitalism working?
- Thread starter Adam
- Start date
Dwayne D.L.Rabon
Registered Senior Member
Wholesale theft is the murder of and near geniocide and genocide, of the indian race for there land, that modern america was built on. hows that for counter!
like i said before your understanding is failing, the distrubution of prorerty, land in the united states is not held by the majority of the public. The land of large ploting that is not used by agriculture is collateral holding of institutions and many banks, that includes a endless list of homes that have been foreclosed on. corporations and banks must maintian a collarteral balance in asset or other such a gold ect... to be in legal standing with the federal goverment. other large track plots held by corpoaration or in some cases private land of large area, go completely unused.
furthur in many states otherlarge tracks of lands are still held by the goverment of states and are with out use as there is no population in the area as there are no jobs ect... the land is ward of the state. even in agriculture large farms go with out crops simply because corporations pay the farms not to farm to avoid surpuls and to keep prices high. America does not use all of its farm land much of it just sits there while the farmes are on vacation in florida ect.... there farms completely run down. corporations can not buy the land as that would institute a monoploy. Do you get that picture!
Moving on, i have nothing against people owning property, and that was not my point, if you where smart you would have recgonized that! Plainly property is not all that it is drummed up to be, in many states cities and counties, the taxes on property define that you would have bought the house 2 times by the time of your death, if you pass it on to your children they will have to pay at least 10 % of the vaule of your home to the state. in addtion to the taxes every year you will have to pay the monthly payment, and overtime when you want to make a improvement add a room ect... you will have to permit cost, inspection fees ect... and the cost of the work men and materials will run you about 5% of the vaule of your home.
Allow me also to exsplain that many buisness men and corporation use property so that it can be written off on there taxes as a deduction due to depreciation. they do not even care about developing the property and if the value goes up instead of down they get rid of it. cold facts of buisness and real estate.
i hope that you now understand that the population is nowhere near holding even 20% of the land in private ownership. plainly to be frank alot of land is not worth any thing any way.
my potin was that in order for the capitalist system to run as a true system oe more along the lines of it in normal practice, a resource is need buy which the common public has access, currently such a free resource does not exist, that leaves the system in the problem which i mention previous. the event od distrubtion of the land gives indivudals a resource x numder of acres per man, woman and child, of which they may sell, live on develope ect.... when the general tally of the land is divided it is manily holding land of corporation and they have genreally little use for it. a few private citizens might fell a little push to the side, but in general they are wealthy enough that they will benoft for the new development more than the rest. in addtion many person will relocate others will stay ect.. those that relocate may sell there land, other may stay and there may be employment openings. ect..... the system would kind of get thrown around for about five years, but regain a base that can propell captialism a greater distance than the present. as the present system is just abusing human rights and destroying the social system, mental stablity ect.... must i go on!
The event of federal interstate transportaion system will also transportaion to the common, and allow circulation of population increasing social stature of the nation, when a person know they can get on the supertrain and just go and find a job that is in his/her field they can do that with out henderances of driving, packing the house ect.. they can go and loook for a job and later return, they can do Mardi graw ect... whens the door is open people will come in. it just conductive to buisness.
heres a option make chemisrty a manditory requirement of high school and college. After all we getting close to the space age!
Really the system is failing down and it just a mess as i already exspalined.
The way that you verbalise about captialism it would be plain anarchy.
DWAYNE D.L.RABON
like i said before your understanding is failing, the distrubution of prorerty, land in the united states is not held by the majority of the public. The land of large ploting that is not used by agriculture is collateral holding of institutions and many banks, that includes a endless list of homes that have been foreclosed on. corporations and banks must maintian a collarteral balance in asset or other such a gold ect... to be in legal standing with the federal goverment. other large track plots held by corpoaration or in some cases private land of large area, go completely unused.
furthur in many states otherlarge tracks of lands are still held by the goverment of states and are with out use as there is no population in the area as there are no jobs ect... the land is ward of the state. even in agriculture large farms go with out crops simply because corporations pay the farms not to farm to avoid surpuls and to keep prices high. America does not use all of its farm land much of it just sits there while the farmes are on vacation in florida ect.... there farms completely run down. corporations can not buy the land as that would institute a monoploy. Do you get that picture!
Moving on, i have nothing against people owning property, and that was not my point, if you where smart you would have recgonized that! Plainly property is not all that it is drummed up to be, in many states cities and counties, the taxes on property define that you would have bought the house 2 times by the time of your death, if you pass it on to your children they will have to pay at least 10 % of the vaule of your home to the state. in addtion to the taxes every year you will have to pay the monthly payment, and overtime when you want to make a improvement add a room ect... you will have to permit cost, inspection fees ect... and the cost of the work men and materials will run you about 5% of the vaule of your home.
Allow me also to exsplain that many buisness men and corporation use property so that it can be written off on there taxes as a deduction due to depreciation. they do not even care about developing the property and if the value goes up instead of down they get rid of it. cold facts of buisness and real estate.
i hope that you now understand that the population is nowhere near holding even 20% of the land in private ownership. plainly to be frank alot of land is not worth any thing any way.
my potin was that in order for the capitalist system to run as a true system oe more along the lines of it in normal practice, a resource is need buy which the common public has access, currently such a free resource does not exist, that leaves the system in the problem which i mention previous. the event od distrubtion of the land gives indivudals a resource x numder of acres per man, woman and child, of which they may sell, live on develope ect.... when the general tally of the land is divided it is manily holding land of corporation and they have genreally little use for it. a few private citizens might fell a little push to the side, but in general they are wealthy enough that they will benoft for the new development more than the rest. in addtion many person will relocate others will stay ect.. those that relocate may sell there land, other may stay and there may be employment openings. ect..... the system would kind of get thrown around for about five years, but regain a base that can propell captialism a greater distance than the present. as the present system is just abusing human rights and destroying the social system, mental stablity ect.... must i go on!
The event of federal interstate transportaion system will also transportaion to the common, and allow circulation of population increasing social stature of the nation, when a person know they can get on the supertrain and just go and find a job that is in his/her field they can do that with out henderances of driving, packing the house ect.. they can go and loook for a job and later return, they can do Mardi graw ect... whens the door is open people will come in. it just conductive to buisness.
heres a option make chemisrty a manditory requirement of high school and college. After all we getting close to the space age!
Really the system is failing down and it just a mess as i already exspalined.
The way that you verbalise about captialism it would be plain anarchy.
DWAYNE D.L.RABON
Dwayne D.L.Rabon – Thanks for giving me your points.
It seems you favor land redistribution because you think the land isn’t being effectively used. Who are you to decide? People and companies don’t own land to just let it go to waste. Land that “just sits there” as you say may have been bought as an investment, or for conservation. The owner is entitled to let the land remain as is. It doesn’t matter whether the owner is an individual, a corporation (group of people), or the government (public).
The first effect of land redistribution would be civil war. People don’t appreciate being stolen from. The Indians didn’t either. Your plan would have to involve gaining control of the military. You wouldn’t be able to convince the public to take property from the corporations, because those corporations are owned by people.
Yes, owning property involves taxes. Taxes pay for things like the supertrain you want. How is that bad?
Yes, the bank does expect you to pay for it. Do you expect the house to be given to you at the expense of someone else’s labor or investment?
Yep, adding a room costs money. Do you expect the crew and inspector to work for free? Am I missing something in your argument? How have you shown in the slightest that property is not all that it is drummed up to be? You seem to just be ranting about how you are expected to pay for stuff.
So what? Having land in public ownership is to my benefit, for I am a member of the public.
In the U.S. there are many such resources. The national park system, the national forests, recreation land, Bureau of Land Management land, public beaches, state parks, city parks, etc. As a member of the public, access is free or low-cost to you. What more do you want?
After the smoke cleared from the civil war, most of these individuals would sell the land back to the corporations and farmers who are better able to tend it. You’d be back to square one. Anybody can own x number of acres now, by working for it. The corporations will be happy to sell it to you for the right price. You’re really talking about money redistribution, or theft.
What support have you given for this other than complain about how the bank has the nerve to expect you to make house payments? Who else is being abused?
I’m all for the supertrain if the riders pay for it in its entirety. But that’s unlikely in the U.S. when we already have airlines flying non-stop from Seattle to New York in 5 hours for $US 110. I gather—based on your previous comments and because you don’t acknowledge that we already have cheap forms of interstate transport—that you expect the supertrain to be free of charge to you. But people don’t work for free, nor will they give up their property for your benefit.
It seems you favor land redistribution because you think the land isn’t being effectively used. Who are you to decide? People and companies don’t own land to just let it go to waste. Land that “just sits there” as you say may have been bought as an investment, or for conservation. The owner is entitled to let the land remain as is. It doesn’t matter whether the owner is an individual, a corporation (group of people), or the government (public).
The first effect of land redistribution would be civil war. People don’t appreciate being stolen from. The Indians didn’t either. Your plan would have to involve gaining control of the military. You wouldn’t be able to convince the public to take property from the corporations, because those corporations are owned by people.
Yes, owning property involves taxes. Taxes pay for things like the supertrain you want. How is that bad?
Yes, the bank does expect you to pay for it. Do you expect the house to be given to you at the expense of someone else’s labor or investment?
Yep, adding a room costs money. Do you expect the crew and inspector to work for free? Am I missing something in your argument? How have you shown in the slightest that property is not all that it is drummed up to be? You seem to just be ranting about how you are expected to pay for stuff.
So what? Having land in public ownership is to my benefit, for I am a member of the public.
In the U.S. there are many such resources. The national park system, the national forests, recreation land, Bureau of Land Management land, public beaches, state parks, city parks, etc. As a member of the public, access is free or low-cost to you. What more do you want?
After the smoke cleared from the civil war, most of these individuals would sell the land back to the corporations and farmers who are better able to tend it. You’d be back to square one. Anybody can own x number of acres now, by working for it. The corporations will be happy to sell it to you for the right price. You’re really talking about money redistribution, or theft.
What support have you given for this other than complain about how the bank has the nerve to expect you to make house payments? Who else is being abused?
I’m all for the supertrain if the riders pay for it in its entirety. But that’s unlikely in the U.S. when we already have airlines flying non-stop from Seattle to New York in 5 hours for $US 110. I gather—based on your previous comments and because you don’t acknowledge that we already have cheap forms of interstate transport—that you expect the supertrain to be free of charge to you. But people don’t work for free, nor will they give up their property for your benefit.
Actually Dwayne, a lot of the points you raised are familiar to anyone who has had exposure to Marx's ideas of base-superstructure, class-struggles, surplus value, labour alienation etc. I think some here do understand what you are pointing out.
But at the same time, it is also easy to see how ideas such as land or resource re-distribution can be interpreted as wholesale theft. The US is at an advanced stage of Capitalism. The system of resource-ownership has already rooted itself way too deep. In my opinion, nothing short of a revolution is going to change the resource distribution landscape. And this, to present resource owners is no different than theft, unless they share the same ideologies of communal ownership.
Look at it this way, if by its own logic, Capitalism will consume itself, why not let it go all the way till the end. Then perhaps people can start clean from square one. But given human greed, I doubt the alternate system would differ very much from the present one.
One thing though, to the best of my knowledge, Marx had always refrained from dating Capitalism's demise. Perhaps he had doubts?
But at the same time, it is also easy to see how ideas such as land or resource re-distribution can be interpreted as wholesale theft. The US is at an advanced stage of Capitalism. The system of resource-ownership has already rooted itself way too deep. In my opinion, nothing short of a revolution is going to change the resource distribution landscape. And this, to present resource owners is no different than theft, unless they share the same ideologies of communal ownership.
Look at it this way, if by its own logic, Capitalism will consume itself, why not let it go all the way till the end. Then perhaps people can start clean from square one. But given human greed, I doubt the alternate system would differ very much from the present one.
One thing though, to the best of my knowledge, Marx had always refrained from dating Capitalism's demise. Perhaps he had doubts?
Capitalism is already failling and falling. The very core of capitalism is the trade of resources and manufacture products between first world countries and third world countries. This is even more true for those times of globablization. ABout 50 years ago, it seems that there was still resources in the US, but nowdays, the resources are almost ended. The consequences of the end of resources are catastrofic for the present system. Since the need for resources is in the core of the trades and of the system itself, the lack of them will make it collapse from inside out. This can only be avoided if we find new resources, more ways to recicle materials or search for resouces outside the planet.
It is not much different then the fall of the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire was based on slave work. When they had not enough slaves, they lost the empire. Of course, there were other things that helped such as lack of communication between the many parts of the empire, corruption and hunger for power from many of the generals (the last two still exist...). The system was also getting old and not very manageable with the size of the empire. It was pretty hard to maintain it.
It is not much different then the fall of the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire was based on slave work. When they had not enough slaves, they lost the empire. Of course, there were other things that helped such as lack of communication between the many parts of the empire, corruption and hunger for power from many of the generals (the last two still exist...). The system was also getting old and not very manageable with the size of the empire. It was pretty hard to maintain it.
Originally posted by NenarTronian
i'd like to say that capitalism makes people materialistic and selfish and such - but i'd be wrong. People are like this regardless of what sort of economic system their government is involved in..
You hit it right on the nose...
"Todos para todos y nada para nosotros"
"Everything for everyone and nothing for ourselves"
--Che Guivera
The maintenance of the Roman Empire was not difficult...It lasted for over 400 years at the size that most of us think of it as (surrounding the Mediterranean Sea). And it didn't collapse because of the lack of slaves...No one has been able to attribute any one thing to its downfall. The fact of the matter is that the US is nothing like the Roman Empire in terms of maintenance. The Romans had to deal with invasions and rebellions. When was the last time you heard of a foreign army stpping foot on American soil for the purpose of conquering? When was the last rebellion that overthrew any particular sector of our government...
Answer to both - NEVER
The US has problems that lie within the government. In that sense we can compare the two empires. Both governments were/are completely imperialistic.
Does this have anything to do with capitalism...NO! Rome was not capitalist. It was ruled in the government and in commerce by an oligarchy. Very few people had wealth of any sort.
US capitalism is failing much more now than it was a few decades ago because of the people's lack of trust in Corporate Capitalism with more and more cases of the bad accountants coming up. Corporate Capitalism is not working and probably never will, for an extended amount of time. A lot of old corporations are being eaten up by bigger ones that claim bankruptcy in a few years. And if you want to talk about corruption - Corporate Capitalism is the main proponent.
1119 – Well put. Seems to me that capitalism, in the U.S. at least, offers a good balance of communal ownership in the form of public places. Most of the best places have been reserved and maintained.
TruthSeeker – You’re right on the consequences. Capitalism has depended on an ever-increasing population. One of the key economic indicators is housing starts; that is, how many new houses are being built. See a flaw with that? Hopefully people will wake up before it’s too late.
dagowop – Welcome to sciforums. In large I think the accounting corruption in the U.S. is minor. Investors can easily minimize their risk through the power of diversification. Compare that to other countries like Argentina, where you can wake up one day to find out that the government froze your bank account.
TruthSeeker – You’re right on the consequences. Capitalism has depended on an ever-increasing population. One of the key economic indicators is housing starts; that is, how many new houses are being built. See a flaw with that? Hopefully people will wake up before it’s too late.
dagowop – Welcome to sciforums. In large I think the accounting corruption in the U.S. is minor. Investors can easily minimize their risk through the power of diversification. Compare that to other countries like Argentina, where you can wake up one day to find out that the government froze your bank account.
Greed is a powerful force so dont under rate it. Capitalism works because it forces people to work to survive or be comfortable. The people, once they have a taste of what money can buy will allways want more. This runs a capitallist society. People get as much education as possible so they can get more money so they may have more luxury. They will often do their jobs as hard and as long as they can so they will get promoted. This catalistic process fules companies, individuals, and in the process tax revenue.
In a truely communist state people would not have this drive because everything is handed to them on a silver platter. Why go to college for 8 years if you will get paid the same amount no matter what? Why work at all if the state is willing to support you? If you take all the money from the rich, why try to become rich?
A communist state collects little money in taxes because the most efficent source of revinue is from the rich, a group they are against. After all, its hard to make money from a person who is getting his money from you. Living conditions and infrastructure gradually deteriorate due to lack of funds. People get unhappy and they rebel.
Though the name is new most civilizations in history were largely capitalistic. Pre-WW2 England back to pre-colonial times. Ancient rome. The Mongolian Empire of Ghangis Khan. The Phonecians. The Carthaginians. The list goes on and on.
America may fall tomorrow but unless you kill every greedy person in the world capitalism will continue. The greedy are successful and thus propogate exponentially. And capitallism with it.
And Dagowop. The british invaded america in the war of 1812. Burned most of the capital too.
In a truely communist state people would not have this drive because everything is handed to them on a silver platter. Why go to college for 8 years if you will get paid the same amount no matter what? Why work at all if the state is willing to support you? If you take all the money from the rich, why try to become rich?
A communist state collects little money in taxes because the most efficent source of revinue is from the rich, a group they are against. After all, its hard to make money from a person who is getting his money from you. Living conditions and infrastructure gradually deteriorate due to lack of funds. People get unhappy and they rebel.
Though the name is new most civilizations in history were largely capitalistic. Pre-WW2 England back to pre-colonial times. Ancient rome. The Mongolian Empire of Ghangis Khan. The Phonecians. The Carthaginians. The list goes on and on.
America may fall tomorrow but unless you kill every greedy person in the world capitalism will continue. The greedy are successful and thus propogate exponentially. And capitallism with it.
And Dagowop. The british invaded america in the war of 1812. Burned most of the capital too.
Dagowoop,
I was mostly talking about corruption. Eventhough there is slavery in capitalism nowdays (they simply disguise it... :bugeye: )...
zanket,
I was mostly talking about corruption. Eventhough there is slavery in capitalism nowdays (they simply disguise it... :bugeye:
)...zanket,
Well, what is actually happening now and that began to happen in the industrial revolution is that the machines are taking the place of humans. It is even worse than you think (it seems...). Eventually, they won't need us anymore... but as robots don't earn and buy anything, who will move the economy? Anyone that study or have studied economy knows that the big corporations need us as much as we "need" them. They need us to buy their products, and for us to buy their products, we need money, that we get through the jobs they offer us. If they stop offering jobs to us, we have no money and they have a superproduction crisis! Do you realize taht many of the big corporation have been having superproduction crisis? Why? Simply because there's not enough people to buy! When there is too many money concentrated in the hands of a few, the market slows down and eventually can (and will) collapse...!
Dwayne D.L.Rabon
Registered Senior Member
Zanket, your preception of the cirumstance is warped, you did not understand. your meathod of ranting as you say was no awnser to the croping problems, in fact you failed to address any of the base issues. the isssue was is captialism failing, the awnser is yes, so then what should be done, i gave the only key elements that will allow its contiuned propagation. incontrast you gave no option to the problems other than let the problem contiune as is.
Your the current meathod means the establishment of a welfare state, or eventual and contniued degregation of life. and plainly don't think that after a while the public does not catch on, because they do, and when they do you see many wealthy people being murder. just as prior to the world war 1. in the french revolution, and the revoltionary war of america.
Thomas jefferson, '' the public will contuine to suffer under the traynny of the few" Declaration of Indpendance.
In general such a brutal event of anarchy is what you suggest by your argument with out another option given in your argument.
Furthur you failed to look at the development of society and organizational system(captialism) in the long term events. you have also confused red tape an credit proccedure of trusts and other formalities. you also have failed to deduct the figures that are physical to sense of reason or event.
And i will say this as well yes you are missing many things, basically the logic of mind to assmeble the ideas presented about capatialism to the physical.
A POINT; given the development of technology in the 21st century the social standing of the united states is failing in human concept of intelligence, and morality. as i know you concepts are short in understanding application of captialism and social standing, and plainly the order,as they apply to events. with out basic standing of the population in socaill order there is no wealthy, the entirity of wealth deminises, as the dollar deminishes. eventually the dollar is worth nothing. i am not going to go deep into the issue of the power of the dollar, and asesing its value, but you can email Allen Greenspan US Treasury Department.
it would also seem that you do not understand quite a bit, given your failur to relate employment with population growth and mechanical technology, inflation and balance of surpuls. I am pretty sure that you have to completey ignore the facts of such to present your argument.
People vote for people that think they will do what is right in govement postion, it is the special intrest groups that you represent, a minority, the united states is by constitutional law required to provide a republican form of gooverment in times of civil unrest. at what point in the faliure of captialism does the fedreal goverment intervene, cleary restucturing is going to be needed should special intrest groups short the whole of the population becuase they have minor benift of capital that would either way deminish.
Also given your argument then i assume that you would support the mandatory education of chemistry, such a event would level imperialist captialist to the ground as they would not have the current options that they do know, the population would have very little need for coproations and those who maintained there wealth by reins attached to those corporation would be hard to make their dollar worth anything. so then it appears it would be the goal of the corparation executives to keep the population under suppression, and uneduacted, like the way they make products to have a limited life time before faliure to gain a profit.
Cleary allow me to exspalin in regional areas it is always more profitalbe to attract the poor rather than the wealthy, if the poor are there the wealthy will come.,for a growing base it is good to have a poor population if you want to make money.
So clearly then stablizing captialism by education of a pratice that makes people independant is not what special intrest groups would want.
So then what are your options for the failing pratice of capitalism with out free resource, would you suggest slavery.
KING,DWAYNE D.L.RABON
Your the current meathod means the establishment of a welfare state, or eventual and contniued degregation of life. and plainly don't think that after a while the public does not catch on, because they do, and when they do you see many wealthy people being murder. just as prior to the world war 1. in the french revolution, and the revoltionary war of america.
Thomas jefferson, '' the public will contuine to suffer under the traynny of the few" Declaration of Indpendance.
In general such a brutal event of anarchy is what you suggest by your argument with out another option given in your argument.
Furthur you failed to look at the development of society and organizational system(captialism) in the long term events. you have also confused red tape an credit proccedure of trusts and other formalities. you also have failed to deduct the figures that are physical to sense of reason or event.
And i will say this as well yes you are missing many things, basically the logic of mind to assmeble the ideas presented about capatialism to the physical.
A POINT; given the development of technology in the 21st century the social standing of the united states is failing in human concept of intelligence, and morality. as i know you concepts are short in understanding application of captialism and social standing, and plainly the order,as they apply to events. with out basic standing of the population in socaill order there is no wealthy, the entirity of wealth deminises, as the dollar deminishes. eventually the dollar is worth nothing. i am not going to go deep into the issue of the power of the dollar, and asesing its value, but you can email Allen Greenspan US Treasury Department.
it would also seem that you do not understand quite a bit, given your failur to relate employment with population growth and mechanical technology, inflation and balance of surpuls. I am pretty sure that you have to completey ignore the facts of such to present your argument.
People vote for people that think they will do what is right in govement postion, it is the special intrest groups that you represent, a minority, the united states is by constitutional law required to provide a republican form of gooverment in times of civil unrest. at what point in the faliure of captialism does the fedreal goverment intervene, cleary restucturing is going to be needed should special intrest groups short the whole of the population becuase they have minor benift of capital that would either way deminish.
Also given your argument then i assume that you would support the mandatory education of chemistry, such a event would level imperialist captialist to the ground as they would not have the current options that they do know, the population would have very little need for coproations and those who maintained there wealth by reins attached to those corporation would be hard to make their dollar worth anything. so then it appears it would be the goal of the corparation executives to keep the population under suppression, and uneduacted, like the way they make products to have a limited life time before faliure to gain a profit.
Cleary allow me to exspalin in regional areas it is always more profitalbe to attract the poor rather than the wealthy, if the poor are there the wealthy will come.,for a growing base it is good to have a poor population if you want to make money.
So clearly then stablizing captialism by education of a pratice that makes people independant is not what special intrest groups would want.
So then what are your options for the failing pratice of capitalism with out free resource, would you suggest slavery.
KING,DWAYNE D.L.RABON
Dwayne – Please don’t smoke crack just before posting. I can barely make sense of your statements. For example, “the ideas presented about capitalism to the physical.” What ideas? Physical what? How did I fail “to relate employment with population growth and mechanical technology, inflation and balance of surplus” when we never discussed that? Can you keep your points short and to the point? Otherwise I’ll have to pass.
Yes! Definitely and is working in accordance with the basics.
Is it working for the common good? If you’re a capitalist, Yes! If you are not, No!
Dose capitalism has moral, ethics or gain-limits? No! if it did, it would be called socialism.
Does capitalism buy power & judgment? Yes! …As basic raw material.
Does capitalism control the masses? Yes! …As a buy-product to multiply.
Can Capitalism be turned into a more effective good? No! Capitalism only knows self destruction.
If Capitalism isn’t that good, why do we have uncontrolled Capitalism?? Because without it, we will not be imperfect humans, and …this isn’t heaven yet!
zanket,
It is already happening... wildely...
It is already happening... wildely...
Socialism is most susceptable to paracites, people who consume rescources but do no work even when they could. Capitalism in its purest form is hard on the individual person but strengthens the country as a whole. THe most successful naturally succeed and the unsuccessful dissapear or change their ways. Social darwinism.
Of course even america is not a purely capitalistic society. We have a welfare system.
Of course even america is not a purely capitalistic society. We have a welfare system.
which one?
Clockwood – Well put. Short-term welfare is capitalistic. If people are down on their luck society should minimally help them so they won’t resort to more expensive crime and so society can profit from them when they’ve gotten back on their feet. Long-term welfare is a net loss. Thankfully Clinton et al got rid of much of it in the U.S.
TruthSeeker – My last question to you above.
TruthSeeker – My last question to you above.
This one? Well, capitalism is not uncontrolled... It is actually controlled by some large corporations, like an oligarchy. The difference is that in an oligarchy the members have political power while in capitalism they have more an influencial and economic power. Without them, the system simply don't work at all. Isn't that to put power in their hands?