Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Money and Finance


Thanks Tree54Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 9th, 2018, 01:20 PM   #31
Mayor of Realville
 
webguy4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil View Post
First, define capitalism. Here's my definition/description/interpretation:

Capitalism is the collective interaction in society that at some point involves the exertion of effort by one party to produce a good or provide a service to another party in exchange for some other good or service, conveyed directly between the two parties, or indirectly through one or more other parties. It is established by the forming of a state and enabled by that state's government. It is a way of obtaining goods or services that doesn't involve theft (stealing, robbery, fraud, etc.), invasion (violence exerted by an outside entity that isn't a party that has entered into any form of agreement subject to the state, or any party that is part of the state, that is invaded), or the dependency on individuals to be fully self sufficient.

Trade is the direct interaction between two parties to exchange goods or services between each other, whether by barter or by use of a medium of exchange. It also refers to a field of expertise for goods or services.

Capitalism can basically exist in two forms, at the public/collective level; one is the free market system and the other is central planning (aka "state capitalism" or "command and control market").

A free market system allows anyone to offer any good or service for trade. It doesn't give anyone offering a good or service the right to force others to engage in trade with them. It also doesn't mean that a good or service can be used to commit a crime.

A central planning system involves the placing of limits, restrictions, bans, or mandates on trade. It is the form advocated by socialism & is essentially a form of enslavement by forcing individuals to buy or sell a good or service whether or not they're willing to do so. It entails the use of force & violence from the state against individuals in situations where there has been no victim.

Neither a free market system nor a central planning system gives anyone offering a good or service the right to arbitrarily or selectively refuse a good or service they are offering on the market.

This is just a draft & partial explanation, and I can expand and revise as needed. You guys are totally welcome to suggest your own ideas that delve into the details & expand on the concept, and what I'll do is respond by stating whether I agree or disagree with it & what I have to say about it, if I get a chance to do so.

Now for the pros & cons.

Pros: It makes humanity more economically efficient by allowing individuals to specialize in one or just a few trades, rather than everyone having to be experts in every field, which is very economically inefficient (being self sufficient has a strong tendency to lead to poverty).

Cons: It still makes us dependent on trusting each other; it leads to envy; crime, poverty, war, abject hunger, homelessness, pollution, and other such problems of society still exist; it cannot be avoided or eliminated without either living in total isolation on some remote location such as a tropical island or by implementing automation, robotics, and other advancements in technology - which has not yet been achieved.
Envy comes from the polluted heart of man not just because someone has more than someone else. Poverty? Capitalism has performed a miracle of raising more people out of abject poverty than ever at any time in human history.

And trusting each other should be a good thing.
webguy4 is offline  
Old March 9th, 2018, 01:26 PM   #32
Senior Member
 
Kode's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Oregon
Posts: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by xMathFanx View Post
@guy

I was not suggesting he was specifically indicating Co-Ops in anyway. Rather, I was pointing out it was a more expansive definition of 'Capitalism' than some would use--though I do not necessarily disagree with his usage.

As for the other point you made--I agree. That is, Co-Ops cannot/should not be achieved by 'force', but rather through 'fair play'. For instance, I think it would be very unjust indeed if Walmart was forced to become a Co-Op 'tomorrow', as it clearly did not start out that way and would be essentially stealing from the owner. The proper way to go about such a transition, if desired, would be for employees to attempt to buy the company out, 'fair-and-square'
In case it provides you some comfort, I cannot see a future in which traditional corporations would be forced to convert to worker-owned, worker-run co-ops. The ways such co-ops may form include ground-up starts and buy-outs of different types in various possible situations. I see it only as a voluntary process, because the likelihood of a co-op failing is significantly increased if the workers involved are forced to participate.
Kode is offline  
Old March 9th, 2018, 01:34 PM   #33
Senior Member
 
BubbaJones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 7,561
Quote:
Originally Posted by webguy4 View Post
Envy comes from the polluted heart of man not just because someone has more than someone else. Poverty? Capitalism has performed a miracle of raising more people out of abject poverty than ever at any time in human history.

And trusting each other should be a good thing.
(My bold) ONLY in the last century or so. Only when some of those evil socialist ideals were applied to our economy did we truly start lifting the common worker out of poverty. Unions and labor laws sought to give a bit more of the profits of production to the workers involved in that production. Wages rose and people could afford the very products and services they were producing. In a little over 100 years we've gone from needing the entire family, Dad, mom and the older kids, working just to feed, clothe and house the family, to a time where one person could find a job paying well enough to sustain the family in modest style, back to a time where most families need both parents working full time.

As our modern conservatives have sought to unravel as many of those socialist ideals we have seen at first a flattening of the raise in standard of living, and are now seeing a decline. While corporate profits, upper management bonuses and stock holder payouts have soared, the wages of the average worker have remained flat for most of the last two decades.

Right now the labor market is getting tight and companies are finally having to give up a little more cash to hire the talent they need. But we need the economy to stay very healthy for quite a while to make up for that last 20 years of minimal and sometimes negative wage growth.
Thanks from Camelot

Last edited by BubbaJones; March 9th, 2018 at 01:38 PM.
BubbaJones is online now  
Old March 9th, 2018, 01:35 PM   #34
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Between everywhere
Posts: 30,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by webguy4 View Post
Capitalism is amoral. But within capitalism we have the option to act morally.

Socialism, communism, or any such coercive system is immoral and nothing good can come from it.
What justification, other than your own demented athrosclorotic brain farts do you have for your second sentence?
RNG is offline  
Old March 9th, 2018, 01:39 PM   #35
Senior Member
 
Kode's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Oregon
Posts: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by webguy4 View Post
Capitalism is amoral. But within capitalism we have the option to act morally.

Socialism, communism, or any such coercive system is immoral and nothing good can come from it.
Communism cannot be coercive or it wouldn't ever exist. Socialism is destroyed by coercive measures as we have seen so often.
Kode is offline  
Old March 9th, 2018, 01:43 PM   #36
Senior Member
 
xMathFanx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by webguy4 View Post
Socialism, communism, or any such coercive system is immoral and nothing good can come from it.
@webguy4

Interestingly, the original idea of 'Socialism' was what are now called 'Worker Cooperatives' that still function inside of a Market economy. However, I suppose one major difference, as has been touched upon here, was that it would be taken by the employees (from the owner), rather than a 'ground start-up' or 'buy-out'. This was attempted to be achieved through 'sit-in' strikes, amongst other methods.
xMathFanx is offline  
Old March 9th, 2018, 02:00 PM   #37
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 60,014
Quote:
Originally Posted by justoneman View Post
Oh brother.
Your myopia is well established on DTT.
imaginethat is online now  
Old March 9th, 2018, 02:05 PM   #38
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 60,014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kode View Post
Capitalism is never in a constant state. It evolves. Generally, it has worked well but that was when there was plenty of room for the requirements of capitalism to be fulfilled. Capitalism requires compounded growth and compounded profits, providing compounded wealth for the elite. But such compounding is not sustainable. At some point the need for growth and profits begin to require strategies that are increasingly harmful to the population, and that defy solution more and more. We are at that point. The ongoing stock market rise is the result not of improving living standards and the growing consumption and the corporate growth that results from such improvement, but rather it is the result of increases in stock buy-backs and of mergers. This, since 2008, is the first market rise in which the people have not shared in the benefits as they did historically in previous rises.

Capitalism is growing more predatory because it has exceeded its usefulness in developing production and technology and living standards. This is where it is in its evolutionary path, and it can only get worse from here. There is no going back because capitalism cannot revert to a less-developed stage and do it all again.
Yes, that's the angle I presented.

The only way for those living on the top floor of the pyramid to keep stuffing their pockets is .... to increase wealth inequality, which is what we're witnessing.
Thanks from Kode
imaginethat is online now  
Old March 9th, 2018, 05:34 PM   #39
Mayor of Realville
 
webguy4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
What justification, other than your own demented athrosclorotic brain farts do you have for your second sentence?
Socialism is always sold by appealing to envy and implemented by theft.
Thanks from Sabcat
webguy4 is offline  
Old March 9th, 2018, 05:36 PM   #40
Mayor of Realville
 
webguy4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubbaJones View Post
(My bold) ONLY in the last century or so. Only when some of those evil socialist ideals were applied to our economy did we truly start lifting the common worker out of poverty. Unions and labor laws sought to give a bit more of the profits of production to the workers involved in that production. Wages rose and people could afford the very products and services they were producing. In a little over 100 years we've gone from needing the entire family, Dad, mom and the older kids, working just to feed, clothe and house the family, to a time where one person could find a job paying well enough to sustain the family in modest style, back to a time where most families need both parents working full time.

As our modern conservatives have sought to unravel as many of those socialist ideals we have seen at first a flattening of the raise in standard of living, and are now seeing a decline. While corporate profits, upper management bonuses and stock holder payouts have soared, the wages of the average worker have remained flat for most of the last two decades.

Right now the labor market is getting tight and companies are finally having to give up a little more cash to hire the talent they need. But we need the economy to stay very healthy for quite a while to make up for that last 20 years of minimal and sometimes negative wage growth.
Delusional rewrite of history
webguy4 is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Money and Finance

Tags
capitalism, cons, pros



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Simmer Down on Islam Neo-Cons: Don't Lead Us Into Another War LongWinded Current Events 12 May 15th, 2015 02:08 PM
Tickle on the Cons., get a promotion pana8 Americas 5 October 19th, 2013 09:47 AM
US military recruits more ex-cons intangible child Warfare 2 April 29th, 2008 02:41 AM
Medical Marijuana: Pros and Cons intangible child Drugs, Alcohol, Tobacco 18 June 28th, 2007 09:07 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.