Capitalism is Devil's Dung

[DutchJazzer]

it is truly sad that certain religious leaders are retarded beyond believe!

condemning capitalism and such.
instead of taking the "evolution vs Creation" debate with actual inteligence

 

[franklin]

In a true capitalistic society banks would have been allowed to fail, just like any other private business. In this society we live in banks have the government at their mercy, they issue the money and inject it into the system lending it to the government, which of course has to be paid back with interests. It's a downward spiral that needs to stop as soon as possible. End the Fed.

I still can't get around the idea that we let Ron Paul go, a modern version of one of our Founding Fathers, we get what we deserve.

Bloody hell. I hope someone put you up to this nonsense Jamezz.

 

[Jamezz]

it is truly sad that certain religious leaders are retarded beyond believe!

condemning capitalism and such.
instead of taking the "evolution vs Creation" debate with actual inteligence

Oh, this is debatable? You mean there is a chance that I do come from a monkey? The gap between monkeys and humans is bigger than the one between where Lindsey Lohan's legs meet.

 

[Jamezz]

Bloody hell. I hope someone put you up to this nonsense Jamezz.

Sounds like this calls for another awesome poker night.

 

[Harambe]

Literally everyone supports reform in one form or another according to their worldview no matter how rational or irrational.

The thing I don't get is you didn't go to school and several here have said going to school is plenty affordable, yet you continue complaining for 'reform' in school funding because it is not currently affordable??? Makes no sense. Then again, you did say you were pulling over your trollmobile so foolish on me for chiming in. Then you repped me asking for me to read and I got sucked in to you and your twin brother dalamaintnuthin's admitted trolling. Well done guys.

So, I saw that something wasn't affordable, saw that the majority found it dangerously unaffordable without going into a stupid amount of debt, and weighed my options. I knew I would have to work my hands, fingers, and eyes into oblivion, but it was better than getting into something and 30k later realizing that's not what i wanted to do.

I'm the idiot for that?

I know you're not dumb, you're just unwilling to give it a thought other than "quitcherbishin". I rep you because at times you can get off the shelf and look at the cupboard and actually think, and I recognize that. It's also a peace offering reminding you that I don't hate you, I just disagree and feel like you're unwilling to get off your shelf.

 

[franklin]

So, I saw that something wasn't affordable, saw that the majority found it dangerously unaffordable without going into a stupid amount of debt, and weighed my options. I knew I would have to work my hands, fingers, and eyes into oblivion, but it was better than getting into something and 30k later realizing that's not what i wanted to do.

I'm the idiot for that?

I know you're not dumb, you're just unwilling to give it a thought other than "quitcherbishin". I rep you because at times you can get off the shelf and look at the cupboard and actually think, and I recognize that. It's also a peace offering reminding you that I don't hate you, I just disagree and feel like you're unwilling to get off your shelf.

Thinking out loud..

I don't get how far rightist and leftist ideologues like you and dalamaintnuthin think everyone else is stuck inside a box. In the past I've spent a lot of time on john bircher conspiracy websites as a hobby and it was a common calling card to break down any discussion. The ideologues telling everyone else they are the ones with a mental block. I'm pretty much the most level headed, open-minded person you'll find yet I have two far leftists (admitting to trolling as well) claiming I'm on some high horse or whatever because I don't agree with their propaganda.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Thinking out loud..

I don't get how far rightist and leftist ideologues like you and dalamaintnuthin think everyone else is stuck inside a box. In the past I've spent a lot of time on john bircher conspiracy websites as a hobby and it was a common calling card to break down any discussion. The ideologues telling everyone else they are the ones with a mental block. I'm pretty much the most level headed, open-minded person you'll find yet I have two far leftists (admitting to trolling as well) claiming I'm on some high horse or whatever because I don't agree with their propaganda.

preach

 

[Jamezz]

The only solution to this is for Utah to secede from the US. The Utah Jazz could stay in the league the same way the Raptors are in the league. Currency: the 'Utahr'

 

[NAOS]

I think that if we first define capitalism then, although it is a popular stance(common sense even), I don't think that your statement makes any sense at all.

If capitalism is defined as from merriam-websters-"a way of organizing an economy so that the things that are used to make and transport products (such as land, oil, factories, ships, etc.) are owned by individual people and companies rather than by the government" from google "an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state." then; You have regulated the market but you haven't regulated ownership. More often than not that monitoring and manipulation of the market is used to consolidate ownership and protect the capitalist.

We have an inability to collectively speak about capitalism because the word has been twisted to be absolutely synonymous with free markets in public discourse.

I think that we need to have a whole different conversation if we are truly taking about regulating capitalism. Should the great grandchildren of an innovator, no matter how inept they may be, have a greater claim to the profits of a company than the people that make it run? Patents eventually expire and yet they still provide ample incentive for inventors. Should there be a point in time where a company transitions from preserving its existence for the purpose of benefiting dead entrepreneurs and becomes an institution that preserves its existence for the profit of its workforce? Should the fruits of the workforce benefit wall-street more than main street?

I think that capitalism is almost completely unregulated while the market is regulated for the benefit of those that have the most capital. If that isn't unbridled capitalism, what is?

They are similar. They aren't interchangeable.

Market Economy(system of Trade)-A market economy is an economy in which decisions regarding investment, production, and distribution are based on supply and demand, and prices of goods and services are determined in a free price system

Capitalism(system of property)-a way of organizing an economy so that the things that are used to make and transport products (such as land, oil, factories, ships, etc.) are owned by individual people and companies rather than by the government

They seem so because we ignore but two main archetypes, Western Capitalism, and Soviet Communism.

I wish these posts had gotten more play, because salt13 makes an incredibly important point.

Part of what salt13 is evoking here goes back to the question of the origin of capitalism. Why did it develop in Europe when it did, when the conditions for its emergence appear at the height of both the Chinese empire and Islamic Empire?

What some thinkers have put forward is that capitalism could only take root when other large, powerful institutional conglomerates like religion and State-philosophy are in decline. In the relative absence of competition for minds and hearts (i.e. values) the logic and mnemotechnics of ***-for-tat exchange can carry the day. There is a good bit of historical evidence that suggests the Chinese and Islamic empires greatly feared the possibility of these values winning out, and consciously acted so as to prevent that possibility.

A definition of capitalism has to include a sociopolitical process whereby the values of ***-for-tat exchange gain ascendancy over competing values. I mean, there are several different ways we transact with one another besides ***-for-tat, so how did the latter take over the judiciaries? How have the latter's values come to be seen as de jure?

Capitalism goes unregulated if we aren't asking these questions about its values and how they are minted. We can regulate or de-regulate the hell out of the marketplace and ignore these other questions. They are separate.


(I'd like to point out how my comments above allow for a reading of capitalism which sees it as a liberating power. The Confucian State in China was, in part, very suffocating. Just like the religious values in Islam. Capitalism decodes that stuff, and lets the chips fall on ***-for-tat exchange. There is a liberating force there.)

 

[Harambe]

Thinking out loud..

I don't get how far rightist and leftist ideologues like you and dalamaintnuthin think everyone else is stuck inside a box. In the past I've spent a lot of time on john bircher conspiracy websites as a hobby and it was a common calling card to break down any discussion. The ideologues telling everyone else they are the ones with a mental block. I'm pretty much the most level headed, open-minded person you'll find yet I have two far leftists (admitting to trolling as well) claiming I'm on some high horse or whatever because I don't agree with their propaganda.

It's not that you disagree that I think you're living in a van down by the river. I don't believe I said high horse at all, nor did I imply that your shelf was the top. It's that you don't acknowledge that there could be a problem, and ignore or discredit those that say there is. It's less about far right/far left shenanigans as it is about continual improvement.

Your mentality says "Suck it up, buttercup" instead of "Do we need to do something about it, and if so what?"

Do we need to?
Most Americans say higher education is not affordable. This poll here says 79% of Americans agree that it's available, just not affordable.

I have not once trolled you for the sake of trolling, or to try to overwhelm you to get you to shut up. It takes WAY too much effort to do that to reasonable posters. I reserve that effort for when DutchRudder goes off..

 

[Dr. Jones]

I wish these posts had gotten more play, because salt13 makes an incredibly important point.

Part of what salt13 is evoking here goes back to the question of the origin of capitalism. Why did it develop in Europe when it did, when the conditions for it's emergence appear at the height of both the Chinese empire and Islamic Empire?

What some thinkers have put forward is that capitalism could only take root when other large, powerful institutional conglomerates like religion and State-philosophy are in decline. In the relative absence of competition for minds and hearts (i.e. values) the logic and mnemotechnics of ***-for-tat exchange can carry the day. There is a good bit of historical evidence that suggests the Chinese and Islamic empires greatly feared the possibility of these values winning out, and consciously acted so as to prevent that possibility.

A definition of capitalism has to include a sociopolitical process whereby the values of ***-for-tat exchange gain ascendancy over competing values. I mean, there are several different ways we transact with one other besides ***-for-tat, so how did the latter take over the judiciaries? How have the latter's values come to be seen as de jure?

Capitalism goes unregulated if we aren't asking these questions about its values and how they are minted. We can regulate or de-regulate the hell out of the marketplace and ignore these other questions. They are separate.


(I'd like to point out how my comments above allow for a reading of capitalism which sees it as a liberating power. The Confucian State in China was, in part, very suffocating. Just like the religious values in Islam. Capitalism decodes that stuff, and lets the chips fall on ***-for-tat exchange. There is a liberating force there.)

I don't often agree with anything NAOS says, but this is a good post, imo. A gem if you will.

 

[DutchJazzer]

The only solution to this is for Utah to secede from the US. The Utah Jazz could stay in the league the same way the Raptors are in the league. Currency: the 'Utahr'

JOIN TEXAS

take some of colorade and new mexico and form your own country!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[franklin]

It's not that you disagree that I think you're living in a van down by the river. I don't believe I said high horse at all, nor did I imply that your shelf was the top. It's that you don't acknowledge that there could be a problem, and ignore or discredit those that say there is. It's less about far right/far left shenanigans as it is about continual improvement.

Your mentality says "Suck it up, buttercup" instead of "Do we need to do something about it, and if so what?"

Do we need to?
Most Americans say higher education is not affordable. This poll here says 79% of Americans agree that it's available, just not affordable.

I have not once trolled you for the sake of trolling, or to try to overwhelm you to get you to shut up. It takes WAY too much effort to do that to reasonable posters. I reserve that effort for when DutchRudder goes off..

Like I asked before, why are the least objective people like yourself, dalamaintnuthin, The Thriller, Dutchjazzer, etc. always thinking everyone else are the closed-minded ones. Why oh why can we not see it your way right?

 

[Harambe]

Like I asked before, why are the least objective people like yourself, dalamaintnuthin, The Thriller, Dutchjazzer, etc. always thinking everyone else are the closed-minded ones. Why oh why can we not see it your way right?

Like I answered before, because they way you talk(in this case post) seems to preclude the possibility of being open minded about the subject.

But I do like the way you're spinning open minded objectiveness into the way this board addresses racialism.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Like I answered before, because they way you talk(in this case post) seems to preclude the possibility of being open minded about the subject.

But I do like the way you're spinning open minded objectiveness into the way this board addresses racialism.

No no he's right, only the most open-minded of people speak in generalities, and dismiss valid factual posts by other members because "they admitted to trolling".

 

[Deleted member 848]

Also awesome seeing franklin's attempt to soil Roach's reputation as one who didn't work hard. What a backfire that was.

 

[franklin]

No no he's right, only the most open-minded of people speak in generalities, and dismiss valid factual posts by other members because "they admitted to trolling".

Close-minded ideologues have a tendency of hypocritically charging others with the negative character traits that define them. You are the king of speaking in generalities, as is evidenced plenty of times in this thread.

However, I wouldn't go so far as claiming you "dismiss valid factual posts" since you generally do not know nearly as much as you think you do to realize how naive your dismissals are.

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." --Bertrand Russell, describing Dalamaintnuthin.

 

[Harambe]

Close-minded ideologues have a tendency of hypocritically charging others with the negative character traits that define them. You are the king of speaking in generalities, as is evidenced plenty of times in this thread.

However, I wouldn't go so far as claiming you "dismiss valid factual posts" since you generally do not know nearly as much as you think you do to realize how naive your dismissals are.

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." --Bertrand Russell, describing Dalamaintnuthin.

Don't push out.. this is at least the second time in this thread you have. First, instead of actually addressing a concern, you asked me why I always assume you don't look at the real world. I told you that nothing you've stated illustrates that you've even considered that there's a problem. 71% of Americans say there's a problem. In most states, usually but not exclusively those republican controlled, we see state university funding cut drastically. In the future, that will make costs greater for the students, increasing that 71%.

How high does that number have to get before you can consider that an issue?

 

[franklin]

Like I answered before, because they way you talk(in this case post) seems to preclude the possibility of being open minded about the subject.

But I do like the way you're spinning open minded objectiveness into the way this board addresses racialism.

It's because I don't take radicals and propagandists seriously. You two should count yourselves lucky I even read your posts.

 

[Harambe]

It's because I don't take radicals and propagandists seriously. You two should count yourselves lucky I even read your posts.

Third time you've refused to answer.