Gothic.net News Horror Gothic Lifestyle Fiction Movies Books and Literature Dark TV VIP Horror Professionals Professional Writing Tips Links Gothic Forum




Go Back   Gothic.net Community > Boards > Politics

Politics "Under democracy, one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule -and both commonly succeed, and are right." -H.L. Menken

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-11-2011, 07:40 PM   #1
AshleyO
 
AshleyO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,700
Capitalism thought excersize.

You are an entrepreneur. You've invented this really cool gadget and there's a high demand to produce it.

Now. You NEED a work force to make this product possible.

Workforce 1:

They are a country with lots of protections for workers. There's a minimum wage you must pay, there's health benefits you must provide for people working 36 hrs or more per week. There's obligations by law to provide time and a half for overtime work. There's regulations in place to ensure the safety of these workers during the day from the machines. If you hire a part-time worker, you are obligated to work them no less than 25 hours per week.

Workforce 2:

There are no regulations in place to ensure the safety of the workers. There is no minimum wage. Healthcare providing is optional. You are not required to pay overtime.


Which workforce do you hire to produce your goods?
__________________
"Women hold up half the sky" -Mao

"God always picks the strangest things to get angry about. Get an abortion or gay married and he'll aim a tornado right at you.

Rip off a million poor people and Wall street has no problems. " -Rebecca B
AshleyO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 07:55 PM   #2
Alan
 
Alan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,932
Hang on, I know this one...





...you carry the one..
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by KissMeDeadly
You fucking people [war veterans] are only a step below entitled rich kids, the only difference being you had to do and witness horrible things, instead of being given everything.
real classy
Alan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 08:02 PM   #3
Despanan
 
Despanan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sugar Hill
Posts: 3,887
Call people un-American.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by KontanKarite
I promote radical change through my actions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Lahnger
I have chugged more than ten epic boners.
Despanan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 10:07 PM   #4
x-deviant-x
 
x-deviant-x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 332
By the very nature of capitalism, workforce 2 would be the logical answer, but definitely not the correct answer, as it is not as simple as what you're trying to portray it as here.

Your tactic to try and prove that capitalism is "the root of all evil" is weak. In order for capitalism to thrive without becoming corrupt, the society it exists in must also thrive.

No system is without flaws and capitalism is no exception. However one thing that capitalism has provided throughout history, that no other system has, is true freedom of its people; freedom to work where you want, to think how you want, to live where you want, to speak what you want, to be whoever you want. If you can point to another system that does provide these freedoms, and give specific examples of each, then please do as I'd love to learn about such a system – and I’m not being facetious, I’d really like to know.

Of course those freedoms can't truly be said today of the current Capitalist system we have, but it is not the fault of the system itself so much as it is the fault of the people behind it. We have turned our Capitalist society into something that more resembles fascism than anything else, primarily by allowing a private corporation (the Federal Reserve) to take control of our economy; by allowing corporations to buy politicians, who in turn pass laws that favor the corporation over the individual; by passing unnecessary laws and forcing regulations that hinder business growth; by allowing corporations to become illegal monopolies; by providing incentives for huge corporations to move their production to other countries instead of penalizing them for doing so. These are just some of the problems that need to be corrected.

The sole function of a business is to generate profit. As much profit as possible, in order for that business to sustain itself and grow. There is nothing wrong with this, but if left unchecked it will take advantage of its workforce by any means necessary in order to reduce production costs and maximize profit – because, without profit it cannot grow. Of course this is greed, but no entity is without greed no matter what its nature is. The simple act of maintaining survival is, at its core, greed.

Businesses can continue to function and remain competitive, and provide prosperity to its workforce, even with certain limitations put on it by laws and regulations. But when those laws and regulations become too restrictive the business is left with the choice of failing, or relocating to a place that is less restrictive. As a result, the people who depend on that business in order to survive (whether it be as income or a necessary product or service), are the ones who suffer.

(to be continued)
x-deviant-x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 10:28 PM   #5
AshleyO
 
AshleyO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by x-deviant-x View Post
By the very nature of capitalism, workforce 2 would be the logical answer, but definitely not the correct answer, as it is not as simple as what you're trying to portray it as here.
I really COULD just stop here. But hey, why not? Let's keep going.

Quote:
Your tactic to try and prove that capitalism is "the root of all evil" is weak. In order for capitalism to thrive without becoming corrupt, the society it exists in must also thrive.
Man, you are SO right that societies themselves must thrive. It's like we're on the same page.

Quote:
No system is without flaws and capitalism is no exception. However one thing that capitalism has provided throughout history, that no other system has, is true freedom of its people; freedom to work where you want, to think how you want, to live where you want, to speak what you want, to be whoever you want. If you can point to another system that does provide these freedoms, and give specific examples of each, then please do as I'd love to learn about such a system – and I’m not being facetious, I’d really like to know.
Anarcho-sydicalism. Worker owned industries ran via direct democracy. They may even VOTE for a manager that will be "boss" for a short amount of time. This model removes the privilege of the boss and puts all deciding powers into the hands of the workers. Because every worker has an equal degree of risk and reward depending on the success of the business, their efforts at work are more genuine.

Quote:
Of course those freedoms can't truly be said today of the current Capitalist system we have, but it is not the fault of the system itself so much as it is the fault of the people behind it. We have turned our Capitalist society into something that more resembles fascism than anything else, primarily by allowing a private corporation (the Federal Reserve) to take control of our economy; by allowing corporations to buy politicians, who in turn pass laws that favor the corporation over the individual; by passing unnecessary laws and forcing regulations that hinder business growth; by allowing corporations to become illegal monopolies; by providing incentives for huge corporations to move their production to other countries instead of penalizing them for doing so. These are just some of the problems that need to be corrected.
If someone was to just give you 10 million dollars for your vote, would you really turn it down? Money DOES talk and the game of capitalism IS to dominate. It only makes sense that capitalism would try to subvert democracy. It IS inherently survival of the fittest mentality. Do you really expect entrepreneurship to be NICE and stay in its free market place where it belongs? That's asinine. It makes SENSE that corporations would lobby for power. You can't expect anything less.

Quote:
The sole function of a business is to generate profit. As much profit as possible, in order for that business to sustain itself and grow. There is nothing wrong with this, but if left unchecked it will take advantage of its workforce by any means necessary in order to reduce production costs and maximize profit – because, without profit it cannot grow. Of course this is greed, but no entity is without greed no matter what its nature is. The simple act of maintaining survival is, at its core, greed.
I nominate you to draw the line as to where profit goes too far.

Quote:
Businesses can continue to function and remain competitive, and provide prosperity to its workforce, even with certain limitations put on it by laws and regulations. But when those laws and regulations become too restrictive the business is left with the choice of failing, or relocating to a place that is less restrictive. As a result, the people who depend on that business in order to survive (whether it be as income or a necessary product or service), are the ones who suffer.

(to be continued)
Do you suppose we should deregulate to bring the jobs back home? I'm sure industry would return to America if we got rid of minimum wage laws and health benefit obligations. You are correct. Regulations cause business and free trade to find the cheapest fields in which to trade. Clearly it is proven that profits ARE more important than people.

So again. I nominate you to tell us how far we should deregulate.
__________________
"Women hold up half the sky" -Mao

"God always picks the strangest things to get angry about. Get an abortion or gay married and he'll aim a tornado right at you.

Rip off a million poor people and Wall street has no problems. " -Rebecca B
AshleyO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 11:06 PM   #6
AshleyO
 
AshleyO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,700
Quote:
No system is without flaws and capitalism is no exception. However one thing that capitalism has provided throughout history, that no other system has, is true freedom of its people;
Really?

Quote:
freedom to work where you want,
Then shave your head to the skin and get a face tatt and move into a small town and get a job at a local grocery store. Let's see how far your rights to self expression actually go.

Quote:
to think how you want,
Your boss finds out that you think all the workers should unionize for better wages. What happens to you?

Quote:
to live where you want,
I would REALLY like to live in NYC by myself. That's just impossible right now. I only have an option to TRY. That's it.

Quote:
to speak what you want,
Boss finds out that you've been openly discussing atheism in the work place in front of customers. What does the boss do?

Quote:
to be whoever you want.
I've yet to see an openly transsexual bank teller. Show this mythical creature to me.

Quote:
If you can point to another system that does provide these freedoms, and give specific examples of each, then please do as I'd love to learn about such a system – and I’m not being facetious, I’d really like to know.
Blah blah blah.
__________________
"Women hold up half the sky" -Mao

"God always picks the strangest things to get angry about. Get an abortion or gay married and he'll aim a tornado right at you.

Rip off a million poor people and Wall street has no problems. " -Rebecca B
AshleyO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 11:45 PM   #7
x-deviant-x
 
x-deviant-x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by AshleyO View Post
Anarcho-sydicalism. Worker owned industries ran via direct democracy. They may even VOTE for a manager that will be "boss" for a short amount of time. This model removes the privilege of the boss and puts all deciding powers into the hands of the workers. Because every worker has an equal degree of risk and reward depending on the success of the business, their efforts at work are more genuine.
This is an interesting concept. I’ve never read much about it but I will. Care to expand on it?

While it could definitely work in some areas, (perhaps medical, educational, etc), just on the surface, I see fault with it in others. Where is the incentive to develop new ideas?

Here’s a scenario for you: suppose Mr. Jobbs was in such a format when he developed the concept for the iPod, and his democratic co-workers decided, for whatever reasons, it wasn’t a good idea – maybe because they felt that the walkman served the same purpose and was much easier and cheaper to produce. (I don’t think Jobbs actually developed the ipod but for simplicity’s sake we’ll say he did). So because of this, the iPod never existed, which means the iPhone, the iPad, and all the other devices that stemmed from the iPod concept, also never existed. Does Anarcho-Syndicalism allow for Mr. Jobs to approach some other company with his brainchild? If he can’t find another company who is interested in developing his concept, and he decides to start his own company to develop it, (were he to even be able to break free from the company he’s currently with), where do the investors come from for the capital required to develop his idea on his own? For that matter, where does the capital for any company to begin, come from? Just on the surface, as I see it, the capital generated from a co-op system like this would always remain within the confines of that system.

IF the system allows for a co-worker to invest his profits in other ideas outside his own company, then maybe it could work. Chances seem pretty high though, that that worker would always invest his money in his own company’s ideas, since he would never actually gain anything from investing in someone else’s company and would in fact be causing his own company to lose profits to someone else. Example: WalMart would never invest in Target’s new ideas as it would only serve to create more competition for WalMart. (Not sure if I worded all of that correctly so I’ll clarify if need be).
x-deviant-x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 11:49 PM   #8
x-deviant-x
 
x-deviant-x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 332
i'm working on the response to the rest of your post, i'm not ignoring it.
x-deviant-x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 12:20 AM   #9
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
What people don't get is that companies like Wal-Mart, Apple, etc. are all sitting on their own economic bubbles. They have outsourced all of their manufacturing, call centres, etc. to India and China. They have in turn made thousands of Americans jobless. This trend is happening across the corporate spectrum. It was always happening on some level, but these days it is reaching critical mass.

Like the housing bubble there will come a point where Americans can't afford to buy products made outside of America due to the financial conditions present in America due to the exportation of all industry.

At which point sales will drop and the companies will have no other cost cutting tools at hand since they have already cut their way to the bottom line.

It will happen.
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 01:00 AM   #10
Versus
 
Versus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,812
Quote:
Originally Posted by x-deviant-x View Post
The sole function of a business is to generate profit. As much profit as possible, in order for that business to sustain itself and grow. There is nothing wrong with this, but if left unchecked it will take advantage of its workforce by any means necessary in order to reduce production costs and maximize profit – because, without profit it cannot grow. Of course this is greed, but no entity is without greed no matter what its nature is. The simple act of maintaining survival is, at its core, greed.
Many models exist that demonstrate that mutual cooperation is just as effective as survival of the fittest.
__________________
Woke up with fifty enemies plottin' my death
All fifty seein' visions of me shot in the chest
Couldn't rest, nah nigga I was stressed
Had me creepin' 'round corners, homie sleepin' in my vest.


-Breathin, Tupac.
Versus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 07:32 AM   #11
Despanan
 
Despanan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sugar Hill
Posts: 3,887
Quote:
Originally Posted by x-deviant-x View Post
This is an interesting concept. I’ve never read much about it but I will. Care to expand on it?
I got this, sweet cheeks:


Anarcho-Syndicalism


To see it in practice, watch The Take it's free on Youtube.


Quote:
While it could definitely work in some areas, (perhaps medical, educational, etc), just on the surface, I see fault with it in others. Where is the incentive to develop new ideas?
Humans develop new ideas and innovate for their own sake. We climb mountains because they're there, we shoot rockets into space because we can. There's plenty of reason to innovate beyond "Gonna Get RICH!"

Quote:
Here’s a scenario for you: suppose Mr. Jobbs was in such a format when he developed the concept for the iPod, and his democratic co-workers decided, for whatever reasons, it wasn’t a good idea – maybe because they felt that the walkman served the same purpose and was much easier and cheaper to produce. (I don’t think Jobbs actually developed the ipod but for simplicity’s sake we’ll say he did). So because of this, the iPod never existed, which means the iPhone, the iPad, and all the other devices that stemmed from the iPod concept, also never existed. Does Anarcho-Syndicalism allow for Mr. Jobs to approach some other company with his brainchild?
Yeah. Of course.

Quote:
If he can’t find another company who is interested in developing his concept, and he decides to start his own company to develop it, (were he to even be able to break free from the company he’s currently with), where do the investors come from for the capital required to develop his idea on his own?
Any number of places. In our society today if Mr. Jobbs can't find a single company in the whole country interested in producing his ipod, why do you think he could find investors? Clearly no one likes his idea. No capitalist would ever invest in a venture that can't even be manufactured.

Quote:
For that matter, where does the capital for any company to begin, come from? Just on the surface, as I see it, the capital generated from a co-op system like this would always remain within the confines of that system.
Any number of places, just one example: The workers from one factory save their salaries and start their own NEW factory together.

Example #2: Workers of factory "A" vote to use a portion of the profit from factory "A" to fund venture "B".

Quote:
IF the system allows for a co-worker to invest his profits in other ideas outside his own company, then maybe it could work. Chances seem pretty high though, that that worker would always invest his money in his own company’s ideas, since he would never actually gain anything from investing in someone else’s company and would in fact be causing his own company to lose profits to someone else.
Why do you think it wouldn't?

Profits /= Wages. Profits by definition are separate from salaries.

Man, that worker is a real son of a bitch. Good thing he doesn't dictate policy for his entire company.

Quote:
Example: WalMart would never invest in Target’s new ideas as it would only serve to create more competition for WalMart. (Not sure if I worded all of that correctly so I’ll clarify if need be).
Man, Wal-Mart is a real son of a bitch. People should probably stop shopping there.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by KontanKarite
I promote radical change through my actions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Lahnger
I have chugged more than ten epic boners.
Despanan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 02:16 PM   #12
Grausamkeit
 
Grausamkeit's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Despanan View Post
Call people un-American.
Survey says......that is the correct answer if you are thinking like an evil capitalist.


My answer was C.

What immediately sprang to my mind was to get a patent, demand enough money to pay the workers fair wages in workforce 1 and sue the shit out of anyone making a similar product.
__________________
I'd rather label myself than have a million other people do it for me. ~ Pathogen

...I've been accused of folly by a fool. ~Antigone

Grausamkeit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 07:15 PM   #13
Jonathan
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: northeast us
Posts: 887
I figure out how much I need to bring in to live a pretty awesome life, (not a whole lot) and pretty much cap out there.

With the rest, I compensate the workforce to an absurd degree, maybe put in an appearance every couple months or so, and make sure nobody is messing up the place too badly. That, or sell out in case some industry giant is interested, after making sure current employees are well compensated. Golden parachutes for all.
Jonathan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 11:11 PM   #14
AshleyO
 
AshleyO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan View Post
I figure out how much I need to bring in to live a pretty awesome life, (not a whole lot) and pretty much cap out there.

With the rest, I compensate the workforce to an absurd degree, maybe put in an appearance every couple months or so, and make sure nobody is messing up the place too badly. That, or sell out in case some industry giant is interested, after making sure current employees are well compensated. Golden parachutes for all.
Bad news. Your competitor just beat the shit out of you by NOT indulging in benevolence such as yourself. You've lost.
__________________
"Women hold up half the sky" -Mao

"God always picks the strangest things to get angry about. Get an abortion or gay married and he'll aim a tornado right at you.

Rip off a million poor people and Wall street has no problems. " -Rebecca B
AshleyO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2011, 05:21 AM   #15
Jonathan
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: northeast us
Posts: 887
Quote:
Originally Posted by AshleyO View Post
Bad news. Your competitor just beat the shit out of you by NOT indulging in benevolence such as yourself. You've lost.
In the most likely scenario, I'd burn my company out by indulging in 90's dot-com excess long before a competitor figured out how we do our shit. But, it was a fun run while it lasted.
Jonathan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2011, 11:45 AM   #16
x-deviant-x
 
x-deviant-x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by AshleyO View Post
Then shave your head to the skin and get a face tatt and move into a small town and get a job at a local grocery store. Let's see how far your rights to self expression actually go.
My head is shaved to the skin and has been for nearly 20 years. I don't have facial tattoos but i do have visible tattoos on my arms and the back of my neck. A pentacle, no less. It's never once been an issue for me finding work, even in a small town. On the same note, someone who chooses to get facial tattoos should consider his employment options before doing so. Personal consequence. He knows he'd be shunned in a small town but probably wouldn't have too much problem in a bigger place like new york or san fran, where it's more common. Capitalism really has nothing to do with it. You’re talking about social stigmas here, which would continue to exist whether our economic system remained capitalist or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AshleyO View Post
Your boss finds out that you think all the workers should unionize for better wages. What happens to you?
You cannot legally be fired in any state for trying to organize a union. Not even in right-to-work states. If you are, you have a case for the labor board. WalMart tried this and was sued, repeatedly. So they just worked around it by shutting down the store, in one case, or closing the meat department company-wide, in another. Not saying that was right, but they were within their legal rights to do so. And people who are against walmart for preventing unions in such a way, have the right to boycott them. I don’t shop at walmart anymore, for reasons such as this. Do you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AshleyO View Post
I would REALLY like to live in NYC by myself. That's just impossible right now. I only have an option to TRY. That's it.
The only option anyone has is to try. I would love to live in Orlando again, or in Austin TX as they have an awesome artist community and some great studios, as do several other cities around the country. But I can't afford to get to any of those places right now. I'm not blaming capitalism for it though. I blame myself for not saving more money to get there. It's about setting personal goals and sticking to them. It doesn't mean you don't have options. Develop the skills it takes to get a better paying job, either through school or personal development. Eliminate luxuries that aren't necessary until you have enough money saved up for a move like that. Get a 2nd job, even if it's part time. In most cases, the only thing that holds someone back is themselves and their lack of motivation, or innovation to find a better method than the one they're currently pursuing. Nothing worth having comes without some combination of risk and sacrifice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AshleyO View Post
Boss finds out that you've been openly discussing atheism in the work place in front of customers. What does the boss do?
Are you suggesting there should be no rules in the work place? The work place is not the proper format for discussion of any social issues unless said work place is designed for it. The boss should make it clear to the employee what is considered proper work place discussion, which varies from one to the next. Should that same employee be allowed to talk openly about his sexual conquests or what he'd like to do sexually to another employee? Or customer? If employee refuses to abide by the rules after repeated offenses and warnings, then he deserves to have his employment terminated for being a detriment to the company.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AshleyO View Post
I've yet to see an openly transsexual bank teller. Show this mythical creature to me.
Funny you should mention that. There's a bank on Semoran Blvd in Orlando FL with an openly trans teller. She was a classmate of mine (and friend, though we never hung out after class much) so I knew first-hand she was trans. It was pretty obvious to anyone really. Not sure if she still works there as it's been a few years, but she did. She dropped out of school for all the discrimination she received there, in a school whose student body is predominantly male. Imagine that.

My best friend is also openly trans and works at a rather successful JEWISH owned local family restaurant. He's worked there nearly 9 years and just began his transition about 2 years ago. Everyone he works with is aware and supportive. It wasn't easy, some people had issue with it at first but they've all come around and are cool with it. He was actually dating 2 of the waitresses there (at separate times of course). And yes of course I know there are plenty who have an extremely difficult time and are often discriminated against for being trans, but it's not always the case, and I can't see how capitalism has anything to do with it. This, again, is a social issue.

How does eliminating capitalism solve any of these issues? Capitalism isn't the creator of discrimination; people create discrimination, regardless of what system their economy is based on. Discrimination will exist whether capitalism does or not.
x-deviant-x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2011, 12:31 PM   #17
Despanan
 
Despanan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sugar Hill
Posts: 3,887
Quote:
Originally Posted by x-deviant-x View Post
My head is shaved to the skin and has been for nearly 20 years. I don't have facial tattoos but i do have visible tattoos on my arms and the back of my neck. A pentacle, no less. It's never once been an issue for me finding work, even in a small town. On the same note, someone who chooses to get facial tattoos should consider his employment options before doing so. Personal consequence. He knows he'd be shunned in a small town but probably wouldn't have too much problem in a bigger place like new york or san fran, where it's more common. Capitalism really has nothing to do with it. You’re talking about social stigmas here, which would continue to exist whether our economic system remained capitalist or not.
So capitalism doesn't have anything to do with "freedom to work where you want" then. Good to know.

Quote:
You cannot legally be fired in any state for trying to organize a union. Not even in right-to-work states. If you are, you have a case for the labor board. WalMart tried this and was sued, repeatedly. So they just worked around it by shutting down the store, in one case, or closing the meat department company-wide, in another. Not saying that was right, but they were within their legal rights to do so. And people who are against walmart for preventing unions in such a way, have the right to boycott them. I don’t shop at walmart anymore, for reasons such as this. Do you?
So capitalism doesn't guarantee you the right to think what you want. Government regulation of industry allows this right (and is currently doing a piss-poor job at it, as Wal-Mart just went around it). You're 0 for 2 here.

Quote:
The only option anyone has is to try. I would love to live in Orlando again, or in Austin TX as they have an awesome artist community and some great studios, as do several other cities around the country. But I can't afford to get to any of those places right now. I'm not blaming capitalism for it though. I blame myself for not saving more money to get there. It's about setting personal goals and sticking to them. It doesn't mean you don't have options. Develop the skills it takes to get a better paying job, either through school or personal development. Eliminate luxuries that aren't necessary until you have enough money saved up for a move like that. Get a 2nd job, even if it's part time. In most cases, the only thing that holds someone back is themselves and their lack of motivation, or innovation to find a better method than the one they're currently pursuing. Nothing worth having comes without some combination of risk and sacrifice.0
So capitalism DOESN'T provide you with the freedom to live where you want (in fact, it actively works against this, as you can't afford Austin.), YOU provide yourself with the freedom to live where you want (Which you are currenty failing to do).

0 for 3. Boy this is fun, isn't it?

Quote:
Are you suggesting there should be no rules in the work place? The work place is not the proper format for discussion of any social issues unless said work place is designed for it. The boss should make it clear to the employee what is considered proper work place discussion, which varies from one to the next. Should that same employee be allowed to talk openly about his sexual conquests or what he'd like to do sexually to another employee? Or customer? If employee refuses to abide by the rules after repeated offenses and warnings, then he deserves to have his employment terminated for being a detriment to the company.
So capitalism doesn't provide you with the freedom to "say what you want." in fact through your boss it actively prevents that freedom on pain of losing your job.

YAY!

Quote:
Funny you should mention that. There's a bank on Semoran Blvd in Orlando FL with an openly trans teller. She was a classmate of mine (and friend, though we never hung out after class much) so I knew first-hand she was trans. It was pretty obvious to anyone really. Not sure if she still works there as it's been a few years, but she did. She dropped out of school for all the discrimination she received there, in a school whose student body is predominantly male. Imagine that.

My best friend is also openly trans and works at a rather successful JEWISH owned local family restaurant. He's worked there nearly 9 years and just began his transition about 2 years ago. Everyone he works with is aware and supportive. It wasn't easy, some people had issue with it at first but they've all come around and are cool with it. He was actually dating 2 of the waitresses there (at separate times of course). And yes of course I know there are plenty who have an extremely difficult time and are often discriminated against for being trans, but it's not always the case, and I can't see how capitalism has anything to do with it. This, again, is a social issue.
So Capitalism does not provide you with the ability to "be whomever you want."

PERFECT SCORE!

Quote:
How does eliminating capitalism solve any of these issues? Capitalism isn't the creator of discrimination; people create discrimination, regardless of what system their economy is based on. Discrimination will exist whether capitalism does or not.
I'll let the Foundational thinker of capitalism answer this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Smith
No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the greater part of the members are poor and miserable...Wherever there is great property, there is great inequality.
Capitalism is about the accumulation and monopolization of property. When you, like any good capitalist, do so, you inevitably hold the right to property above all other rights (Including the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness) You directly increase society's propensity towards discrimination by increasing inequality and tolerance for inequality. Capitalism directly encourages the idea that some people (Those with property) are better than others by allowing their right to property to overwhelm the civil rights of those without property.

Thanks for playing.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by KontanKarite
I promote radical change through my actions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Lahnger
I have chugged more than ten epic boners.
Despanan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2011, 03:41 PM   #18
Jonathan
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: northeast us
Posts: 887
Is the problem the monopoly part, or the improperly regulated part?

We can fix it without burning everything down.
Jonathan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2011, 05:02 PM   #19
x-deviant-x
 
x-deviant-x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by Despanan View Post
To see it in practice, watch The Take it's free on Youtube.
Thanks for the link. I watched it and found it pretty damned fascinating and informative. I like the concept. But it’s still capitalism at its core. Restructuring a company so that profits generated are distributed evenly instead of funneled to the top, is still Capitalism. It could be considered a farer form of Capitalism, in some regards, (not including how they got there that is). It would definitely eliminate the need for unions. But how does it differ from Capitalism on a grand scale?

I don’t see much difference between this and our current system (minus the corruption of course), other than the workers running the factory own the factory, instead of a handful of executives at the very top. Don’t similar models already exist in pretty much every country that still has a free market? A group of crafters making products to sell on their own and share the profits equally. That is basically what is displayed in The Take. If their business is successful enough, if the products they produce are in high enough demand and they are able to out-produce any competition, then eventually that group will get rich. How does this level the playing field for everyone? Competition between companies will remain the same. How does it solve the plight of everyone in the country? People who don’t have the skills, or the interest in developing those skills, to work in these factories, will still remain poor, until they develop skills and acquire the assets to form their own company or join one already in existence. Assuming they’re able to find a company whose majority will vote them in. Every new employee will diminish the profit for each of them, until their production catches up. That’s simple math. The only difference here is that they stole the factories and equipment they’re using, and the government allowed them to through expropriation.

Expropriation: A legalese term for theft.

Don’t get me wrong, I agree with what they did, for the most part. Their companies made fortunes off of them and then discarded them like trash, so in my view they had every right to do what they did. But it’s still theft regardless how you paint it.
x-deviant-x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2011, 05:08 PM   #20
x-deviant-x
 
x-deviant-x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by Despanan View Post
Capitalism is about the accumulation and monopolization of property.
You are confusing Capitalism with Corporatism. Capitalism is all about the free market with no government interference. Monopolies are illegal in a Capitalist Republic (aka: The United States), but it’s no longer enforced due to our Corporatist economy and corrupt politicians. The only time it's enforced is when enough people make a big enough stink about it. And even then, only when the right politicians gather enough support to challenge it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Despanan View Post
When you, like any good capitalist, do so, you inevitably hold the right to property above all other rights (Including the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness)
So what you’re saying here, is that our founding fathers built the constitution around a system that would rob the citizens of the very rights that the constitution provide them? Yeah, that makes a whole lot of sense.
x-deviant-x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2011, 05:10 PM   #21
x-deviant-x
 
x-deviant-x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 332
What is Capitalism?
Quote:
Capitalism is a social system based upon the recognition of individual rights, including private property rights where all goods, both intermediate goods and final goods, are owned privately. The “rights” referred to above are ethical-legal principles that identify and sanction man's freedom of action strictly within a social context.

Under capitalism, each individual possesses the legally unalterable authority to support and sustain himself, to conduct himself in accordance with his own independent judgment, to control the material product of his mental and/or physical labor, and, in connection with these rights, each and every individual has the legal authority to be free from the initiation of physical force. The initiation of physical force, also known as aggression, refers to any act that disturbs or upsets the soundness or cohesion of a non-aggressor's body, his property, or ownership of his property. A man must think and act in order to survive; his survival requires both mental and physical activity. Rights recognize and sanction man's freedom to proceed with thinking and acting in his self-interest. Only the initiation of physical force can frustrate another’s attempt to take those actions condoned by his rights. A man is prevented from exercising his rights only from the coercion of another. Murder, assault, vandalism, and theft are apt examples. Such actions and all other examples of aggression are illegal under capitalism, period. Accordingly, all relationships under capitalism must be formed voluntarily between consenting adults. Furthermore, this absence of aggression that exists under capitalism allows for the formation of the free market, the vast network of voluntary exchanges of property titles to intermediate and final goods.

Government intervention is yet another exemplar of initiated force since it is the use of aggression to fulfill certain socio-economic objectives. As such, it contradicts the essential nature of a capitalist economy as a non-aggressive economy. An economy remains capitalist so long as the government, or any other agency for that matter, refrains from intervening coercively in the peaceful private lives of citizens. The implications of this fact are substantial: under pure capitalism there are no taxes, no price ceilings, no price floors, no product controls, no subsidies to either the rich or the poor, no public streets, no public schools, no public parks, no central banks, no wars of aggression, no immigration restrictions, etc. Government neither resorts to aggression under capitalism nor does it sanction its use by others, end of story.
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com...e-between.html
x-deviant-x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2011, 05:14 PM   #22
Alan
 
Alan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by x-deviant-x View Post
You are confusing Capitalism with Corporatism. Capitalism is all about the free market with no government interference. Monopolies are illegal in a Capitalist Republic (aka: The United States), but it’s no longer enforced due to our Corporatist economy and corrupt politicians
Ugh, it's clear your knowledge of economics comes at best from Ron Paul blogger fans.

Seriously, this shit has nothing to do with the natural development of capitalism. You might just as well be talking about how awesome it would be if the world followed the Venus Project: it has jack shit to do with actual economics and all to do with naive and moralistic fantasies of a specific economic utopia.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by KissMeDeadly
You fucking people [war veterans] are only a step below entitled rich kids, the only difference being you had to do and witness horrible things, instead of being given everything.
real classy
Alan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2011, 05:28 PM   #23
x-deviant-x
 
x-deviant-x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 332
If that's what you believe Alan, fine.
x-deviant-x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2011, 07:55 PM   #24
Alan
 
Alan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,932
It's not what I believe. It's what YOU believe. You fucking build a castle of ideological bullshit on No True Scotsman sand.

"Oh, if it's bad then it's not capitalism. It doesn't matter that it's perfectly logical under free trade that if one can corner a market, one WILL corner a market, no that's not capitalism because it's bad, and we know that a priori if it's bad we can't call it capitalism. What? No I do not know what the phrase 'begging the question' means, why do you ask?"
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by KissMeDeadly
You fucking people [war veterans] are only a step below entitled rich kids, the only difference being you had to do and witness horrible things, instead of being given everything.
real classy
Alan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2011, 10:03 AM   #25
Despanan
 
Despanan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sugar Hill
Posts: 3,887
No one is seriously talking about burning anything down, Johnathan.

Alan: Deviant is actually listening here. I appreciate your help on this, but let's make sure he understands WHY he's wrong. We can insult him later if he doesn't get it, but let's try to be patient for now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by x-deviant-x View Post
You are confusing Capitalism with Corporatism. Capitalism is all about the free market with no government interference. Monopolies are illegal in a Capitalist Republic (aka: The United States), but it’s no longer enforced due to our Corporatist economy and corrupt politicians. The only time it's enforced is when enough people make a big enough stink about it. And even then, only when the right politicians gather enough support to challenge it.
You're talking about Anarcho-Capitalism, which inevitably morphs into Corporatism or Feudalism almost as soon as it is realized. Capitalism, as you have defined it is an unsustainable system because of this. But hey, don't take my word for it, let's see what the foundational thinker of capitalism says about this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Smith
Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defence of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.
You can't have property, which in this case means "private ownership of industry" without a coercive force to defend it. Without a government or private security force, property does not exist.

You're advocating for Capitalism, free of government intervention, and then pointing to an incident in which the government SHOULD intervene (Monopolies) and citing it's failure to do so as "Corporatism", when, if you had your druthers, The government would never have banned monopolies to begin with.

Quote:
So what you’re saying here, is that our founding fathers built the constitution around a system that would rob the citizens of the very rights that the constitution provide them? Yeah, that makes a whole lot of sense.
Dude, our founding fathers owned slaves. There was a huge contingent who wanted only landowners and other citizens with property to be able to vote -And these people were the radical leftists of their day.

The Tory's (Republicans of the time) wanted hereditary bloodlines of nobility and royalty.

It's not surprising, as nearly all of them believed that you could own a human being that the right to property was more important than every other right.

Thankfully, we live in a more enlightened time, due to the abolitionist movement, the Civil Rights movement, etc. but yeah, they totally built around a system which inevitably robs citizens of the very rights guaranteed by the constitution, because at the end of the day, that's what Capitalism IS: Some people are just BETTER and deserve more than others, and the best way to figure out who's the best is through the free market.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deviant
Thanks for the link. I watched it and found it pretty damned fascinating and informative. I like the concept. But it’s still capitalism at its core. Restructuring a company so that profits generated are distributed evenly instead of funneled to the top, is still Capitalism. It could be considered a farer form of Capitalism, in some regards, (not including how they got there that is). It would definitely eliminate the need for unions. But how does it differ from Capitalism on a grand scale?
It differs from capitalism in intention. A capitalist company by definition is not primarily interested in the welfare of it's workers. Instead a Capitalist company is interested in increasing it's bottom line (Profit) to enrich a board of directors and group of investors. How is this accomplished? by lowering production costs (Materials, Worker's Salaries) and increasing revenue (the cost of the item/service) for no other reason than increasing profit. Literally the only way this can be done is by exploiting the workers, the suppliers, the public, or all of them together.

What you have in The Take is factories being run by the workers FOR the workers and FOR the good of their communities and their suppliers. The goal is no longer to exploit, but instead to sustain and enrich the largest amount of people possible.

What's ironic, is that this approach is actually much more efficient than our current top-down hierarchical models, but is largely ignored and conspired against by Capitalist dominated society specifically BECAUSE it threatens to reduce the privilege of the 1% at the top.

Quote:
I don’t see much difference between this and our current system (minus the corruption of course), other than the workers running the factory own the factory, instead of a handful of executives at the very top. Don’t similar models already exist in pretty much every country that still has a free market? A group of crafters making products to sell on their own and share the profits equally. That is basically what is displayed in The Take. If their business is successful enough, if the products they produce are in high enough demand and they are able to out-produce any competition, then eventually that group will get rich. How does this level the playing field for everyone?
See above. If you remove exploitation from the equation, if you remove hierarchical power and replace it with democracy, if you share proceeds equally, or in equal proportion you enable upward mobility of the lower classes, and severely limit the ability of an individual or group of individuals to economically coerce their neighbors, thus as economic inequality goes down, social equality goes up, and liberty increases.

Instead of a Mad-Dash to see who can be the next King/Noble/Ceo and dictate political and economic policy for the rest of us, you have a dialogue among equals about what's best for all, instead of a tiny entitled minority.


Quote:
Competition between companies will remain the same. How does it solve the plight of everyone in the country? People who don’t have the skills, or the interest in developing those skills, to work in these factories, will still remain poor, until they develop skills and acquire the assets to form their own company or join one already in existence. Assuming they’re able to find a company whose majority will vote them in. Every new employee will diminish the profit for each of them, until their production catches up. That’s simple math. The only difference here is that they stole the factories and equipment they’re using, and the government allowed them to through expropriation.
It's utopian (and therefore totalitarian) to assume that you can solve the plights of everyone in the country with one action or policy (or even many) But I think this approach to industry goes a long way. There will still be competition, because we're people and competition is good to a certain extent. People will always have to work to stay alive regardless of the system they labor under, but Anarcho-syndicalism is a BETTER more equitable system than Capitalism/Corporatism which is WAY past it's expiration date.

Quote:
Expropriation: A legalese term for theft.

Don’t get me wrong, I agree with what they did, for the most part. Their companies made fortunes off of them and then discarded them like trash, so in my view they had every right to do what they did. But it’s still theft regardless how you paint it.
I would argue that owning and operating a factor or similar industry specifically for the enrichment of one person or a handful of people, to the detriment of it's workers, suppliers, and community is also theft, and in fact, theft on a much greater scale.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by KontanKarite
I promote radical change through my actions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Lahnger
I have chugged more than ten epic boners.
Despanan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:07 AM.