What's wrong with Capitalism?

[Onyx]

Originally Posted by Beneath the Shadows

Call bullshit all you like. What I said is the truth, and saying "bullshit" won't change anything.



In some cases, yes. But I wasn't thinking of those cases.

Then I'd like to know just how many cases you know of and also, once again, where the hell you live so I can move there. Because I've been broke and living in Cali, Colorado, Washington, Oregon, Arizona, Louisiana and Missouri. Nowhere that I've lived has there been many people living around me with nice new electronics or cars. In fact, the poorest neighbourhoods I've probably ever lived in, New Orleans, Louisiana, the neighbourhood pass time was hanging out on your porch talking to your neighbours because, even if you had a TV, you didn't have cable and reception, on the one or two channels that came in at all, was horrible. There's exceptions to every rule, however, those exceptions are few and far between.

Most of the homeless people I know wouldn't choose that option simply because being homeless they're discriminated against. A homeless person walks into a store wanting to pent-to-own any piece of electronics, and the cashier and/or manager will instantly assume that that person just wants to pay a small amount for the item, turn around and sell it for more, and then disappear without paying the item off. No, if we wanted something like that, we'd save until we had enough money, and we'd lay our money on the table. (And I say "we" because once upon a time that included me.)

None of the homeless people I've known would choose that option. When you're homeless you're pretty much forced to own no more than you can carry on your back. Anything more becomes a burden as you either have no place to store it or could be forced to relocate, on zero notice, at any time.

I was talking about the working poor as being the ones who go the rent to own route.

[Beneath the Shadows]

Originally Posted by Onyx

Then I'd like to know just how many cases you know of and also, once again, where the hell you live so I can move there. Because I've been broke and living in Cali, Colorado, Washington, Oregon, Arizona, Louisiana and Missouri. Nowhere that I've lived has there been many people living around me with nice new electronics or cars. In fact, the poorest neighbourhoods I've probably ever lived in, New Orleans, Louisiana, the neighbourhood pass time was hanging out on your porch talking to your neighbours because, even if you had a TV, you didn't have cable and reception, on the one or two channels that came in at all, was horrible. There's exceptions to every rule, however, those exceptions are few and far between.

I didn't keep records. But I've also lived in New Orleans (9th Ward, to be exact), and even there I saw plenty of people with half-way decent TVs and Playstations. Though I was there before Katrina, I don't know what it's like since then.

None of the homeless people I've known would choose that option. When you're homeless you're pretty much forced to own no more than you can carry on your back. Anything more becomes a burden as you either have no place to store it or could be forced to relocate, on zero notice, at any time.

You don't need to tell me what it's like to be homeless, I've hitch-hiked and train hopped across the country. If you notice, the items I've attributed to the homeless are smaller items, easily carried. It doesn't take much room for a cell phone or an MP3 player (and their chargers). Even a laptop can be carried around easily if you have a good alice pack.

I was talking about the working poor as being the ones who go the rent to own route.

I was talking specifically about homeless people, hence me making a distinction between the homeless and the rest of the poor.

[Onyx]

Originally Posted by Beneath the Shadows

I didn't keep records. But I've also lived in New Orleans (9th Ward, to be exact), and even there I saw plenty of people with half-way decent TVs and Playstations. Though I was there before Katrina, I don't know what it's like since then.

Yeah, I lived in the 9th pre-Katrina. Lived on Feliciana St. and two blocks away there'd be 15-20 kids hanging out selling crack near the tire shop any given night. Though, when talking about the general outlook for the poor, I don't include crack dealers.

As for the rest, once again you're talking exceptions to the rule. Are there rich people in Zimbabwe? Yes, but, like your luxury item having homeless, they're rare and there's probably an explanation as to why they have what they do, which isn't because Zimbabwe's a great country to live in. Come to think of it, one of the reasons Zimbabwe is in such bad shape is because of previous efforts to orient their economy to Free Market Capitalism. Which is what generally happens when third world countries do the same.

BTW, since you've been homeless, then you're probably aware that the MP3 player carrying homeless are mostly runaways who packed up all the nice toys they could carry and left their parents house, the rest generally got them through illicit means like selling drugs or theft. Do you really want to pin your contention that being poor or homeless isn't that bad here on runaways and people who acquire what they have by breaking the rules? Or should we be basing it on the homeless who aren't runaways or criminals and instead are actually poor and have to rely on the charity of others?

[Alan]

Originally Posted by Beneath the Shadows

The United States and Japan are the epitome of capitalism in this world. We are what anti-capitalist complain about. (The US more-so, of course.) Oh, yes, our poor have such shitty living conditions. Flat-screen TVs, LCD monitors, iPhones, Blu-ray, enough food to throw away a large portion of it uneaten. Even our homeless have cellphones, MP3 players, and laptops. Oh, those poor things.

So? I worked with your definition of slavery; apparently, you just don't give a shit about the rest of the world.

All those pretty things you have are the product of imperialism. There's no fucking way countries with such rich resources and manpower would be that poor except through force and violence by the first world.

Seriously, it almost offends me that you would be that fucking tunnel-visioned.

[viscus]

Originally Posted by Beneath the Shadows

The United States and Japan are the epitome of capitalism in this world. We are what anti-capitalist complain about. (The US more-so, of course.) Oh, yes, our poor have such shitty living conditions. Flat-screen TVs, LCD monitors, iPhones, Blu-ray, enough food to throw away a large portion of it uneaten. Even our homeless have cellphones, MP3 players, and laptops. Oh, those poor things.

You might want to explain your definition of capitalism in a bit more depth, because I've found Japan to be loads more egalitarian than America. Yes, there are the very rich and the very poor, as everywhere, but the gap is not near as huge and the populace as a whole is much more middle class.

[Pineapple_Juice]

It's odd to me, being of the upper lower class type, and of having lived several years of my life either on welfare or on the streets, and also being of the very left-winged variety, that I would lean towards the side of capitalism. I think it's perhaps that I understand very little in regards to politics and that I am comfortable with what I know. Research is imminent.

[transsexual transylvania]

Some people oppose socialism because people can survive without working. I oppose capitalism because people can work without surviving.

[KontanKarite]

Socialism? Capitalism? Heh. By in large, I'm rather indifferent as to which system is in place because it's all generally based on who is playing the game. People.

It's insane to assume that every capitalists wakes up with the thought in their head, "How can I make others suffer by exploiting their efforts?" There ARE benevolent capitalists.

It's also insane to assume that the vast collective of production by the people has an individual's autonomy in mind. But not all socialists are bad.

The point of my post is that as long as all people involved are playing the game in the most autonomous way possible, either system could work. Sadly, we have seen BOTH systems fall to corruption. It's almost like the law of entropy. All things in order must eventually fall into chaos.

It's not the systems in place, it's basically the social aspects that demand a certain kind of behavior that are in place that have been put there by the people of that system. If the people want their lives to be a living hell, they'll see to it that it happens, if they want something better and more liberating, they'll see to that as well.

[viscus]

I don't think there's anything fundamentally wrong with the market, it just needs some protections from abuse and basic services need to be provided for the public good.

It's kind of a shame that the economy of the United Federation of Planets was never explained in any of the Star Trek series, suffice to say that they didn't use money and the accumulation of wealth was frowned upon. The writers never explained it because they wanted to have artistic freedom and to show that economics were only important insofar as everyone got what they needed, I would surmise.

I ran across one article suggesting that it might be a form of participatory economics, which I'm going to have to read up on.

[Alan]

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

It's insane to assume that every capitalists wakes up with the thought in their head, "How can I make others suffer by exploiting their efforts?" There ARE benevolent capitalists.

How the fuck is that a good argument?
There ARE benevolent capitalists just as there WERE benevolent slave owners.

The fact that the world is in these shit conditions when "there ARE benevolent capitalists" should show anyone that can add 2 + 2 that obviously the problem is not the people, it's the system - you just fucking proved it!!

And yet, no, you don't seem to get it.

[KontanKarite]

Originally Posted by Alan

How the fuck is that a good argument?
There ARE benevolent capitalists just as there WERE benevolent slave owners.

The fact that the world is in these shit conditions when "there ARE benevolent capitalists" should show anyone that can add 2 + 2 that obviously the problem is not the people, it's the system - you just fucking proved it!!

And yet, no, you don't seem to get it.

All that I proved is that I don't give a good god damn. How's that fucking grab you, Alan? Either system is ABUSED by assholes.

It makes no difference to me as to what system "the people" want to play by. At the start of the day, I realize the masses want something in a system like this or that, so how do I deal with it? If it were a socialist system, I'm certain some other aspects of my own individual autonomy would be fucked with. Either system is going to dish out its own brand of shit and I'd deal with it in the best way that I can. If "the people" wanted to play by socialist rules, I wouldn't impede their progress. I invite whatever amount of triumph or fuck up "the people" want.

This nit picking posts thing is totally ignoring the crux of my post. Of course you're not even nit picking the other part of that post where I mentioned that it's also insane to assume that all socialist are benevolent loving angels that want nothing but the absolute best for you.

But being that we're all pissed about capitalism being in place and is being abused is an afterthought right? "The people" are docile, lame, and utterly indifferent to their own strife. THEY enable the bullshit.

But hey, maybe someday we might get lucky and see socialism once again get abused in another country.

As for the small pockets of those that find a way to make it all work and everyone is happy, I commend them. Good for them. At least they've got balls to stand up for themselves.

[Alan]

How is it 'nitpicking' when you yourself said I referred to HALF of your post? It wasn't even HALF, though. Simply, specifically referring to the other part of your post would validate the capitalism/socialism dichotomy you're working with, which is stupid.

[vindicatedxjin]

Metete un palo por el culo,hijo de puta.^^^

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by Alan

How the fuck is that a good argument?
There ARE benevolent capitalists just as there WERE benevolent slave owners.

The fact that the world is in these shit conditions when "there ARE benevolent capitalists" should show anyone that can add 2 + 2 that obviously the problem is not the people, it's the system - you just fucking proved it!!

And yet, no, you don't seem to get it.

This post on it's own is enough to prove that Alan is a retard. Not only is he comparing a system of trading to human bondaged (Hubba Hubba) and thus displaying an utter lack of both perspective AND a lack of respect for the struggles of the African American; but his logic is also completely broken.

I mean seriously, look at that middle bit. The fuctard is claiming that because good people exist in a world in which bad things happen "anyone that can add 2+2" should come to the conclusion that things are bad solely because of the way people trade.

What? What fucking world do you live in kid? How could something that insane make "mathematical" sense to you?

[Alan]

Why do you think all the problems in the world are made by "bad people"?
Seems very childish to me.

[Renatus]

Originally Posted by Alan

Why do you think all the problems in the world are made by "bad people"?
Seems very childish to me.

So you're saying that world war two for example was caused by "the all powerful system!"? Systems dont kill people, people kill people.

[Renatus]

Originally Posted by Alan

Why do you think all the problems in the world are made by "bad people"?
Seems very childish to me.

So you're saying that world war two for example was caused by a system? Systems dont kill people, people kill people. What will it take to get this into your thick skull?

[Renatus]

Originally Posted by Renatus

So you're saying that world war two for example was caused by "the all powerful system!"? Systems dont kill people, people kill people.

Uh oh, double post, heh. Oh and you better not try and blame this on a system Alan.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Renatus

So you're saying that world war two for example was caused by a system? Systems dont kill people, people kill people. What will it take to get this into your thick skull?

Somehow if Germany wasn't a dictatorship, or wasn't sent into poverty because of the Treaty of Versailles, allowing the German people to become desperate enough to vote just about anyone in with an answer, then a few things could have been prevented, yes, to put it in simple terms. There are bad people in the world and certain power structures make it far easier for those bad people to abuse others. And certain power structures just create an atmosphere of privilege amongst the elite and make them blind to the plight of those less lucky than them, doesn't make them bad people, just ignorant of the way things work and unwilling to change things since its going so good for them.

[Renatus]

Originally Posted by Saya

There are bad people in the world and certain power structures make it far easier for those bad people to abuse others. And certain power structures just create an atmosphere of privilege amongst the elite and make them blind to the plight of those less lucky than them, doesn't make them bad people, just ignorant of the way things work and unwilling to change things since its going so good for them.

Not really, all systems are equally exploitable, it just depends on where in the system you are. The only thing that changes from system to system is what is the name of the role of the person you need to kiss the ass of.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Renatus

Not really, all systems are equally exploitable, it just depends on where in the system you are. The only thing that changes from system to system is what is the name of the role of the person you need to kiss the ass of.

Yeah, really, a totalitarian dicatorship is a world different than the American democracy, for instance. Sure its not so bad for us, we got freedom of speech and are free to call our leaders douche bags if we don't like them without the risk of getting shot in a back alley. The system does leave the "poor poorer" though as the saying goes, and makes it really really easy for those of us who don't have to worry about those kinds of things to ignore their problems and deny them the basic needs of life. For example, the capitalist system in its more pure form rejects universal health care, everyone should pay for their own insurance. Its very easy for those people who don't have health problems or have their own insurance to say they don't know what the problem is and deny those without insurance health care. Here in Canada though we've had universal health care for a long time, if we were in the same system as Americans we'd probably be more apathetic to those without insurance, but we're used to a system with socialist values so we don't turn a blind eye to poor people who are sick, or rather we turn a blind eye to the fact that thats where our taxes are going.

[viscus]

Originally Posted by Renatus

Not really, all systems are equally exploitable, it just depends on where in the system you are. The only thing that changes from system to system is what is the name of the role of the person you need to kiss the ass of.

Are they? Or how about a more fundamental question: which system is more likely to be exploited?

I hear people blaming the "bad apples" and I hear people blaming "the system," but nobody's blaming the culture. Really, an economic system is merely an outgrowth of a country's culture. Look at the nations of the world, the more individualistic and exploitative a culture is, the more free-market capitalism and systemic abuse there will be. The more collectively-minded a culture is, the more wealth distribution there will be.

If you can effect a change in the culture, then the system will change accordingly and the bad apples will be marginalized.

[creature6]

What's wrong with capitalism is that its competitive struggle for profits leads to speed-up, stress and insecurity at work, to damage to the environment, to wars and the waste of preparations for war that arms spending represents.
Capitalism has no history of ever working for the benefit of society .
All this seems to create is exploitation.

[viscus]

Exploitation created capitalism, not the other way around.

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by creature6

What's wrong with capitalism is that its competitive struggle for profits leads to speed-up, stress and insecurity at work, to damage to the environment, to wars and the waste of preparations for war that arms spending represents.
Capitalism has no history of ever working for the benefit of society .
All this seems to create is exploitation.

Hey, how did you teach your ass to talk? That's impressive.