Re: Capitalism

Topaz wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:48:28 -0700 (PDT), Michael Price
> <nini_pad@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 
> 
>>  Material has no rights under capitalism and people do, that sounds
>> like
>> favouring people over material to me.  What you really mean is that it
>> objects to laws and programs that favour those that want to take the
>> material from those that own it.  You are however too dishonest to
>> admit it.
> 
>   Capitalism claims that because the employer and the employee freely
> agreed on the wage everything must be fine. But that is a major crock.
> In the supply and demand of Capitalism, humans, especially unskilled
> humans, have little value. We can do better than that, a lot better.
> We need to flush capitalism away whether the capitalists like it or
> not.
> 

Why is it a crock? When enough people think the owner is underpaying 
they have done things like form unions, boycott the business, etc... The 
unskilled worker is not completely powerless. Often, government 
interference, on either side, is what leads to violence.

Still, best thing to do is learn a valued skill.


>>>   Exactly, it has no values.
>>>
>>  So what?  People have values and it's their values, not those of the
>> social/
>> economic system that are im****tant.
> 
>  No, the economic system should value people.

Economic systems do not value anything.

The people that are using the economic system decide the value of 
things. If everyone agrees that it is valuable to give everyone a 
certain standard of living then that is what they will do with their 
wealth. As it happens, while most people are willing to give some part 
of their income to charity, most feel if you want more than subsidence 
you should earn it.

> 
>>  Oh and BTW you just admitted
>> that
>> you lied when you said it values goods over people.
>>
>>  So you quote a Nazi about how well off people were under Hitler,
>> which
>> doesn't address the point at all.  This is how I know you have no
>> counterargument.
>> Oh and BTW Germany had routine goods shortages under Hitler and was
>> going
>> even broker than it already was.
> 
>  If there was a shortage it was because some Jewish controlled
> countries refused to trade food and materials with Germany. But
> Germany was highly prosperous:
> 

Racism that blunt still surprises me.

> 
>  From a German pamphlet:
> 
[snip - racist bull****]

> 
>>  Well no, they didn't.  They simply didn't pay to have his crap
>> published.
>> There's a difference between not sup****ting someone and censoring
>> them.
> 
>   Jews control the media.

Racist propaganda. Why are you able to spew this racist crap if the Jews 
control 'the media'?

> 
>>  Well that's their problem not yours.  What bad does it do you for
>> them
>> to have a billion dollars.  I'll tell you at least on thing that
>> having a billion
>> dollars is useful for, making investment decisions on that scale.
> 
> No person needs to have a billion dollars. We need to increase some
> wages of other people if that is happening. If captialists don't like
> that there is not much point in argueing with them. We should just
> kick them in their aft ends and do it anyway.
> 

Why? If some rich guy has a billion dollars it doesn't hurt me and it 
very likely helps me. That billion isn't siting in a piggy bank tucked 
in a corned of the mansion, it is INVESTED in some profitable enterprise 
that likely produces goods or services for many people a lot cheaper 
than if we all were craftsmen working in our cottages.

You seem to think it is ok to use force to get your way. If your system 
is so wonderful, just set it up. There is nothing in a free capitalist 
economic system stopping anyone from spending their money however they 
like. If your system is effective it will soon spread.

> 
>> There are
>> people who just plain WANT to create a billion dollar business doing
>> useful things.  It's a good thing some of them can.
>>
>>
>>  Assertion is not evidence.  And come to think of it, it's the same
>> assertion
>> you had several other times.
> 
>>>   Capitalists don't agree that they are greedy.
>>  Well no, they do agree they just don't think there's anything bad
>> about
>> that.
>>
>>> They say a person can take their job for $5 an hour or they will find
someone
>>> else to take the job. It doesn't matter if they are making billions of
dollars.
>>> It's all perfectly fair in their minds.
>>  And what is unfair about it?  Why do you deserve the job more than
>> they
>> guy who will work for $5 an hour?  You are as usual mistaking things
>> you
>> don't like for things that are unfair.
> 
> If someone is making billions he needs to be paying his workers more
> that $5 an hour. It's not a question of convicing the capitalists of
> that. Capitalists need a swift boot to the aft end.

Some people will be making more than $5 an hour, the people doing work 
worth more.

Some would argue that any government intervention, for example a minimum 
wage, will simply cause unemployment among the unskilled. Given the 
imbalance in power between unskilled workers and their employees I think 
some laws governing labour conditions are warranted: maximum hours that 
can be worked in day, over time rules, safety rules, a low minimum wage.

I'm sure I'll get some argument here. I have seen a rise in minimum wage 
cause people to be laid off first hand, so it doesn't automatically help 
everyone. At the same time there are employers will take advantage of 
desperate or ignorant people.

> 
>>> And they are totally against "big government" doing anything to stop
them.
>>  Believers in capitalism do believe that it's wrong to use government
>> violence
>> to constrain people's legitimate choices.  How is that bad?
> 
>   I've wasted enough time on you. Now you will say capitalism won the
> arguement. But we don't have to convince the capitalists that they are
> greedy s***bags and their theories are all hogwash. We just need to
> put some "government violence" on their sorry aft ends because they
> have **** for brains.

Capitalism doesn't argue, people do. Just look at the world. Virtually 
every country with a high, or rising, standard of living has at least  a 
partially capitalist, free enterprise economic system. Even the most 
rabid free enterprise country also has socialist programs, for example: 
roads and other infrastructure, education, military, police, courts, and 
health care.

There are greedy people, not greedy economic systems. Under socialist 
systems you the freeloader and 'tragedy of the commons' problems which 
are also caused by greed and short sightedness.

Alex R.