You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
M
magnet
Guest
The perfection of capitalism in Europe was accomplished by mercantilism. Early champions of mercantilism were Spain and Portugal with the creations of their empires. How was this accomplished:Mr. Noe, the rationalization that you will see through this thread, is the the US is not true capitalism. I have disputed this vigorously.
The savage abuses of capitalism that have existed for 250 years, are inherent whether or not there is government bureaucracy. Today the worst abuses are in the private, corporate bureaucracies, which these people think somehow would melt away if only government was eviscerated. However deregulation since Reagan has not dissipated the abuses, they have grown. The intertwined public/ private bureaucracies that bilk and enslave the common man have burgeoned in my lifetime, but it is not enough for these people. They want everybody in the world to have that overarching ambition and greed, aspire to be capitalists-- that is what fuels the system. That is the jujitsu used on the 99%. (And meanwhile nature is being destroyed…)
It entailed governmental regulation of a nation’s economy for the purpose of augmenting state power at the expense of rival national powers. Mercantilism dominated Western European economic policy and discourse from the 16th to late-18th centuries.[2] Mercantilism was a cause of frequent European wars and also motivated colonial expansion. High tariffs, especially on manufactured goods, are an almost universal feature of mercantilist policy. Other policies have included:
Building overseas colonies;
Forbidding colonies to trade with other nations;
Monopolizing markets with staple ports;
Banning the export of gold and silver, even for payments;
Forbidding trade to be carried in foreign ships;
Export subsidies;
Promoting manufacturing with research or direct subsidies;
Limiting wages;
Maximizing the use of domestic resources;
Restricting domestic consumption with non-tariff barriers to trade.
These measures made free trade non-existent. They may have been capitalistic but with a lot abuses of the system.
T
ThomasJMullally
Guest
Yes imperialism is horrible too… and who are the imperialsts? The ones who need materials and cheap labor for the gears of greed… the gears of capital. If you think the US is not the foremost imperialist nation today, you are sadly mistaken.The perfection of capitalism in Europe was accomplished by mercantilism. Early champions of mercantilism were Spain and Portugal with the creations of their empires. How was this accomplished:
It entailed governmental regulation of a nation’s economy for the purpose of augmenting state power at the expense of rival national powers. Mercantilism dominated Western European economic policy and discourse from the 16th to late-18th centuries.[2] Mercantilism was a cause of frequent European wars and also motivated colonial expansion. High tariffs, especially on manufactured goods, are an almost universal feature of mercantilist policy. Other policies have included:
Building overseas colonies;
Forbidding colonies to trade with other nations;
Monopolizing markets with staple ports;
Banning the export of gold and silver, even for payments;
Forbidding trade to be carried in foreign ships;
Export subsidies;
Promoting manufacturing with research or direct subsidies;
Limiting wages;
Maximizing the use of domestic resources;
Restricting domestic consumption with non-tariff barriers to trade.
These measures made free trade non-existent. They may have been capitalistic but with a lot abuses of the system.
Really, I was just thinking more of the cruel and inhumane labor conditions of American factories of the 19th century. The abuses did not get resolved in the free market, they ended with legislation, including union rights. Today we have transplanted the abuses overseas. However without the demand for excessive quantities of cheap goods to resell, the horrible factories and labor exploitation could not exist. Those poor workers, are wasting their lives, so that you can stack up junky products in your oversized home.
T
ThomasJMullally
Guest
Yes, I was just thinking about the cruel and inhumane labor conditions of American factories of the 19th century. Your “true” capitalism… The abuses did not get resolved in the free market, they ended with legislation, including union rights. Today we have transplanted the abuses overseas. However without the demand for excessive quantities of cheap goods to resell, the horrible factories and labor exploitation could not exist. Those poor workers, are wasting their lives, so that you can stack up junky products in your oversized home.Then you must believe that the US economy is a perfect example of a capitalist economy. I find this interesting because most would view the early US economy as capitalist and today’s economy as equally capitalist. And yet the economies are very different. I find most men define capitalism as whatever the US economy is at present.
I view the US as very fascist. This is a system where large corporations work with the government. In as much as the US is fascist it is not capitalist. I agree that corporations in modern America are a problem. But I don’t view that as being a necessary aspect of capitalism. In fact in the US the government works with corporations to use the law to create barriers of entry that maintain corporate power against competition.
In other economies there are also select citizens who have more than others. In an aristocracy this would be the nobility. In communism this would be the party leaders. It seems to me every economic system has concentration of wealth to some extent. But in capitalism you are actually free to compete to be one of those who has wealth.
T
ThomasJMullally
Guest
Your paternalism betrays you… This is the point I am making. The world can care for itself, without being involved with American systems. I have travelled overseas extensively, and the people might seem to you, to live “poorly”. They are no less happy than us. I say, they live “simply”. Some aspire to Western goods, some do not. At the same time, there is a lot of misery in the US middle class, in what you would call “advanced”, or “high-income” countries. So GDP is a useless measurement, for human happiness. How do we multiply and divide this out, sir?‘The other group contained those who could care for themselves if they had an opportunity to do so. Ideally, they would be able to get themselves out of poverty if they lived in a place or in a system that allowed or encouraged them to do so. Not every economic or political system can or will do this.
This is incorrect, For every piece of scripture where Jesus value the merchant or owner of land, there are ten where he decries them. And show me where our Lord decries laziness?That Jesus of Nazareth specifically shows us the value of energy, alertness, and perseverance in making a truly significant profit and looks with love on upon human work and that the work of the merchant – the businessman or the entrepreneur – is one of the forms of work that is affirmed. The parable of the talents makes this clear by its reference to money, trading, risk taking and banking. Laziness and avoiding risks and obstacles are condemned, so that the lessons for the spiritual life and attaining salvation are starkly revealed by these truisms.
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
There has never been one “abuse” of Capitalism that cannot be traced to regulations or government involvement.Mr. Noe, the rationalization that you will see through this thread, is the the US is not true capitalism. I have disputed this vigorously.
The savage abuses of capitalism that have existed for 250 years, are inherent whether or not there is government bureaucracy. Today the worst abuses are in the private, corporate bureaucracies, which these people think somehow would melt away if only government was eviscerated. However deregulation since Reagan has not dissipated the abuses, they have grown. The intertwined public/ private bureaucracies that bilk and enslave the common man have burgeoned in my lifetime, but it is not enough for these people. They want everybody in the world to have that overarching ambition and greed, aspire to be capitalists-- that is what fuels the system. That is the jujitsu used on the 99%. (And meanwhile nature is being destroyed…)
It is historical fact that world political systems of the nineteenth century were not pure capitalism, but mixed economies. The element of freedom, however, was dominant; it was as close to a century of Capitalism as mankind has come.
Various degrees of government interference and control crept in and still remained, even in America—and this is what led to the eventual destruction of True Capitalism. But the extent to which certain countries were free was the exact extent of their economic progress. America, the freest, achieved the most.
Those who are loudest in denouncing Capitalism do not have man’s well-being as their goal.
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
Are you saying that slavery would have never existed if there was no government?There has never been one “abuse” of Capitalism that cannot be traced to regulations or government involvement.
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
Never mind the low wages and the harsh living conditions of the early years of Capitalism. They were all that the national economies of the time could afford.Yes, I was just thinking about the cruel and inhumane labor conditions of American factories of the 19th century. Your “true” capitalism… The abuses did not get resolved in the free market, they ended with legislation, including union rights. Today we have transplanted the abuses overseas. However without the demand for excessive quantities of cheap goods to resell, the horrible factories and labor exploitation could not exist. Those poor workers, are wasting their lives, so that you can stack up junky products in your oversized home.
Capitalism didn’t create poverty, it inherited it. Compared to the centuries of pre-capitalist starvation, the living conditions of the poor in the early years of Capitalism were the first chance the poor had ever had to survive.
The enormous growth of the European population during the nineteenth century is proof. There was growth of over 300 per cent, as compared to the previous growth of something like 3 per cent per century.
Capitalism has created the highest standard of living ever known on earth.
T
ThomasJMullally
Guest
If by “well-being” you ean the capacity to relentlessly destroy the world, and subsume and waste the lives of the vast majority of people in the process, then yes I am against “well-being”.Those who are loudest in denouncing Capitalism do not have man’s well-being as their goal.
T
ThomasJMullally
Guest
Standard of living… hah! Suffice to say I am advocating negative “growth” as is currently measured.
I am still waiting to hear one word about the destruction of the environment.
I am still waiting to hear one word about the destruction of the environment.
T
ThomasJMullally
Guest
You are right-- the concept of poverty was created by capitalism. Before the age of reason, people were happy with what God gave.Capitalism didn’t create poverty, it inherited it. Compared to the centuries of pre-capitalist starvation, the living conditions of the poor in the early years of Capitalism were the first chance the poor had ever had to survive.
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
I didn’t say that, but the concept is worth a ponder…Are you saying that slavery would have never existed if there was no government?
Let’s see…when did slavery start? Probably with pre-historic tribes. Not much “government” in those days. Even American Indians enslaved other tribes…their form of government encouraged it. The governments of Spain, Portugal, Arabia and England all encouraged and profited from slavery before the U.S. was founded…
I think the answer would be…slavery would have existed with or without government.
However slavery cannot exist in a Capitalist society.
Capitalism by it’s nature recognizes, respects and protects individual rights.
Therefore, Capitalism cannot work with slave labor.
Remember your U.S. History. It was the agrarian, feudal South that maintained slavery. It was the industrial, Capitalistic North that wiped it out. Just as Capitalism wiped out slavery and serfdom in the whole civilized world of the nineteenth century.
What greater virtue can be placed on a social system than the fact that it leaves no possibility for any man to serve his own interests by enslaving other men?
T
ThomasJMullally
Guest
Your classism betrays you. Agrarianism is not equal to backwardness. Simple living is not poverty. There is poverty of material, and there is poverty of spirit. America is rife with the latter, which is partly caused by, an overflow in the former.Remember your U.S. History. It was the agrarian, feudal South that maintained slavery. It was the industrial, Capitalistic North that wiped it out. Just as Capitalism wiped out slavery and serfdom in the whole civilized world of the nineteenth century.
What greater virtue can be placed on a social system than the fact that it leaves no possibility for any man to serve his own interests by enslaving other men?
What greater virtue? Freedom to be lazy,without incurring debt.
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
I don’t think people were “happy” during the Dark Ages. I don’t think people were happy with the Black (and other) Plagues. I don’t think people were happy serving their monarchs as serfs and peasants.You are right-- the concept of poverty was created by capitalism. Before the age of reason, people were happy with what God gave.
People began to cheer up when they could keep the fruits of their own labor. When they could trade their goods with others and then began to prosper.
With prosperity comes leisure time. The opportunity to educate, to participate and enjoy the Arts. Serfs and peasants just can’t take time off for such things.
Man’s self interest or nature is to do better for himself and family. Capitalism provides this opportunity and encourages it.
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
Tom, I didn’t mention the word “poverty”. Nor did I suggest it. I was talking about slavery.Your classism betrays you. Agrarianism is not equal to backwardness. Simple living is not poverty. There is poverty of material, and there is poverty of spirit. America is rife with the latter, which is partly caused by, an overflow in the former.
What greater virtue? Freedom to be lazy,without incurring debt.
I don’t think agrainists are backwards and I agree that simple living is not poverty.
I don’t think that the freedom to be lazy is a virtue, but it is prevalent here in America.
Where else would you find one hundred MILLION unemployed people essentially being paid by the government…not to work. Only in America…is this a great country, or what?
T
ThomasJMullally
Guest
You are burdened with an orthodox, rote view of the Middle Ages as you say: “The Daaaark Ages”. How boring. During that epoch, there was an equal amount of sunlight. During that epoch, the light of the world was our Church.I don’t think people were “happy” during the Dark Ages. I don’t think people were happy with the Black (and other) Plagues. I don’t think people were happy serving their monarchs as serfs and peasants.
People began to cheer up when they could keep the fruits of their own labor. When they could trade their goods with others and then began to prosper.
With prosperity comes leisure time. The opportunity to educate, to participate and enjoy the Arts. Serfs and peasants just can’t take time off for such things.
Man’s self interest or nature is to do better for himself and family. Capitalism provides this opportunity and encourages it.
At the time, people kept the fruit of their labor, as much as they ever have since. There was less printed currency, less stuff, but why you would think people were not as happy as they are now, is inexplicable. They knew no other way, they were submitted to faith, and to fate. They had a personal relationship with their knight, or whoever ran the town. They were happy for every little thing, not craven for ever more. (As we should be.)
Serfs and peasants… disparaging terms for simple people, but yes that is mostly what we have today. They are harnessed into a system of consumption, they are fed a continuous stream of advertising and entertainment to tie them down. I would hardly call that “leisure” and “arts”.
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
Destruction of the environment is terrible.Standard of living… hah! Suffice to say I am advocating negative “growth” as is currently measured.
I am still waiting to hear one word about the destruction of the environment.
It would never happen in a a true, pure Capitalist society. Simply because Capitalists share the environment with other Capitalists. Why destroy it?
T
ThomasJMullally
Guest
Good-- maybe they have wised up. Because why should you run yourself ragged for low wages? Or compete with one h8undred others selling the same widget on Amazon or Google? And pay taxes out of that to pay for police, to pay for a military-industrial complex. For the rationalization that you are a cog in a system, replaceable at any time. Talk about slavery! Each individual deserves more respect.Tom, I didn’t mention the word “poverty”. Nor did I suggest it. I was talking about slavery.
I don’t think agrainists are backwards and I agree that simple living is not poverty.
I don’t think that the freedom to be lazy is a virtue, but it is prevalent here in America.
Where else would you find one hundred MILLION unemployed people essentially being paid by the government…not to work. Only in America…is this a great country, or what?
So perhaps people have finally seen through the hype: hard work toward producing more and more needless stuff, will get them to happiness. Pondering the stars, the sunset, a flock of birds, chasing the opposite sex… that is living.
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
So the next question is, how do you have a government that protects property rights without being captured by the upper part of the business class?However slavery cannot exist in a Capitalist society.
Capitalism by it’s nature recognizes, respects and protects individual rights.
Therefore, Capitalism cannot work with slave labor.
T
ThomasJMullally
Guest
Simple-- you destroy it to produce more and more, you are trying to beat your competitors. You need a higher ratio of capital, you aspire to greatness, to dominance, to the hitory books. You don’t see it? You turn the other way… you WON’T see it.Destruction of the environment is terrible.
It would never happen in a a true, pure Capitalist society. Simply because Capitalists share the environment with other Capitalists. Why destroy it?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.