Is it ludicrous to think that the world will remain Capitalistic?

[Boatswain2PA]

In a free market, there will always be income disparity. The fact of income disparity means that the free market is working, that people have opportunity and are using it.

In an economic system with forcible equality, such as North Korea, everyone is equally poor–except for the leaders.

Income disparity does not cause poverty. The question is whether one hates the rich more than one hates poverty. Because a free market will help more to get out of poverty than other systems. If one hates the rich enough to force income leveling, we are all equally poor, and economic depressions become even worse.

In other words, the upward mobility found ONLY in a free market system is the best cure for poverty.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

Along your line of reasoning, rape and murder would also be good things provided it put money on the rich man’s table.

More liberal hype. That has nothing, AT ALL, to do with the points he was making.

Although, the worst rates of rape and murder have come at the hands of strong central governments…like those needed to implement your “perfect” socialism.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

Nothing of the sort.

Try reading something that disagrees with your worldview without instantly discrediting it because of your bias, Robert.

Liberals like Robert simply cannot do that. The emotional pain they would feel if they were to ever realize their entire political belief system has always been so completely wrong would be comparable to finding out your wife is a dude. So, instead of trying to understand someone else’s point of view (which could by psychologically damaging to him), they simply resort to hyperbolic statements and diversions.

 

[holyreyes]

Greed. power and prestige…maligned terms used by communists to bash Capitalism.

GREED
In a true Free Market, Greed does not exist. People operate on the principle of SELF INTEREST. Self Interest is not greed. A man seeking to improve his lot in life so that his family benefits is acting in his own self-interest. If he, in his own self-interest, improves himself and his family, then the general good is accomplished. Communists. socialists and liberal thinkers of today call that GREED every chance they get…but it is not.

Adam Smith said it very well: “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest.” In other words, the butcher is not working in his shop so that you can eat; he’s doing it so that he can. But by virtue of him being there, doing what he does, you are able to also eat.

POWER
The power that exists in a Free Market is ECONOMIC Power and that is not a negative… Socialism, communism and tyranny depend on POLITICAL power. There is a big difference.
Economic power is exercised by means of a positive, by offering everyone a reward, an incentive, a payment, a value. Political power is exercised by means of a negative, by the threat of punishment, injury, imprisonment, destruction. The Free Market’s power is** values**; socialism’s power is fear.

PRESTIGE
Prestige is not a negative in the Free Market. It is a goal. It is earned by respecting the rights and property of others and maintaining the ruling economic principle of justice.
Prestige in a socialist/communist society is UN-earned. It is usurped by force or political power. It is simply “claimed”.

Self Interest, (What you mistakenly call greed) Power and Prestige are not negatives of the Free Market (Capitalism). They are actually positives that make the Free Market the overall best economic system in the world.

Do they have to be communists to use such words to bash Capitalism? Christians, Catholics among others use such words to bash Capitalism…

On the contrary, the communist government of China among other communist countries has embraced Capitalism as its new economic system. This has transformed its country and its nation into an economic power house. With renewed economic mind set, China’s aggressiveness being demonstrated at the West Philippine Sea and surrounding seas is the result of its confidence brought by CAPITALISM . With booming economy, the demands of its nation cannot adequately support the voracious appetite of the new bourgeosie who make up a large percentage of the population. China’s hunger must look elsewhere for RESOURCES to satisfy the bottomless pit demands of Capitalism and must bully, grab and steal the small neighboring nations resources for the sake of self-centered-interest of greedy economic system, boasting military power, and maintaining an ostentacious, pretentious, superficial prestige. So, how can you say that greed(self-interest), power and prestige that describe Capitalism are positive?

In the West, the very elite rich people in the US own and control more than half of the world’s wealth and resources while 1 out of 6 people live below poverty and go hungry. There is a wide discrepancy between the rich and the poor and that is a travesty! Likewise, it is also a travesty when one cannot see the injustices of greed, power and prestige being perpetuated under the umbrella of CAPITALISM…

Furthermore, the natural and material Earth cannot naturally support the selfish, vacuumic demands of Capitalism. It is detrimental, intrusive and pompous to the natural enviroment.

There has not been a steady economic system in the world. It has always changed. Therefore, it is highly ridiculous to think the the world will remain CAPITALISTIC!

 

[Inisfallen]

One glaring example is the regulations for driving a taxi in New York. That job used to be available to virtually anyone with enough start up cash for a decent car and a map. Now you have to buy one of the limited number of medallions (limited by a very socialist city government) which costs upward of $1,000,000…thus preventing a poor or middle class person from getting that job.

Former NYC yellow cab driver here (back in the bad old days of the 80s). The medallion system was put into place in the '30s, and the number of medallions has remained pretty much the same ever since (it’s only slightly higher today than it was in the beginning). The number is fixed at about 13,000, and it’s not a bad number. If there were many more, nobody could make a living driving a cab.

About 30% of medallions are reserved for individual owner/operators (the rest are owned by fleets), and they are in fact owned by poor or middle-class persons. They take out loans to buy the medallions, and operate the cab themselves until the loan is paid off. At that point, the owner can lease out the medallion and car and relax a bit. He can sell it to fund his retirement (assuming it’s increased in value, and they always have, so far).

Speaking as both a former driver (I didn’t own a medallion – I leased a car with a medallion from a fleet) and a semi-regular passenger, it’s not a bad system. The cars are regulated by the city Taxi & Limosine Commission, which makes sure that they’re maintained and insured. The drivers are required to be specially licensed. The fixed number ensures that there are enough cabs on the street to satisfy the customers, while allowing fares to stay high enough so that the drivers and owners can make a living.

 

[ishii]

Liberals like Robert simply cannot do that. The emotional pain they would feel if they were to ever realize their entire political belief system has always been so completely wrong would be comparable to finding out your wife is a dude. So, instead of trying to understand someone else’s point of view (which could by psychologically damaging to him), they simply resort to hyperbolic statements and diversions.

Presumably, if one has believed in a lie their whole life, and that lie is engrained deeply in their psyche, it has to be very, very difficult to remotely entertain views that might threaten the lie. Some on the left in history have seen the light - and given up the lie. It must take a great deal of courage, especially if you have so much of your emotion vested in the lie - to give it up and embrace the truth. One thinks of Whitaker Chambers, for example. And more recently David Horowitz.

This is an excellent account of the power and tactics of leftists, written by a former leftist:

amazon.com/Radical-Son-A-Generational-Odyssey/dp/0684840057

Here is one reason why David Horowitz changed his views:

“The catalytic episode came when he discovered that the Panthers had murdered a friend of his, but even then Horowitz was slow to convert, primarily because he was heavily enmeshed in what he now views as the quintessential leftist habit of judging politics by its intentions, not its acts.”

Intentions, not acts. And emotions. That is what guides the mind of the leftist. And probably many other things, such as greed and pride. This is something to keep in mind when reading posts by people who sound like they just returned brainwashed from a North Korean re-education camp.

Ishii

 

[Boatswain2PA]

In the West, the very elite rich people in the US own and control more than half of the world’s wealth and resources while 1 out of 6 people live below poverty and go hungry. There is a wide discrepancy between the rich and the poor and that is a travesty!

Two fatal flaws in this statement. Go to a home of one of these 1 out of 6 people who live in poverty in America. This is what you will find ( heritage.org/research/reports/2011/07/what-is-poverty) Furthermore you will find almost NO-ONE who goes hungry in America. In fact it is the opposite here, with the poor people being over-nourished (ie: obese). Now, go to a poverty-stricken area in a socialist society. I’ve been there,and that is where you will find true poverty.

Furthermore, the natural and material Earth cannot naturally support the selfish, vacuumic demands of Capitalism. It is detrimental, intrusive and pompous to the natural enviroment.

Liberal literate idiots have been proclaiming the end of the world due to overpopulation for over nearly 200 years since Thomas Malthus…and they’ve been wrong every time.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

About 30% of medallions are reserved for individual owner/operators (the rest are owned by fleets), and they are in fact owned by poor or middle-class persons. They take out loans to buy the medallions, and operate the cab themselves until the loan is paid off. At that point, the owner can lease out the medallion and car and relax a bit. He can sell it to fund his retirement (assuming it’s increased in value, and they always have, so far).

I am not against ALL regulations. But the medallion system of limiting the number of taxi’s does two things. First, as you described above, it puts poor/middle class people on the hook for a million-dollar loan to an elitist banker. Second, it jacks up the price of taxi-fares for every consumer in the city.

Wouldn’t it be better to just have a standard requirement like every other city in the nation? Safe car, licensed driver??

 

[Inisfallen]

I am not against ALL regulations. But the medallion system of limiting the number of taxi’s does two things. First, as you described above, it puts poor/middle class people on the hook for a million-dollar loan to an elitist banker. Second, it jacks up the price of taxi-fares for every consumer in the city.

Wouldn’t it be better to just have a standard requirement like every other city in the nation? Safe car, licensed driver??

I don’t know. The NYC taxi system works pretty well for everyone. I don’t know what the rules are in other cities. Different situations call for different rules, and what works in New York may not work in other cities. For me, it’s not about ideology, it’s about what works.

Look, everyone starting up a business with a high capital investment ends up on the hook for loans to a banker. Want to open a Dunkin Donuts? You’ve got to buy the franchise. You’ll need financing. Want to open up a dry-cleaning shop? Same.

As to fares being high, New York is nearly unique among American cities in that it has a spectacular public transit system that operates 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. You don’t want to pay tax fare, fine – you can always take the subway or the bus. Nobody is forced to take yellow cabs. I rarely do these days, now that I have a child – I’d rather see the money go into her college fund.

If you don’t want to borrow to buy a medallion, you can go into the car service business. You don’t need a medallion for that. And there are plenty of those on the streets (they’re known as “black cars” in NYC, even though they don’t actually have to be painted black).

 

[Boatswain2PA]

I don’t know. The NYC taxi system works pretty well for everyone… Nobody is forced to take yellow cabs. I rarely do these days, now that I have a child – I’d rather see the money go into her college fund…

Sounds like it doesn’t work so well for YOU because of the price. Certainly the same thing with me when I visit NYC. I’ll just walk.

If you don’t want to borrow to buy a medallion, you can go into the car service business. You don’t need a medallion for that. And there are plenty of those on the streets (they’re known as “black cars” in NYC, even though they don’t actually have to be painted black).

I don’t know anything about the “black cars”. Is this, perhaps, an example of capitalism finding a nook within all of the governmental regulations??

 

[Inisfallen]

Sounds like it doesn’t work so well for YOU because of the price. Certainly the same thing with me when I visit NYC. I’ll just walk.

It works fine for me. As we all do, with every potential transaction, I weigh the benefit to me versus the cost. Once in a while, I’ll take a cab.

I don’t know anything about the “black cars”. Is this, perhaps, an example of capitalism finding a nook within all of the governmental regulations??

Nothing new about black cars. There are more of them than medallion cabs. Lots more. They’re just plain old car services, like you’d find anywhere else. You can call them. You can (although it’s not strictly legal) hail them on the street, especially in the boroughs outside Manhattan. If you do, the fare is negotiated before you take the trip – there’s no meter.

It’s all capitalism. All the cabs, yellow, black, whatever, are privately owned. And they’re regulated, to varying extents, by the local government. As they should be. Do you really want to ride in a cab with no insurance requirement? No maintenance standards? No licensing requirement? With a convicted violent felon driving you around at night? No? Then you need some regulation.

 

[nmgauss]

Two fatal flaws in this statement. Go to a home of one of these 1 out of 6 people who live in poverty in America. This is what you will find:
As scholar James Q. Wilson has stated, “The poorest Americans today live a better life than all but the richest persons a hundred years ago.”[3] In 2005, the typical household defined as poor by the government had a car and air conditioning. For entertainment, the household had two color televisions, cable or satellite TV, a DVD player, and a VCR. If there were children, especially boys, in the home, the family had a game system, such as an Xbox or a PlayStation.[4] In the kitchen, the household had a refrigerator, an oven and stove, and a microwave. Other household conveniences included a clothes washer, clothes dryer, ceiling fans, a cordless phone, and a coffee maker.

The home of the typical poor family was not overcrowded and was in good repair. In fact, the typical poor American had more living space than the average European. The typical poor American family was also able to obtain medical care when needed. By its own report, the typical family was not hungry and had sufficient funds during the past year to meet all essential needs.Poor families certainly struggle to make ends meet, but in most cases, they are struggling to pay for air conditioning and the cable TV bill as well as to put food on the table. Their living standards are far different from the images of dire deprivation promoted by activists and the mainstream media.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

Nothing new about black cars. There are more of them than medallion cabs. Lots more. They’re just plain old car services, like you’d find anywhere else. You can call them. You can (although it’s not strictly legal) hail them on the street…
It’s all capitalism. All the cabs, yellow, black, whatever, are privately owned. And they’re regulated, to varying extents, by the local government. As they should be. Do you really want to ride in a cab with no insurance requirement? No maintenance standards? No licensing requirement? With a convicted violent felon driving you around at night? No? Then you need some regulation.

Thank you for the education. I didn’t know anything about the “black cars”. Next time I’m in NYC I will call them vice the cab.

And YES, they both are capitalism, however the taxi cabs have that extra mandate that just doesn’t make any sense. Why have a medallion requirement at all? Nobody is against common sense regulations (insurance, maintenance, licensure, etc), but why the medallion that prevents many poor people from joining the middle-class?

 

[holyreyes]

Two fatal flaws in this statement. Go to a home of one of these 1 out of 6 people who live in poverty in America. This is what you will find ( heritage.org/research/reports/2011/07/what-is-poverty) Furthermore you will find almost NO-ONE who goes hungry in America. In fact it is the opposite here, with the poor people being over-nourished (ie: obese). Now, go to a poverty-stricken area in a socialist society. I’ve been there,and that is where you will find true poverty.

Liberal literate idiots have been proclaiming the end of the world due to overpopulation for over nearly 200 years since Thomas Malthus…and they’ve been wrong every time.

I beg to differ. Obese can be as malnourished as underweight. While you have skinny and underweight people in “socialist” countries who lack food, you have poor obese in “capitalist” countries who eat food that are cheap, low quality, has low nutritional value and high in fat. Moreover, hunger can be felt by all people regardless of their weight.

I never hear this “end of the world” propaganda from “LIBERAL LITERATE IDIOTS.” (lol) I, however, hear the consequences our actions have from lack of responsibilty has on our environment. As a matter of fact, this “end of the world” propaganda can be heard more often from the other side of the political spectrum.

 

[freeRadical]

Thank you for the education. I didn’t know anything about the “black cars”. Next time I’m in NYC I will call them vice the cab.

And YES, they both are capitalism, however the taxi cabs have that extra mandate that just doesn’t make any sense. Why have a medallion requirement at all? Nobody is against common sense regulations (insurance, maintenance, licensure, etc), but why the medallion that prevents many poor people from joining the middle-class?

The point of requiring a medallion is the same as any type of licensure: to keep out competition. You listed licensure as a common sense regulation, a medallion is a form of licensure. So that means that, to you, a medallion is common sense regulation.

 

[freeRadical]

Do they have to be communists to use such words to bash Capitalism? Christians, Catholics among others use such words to bash Capitalism…

On the contrary, the communist government of China among other communist countries has embraced Capitalism as its new economic system. This has transformed its country and its nation into an economic power house. With renewed economic mind set, China’s aggressiveness being demonstrated at the West Philippine Sea and surrounding seas is the result of its confidence brought by CAPITALISM . With booming economy, the demands of its nation cannot adequately support the voracious appetite of the new bourgeosie who make up a large percentage of the population. China’s hunger must look elsewhere for RESOURCES to satisfy the bottomless pit demands of Capitalism and must bully, grab and steal the small neighboring nations resources for the sake of self-centered-interest of greedy economic system, boasting military power, and maintaining an ostentacious, pretentious, superficial prestige. So, how can you say that greed(self-interest), power and prestige that describe Capitalism are positive?

In the West, the very elite rich people in the US own and control more than half of the world’s wealth and resources while 1 out of 6 people live below poverty and go hungry. There is a wide discrepancy between the rich and the poor and that is a travesty! Likewise, it is also a travesty when one cannot see the injustices of greed, power and prestige being perpetuated under the umbrella of CAPITALISM…

Furthermore, the natural and material Earth cannot naturally support the selfish, vacuumic demands of Capitalism. It is detrimental, intrusive and pompous to the natural enviroment.

There has not been a steady economic system in the world. It has always changed. Therefore, it is highly ridiculous to think the the world will remain CAPITALISTIC!

Now that you have pointed out what you believe to be flaws in a capitalistic economic system, what is your solution? What should we replace it with?

Economics has two fundamental principles that is bases almost all of its theory on:

1. Resources are scarce.
2. People have unlimited wants and desires.

Given those two principles, economics tries to answer the following two questions:

1. How do we decide what goods and services to produce?
2. How do we decide how to distribute those goods and services?

So, how would you answer the above questions?

Btw, Malthusian economics died a long time ago. No economist takes it seriously any more. Population does not grow exponentially without bound, it grows exponentially until it approaches a carry capacity and then the rate of growth slows down until the population hits an equilibrium at the carrying capacity.

The world is not overpopulated, it’s nowhere close to being overpopulated. Are certain nations overpopulated? Yes. But the world as a whole? No.

 

[nmgauss]

The world is not overpopulated, it’s nowhere close to being overpopulated. Are certain nations overpopulated? Yes. But the world as a whole? No.

How do you determine overpopulation, as a whole?

 

[nmgauss]

I beg to differ. Obese can be as malnourished as underweight. While you have skinny and underweight people in “socialist” countries who lack food, you have poor obese in “capitalist” countries who eat food that are cheap, low quality, has low nutritional value and high in fat. Moreover, hunger can be felt by all people regardless of their weight.

There is a difference between being under-nourished and being mal-nourished. Mal-nourishment is the result of people making poor choices. Under-nourishment is the result of not having enough food to maintain normal weight. Pet food is just about the cheapest and most highly nutritious food in the supermarket. Yet people will choose junk food. How many people have vegetable gardens? How many people in apartments grow vegetables in pots? Being persuaded by TV commercials has a lot to do with people’s choices.

 

[holyreyes]

Now that you have pointed out what you believe to be flaws in a capitalistic economic system, what is your solution? What should we replace it with?

Economics has two fundamental principles that is bases almost all of its theory on:

1. Resources are scarce.
2. People have unlimited wants and desires.

Given those two principles, economics tries to answer the following two questions:

1. How do we decide what goods and services to produce?
2. How do we decide how to distribute those goods and services?

So, how would you answer the above questions?

Btw, Malthusian economics died a long time ago. No economist takes it seriously any more. Population does not grow exponentially without bound, it grows exponentially until it approaches a carry capacity and then the rate of growth slows down until the population hits an equilibrium at the carrying capacity.

The world is not overpopulated, it’s nowhere close to being overpopulated. Are certain nations overpopulated? Yes. But the world as a whole? No.

 

[holyreyes]

freeRadical:

Now that you have pointed out what you believe to be flaws in a capitalistic economic system, what is your solution? What should we replace it with?

Economics has two fundamental principles that is bases almost all of its theory on:

1. Resources are scarce.
2. People have unlimited wants and desires.

Given those two principles, economics tries to answer the following two questions:

1. How do we decide what goods and services to produce?
2. How do we decide how to distribute those goods and services?

So, how would you answer the above questions?

Btw, Malthusian economics died a long time ago. No economist takes it seriously any more. Population does not grow exponentially without bound, it grows exponentially until it approaches a carry capacity and then the rate of growth slows down until the population hits an equilibrium at the carrying capacity.

The world is not overpopulated, it’s nowhere close to being overpopulated. Are certain nations overpopulated? Yes. But the world as a whole? No.

1. Resources are not scarce. God always provide us with abundance. There is more than enough for everyone. It’s just that some part of the world has amassed, and now own and control these resources.
2. Perhaps, there is a philosophical, cultural problem with people having unlimited wants and desires. Religious saints and spiritual leaders tell us to live a life for the sake of others by relinquishing our worldly desires. As Pope Francis said, “The world tells to seek success, power and money; God tells us to seek humility, service and love.”

It is a challenge to solve our world economic problems isn’t it? I will get back to you to answer the next 2 questions as I don’t have time…

I never said the world is overpopulated. I, however, made a reference to a population demand under the umbrella of Capitalism is detrimental to our environment. The population of the USA, for example, having a smaller population than India or China use up more natural resources than any other countries in the world thereby leaving more carbon imprint in the environment.