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

[holyreyes]

There is that “G” word again…

I have shown you before that greed does not exist in Capitalism. Yet you persist in posting misinformation.

Don’t you realize that young people read this forum and because of uncorrected statements like yours…they become “brain washed” about virtuous economic systems.

Or is that your agenda?

Hmmm… Likewise, I find that to be also my concerns regarding about your postings.

 

[holyreyes]

Anybody who has a savings account is a capitalist. Are you saying that one cannot have a savings account without being accused of being greedy?

Anyone who contributes to a retirement account is a capitalist. Is that person greedy?

In order to give to the poor, people must have excess of income beyond their needs. Is that being greedy?

Was Bill Gates greedy? Today he is giving away millions of dollars to the poor.

Oh Dear… You make it seems like the only thing in this world is MONEY and therefore the only that one can give is MONEY??? This world is in a sad state indeed…

 

[freeRadical]

I understand all of your concerns because our own world economic system does not allow us to be as charitable as we are called to.

There is no “world” economic system. The world is made up of different nations with different economic systems. People in Capitalistic societies tend to be more charitable then people in non-capitalistic societies. Why? Cause they have the money to be able to. Do you know how much aid we give to other countries? Why is it the US can not only produce enough food for itself but produces enough to send to other countries? How is that the US is able to give away billions of dollars in aid to other countries? Do you think we would be able to that if we had an economic system other than Capitalism?

 

[freeRadical]

Oh Dear… You make it seems like the only thing in this world is MONEY and therefore the only that one can give is MONEY??? This world is in a sad state indeed…

We are required to have money to give anything, whether it be monetary or non-monetary.

 

[nmgauss]

Oh Dear… You make it seems like the only thing in this world is MONEY and therefore the only that one can give is MONEY??? This world is in a sad state indeed…

How do you define GREED? Isn’t that the pursuit of riches over and above your needs? How does one define riches?

 

[Boatswain2PA]

That is false.

Robert has been called out on his falsehood many times, but he is a broken record repeating the same lines over and over and over (ad nauseum). He apparently doesn’t have the ability to actually back up his rhetoric with any data or historical perspective.

All one has to do is look at the human rights abuses of socialist regimes of history to know, without any doubt, that socialism is bad for people. It is so bad that the Catholic Catechism specifically spells out the evils of socialism.

 

[holyreyes]

Wow…you were on a roll…why stop? I’m sure you can add more than etc…etc…etc…

Etc, etc, etc…

There is no economic system that provides “equal rewards” and this hopeful theory of "equality " is a utopian wish.

Those who promote this “myth of equality”, propose to achieve this unattainable state by lowering standards…“some people should not earn more than others”. This flies in the face of reason and human nature. Would it not be a better goal to promote the raising of standards and encourage lower earners to earn more in order to gain this “equality”?

Lack of Faith and trust, Fear of the unknown, Fear of changes, Fear of relinquishing their worldly things, being stuck and born into the system, yes, all of these would make you say all of these things. I find it hard to believe that anyone would promote a low standard of living?

You won’t be able to realize this “utopian” state as you call it unless you do not take a quatum leap. I find it hard to believe that people have taken comfort in the current world economic system. It only goes to show their callus stance on solving the injustices being perpetuated under the umbrella of Capitalism. Just to stay on this topic, I would like to again answer Robert’s question that it is definitely ludicrous to think that the world will remain Capitalistic. You don’t need a rocket scienitist or a mystic/prophetic visionary or a brilliant economist to tell you that. I am 1000000000000% of it FOR SURE!

 

[holyreyes]

Now that you have criticized Capitalism, I would like to know what economic system do you think we should replace it with?

Stay tune and we’ll see it unfold in our lifetime I hope… crossing my fingers…

 

[holyreyes]

So, basically you are pursuing your own self-interest. You are engaging in the economic activities that you want to engage in, you are pursuing your own interests, your own desires. Who are you to judge someone else pursuing their own self-interest?

 

[holyreyes]

there is no “world” economic system. The world is made up of different nations with different economic systems. People in capitalistic societies tend to be more charitable then people in non-capitalistic societies. Why? Cause they have the money to be able to. Do you know how much aid we give to other countries? Why is it the us can not only produce enough food for itself but produces enough to send to other countries? How is that the us is able to give away billions of dollars in aid to other countries? do you think we would be able to that if we had an economic system other than capitalism?

a collosal yes!

 

[holyreyes]

How do you define GREED? Isn’t that the pursuit of riches over and above your needs? How does one define riches?

Okay, sigh, how can I explain… all these terms imply money… we need to get out of that system and that mindset. as long as the world is being run on money, these are going to be the pursuit of everyone to survive, which is ridiculous. i know you don’t believe but we really cannot serve 2 masters. i hate repeating myself… go figure…

 

[freeRadical]

Okay, sigh, how can I explain… all these terms imply money… we need to get out of that system and that mindset. as long as the world is being run on money, these are going to be the pursuit of everyone to survive, which is ridiculous. i know you don’t believe but we really cannot serve 2 masters. i hate repeating myself… go figure…

The world isn’t run on money, money is just a medium of exchange. The world is run on separate people pursuing their own self interests, interacting with each other, exchanging, and trading. What do you propose we replace the current system with?

 

[Robert_Sock]

Robert has been called out on his falsehood many times, but he is a broken record repeating the same lines over and over and over (ad nauseum). He apparently doesn’t have the ability to actually back up his rhetoric with any data or historical perspective.

All one has to do is look at the human rights abuses of socialist regimes of history to know, without any doubt, that socialism is bad for people. It is so bad that the Catholic Catechism specifically spells out the evils of socialism.

Are you talking about socialism, or dictatorships? All I saw listed in the past posts were dictatorships. A single socialistic nation in the middle of greedy, capitalistic societies will not have a chance of survival. So how can one cite the historical perspective of successful socialism when they exists in an otherwise capitalistic world?

 

[nmgauss]

Instead of bemoaning the weak aspects of capitalism, why not emphasize its pluses?

In a perfect world, everyone would have equal intelligence, equal bodies, and equal ability to produce goods and services. They would also have uniform distribution of resources and equal transportation. If that were to happen, then social justice would be to have everyone earn the same wages and be able to buy the same products at the same price… If they all had equal needs, then distributing wages equally would make sense.

No economic system will be perfect because humans are not perfect, and the earth was not designed specifically for imperfect uniform human habitation. Utopias have been tried and failed numerous times in human history. The only system that will prevail will rely on the natural tendencies of humanity in the face of advantages and disadvantages existing in the means of production and the markets for its products. Theory that goes against human proclivities in the face of uneven availability of resources and markets will never work.

 

[holyreyes]

The world isn’t run on money, money is just a medium of exchange. The world is run on separate people pursuing their own self interests, interacting with each other, exchanging, and trading. What do you propose we replace the current system with?

Fine… Then ALL MEN can perfectly function, survive and live prosperously without it. LET’S DISMANTLE IT ONCE AND FOR ALL!

 

[holyreyes]

Instead of bemoaning the weak aspects of capitalism, why not emphasize its pluses?

In a perfect world, everyone would have equal intelligence, equal bodies, and equal ability to produce goods and services. They would also have uniform distribution of resources and equal transportation. If that were to happen, then social justice would be to have everyone earn the same wages and be able to buy the same products at the same price… If they all had equal needs, then distributing wages equally would make sense.

No economic system will be perfect because humans are not perfect, and the earth was not designed specifically for imperfect uniform human habitation. Utopias have been tried and failed numerous times in human history. The only system that will prevail will rely on the natural tendencies of humanity in the face of advantages and disadvantages existing in the means of production and the markets for its products. Theory that goes against human proclivities in the face of uneven availability of resources and markets will never work.

Oh dear! LOL! God’s material creation are perfect, our ways are not. Our thoughts, actions, and feelings are corrupt. A perfect world does not imply everyone to have equal intelligence. In a perfect world, everyone is gifted by God with unique qualities and talents (which everyone already has). By using the gifts that God is bestowed upon us, we are all called to be good stewards of God’s providence to promote the public common good in which all can share. In a perfect world there is no such thing as an economy whereby you use currency to sell and buy. The work that you and all do is the God given talents that you and all have and love to do that benefit humanity. The resources that we have are more than sufficient, there’s more than abundance for everyone to share. In a perfect world one’s “professional” talent whether it be a care giver or a doctor or a janitor, all receive equal rewards of human kindness, human services and natural resources. My brother, this is not an unattainable utopia. This is easily attainable as it is readily available. Just remove the other worldly God which is Money and everyone will function, survive and live prosperously equally from one another. Everyone will have to dig in their hearts to share. That is the idea of the utopian state. IT IS NOT A DIFFICULT TASK.

 

[Zzyzx_Road]

Communism and socialism are based on the violation of the Tenth Commandment. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods, etc… but communism and socialism take them away by force. Yet another reason why they are considered ungodly in many circles. Government-based charity is an oxymoron. If one wants to help out of the goodness of their hearts, nothing wrong with that. But the help shouldn’t be compelled from them at the point of a gun.

Capitalism isn’t perfect, it certainly has its faults. But one should stop pretending socialism is the Christian thing to do…

Regarding money, much human activity requires a medium of exchange. You might not want my widget for your corn, well the medium of exchange allows me to buy your corn while you use the medium of exchange you received from me to buy a different widget from someone else. That is the lubricant that makes commerce possible. No commerce, no way the planet can support 7 billion people, need to get real about that. We were told to be fruitful and multiply, that we had dominion over the earth. People have this warm fuzzy vision of small artisan villages with tiny farms and village smiths that are completely self-supporting. As if that life is guaranteed to be better. May work for some, but it’s not one size fits all. That ship sailed millenia before Christ. We’ve been dealing with medium of exchange for at least 6000 years now, no large scale human society has ever functioned without it during that time. Hence it shouldn’t be surprising that the Bible has a few things to say about that. Holyreyes might want to recheck his claims regarding the ease with which we can do without mediums of exchange.

Further, the medium of exchange can and often does morph into a store of wealth. From which capital formation can happen that supports greater commercial ventures than any one single man can pull off. Which can succeed or fail. The success of which over time has eventually led to the ability to communicate with each other with electronic devices that would have been inconceivable just a century ago. The business cycle has always been part of civilization, it will never not be there. Every attempt to suppress the business cycle has failed over time. Disastrously I might add. Jesus dealt with bankers and tax collectors, did somehow anyone think He was dealing with something new? Or something we can abolish?

 

[freeRadical]

Fine… Then ALL MEN can perfectly function, survive and live prosperously without it. LET’S DISMANTLE IT ONCE AND FOR ALL!

And replace it with what?

 

[freeRadical]

Are you talking about socialism, or dictatorships? All I saw listed in the past posts were dictatorships. A single socialistic nation in the middle of greedy, capitalistic societies will not have a chance of survival. So how can one cite the historical perspective of successful socialism when they exists in an otherwise capitalistic world?

Robert, haven’t the Popes and the Catholic Church condemned Socialism?

 

[markomalley]

Are you talking about socialism, or dictatorships? All I saw listed in the past posts were dictatorships. A single socialistic nation in the middle of greedy, capitalistic societies will not have a chance of survival. So how can one cite the historical perspective of successful socialism when they exists in an otherwise capitalistic world?

You’ve never heard of the “dictatorship of the proletariat” before, Robert?

You, yourself, on this thread have said that smart people (presumably like you) would need to control things in a socialist state. Your words were, “*A ruling minority is needed to run any government *” (this in the context of ***defending ***the existence of a “nomenklatura” in every existing socialist government).

Or did you forget that part?