Am I a Capitalist?

[columbus]

I am a sole proprietor of a small business crafting high end luxury goods. I do this in a small town in Indiana. I think this makes me a de facto capitalist.

I have many critical comments and opinions of capitalism when it comes to other goods and services. I am especially inclined to criticize Christian capitalists.

Am I allowed to post in this forum? I assumed that having voted in favor of creating it I would be a member. I want some clarity. Who decides how ideologically pure a capitalist must be to post without getting modded the way I sometimes do.

Tom

Eta I'm asking because tarheeler just posted a definition I'm not sure I qualify for

 

[Revoltingest]

Do you favor a market economy?
Do you favor voluntary relationships in economics?

I'm a devout capitalist, and yet I favor regulation to prevent monopolies & environmental degradation.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Do any of you think that definitions given here: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/capitalist-only/166790-definitions-restricted-political-areas.html might be a little too broad? Because now I am qualified to post here.

 

[xkatz]

I am a sole proprietor of a small business crafting high end luxury goods. I do this in a small town in Indiana. I think this makes me a de facto capitalist.

Well at least you're not a communist!

I have many critical comments and opinions of capitalism when it comes to other goods and services. I am especially inclined to criticize Christian capitalists.

The ghost of John Calvin might not approve.

Am I allowed to post in this forum? I assumed that having voted in favor of creating it I would be a member. I want some clarity. Who decides how ideologically pure a capitalist must be to post without getting modded the way I sometimes do.

Tom

Eta I'm asking because tarheeler just posted a definition I'm not sure I qualify for

I dunno, but feel free to be seduced by the money...

 

[Willamena]

Do you observe the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, and feel yourself on the right side of that line?

Then you could be a Capitalist. It's hard to say.

 

[columbus]

Do you favor a market economy?
Do you favor voluntary relationships in economics?

I'm a devout capitalist, and yet I favor regulation to prevent monopolies & environmental degradation.

The answer to both questions is a firm maybe. Sometimes yes, but not always.

In my own business, custom picture framing, sure. Nobody ever really needs it, but if someone wants it more than whatever else they might spend disposable income on I'm really good. If Cadillac and Mercedes duke it out over the luxury car market, fine. But other, more needful things, I think are basic human rights, such as medical care and education.


Like you, I am a mixed capitalist. I suspect our mix is a little different.



I'll expound on the incompatibility of Christianity and capitalism later. But I do think that part of the USA's schizophrenia is that the dominant economic system and religion are utterly in opposition.

Tom

 

[columbus]

Do you observe the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, and feel yourself on the right side of that line?

Then you could be a Capitalist. It's hard to say.

Well, I've definitely gotten poorer since the Republican Recession. But I am in a nonessential housing related market, catering mainly to the middle class. Not a good market position, if you follow the numbers.

Does that put me on the right side of the line?

Tom

 

[Phil25]

Do you favor a market economy?
Do you favor voluntary relationships in economics?

I'm a devout capitalist, and yet I favor regulation to prevent monopolies & environmental degradation.

^This

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Well at least you're not a communist!

The ghost of John Calvin might not approve.

I dunno, but feel free to be seduced by the money...

I never understood why people think money is evil. It is one of the main things that structure society. I can see how people shun the corruption money inevitably causes, but not money itself.

 

[Revoltingest]

I never understood why people think money is evil. It is one of the main things that structure society. I can see how people shun the corruption money inevitably causes, but not money itself.

Money doesn't cause corruption.
(Tis just as how banks don't cause bank robberies.)
Corrupt people cause it.
Money is just the prize.

 

[Revoltingest]

The answer to both questions is a firm maybe. Sometimes yes, but not always.
In my own business, custom picture framing, sure. Nobody ever really needs it, but if someone wants it more than whatever else they might spend disposable income on I'm really good. If Cadillac and Mercedes duke it out over the luxury car market, fine. But other, more needful things, I think are basic human rights, such as medical care and education.
Like you, I am a mixed capitalist. I suspect our mix is a little different.
I'll expound on the incompatibility of Christianity and capitalism later. But I do think that part of the USA's schizophrenia is that the dominant economic system and religion are utterly in opposition.
Tom

It would seem that you're one of us....one of us....one of us.

Btw, custom picture framing is essential to those of us who need archival treatment of
historic documents which need to be displayed. Poor framing & materials will wreck things.

 

[Revoltingest]

Do any of you think that definitions given here: http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...0-definitions-restricted-political-areas.html might be a little too broad? Because now I am qualified to post here.

You think that's frightening.....I'm now qualified to post in the Feminist DIR!
But no, the horror doesn't end there.
Hillary, Bill, Barack, Sarah, Bernie, & Rosie could post in the Libertarian DIR.

The new rules appear such that dang near everyone here is a capitalist, feminist, & libertarian.
Why don't they consult us before designing these definitions? And then they're posted for a month
without fanfare....other than poofing a post because "classical liberal" is no longer liberal.

To post definitions is a great idea, one I've long been advocating.
But it's a work in progress.
One thing about them which isn't in the sticky thread is that RF is using Americastanian definitions.
But for "libertarian", they made the singular exception of including a European flavor which includes
socialists. What good is this, since socialists have their own DIR?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Money doesn't cause corruption.
(Tis just as how banks don't cause bank robberies.)
Corrupt people cause it.
Money is just the prize.

That's true. But it has some sort of hand in it. It gives power to the corrupt is what I meant. Some people will imagine that if they become rich they'll donate and try to save it for needed things, but it never truly ends up that way. If it does it is very rare. Giving someone such a life-changing gift (someone becoming rich) would definitely make some change on their personality. In a way, it depends on the person to become corrupt. But in a way, money could influence that person to become corrupt.

In any case, I was just saying that money shouldn't be viewed as evil.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's true. But it has some sort of hand in it. It gives power to the corrupt is what I meant. Some people will imagine that if they become rich they'll donate and try to save it for needed things, but it never truly ends up that way. If it does it is very rare. Giving someone such a life-changing gift (someone becoming rich) would definitely make some change on their personality. In a way, it depends on the person to become corrupt. But in a way, money could influence that person to become corrupt.

In any case, I was just saying that money shouldn't be viewed as evil.

Money doesn't differ from any other resource or resource allocation method.
If there were no money, decisions would still be made (by someone wielding
power) about resource allocation, & those resources would be desired.
So money is related to corruption as would be:
- Food, housing, vacations, cars, & other desired things
- The power to grant these things
- The power to deny these things

Corruption is endemic with humans. The trick is to have a system which encourages
honesty, discourages dishonesty, & is transparent.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Money doesn't differ from any other resource or resource allocation method.
If there were no money, decisions would still be made (by someone wielding
power) about resource allocation, & those resources would be desired.
So money is related to corruption as would be:
- Food, housing, vacations, cars, & other desired things
- The power to grant these things
- The power to deny these things

Corruption is endemic with humans. The trick is to have a system which encourages
honesty, discourages dishonesty, & is transparent.

I agree, I think I just used corruption without thinking

 

[Revoltingest]

Do any of you think that definitions given here: http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...0-definitions-restricted-political-areas.html might be a little too broad? Because now I am qualified to post here.

It seems that you are not allowed after all.
(It's not my determination...just opining & observing.)

You oppose private property. Ref:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/3893340-post185.html
Wherein you state:

I advocate the abolition of private property to eliminate the need for government!

Consider the underlined portion of the definition, which is the primary descriptor of a "capitalist".
You oppose a fundamental belief of a "capitalist".

Capitalism: An economic system based on private ownership of capital, resources, production, and systems of distribution. It functions primarily through the use of competitive markets, wage labor, and private property rights. It is affected by the political system it operates under, and can be found in many models such as laissez-faire capitalism, state capitalism, and social-market capitalism.

Note that some examples might be found in "state capitalism", but this does not
mean that state capitalism is entirely included in the RF definition of "capitalist".

Disclaimer:
Tis not for me to give anyone the boot. I only posted this to inform,
based upon Tarheeler's recent clarification of interpreting definitions.
As I've found, those of us who aren't members might find our posts poofed.
(Once again, I've gone from membership in the Feminist forum to outsider.)

 

[ShivaFan]

I agree with you Revoltingest, people are the issue in most cases, people are corrupt.

IMHO, that is why I am always amazed at the simpleton perspective of some, who arre overly vocal about "those corrupt corporate guys" corrupted "by money" who "have power", but this same person who may or may not have a legitimate personal case or example, this same person hands over even more power directly over their own personal life to some politician and some government, yet this government is full of people and you will have the same power hungry, money fixated, corrupt people as any place else only now it is often even more of an impact over a broader scale of lives and even less accountable.

It seems a certain percentage of people are corrupt or corruptable. I don't know the exact percent, but they are there among us all. Why do some not understand this, and give all trust to one and totally sterotype another?

Even within a religious organization, you have that percentage of corrupt people. In the TSA. At your job. In Obama's "justice department". At the IRS.