An Image From 1867

[almifkhar]

i just learned a little something about capitalism last night. remember in the 90's when all these "middle class people" were investing into the stock market? well what was going on is called a pump and dump. what this is is the people or we shall call it small money would be advised to put the cash into this stock or that stock and the big money or elites would also invest into the same stocks. when the stock raised in price, the big money would pull their money out which then made the stock more or less worthless. as a result, the small money or middle class investers lost everything. and apparently this schme has been going on for a long time. jfk's dad said after the 1929 crash that he was getting his shoes shined and the shoe shinner was telling him about how he decided to invest into the market. jfk's dad (sorry can't remember his name) said that he went right away and took his money out of the market and that is how he saved his forturne. he said that if a shoeshinner was playing the market that it ment that too many people were playing and that the stocks were worthless.

the bottom line in capatolism is the rich get rich and the poor get poorer, that is the way it has always worked. you can only go so far up the ladder before you get kicked down or stuck where you are. the deck is always stacked against the people. it is rare when one makes enough money to be considered in the wealthy class, last person i know of that was able to climb the ladder to that class was bill gates and the elites still tried to destroy him. i would have to say that the middle class stands at around 70% if that anymore. working class and middle class are two different things and the fact is both classes are becomming poor with their jobs going bye bye and being in debt up to their eyeballs. and you must keep in mind that there are different tax breaks for the welthy class and the middle and working class. to me capitolism is nothing more than a way to wage war on the people. i can't say that i am down with socialism for i am not well versed in it. but i do think that there needs to be another way. a way that is honest and fair cause capitolism sure isn't it.

 

[AtheistAJ]

Capitalism is horrid. It teaches people to think only about themselves and close family.

However humans could never successfully live in communism. It just gets corrupted too soon as proven by history. Some kind of social anarchy would be most productive if people didn't naturally strive for personal power over humanity's progress, but commercialism is most fun.

 

[michel]

To both of you, Almifkar, and Atheist AJ, Capitalism is not bad.


The concepts of capitalism are to promote self employment (people going into business for themselves) - that creates jobs for the unemployed. Capitalism is, basicallly, the idea of being able to make money from your own efforts.

If you do no work, you earn nothing; if you work, but have a good safe job, you earn , but not that much (depending on the job) If you have your own private business (damned hard work with a great element of risk), you can either make a lot of money, or, if you are unlucky, you become bankrupt.

Statistically, it differs from country to country, but, as a rule of thumb, only 2 in 5 businesses started by individuals will ever make it; there is very little prospect of there ever being a profit in year one, after that, it depends. If you own your own business, the chances are that you will work very hard, and have very few holidays.

Where Capitalism does go wrong, is when individuals become greedy.

Yes, Almifcar, there is a tactic of pump & dump - it is well known.

In the early 60's a firm in Australia claimed to have found gold, in a mine; investors flooded in, and bought more and more shares. The more shares people buy, the more valuable (and expensive to buy) they become - inflating to price to a value that does not reflect the real value. I cannot remember the name of the company (I hope someone here knows it, and can fill in the blank), but there was no mine in the first place. People were so gullible as to buy something they knew nothing about, and every investor was cheated.

The principle of Capitalism, and the money making potential might be best described as the profit you will make is directly proportional to the amount of risk you are prepared to put in to make money. There is nothing 'wrong' with capitalism; what is wrong is greedy people.

 

[Sunstone]

I think capitalism has been a mixed blessing. On the one hand (and this is huge), capitalism has lifted millions of people out of poverty and created a world in which, for the first time in human history, there is in many countries a sizable middle class. That only begins to list the accomplishments of capitalism.

But on the other hand, the economic ruthlessness demanded by modern capitalism threatens to destroy the very middle class created by it. Furthermore, I blame that economic ruthlessness for the destruction and degradation of community.

But...capitalism is only a few centuries old. In historical terms, it's still a baby. Who knows what it will end up as?

 

[AtheistAJ]

There is nothing 'wrong' with capitalism; what is wrong is greedy people.

That's just it - capitalism makes people greedy. I certainly hope that second part wasn't a question. By the way, didn't Jesus allegedly tell all his followers to give everything away?

 

[Sunstone]

That's just it - capitalism makes people greedy.

How does capitalism make people any greedier than they already are?

 

[michel]

That's just it - capitalism makes people greedy. I certainly hope that second part wasn't a question. By the way, didn't Jesus allegedly tell all his followers to give everything away?

I disagree; People make themselves greedy; Capitalism make nobody anything. You might say that Brothels make women become prostitutes.

As to your point about Jesus .........Isn't that a bit of a bad argument to use, since you apparently don't believe in him ?

 

[Feathers in Hair]

What do I think of the image? *peers at screen* That I need a new computer. It looks like a giant, blurry wedding cake with people dancing on it to me.

 

[Fluffy]

Like anything in existence, capitalism has its good points and bad points. It would be stupid to deny that capitalism has had no benefit across the globe. However, I feel that it is a fair assessment to assert that whilst such benefits have been significant, they are swallowed up by the more negative impacts. Overall, therefore, capitalism is a bad thing.

The basic idea behind capitalism is that people will be paid according to the time and effort which they put into society. However, this inevitably does not work for a number of reasons:
1) People do not have to put time or effort in order to become wealthy. They can be very lucky (win the lottery) or recieve a big inheritance.
2) People do not have to contribute to society in order to become wealthy. There are various jobs which do nothing to benefit society yet earn the workers money.
3) It is easier to accumulate wealth when you have wealth. It is harder to accumulate wealth when you are poor. Therefore, the gap between rich and poor will become greater over time.
4) Wealth is not an infinite resource. If everybody were rich then prices would rise and money would devalue. Therefore everybody cannot become rich. Therefore some people must remain poor in order for the rich to stay rich. Therefore if everybody put the maximum amount of effort into contributing to society, some people would still stay poor.
5) Wealth allows people more power. People with power have a high tendancy to use it for their own benefit. Therefore there is a exponential (and not linear like it should be) trend of luxury with the very rich gaining more benefit for minimal more contribution to society. In other words they are able to attain more for less effort than somebody with less wealth would be able to do.
6) Everybody is not born equal. Some people have inherent talents whilst others have inherent disadvantages. Putting them all in the same pit means that those who are more talented will be able to contribute more to society and therefore become more wealthy. However, this indirectly punishes those individuals who, through no fault of their own, are unable to contribute to society as much and therefore cannot accumulate as much wealth even if the actual effort they are putting in is much higher than a talented person.

Please note that I am not advocating communism or socialism although I do believe that the latter would be a better system than the current one if it were adopted worldwide. I believe a hybrid of the two is the most effective economic system, however.

What do I think of the image? *peers at screen* That I need a new computer. It looks like a giant, blurry wedding cake with people dancing on it to me.

Don't worry its not your screen, its the quality of the picture. I found it hard to make it out myself and my screen is supposed to be top of the line.

 

[NoName]

Capitalism is horrid. It teaches people to think only about themselves and close family.

People won't work for anything else. They did a study comparing volunteer life guards to paid life guards. Even though both were doing such a noble job (saving people's life) and both wanted to be there (why volunteer for something if you don't want to be there), the paid people did a much better job than the volunteers. Money talks. It talks louder than anything else. People are naturally selfish, too. To force them into a society where nothing is talking is to allow society to crumble.

 

[Yerda]

I think capitalism has been a mixed blessing. On the one hand (and this is huge), capitalism has lifted millions of people out of poverty and created a world in which, for the first time in human history, there is in many countries a sizable middle class.

I don't see that. I see a violent force that concentrates power and wealth.

They spread of wealth has only been possible by what you, my American friends, call socialism. The increase in living standards has only been achieved by use of what you call socialism. The level of literacy and higher education only came about through what you call socialism.

Each freedom was the result of a long hard fight, not a gift from our wealthy overseers. Capitalism gave the lower classes nothing until they coerced it from reluctant hands of the elite.

But on the other hand, the economic ruthlessness demanded by modern capitalism threatens to destroy the very middle class created by it. Furthermore, I blame that economic ruthlessness for the destruction and degradation of community.

I would also lay at its feet the starvation in the developing world, the erosion of natural resources and loss of biodiversity, climate change, and a whole host of imperial wars.

But...capitalism is only a few centuries old. In historical terms, it's still a baby. Who knows what it will end up as?

Hopefully the bin. Trade and enterprise will always hopefully have a place in a fair and sustainable society however.

 

[nutshell]

The US is not purely capitalistic as some would contend. Rather, it uses many socialist methods in an attempt to make all equal. In a purely capitalistic system, welfare, school lunches, and student grants would not exist.

One thing my studies have shown me is that there will always be the elite and the down-trodden no matter what form of government is in place.

 

[ChrisP]

My vote was cast in favour of Socialism, however I would like to qualify why this was the case.

Socialism is ideally the better system, however in order for socialism to work, all of humanity would have to be working together solely for each others benefit, and that does not allow for much diversity of views. It also does not allow for anyone to do their own thing, or for any competition other than sporting because as soon as any competition is introduced the unity of the socialist entity is dissolved.

But Hey, I'm an idealist

 

[Yerda]

The concepts of capitalism are to promote self employment (people going into business for themselves) - that creates jobs for the unemployed. Capitalism is, basicallly, the idea of being able to make money from your own efforts.

More accurately, make money from other people's efforts.

 

[jonny]

I agree that socialism is the better system, but it will never work. People are too selfish.

 

[Sunstone]

I agree that socialism is the better system, but it will never work. People are too selfish.

Maybe some kind of hybrid between socialism and capitalism. One that allowed economic and job growth, but protected the disadvantaged and communities. I think that would be an ideal.

 

[nutshell]

Maybe some kind of hybrid between socialism and capitalism. One that allowed economic and job growth, but protected the disadvantaged and communities. I think that would be an ideal.

Believe it or not, we do have a hybrid system right now.

 

[ChrisP]

Believe it or not, we do have a hybrid system right now.

True, but any capitalism within socialism perverts/distorts it's abilities, I guess it just a case of which side of the See Saw you're on.

I'd enjoy a world that was still completely agricultural. That way it's socialist without effort.

 

[AtheistAJ]

Like anything in existence, capitalism has its good points and bad points. It would be stupid to deny that capitalism has had no benefit across the globe. However, I feel that it is a fair assessment to assert that whilst such benefits have been significant, they are swallowed up by the more negative impacts. Overall, therefore, capitalism is a bad thing.

I have to digress for a moment and use that well structured point as the way I feel about religion as well.
And I agree with all your points on capitalism Fluffy.

 

[Skavau]

I believe an economic system needs to be designed based on the principals of humanity and with goal of achieving positive growth which effects society on an objective level.

I believe strongly in Self-Determination as it is, by it's very nature - a progressive thing. Self-Determination preaches that individuals have the right to govern their own lives and move forward and onward with their lives. This should be applied to economical systems.

Businesses should be allowed to freely establish themselves in society. They should be able to determine their own interests and their own progression forward while having the goal of improving the society around them. They should also indeed be subject to economic regulations around them. Environmental Regulations, Corruption Regulations and the like.

These regulations should be handled by trading organisations who oversee the system and regulate it to ensure it maintains a stable stability. These Organisations would be public organisations and not independent businesses. They wouldn't themselves effectively be a business, they would just be an organisation who oversees the economic structure.

Inline with this ideology, governmental interference with the economy should be kept minimal. Communities would have the right to interfere and guide corporations. They would have the right of the 'final vote' on acceptence if an organisation wishes to privatise public land. The Community should be able to decide what businesses and organisations enter their community and what effect they can have on society.

A clearer distinction needs to be given to what public land is and what private land is, if a business wishes to set up, expand or develop private land which is not labelled as a greenfield or has any environmental regulations - then if they pay the right amount of money to the land owner, they should have that right to do so. They may even rent out the privatised land if they please. The land owner takes the priority in this given scenario.

Public land is ultimately though, down to the community and down to society. If the community is against public land being converted into private business land then such should not happen. The people should have the say in what happens to their community.

Indeed, while most organisations would be private - there would be public organisations set up to bring an order to society. These of course would be: Health, Education, Public Services, Police.. etc.

These organisations would be tax exempt and would be government funded.

Essentially, my ideology believes that there should be a free-market environment were free-trade is encouraged with other organisations, be public or private and that good economic relations between different organisations are encouraged. A self-governing public Global Trade Organisation would oversee all areas of trade and keep the system economically sharp and economically vibrant. The Communities would have the say over the expansion of organisations in Public Areas. They would have the underlining say of progression since they are the consumers and they control the demand.

Anyone have anything to add? I conjured this ideology up in about an hour.