Arnaud1221
Red-hood
There is level of capitalism or a spectrum. At the far right, it's true, it's damn nuts. But at moderation or the centre, it's good to see the citizen taking care of their finance and expense.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Capitalists may have the same mentality as Nazis: that people must be enslaved
- Thread starter Estro Felino
- Start date
I had a staff of three, one being my wife. She didn't take a paycheck and so didn't pay income taxes or accrue Social Security benefits, but like me, has lived on what the office generated then and now, fifteen years since closing the office. The other two - a receptionist and a back-office assistant - made $12/hr. in 2009, our last year open. Prevailing wages for those jobs were about $10/hr. My income was six figures.
Heyo
Veteran Member
So you really were a capitalist, owning means of production and employing people. I wasn't sure about that.
And your income (was that income after costs and taxes?) was about five times that of your workers. A reasonable amount, given your education and risk (and most probably work hours and dedication), at least in my mind. A communist might find that to be outrageous exploitation.
And that is probably the scale where most people disagree. The far left wants everybody to get the same, and the far right wants to allow the capitalists to get away with anything they can grab (tax-free).
What would be your threshold for an income to be called greedy?
Which is what leftists do 24/7 when they talk about Fox News.
Or European media. (From EU not from UK)
Books don’t prove if Nigeria were a socialist country, that their economic outlook would be improved.
But the leadership of these countries consent to this. What indication do you have if these Nations were Socialist, that the leadership wouldn’t consent to such thievery?
What point are you making? Are you saying if the countries extracting resources from these African nations were socialist, that they wouldn’t want to extract their resources? Or are you saying if African nations were socialist, these countries that extracted resources wouldn’t have no interest in doing so; which point are you making?
So it’s exploitation you have a problem with? That’s a completely different argument. The person I was responding to was making the argument things would be much better if we got rid of capitalism and enacted socialism; but exploitation happens under socialism as well, so changing systems won’t solve anything
Do you mind me asking what kind of studies did you undertake?
My point is that foreign robbers steal these resources.
In Niger the people rose up against these vulgar thieves.
None; I've never went to school a day in my life. Does that matter?
That's different. Before you said it was due to Capitalism that Africa is in the financial situation they find themselves; now you seem to be saying something different.
Personally, I support a well-regulated capitalist economy tempered with socialism to support the commonwealth (infrastructure, military, police), support human development (free public education, small business start-up loans, public health care, GI bill) and for the unlucky (disabled, mentally ill, homeless).
And thanks for the kind words. My wife and I did better than our employees, but as you say, there were years of preparation required, start-up costs, liability, all kinds of insurance (malpractice was always pricey), and frequent midnight runs to the ER for two hours to admit a patient. The reason I brought it up is because that was the incentive to do all of that, along with some other benefits such as self-employment, instant respect and social standing, working in the sciences, and working with people (my Army job taught be that I wasn't right for a cubicle in an office working for others).
I'd answer in terms of total wealth. I'd say that once you have enough to live on comfortably, you needn't do anything for money again. Of course, some people never have enough. They are greedy.
In my case, I hit that point in 2009, retired, and moved to Mexico. I was 55 years old. We have enough. Our lifestyle is humble and our tastes are inexpensive.
We'll be going out for breakfast at Scallion (Ajijic) in 45 minutes, and then grocery shopping. I'll probably get the Cowboy Omelet. My wife usually gets the Farmer's Burrito. Together, they're 240 pesos (under $13 USD), but my wife will also order a latte for another 40 pesos. With tip, we'll be out of there for about $20 USD.
The question is: Niger has uranium and gold.
Who deserves to own these raw materials?
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Which is what leftists do 24/7 when they talk about Fox News.
The very obvious difference is that Fox News has legitimately been proven to be bias, dishonest, and inaccurate.
Fox News controversies - Wikipedia
Dominion vs Fox News: 'Fox has admitted to telling lies about Dominion'
Dominion lawyers have announced Fox and Dominion have reached a settlement of $787.5m (£633.6m).
Fox News (Opinion) Media Bias Rating
Learn the AllSides Media Bias Rating of Fox News (Opinion). AllSides rates the media bias of hundreds of news outlets, media sources and writers.
www.allsides.com
You're entitled to your own opinion, but you're not entitled to your own facts. I know you hate to hear it, but you can't just handwave the truth away whenever it becomes inconvenient.
European media is generally left leaning. Also, Fox News is a single outlet, whereas Europe has multiple outlets, so your comparison makes zero sense.
Last edited:
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
The ones who already possess it (Niger)?
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
What's needed is balance.
You guess?
Pretty lame justification.
Note also that this greater income is also mitigated by....
- Employee compensation being greater than $10/hour
because over & above that, the employer pays payroll
taxes & benfits.
- Owner compensation is for 2 people, not one,
because the spouse was nominally unpaid.
That's what transpires from Hannah Arendt's books : that the IG Farben demanded from the Nazis slave labor, and Jews were exploited so that the Capitalists that owned the IG Farben could obtain the profit maximization, and produce chemicals with basically zero costs of productions.
This is what Capitalism does to men: it transforms them into greedy people, who lose their humanhood, so I am entitled to call them greedy wolves.
Greedy, sadistic wolves disposed to enjoy seeing Jews dying while working in those camps.
They even built their factories around Auschwitz on purpose.
It's all in Hannah Arendt's book The banality of evil.
Thoughts?
To date, every man-made machine needs monitoring, and regulating and adjusting to continue to work well. Economic systems are man-made machines.
Next, I would say that it's built into human nature to explore and to be competitive. So I think we must create economic systems that reward invention and innovation.
So to me the answer is UNFETTERERED economic systems will always devolve. I think capitalism or perhaps free market-ism is the best answer we have, but we MUST monitor and regulate those systems. We need strong banking regulations like we had before Reagan, we must undo Citizen's United, we must make rich people pay their fair share of taxes, and so on.
I also remind you that if anti-Natalism prevailed and people stopped procreating, Capitalists would cease to exist.
Because they would have no more slaves to exploit.
The Niger State.
What's the point of such a stupid
post that humans are necessary
for an economic system to exist?
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Exactly.