Unbridled Capitalism is self-destructive

[Estro Felino]

I don't understand why Italians make **** up about Americans.

ok...pardon me...I meant some people.

 

[Revoltingest]

@Revoltingest

Did you know that the State here expropriated a motorway/highway enterprise from a private company, and nationalized it?

Would the United States' government do something like that?

I sure hope not.

 

[Stevicus]

Were that so, you could make the argument with evidence.

I did. I compared their performance from WW1 to WW2. That's evidence.

It's reasonable to reject ideas with 2 problems....
1) Irrelevant to the argument which system is best.

That's because that's not the argument. The exact argument I was addressing was this:

Socialists are different. They pursue a system
that has never turned out well for any country.

Note that this particular argument is not a comparative argument, but a declarative claim that "it has never turned out well," which would require YOU to prove that their system and living standard actually got worse from what it was before, which you have consistently failed to do.

2) Lack of evidence.
BTW, I'm far from the only one.
Others simply ignored your claim.

There's plenty of evidence, but if you wantonly refuse to look at it, then that's an indication that you have no interest in a reasonable argument based in good faith. I see that as clear evidence that you only want to play some sort of game. Most reasonable people aren't like that, which is why you're the only one in the entire world taking this position.

Are you making the argument of popularity of
belief among un-named people? It's still irrelevant
to my claim that you argue against.

Your question is incoherent. Please rephrase.

So many words.
No content.

And more gaslighting and a refusal to argue in good faith.

 

[Stevicus]

It's endemic to centralized governments with the
power to enforce a command economy that
authoritarianism both economic & social will reign.
(History shows this in every full blown socialist country.)
Capitalism has a range of results, from hideous to
wonderful. It's that potential for wonderful that
differentiates it from socialism.
Capitalism, democracy, constitutional law, & a
progressive populace are the ideal combination.

So many words. No content.

 

[Revoltingest]

I did. I compared their performance from WW1 to WW2. That's evidence.

Of what?

That's because that's not the argument. The exact argument I was addressing was this:

You change the subject, & act as though you've responded.

Note that this particular argument is not a comparative argument, but a declarative claim that "it has never turned out well," which would require YOU to prove that their system and living standard actually got worse from what it was before, which you have consistently failed to do.



There's plenty of evidence, but if you wantonly refuse to look at it, then that's an indication that you have no interest in a reasonable argument based in good faith. I see that as clear evidence that you only want to play some sort of game. Most reasonable people aren't like that, which is why you're the only one in the entire world taking this position.



Your question is incoherent. Please rephrase.



And more gaslighting and a refusal to argue in good faith.

"Gaslighting", eh.
Geeze, what a fragile fellow.

 

[Revoltingest]

So many words. No content.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flatterly.
Oh, if only you used me tools cromulently.

 

[Estro Felino]

It's that potential for wonderful that
differentiates it from socialism.
Capitalism, democracy, constitutional law, & a
progressive populace are the ideal combination.

I have never denied the potentialities of Capitalism. You should re-read the OP.
The problem is when you think Capitalism should be unbridled.
Unruly.

If we give Capitalists the freedom to exploit the weakest, then the law of the fittest prevails.
Like in the jungle.
But I guess...we humans have evolved from the animal stage, haven't we?

 

[Revoltingest]

I have never denied the potentialities of Capitalism.

Did I claim that you denied them?

You should re-read the OP.
The problem is that people like you think Capitalism should be unbridled.
Unruly.

Hoo boy!
What a load of bat guano!
I've advocated often & repeatedly here for bridling.
The issues are what kind, to what extent, to what end, & efficacy.

 

[Estro Felino]

Did I claim that you denied them?

Hoo boy!
What a load of bat guano!
I've advocated often & repeatedly here for bridling.
The issues are what kind, to what extent, to what end, & efficacy.

Give me an example of "bridling".

 

[Revoltingest]

Give me an example of "bridling".

Environmental regulation.
Consumer protection laws.
Bank reserve requirements.
Employee safety laws.
Professional service licensing.

This is not an exhaustive list.

 

[Estro Felino]

Environmental regulation.
Consumer protection laws.
Bank reserve requirements.
Employee safety laws.
Professional service licensing.

This is not an exhaustive list.

What about expropriating and nationalizing banks whose owners have mismanaged savers' money through gambling?
What about a State limiting bankers' choices in order to prevent such things from happening?

 

[Revoltingest]

What about expropriating and nationalizing banks whose owners have mismanaged savers' money through gambling?
What about a State limiting bankers' choices in order to prevent such things from happening?

I made my point, & would rather
not explore every hypothetical
scenario you can imagine.

 

[Estro Felino]

I made my point, & would rather
not explore every hypothetical
scenario you can imagine.

Ok...but that's not bridling.
That's just regulating consumers and savers. Not Capitalists. The real moneyed people.
So you probably believe in unbridled Capitalism...maybe unconsciously.

 

[Revoltingest]

Ok...but that's not bridling.

Agree to disagree.

 

[Stevicus]

Of what?

That there was marked improvement in their system after socialism was implemented. Is it really so difficult for you to comprehend? Do I need to include pictures and explain it like Mister Rogers would?

You change the subject, & act as though you've responded.

No, I've been addressing the same subject all along. You're the one who keeps changing the subject.

"Gaslighting", eh.
Geeze, what a fragile fellow.

Just as long as you understand that it's not your call to make. If you can't answer a point, then just admit defeat, but when you deflect and say things like "no evidence" or "no content," when there clearly is, it makes you look even lamer.

 

[Revoltingest]

Is it really so difficult for you to comprehend?

I can comprehend rational arguments.
Try making one (with evidence).

 

[Stevicus]

I can comprehend rational arguments.
Try making one (with evidence).

If you can't answer a point, then just admit defeat, but when you deflect and say things like "no evidence" or "no content," when there clearly is, it makes you look even lamer.

 

[Revoltingest]

If you can't answer....

Goodness, it's tough trying to be nicer to you.

 

[Stevicus]

Goodness, it's tough trying to be nicer to you.

That's what I would say about you.

To me, "nicer" would be acknowledging what one writes, not pretending that they didn't write it. If evidence is presented, and you ignore it and say "no evidence," that's not nice.

 

[Heyo]

Must stop there.

Maybe you can try just a little bit harder?
You are the defender of the idea of capitalism and as it is now, capitalism is losing hard.
And I don't even have to argue against it, just mentioning the flaws in the debate style of the proponents.