Unbridled Capitalism is self-destructive

[Revoltingest]

To me, "nicer" would be acknowledging what one writes,

I acknowledge.
You just dislike it.
Bad arguments will never be treated with love.

 

[Estro Felino]

Economic concepts exist, but some are
fantasies, eg, socialism with economic
liberty, social liberty, & prosperity.
Those things just don't exist together in
nature....like lions lying down with lambs.
Belief can't make such things happen.

This is an absolutist vision.
It's either black or white, in your vision.

 

[Revoltingest]

Maybe you can try just a little bit harder?

Oh, I'm just waiting for re-phrasing to
begin the hard work of responding.

You are the defender of the idea of capitalism and as it is now, capitalism is losing hard.

While capitalism could be said to be "losing"
because its implementation always has problems,
socialism has already lost.

Socialists never really address my claim....
Capitalism offers the potential for a country with
Peace, liberty (both economic & social) & prosperity.
There are many positive examples of such market
economies currently (eg, Norway, Canuckistan,
Denmark).
Socialism (ie, command economy without capitalism)
has in every single case been authoritarian & poor.

Common socialist arguments against this have been
less than cromluent, eg....
- USSR was better off than Czarist Russia,
which is irrelevant to my claim.
- Calling capitalist countries "socialist" (eg, Denmark),
which uses an ad hoc re-definition.
- Mere complaining about bad things that have
happened in or been done by capitalist countries.
(Never compared with bad socialist actors.)

And I don't even have to argue against it, just mentioning the flaws in the debate style of the proponents.

Debate style is irrelevant to comparisons
of economic systems. So let's avoid the
hints of tu quoque, eh.

 

[Revoltingest]

This is an absolutist vision.

Just an observation of the various
economic systems that have existed
throughout history.
Just as we don't observe lions lying with
lambs, we don't observe democracy plus
economic liberty plus social liberty in any
socialist country.

I notice that your vision is the opposite
of black & white....it's more airy fairy,
dreamy, fantastical, & straight from
Russian propaganda.
To each their own, eh.

 

[Estro Felino]

- Calling capitalist countries "socialist" (eg, Denmark),
which uses an ad hoc re-definition.

I give you an example: labor rights. Just cause. If you need to dismiss an employee, there needs to be a just cause. In my country if an employer fires an employee without just cause, he has to compensate them, and the compensation will amount to 6 or 13 months of salary, plus the hedonic damage. If the employee shows that the dismissal was accompanied by psychological harassment and bullying (in Italian law called "mobbing"), the hedonic damage will amount to thousands of euros.
If the firm has more than 15 employees, the dismissal without just cause is null and void, and the employee will be reinstated obligatorily, by the judge, and the employer will have to pay the unpaid months of salary between the dismissal and the reinstatement.


Is something like this imaginable in the United States?

 

[Estro Felino]

Just an observation of the various
economic systems that have existed
throughout history.
Just as we don't observe lions lying with
lambs, we don't observe democracy plus
economic liberty plus social liberty in any
socialist country.

I notice that your vision is the opposite
of black & white....it's more airy fairy,
dreamy, fantastical, & straight from
Russian propaganda.
To each their own, eh.

I think humans have evolved from the animal stage, so wildlife is not the best example.

And by the way, socialism includes capitalism. The State can perfectly manage an enterprise, a business.

 

[Revoltingest]

With all due respect, but an American cannot define a European country.

And an Italian cannot define "capitalism", "socialism", or "American".
So where's that line of thought leave us?

I give you an example: labor rights. Just cause. If you need to dismiss an employee, there needs to be a just cause. In my country if an employer fires an employee without just cause, he has to compensate them, and the compensation will amount to 6 or 13 months of salary, plus the hedonic damage. If the employee shows that the dismissal was accompanied by psychological harassment and bullying (in Italian law called "mobbing"), the hedonic damage will amount to thousands of euros.

I find that to be excessive regulation, which
is a thing that happens under capitalism.

If the firm has more than 15 employees, the dismissal without just cause is null and void, and the employee will be reinstated obligatorily, by the judge, and the employer will have to pay the unpaid months of salary between the dismissal and the reinstatement.
I personally know attorneys who love to destroy employers in court. They are very wicked to wicked people.

Is something like this imaginable in the United States?

Yes. We have micro-management
of the employer-employee relationship.

No.

Wrongo pongo.
(Sorry...I had to go there.

 

[Revoltingest]

I think humans have evolved from the animal stage, so wildlife is not the best example.

What a strange thing to post.

And by the way, socialism includes capitalism.

This is a perfect example of socialists
ignoring my specific claim in post# 503.
To repeat...
Capitalism offers the potential for a country with
Peace, liberty (both economic & social) & prosperity.
There are many positive examples of such market
economies currently (eg, Norway, Canuckistan,
Denmark).
Socialism (ie, command economy without capitalism)
has in every single case been authoritarian & poor.

The State can perfectly manage an enterprise, a business.

You've not met people in our government, or
dealt with city utility departments, the IRS,
Michigan State government, or the other
slack jawed imperious surly employees.

 

[Revoltingest]

Never heard of it. Care to explain?

What specifically do you refer to?

 

[Estro Felino]

What specifically do you refer to?

Micromanagement...whatever

 

[Revoltingest]

Micromanagement...whatever

Micromanagement - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Estro Felino]

Micromanagement - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It's a private phenomenon.
It has nothing to do with labor law and labor courts.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's a private phenomenon.
It has nothing to do with labor law and labor courts.

Disagree.

 

[Heyo]

Oh, I'm just waiting for re-phrasing to
begin the hard work of responding.

While capitalism could be said to be "losing"
because its implementation always has problems,
socialism has already lost.

Socialists never really address my claim....
Capitalism offers the potential for a country with
Peace, liberty (both economic & social) & prosperity.
There are many positive examples of such market
economies currently (eg, Norway, Canuckistan,
Denmark).
Socialism (ie, command economy without capitalism)
has in every single case been authoritarian & poor.

Yep. And that is exactly what we are not discussing.
That dictatorship and command economy are not great is not disputed (at least not by me).

Common socialist arguments against this have been
less than cromluent, eg....
- USSR was better off than Czarist Russia,
which is irrelevant to my claim.
- Calling capitalist countries "socialist" (eg, Denmark),
which uses an ad hoc re-definition.
- Mere complaining about bad things that have
happened in or been done by capitalist countries.
(Never compared with bad socialist actors.)

Not by me. I'm attacking systemic problems of capitalism and I'm not defending socialist doctrines that clearly don't work.
What is working is state owned means of production. (Which is a socialist idea.) It works in Germany, in France and in Norway. (Those are the ones I'm familiar with. Mixed economies.
Unbridled (well, less bridled than European) capitalism has shown its flaws and the US is an excellent example. Wealth is accumulating at an exponential rate while the lower half of the country is sinking into poverty. (Someone mentioned that half of households didn't earn enough to have to pay taxes.)

Debate style is irrelevant to comparisons
of economic systems. So let's avoid the
hints of tu quoque, eh.

It's to know what we are talking about before we dismissing the other side's arguments.
(And yes, I am dismissing your arguments when you are talking about something that's not within the scope of the debate. As a reminder, the OP title is "Unbridled Capitalism is Self Destructive".)

 

[Estro Felino]

Disagree.

Russia isn't socialist either...right?

 

[Revoltingest]

Yep. And that is exactly what we are not discussing.

It's often the case that posters aren't discussing exactly the same thing.

That dictatorship and command economy are not great is not disputed (at least not by me).

Good.

Unbridled (well, less bridled than European) capitalism has shown its flaws and the US is an excellent example.

I can assure you (as one who has businesses)
that things are "bridled" here. You just want
more "bridling" than we have.

Wealth is accumulating at an exponential rate while the lower half of the country is sinking into poverty. (Someone mentioned that half of households didn't earn enough to have to pay taxes.)

That is an issue separate from "bridling" because
it's about the extent to which society & government
want social services.

It's to know what we are talking about before we dismissing the other side's arguments.
(And yes, I am dismissing your arguments when you are talking about something that's not within the scope of the debate.

You don't dismiss my arguments.
You consistently respond, often thoughtfully.
As for the scope of "debate", see below.

As a reminder, the OP title is "Unbridled Capitalism is Self Destructive".)

And that's a straw man, which demands addressing
the real issues. There is no "unbridled capitalism"
that anyone has presented.

 

[Revoltingest]

Russia isn't socialist either...right?

I'd label it capitalistic.
But I've addressed socialist aspects in other posts.
Not worth repeating here....irrelevant.

 

[Estro Felino]

I'd label it capitalistic.
But I've addressed socialist aspects in other posts.
Not worth repeating here....irrelevant.

Ok, thanks for answering

 

[Stevicus]

I acknowledge.
You just dislike it.
Bad arguments will never be treated with love.

We shall see.

 

[Revoltingest]

We shall see.

OK.