Designer capitalism

[Seth]

If you're against capitalism altogether, please explain what you think is wrong with it and why. How can people co-exist in society without producing, buying and selling goods? What's so unnatural or unhealthy about it? What's a superior alternative, and why?

Please be aware that I'm no fan of any 'ism'; I'm open-minded about workable alternatives.

For others, what's wrong with (what needs to be improved about) the version of capitalism - or whatever economic system there is - where you live?

Capitalism is not the same as trade, ie, producing, buying and selling.

Capitalism doesn't even rely on trade, Capitalism is about making a profit on what workers produce as well as destroying competition so you can exploit trade.

There was trade millenia before Capitalism, but people didn't invest their surplus in increasing manufacturing output, they invested it in farming, real estate or cultural activities.

Ignorant nonsense. The laws of supply and demand, which are the basic element of capitalism, have always existed. The farmer who sells his wheat in Mesopotamia for more than it cost him to produce it uses the surplus to invest in a new crop. If the demand is high enough, he buys or rents more land to grow more wheat to make more money, or capital, which he then reinvests in his business in order to improve his economic situation. As his land holdings grow, he can no longer do all the work himself, so he hires workers to assist him. He pays them as little as possible so that he can make a bigger profit and continue to improve his economic situation, and the workers ask for as much as possible, so that they can improve theirs. In the end, the workers agree to a wage that represents their fair market value for their labor, no more, no less. If they demand too much, the farmer will not hire them because it will eliminate his profit. If he pays them too little, they will refuse to work for him and he will lose his profit because he cannot do the work alone, and his crop will rot in the field. It's a perfect dynamic balance created by the law of supply and demand for labor in precisely the same way that the law of supply and demand for wheat determines the price of a bushel.

Your description of capitalism is Marxist disinformation and nothing more, and has no element of truth to it.

The problem with Capitalism is that it doesn't provide for the needs of society and fosters empty materialistic life goals.

That's more Marxist drivel. Capitalism is a description of the natural economic processes of human trade and interaction. It's NOT a social model or theory. It says nothing whatever about the "needs of society," whatever that may mean, nor does it engage in philosophical speculation about the moral or ethical value of the life goals of the members of society. It simply describes how economics and trade function best. Social issues fall entirely outside of capitalism, as does ethical philosophy.

most marxists won't even prescribe a system for society ( the ones that do are politicians , grrrrr )

Complete horseshit. Marxism prescribes a precise system and structure for society, and the progression of society from capitalism, to socialism, to the ultimate goal of communism. You would know this if you'd ever actually read Marx.

they know that society grows and develops and that when a time comes for change people will do it on a micro not a macro level.
IOW, people will create their own alternative. There will be no revolution.

Okay, I apologize, you cannot actually be a Marxist because you are utterly ignorant of the fundamental precepts of Marxism, and it's clear that you've never read anything Marx has ever written. Unless you're a shill who is attempting to obfuscate Marxism deliberately.

What you said is idiocy insofar as having even the slightest connection to actual Marxism. I don't know what political ideology you are expounding but it absolutely is NOT Marxism.

[.Morticia.]

here's that contact number again

call them, you know you want to

http://www.dhs.gov/xutil/contactus.shtm

Tell them you really know what you're talking about because you've read "Road To Serfdom!!!"

[Seth]

here's that contact number again

call them, you know you want to

http://www.dhs.gov/xutil/contactus.shtm

Tell them you really know what you're talking about because you've read "Road To Serfdom!!!"

Great. Now just post your first, middle and last names, date of birth, residence address and the registration number on your green card. In fact, you should scan and post your green card so I can be sure that its really you.

If you're so secure in your belief that you've done nothing wrong, you shouldn't have any problem providing this information.

[.Morticia.]

What would be the point in that, Homeland already knows me, of course.

Nice people. :~D

[FBM]

Marxism is based upon a materialist interpretation of history. Taking the idea that social change occurs because of the struggle between different classes within society who are under contradiction one against the other, the Marxist analysis leads to the conclusion that capitalism, the currently dominant form of economic management, leads to the oppression of the proletariat, who not only make up the majority of the world's populace but who also spend their lives working for the benefit of the bourgeoisie, or the wealthy ruling class in society.

To correct this inequality between the bourgeoisie, who are the wealthy minority, and the proletariat, who are the poorer majority, Marxism advocates, and believes in the historical inevitability of, a proletarian revolution, when the proletariat take control of government, and then implement reforms to benefit their class, namely the confiscation of private property which is then taken under state control and run for the benefit of the people rather than for the interests of private profit. Such a system is socialism, although Marxists believe that eventually a socialist society would develop into an entirely classless system, which is known as communism in Marxist thought.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism

A bit about the materialist interpretation of history, in Marx's own words:

At a certain stage of development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production or — this merely expresses the same thing in legal terms — with the property relations within the framework of which they have operated hitherto. From forms of development, of the productive forces, these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an era of social revolution. The changes in the economic foundation lead, sooner or later, to the transformation of the whole, immense, superstructure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_materialism

[Emphases mine]

Would this revolution necessarily be a violent one? I can't see the fatcats letting go of their means of production and wealth without a fight.

Dude. I was talking about population control, not regression to the Bronze Age. What we've been doing isn't sustainable indefinitely. We do need to change our economic fundamentals to acknowledge the finite nature of the planet, but that doesn't entail wiping out the technological developments we've already made. We just need to wear rubbers and stop thinking like the Babble says wrt "Go forth and multiply".

Nature will take care of it. Until then, eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die.

What, you wanted to live forever?

I'm a step ahead of you, Omar. Tonight, I'm going to dine in hell.

[Seth]

What would be the point in that, Homeland already knows me, of course.

Nice people. :~D

Then send me the info by PM and I'll forward the information to them and we'll see what they have to say about it. If they "know you" you shouldn't be afraid to walk the walk.

IOW, they may "know" you in the guise you presented to them when you applied, but they most likely do not know of your Marxist sympathies and affiliations.

You've never answered the question I originally asked, you've just obfuscated and pettifogged your way around it: Did you reveal your Marxist sympathies to your interviewer when you applied for your Green Card, or did you elide that information deliberately, knowing that it would disqualify you?

[Seth]

Marxism is based upon a materialist interpretation of history. Taking the idea that social change occurs because of the struggle between different classes within society who are under contradiction one against the other, the Marxist analysis leads to the conclusion that capitalism, the currently dominant form of economic management, leads to the oppression of the proletariat, who not only make up the majority of the world's populace but who also spend their lives working for the benefit of the bourgeoisie, or the wealthy ruling class in society.

To correct this inequality between the bourgeoisie, who are the wealthy minority, and the proletariat, who are the poorer majority, Marxism advocates, and believes in the historical inevitability of, a proletarian revolution, when the proletariat take control of government, and then implement reforms to benefit their class, namely the confiscation of private property which is then taken under state control and run for the benefit of the people rather than for the interests of private profit. Such a system is socialism, although Marxists believe that eventually a socialist society would develop into an entirely classless system, which is known as communism in Marxist thought.

Correct. Violent, revolutionary overthrow of the existing system of government combined with the outright and unapologetic theft of the property of the bourgeoisie merchant class (and the elite aristocracy as well), with the goal of "fundamentally transforming" the existing system into a socialist, and eventually a communist system.

Pure insanity and tyrannical death-dealing made manifest.

A bit about the materialist interpretation of history, in Marx's own words:

At a certain stage of development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production or — this merely expresses the same thing in legal terms — with the property relations within the framework of which they have operated hitherto. From forms of development, of the productive forces, these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an era of social revolution. The changes in the economic foundation lead, sooner or later, to the transformation of the whole, immense, superstructure.

[Emphases mine]

Would this revolution necessarily be a violent one? I can't see the fatcats letting go of their means of production and wealth without a fight.

[/quote]

Nor should they. The means of production belong to them. They financed them, they built them, they operate them to the social benefit of all. Marx's entire philosophy rests on the single slender political reed that workers are exploited by the bourgeoisie because return on investment, which is to say profits, interest and rents, are not "work" in Marx's mind, and therefore those who reap them are illegitimately "taking" what is rightfully the property of the working class. Neither Marx nor socialism generally acknowledge the risk inherent in capital investment as a legitimate form of labor, and therefore they believe that those who profit from risk-taking alone are undeserving of their profits, and that the working class is justified in simply stealing it.

Everything he wrote, and every interpretation of Marxism and socialism ever since is built on this foundation of sand.

It's a shifting foundation based solely in class envy and jealousy, nothing more. It's a vacuous philosophy that seeks to create class distinctions and foment class warfare by pitting the have-nots against the haves for no better reason than that the wealthy have what the working class do not.

Such a philosophy might be valid during feudal times, or during hereditary monarchies where social and economic mobility were constrained by law and custom and where it was impossible for the working class to ever move into the bourgeoisie merchant class no matter how hard they worked. But that does not obtain any longer in Europe or the United States. In those places, no man is settled permanently into an underclass caste system that he cannot rise up out of by virtue of his own industry.

Thus, Marxism, and indeed all of socialism, becomes an anachronism that exists today only as an avenue to political and social power and control by the Marxist elite, at the expense of the lumpen proletariat, who are sent as cannon-fodder into the fray without a second thought by the intellectual elite.

[.Morticia.]

Call the DHS.

Be sure to tell them you have made persistent allusions to violence and demanded my name and address and personal information.

Tell them that you're just being a patriot and trying to keep America safe.

And that you like guns.

That should get their attention in no time. :~D

[Seth]

Call the DHS.

Be sure to tell them you have made persistent allusions to violence and demanded my name and address and personal information.

Tell them that you're just being a patriot and trying to keep America safe.

And that you like guns.

That should get their attention in no time. :~D

Still need your personal information so they can know who I'm talking about, and you're still afraid to give it to me. QED.

[.Morticia.]

would you like me to call homeland security since you are frightened to do so

but first, let me call some friends on the force.

[Seth]

Why of course I'll give a man who has threatened to kill me and my loved ones , who professes to keep guns , my name and address.

Who wouldn't?

If you're not a Marxist bent on destroying my country and killing me, you have nothing to fear.

And I note that you still evade the core question: Did you reveal your Marxist affiliations and sympathies to your interviewer or not?

[.Morticia.]

Have you jerked off yet?

[charlou]

Have you jerked off yet?

I don't know how you feel about indulging his absurd harrassment, but I wouldn't give him the satisfaction.

[JimC]

How can people co-exist in society without producing, buying and selling goods? What's so unnatural or unhealthy about it?

That's not capitalism. That's trade. Capitalism is that the goal of economic profit runs the system by means of free (unregulated) market. The most obvious flaw it's that if profit seek becomes the only market rule, then unprofitable activities will not be taken by anyone. Those activities are like health system, education, transport and other human needs of the dispossessed.
The second flaw it's that without said regulation, it can easily create social and environmental abuse.

In both cases, you have to establish a regulation. In the first one, taxes and fiscal policies. In the second one, other laws (child labour, working hours, minimum wage...).

The only point would be how much of those norms to put. Too few, and you are truly capitalist. Too many, and you are socialist.

I think evident that capitalism is the best system for economic maximisation, but it sucks at social welfare. And socialism rules for social welfare, but sucks at finding economic efficiency... To be in the middle or swing among the systems with healthy regular policy changes is the way to find a good balance.

But now I will let Seth and .Morticia. to tear each other to pieces.

A good summation of the centrist position, recognising the reality of a mixed economy within a pragmatically workable democracy with a desire for social justice.

PS - Seth and sandinista seem much more willing to bash us centrists than each other, for some reason...

[Hermit]

...you cannot actually be a Marxist...

You noticed already? Wow!