Capitalism Guarantees Rising Inequality

[bripat9643]

socialism can not work.

You think corruption is bad now?


try socialism.


well regulated capitalism combined with democracy is the only way

By the time you and your Komrades are done regulating, the result will be indistinguishable from socialism.

 

[Contumacious]

stop the republican party from cheating in elections and everything will work out.

what we have right now is democracy being abused by the republican party

What we have right now is democracy being abused by the Demopublican Party.

.

 

[gnarlylove]

What we have right now is democracy being abused by the Demopublican Party.

Agreed. We are under a tyranny since both parties represent the same narrow interests: global control among the elite. They say it's for our own good.

 

[Contumacious]

What we have right now is democracy being abused by the Demopublican Party.

Agreed. We are under a tyranny since both parties represent the same narrow interests: global control among the elite. They say it's for our own good.

Yes, indeed.


The elitists in BOTH PARTIES want to control the economy and mold society into what THEY think is ideal

 

[georgephillip]

Is there more than one definition for socialism and crony capitalism?

.

Maybe so.
When Lenin came to power in 1917 his success depended upon finding enough food to feed his starving population. According to some accounts, Wall Street provided the food in exchange for Lenin dissolving the worker Soviets which were supposed to control the economy.

Lenin's people were starving because of Lenin's economic policies. ALl he had to do to provide them with enough food is allow them to grow it and sell it without the government trying to control everything. The "accounts" you've read are from communist propagandists who refuse to acknowledge their crimes.

[Both sides got what they wanted.
Lenin created a powerful state-run economy which actually crushed the socialist model, and capitalists in the US created a version of "socialism" they could turn against domestic progressives who wanted to curtail corporate power during the decades between WWI and WWII.

There is no "model" of socialism that isn't state run. It's impossible to have voluntary socialism. What happened in the USSR was horrifying for the simple reason that socialism is horrifying.

Russians were starving in 1917 before Lenin took power.
If you think state control has anything to do with Socialism, here's a clue:

"When the world's two great propaganda systems agree on some doctrine, it requires some intellectual effort to escape its shackles.

"One such doctrine is that the society created by Lenin and Trotsky and molded further by Stalin and his successors has some relation to socialism in some meaningful or historically accurate sense of this concept.

"In fact, if there is a relation, it is the relation of contradiction.

"It is clear enough why both major propaganda systems insist upon this fantasy.

"Since its origins, the Soviet State has attempted to harness the energies of its own population and oppressed people elsewhere in the service of the men who took advantage of the popular ferment in Russia in 1917 to seize State power.

"One major ideological weapon employed to this end has been the claim that the State managers are leading their own society and the world towards the socialist ideal; an impossibility, as any socialist -- surely any serious Marxist -- should have understood at once (many did), and a lie of mammoth proportions as history has revealed since the earliest days of the Bolshevik regime.

"The taskmasters have attempted to gain legitimacy and support by exploiting the aura of socialist ideals and the respect that is rightly accorded them, to conceal their own ritual practice as they destroyed every vestige of socialism."

BTW, before you make an utter idiot out of yourself again, Chomsky's an anarchist who correctly suspects all totalitarian structures, whether communist or capitalist.

The Soviet Union Versus Socialism, by Noam Chomsky

 

[Contumacious]

I suppose that depends on what role you believe collectivism plays in modern corporations and how you define socialism:

Is there more than one definition for socialism and crony capitalism?

.

Maybe so.
When Lenin came to power in 1917 his success depended upon finding enough food to feed his starving population.

HUH?

What the fuck was the difference between Lenin and Peter the Great?

Lenin created a powerful state-run economy which actually crushed the socialist model,

Wut?

Read your statement and re-post.

 

[gnarlylove]

Command economies like we saw just after Czarist Russia don't work well without abundance in place. Additionally, Stalin was not aiming to treat everyone as equal, he was eager to develop military control and human life meant very little. In genuine communism life is to be valued equally.

Capitalism is best viewed as a bridge for developing abundance so a better world order can follow. Capitalism aims to maintain power among elite by convincing the herd that capitalism is good for everyone. Indeed, it is but upon reflection, capitalism overwhelmingly benefits a few elite and leaves the rest of the world, some 7 billion, to fight over a few bones. This is not freedom and this is not equality.

 

[dblack]

Capitalism aims to maintain power among elite by convincing the herd that capitalism is good for everyone.

Huh? Sorry, but that makes no sense. Capitalism has no aims. People do.

 

[dblack]

Capitalism is inherently undemocratic, as it's practiced in the US.

Capitalism isn't meant to be democratic. Democracy is a principle that applies to government, where consensus decisions are often necessary. Majority rule isn't necessary, nor, in my view, desirable, when it comes to our economic decisions.

 

[gnarlylove]

That's a semantic point. Indeed the proponents of capitalism are those who have aims. Sometimes those aims are at odds with themselves as evinced by the power Koch brothers infiltrating KY and WV folks who are poor yet support his policies to end welfare. More often than not those people rely on the welfare system themselves! These proponents are dividing us against ourselves so we cannot make rational decisions. I do not think capitalism as practiced today should be defended. If anything proponents of capitalism should spotlight the huge gap between real capitalism and today's capitalism. Even then we can all agree capitalism necessitates a large working class on which mass wealth concentration is created. Modern humans are still too greedy to be trusted to share fair amounts and so capitalism has many potential flaws even if practiced true to its principles.

 

[dblack]

That's a semantic point. Indeed the proponents of capitalism are those who have aims. Sometimes those aims are ...

Sometimes, sure. But your wording is more than semantically inaccurate. By saying "capitalism aims to do x", you're implying that everyone who supports capitalism "aims to do x". And that's obviously untrue.

Personally, I share your view that current US economic policy is unjust and should be changed. But it's the restriction of economic freedom that is the source of that injustice, and you seem to be advocating for even more state interference in the economy.

 

[bripat9643]

What we have right now is democracy being abused by the Demopublican Party.

Agreed. We are under a tyranny since both parties represent the same narrow interests: global control among the elite. They say it's for our own good.

We are under the tyranny of a large herd of numskulls. I refer you, of course, to the Democrat voter.

 

[Dragonlady]

What we have right now is democracy being abused by the Demopublican Party.

Agreed. We are under a tyranny since both parties represent the same narrow interests: global control among the elite. They say it's for our own good.

We are under the tyranny of a large herd of numskulls. I refer you, of course, to the Democrat voter.

Oh please! The Republican Party offers nothing but more of the same failed economic policies that got the country into the mess that Obama inherited - tax cuts and runaway spending.

 

[Contumacious]

Agreed. We are under a tyranny since both parties represent the same narrow interests: global control among the elite. They say it's for our own good.

We are under the tyranny of a large herd of numskulls. I refer you, of course, to the Democrat voter.

Oh please! The Republican Party offers nothing but more of the same failed economic policies that got the country into the mess that Obama inherited - tax cuts and runaway spending.

I agree. Specially, Now that they have merged with the democrats .

.

 

[bripat9643]

Agreed. We are under a tyranny since both parties represent the same narrow interests: global control among the elite. They say it's for our own good.

We are under the tyranny of a large herd of numskulls. I refer you, of course, to the Democrat voter.

Oh please! The Republican Party offers nothing but more of the same failed economic policies that got the country into the mess that Obama inherited - tax cuts and runaway spending.

So the Democrats are the party that wants to cut spending?

BWHAHAHAHAHA!

See what I mean? Numskulls.

 

[gnarlylove]

Bri you are convinced that the RHETORIC of the Republican Party holds the key but yet you see BEYOND the RHETORIC of the Democrats. NEWS FLASH: THEY ARE LYING EGO-MANIACS just like the DEMOCRATS. There's a lot more to policy than simply bringing down the deficiet. For example, the medical system is a main source of worry and spending, well, wake up and tell the citizens it saves them money to be healthier and eat less meat and we would be better for it. But no, its reduced to political slurry of "cut this" and "slash that" when that's not addressing the issue!!! It's just got-dang rhetoric to distract us that freedom comes with responsibility IN OUR PERSONAL LIVES. But alas, advertising tells us we need what we want all the time and there's no reason we shouldn't have it. FUCK THAT!

Why do you think we are in a stalmate? Because Rep. policies aren't allowed to be implemented? For god sakes the economy operates on Trickle Down principles which have failed all but the top 2%. Give me a break! Somehow you can see past the Democrat HOGWASH but refuse to see that you are wallowing in the same olde shite.

Until people like yourself recognize Republicans are equally bad as Democrats, we will continue to watch the train wreck that is Congress and the Political arena. We will continue to see 2% prosper as the 98% lag behind and suffer. If this is the government you want, slow and ineffective, then support those egotistical madmen who call themselves Republicans. But if you can acknowledge incessant RHETORIC is the death of good politics, then we just might start getting somewhere...

 

[georgephillip]

^^^Yet another good set of reasons for FLUSHING as many Republican AND Democrat incumbents from DC as possible next November. If your ballot offers third party candidates running for congress, consider choosing the one that comes the closest to mirroring your political/economic views and reject the false "choice" of Democrat OR Republican.

 

[georgephillip]

dear idiot.

You are the one who said we should return to kings and queens Bri bri

No, I only said that monarchy would be infinitely preferable to the rule by Obama and Harry Reid that we are all currently suffering under. At a minimum, our taxes would be less than 20% of what we now pay.

So, you're planning on contributing to Money Mitt's refund?

"Mitt Romney made $13.7 million last year and paid $1.94 million in federal income taxes, giving him an effective tax rate of 14.1%, his campaign said Friday."

Romney paid 14% effective tax rate in 2011 - Sep. 21, 2012

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

dear idiot.

You are the one who said we should return to kings and queens Bri bri

No, I only said that monarchy would be infinitely preferable to the rule by Obama and Harry Reid that we are all currently suffering under. At a minimum, our taxes would be less than 20% of what we now pay.

So, you're planning on contributing to Money Mitt's refund?

"Mitt Romney made $13.7 million last year and paid $1.94 million in federal income taxes, giving him an effective tax rate of 14.1%, his campaign said Friday."

Romney paid 14% effective tax rate in 2011 - Sep. 21, 2012

Mitt Romney made $13.7 million last year and paid $1.94 million in federal income taxes and gave $4 million to charity.

That bastard! Giving away over 43% of his income. Awful, just awful.

 

[P@triot]

Agreed. We are under a tyranny since both parties represent the same narrow interests: global control among the elite. They say it's for our own good.

We are under the tyranny of a large herd of numskulls. I refer you, of course, to the Democrat voter.

Oh please! The Republican Party offers nothing but more of the same failed economic policies that got the country into the mess that Obama inherited - tax cuts and runaway spending.

The only failed policies are the Dumbocrat policies which you support...

The greatest thing that happen to conservatism was complete Dumbocrat rule (both mayor and city council, plus powerful unions in the private sector) for over 60 years in Detroit. It ended the debate once and for all the Dumbocrat marxist policy ends with bankruptcy, poverty, misery, and collapse.

Of course, people not brainwashed by an ignorant ideology and capable of learning from history already figured this out over a century ago.