Capitalism is always better, innit?

[kaz]

Yahoo is now part of Oath

The UK govt has taken over a G4S prison because the G4S couldn't run it properly.

"He wrote: "It was often difficult to find officers, although we did find some asleep during prisoner lock-up periods."

Government planning possible take-over of Southern rail – report

"
Government planning possible take-over of Southern rail – report"

"Commuters have suffered almost two years of disruption and delay on the rail network, a situation that has been exacerbated by strikes since last April. "

Louisiana, Prisons for Profit, and World's Highest Incarceration Rate

Louisiana's private prison system is the envy of nobody anywhere. It's a system that encourages reoffending, because it earns the prisons more money.

Yep, capitalism is always best... except when it isn't.

It's sad how someone can be born and grow up in America and not have a fucking clue what capitalism even is.

Capitalism is not government outsourcing to private companies. Capitalism is free markets. Prisons and public transportation are government functions. Just because government outsources it to contractors doesn't make it remotely capitalism.

You can't have competing free market prisons or public rail. That's why they are government functions.

You're proving how bad socialism is. Only government can do those things, yet as you point out government sucks at doing those too.

People like you are the ones who just completely and utterly leave me despondent as to the future of our country. How can you possibly know so little about what made your own country so great? It's truly sad

Just because government outsources it to contractors doesn't make it remotely capitalism

It's state capitalism.

That's a bull shit made up term. It has zero to do with capitalism. There is no free market at all

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Nope, if you have enough money you can eliminate the competition and that always ends with the consumer and workers getting screwed.

Nope
Show Where A Company Has Been Able To Maintain Profitability
With-Out Government Interference In Their Market
In The Way You Discribe

That Is Merely A Prog Theory
That Has Never Sustained Itself, Ever
It Only Invites More Competition It Can't Stamp-Out
Or Buy-Out Forever

My own local brewery, the famous Wrexham Lager was bought out by the Danish brewer Carlsberg in the 80s. Wrexham Lager had been making its unique product for a regional market for over a century.

They were a big local employer and did a lot of community work in the area. They were much loved. Carlsberg were a giant in comparison. They bought the company to get their hands on the pubs owned by Wrexham Lager as well as licenses to brew Castlemaine and Labatts( I think).

They shut down the brewery and moved production of the lager to one of their other breweries. People stopped drinking it because Wrexham Lager has to be brewed in Wrexham using water from the town well in Brook St.

So with sales dropping Carlsberg stopped brewing Wrexham Lager and a famous and much loved name disappeared.
Carlsberg had its pubs, and licenses and several hundred people lost their jobs because Carlsberg were rich and they werent..

What they did was not illegal but it was immoral and to the economic and social detriment of the community.

That is the capitalist jungle.

And this is what it looks like now.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Capitalism is always better than Venezuela. Come back to me when you don't have access to toilet paper and have to eat the family pets if not children to survive.

Also, feel free to get the fck out of our nation. This nation is capitalist, read the constitution. There are plenty of shit holes to choose from for you. Instead of wanting to make the country in your miserable sorry ass image, go to a country that already is that way.

Capitalism is not always better. He has given you examples of that. Why do you feel the need to show how uncouth you are ?

He gave examples of government outsourcing government functions to a private business. That has zero to do with capitalism. It's still socialism. Companies that bid on government contracts are following government specs. They aren't making any free market decisions. You don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Free markets are companies that create a better mouse trap. They aren't companies that build a mouse trap to government specifications.

Yes, actually making your own choice is ALWAYS better than a politician making your choice for you

Privatisation is the polar opposite of socialism. Its a free hit for private companies. If they screw up the state will always step back in and rescue them because these services cant be allowed to fail.

There are businesses that the state has no reason to be involved in.But there are also businesses that the state should either run or control very tightly.

 

[dudmuck]

Capitalism is always better than Venezuela. Come back to me when you don't have access to toilet paper and have to eat the family pets if not children to survive.

Also, feel free to get the fck out of our nation. This nation is capitalist, read the constitution. There are plenty of shit holes to choose from for you. Instead of wanting to make the country in your miserable sorry ass image, go to a country that already is that way.

Capitalism is not always better. He has given you examples of that. Why do you feel the need to show how uncouth you are ?

He gave examples of government outsourcing government functions to a private business. That has zero to do with capitalism. It's still socialism. Companies that bid on government contracts are following government specs. They aren't making any free market decisions. You don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Free markets are companies that create a better mouse trap. They aren't companies that build a mouse trap to government specifications.

Yes, actually making your own choice is ALWAYS better than a politician making your choice for you

Privatisation is the polar opposite of socialism. Its a free hit for private companies. If they screw up the state will always step back in and rescue them because these services cant be allowed to fail.

There are businesses that the state has no reason to be involved in.But there are also businesses that the state should either run or control very tightly.

Socialism is too broad of a term to say that its the opposite of privatization.
Worker cooperatives are socialism, but ownership is still private.
Employee stock ownership programs (ESOPs) are socialism, but are still privately owned.
In otherwords, everybody is a capitalist.

On the other side of the spectrum, you have state capitalism, as described in Ian Bremmer's book.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Capitalism is always better than Venezuela. Come back to me when you don't have access to toilet paper and have to eat the family pets if not children to survive.

Also, feel free to get the fck out of our nation. This nation is capitalist, read the constitution. There are plenty of shit holes to choose from for you. Instead of wanting to make the country in your miserable sorry ass image, go to a country that already is that way.

Capitalism is not always better. He has given you examples of that. Why do you feel the need to show how uncouth you are ?

Show me a socialist country that is better than the US.

And after you have shown it. What's keeping you here?

How many countries are actually, really, truly socialist?

Not many. Cuba might be the only one.

China claims to be Communist but is at best not that Socialist.

The USSR was Socialist to a large degree.

But then again we can find Capitalist countries that suck.

HOWEVER, this thread isn't a Socialist countries v. Capitalist countries thread.

It's that sometimes Capitalism isn't the best thing. That doesn't mean that full bang on Socialism is also the best.

Not many, because it has been the observation that socialism is a catastrophic failure everywhere where it's been tried. Yet you are cheering for it here, because you are a jackass.

America is part socialist. Pretty much everywhere is.
You have medicaid,welfare,schools,libraries and stuff.

Agreed that Medicaid and welfare are socialistic giveaway programs. Not sure that schools and libraries are socialistic. Believe it or not, socialism doesn't simply mean "the government does stuff".

 

[Cecilie1200]

Capitalism is always better than Venezuela. Come back to me when you don't have access to toilet paper and have to eat the family pets if not children to survive.

Also, feel free to get the fck out of our nation. This nation is capitalist, read the constitution. There are plenty of shit holes to choose from for you. Instead of wanting to make the country in your miserable sorry ass image, go to a country that already is that way.

Capitalism is not always better. He has given you examples of that. Why do you feel the need to show how uncouth you are ?

No he didn't. He showcased a failed business. That is not indicative of capitalism

The problem with capitalism is that it is better than anything else out there and has done more to lift people out of destitution and poverty than any other system bar none.

Well it sort of is the point. Capitalism,left to itself, is driven purely by greed. It will always screw the people unless the people keep it in check.

No, capitalism is driven by self-interest, which is NOT the same thing as greed.

What YOU advocate is greed, because it wants what others own and/or produce. And it always screws people, period.

 

[OODA_Loop]

What they did was not illegal but it was immoral and to the economic and social detriment of the community.

That is the capitalist jungle.

So you want a law that you cant sell your business ?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Capitalism is not always better. He has given you examples of that. Why do you feel the need to show how uncouth you are ?

Show me a socialist country that is better than the US.

And after you have shown it. What's keeping you here?

How many countries are actually, really, truly socialist?

Not many. Cuba might be the only one.

China claims to be Communist but is at best not that Socialist.

The USSR was Socialist to a large degree.

But then again we can find Capitalist countries that suck.

HOWEVER, this thread isn't a Socialist countries v. Capitalist countries thread.

It's that sometimes Capitalism isn't the best thing. That doesn't mean that full bang on Socialism is also the best.

Not many, because it has been the observation that socialism is a catastrophic failure everywhere where it's been tried. Yet you are cheering for it here, because you are a jackass.

America is part socialist. Pretty much everywhere is.
You have medicaid,welfare,schools,libraries and stuff.

Agreed that Medicaid and welfare are socialistic giveaway programs. Not sure that schools and libraries are socialistic. Believe it or not, socialism doesn't simply mean "the government does stuff".

Welfare and health are not give aways.We fund them through the tax system. Nothing is free.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Show me a socialist country that is better than the US.

And after you have shown it. What's keeping you here?

How many countries are actually, really, truly socialist?

Not many. Cuba might be the only one.

China claims to be Communist but is at best not that Socialist.

The USSR was Socialist to a large degree.

But then again we can find Capitalist countries that suck.

HOWEVER, this thread isn't a Socialist countries v. Capitalist countries thread.

It's that sometimes Capitalism isn't the best thing. That doesn't mean that full bang on Socialism is also the best.

Not many, because it has been the observation that socialism is a catastrophic failure everywhere where it's been tried. Yet you are cheering for it here, because you are a jackass.

America is part socialist. Pretty much everywhere is.
You have medicaid,welfare,schools,libraries and stuff.

Agreed that Medicaid and welfare are socialistic giveaway programs. Not sure that schools and libraries are socialistic. Believe it or not, socialism doesn't simply mean "the government does stuff".

Welfare and health are not give aways.We fund them through the tax system. Nothing is free.

They're giveaways, because they operate by taxing people who don't use them, and they're used by people who - by definition - aren't paying for them. I can call them "redistribution", if you prefer. I wasn't sure that wouldn't be too many syllables for you.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

What they did was not illegal but it was immoral and to the economic and social detriment of the community.

That is the capitalist jungle.

So you want a law that you cant sell your business ?

Not in every instance.

However............................
There are many stakeholders in a business.
Owners
Workers
Customers
The wider community.

In this instance we were fucked over by globalists and there was nothing we could do about it.
I would like to block some takeovers in the public interest. I think that would be a good thing for people. It is something that the takeover panels could look at.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Yahoo is now part of Oath

The UK govt has taken over a G4S prison because the G4S couldn't run it properly.

"He wrote: "It was often difficult to find officers, although we did find some asleep during prisoner lock-up periods."

Government planning possible take-over of Southern rail – report

"
Government planning possible take-over of Southern rail – report"

"Commuters have suffered almost two years of disruption and delay on the rail network, a situation that has been exacerbated by strikes since last April. "

Louisiana, Prisons for Profit, and World's Highest Incarceration Rate

Louisiana's private prison system is the envy of nobody anywhere. It's a system that encourages reoffending, because it earns the prisons more money.

Yep, capitalism is always best... except when it isn't.

Yes, capitalism is always better.

The things you listed are what we pay taxes for and because the government isn't exercising proper oversight doesnt mean capitalism doesnt work. In fact it proves the government can't even handle oversight.

And you want them to have full control...


DUMB

 

[Tommy Tainant]

How many countries are actually, really, truly socialist?

Not many. Cuba might be the only one.

China claims to be Communist but is at best not that Socialist.

The USSR was Socialist to a large degree.

But then again we can find Capitalist countries that suck.

HOWEVER, this thread isn't a Socialist countries v. Capitalist countries thread.

It's that sometimes Capitalism isn't the best thing. That doesn't mean that full bang on Socialism is also the best.

Not many, because it has been the observation that socialism is a catastrophic failure everywhere where it's been tried. Yet you are cheering for it here, because you are a jackass.

America is part socialist. Pretty much everywhere is.
You have medicaid,welfare,schools,libraries and stuff.

Agreed that Medicaid and welfare are socialistic giveaway programs. Not sure that schools and libraries are socialistic. Believe it or not, socialism doesn't simply mean "the government does stuff".

Welfare and health are not give aways.We fund them through the tax system. Nothing is free.

They're giveaways, because they operate by taxing people who don't use them, and they're used by people who - by definition - aren't paying for them. I can call them "redistribution", if you prefer. I wasn't sure that wouldn't be too many syllables for you.

There are roads being built in the Highlands of Scotland that I will never use. Why should my taxes go to that ? Similarly my taxes pay for nuclear weapons that I would never want to see used.
Your argument is weak. You may never have to use welfare but it is there for you if you should ever need it. That is the point.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

This thread just goes to show you how incredibly uninformed and stupid the average leftist is.

 

[OODA_Loop]

I would like to block some takeovers in the public interest. I think that would be a good thing for people. It is something that the takeover panels could look at.

And if it was something that was "bad" the panels could just abolish and destroy it.

 

[Some Guy]

How many countries are actually, really, truly socialist?

Not many. Cuba might be the only one.

China claims to be Communist but is at best not that Socialist.

The USSR was Socialist to a large degree.

But then again we can find Capitalist countries that suck.

HOWEVER, this thread isn't a Socialist countries v. Capitalist countries thread.

It's that sometimes Capitalism isn't the best thing. That doesn't mean that full bang on Socialism is also the best.

Not many, because it has been the observation that socialism is a catastrophic failure everywhere where it's been tried. Yet you are cheering for it here, because you are a jackass.

America is part socialist. Pretty much everywhere is.
You have medicaid,welfare,schools,libraries and stuff.

Agreed that Medicaid and welfare are socialistic giveaway programs. Not sure that schools and libraries are socialistic. Believe it or not, socialism doesn't simply mean "the government does stuff".

Welfare and health are not give aways.We fund them through the tax system. Nothing is free.

They're giveaways, because they operate by taxing people who don't use them, and they're used by people who - by definition - aren't paying for them. I can call them "redistribution", if you prefer. I wasn't sure that wouldn't be too many syllables for you.

That's socialism though. You have a group of people, all of which are contained under the umbrella of the service, and all of which receive from that pool. It obviously ends up being where a minority of people end up putting in the majority of the value and therefore get less value out of it. That's the definition of socialism really. So yes, something like Social Security is a socialist endeavor, strictly speaking. Socialism is redistribution of assets.

The argument that the pro-socialism people are making is that that's a good thing in some instances in the name of compassion and taking care of people. It's forced charity. Charity = good, therefore forcing someone at gunpoint to be charitable = good. The ends justify the means. It's about that simple.

Yet, i'd bet you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who is for making all schooling private. Meaning, you have to pay for kindergarten through high school out of your own pocket. Sure, you'd save a smidge on taxes, but for those below the middle class, you'd have over half the population being illiterate or completely devoid of schooling. Can anyone make a really good argument for school being completely privatized and the government not funding it?

Are you willing to let someone die in the streets cause he got cancer through no fault of his own in order to save on your taxes? Are you willing to let millions of kids grow up illiterate and in abject poverty because they have no access to education in order to save on some taxes? It's all about where you draw that line. As bad as socialism is, anarchy is the other extreme and it's just as bad. What everyone argues over is where the line is to be drawn.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

I would like to block some takeovers in the public interest. I think that would be a good thing for people. It is something that the takeover panels could look at.

And if it was something that was "bad" the panels could just abolish and destroy it.

Its a complex issue. The local brewery I highlighted was a profitable business.It didnt need to close.
If a business is in difficulty and someone comes in for it then that is a different matter and different criteria come into play.
There should be consideration of all stakeholders when these things happen. That isnt unreasonable.

A year or so back a UK retailer, BHS was sold to an Aussie conman for a £5. They were struggling and about to collapse.The owner wanted rid and the staff were relieved that someone wanted them. Less than a year later they went bust.
Then the problems started. There was a mega sized hole in the company pension fund. The new owners had bought assets and liabilities but were potless.
The previous owner played Pilate and washed his hands of them. That takeover should have been blocked until the pension deficit had been put right.
The pensioners were stakeholders in the business and had been ignored in the takeover process. That cant be right.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Not many, because it has been the observation that socialism is a catastrophic failure everywhere where it's been tried. Yet you are cheering for it here, because you are a jackass.

America is part socialist. Pretty much everywhere is.
You have medicaid,welfare,schools,libraries and stuff.

Agreed that Medicaid and welfare are socialistic giveaway programs. Not sure that schools and libraries are socialistic. Believe it or not, socialism doesn't simply mean "the government does stuff".

Welfare and health are not give aways.We fund them through the tax system. Nothing is free.

They're giveaways, because they operate by taxing people who don't use them, and they're used by people who - by definition - aren't paying for them. I can call them "redistribution", if you prefer. I wasn't sure that wouldn't be too many syllables for you.

There are roads being built in the Highlands of Scotland that I will never use. Why should my taxes go to that ? Similarly my taxes pay for nuclear weapons that I would never want to see used.
Your argument is weak. You may never have to use welfare but it is there for you if you should ever need it. That is the point.

1 .its not the states problem you abused your privilege to drive


2. Your fish travel those roads to market.


.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

America is part socialist. Pretty much everywhere is.
You have medicaid,welfare,schools,libraries and stuff.

Agreed that Medicaid and welfare are socialistic giveaway programs. Not sure that schools and libraries are socialistic. Believe it or not, socialism doesn't simply mean "the government does stuff".

Welfare and health are not give aways.We fund them through the tax system. Nothing is free.

They're giveaways, because they operate by taxing people who don't use them, and they're used by people who - by definition - aren't paying for them. I can call them "redistribution", if you prefer. I wasn't sure that wouldn't be too many syllables for you.

There are roads being built in the Highlands of Scotland that I will never use. Why should my taxes go to that ? Similarly my taxes pay for nuclear weapons that I would never want to see used.
Your argument is weak. You may never have to use welfare but it is there for you if you should ever need it. That is the point.

1 .its not the states problem you abused your privilege to drive


2. Your fish travel those roads to market.


.

You are making the case for socialism. Well done mate.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Not many, because it has been the observation that socialism is a catastrophic failure everywhere where it's been tried. Yet you are cheering for it here, because you are a jackass.

America is part socialist. Pretty much everywhere is.
You have medicaid,welfare,schools,libraries and stuff.

Agreed that Medicaid and welfare are socialistic giveaway programs. Not sure that schools and libraries are socialistic. Believe it or not, socialism doesn't simply mean "the government does stuff".

Welfare and health are not give aways.We fund them through the tax system. Nothing is free.

They're giveaways, because they operate by taxing people who don't use them, and they're used by people who - by definition - aren't paying for them. I can call them "redistribution", if you prefer. I wasn't sure that wouldn't be too many syllables for you.

That's socialism though. You have a group of people, all of which are contained under the umbrella of the service, and all of which receive from that pool. It obviously ends up being where a minority of people end up putting in the majority of the value and therefore get less value out of it. That's the definition of socialism really. So yes, something like Social Security is a socialist endeavor, strictly speaking. Socialism is redistribution of assets.

Yes, thank you, I'm aware of that. Notice that, in the post to which you are putatively responding, I SAID Medicaid and Medicare were socialistic. Didn't actually mention Social Security, so I'm not sure why you're explaining to me as though I tried to claim otherwise.

The argument that the pro-socialism people are making is that that's a good thing in some instances in the name of compassion and taking care of people. It's forced charity. Charity = good, therefore forcing someone at gunpoint to be charitable = good. The ends justify the means. It's about that simple.

Yet, i'd bet you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who is for making all schooling private. Meaning, you have to pay for kindergarten through high school out of your own pocket. Sure, you'd save a smidge on taxes, but for those below the middle class, you'd have over half the population being illiterate or completely devoid of schooling. Can anyone make a really good argument for school being completely privatized and the government not funding it?

Yeah, again, socialism does NOT mean simply "the government does stuff". And I would like to thank you profusely for giving me this careful analysis refuting a position I never suggested or even considered suggesting. I always enjoy people coming up with lame extremisms and then trying to hold ME responsible for them.

Oh, wait, I don't.

Are you willing to let someone die in the streets cause he got cancer through no fault of his own in order to save on your taxes? Are you willing to let millions of kids grow up illiterate and in abject poverty because they have no access to education in order to save on some taxes? It's all about where you draw that line. As bad as socialism is, anarchy is the other extreme and it's just as bad. What everyone argues over is where the line is to be drawn.

You know what I'm "willing to let" happen, Sparky? For you to strap on a pair and debate like a reasoning adult, instead of puking up a bunch of emotional, melodramatic guilt trips at me.

And for the record, I read as far as "willing to let someone die in the streets"; then I said, "Wow, his ruffly panties are showing, how embarrassing", and dismissed every single other word in your paragraph as worthless drivel without even looking at it.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

And

Not many, because it has been the observation that socialism is a catastrophic failure everywhere where it's been tried. Yet you are cheering for it here, because you are a jackass.

America is part socialist. Pretty much everywhere is.
You have medicaid,welfare,schools,libraries and stuff.

Agreed that Medicaid and welfare are socialistic giveaway programs. Not sure that schools and libraries are socialistic. Believe it or not, socialism doesn't simply mean "the government does stuff".

Welfare and health are not give aways.We fund them through the tax system. Nothing is free.

They're giveaways, because they operate by taxing people who don't use them, and they're used by people who - by definition - aren't paying for them. I can call them "redistribution", if you prefer. I wasn't sure that wouldn't be too many syllables for you.

That's socialism though. You have a group of people, all of which are contained under the umbrella of the service, and all of which receive from that pool. It obviously ends up being where a minority of people end up putting in the majority of the value and therefore get less value out of it. That's the definition of socialism really. So yes, something like Social Security is a socialist endeavor, strictly speaking. Socialism is redistribution of assets.

The argument that the pro-socialism people are making is that that's a good thing in some instances in the name of compassion and taking care of people. It's forced charity. Charity = good, therefore forcing someone at gunpoint to be charitable = good. The ends justify the means. It's about that simple.

Yet, i'd bet you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who is for making all schooling private. Meaning, you have to pay for kindergarten through high school out of your own pocket. Sure, you'd save a smidge on taxes, but for those below the middle class, you'd have over half the population being illiterate or completely devoid of schooling. Can anyone make a really good argument for school being completely privatized and the government not funding it?

Are you willing to let someone die in the streets cause he got cancer through no fault of his own in order to save on your taxes? Are you willing to let millions of kids grow up illiterate and in abject poverty because they have no access to education in order to save on some taxes? It's all about where you draw that line. As bad as socialism is, anarchy is the other extreme and it's just as bad. What everyone argues over is where the line is to be drawn.

And there are some things that the state can do better than the private sector. Health,Defence and education being good examples. But then nobody wants to see a state run burger bar.