Does Capitalism Ensure Freedom?

[georgephillip]

Capitalism doesn't ensure freedom. It reflects freedom. And our government's job is to ensure capitalistic opportunity but not success. Beyond that you're on your own.
Except for what democrats are doing to that concept.

Neither Democrats nor Republicans seem concerned about capitalism's penchant for producing great inequalities of income and wealth. Neither party wants to seriously consider the possibility that producing obscene wealth at one pole requires generating massive poverty at the other.

Over the past thirty years, both parties have controlled DC, yet inequality has consistently worsened.

Perhaps that's to be expected when the richest 1% of voters determine which names appear on your ballot?

Generating wealth does not automatically create poverty. It can create relative gaps but not necessarily true poverty. You are spoiled.

Capitalism's success at generating wealth is offset by the method it chooses to distribute wealth. A small fraction of shareholders and executives claim a large percentage of the spoils by virtue of their "ownership" over the means of production.
Poverty Has Always Accompanied Capitalism
"Poverty has always accompanied capitalism (as Thomas Piketty's work documents yet again). As an economic system, it has proven to be as successful in producing wealth at one pole as it is in producing poverty at the other.

"Periodic 'rediscoveries of' and campaigns against poverty have not changed that.

"Capitalism's defenders, having long promoted the system as the means to overcome both absolute and relative poverty (i.e. to be an equalizing system), now change their tune. They either abandon equality as a social good or goal or else try to avoid discussing poverty altogether."

Equality is a commie pipedream and is irrelevant in capitalism. Denying opportunity should not be confused with not granting wealth.

Equality of opportunity is a key component of democracy, no commies or pipes required:

"Equality of opportunity is a political ideal that is opposed to caste hierarchy but not to hierarchy per se. The background assumption is that a society contains a hierarchy of more and less desirable, superior and inferior positions."
Equality of Opportunity (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Without equality of opportunity, capitalism is a pipe dream

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Capitalism doesn't ensure freedom. It reflects freedom. And our government's job is to ensure capitalistic opportunity but not success. Beyond that you're on your own.
Except for what democrats are doing to that concept.

Neither Democrats nor Republicans seem concerned about capitalism's penchant for producing great inequalities of income and wealth. Neither party wants to seriously consider the possibility that producing obscene wealth at one pole requires generating massive poverty at the other.

Over the past thirty years, both parties have controlled DC, yet inequality has consistently worsened.

Perhaps that's to be expected when the richest 1% of voters determine which names appear on your ballot?

Generating wealth does not automatically create poverty. It can create relative gaps but not necessarily true poverty. You are spoiled.

Capitalism's success at generating wealth is offset by the method it chooses to distribute wealth. A small fraction of shareholders and executives claim a large percentage of the spoils by virtue of their "ownership" over the means of production.
Poverty Has Always Accompanied Capitalism
"Poverty has always accompanied capitalism (as Thomas Piketty's work documents yet again). As an economic system, it has proven to be as successful in producing wealth at one pole as it is in producing poverty at the other.

"Periodic 'rediscoveries of' and campaigns against poverty have not changed that.

"Capitalism's defenders, having long promoted the system as the means to overcome both absolute and relative poverty (i.e. to be an equalizing system), now change their tune. They either abandon equality as a social good or goal or else try to avoid discussing poverty altogether."

Equality is a commie pipedream and is irrelevant in capitalism. Denying opportunity should not be confused with not granting wealth.

Equality of opportunity is a key component of democracy, no commies or pipes required:

"Equality of opportunity is a political ideal that is opposed to caste hierarchy but not to hierarchy per se. The background assumption is that a society contains a hierarchy of more and less desirable, superior and inferior positions."
Equality of Opportunity (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Without equality of opportunity, capitalism is a pipe dream

You're making my point.
Equality of opportunity is not equality. Equality is the anti-capitalist/commie argument of the left.

 

[boedicca]

Capitalism doesn't ensure freedom. It reflects freedom. And our government's job is to ensure capitalistic opportunity but not success. Beyond that you're on your own.
Except for what democrats are doing to that concept.

Neither Democrats nor Republicans seem concerned about capitalism's penchant for producing great inequalities of income and wealth. Neither party wants to seriously consider the possibility that producing obscene wealth at one pole requires generating massive poverty at the other.

Over the past thirty years, both parties have controlled DC, yet inequality has consistently worsened.

Perhaps that's to be expected when the richest 1% of voters determine which names appear on your ballot?

Generating wealth does not automatically create poverty. It can create relative gaps but not necessarily true poverty. You are spoiled.

Capitalism's success at generating wealth is offset by the method it chooses to distribute wealth. A small fraction of shareholders and executives claim a large percentage of the spoils by virtue of their "ownership" over the means of production.
Poverty Has Always Accompanied Capitalism
"Poverty has always accompanied capitalism (as Thomas Piketty's work documents yet again). As an economic system, it has proven to be as successful in producing wealth at one pole as it is in producing poverty at the other.

"Periodic 'rediscoveries of' and campaigns against poverty have not changed that.

"Capitalism's defenders, having long promoted the system as the means to overcome both absolute and relative poverty (i.e. to be an equalizing system), now change their tune. They either abandon equality as a social good or goal or else try to avoid discussing poverty altogether."

Equality is a commie pipedream and is irrelevant in capitalism. Denying opportunity should not be confused with not granting wealth.

Equality of opportunity is a key component of democracy, no commies or pipes required:

"Equality of opportunity is a political ideal that is opposed to caste hierarchy but not to hierarchy per se. The background assumption is that a society contains a hierarchy of more and less desirable, superior and inferior positions."
Equality of Opportunity (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Without equality of opportunity, capitalism is a pipe dream

Progressive nonsense written by an elitist who is part of an academic caste hierarchy.

The U.S. system is one of equality before the law, not equality of circumstances and outcomes.

 

[georgephillip]

Neither Democrats nor Republicans seem concerned about capitalism's penchant for producing great inequalities of income and wealth. Neither party wants to seriously consider the possibility that producing obscene wealth at one pole requires generating massive poverty at the other.

Over the past thirty years, both parties have controlled DC, yet inequality has consistently worsened.

Perhaps that's to be expected when the richest 1% of voters determine which names appear on your ballot?

Generating wealth does not automatically create poverty. It can create relative gaps but not necessarily true poverty. You are spoiled.

Capitalism's success at generating wealth is offset by the method it chooses to distribute wealth. A small fraction of shareholders and executives claim a large percentage of the spoils by virtue of their "ownership" over the means of production.
Poverty Has Always Accompanied Capitalism
"Poverty has always accompanied capitalism (as Thomas Piketty's work documents yet again). As an economic system, it has proven to be as successful in producing wealth at one pole as it is in producing poverty at the other.

"Periodic 'rediscoveries of' and campaigns against poverty have not changed that.

"Capitalism's defenders, having long promoted the system as the means to overcome both absolute and relative poverty (i.e. to be an equalizing system), now change their tune. They either abandon equality as a social good or goal or else try to avoid discussing poverty altogether."

Equality is a commie pipedream and is irrelevant in capitalism. Denying opportunity should not be confused with not granting wealth.

Equality of opportunity is a key component of democracy, no commies or pipes required:

"Equality of opportunity is a political ideal that is opposed to caste hierarchy but not to hierarchy per se. The background assumption is that a society contains a hierarchy of more and less desirable, superior and inferior positions."
Equality of Opportunity (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Without equality of opportunity, capitalism is a pipe dream

You're making my point.
Equality of opportunity is not equality. Equality is the anti-capitalist/commie argument of the left.

Equality of Opportunity (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
"Equality of opportunity is a political ideal that is opposed to caste hierarchy but not to hierarchy per se. The background assumption is that a society contains a hierarchy of more and less desirable, superior and inferior positions. Or there may be several such hierarchies. In a caste society, the assignment of individuals to places in the social hierarchy is fixed by birth."
Do you prefer a social hierarchy fixed by birth?

 

[Rustic]

How well did capitalism preserve and promote capitalism in Central America?

 

[Rustic]

 

[georgephillip]

Progressive nonsense written by an elitist who is part of an academic caste hierarchy.

An academic caste determined by merit and not by birth.
Richard D. Wolff - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Wolff earned a BA magna cum laude in history from Harvard in 1963 and moved on to Stanford—he attained a MA in economics in 1964—to study with Paul A. Baran. Baran died prematurely from a heart attack in 1964 and Wolff transferred to Yale University, where he received a MA in economics in 1966, MA in history in 1967, and a PhD in economics in 1969. As a graduate student at Yale, Wolff worked as an instructor.[1] His dissertation, 'The Economics of Colonialism: Britain and Kenya',[10] was eventually published in book form in 1974."

 

[Rustic]

 

[boedicca]

Progressive nonsense written by an elitist who is part of an academic caste hierarchy.

An academic caste determined by merit and not by birth.
Richard D. Wolff - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Wolff earned a BA magna cum laude in history from Harvard in 1963 and moved on to Stanford—he attained a MA in economics in 1964—to study with Paul A. Baran. Baran died prematurely from a heart attack in 1964 and Wolff transferred to Yale University, where he received a MA in economics in 1966, MA in history in 1967, and a PhD in economics in 1969. As a graduate student at Yale, Wolff worked as an instructor.[1] His dissertation, 'The Economics of Colonialism: Britain and Kenya',[10] was eventually published in book form in 1974."

B'loney. Elite Academia is one of the most political systems in the country.

 

[georgephillip]

How well did capitalism preserve and promote capitalism in Central America?

Happy 4th?

 

[georgephillip]

Progressive nonsense written by an elitist who is part of an academic caste hierarchy.

An academic caste determined by merit and not by birth.
Richard D. Wolff - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Wolff earned a BA magna cum laude in history from Harvard in 1963 and moved on to Stanford—he attained a MA in economics in 1964—to study with Paul A. Baran. Baran died prematurely from a heart attack in 1964 and Wolff transferred to Yale University, where he received a MA in economics in 1966, MA in history in 1967, and a PhD in economics in 1969. As a graduate student at Yale, Wolff worked as an instructor.[1] His dissertation, 'The Economics of Colonialism: Britain and Kenya',[10] was eventually published in book form in 1974."

B'loney. Elite Academia is one of the most political systems in the country.

How would you know?

 

[boedicca]

Progressive nonsense written by an elitist who is part of an academic caste hierarchy.

An academic caste determined by merit and not by birth.
Richard D. Wolff - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Wolff earned a BA magna cum laude in history from Harvard in 1963 and moved on to Stanford—he attained a MA in economics in 1964—to study with Paul A. Baran. Baran died prematurely from a heart attack in 1964 and Wolff transferred to Yale University, where he received a MA in economics in 1966, MA in history in 1967, and a PhD in economics in 1969. As a graduate student at Yale, Wolff worked as an instructor.[1] His dissertation, 'The Economics of Colonialism: Britain and Kenya',[10] was eventually published in book form in 1974."

B'loney. Elite Academia is one of the most political systems in the country.

How would you know?

Life experience, observation, and reading.

 

[JakeStarkey]

What are the Free Countries that don't follow a form of Capitalism?

Tell us.

 

[georgephillip]

The U.S. system is one of equality before the law, not equality of circumstances and outcomes.

The US legal system guarantees equality of opportunity.
Equality of Opportunity (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

 

[JakeStarkey]

Cuba was a hell hole under free market capitalism. Read up on Batista's regime, Rustic.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Generating wealth does not automatically create poverty. It can create relative gaps but not necessarily true poverty. You are spoiled.

Capitalism's success at generating wealth is offset by the method it chooses to distribute wealth. A small fraction of shareholders and executives claim a large percentage of the spoils by virtue of their "ownership" over the means of production.
Poverty Has Always Accompanied Capitalism
"Poverty has always accompanied capitalism (as Thomas Piketty's work documents yet again). As an economic system, it has proven to be as successful in producing wealth at one pole as it is in producing poverty at the other.

"Periodic 'rediscoveries of' and campaigns against poverty have not changed that.

"Capitalism's defenders, having long promoted the system as the means to overcome both absolute and relative poverty (i.e. to be an equalizing system), now change their tune. They either abandon equality as a social good or goal or else try to avoid discussing poverty altogether."

Equality is a commie pipedream and is irrelevant in capitalism. Denying opportunity should not be confused with not granting wealth.

Equality of opportunity is a key component of democracy, no commies or pipes required:

"Equality of opportunity is a political ideal that is opposed to caste hierarchy but not to hierarchy per se. The background assumption is that a society contains a hierarchy of more and less desirable, superior and inferior positions."
Equality of Opportunity (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Without equality of opportunity, capitalism is a pipe dream

You're making my point.
Equality of opportunity is not equality. Equality is the anti-capitalist/commie argument of the left.

Equality of Opportunity (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
"Equality of opportunity is a political ideal that is opposed to caste hierarchy but not to hierarchy per se. The background assumption is that a society contains a hierarchy of more and less desirable, superior and inferior positions. Or there may be several such hierarchies. In a caste society, the assignment of individuals to places in the social hierarchy is fixed by birth."
Do you prefer a social hierarchy fixed by birth?

Apples and oranges. Do you prefer a system that designates privilege based on religion? Or skin color or height?

 

[Synthaholic]

Capitalism will always survive because it will always have Socialism to bail it out. ~ Ralph Nader

 

[Iceweasel]

Capitalism made the US the greatest nation on Earth and that irritates the Marxist to no end since it proves they are wrong.

And what institution made US capitalism?

How Slaves Built American Capitalism

Slavery ended long long ago and not all states held them.

Fail.

You failed to learn US History
How Slaves Built American Capitalism
"The expansion of slavery in the first eight decades after American Independence drove the evolution and modernization of the United States..."

"Through torture and punishment slave owners extracted greater efficiencies from slaves which allowed the United States to seize control of the world market for cotton, the key raw material of the Industrial Revolution, and become a prosperous and powerful nation.

"Cotton was to the early 19th century, what oil was to the 20th century: the commodity that determined the wealth of nations. Cotton accounted for a staggering 50 percent of US exports and ignited the economic boom that America experienced. America owes its very existence as a first world nation to slavery."

Yawn, slavery existed the world over and still does in places. Slaves were replaced by machines and like I said it ended here long ago. You are trying to pick and choose to fit your narrative.

You think getting rid of capitalism, which drives innovation and creates wealth, because of past slavery so we can become slaves to the state makes sense. It doesn't to anyone with a functioning brain.

 

[Iceweasel]

How well did capitalism preserve and promote capitalism in Central America?

Happy 4th?

That's a stupid cartoon and reveals your ignorance. No other countries have been blocked by the US. We don't have the authority.

 

[georgephillip]

How well did capitalism preserve and promote capitalism in Central America?

Happy 4th?

That's a stupid cartoon and reveals your ignorance. No other countries have been blocked by the US. We don't have the authority.

"Chile and the United States: Declassified Documents Relating to the Military Coup, September 11, 1973"
Chile and the United States: Declassified Documents Relating to the Military Coup, September 11, 1973
"Revelations that President Richard Nixon had ordered the CIA to 'make the economy scream' in Chile to 'prevent Allende from coming to power or to unseat him,' prompted a major scandal in the mid-1970s, and a major investigation by the U.S. Senate. Since the coup, however, few U.S. documents relating to Chile have been actually declassified- -until recently.

"Through Freedom of Information Act requests, and other avenues of declassification, the National Security Archive has been able to compile a collection of declassified records that shed light on events in Chile between 1970 and 1976.