Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ask them how well capitalism was doing in 1929.
View attachment 245504 View attachment 245506 View attachment 245505
To the extent that capitalism’s problems – inequality, instability (cycles/crises), etc. – stem in part from its production relationships, reforms focused exclusively on regulating or supplanting markets will not succeed in solving them. For example, Keynesian monetary policies (focused on raising or lowering the quantity of money in circulation and, correspondingly, interest rates) do not touch the employer-employee relationship, however much their variations redistribute wealth, regulate markets, or displace markets in favor of state-administered investment decisions. Likewise, Keynesian fiscal policies (raising or lowering taxes and government spending) do not address the employer-employee relationship.
Keynesian policies also never ended the cyclical instability of capitalism. The New Deal and European social democracy left capitalism in place in both state and private units (enterprises) of production notwithstanding their massive reform agendas and programs. They thereby left capitalist employers facing the incentives and receiving the resources (profits) to evade, weaken and eventually dissolve most of those programs.
It is far better not to distribute wealth unequally in the first place than to re-distribute it after to undo the inequality. For example, FDR proposed in 1944 that the government establish a maximum income alongside a minimum wage; that is one among the various ways inequality could be limited and thereby redistribution avoided. Efforts to redistribute encounter evasions, oppositions, and failures that compound the effects of unequal distribution itself. Social peace and cohesion are the victims of redistribution sooner or later. Reforming markets while leaving the relations/organization of capitalist production unchanged is like redistribution. Just as redistribution schemes fail to solve the problems rooted in distribution, market-focused reforms fail to solve the problems rooted in production.
Since 2008, capitalism has showed us all yet again its deep and unsolved problems of cyclical instability, deepening inequality and the injustices they both entail. Their persistence mirrors that of the capitalist organization of production. To successfully confront and solve the problems of economic cycles, income and wealth inequality, and so on, we need to go beyond the capitalist employer-employee system of production. The democratization of enterprises – transitioning from employer-employee hierarchies to worker cooperatives – is a key way available here and now to realize the change we need.
Worker coops democratically decide the distribution of income (wages, bonuses, benefits, profit shares, etc.) among their members. No small group of owners and the boards of directors they choose would, as in capitalist corporations, make such decisions. Thus, for example, it would be far less likely that a few individuals in a worker coop would earn millions while most others could not afford to send children to college. A democratic worker coop decision on the distribution of enterprise income would be far less unequal than what typifies capitalist enterprises. A socialism for the 21st century could and should include the transition from a capitalist to a worker-coop-based economic system as central to its commitments to less inequality and less social conflict over redistribution.
Capitalism Is Not the “Market System”
Strangely all the Socialist ideas that the racist KKK, Progressive Marxist Socialists and FDR came up with the New Deal to bring America out of the Depression did not work. What did bring the U.S. out of the Great Depression was World War II. The slogan was "A Chicken In Every Pot And A Car In The Garage". What's the slogan for the "Green New Deal"?
#37 – If FDR's New Deal Didn't End the Depression, Then It ...
https://fee.org/articles/37-if-fdrs-new-deal-didnt-end-the...
In April 1939, almost ten years after the crisis began, more than one in five Americans still could not find work. On the surface, World War II seems to mark the end of the Great Depression. During the war more than 12 million Americans were sent into the military, and a similar number toiled in defense-related jobs.
~~~~~~~~~~~~The Great Depression and World War II, 1929-1945 | Gilder ...
https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-now/great-depression-and...
And between 1929 and 1945 the Great Depression and World War II utterly redefined the role of government in American society and catapulted the United States from an isolated, peripheral state into the world’s hegemonic superpower.
Nobody says they want move to Russia, Huckleberry.I'm always baffled by how people can look at a country founded, and built on Capitalism, that has existing for only a short 200 years compared to those which has existed for thousands of years, which has the largest economy on the face of the earth, the highest standard of living, and then laugh when you point this out, as if it the two things can't be connected.
But I guess you have to deny reality, when facing it would force you to reconsider your ideology.
Easy, Clyde. There's a reason for everything.What does that have to do with anything? No one wants to buy a house on the moon for that matter. So what?
So I looked it up, just to double check. You are right. Right now I'm about 210%. Little more than double I put in.Good business people don't talk like that.
Just think of all the middle class, and upper middle class people who have employment making those ships.
And quite frankly, you are an idiot when it comes to job creation.
Do you have any idea how much yacht crews make?
An experienced deck hand can make $42,000 a year. That's for the smallest of yachts. By the way, that salary, doesn't include free room and board. You typically have a fairly nice place to live, and the food is provided.
The more yachts on the water, the more middle class jobs are created, both in building those ships, and working on them. Idiot.
You're a total fraud with your 250% portfolio.
Without a strong, vibrant, healthy society, capitalism is a failure.Capitalism creates wealth. Socialism redistributes wealth.
Without capitalism, socialism wouldn't exist as a concept.
Ergo, capitalism > socialism.
As a GOP voter damn smart phonehas the GOP voter of course you believe socialism is not capitalism, when it is obviously is in the modern definition. Bernie Sanders and AOC or any socialists in any modern country are all for Democratic capitalism but fair and with a good safety net and benefits. Unlike scumbag GOP America at this point.
Did you pass your ESL class?
As a GOP voter damn smart phonehas the GOP voter of course you believe socialism is not capitalism, when it is obviously is in the modern definition. Bernie Sanders and AOC or any socialists in any modern country are all for Democratic capitalism but fair and with a good safety net and benefits. Unlike scumbag GOP America at this point.
Did you pass your ESL class?
For the intelligence well-informed and civilized actually.Socialism is the ideology for losers.
Ask them how well capitalism was doing in 1929.
View attachment 245504 View attachment 245506 View attachment 245505
To the extent that capitalism’s problems – inequality, instability (cycles/crises), etc. – stem in part from its production relationships, reforms focused exclusively on regulating or supplanting markets will not succeed in solving them. For example, Keynesian monetary policies (focused on raising or lowering the quantity of money in circulation and, correspondingly, interest rates) do not touch the employer-employee relationship, however much their variations redistribute wealth, regulate markets, or displace markets in favor of state-administered investment decisions. Likewise, Keynesian fiscal policies (raising or lowering taxes and government spending) do not address the employer-employee relationship.
Keynesian policies also never ended the cyclical instability of capitalism. The New Deal and European social democracy left capitalism in place in both state and private units (enterprises) of production notwithstanding their massive reform agendas and programs. They thereby left capitalist employers facing the incentives and receiving the resources (profits) to evade, weaken and eventually dissolve most of those programs.
It is far better not to distribute wealth unequally in the first place than to re-distribute it after to undo the inequality. For example, FDR proposed in 1944 that the government establish a maximum income alongside a minimum wage; that is one among the various ways inequality could be limited and thereby redistribution avoided. Efforts to redistribute encounter evasions, oppositions, and failures that compound the effects of unequal distribution itself. Social peace and cohesion are the victims of redistribution sooner or later. Reforming markets while leaving the relations/organization of capitalist production unchanged is like redistribution. Just as redistribution schemes fail to solve the problems rooted in distribution, market-focused reforms fail to solve the problems rooted in production.
Since 2008, capitalism has showed us all yet again its deep and unsolved problems of cyclical instability, deepening inequality and the injustices they both entail. Their persistence mirrors that of the capitalist organization of production. To successfully confront and solve the problems of economic cycles, income and wealth inequality, and so on, we need to go beyond the capitalist employer-employee system of production. The democratization of enterprises – transitioning from employer-employee hierarchies to worker cooperatives – is a key way available here and now to realize the change we need.
Worker coops democratically decide the distribution of income (wages, bonuses, benefits, profit shares, etc.) among their members. No small group of owners and the boards of directors they choose would, as in capitalist corporations, make such decisions. Thus, for example, it would be far less likely that a few individuals in a worker coop would earn millions while most others could not afford to send children to college. A democratic worker coop decision on the distribution of enterprise income would be far less unequal than what typifies capitalist enterprises. A socialism for the 21st century could and should include the transition from a capitalist to a worker-coop-based economic system as central to its commitments to less inequality and less social conflict over redistribution.
Capitalism Is Not the “Market System”
Strangely all the Socialist ideas that the racist KKK, Progressive Marxist Socialists and FDR came up with the New Deal to bring America out of the Depression did not work. What did bring the U.S. out of the Great Depression was World War II. The slogan was "A Chicken In Every Pot And A Car In The Garage". What's the slogan for the "Green New Deal"?
#37 – If FDR's New Deal Didn't End the Depression, Then It ...
https://fee.org/articles/37-if-fdrs-new-deal-didnt-end-the...
In April 1939, almost ten years after the crisis began, more than one in five Americans still could not find work. On the surface, World War II seems to mark the end of the Great Depression. During the war more than 12 million Americans were sent into the military, and a similar number toiled in defense-related jobs.
~~~~~~~~~~~~The Great Depression and World War II, 1929-1945 | Gilder ...
https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-now/great-depression-and...
And between 1929 and 1945 the Great Depression and World War II utterly redefined the role of government in American society and catapulted the United States from an isolated, peripheral state into the world’s hegemonic superpower.
Everything he posted is dead on accurate. Why do people ignore this?
And in fact, it wasn't even world war 2 that ended the depression. There is only one economic measure that suggests the depression ended at world war 2, and that is the unemployment rate.
But the unemployment rate declining, was largely due to the US drafting everyone into the military. Unemployed people went into the military, or employed people were drafted, and had to be replaced by unemployed people. The real number of jobs, in the private sector really didn't increase much. What increased was the number of people in the military.
If we simply made it a prison sentence to be unemployed, and put all the unemployed into labor gangs, would you conclude that dramatically lower unemployment was due to economic growth? NO, of course not. That would be ridiculous. But that is exactly what happened in WW2.
And by any economic measure, the standard of living declined during world war 2. Rationing of meat, and eggs, and automobiles. Everything was reduced. In what economic growth situation, does everyone become worse off?
In reality, the real end of the depression was in the late 40s, when tariffs on trade were removed, regulations were reduced, and taxes were cut.
A lot of people fail to remember that in 1945, when the war was over, and all the men started returning home, tons of problems came up. Unemployment went up, there was a housing crisis, and shortages of food.
So all the problems that existed before the war, returned after the war. It was the repeal of the taxes, and the regulations, and tariffs, that resulted in all those problems going away.
And unchecked capitalism in the hands of an empire like Great Britain ? Did we learn the lesson of selling England by the pound ? I think not from the looks of how fast countries are dumping the petro dollar.Without a strong, vibrant, healthy society, capitalism is a failure.Capitalism creates wealth. Socialism redistributes wealth.
Without capitalism, socialism wouldn't exist as a concept.
Ergo, capitalism > socialism.
Capitalism is what creates a strong vibrant healthy society. You can't get there, with socialism. We know this because China in ages past, was the leader of the world, culturally, economically, and technologically. After they fell into socialism, they were a 3rd world, backwards culture.
Now that they have adopted Capitalism again, they are growing into a strong, vibrant, healthy society.
You can say the same for Cuba, India, and many other places. Socialism is what destroys society. Capitalism is what builds it.
Ask them how well capitalism was doing in 1929.
View attachment 245504 View attachment 245506 View attachment 245505
To the extent that capitalism’s problems – inequality, instability (cycles/crises), etc. – stem in part from its production relationships, reforms focused exclusively on regulating or supplanting markets will not succeed in solving them. For example, Keynesian monetary policies (focused on raising or lowering the quantity of money in circulation and, correspondingly, interest rates) do not touch the employer-employee relationship, however much their variations redistribute wealth, regulate markets, or displace markets in favor of state-administered investment decisions. Likewise, Keynesian fiscal policies (raising or lowering taxes and government spending) do not address the employer-employee relationship.
Keynesian policies also never ended the cyclical instability of capitalism. The New Deal and European social democracy left capitalism in place in both state and private units (enterprises) of production notwithstanding their massive reform agendas and programs. They thereby left capitalist employers facing the incentives and receiving the resources (profits) to evade, weaken and eventually dissolve most of those programs.
It is far better not to distribute wealth unequally in the first place than to re-distribute it after to undo the inequality. For example, FDR proposed in 1944 that the government establish a maximum income alongside a minimum wage; that is one among the various ways inequality could be limited and thereby redistribution avoided. Efforts to redistribute encounter evasions, oppositions, and failures that compound the effects of unequal distribution itself. Social peace and cohesion are the victims of redistribution sooner or later. Reforming markets while leaving the relations/organization of capitalist production unchanged is like redistribution. Just as redistribution schemes fail to solve the problems rooted in distribution, market-focused reforms fail to solve the problems rooted in production.
Since 2008, capitalism has showed us all yet again its deep and unsolved problems of cyclical instability, deepening inequality and the injustices they both entail. Their persistence mirrors that of the capitalist organization of production. To successfully confront and solve the problems of economic cycles, income and wealth inequality, and so on, we need to go beyond the capitalist employer-employee system of production. The democratization of enterprises – transitioning from employer-employee hierarchies to worker cooperatives – is a key way available here and now to realize the change we need.
Worker coops democratically decide the distribution of income (wages, bonuses, benefits, profit shares, etc.) among their members. No small group of owners and the boards of directors they choose would, as in capitalist corporations, make such decisions. Thus, for example, it would be far less likely that a few individuals in a worker coop would earn millions while most others could not afford to send children to college. A democratic worker coop decision on the distribution of enterprise income would be far less unequal than what typifies capitalist enterprises. A socialism for the 21st century could and should include the transition from a capitalist to a worker-coop-based economic system as central to its commitments to less inequality and less social conflict over redistribution.
Capitalism Is Not the “Market System”
Strangely all the Socialist ideas that the racist KKK, Progressive Marxist Socialists and FDR came up with the New Deal to bring America out of the Depression did not work. What did bring the U.S. out of the Great Depression was World War II. The slogan was "A Chicken In Every Pot And A Car In The Garage". What's the slogan for the "Green New Deal"?
#37 – If FDR's New Deal Didn't End the Depression, Then It ...
https://fee.org/articles/37-if-fdrs-new-deal-didnt-end-the...
In April 1939, almost ten years after the crisis began, more than one in five Americans still could not find work. On the surface, World War II seems to mark the end of the Great Depression. During the war more than 12 million Americans were sent into the military, and a similar number toiled in defense-related jobs.
~~~~~~~~~~~~The Great Depression and World War II, 1929-1945 | Gilder ...
https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-now/great-depression-and...
And between 1929 and 1945 the Great Depression and World War II utterly redefined the role of government in American society and catapulted the United States from an isolated, peripheral state into the world’s hegemonic superpower.
Everything he posted is dead on accurate. Why do people ignore this?
And in fact, it wasn't even world war 2 that ended the depression. There is only one economic measure that suggests the depression ended at world war 2, and that is the unemployment rate.
But the unemployment rate declining, was largely due to the US drafting everyone into the military. Unemployed people went into the military, or employed people were drafted, and had to be replaced by unemployed people. The real number of jobs, in the private sector really didn't increase much. What increased was the number of people in the military.
If we simply made it a prison sentence to be unemployed, and put all the unemployed into labor gangs, would you conclude that dramatically lower unemployment was due to economic growth? NO, of course not. That would be ridiculous. But that is exactly what happened in WW2.
And by any economic measure, the standard of living declined during world war 2. Rationing of meat, and eggs, and automobiles. Everything was reduced. In what economic growth situation, does everyone become worse off?
In reality, the real end of the depression was in the late 40s, when tariffs on trade were removed, regulations were reduced, and taxes were cut.
A lot of people fail to remember that in 1945, when the war was over, and all the men started returning home, tons of problems came up. Unemployment went up, there was a housing crisis, and shortages of food.
So all the problems that existed before the war, returned after the war. It was the repeal of the taxes, and the regulations, and tariffs, that resulted in all those problems going away.
~~~~~~
The Wartime Economy | US History II (American Yawp)
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/.../chapter/the-wartime-economy-2
The Wartime Economy. Economies win wars no less than militaries. ... as the War Production Board and the Office of War Mobilization and Reconversion managed economic production for the war effort and economic output exploded. ... southward, to Mexico, to fill its labor force. Between 1942 and 1964, the United States contracted thousands of ...
And unchecked capitalism in the hands of an empire like Great Britain ? Did we learn the lesson of selling England by the pound ? I think not from the looks of how fast countries are dumping the petro dollar.Without a strong, vibrant, healthy society, capitalism is a failure.Capitalism creates wealth. Socialism redistributes wealth.
Without capitalism, socialism wouldn't exist as a concept.
Ergo, capitalism > socialism.
Capitalism is what creates a strong vibrant healthy society. You can't get there, with socialism. We know this because China in ages past, was the leader of the world, culturally, economically, and technologically. After they fell into socialism, they were a 3rd world, backwards culture.
Now that they have adopted Capitalism again, they are growing into a strong, vibrant, healthy society.
You can say the same for Cuba, India, and many other places. Socialism is what destroys society. Capitalism is what builds it.
Unchecked meaning deregulated. And one example government's grip over the economy is simply the fact that Goldman Sachs executives are in charge of the US Treasury Department, and Congressional oversight is all but completely gone.I'm little confused by your statement. When you say unchecked Capitalism in the hands of a great empire.... if it is in the hands of the empire, then it isn't capitalism. By definition, capitalism means that it is free of control by the government. If the government is controlling it, then it isn't capitalism.
Moreover, give me a clearly example by what you mean when you say 'selling England by the pound'?
In the developed successful Rich modern world, only we have people that think that socialism is communism like you do, super dupes... My smart phone doesn't give the numbers of posts... What has saved capitalism in the 20th century has been the addition of living wage cheap college excetera socialism in other words.... Which the GOP has been wrecking the last 35 years.francoHFW lucked out by not reading the assignment.: there's no test on this material for obtaining a degree in political philosophy.
#807: No, there are other things to consider when blindly glorifying capitalism. Otherwise #807 has a cyclopian frog's eye-view from the bottom of a well.
