Unrestrained Capitalism Would Cause........

[Cellblock2429]

Unrestrained capitalism enables slavery.

/---- So unrestrained Capitalism causes present day slavery in the Sudan?

/---- Sorry for the multiple posts. I did this on my iPhone and it kept saying can not post due to error so I tried several times.

 

[dblack]

Unrestrained capitalism enables slavery.

/---- So unrestrained Capitalism causes present day slavery in the Sudan?

Unrestrained government IS slavery.

 

[dblack]

The meltdown wasn't caused by a lack of regulation.

Of course it was.

• There was no regulation of how CMO's were constructed
• There was no regulation of how CDO's were constructed
• There was no regulation of how CMO's and CDO's were sold
  
• There was no regulation of derivatives (Greenspan refused)
  
• There was no regulation of how the ratings agencies gave AAA ratings to absolute shit securities
• There was no regulation to stop the banks from betting AGAINST the very derivatives they were SELLING
  
• There were no reserve requirements for AIG to write $500 BILLION in credit default swaps, which transferred risk and were a primary driver of the speculation

There are books and documentaries on the Meltdown. They're not hard to find.
.

Arguably, it was caused by the presumption of regulation - regulation that was either non-existent, or 'tweaked' to ineffectiveness by persistent lobbying. If there were no presumption of regulation, customers would pay more attention to the risks involved, and these kinds of large scale meltdowns could be avoided. There would be more personal losses, as some people would no doubt choose investments foolishly, but there wouldn't be a widespread assumption that the market had been "child-proofed" by government.

 

[dblack]

Unrestrained capitalism enables slavery.

/---- So unrestrained Capitalism causes present day slavery in the Sudan?

Unrestrained government IS slavery.

The meltdown wasn't caused by a lack of regulation.

Of course it was.

• There was no regulation of how CMO's were constructed
• There was no regulation of how CDO's were constructed
• There was no regulation of how CMO's and CDO's were sold
  
• There was no regulation of derivatives (Greenspan refused)
  
• There was no regulation of how the ratings agencies gave AAA ratings to absolute shit securities
• There was no regulation to stop the banks from betting AGAINST the very derivatives they were SELLING
  
• There were no reserve requirements for AIG to write $500 BILLION in credit default swaps, which transferred risk and were a primary driver of the speculation

There are books and documentaries on the Meltdown. They're not hard to find.
.

Arguably, it was caused by the presumption of regulation - regulation that was either non-existent, or 'tweaked' to ineffectiveness by persistent lobbying. If there were no presumption of regulation, customers would pay more attention to the risks involved, and these kinds of large scale meltdowns could be avoided. There would be more personal losses, as some people would no doubt choose investments foolishly, but there wouldn't be a widespread assumption that the market had been "child-proofed" by government.

 

[bripat9643]

The meltdown wasn't caused by a lack of regulation.

Of course it was.

• There was no regulation of how CMO's were constructed
• There was no regulation of how CDO's were constructed
• There was no regulation of how CMO's and CDO's were sold
  
• There was no regulation of derivatives (Greenspan refused)
  
• There was no regulation of how the ratings agencies gave AAA ratings to absolute shit securities
• There were no reserve requirements for AIG to write $500 BILLION in credit default swaps, which transferred risk drove the speculation

There are books and documentaries on the Meltdown. They're not hard to find.
.

One can always point after the fact by not allowing this or that some problem could have been prevented. Of course, the regulations always come after the fact. If it wasn't for bad mortgages, none of the regulations you want would be necessary. The bottom line is that bad mortgages caused the problem, and government regulations were the cause of those mortgages.

I don't think you understand what happened.
.

I sure as hell do. However, I'm immune to leftwing propaganda.

 

[Mac1958]

The meltdown wasn't caused by a lack of regulation.

Of course it was.

• There was no regulation of how CMO's were constructed
• There was no regulation of how CDO's were constructed
• There was no regulation of how CMO's and CDO's were sold
  
• There was no regulation of derivatives (Greenspan refused)
  
• There was no regulation of how the ratings agencies gave AAA ratings to absolute shit securities
• There were no reserve requirements for AIG to write $500 BILLION in credit default swaps, which transferred risk drove the speculation

There are books and documentaries on the Meltdown. They're not hard to find.
.

One can always point after the fact by not allowing this or that some problem could have been prevented. Of course, the regulations always come after the fact. If it wasn't for bad mortgages, none of the regulations you want would be necessary. The bottom line is that bad mortgages caused the problem, and government regulations were the cause of those mortgages.

I don't think you understand what happened.
.

I sure as hell do. However, I'm immune to leftwing propaganda.

I wish you were immune to rightwing propaganda, because that's what you're parroting.
.

 

[Tehon]

Shared ownership means government ownership.

No it does not mean that.

If it doesn't, then explain how it would work.

I have already explained it in this thread multiple times. Time to move on.

You haven't explained jack shit, dumbass. You've done nothing more than spout political slogans.

When you use the term "shared ownership," it means government ownership. The only other way it can work is called "corporate ownership." You have failed to explain any conceivable third way. You simply grunt and insist it isn't one of those two things.

I don't think you have the intellect to understand anything besides slogans.

Do you understand what the means of production are? Land, labor and capital. Where, in Marxist theory, capital is money used only to buy something with the express intent to resell it at a profit.

Means of production - Wikipedia
Ownership of the means of production and control over the surplus product generated by their operation is the fundamental factor in delineating different economic systems (or modes of production). Capitalism is defined as private ownership and control over the means of production, where the surplus product becomes a source of unearned income for its owners. By contrast, socialism is defined as public ownership of the means of production so that the surplus product accrues to society at large.

When I use the term shared ownership I am speaking of the means of production and it does not mean government ownership. A group of people collaborate in the production of a commodity. They share in the surplus value created by their labor. They don't sell the surplus value to a capitalist at a discounted rate by means of a wage. Labor is not a commodity in a socialist system.

Once again. The socialist system works the same as a capitalist system, except that labor is not a commodity to be purchased and used for private gain. Individuals still have the freedom to associate and collaborate on the production of commodities to be sold in the market. But the surplus value created by labor is shared among the producers of the commodity, not expropriated by the capitalist via the wage.

In this manner surplus value accrues to society at large. It has nothing to do with government control and handouts.

 

[francoHFW]

fair capitalism

?????
Capitalism exploits the wage earner. How do you make that fair without undoing it? By imposing on society the cost of the difference? Does that make sense to you?

Look at all the laws and reg's that make it fair. "Socialism, where industry is owned or REGULATED by the community"...

The community? As in the federal government? If so we have vastly differing ideas about what is a community.

How do you account for laws that allowed capitalists to flee to low wage countries. Is that fair? Do you have any perception of who dominates government policy making? Or why it is so?

The GOP suqs duh. Repeat. Yes, the gov't. Since the greatest generation moved on and the GOP busted the unions, they're the only ones left. There's nothing wrong with the gov't that 4 years of Dem control (last time- LBJ) wouldn't fix.

 

[francoHFW]

Shared ownership means government ownership.

No it does not mean that.

If it doesn't, then explain how it would work.

I have already explained it in this thread multiple times. Time to move on.

You haven't explained jack shit, dumbass. You've done nothing more than spout political slogans.

When you use the term "shared ownership," it means government ownership. The only other way it can work is called "corporate ownership." You have

It looks to me like those (like the OP) who refuse to acknowledge that capitalism requires careful and efficient regulation are leaving the intellectual door open to people who want to push Marxist theory. That's what happens when we allow ourselves to fall into binary thinking patterns.

The fact that the anti-regulation zealots can look at the Meltdown of a few years ago and still push their ideology speaks to the overwhelming power of ideology.

We would be far better off having an honest discussion about how to most effectively and efficiently regulate capitalism than debating over some dreamy utopian theory that flies in the face of human nature, one that will simply never exist.

But those who simplistically knee-jerk against regulation because they are intellectual slaves to their ideology just won't have any of that.

So here we are, talking about Marx.


.

The meltdown wasn't caused by a lack of regulation. The government has tens of thousands of pages of regulations to control the financial system. That control is precisely what caused the meltdown. Government forced banks to make unwise mortgage decisions. government ruled standard lending practices to be illegal to promote some political goal.

The claim that lack of regulation caused the meltdown is pure propaganda. It has no conceivable basis in fact.

Funny how it ALL happened under crony Boooshie "oversight", dupes. Toxic crap assets rated A+ and sold around the world. Great job! DUHHHHHHHHH.

 

[ph3iron]

our companies to fight to the death in order to survive by raising our standard of living at the fastest possible rate!!! Lets do it!!!

Omg as a filthy rich corporatist, let us continue sucking of the uneducated white boy rubes

 

[Kosh]

Unrestrained capitalism enables slavery.

Is that what you far left drones do already with politics and socialism/communism?

 

[francoHFW]

Shared ownership means government ownership.

No it does not mean that.

If it doesn't, then explain how it would work.

I have already explained it in this thread multiple times. Time to move on.

You haven't explained jack shit, dumbass. You've done nothing more than spout political slogans.

When you use the term "shared ownership," it means government ownership. The only other way it can work is called "corporate ownership." You have failed to explain any conceivable third way. You simply grunt and insist it isn't one of those two things.

I don't think you have the intellect to understand anything besides slogans.

Do you understand what the means of production are? Land, labor and capital. Where, in Marxist theory, capital is money used only to buy something with the express intent to resell it at a profit.

Means of production - Wikipedia
Ownership of the means of production and control over the surplus product generated by their operation is the fundamental factor in delineating different economic systems (or modes of production). Capitalism is defined as private ownership and control over the means of production, where the surplus product becomes a source of unearned income for its owners. By contrast, socialism is defined as public ownership of the means of production so that the surplus product accrues to society at large.

When I use the term shared ownership I am speaking of the means of production and it does not mean government ownership. A group of people collaborate in the production of a commodity. They share in the surplus value created by their labor. They don't sell the surplus value to a capitalist at a discounted rate by means of a wage. Labor is not a commodity in a socialist system.

Once again. The socialist system works the same as a capitalist system, except that labor is not a commodity to be purchased and used for private gain. Individuals still have the freedom to associate and collaborate on the production of commodities to be sold in the market. But the surplus value created by labor is shared among the producers of the commodity, not expropriated by the capitalist via the wage.

In this manner surplus value accrues to society at large. It has nothing to do with government control and handouts.

The fact that you guys go on and on about irrelevant bs shows how dumbed down our political discourse has become. Communism is irrelevant and dead. Socialism is ALWAYS democratic, FAIR capitalism. Gov't is the only hope, and not New BS GOP gov't. Obviously to anyone not brainwashed or totally misinformed by our crap media.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

our companies to fight to the death in order to survive by raising our standard of living at the fastest possible rate!!! Lets do it!!!

Omg as a filthy rich corporatist, let us continue sucking of the uneducated white boy rubes

care to restate in better english????

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Socialism is ALWAYS democratic, FAIR capitalism.

1) socialism is anti-democratic. it is 100% about the state taking power from the people

2) socialism is not fair capitalism. Socialism is govt mismanagement. We have it in health care,not capitalism, and it is our least efficient industry bleeding every man woman and child in American for $10,000/year. 1+1=2

it pays to stay in school!!!

 

[francoHFW]

The meltdown wasn't caused by a lack of regulation.

Of course it was.

• There was no regulation of how CMO's were constructed
• There was no regulation of how CDO's were constructed
• There was no regulation of how CMO's and CDO's were sold
  
• There was no regulation of derivatives (Greenspan refused)
  
• There was no regulation of how the ratings agencies gave AAA ratings to absolute shit securities
• There were no reserve requirements for AIG to write $500 BILLION in credit default swaps, which transferred risk drove the speculation

There are books and documentaries on the Meltdown. They're not hard to find.
.

One can always point after the fact by not allowing this or that some problem could have been prevented. Of course, the regulations always come after the fact. If it wasn't for bad mortgages, none of the regulations you want would be necessary. The bottom line is that bad mortgages caused the problem, and government regulations were the cause of those mortgages.

I don't think you understand what happened.
.

I sure as hell do. However, I'm immune to leftwing propaganda.

Or anything but New BS GOP propaganda, superdupe.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

. Gov't is the only hope,.

actually our genius Founders thought freedom from govt was the only hope! And they had not seen Hitler Stalin Mao Pot Castro or Obamacare!!!

 

[Mac1958]

An aggressive lack of regulation, even an outright refusal to regulate (Greenspan), was by far the biggest reason for the Meltdown - it allowed the proliferation of shit securities, AAA ratings for those shit securities, banks betting against the very shit securities they were pushing, and well over $500 BILLION in unregulated credit default swaps with NO regulations on cash reserves.

That crap was a FAR bigger factor than any legislation. The banks and ratings agencies and brokers and mortgage companies ran amok, unrestrained by those mean 'ol commie regulations, running us headlong into a disaster of historic proportions.

Regardless of what Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin and WND pretend.

And that's my own fucking industry that I'm talking about.
.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Funny how it ALL happened under crony Boooshie "oversight", dupes. Toxic crap assets rated A+ and sold around the world. Great job! DUHHHHHHHHH.

actually it all happened under massive liberal govt interference in the housing market.

It pays to stay in school!!

 

[francoHFW]

Socialism is ALWAYS democratic, FAIR capitalism.

1) socialism is anti-democratic. it is 100% about the state taking power from the people

2) socialism is not fair capitalism. Socialism is govt mismanagement. We have it in health care,not capitalism, and it is our least efficient industry bleeding every man woman and child in American for $10,000/year. 1+1=2

it pays to stay in school!!!

BS, brainwashed functional moron. Big Health has been an unregulated GOP mess forever. That's how it got so out of control and ridiculously expensive. DUHHHH. ACA finally spoke the truth about costs, got rid of scams, and started a solution.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

An aggressive lack of regulation, even an outright refusal to regulate (Greenspan), was by far the biggest reason for the Meltdown -
.

Hitler Stalin and Mao very aggressively regulated. Does a liberal know his history 101??

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

. Big Health has been an unregulated GOP mess forever. .

actually Medicare Medicaid Schip Tricare VA Clinics and illegal interstate competition are not capitalist. When a conservative and liberal meet the conservative ends up running a kindergarten.