Who should own and control the means of production?

[Contumacious]

Do you want to have every American vote on every detail of every act that ever goes into effect?

Fuck no.

Did a city official choose your wife?

Did he pop her cherry for you so you wouldn't have to go through the hassle?

.

 

[JBeukema]

Do you want to have every American vote on every detail of every act that ever goes into effect?

Fuck no.

Did a city official choose your wife?

Did he pop her cherry for you so you wouldn't have to go through the hassle?

.

I get the distinct impression that reading comprehension is not your strong suit.

 

[Contumacious]

Do you want to have every American vote on every detail of every act that ever goes into effect?

Fuck no.

Did a city official choose your wife?

Did he pop her cherry for you so you wouldn't have to go through the hassle?

.

I get the distinct impression that reading comprehension is not your strong suit.

I get the distinct impression that you are the mother of all parasites.

.

 

[Bern80]

Free Market Capitalism is not similar to Anarchy.

Those who advocate a 'free market' always reveal themselves as advocates of market anarchy. They seek to empower capital to circumvent the authority of the nation-state and return us to something approximating feudalism. The only freedom of the 'free market' and 'free trade' which they espouse is capital's freedom from all restraints upon the exploitation of the common man and the bourgeoisie's freedom from the limits once placed upon their powers by socialist progress.

In reality, the market cannot exist without being less than wholly free, for the absence of standards and regulation and limits upon the growth and power of corporations and private interests has always lead us to oligarchy, tyranny, exploitation, and oppression.

That's the problem. Is tha people seem to think capitalism and exploitation are synonomous. They are not. Capitalism is what allows AGREEMENT between parties in a transaction. Not exploitation.

You don't have the ability to negotiate with socialism. The owner of the means of production says 'Here's the price, I have no incentive to change it, if you don't like it take your business else where. Oh that's right....YOU CAN'T'.

Capitalism gives MORE power to the consumer. Not less. But as Ben Parker noted, with power comes responsiblity and American's certainly want the power, but not the responsibility.

 

[JBeukema]

Have you taken your medication today?

 

[JBeukema]

Free Market Capitalism is not similar to Anarchy.

Those who advocate a 'free market' always reveal themselves as advocates of market anarchy. They seek to empower capital to circumvent the authority of the nation-state and return us to something approximating feudalism. The only freedom of the 'free market' and 'free trade' which they espouse is capital's freedom from all restraints upon the exploitation of the common man and the bourgeoisie's freedom from the limits once placed upon their powers by socialist progress.

In reality, the market cannot exist without being less than wholly free, for the absence of standards and regulation and limits upon the growth and power of corporations and private interests has always lead us to oligarchy, tyranny, exploitation, and oppression.

That's the problem. Is tha people seem to think capitalism and exploitation are synonomous. They are not. Capitalism is what allows AGREEMENT between parties in a transaction. Not exploitation.

That's not how it played out in history.

 

[Contumacious]

Those who advocate a 'free market' always reveal themselves as advocates of market anarchy. They seek to empower capital to circumvent the authority of the nation-state and return us to something approximating feudalism. The only freedom of the 'free market' and 'free trade' which they espouse is capital's freedom from all restraints upon the exploitation of the common man and the bourgeoisie's freedom from the limits once placed upon their powers by socialist progress.

In reality, the market cannot exist without being less than wholly free, for the absence of standards and regulation and limits upon the growth and power of corporations and private interests has always lead us to oligarchy, tyranny, exploitation, and oppression.

That's the problem. Is tha people seem to think capitalism and exploitation are synonomous. They are not. Capitalism is what allows AGREEMENT between parties in a transaction. Not exploitation.

That's not how it played out in history.

How did they play out in History?

Identify the country and any historical evidence showing that they adopted Capitalism and Free Market policies.

Go frit.

Don't be shy.

Don't let my presence intimidate you.

.

 

[JBeukema]

How did they play out in History?

Go to the library and ask for a history book. Try asking for a history of the labour movement. Ask about American imperialism, Granada, the United Fruit Company, and colonialism.

Come back when you have a clue.

 

[Contumacious]

Those who advocate a 'free market' always reveal themselves as advocates of market anarchy. They seek to empower capital to circumvent the authority of the nation-state and return us to something approximating feudalism. The only freedom of the 'free market' and 'free trade' which they espouse is capital's freedom from all restraints upon the exploitation of the common man and the bourgeoisie's freedom from the limits once placed upon their powers by socialist progress.

In reality, the market cannot exist without being less than wholly free, for the absence of standards and regulation and limits upon the growth and power of corporations and private interests has always lead us to oligarchy, tyranny, exploitation, and oppression.

That's the problem. Is tha people seem to think capitalism and exploitation are synonomous. They are not. Capitalism is what allows AGREEMENT between parties in a transaction. Not exploitation.

That's not how it played out in history.

How did they play out in History?

Identify the country and any historical evidence showing that they adopted Capitalism and Free Market policies.

Go frit.

Don't be shy.

Don't let my presence intimidate you.

.

 

[Kat]

That's the problem. Is tha people seem to think capitalism and exploitation are synonomous. They are not. Capitalism is what allows AGREEMENT between parties in a transaction. Not exploitation.

That's not how it played out in history.

How did they play out in History?

Identify the country and any historical evidence showing that they adopted Capitalism and Free Market policies.

Go frit.

Don't be shy.

Don't let my presence intimidate you.

.

YOU intimidate???? Bwahahahahahaha!!!!

(so sorry, I couldn't help it)

 

[Contumacious]

How did they play out in History?

Go to the library and ask for a history book. Try asking for a history of the labour movement. Ask about American imperialism, Granada, the United Fruit Company, and colonialism.
.

Man, I admire you. It takes balls to admit that you were wrong and don't know your ass from a hole in the ground.

Go forth and sin no more.

.

 

[Contumacious]

That's not how it played out in history.

How did they play out in History?

Identify the country and any historical evidence showing that they adopted Capitalism and Free Market policies.

Go frit.

Don't be shy.

Don't let my presence intimidate you.

.

YOU intimidate???? Bwahahahahahaha!!!!

(so sorry, I couldn't help it)

I knew it. You missed me.

.

 

[Affrayer]

Yes, bad idea's. Did I studder?

Nope, you got it wrong.

They are part of Human History...

So is it "bad ideas" or is it "human history" or as I correctly concluded "human ontology?

The Free Market Capitalist System...

Does not exist...it's right up there with the belief that if you clap your hands and shout you believe Tinkerbell will recover from the injury Captain Hook gave her.

The goal of capitalism is to own and control the market system, monopoly dominance. The only way we can even come close to a "free market" is by heavily regulating it.

How is State Capitalism superior to Free Market Capitalism, Comrade?

Before Arnold Schwartenfarten and the republicans California was a thee most prosperous economy in America with enormous benefits like free higher education. Now? It's nearly bankrupt just like every state run by "free market" republicans over the last 10 years.

is it that Enron broke the law?

How could the law be broken in a "free market" system? And regardless if there were laws, they weren't enforced. In other words, Bush Jr enabled the "free market" and as a result Enron was allowed to run rampant.

Was Government the Impartial Referee here, or part of a corrupted conspiracy?

Nope, in fact Bush Jr was a cheerleader for Enron's unbridled avarice and greed.

When Government plays the Impartial Referee...

So you're saying that capitalism is a poor choice for an economy UNLESS you have proper regulations to reign in human ontology.

I.E. Regulated Capitalism.

I believe that the ups and downs have more to do with Banking Schemes, and not being on the Gold Standard.

Banking schemes and other aspects of the economic system that could be abused certainly played a part but before the FED we were on the gold standard.

So was it true that we had not gone on the deficit spending binges that we are on now.

Yet we had terribly disruptive boom and bust cycles.

Your Premise is false.

Your facts are horribly wrong...

Actually the Market wen't Kamikaze on 9-11-01.

Nope, we went into Bush Jr's eight year recession well before 9/11.

Bush did a fantastic job handling that recovery.

Nope. 9-11 and The New York Stock Exchange

The stock market remained closed until September 17. It would turn out to be the longest that the market would remain closed since 1933 and the Great Depression. During it's first day of trading after the attacks, the market lost over 680 points, the single biggest one day drop in the exchanges history. While the drop only accounted for a little over 7 percent, it is still considered a major event. By the end of that first week back open, the Dow Jones had lost over 1360 points or 14 percent of its value. It would go down as the worst week in market history. The total money losses during that time were estimated to be around 1.2 trillion.​

Bush Jr couldn't have done a worse job even if he stayed in Florida reading "My Pet Goat."

Again you have you facts horribly wrong.

He rebuilt a decimated Military...

The military wasn't decimated. That was nothing more than a 2000 campaign lie told by Bush Jr. In fact it was strong enough to man two wars, one right after the other. Two wars that were paid for with massive deficit spending.

Can you tell me without doubt or hesitation that what he did, did not help secure us against further threat or attack?

Absolutely. And rather go into a detail description of how Bush Jr failed, all I need point out is that terrorism, the "threat" to our national security, is worse now then it was before Bush Jr entered the White House.

Again you have your facts horribly wrong.

That is the thinking that primarily brought us to 9/11 in the first place.

Nope, bush Jr's gun boat diplomacy, in which he threatened the Taliban with carpet bombing if they didn't do as he ordered, brought us to 9/11.

How many years did you waste your breath condemning Bush for 5.5% unemployment rate?

1) Not one single second.

2) The 5.5% unemployment rate was a flat out lie. It was achieved by changing the definition of "long term unemployment" and dropping millions of workers off the "reported" unemployment rate.

If you don't believe me do the math. The "worker" population grew almost 12 million from January 2001 to January 2009. Bush Jr ONLY managed to create a net of 3 million new jobs. Which means that 9 million workers were unemployed but not accounted for by the Bureau of Labor under Bush Jr.

Again you have you facts horribly wrong.

 

[Affrayer]

humanity fails

But don't forget, it is also "humanity" that crafts the regulations that reigns in the avarice and greed that invariably brings capitalism to its knees.

So in one sense it inherently fails but in another it overtly succeeds.

 

[Bern80]

Those who advocate a 'free market' always reveal themselves as advocates of market anarchy. They seek to empower capital to circumvent the authority of the nation-state and return us to something approximating feudalism. The only freedom of the 'free market' and 'free trade' which they espouse is capital's freedom from all restraints upon the exploitation of the common man and the bourgeoisie's freedom from the limits once placed upon their powers by socialist progress.

In reality, the market cannot exist without being less than wholly free, for the absence of standards and regulation and limits upon the growth and power of corporations and private interests has always lead us to oligarchy, tyranny, exploitation, and oppression.

That's the problem. Is tha people seem to think capitalism and exploitation are synonomous. They are not. Capitalism is what allows AGREEMENT between parties in a transaction. Not exploitation.

That's not how it played out in history.

Umm, like when? In what society was there a truly free market capitalism and how did it lead to the civilizations down fall?

 

[Affrayer]

That's the problem. Is tha people seem to think capitalism and exploitation are synonomous. They are not. Capitalism is what allows AGREEMENT between parties in a transaction. Not exploitation.

You really believe that? Capitalism as all about gaining an advantage in the market place. Nothing impeeds that desire. In fact our courts are jammed full of cases where "agreements" were broken in pursuit of that advantage.

The "Rule Of Law" allows for agreements and not capitalism...and the "Rule Of Law" is based on equality and I assure you, capitalism has nothing to do nor does it want anything to do with equality.

Capitalism is not the "Rule Of Law" and the "Rule Of Law" is not capitalism!

It is the combination of the "Rule Of Law" and Capitalism" that works. And if anything, capitalists hate the rule of law when it gets in the way of profits. See the S&Ls under Reagan and Enron and the Mortgage Meltdown under Bush Jr for excellent examples of what capitalists think of the "Rule Of Law."

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Why is it that leftist have some incredible belief that a government owning production is better than private ownership? That greed/corruption etc. only exist when government is not present?
This is to the point of lunacy. Regardless of centuries of history showing the opposite - they still desire to believe in this.
Sorta like a religion I guess.

 

[Kat]

How did they play out in History?

Identify the country and any historical evidence showing that they adopted Capitalism and Free Market policies.

Go frit.

Don't be shy.

Don't let my presence intimidate you.

.

YOU intimidate???? Bwahahahahahaha!!!!

(so sorry, I couldn't help it)

I knew it. You missed me.

.

Ha Ha Ha Maybe.

 

[Affrayer]

Why is it that leftist...

Why is it that right wingers believe that fascism is good when they are the fascists?

 

[Contumacious]

Before Arnold Schwartenfarten and the republicans California was a thee most prosperous economy in America with enormous benefits like free higher education. Now? It's nearly bankrupt just like every state run by "free market" republicans over the last 10 years..

HUH? WTF.


California Screaming

During the last two decades, the Golden State has been transformed from what was once known as the nation’s most anti-labor outpost to a state essentially run by public-sector unions. Nearly three in five publicsector workers are unionized, compared to less than two in five public employees in other states. The Democratic Party, which is fully in hock to unions, has controlled the legislature and most statewide posts, with the notable exception of the governor’s mansion, for more than a decade. That means more government workers, higher salaries, and drastically higher pension costs. "

.