Are there any positives at all to attribute to Capitalism?

[loosecannon]

your input please, please include a definition of beneficial in your entry. Thanks.

Sure... just look at all the Nanny-State programs and pork-barrel spending it funds.

I don't think that has much to do with capitalism. But if it does you better show me why.

 

[Two Thumbs]

that is all bullshit. Capitalism is a specific kind of idealistic economic form.

People worship capitalism even tho they have no idea what it is, what the options are are or that there have been different systems that worked fine. Like the economy of Rome or the mercantilist economy of the British empire.

Rome was a Class society. Where the powerfull government ran damn near everthing. There was almost no middle class, and most people were poor, so poor that joining the Legion was a huge income increase.

Imagine that. A society that cared more for the people that protected it than it did for the destitute.

capitalism is a tree with many branches. Call it what you want, it's still capitalism.

In it's day Roman citizens were the wealthiest people in existence, same was true of the British empire.

You need to watch the History Channel. The common Roman was dirt poor, so poor that those with money walked with armed guards, of heavily armed themselves, in Rome itself.

but

Compared to the people living ruff outside the Empire.. sure, to the Romans and standard civilization, living free in a tent of long house was poor.

 

[loosecannon]

Capitalism is a hotly debated topic in this..and many other countries. Where should regulation begin and end; for example. And this is something I am very interested in.

That is a question that can only be answered by trial and error and according to the moment's needs.

I am trying to get to something much more simple: For all the worship and admiration we bestow upon glorious, sweet capitalism we do so because we adhere to giant myths about what made us great and what is sucking the great from our nation today.

I suspect capitalism at most is responsible for 10% of our rise and it may be responsible for most of our fall.

Which is the point, capitalism even in limited forms may end being far more destructive than it ever was creative of anything good.

 

[loosecannon]

You need to watch the History Channel. The common Roman was dirt poor, so poor that those with money walked with armed guards, of heavily armed themselves, in Rome itself.

but

Compared to the people living ruff outside the Empire.. sure, to the Romans and standard civilization, living free in a tent of long house was poor.

No economic system would have made a nation wealthy by our standards in roman times. But their econ system was actually quite good and they were extremely wealthy by world standards.

 

[Samson]

I suspect capitalism at most is responsible for 10% of our rise and it may be responsible for most of our fall.

What do you suspect is responsible for the other 90% of "our rise?"

 

[hortysir]

Are you purposefully this thick?

One needs only to look at the definition of capitalism to see the positive aspect:

Those are not the only two choices. The world is not a choice between state owned wealth and capitalism which you can't even define.

False dichotomy. Fail. Try to keep up. Seriously. IF you have something to contribute I won't want to miss it.

Please identify an economy that does NOT fall in to either one of those 2 categories.
I'll try to stay awake

Still waiting, ass-hat

 

[Sallow]

which nation is that?

It has already been noted that:

>there is no such thing as capitalism, only partially capitalist economies

>capitalism didn't build the US or make the US great. Not by a long shot.

But why do you believe that and define "great"?

and in addition ...isn't china (socialist dictatorship) one of the 2 most powerful (and rich) nations on the planet?

if America is evidence that CAPITALISM works...
isn't china evidence that socialism ALSO works?

since China is a communist country. No.

It has to torture it's citizens to keep them in place. Murder them to keep them afraid.

The only people practicing "capitalism" are the powerfull and well connected.

This branch of capitalism would/could be called cronyism [-1sp].

I'm sorry..China has not been this sort of place in Decades. There's a great deal of corruption, and the government sometimes does some pretty outrageous things, but it's probably a place far different then you'd imagine.

 

[loosecannon]

Unfettered capitalism is not survival of the fitest its survival of the most dishonest.

Those willing to do anything for money will win.

The decent people end up getting robbed by the not so decent people.

Communism: from each according to his ability to each according to his need

Capitalism: from each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed?

They both can not stand alone without falling prey to mans greed.

Communism is GREAT on PAPER and there is NO good way to make it human greed free.

Capitalism on the other hand is PERFECT for rules to make it human greed adverse.

Why the right in this country doesnt want capitalism greed protected is beyond me.

I was being facetious by posting that adage.

Again, communism is not the opposite of capitalism.

 

[Samson]

You need to watch the History Channel. The common Roman was dirt poor, so poor that those with money walked with armed guards, of heavily armed themselves, in Rome itself.

but

Compared to the people living ruff outside the Empire.. sure, to the Romans and standard civilization, living free in a tent of long house was poor.

No economic system would have made a nation wealthy by our standards in roman times. But their econ system was actually quite good and they were extremely wealthy by world standards.

Link? or just your opinion...........

 

[Two Thumbs]

communism: From each according to his ability to each according to his need

capitalism: From each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed?

that's not even close to the truth.

First off, communism requires a huge murder count to get properly installed. Then it needs more murder to keep it in place.

Russia, while it was still a "thriving" country, had lines for the very basics of life, and frequently people went w/o.

Why?

No matter how hard you worked or how good you were at what you did, you didn't get one pea more than the other guy that sobered up long enough to "stand" in line.

Do you want to rid the world of capitalism?

If so. With what? Again, keeping in mind that communism and socialism are failures.

capitalism is not the opposite of socialism and communism. False paradigm.

answer the fucking question!

 

[Sallow]

Rome was a Class society. Where the powerfull government ran damn near everthing. There was almost no middle class, and most people were poor, so poor that joining the Legion was a huge income increase.

Imagine that. A society that cared more for the people that protected it than it did for the destitute.

capitalism is a tree with many branches. Call it what you want, it's still capitalism.

In it's day Roman citizens were the wealthiest people in existence, same was true of the British empire.

You need to watch the History Channel. The common Roman was dirt poor, so poor that those with money walked with armed guards, of heavily armed themselves, in Rome itself.

but

Compared to the people living ruff outside the Empire.. sure, to the Romans and standard civilization, living free in a tent of long house was poor.

And again..that really depends on what part of the Empire you are talking about. I personally suspect that Rome was far more advanced then we really know. And my visits to many of the countries Rome occupied also lead me to suspect they lived pretty well.

 

[Jeremy]

Exactly..which is why unbridled capitalism is not desirable or functional.

Agreed. But the point Loosebowels was making in the OP was about capitolism in general, not just "unbridled" or "unfettered" capitolism.

That may well be..but as per usual..these threads seldom stay on the OP's topic and may open up some useful discussions on various issues.

Capitalism is a hotly debated topic in this..and many other countries. Where should regulation begin and end; for example. And this is something I am very interested in.

Same here but the idiocy of the op's question, in it's literal form, deserves to be pointed out and laughed at before the deflection starts.

Plus, it is pointless to give a serious response to the original question because trolls like the OP don't care. They only want to "projectile vomit" diarreah from their keyboard.

 

[loosecannon]

Those are not the only two choices. The world is not a choice between state owned wealth and capitalism which you can't even define.

False dichotomy. Fail. Try to keep up. Seriously. IF you have something to contribute I won't want to miss it.

Please identify an economy that does NOT fall in to either one of those 2 categories.
I'll try to stay awake

Still waiting, ass-hat

I already did, try to read the thread.

Mercantilism, barter systems, tribalism, the family unit, social democracy (LIKE THE USA), fuedalism, empire, monarchy, oligarchy, and hundreds and hundreds of hybrids.

The vast majority of econs that ever existed were unique hybrids incorporating elements of many isms.

You realize that you are absolutely stuck in a rut of Marxist thinking right? Because you are. The idea that capitalism is an alternative to socialism and communism is an idea that is purely Marxist.

 

[Samson]

as in he who dies with the most toys wins?

Why not?

If you have a better goal, then I suggest sending me all your toys.

OK, you might be onto something here.

Define success. Define benefit. Tell me what purpose you want an econ system to serve. And for whom.

"He who dies with the most toys wins," IMHO, is an interpretation of my right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

 

[Contumacious]

OK, so everybody knows that capitalism is evil and promotes wealth redistribution from the many toward the rich......duh.

But does capitalism have a positive aspect? Anything at all?

Are there any positives at all to attribute to loosecannon? No.

Fascism and socialism redistribute/confiscate wealth.

In a CAPITALIST system there is no wealth redistribution. So learn the difference between the two systems then re-post.

.

 

[Two Thumbs]

You need to watch the History Channel. The common Roman was dirt poor, so poor that those with money walked with armed guards, of heavily armed themselves, in Rome itself.

but

Compared to the people living ruff outside the Empire.. sure, to the Romans and standard civilization, living free in a tent of long house was poor.

No economic system would have made a nation wealthy by our standards in roman times. But their econ system was actually quite good and they were extremely wealthy by world standards.

They were conquering war mongers. To maintain what they had, they had to expand through violence. Nearly non-stop war. As soon as they came across someone they couldn't beat, the fall began.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

your input please, please include a definition of beneficial in your entry. Thanks.

Sure... just look at all the Nanny-State programs and pork-barrel spending it funds.

I don't think that has much to do with capitalism. But if it does you better show me why.

If you need to have this explained, you're hopeless.

 

[Truthmatters]

Unfettered caplitalism crumbles captialism.

It has every time in history

 

[Two Thumbs]

In it's day Roman citizens were the wealthiest people in existence, same was true of the British empire.

You need to watch the History Channel. The common Roman was dirt poor, so poor that those with money walked with armed guards, of heavily armed themselves, in Rome itself.

but

Compared to the people living ruff outside the Empire.. sure, to the Romans and standard civilization, living free in a tent of long house was poor.

And again..that really depends on what part of the Empire you are talking about. I personally suspect that Rome was far more advanced then we really know. And my visits to many of the countries Rome occupied also lead me to suspect they lived pretty well.

Oh, of course. Anywhere Rome went it killed those that didn't want it there, and in return they built roads that are used to this day, built bath houses - Who doesn't like a hot bath? Put in aquaducts, etc, etc,,,,

But lets not look at Rome with the rose glasses on. These were some of the most blood thierty people ever.

They were conquerers and tyrants. The upper class had all the power, the poor had jack and squat, and plenty of it. They were given just enough to keep them happy, and as long as the coffers were filled by war booty, everthing was fine.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Unfettered caplitalism crumbles captialism.

It has every time in history

Today is 12/20/10
The time is 11:02 am Eastern.

That is the moment I agreed with Truthmatters.