Capitalism is always better, innit?

[EGR one]

Capitalism is always better than Venezuela. Come back to me when you don't have access to toilet paper and have to eat the family pets if not children to survive.

Also, feel free to get the fck out of our nation. This nation is capitalist, read the constitution. There are plenty of shit holes to choose from for you. Instead of wanting to make the country in your miserable sorry ass image, go to a country that already is that way.

Capitalism is not always better. He has given you examples of that. Why do you feel the need to show how uncouth you are ?

No he didn't. He showcased a failed business. That is not indicative of capitalism

The problem with capitalism is that it is better than anything else out there and has done more to lift people out of destitution and poverty than any other system bar none.

Well it sort of is the point. Capitalism,left to itself, is driven purely by greed. It will always screw the people unless the people keep it in check.

Nonsense! Capitalism works like a well built watch. All of the evils that people see is not capitalism, but perversions of capitalism. Greedy people attempting to twist the system in their favor. Often, government is complicit in that twisting.

Capitalism distributes goods and services through billions of individual transactions, and does a damn good job of seeing that just about anything one wants to purchase is available at just about everyplace and at every time.

There isn't a bureaucrat, or group of bureaucrats, that has the capacity to even come close to the free market in the efficient distribution of goods and services.

A well built watch that goes too fast sometimes and at other times too slow? Hmmmmmmmm

Obviously, Your "well built" watch was designed and built by government.

 

[Darkwind]

Show me a socialist country that is better than the US.

And after you have shown it. What's keeping you here?

How many countries are actually, really, truly socialist?

Not many. Cuba might be the only one.

China claims to be Communist but is at best not that Socialist.

The USSR was Socialist to a large degree.

But then again we can find Capitalist countries that suck.

HOWEVER, this thread isn't a Socialist countries v. Capitalist countries thread.

It's that sometimes Capitalism isn't the best thing. That doesn't mean that full bang on Socialism is also the best.

Not many, because it has been the observation that socialism is a catastrophic failure everywhere where it's been tried. Yet you are cheering for it here, because you are a jackass.

America is part socialist. Pretty much everywhere is.
You have medicaid,welfare,schools,libraries and stuff.

Any or that stuff working well?

Well, a capitalist company with poor CEOs or bosses, will be a poor company, won't it.

When the country is run by a bunch of fuckers elected by people who think who they vote for doesn't matter as long as they "win", then you get a shit system.

Wow, sounds like an argument for an election system based upon the majority vote.

 

[dudmuck]

Youre also disappointing.
Private prisons are crony capitalism.
and they're up 100 percent under trump.

The definition of Trump administration: Cronyism is the practice of partiality in awarding jobs and other advantages to friends, family relatives or trusted colleagues,

Dude, it's better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than open it and remove all doubt.

Socialism is central economic planning, government.
Capitalism is distributed economic planning. AKA free markets, where market participants make their own decisions for their own interest. Capitalism is economic freedom. Suppliers, consumers, employers, employees, all market participants make their own choices.

Crony capitalism is when government chooses market winners. That is SOCIALISM, hombre. Think about it. But do a lot of stretching first. You don't want to hurt yourself, you're not used to it.

And prisons and mass transit are GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS. They are not crony capitalism. Government is the only customer. Government is not picking market winners like crony capitalism. It's just government outsourcing it's own job. Geez man.

It's just sad that you don't know crap about economics, not even the most basic concepts

Sigh, i suppose you need to read the actual definition.

Additionally, how private prisons are crony capitalism.

"I'm going to educate you. Look, here's Wikipedia."



Have you ever heard of these things called "dictionaries"?

Definition of SOCIALISM

Oh, hey, wow. Look at that. Kaz was right.

Dictionaries use only an abbreviated definition.
Such topics as this require encyclopedia.

To cover all the implementations and nuances, sure. But you can easily recognize the difference like a dog and a cat.

Socialism: Central / government planning
Capitalism: Distributed, free market economic planning. Consumers, suppliers, employers, employees are all free from government control to make our own best choices

Socialism comes in many forms. Full socialism with government ownership of industry, fascism where there are title head owners of industry but government dictates policy and approves decisions, crony capitalism where companies bribe government to pick market winners. But they are all socialism

largest defense contractors.
Lockheed martin is traded on NYSE as LMT.
Ratheon traded as RTN.
Northrup Grumman traded as NOC.
etc, etc. All privately owned.

On the other hand, governments can run operations for profit motive, rather than for social good, as described here.

 

[kaz]

Dude, it's better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than open it and remove all doubt.

Socialism is central economic planning, government.
Capitalism is distributed economic planning. AKA free markets, where market participants make their own decisions for their own interest. Capitalism is economic freedom. Suppliers, consumers, employers, employees, all market participants make their own choices.

Crony capitalism is when government chooses market winners. That is SOCIALISM, hombre. Think about it. But do a lot of stretching first. You don't want to hurt yourself, you're not used to it.

And prisons and mass transit are GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS. They are not crony capitalism. Government is the only customer. Government is not picking market winners like crony capitalism. It's just government outsourcing it's own job. Geez man.

It's just sad that you don't know crap about economics, not even the most basic concepts

Sigh, i suppose you need to read the actual definition.

Additionally, how private prisons are crony capitalism.

"I'm going to educate you. Look, here's Wikipedia."



Have you ever heard of these things called "dictionaries"?

Definition of SOCIALISM

Oh, hey, wow. Look at that. Kaz was right.

Dictionaries use only an abbreviated definition.
Such topics as this require encyclopedia.

To cover all the implementations and nuances, sure. But you can easily recognize the difference like a dog and a cat.

Socialism: Central / government planning
Capitalism: Distributed, free market economic planning. Consumers, suppliers, employers, employees are all free from government control to make our own best choices

Socialism comes in many forms. Full socialism with government ownership of industry, fascism where there are title head owners of industry but government dictates policy and approves decisions, crony capitalism where companies bribe government to pick market winners. But they are all socialism

largest defense contractors.
Lockheed martin is traded on NYSE as LMT.
Ratheon traded as RTN.
Northrup Grumman traded as NOC.
etc, etc. All privately owned.

On the other hand, governments can run operations for profit motive, rather than for social good, as described here.

Bull shit and bull shit.

You just listed more companies who's only customer is government, which has nothing to do with capitalism.

Then you claimed the post office and government trains are capitalist.

You're proving how inept government is. You're arguing that when government is involved, they suck.

Then you say if government removes competition, they work. Actually, the post office is constantly going bankrupt and government trains would be shut down if they weren't subsidized by taxpayers.

You're making the case how bad socialism is, you haven't addressed anything capitalist at all. You haven't named a single example with free suppliers and free consumers, not one

 

[frigidweirdo]

How many countries are actually, really, truly socialist?

Not many. Cuba might be the only one.

China claims to be Communist but is at best not that Socialist.

The USSR was Socialist to a large degree.

But then again we can find Capitalist countries that suck.

HOWEVER, this thread isn't a Socialist countries v. Capitalist countries thread.

It's that sometimes Capitalism isn't the best thing. That doesn't mean that full bang on Socialism is also the best.

Not many, because it has been the observation that socialism is a catastrophic failure everywhere where it's been tried. Yet you are cheering for it here, because you are a jackass.

America is part socialist. Pretty much everywhere is.
You have medicaid,welfare,schools,libraries and stuff.

Any or that stuff working well?

Well, a capitalist company with poor CEOs or bosses, will be a poor company, won't it.

When the country is run by a bunch of fuckers elected by people who think who they vote for doesn't matter as long as they "win", then you get a shit system.

A capitalist company with poor leaders will not be in business long. Government is forever, good or bad.

Rubbish, governments change all the time. The US has a system of changing govts over a 2 year period.

The UK has changing governments over a 5 year period.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Capitalism is not always better. He has given you examples of that. Why do you feel the need to show how uncouth you are ?

No he didn't. He showcased a failed business. That is not indicative of capitalism

The problem with capitalism is that it is better than anything else out there and has done more to lift people out of destitution and poverty than any other system bar none.

Well it sort of is the point. Capitalism,left to itself, is driven purely by greed. It will always screw the people unless the people keep it in check.

Nonsense! Capitalism works like a well built watch. All of the evils that people see is not capitalism, but perversions of capitalism. Greedy people attempting to twist the system in their favor. Often, government is complicit in that twisting.

Capitalism distributes goods and services through billions of individual transactions, and does a damn good job of seeing that just about anything one wants to purchase is available at just about everyplace and at every time.

There isn't a bureaucrat, or group of bureaucrats, that has the capacity to even come close to the free market in the efficient distribution of goods and services.

A well built watch that goes too fast sometimes and at other times too slow? Hmmmmmmmm

Obviously, Your "well built" watch was designed and built by government.

Not at all. Ever heard of boom and bust? What happened in 2008? What happened in 1929?

 

[Hiryuu]

Capitalism is not always better. He has given you examples of that.

What exactly does the prison do, that makes the person go out and commit another crime?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Capitalism is not always better. He has given you examples of that.

What exactly does the prison do, that makes the person go out and commit another crime?

No rehabilitation, for a start.

The UK has better rates of non-reoffending than the US because it puts more effort into rehab. Private prisons do the opposite of rehab, they make prisoners more likely to reoffend.

 

[Hiryuu]

No rehabilitation, for a start.

The UK has better rates of non-reoffending than the US because it puts more effort into rehab. Private prisons do the opposite of rehab, they make prisoners more likely to reoffend.

Any difference in recidivism rates between private and public prisons is negligible at best, and more closely associated with the individual facilities and the programs each offers. There are both public and private prisons that offer better programs than their counterparts.

Otherwise, the only complaint you could possibly make is that private prisons (on average) hold inmates an average of one to two months longer than public prisons. However, the prisons do not determine sentencing, and if you want to support the idea it is better to release prisoners earlier to save money and put them back on the streets quicker to commit another crime ... Well, you may actually have a point.

 

[frigidweirdo]

No rehabilitation, for a start.

Any difference in recidivism rates between private and public prisons is negligible at best, and more closely associated with the individual facilities and the programs each offers. There are both public and private prisons that offer better programs than their counterparts.

Otherwise, the only complaint you could possibly make is that private prisons (on average) hold inmates an average of one to two months longer than public prisons. However, the prisons do not determine sentencing, and if you want to support the idea it is better to release prisoners earlier to save money and put them back on the streets quicker to commit another crime ... Well, you may actually have a point.

I've struggled to find recidivism rates between states, especially involving Louisiana to compare. Do you have anything that shows this in detail?

I do know that the rates between the UK and US are about 10% different, the UK's rate 10% better than the US's.

 

[Hiryuu]

No rehabilitation, for a start.

Any difference in recidivism rates between private and public prisons is negligible at best, and more closely associated with the individual facilities and the programs each offers. There are both public and private prisons that offer better programs than their counterparts.

Otherwise, the only complaint you could possibly make is that private prisons (on average) hold inmates an average of one to two months longer than public prisons. However, the prisons do not determine sentencing, and if you want to support the idea it is better to release prisoners earlier to save money and put them back on the streets quicker to commit another crime ... Well, you may actually have a point.

I've struggled to find recidivism rates between states, especially involving Louisiana to compare. Do you have anything that shows this in detail?

I do know that the rates between the UK and US are about 10% different, the UK's rate 10% better than the US's.

Study finds private prisons keep inmates longer, without reducing future crime

Furthermore, any suggestion that recidivism is restricted to prison experience, versus the other underlying causes that lead to crime (in any circumstance), would be an attempt to associate blame where it may not be due.

I am not saying that someone could not come to that conclusion if they choose to make that association, just that it is a poor association.

 

[frigidweirdo]

No rehabilitation, for a start.

Any difference in recidivism rates between private and public prisons is negligible at best, and more closely associated with the individual facilities and the programs each offers. There are both public and private prisons that offer better programs than their counterparts.

Otherwise, the only complaint you could possibly make is that private prisons (on average) hold inmates an average of one to two months longer than public prisons. However, the prisons do not determine sentencing, and if you want to support the idea it is better to release prisoners earlier to save money and put them back on the streets quicker to commit another crime ... Well, you may actually have a point.

I've struggled to find recidivism rates between states, especially involving Louisiana to compare. Do you have anything that shows this in detail?

I do know that the rates between the UK and US are about 10% different, the UK's rate 10% better than the US's.

Study finds private prisons keep inmates longer, without reducing future crime

Furthermore, any suggestion that recidivism is restricted to prison experience, versus the other underlying causes that lead to crime (in any circumstance), would be an attempt to associate blame where it may not be due.

I am not saying that someone could not come to that conclusion if they choose to make that association, just that it is a poor association.

This study was only Mississippi, which doesn't tell us the whole story. The UK attitude of pay for performance is an interesting idea, but clearly something has also gone wrong with that in at least one case.

 

[Hiryuu]

This study was only Mississippi, which doesn't tell us the whole story. The UK attitude of pay for performance is an interesting idea, but clearly something has also gone wrong with that in at least one case.

The study covers the subject (there are more available specific to the topic if you choose to search them). But in short, it represents the idea that private prisons do make money holding prisoners sentenced by the state into incarceration, on average, longer than public prisons, and the suggestion that has little effect on recidivism.

It also suggests that facilities (public or private) that offer better programs, have better success rates combating recidivism. That does not mean that the public institutions are any better than the private, just that having programs is better than not having them.

My suggestion is that programs for rehabilitation are good (public or private), and that until we do a better job to address the underlying causes that contribute to crime, recidivism will remain somewhat the same.

 

[frigidweirdo]

This study was only Mississippi, which doesn't tell us the whole story. The UK attitude of pay for performance is an interesting idea, but clearly something has also gone wrong with that in at least one case.

The study covers the subject (there are more available specific to the topic if you choose to search them). But in short, it represents the idea that private prisons do make money holding prisoners sentenced by the state into incarceration, on average, longer than public prisons, and the suggestion that has little effect on recidivism.

It also suggests that facilities (public or private) that offer better programs, have better success rates combating recidivism. That does not mean that the public institutions are any better than the private, just that having programs is better than not having them.

My suggestion is that programs for rehabilitation are good (public or private), and that until we do a better job to address the underlying causes that contribute to crime, recidivism will remain somewhat the same.

Yes, I understand that, I'm just concerned by the limitations of the study.

 

[Hiryuu]

Yes, I understand that, I'm just concerned by the limitations of the study.

Only because it doesn't support your desired conclusion. I know you think what you believe is correct, I am only saying you may not be.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yes, I understand that, I'm just concerned by the limitations of the study.

Only because it doesn't support your desired conclusion. I know you think what you believe is correct, I am only saying you may not be.

Oh piss off. I'm not one of these lame fuckers on this board who couldn't string an argument together.

What I'm looking for is evidence that I could use in FORMULATING AN ARGUMENT and this article does NOT show me enough to be able to do so.

I'm sorry if you think one state in the US can show you all you need to know on a topic.

 

[Hiryuu]

[

Oh piss off. I'm not one of these lame fuckers on this board who couldn't string an argument together.

What I'm looking for is evidence that I could use in FORMULATING AN ARGUMENT and this article does NOT show me enough to be able to do so.

I'm sorry if you think one state in the US can show you all you need to know on a topic.

Point in case, your opinion of yourself is irrelevant to any argument you could make.

You asked for a study, and I provided you with one quickly (addressing the fact there are more), You didn't debate the ideas in the study, you debated the fact the study must be flawed because you didn't like what it studied, and it didn't represent your desired outcome.

You are correct, that you are not, "one of these lame fuckers on this board who couldn't string an argument together". Unfortunately you have mistaken your abilities to make an argument, with the idea it makes your argument worth anything.

 

[kaz]

No he didn't. He showcased a failed business. That is not indicative of capitalism

The problem with capitalism is that it is better than anything else out there and has done more to lift people out of destitution and poverty than any other system bar none.

Well it sort of is the point. Capitalism,left to itself, is driven purely by greed. It will always screw the people unless the people keep it in check.

Nonsense! Capitalism works like a well built watch. All of the evils that people see is not capitalism, but perversions of capitalism. Greedy people attempting to twist the system in their favor. Often, government is complicit in that twisting.

Capitalism distributes goods and services through billions of individual transactions, and does a damn good job of seeing that just about anything one wants to purchase is available at just about everyplace and at every time.

There isn't a bureaucrat, or group of bureaucrats, that has the capacity to even come close to the free market in the efficient distribution of goods and services.

A well built watch that goes too fast sometimes and at other times too slow? Hmmmmmmmm

Obviously, Your "well built" watch was designed and built by government.

Not at all. Ever heard of boom and bust? What happened in 2008? What happened in 1929?

Government policies melted down the economy

 

[OODA_Loop]

I'm sorry if you think one state in the US can show you all you need to know on a topic.

But yet you use one tiny insignificant African country as proof capitalism is a failure.

 

[Claudette]

I'm sorry if you think one state in the US can show you all you need to know on a topic.

But yet you use one tiny insignificant African country as proof capitalism is a failure.

Gotta laugh at the OP. Capitalism works well and I for one love it.

If he doesn't like it he can always move the Venezuela and enjoy socialism at its best. LOL