"Capitalism takes more people out of poverty than charity does" - Bono

[EdwardBaiamonte]

. By having a home paid for totally (unfinished and in need of repair but very much livable) I was free to seek out my own type work,

of course that makes no sense. the money you used to pay off home could have been used to start your own type work decades earlier and you could have earned the money decades earlier. .

No I bought a house that could be paid for in less than ten years and even then the payments were very reasonable as I knew we could not afford to have it all at one time. The house needed repairs and upgrades, it was an older large house. Rod was hurt badly in an industrial accident and he received a settlement. He gave me the option of having a mortgage and a finished house or paying the house off as it was and fixing it as we went. I chose the later and started doing what I knew I could do, painted billboards, signs, etc.. and started contracting repairs for insurance companies customers. From there I also started bidding state contracts again (which I had done previously but was blacklisted for making complaint against actual sexual harassment).

Today that may be impossible because so many towns and cities, counties, etc... have sold themselves and their citizen into bond slavery.

debt is a choice; many feel it improves present consumption so is worth the long term consequences. For example, better to raise your kids in a house with a lawn and mortgage than wait till you can pay cash after the kids are grown.
Corporations often need to expand quickly to capture a new market's profits but cant finance it out of current earning so debt is a great idea to get into business before the business disappears or another company jumps in to capture the profits. Make sense?

 

[Asclepias]

. I dont have time to school you on economics. Have a nice one.

ever see a conservative have to run from a debate? What does that teach you?

That conservatives are willfully ignorant and incapable of processing anything other than what they want to believe. Why do you ask?

 

[RodISHI]

. By having a home paid for totally (unfinished and in need of repair but very much livable) I was free to seek out my own type work,

of course that makes no sense. the money you used to pay off home could have been used to start your own type work decades earlier and you could have earned the money decades earlier. .

No I bought a house that could be paid for in less than ten years and even then the payments were very reasonable as I knew we could not afford to have it all at one time. The house needed repairs and upgrades, it was an older large house. Rod was hurt badly in an industrial accident and he received a settlement. He gave me the option of having a mortgage and a finished house or paying the house off as it was and fixing it as we went. I chose the later and started doing what I knew I could do, painted billboards, signs, etc.. and started contracting repairs for insurance companies customers. From there I also started bidding state contracts again (which I had done previously but was blacklisted for making complaint against actual sexual harassment).

Today that may be impossible because so many towns and cities, counties, etc... have sold themselves and their citizen into bond slavery.

debt is a choice; many feel it improves present consumption so is worth the long term consequences. For example, better to raise your kids in a house with a lawn and mortgage than wait till you can pay cash after the kids are grown.
Corporations often need to expand quickly to capture a new market's profits but cant finance it out of current earning so debt is a great idea to get into business before the business disappears or another company jumps in to capture the profits. Make sense?

No it does not make sense to me as those who are in debt never actually own anything they merely go farther in debt and eventually want someone else to pay their expenses when they bankrupt

 

[Asclepias]

. By having a home paid for totally (unfinished and in need of repair but very much livable) I was free to seek out my own type work,

of course that makes no sense. the money you used to pay off home could have been used to start your own type work decades earlier and you could have earned the money decades earlier. .

No I bought a house that could be paid for in less than ten years and even then the payments were very reasonable as I knew we could not afford to have it all at one time. The house needed repairs and upgrades, it was an older large house. Rod was hurt badly in an industrial accident and he received a settlement. He gave me the option of having a mortgage and a finished house or paying the house off as it was and fixing it as we went. I chose the later and started doing what I knew I could do, painted billboards, signs, etc.. and started contracting repairs for insurance companies customers. From there I also started bidding state contracts again (which I had done previously but was blacklisted for making complaint against actual sexual harassment).

Today that may be impossible because so many towns and cities, counties, etc... have sold themselves and their citizen into bond slavery.

debt is a choice; many feel it improves present consumption so is worth the long term consequences. For example, better to raise your kids in a house with a lawn and mortgage than wait till you can pay cash after the kids are grown.
Corporations often need to expand quickly to capture a new market's profits but cant finance it out of current earning so debt is a great idea to get into business before the business disappears or another company jumps in to capture the profits. Make sense?

You dont seem to understand the difference between good and bad debt. I hope you dont try to give financial advice to anyone else.

 

[Asclepias]

. By having a home paid for totally (unfinished and in need of repair but very much livable) I was free to seek out my own type work,

of course that makes no sense. the money you used to pay off home could have been used to start your own type work decades earlier and you could have earned the money decades earlier. .

No I bought a house that could be paid for in less than ten years and even then the payments were very reasonable as I knew we could not afford to have it all at one time. The house needed repairs and upgrades, it was an older large house. Rod was hurt badly in an industrial accident and he received a settlement. He gave me the option of having a mortgage and a finished house or paying the house off as it was and fixing it as we went. I chose the later and started doing what I knew I could do, painted billboards, signs, etc.. and started contracting repairs for insurance companies customers. From there I also started bidding state contracts again (which I had done previously but was blacklisted for making complaint against actual sexual harassment).

Today that may be impossible because so many towns and cities, counties, etc... have sold themselves and their citizen into bond slavery.

debt is a choice; many feel it improves present consumption so is worth the long term consequences. For example, better to raise your kids in a house with a lawn and mortgage than wait till you can pay cash after the kids are grown.
Corporations often need to expand quickly to capture a new market's profits but cant finance it out of current earning so debt is a great idea to get into business before the business disappears or another company jumps in to capture the profits. Make sense?

No it does not make sense to me as those who are in debt never actually own anything they merely go farther in debt and eventually want someone else to pay their expenses when they bankrupt

Theres this whole concept of time, money, and debt that seems to bewilder Edward.

 

[Asclepias]

. By having a home paid for totally (unfinished and in need of repair but very much livable) I was free to seek out my own type work,

of course that makes no sense. the money you used to pay off home could have been used to start your own type work decades earlier and you could have earned the money decades earlier. .

No I bought a house that could be paid for in less than ten years and even then the payments were very reasonable as I knew we could not afford to have it all at one time. The house needed repairs and upgrades, it was an older large house. Rod was hurt badly in an industrial accident and he received a settlement. He gave me the option of having a mortgage and a finished house or paying the house off as it was and fixing it as we went. I chose the later and started doing what I knew I could do, painted billboards, signs, etc.. and started contracting repairs for insurance companies customers. From there I also started bidding state contracts again (which I had done previously but was blacklisted for making complaint against actual sexual harassment).

Today that may be impossible because so many towns and cities, counties, etc... have sold themselves and their citizen into bond slavery.

debt is a choice; many feel it improves present consumption so is worth the long term consequences. For example, better to raise your kids in a house with a lawn and mortgage than wait till you can pay cash after the kids are grown.
Corporations often need to expand quickly to capture a new market's profits but cant finance it out of current earning so debt is a great idea to get into business before the business disappears or another company jumps in to capture the profits. Make sense?

Debts not a choice. Its a tool. If you dont know what your are doing you can cut your foot off. If you do know what you are doing then you do great things with it. My point is that most americans have bad debt not good debt. Bad debt takes more money out of your pocket. Good debt realizes a profit faster than inflation moves. Capitalism takes advantage of the human need to have status symbols or the "Jones Complex" which puts people into bad debt.

 

[RodISHI]

Edward apparently thinks that the banks should own everything including the peoples money that have worked and saved their pennies and wall street should own the banks.

 

[baileyn45]

Idiots.

"According to the most recent estimates, in 2013, 10.7 percent of the world’s population lived on less than US$1.90 a day, compared to 12.4 percent in 2012. That’s down from 35 percent in 1990."

Do a little research, the driving force behind changing 35% of the world's population living in extreme poverty to 10.7% is capitalism. China adapting market based reforms.

Idiots.

 

[Yarddog]

Tell that to the people in Huston and the hurricane ravaged islands of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.

Capitalism makes your charity much more effective.

 

[Yarddog]

The big lie about capitalism is that everyone benefits. The exact opposite is actually the truth. Capitalism requires that there are haves and have nots. It requires that there are more people than employement to work. its driven by supply but more importantly demand. This demand is generated by those wishing to display their status as haves. The people that really benefit are the ones that make whatever bullshit product you dont really need.

Sure! the Bullshit things we really don't need. Think of how many man hours, or woman hours were saved by the invention of the washing machine and the dishwasher. I invite you to unplug yours and have your wife do all the dishes by hand and wash your clothes on a scrubbing board from here on out Asclepias. Of course she wont have time any more to go out with you and catch the opera or spend some free time reading an interesting book but at least she wont be feeding into the myth of the 'white mans' capitalist philosophy. Keep yourself pure.

Hey so what does that yin and yang symbol you show actually mean? do you ever really contemplate that? there is good and bad in every system.

 

[Tehon]

"Government doesn't stand a chance against capital accumulation in America. So it succumbs to it."

See, here's where you go wrong. Gov't DOES have a chance, in fact it has the power to regulate capitalism as it sees fit. That why you see something called UNIONS and labor laws and suchlike. It doesn't have to succumb to the influence of capital accumulation, but if it does it's due to the weakness and corruption of the politicians who allow themselves to be corrupted. And it is ultimately on the voters to remove those people from office; if we don't then we all bear some responsibility for what happens. And here's the thing that you miss: corruption occurs in EVERY form of economic model and gov't because PEOPLE run them and if left to their own devices will lie, cheat, and steal or otherwise take advantage of everyone else to further their own ends. It is a human failing that is not specific to capitalism.

Let's take a look at my quote that you edited for your own purpose.

What with the pervasive individualist ideology and competing self interests government doesn't stand a chance against capital accumulation in America. So it succumbs to it.

How does your statement below discredit mine? It doesn't.

And here's the thing that you miss: corruption occurs in EVERY form of economic model and gov't because PEOPLE run them and if left to their own devices will lie, cheat, and steal or otherwise take advantage of everyone else to further their own ends. It is a human failing that is not specific to capitalism.

My point is that money is the corrupting influence. Which you recognize. You even go a step further and claim that it is human nature to fall prey to it. Yet you believe that in America it is not the fault of the historically known corrupting influence. You blame the people for succumbing to human nature. Is that rational?

Note that I have never claimed that capitalism set itself apart from other economic models as it relates to the corrupting influence of money. And as a Marxist I believe in abolishing the money form due to its corrupting influence and distorting characteristics.

 

[task0778]

"Government doesn't stand a chance against capital accumulation in America. So it succumbs to it."

See, here's where you go wrong. Gov't DOES have a chance, in fact it has the power to regulate capitalism as it sees fit. That why you see something called UNIONS and labor laws and suchlike. It doesn't have to succumb to the influence of capital accumulation, but if it does it's due to the weakness and corruption of the politicians who allow themselves to be corrupted. And it is ultimately on the voters to remove those people from office; if we don't then we all bear some responsibility for what happens. And here's the thing that you miss: corruption occurs in EVERY form of economic model and gov't because PEOPLE run them and if left to their own devices will lie, cheat, and steal or otherwise take advantage of everyone else to further their own ends. It is a human failing that is not specific to capitalism.

Let's take a look at my quote that you edited for your own purpose.

What with the pervasive individualist ideology and competing self interests government doesn't stand a chance against capital accumulation in America. So it succumbs to it.

How does your statement below discredit mine? It doesn't.

And here's the thing that you miss: corruption occurs in EVERY form of economic model and gov't because PEOPLE run them and if left to their own devices will lie, cheat, and steal or otherwise take advantage of everyone else to further their own ends. It is a human failing that is not specific to capitalism.

My point is that money is the corrupting influence. Which you recognize. You even go a step further and claim that it is human nature to fall prey to it. Yet you believe that in America it is not the fault of the historically known corrupting influence. You blame the people for succumbing to human nature. Is that rational?

Note that I have never claimed that capitalism set itself apart from other economic models as it relates to the corrupting influence of money. And as a Marxist I believe in abolishing the money form due to its corrupting influence and distorting characteristics.

First of all, I didn't change your words, I just cut out the extra words that had no influence or effect whatsoever on your meaning. And I think you know that. What I wrote most certainly DID discredit your earlier post, to maintain as you did that gov't is incapable of an effective and proper regulating of capitalism is nonsense as I showed.

To excuse those who allow themselves to be corrupted as you suggest is what I would call irrational. One does not excuse those who offer the bribes, any more than one excuses a rapist because the female was too attractive. One sure as hell places the responsibility for the failure to honorably act in the performance of their jobs as gov't officials on those who took an oath of office to do just that. And it also sure looks like you are indeed claiming that capitalism sets itself apart as it relates to the corruption of money. See, corruption is NOT about economic models and which one offers the greatest accumulation of wealth; corruption is about the rule of law, i.e., government.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Debts not a choice.

sure it is, people decide or make choice to get a mortgage or credit card or loan
Do you understand?

 

[otto105]

M....

I do not call people having to work 2 or more full-time jobs just to survive independence.......

Then you are lazy and infantile.

I thought the Wicked Witch of the West died years ago....

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

. Capitalism takes advantage of the human need to have status symbols or the "Jones Complex" which puts people into bad debt.

what you are trying to say is that capitalism
affords people the freedom to to do what they want, to make mistakes, and perhaps to learn from their mistakes while libNazism infantilizes people rendering them more and more incompetent. See how easy that was?

 

[basquebromance]

How To Avoid Poverty
1. Finish high school
2. Don't have a child before the age of 20
3. Get married before having children

 

[otto105]

. Capitalism takes advantage of the human need to have status symbols or the "Jones Complex" which puts people into bad debt.

what you are trying to say is that capitalism
affords people the freedom to to do what they want, to make mistakes, and perhaps to learn from their mistakes while libNazism infantilizes people rendering them more and more incompetent. See how easy that was?

Given all of history before America adopted its very successful managed capitalism model starting in about 1933, what can you point to that capitalism gave all people?

Where old people better off before Social Security or after?

 

[rightwinger]

Capitalism keeps people in a state of near poverty

The key is to make them thankful for working their life for a meager standard of living

 

[otto105]

Capitalism keeps people in a state of near poverty

The key is to make them thankful for working their life for a meager standard of living

I have always believed that the classic holiday movie It’s a Wonderful Life” offers an answer. Do you want a “thrifty working class underpaid barely getting by renting housing” or people given an opportunity to make themselves better?

 

[rightwinger]

Capitalism keeps people in a state of near poverty

The key is to make them thankful for working their life for a meager standard of living

I have always believed that the classic holiday movie It’s a Wonderful Life” offers an answer. Do you want a “thrifty working class underpaid barely getting by renting housing” or people given an opportunity to make themselves better?

Good point Mr Potter

What happens when the working class has its avenues of success limited by the filthy rich?