Capitalist Paradigm

[EdwardBaiamonte]

What a sad time when prosperity had shifted from something people had faith in producing for themselves to being something they had to rely on buying, selling, and investing to achieve.

what on earth are you trying to say??

 

[jasonnfree]

The entrepreneur then puts the house on the market, generally at a below market price so that it will sell quickly. The buyer is happy to acquire a house that is in perfect condition, with all or most of the features she was looking for.

Win. Win. Win.

The seller is happy, the contractors are happy, the buyer is happy, and the entrepreneur makes a profit so she is happy.

Nobody was taken advantage of. Nobody lost.

The entrepreneur didn't "do" anything. She didn't clean the house, make any repairs, install the new cabinets, or work on the new landscaping.

This is exactly what has caused capitalism to go wrong. People have gotten used to the idea that they can get a place to live in perfect condition if they can just get the money to pay for it. So practically everyone looks for ways to get money with the least amount of effort possible and most people have abandoned the idea of building a domicile or performing other labor purely for the sake of consuming the fruits of their own labor.

Economic freedom was supposed to be a good system because it was assumed that basically everyone was a skilled laborer who could manage their own work and commerce. Thus, it was assumed that people would basically create their own wealth with their own hands and they would be able to trade products and services with others if and when they needed help with their own efforts and enterprises.

Calvin Coolidge is famed for saying that "the chief business of the American people is business. They are profoundly concerned with producing, buying, selling, investing and prospering in the world." What a sad time when prosperity had shifted from something people had faith in producing for themselves to being something they had to rely on buying, selling, and investing to achieve.

When has capitalism ever worked on it's own without throwing millions into poverty?
The history of our country has been the few at the top getting most of the gains while millions barely survived.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

When has capitalism ever worked on it's own without throwing millions into poverty?
.

too stupid by 1000%. China just switched and instantly eliminated 40% of the worlds poverty. A liberal will be so totally ignorant as to never have heard of China.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The history of our country has been the few at the top getting most of the gains while millions barely survived.

2000% liberal and stupid. We have more cars than drivers and 100 million smart phone toys at $125/month plus state of the art medical care for all. Barelu surviving is what they do in Africa.

see why we have to be 100% positive that a liberal will be stupid? What other conclusion is possible?

 

[jasonnfree]

The history of our country has been the few at the top getting most of the gains while millions barely survived.

2000% liberal and stupid. We have more cars than drivers and 100 million smart phone toys at $125/month plus state of the art medical care for all. Barelu surviving is what they do in Africa.



see why we have to be 100% positive that a liberal will be stupid? What other conclusion is possible?

Cars have been made a necessity thanks to capitalism helping destroy public transportation in this country, yet the rising costs of maintaining a car is difficult with stagnant wages. Are you aware of the battles of labor vs management in the 19th century alone? In the 20th century our own military has been used against it's own citizens protesting hunger. We have food stamps and other safety nets because of the inability of the market to provide enough decent paying jobs, not because people are lazy, although there is always a certain percentage of the lazy with us.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

We have food stamps and other safety nets because of the inability of the market to provide enough decent paying jobs,.

too stupid by 1000%. the market provides 100% of the jobs needed. you have learned this 100 times but as a liberal are too stupid to remember it. For 101st time:


1) Make unions illegal ( 10 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

2) make minimum wage illegal ( 5 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

3) end business taxation; especially tax incentives to off-shore jobs ( 5 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

4) make inflation illegal ( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

5) make Federal debt illegal( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

6) send illegal workers home(8 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

7) Pass Balanced Budget Amendment to Constitution( 3 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

8) cut pay of government workers in half( 4 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

9) Make health insurance competition legal( 6 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

10) end needless business regulations ( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

11) restrict Federal spending to 15% of GNP( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

12) support unlimited free trade( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

13) reduced unemployment compensation, welfare, food stamps, medicaid.( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

14) privatize education, social security ( 4 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

15) end payroll taxes ( 1 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

Since Democrats always oppose wisdom and common sense the only serious option is to make them illegal as the Constitution

 

[bripat9643]

When has capitalism ever worked on it's own without throwing millions into poverty?
.

too stupid by 1000%. China just switched and instantly eliminated 40% of the worlds poverty. A liberal will be so totally ignorant as to never have heard of China.

Poverty is the natural state of man. Capitalism lifted billions out of poverty. Before capitalism, 95% of the world's population lived in poverty so abject that people were perennially on the verge of starvation. You have to be incomprehensibly ignorant or profoundly dishonest to claim that capitalism causes poverty.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

When has capitalism ever worked on it's own without throwing millions into poverty?
.

too stupid by 1000%. China just switched and instantly eliminated 40% of the worlds poverty. A liberal will be so totally ignorant as to never have heard of China.

Poverty is the natural state of man. Capitalism lifted billions out of poverty. Before capitalism, 95% of the world's population lived in poverty so abject that people were perennially on the verge of starvation. You have to be incomprehensibly ignorant or profoundly dishonest to claim that capitalism causes poverty.

And liberal/socialism/communism has slowly starved 150 million to death. It seems no obvious example can overcome the pure ignorance of liberals!

 

[bripat9643]

The entrepreneur then puts the house on the market, generally at a below market price so that it will sell quickly. The buyer is happy to acquire a house that is in perfect condition, with all or most of the features she was looking for.

Win. Win. Win.

The seller is happy, the contractors are happy, the buyer is happy, and the entrepreneur makes a profit so she is happy.

Nobody was taken advantage of. Nobody lost.

The entrepreneur didn't "do" anything. She didn't clean the house, make any repairs, install the new cabinets, or work on the new landscaping.

This is exactly what has caused capitalism to go wrong. People have gotten used to the idea that they can get a place to live in perfect condition if they can just get the money to pay for it. So practically everyone looks for ways to get money with the least amount of effort possible and most people have abandoned the idea of building a domicile or performing other labor purely for the sake of consuming the fruits of their own labor.

Economic freedom was supposed to be a good system because it was assumed that basically everyone was a skilled laborer who could manage their own work and commerce. Thus, it was assumed that people would basically create their own wealth with their own hands and they would be able to trade products and services with others if and when they needed help with their own efforts and enterprises.

Calvin Coolidge is famed for saying that "the chief business of the American people is business. They are profoundly concerned with producing, buying, selling, investing and prospering in the world." What a sad time when prosperity had shifted from something people had faith in producing for themselves to being something they had to rely on buying, selling, and investing to achieve.

When has capitalism ever worked on it's own without throwing millions into poverty?
The history of our country has been the few at the top getting most of the gains while millions barely survived.

It works every time it's tried. Capitalism doesn't throw people into poverty, socialism does.

 

[georgephillip]

Dear, Hoover and FDR were liberals with the same programs. See why we are positive that liberalism is based inpure ignorance

Hoover's domestic policies:
"Despite being at the helm of government when the stock market crashed and the Great Depression set in, Herbert Hoover was not the do-nothing president his detractors claimed. In fact, he entered the presidency with an array of programs and reforms designed to address the most pressing issues of the day. His fault lay mainly in his approach. While he went out of his way to encourage businesses and organizations to refine their operations for the betterment of all, he refused to challenge Congress or assert forceful presidential leadership. Further, his firm belief in American individualism blinded him to the necessity for governmental intervention in even the most dire of circumstances."

FDR's domestic policies:
"Roosevelt passed a flurry of economic legislation during the first hundred days of his administration as part of his New Deal domestic program. Measures like the Conservation Corps (CCC), Works Progress Administration (WPA) and Tennessee Valley Authority brought hundreds of thousands of unemployed men to work on rural local projects and earn a paycheck again. Although these early economic reforms did little to immediately solve the problem of massive unemployment, they carried tremendous momentum and bipartisan support and laid the groundwork for lifting the United States out of the Great Depression by the beginning of WWII.

See why we are sure you are a compulsive liar?

http://us-presidents.findthebest.com/compare/17-25/Herbert-Clark-Hoover-vs-Franklin-D-Roosevelt

 

[georgephillip]

It works every time it's tried. Capitalism doesn't throw people into poverty, socialism does.

Capitalism was responsible for the Great Depression and Recession since its only concern is with short term profit for a few and not the long term survival of the many.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Capitalism was responsible for the Great Depression.

of course thats 100% impossible since the pure beauty of capitalism is thats its self-correcting.

 

[Spare_change]

It works every time it's tried. Capitalism doesn't throw people into poverty, socialism does.

Capitalism was responsible for the Great Depression and Recession since its only concern is with short term profit for a few and not the long term survival of the many.

A fallacious argument, at best ... in order to have lost great sums of money in the Great Depression, isn't it logical to assume that you had to have earned great sums of money first?

Then, of course, you conveniently ignore the disastrous impact of the socialistic policies implemented by Roosevelt in response to the market change. In fact, isn't it true that his policies actually deepened, and lengthened, the Great Depression, just as Obama's have done in the past 6 years?

Study up, man .... you can't just make broad statements and expect them to be accepted unilaterally.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Then, of course, you conveniently ignore the disastrous impact of the socialistic policies implemented by Roosevelt in response to the market change..

the liberals would have us think the Great Depression and world war were great successful times in America. It shows how deeply twisted their thinking is and the nature of cancer we face.

 

[georgephillip]

of course thats 100% impossible since the pure beauty of capitalism is thats its self-correcting.

Then why does it constantly need government's intervention to survive its speculators?
"But there is another less obvious bug in capitalism that I don’t believe regulation can quite handle.

"It is the fundamental flaw that our celebrated system rewards speculators much more than creators.

"A relatively junior hedge-fund manager or a bond trader on Wall Street makes a great deal more money in his career than Charles Kao, who invented the basic physics making optical communication a reality. Dr. Kao, now 73, won the Nobel Prize this year, but his net worth would not compare favorably with that of George Soros."
Capitalism s Fundamental Flaw - Forbes

 

[DGS49]

Typical liberal BS. "The problem is that some people make too much money."

They will never understand.

 

[Spare_change]

of course thats 100% impossible since the pure beauty of capitalism is thats its self-correcting.

Then why does it constantly need government's intervention to survive its speculators?
"But there is another less obvious bug in capitalism that I don’t believe regulation can quite handle.

"It is the fundamental flaw that our celebrated system rewards speculators much more than creators.

"A relatively junior hedge-fund manager or a bond trader on Wall Street makes a great deal more money in his career than Charles Kao, who invented the basic physics making optical communication a reality. Dr. Kao, now 73, won the Nobel Prize this year, but his net worth would not compare favorably with that of George Soros."
Capitalism s Fundamental Flaw - Forbes

So, which one makes more money for their investor - Kao or the hedge-fund manager? Which one had a greater effect on more people?

 

[georgephillip]

Then, of course, you conveniently ignore the disastrous impact of the socialistic policies implemented by Roosevelt in response to the market change

Socialist policies that put millions of Americans back to work after capitalism had destroyed the global economy?
"Between 1935 and 1943, the WPA provided almost eight million jobs.[3] Full employment, which was reached in 1942 and emerged as a long-term national goal around 1944, was not the WPA goal.

"It tried to provide one paid job for all families in which the breadwinner suffered long-term unemployment.[4]

"Robert D. Leighninger asserts that 'The stated goal of public building programs was to end the depression or, at least, alleviate its worst effects. Millions of people needed subsistence incomes. Work relief was preferred over public assistance (the dole) because it maintained self-respect, reinforced the work ethic, and kept skills sharp.'"[
Works Progress Administration - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[georgephillip]

So, which one makes more money for their investor - Kao or the hedge-fund manager? Which one had a greater effect on more people?

I think that answer depends on how you relate "money" and "effect." We are losing some of out best minds to Wall Street speculation, and that will have another profound effect on billions of people around the globe just as it did in 2007.
"And our talented youth gets seduced by this profession of speculation known for its easy and abundantly flowing financial rewards, avoiding those that require much greater intellectual capacity.

"Most importantly, very early in their lives, our talented youth come to realize that fields that may earn them a Nobel Prize–cancer research or multi-core computing–may not make them rich.

"But moving money from here to there will.

And thus, we lose Berkeley Ph.Ds in nuclear physics to hedge funds and MIT computer scientists capable of delivering computing to 6 billion people to derivative manipulation on Wall Street."
Capitalism s Fundamental Flaw - Forbes

 

[georgephillip]

Typical liberal BS. "The problem is that some people make too much money."

They will never understand.

Why can't you grasp the fact billionaires don't earn their wealth? They obtain it by bribing corrupt politicians for favorable tax and trade legislation.