Chilling Economic Report Getting Passed Around By CEOs

[Freemason9]

No, capitalism does not require infinite sustained growth. That's the consumer corporatism we have you're confusing with capitalism. Captialism requires a sound monetary system and money, the private means of production and a free market of competition. There are still going to be down turns and bad investments in true capitalism. Human action isn't perfect.

Of course it requires infinite sustained growth. That is what defines capitalism. Without economic growth, there is no profitability in investments. That's all that drives capitalism.

 

[Freemason9]

This report, once again, coming from inside the financial system we have, is totally off the rocker. It wants to save a Keynsian poonzi monetary scheme by addressing a few of the symptoms of that scheme. Why is it so incredibly difficult for most main stream analysts and economists to understand? Why do they absolutely refuse to listen to the scholars who have been right about the problem all along?

There is no "fixing" this corporatist system. It's finally collapsing under its own weight and the federal reserve, fiat currency and inflationary monetary policy is at the absolute heart of the matter. Until these people wake up and realize the free money party is OVER, we'll continue reading this type of tripe.

Capitalism requires infinite, sustained economic growth. If you can figure out a way to do that and maintain concentrated wealth in the American aristocracy, I would be happy to know how that happens.

The problem is that your viewpoint is centered on the US, Europe, and very small portion of Asia, one must realize the world is now flat due to technology, view potential sustained economic growth through a broader spectrum, as in world.

YES, but sustained economic growth in this context requires a reduced income rate for American workers--i.e., capitalists will take advantage of the "commodity" aspect of labor and drive down wages. (You know where this ends up, right?)

 

[TakeAStepBack]

No, capitalism does not require infinite sustained growth. That's the consumer corporatism we have you're confusing with capitalism. Captialism requires a sound monetary system and money, the private means of production and a free market of competition. There are still going to be down turns and bad investments in true capitalism. Human action isn't perfect.

Of course it requires infinite sustained growth. That is what defines capitalism. Without economic growth, there is no profitability in investments. That's all that drives capitalism.

Capitalism

an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market

Growth is commanded by many variables. Capitalism can survive just fine in relatively flat growth curves. Profitability can be extremely limited, and does not require inifinite sustained growth to remain in existence.

The fact is, capitalism itself creates growth (as one variable). Because it incites innovation, ingenuity, invention, etc...all which lead to better ways of production and living standard which in turn, leads to growth.

I gues i really don't understand what you're arguing here.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Capitalism requires infinite, sustained economic growth. If you can figure out a way to do that and maintain concentrated wealth in the American aristocracy, I would be happy to know how that happens.

The problem is that your viewpoint is centered on the US, Europe, and very small portion of Asia, one must realize the world is now flat due to technology, view potential sustained economic growth through a broader spectrum, as in world.

YES, but sustained economic growth in this context requires a reduced income rate for American workers--i.e., capitalists will take advantage of the "commodity" aspect of labor and drive down wages. (You know where this ends up, right?)

In a free market, wages are dictated by the market. If workers can not afford to live on wages given by a company that is in competition with another, that company either reduces prices, or increases wages. Or losses the workers to the competition and goes out of business.

How does a business manage to keep competition away enough to conduct real wage suppression? Through government favoritism to push out competiton. It's called corporatism.

 

[Freemason9]

TASB:

I'm only pointing out that:

(1) The nature of capitalism encourages anything that produces ROI--including Ponzi schemes though federal fiscal policy. (In the end, who do you think ended up with that $16 trillion that the federal government "overspent?" Nobody seems to consider that.)

(2) Another aspect of the ONLY motivation behind capitalism--profit--is that labor will be underpaid so that more money can end up in the hands of capitalists; ergo, the increase in wealth concentration in the hands of a few since Reagan. Do you think this economic system is sustainable without artificial "stimulus?"

Capitalists have ONE god to answer to--PROFIT. They will do ANYTHING to satisfy their hunger for more profit--because money means control.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

TASB:

I'm only pointing out that:

(1) The nature of capitalism encourages anything that produces ROI--including Ponzi schemes though federal fiscal policy. (In the end, who do you think ended up with that $16 trillion that the federal government "overspent?" Nobody seems to consider that.)

(2) Another aspect of the ONLY motivation behind capitalism--profit--is that labor will be underpaid so that more money can end up in the hands of capitalists; ergo, the increase in wealth concentration in the hands of a few since Reagan. Do you think this economic system is sustainable without artificial "stimulus?"

Capitalists have ONE god to answer to--PROFIT. They will do ANYTHING to satisfy their hunger for more profit--because money means control.

And you're still acting as if our sytem is capitalism. It's not. That's where you seem to be stuck.

Anarcho-capitalism "may" allow for ponzi schemes, but the law in this country is supposed to be designed to protect our rights. Not be used to further corrupt every economic sector in the economy. This all started with banking in 1913.

And wage suppression i already addressed. It's fallacy argument under capitalism.

 

[Staidhup]

Capitalism requires infinite, sustained economic growth. If you can figure out a way to do that and maintain concentrated wealth in the American aristocracy, I would be happy to know how that happens.

The problem is that your viewpoint is centered on the US, Europe, and very small portion of Asia, one must realize the world is now flat due to technology, view potential sustained economic growth through a broader spectrum, as in world.

YES, but sustained economic growth in this context requires a reduced income rate for American workers--i.e., capitalists will take advantage of the "commodity" aspect of labor and drive down wages. (You know where this ends up, right?)

Manufacturing within a technological enhanced production environment requires skill sets, education, programing and a host of other skills lacking of the common laborer. The era of manual lathes is now CNC controlled, what one man on a lathe could produce in a shift can now be a accomplished in a fraction of the time on a computer controlled machine. Capitalists will have too much time, training, and investment in one operator to risk compromising the investment by adopting what you call "commodity aspect of labor". As the standard of living increases in other country's the ability to consume off shore manufactured products increases. This can be readily seen in China. Again you view American workers as the center point of you position, unfortunately the fact that simple parts will be manufactured off shore and imported for assembly and refinement within technologically advanced country's is the reality of the global economic environment. The world is flat, face it, America will remain an innovative powerhouse, but at the same time what will be demanded of the work force is skill oriented, not back bone and sweat. The emphasis on mathematics and science will be and is required, unless our education system is overhauled we will remain mired in the 19th and 20th century mindset. The pardygm shift from sweat to brains occurred in the late 70's and early 80's as witnessed by the collapse of the steel and auto industry, in part, due to technological advancement and inability of industry to adopt to change due to regulatory and prohibitive tax structure.

 

[Freemason9]

The problem is that your viewpoint is centered on the US, Europe, and very small portion of Asia, one must realize the world is now flat due to technology, view potential sustained economic growth through a broader spectrum, as in world.

YES, but sustained economic growth in this context requires a reduced income rate for American workers--i.e., capitalists will take advantage of the "commodity" aspect of labor and drive down wages. (You know where this ends up, right?)

Manufacturing within a technological enhanced production environment requires skill sets, education, programing and a host of other skills lacking of the common laborer. The era of manual lathes is now CNC controlled, what one man on a lathe could produce in a shift can now be a accomplished in a fraction of the time on a computer controlled machine. Capitalists will have too much time, training, and investment in one operator to risk compromising the investment by adopting what you call "commodity aspect of labor". As the standard of living increases in other country's the ability to consume off shore manufactured products increases. This can be readily seen in China. Again you view American workers as the center point of you position, unfortunately the fact that simple parts will be manufactured off shore and imported for assembly and refinement within technologically advanced country's is the reality of the global economic environment. The world is flat, face it, America will remain an innovative powerhouse, but at the same time what will be demanded of the work force is skill oriented, not back bone and sweat. The emphasis on mathematics and science will be and is required, unless our education system is overhauled we will remain mired in the 19th and 20th century mindset. The pardygm shift from sweat to brains occurred in the late 70's and early 80's as witnessed by the collapse of the steel and auto industry, in part, due to technological advancement and inability of industry to adopt to change due to regulatory and prohibitive tax structure.

I view American workers as "the center point" of my position because America is regarded as the closest thing to a purist capitalist ecomomy.

Your argument about how workers can maintain bargaining power is seriously flawed, because--ultimately--all human labor can be replaced with technology. That is happening right now, and it is largely responsible for the historically high (and persistent) unemployment rate.

Because--with capitalism--capitalists will always opt for the lowest-cost means of production, even if it means committing a large portion of your population to endemic unemployment. That is exactly why capitalism fails.

It consumes itself from unfettered and unmitigated greed.

Give 'em enough rope, they say. Another metaphor goes like this:

Greedy persons are like thirsty ones amidst a sea of salt water. They drink the salt water to satisfy their thirst, but the salt water only makes them thirstier . . .

 

[Freemason9]

TASB:

I'm only pointing out that:

(1) The nature of capitalism encourages anything that produces ROI--including Ponzi schemes though federal fiscal policy. (In the end, who do you think ended up with that $16 trillion that the federal government "overspent?" Nobody seems to consider that.)

(2) Another aspect of the ONLY motivation behind capitalism--profit--is that labor will be underpaid so that more money can end up in the hands of capitalists; ergo, the increase in wealth concentration in the hands of a few since Reagan. Do you think this economic system is sustainable without artificial "stimulus?"

Capitalists have ONE god to answer to--PROFIT. They will do ANYTHING to satisfy their hunger for more profit--because money means control.

And you're still acting as if our sytem is capitalism. It's not. That's where you seem to be stuck.

Anarcho-capitalism "may" allow for ponzi schemes, but the law in this country is supposed to be designed to protect our rights. Not be used to further corrupt every economic sector in the economy. This all started with banking in 1913.

And wage suppression i already addressed. It's fallacy argument under capitalism.

And you're acting as if there is some realm that exists that enables a "pure" form of ANYTHING to exist. There is not. And if this capitalist system cannot work in such an "impure" form, then it cannot work at all. Because "purity" will not happen, ever.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

If you say so. Sounds like complete defeatist to me. Nothing works pure, everything is broken. So what's the answer then?

 

[Freemason9]

If you say so. Sounds like complete defeatist to me. Nothing works pure, everything is broken. So what's the answer then?

I don't have an answer. A lot of folks seem to think I am socialist when I tell them that capitalism is a dead end, but that isn't the case. If humans were purely altruistic, educated, compassionate, and logical--yes, socialism would work. But that would require 100% voluntary compliance; without that total acceptance, you need to introduce complusion as a way to assure socialism. And that, by definition, is not socialism.

Shit, you got me, TASB. I don't know the answer, and I think that's been debated for centuries without a good solution.

 

[P@triot]

That "plan" is what is happening in Greece right now.

Oh and you CAN forgive debt, it's called "Debt Jubilee". Look that up.

You CAN commit mureder. You CAN commit rape. Doesn't mean either are a good idea. Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you SHOULD do something.

Why would anyone give the U.S. credit ever again if they operate under the assumption they can just not pay it back if they don't feel like it? That's stupid on a level that is incomprehensible.

 

[RightNorLeft]

YES, but sustained economic growth in this context requires a reduced income rate for American workers--i.e., capitalists will take advantage of the "commodity" aspect of labor and drive down wages. (You know where this ends up, right?)

Manufacturing within a technological enhanced production environment requires skill sets, education, programing and a host of other skills lacking of the common laborer. The era of manual lathes is now CNC controlled, what one man on a lathe could produce in a shift can now be a accomplished in a fraction of the time on a computer controlled machine. Capitalists will have too much time, training, and investment in one operator to risk compromising the investment by adopting what you call "commodity aspect of labor". As the standard of living increases in other country's the ability to consume off shore manufactured products increases. This can be readily seen in China. Again you view American workers as the center point of you position, unfortunately the fact that simple parts will be manufactured off shore and imported for assembly and refinement within technologically advanced country's is the reality of the global economic environment. The world is flat, face it, America will remain an innovative powerhouse, but at the same time what will be demanded of the work force is skill oriented, not back bone and sweat. The emphasis on mathematics and science will be and is required, unless our education system is overhauled we will remain mired in the 19th and 20th century mindset. The pardygm shift from sweat to brains occurred in the late 70's and early 80's as witnessed by the collapse of the steel and auto industry, in part, due to technological advancement and inability of industry to adopt to change due to regulatory and prohibitive tax structure.

I view American workers as "the center point" of my position because America is regarded as the closest thing to a purist capitalist ecomomy.

Your argument about how workers can maintain bargaining power is seriously flawed, because--ultimately--all human labor can be replaced with technology. That is happening right now, and it is largely responsible for the historically high (and persistent) unemployment rate.

Because--with capitalism--capitalists will always opt for the lowest-cost means of production, even if it means committing a large portion of your population to endemic unemployment. That is exactly why capitalism fails.

It consumes itself from unfettered and unmitigated greed.

Give 'em enough rope, they say. Another metaphor goes like this:

Greedy persons are like thirsty ones amidst a sea of salt water. They drink the salt water to satisfy their thirst, but the salt water only makes them thirstier . . .

The historically high unemployment rate has many contributing factor...Outsourcing millions of the decent paying jobs that an american could actually be self sufficient and care for his family and improving the quality of life for communist chinese instead of americans. Outsourcing every job you can to china, Phillipines and India and latin america.
The other factor was big business refusing to hire during the campaign to keep the numbers worse and keep the republican campaign theme going of doom and gloom.

 

[P@triot]

No, capitalism does not require infinite sustained growth. That's the consumer corporatism we have you're confusing with capitalism. Captialism requires a sound monetary system and money, the private means of production and a free market of competition. There are still going to be down turns and bad investments in true capitalism. Human action isn't perfect.

Of course it requires infinite sustained growth. That is what defines capitalism. Without economic growth, there is no profitability in investments. That's all that drives capitalism.

Clearly you have zero idea what Capitalism is...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism
Capitalism is an economic system that is based on private ownership of the means of production and the production of goods or services for profit.

You think Capitalism is strictly "Wall Street"...

 

[Freemason9]

The historically high unemployment rate has many contributing factor...Outsourcing millions of the decent paying jobs that an american could actually be self sufficient and care for his family and improving the quality of life for communist chinese instead of americans. Outsourcing every job you can to china, Phillipines and India and latin america.
The other factor was big business refusing to hire during the campaign to keep the numbers worse and keep the republican campaign theme going of doom and gloom.

I dunno, I don't think so. I don't think there was any sort of orchestrated conspiracy to suppress the economy to prevent Obama's election. It's simply in the interest of capitalists to keep wages down, and high unemployment works in the favor of capitalists--that reduces demand for labor in the midst of high supplies, so wages drop. Capitalists like that!

HOWEVER, what ultimately happens is that labor can no longer afford to purchase the goods and services they produce. When that happens--well, the capitalist structure collapses, because economic circulation comes to a stop. It is very, very difficult to restart such a system without artificial (i.e., government) stimulation.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

If you say so. Sounds like complete defeatist to me. Nothing works pure, everything is broken. So what's the answer then?

I don't have an answer. A lot of folks seem to think I am socialist when I tell them that capitalism is a dead end, but that isn't the case. If humans were purely altruistic, educated, compassionate, and logical--yes, socialism would work. But that would require 100% voluntary compliance; without that total acceptance, you need to introduce complusion as a way to assure socialism. And that, by definition, is not socialism.

Shit, you got me, TASB. I don't know the answer, and I think that's been debated for centuries without a good solution.

We may never get a "pure" version of capitalism, but that system is by far the best and should remain as free as possible from intervention by central planners. Praxeology is not meant, like economics, to be perfect. Humans aren't perfect. But if we can understand this and protect the rights of everyone under a uniformed and equal standard of the law, we find the best possible economic system known to man.

What we have now is none of that. We have central planners constantly fucking with our money supplies, we have a government corrupt that picks favorites in almost every sector of the economy, and they are all above the law. That's why this corporatism has to implode.

So we can hopefully reclaim our human actions as free, while establishing a rule of law that protects the rights of all.

 

[P@triot]

I view American workers as "the center point" of my position because America is regarded as the closest thing to a purist capitalist ecomomy.

America is not even remotely close to a "pure capitalist economy" and has not been for well over 100 years.

Your argument about how workers can maintain bargaining power is seriously flawed, because--ultimately--all human labor can be replaced with technology. That is happening right now, and it is largely responsible for the historically high (and persistent) unemployment rate.

And who makes the technology? This is the same failed belief that Barack Obama has when he blames ATM's for the economy every other week

See, Socialists/Marxists/Communists fail to comprehend that for every Bank Teller replaced by an ATM, there were literally several dozen jobs created. Someone had to design the ATM (higher paying engineer job than a Bank Teller), others had to design an assembly line for it. Others still had to set up that assembly line. Then there were tons of jobs created for the shipping of these units. Then there were tons of jobs created for the installation of these units. And finally, there have been tons of jobs created by the need to repair the units when they malfunction.

Because--with capitalism--capitalists will always opt for the lowest-cost means of production, even if it means committing a large portion of your population to endemic unemployment. That is exactly why capitalism fails.

Actually, Capitalism flourishes because it creates competition. And competition creates better products at lower prices. The problem is, we no longer have Capitalism in America and haven't for well over a 100 years. It's your philosophy of communism that is collapsing America, while you blame it on Capitalism which doesn't even exist.

It consumes itself from unfettered and unmitigated greed.

Give 'em enough rope, they say. Another metaphor goes like this:

Greedy persons are like thirsty ones amidst a sea of salt water. They drink the salt water to satisfy their thirst, but the salt water only makes them thirstier . . .

Since no one can justify communism, all they can do is attempt to vilify capitalism by falsely citing a "greed" that doesn't even exist.

 

[Freemason9]

We may never get a "pure" version of capitalism, but that system is by far the best and should remain as free as possible from intervention by central planners. Praxeology is not meant, like economics, to be perfect. Humans aren't perfect. But if we can understand this and protect the rights of everyone under a uniformed and equal standard of the law, we find the best possible economic system known to man.

What we have now is none of that. We have central planners constantly fucking with our money supplies, we have a government corrupt that picks favorites in almost every sector of the economy, and they are all above the law. That's why this corporatism has to implode.

So we can hopefully reclaim our human actions as free, while establishing a rule of law that protects the rights of all.

John Smith explained quite clearly why unfettered, unregulated capitalism ALWAYS collapses. He stated that capitalism only works in a carefully regulated environment--lest labor be relegated entirely to commodity status.

But I see your point in general. I would personally much prefer a system that rewards productivity well, and rewards ONLY productivity. The American economy is extremely far from that ideal, though. Too many Americans are rewarded only because they have the ability and means to demand it.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Workers are already following companies out of the country. It can't happen fast enough. The US needs to wallow.

It took Obama, Pelosi, and Reid only 2 years to completely devastate the world's premier superpower.

This has been in the making for more than half a century.

Longer than that... look up th 16th & 17th amendments... it was downhill from there.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

We may never get a "pure" version of capitalism, but that system is by far the best and should remain as free as possible from intervention by central planners. Praxeology is not meant, like economics, to be perfect. Humans aren't perfect. But if we can understand this and protect the rights of everyone under a uniformed and equal standard of the law, we find the best possible economic system known to man.

What we have now is none of that. We have central planners constantly fucking with our money supplies, we have a government corrupt that picks favorites in almost every sector of the economy, and they are all above the law. That's why this corporatism has to implode.

So we can hopefully reclaim our human actions as free, while establishing a rule of law that protects the rights of all.

John Smith explained quite clearly why unfettered, unregulated capitalism ALWAYS collapses. He stated that capitalism only works in a carefully regulated environment--lest labor be relegated entirely to commodity status.

But I see your point in general. I would personally much prefer a system that rewards productivity well, and rewards ONLY productivity. The American economy is extremely far from that ideal, though. Too many Americans are rewarded only because they have the ability and means to demand it.

Labor is a commodity. It is not something exploited by capitalists unless there is a lack of rule of law to protect the rights of everyone equally.

John Smith, is mistaken. Big time. Unless you just don't really like freedom.

"the world has gone astray in sum, because it has sought freedoms from the dangers and risks of liberty."