The difference between capitalism and socialism in a nutshell

[Skylar]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

Great read... but ironically, I have a shorter version:

Capitalism is the free exchange of goods and services to the mutual profit of both parties.

Capitalism requires that the ownership and decisions be made by private individuals.

The former is self sustaining, as such is the natural order of economics, while the latter is not sustainable at all, with a dismal failure being found at every point where such has been tried, beyond the scope of very small, familial communities...

Capitalism in its pure form doesn't last long. As its unsustainable. It either degenerates into varying degrees of oligarchy as concentrations of private power corrupt the political system, or the people regulate it to prevent such abuses.

Regulated capitalism is the only sustainable variant of capitalism. And it works much better than unregulated capitalism.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The dictionary definitions are irrelevant.

Actually, the meanings of words is pretty relevant to a discussion about the meaning of words.

Only to you because you lack the cognitive faculty to determine whether you are a freeman or a slave.


.

Or to anyone who was interested in say, the meaning of fascism, communism, capitalism, etc.

OH! Let me help.

Fascism, OKA: Progressivism or 'National Socialism' is the means to implement socialism where revolutionary means is likely to get the socialists determined to deploy such, killed.


Where fascism is applied, the failure built into the system will require ever greater government control (Power) to 'solve the problems' (which fascism created) until inevitably, the expansion of government control, permeates the entire culture, with all rights which were once common to the individual having been transferred to the government, as the government relived the individuals of the right sustaining responsibilities, as it acquired more power. At which time, you're a comrade, whose only choice in life is whether you'll drink the vodka closest to you, or get up and get the bottle in the ice-box (assuming you're a block Captain, who gets to own an ice-box).

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Capitalism in its pure form doesn't last long.

ROFLMNAO!

Capitalism is the natural order of economics... and as such, it is inherently sustainable.

Meaning that capitalism has never failed anyone, at any time, anywhere.

Meaning that NO WHERE in the history of humanity has ANYONE ever been injured by their having freely exchanged goods and services to the mutual profit of both parties.


Now what the cited contributor will do, is to run to examples where unprincipled people engaged in capitalism and as a result, those people injured others... through the advancement of Deceit, FRAUDULENTLY advanced as a means to influence the Ignorant.

Now, we know from our studies that there is only one organism on earth that is DEFINED by its three fundamental traits: Deceit, FRAUD and Ignorance.

And that organism is EVIL... which is advanced politically through the Ideological Left.

So, where there exist no Leftist... there is no potential for injury through engaging in Capitalism.

What the Left needs you to believe is that THEY are the only people that can fix the problem THEY CREATE.

Which leads us back to the lesson in how fascism is turned into communism, to which I spoke earlier.

 

[Skylar]

The dictionary definitions are irrelevant.

Actually, the meanings of words is pretty relevant to a discussion about the meaning of words.

Only to you because you lack the cognitive faculty to determine whether you are a freeman or a slave.


.

Or to anyone who was interested in say, the meaning of fascism, communism, capitalism, etc.

OH! Let me help.

Fascism, OKA: Progressivism or 'National Socialism' is the means to implement socialism where revolutionary means is likely to get the socialists determined to deploy such, killed.


Where fascism is applied, the failure built into the system will require ever greater government control (Power) to 'solve the problems' (which fascism created) until inevitably, the expansion of government control, permeates the entire culture, with all rights which were once common to the individual having been transferred to the government, as the government relived the individuals of the right sustaining responsibilities, as it acquired more power. At which time, you're a comrade, whose only choice in life is whether you'll drink the vodka closest to you, or get up and get the bottle in the ice-box (assuming you're a block Captain, who gets to own an ice-box).

But what is fascism? Specifically.

 

[Skylar]

Capitalism in its pure form doesn't last long.

ROFLMNAO!

Capitalism is the natural order of economics... and as such, it is inherently sustainable.

Nope. When the inevitable negative consequences of capitalism rear their ugly heads.....common sense prevails and folks regulate it. Anti-competitive practices are discouraged through regulation. The instability of capitalism is mitigated by social programs and central banking. The severe environmental consequences of capitalism will be met with varying degrees of environmental regulation.

And capitalism is the stronger for it. As you still get all the benefits of efficiency but less of the disadvantages.

It either goes to regulation....or it goes more toward oligarchy as private power is concentrated.

Meaning that NO WHERE in the history of humanity has ANYONE ever been injured by their having freely exchanged goods and services to the mutual profit of both parties.

Third parties are injured all the time. If its beneficial to say, pollute the river downstream....many a capitalist will do it. That it screws over the village downstream isn't their problem. Harm is caused....just not the one causing it.

 

[defcon4]

"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."
I like this line attributed to Margaret Thatcher

 

[Contumacious]

The dictionary definitions are irrelevant.

Actually, the meanings of words is pretty relevant to a discussion about the meaning of words.

Only to you because you lack the cognitive faculty to determine whether you are a freeman or a slave.


.

Or to anyone who was interested in say, the meaning of fascism, communism, capitalism, etc.

What difference does it make to you if the word Capitalism has been bastardized and now Capitalism, fascism and socialism all mean the same thing.

We now have to come up with a new name for that socioeconomic system where the government does NOT control the economy or the social aspect of our lives.

.

The difference is that what you describe as fascism isn't fascism. As for capitalism, I've been specific in my praise and criticism. If you agree or disagree, tell me why.

I am not playing semantics with you any longer.

I support that socio-economic system which is not controlled by government bureaucrats in any way shape or form.


.


.

 

[danielpalos]

The problem with socialism is a sad lack of social morals for free, not running out of the (other) Peoples' money; only bad capitalists can do that with an official Mint at their disposal.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The dictionary definitions are irrelevant.

Actually, the meanings of words is pretty relevant to a discussion about the meaning of words.

Only to you because you lack the cognitive faculty to determine whether you are a freeman or a slave.


.

Or to anyone who was interested in say, the meaning of fascism, communism, capitalism, etc.

OH! Let me help.

Fascism, OKA: Progressivism or 'National Socialism' is the means to implement socialism where revolutionary means is likely to get the socialists determined to deploy such, killed.


Where fascism is applied, the failure built into the system will require ever greater government control (Power) to 'solve the problems' (which fascism created) until inevitably, the expansion of government control, permeates the entire culture, with all rights which were once common to the individual having been transferred to the government, as the government relived the individuals of the right sustaining responsibilities, as it acquired more power. At which time, you're a comrade, whose only choice in life is whether you'll drink the vodka closest to you, or get up and get the bottle in the ice-box (assuming you're a block Captain, who gets to own an ice-box).

But what is fascism? Specifically.

It REALLY helps if ya actually read the posts to which you're resondin'.

To wit:

Fascism, OKA: Progressivism or 'National Socialism' is the means to implement socialism where revolutionary means is likely to get the socialists determined to deploy such, killed.

Does that help or do ya need me to ... oh well, let me just go ahead and post up the formal definition:

fascism: a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts any form of idea, such as racial superiority, deteriorating climatic conditions, or the choice of a woman to murder her own pre-born child, claiming such as a right; ANY deceitful notion that can be fraudulently used to influence the ignorant and to promote the needs of the collective over the rights of the individual; manifested through a strong centralized government, headed by a dictatorial leader who through a series of deceits imparts severe economic and social regimentation, and forcibly suppresses it's opposition, advancing the tenets of socialism, through the slow progression occurring through the steady separation of the culture from its heritage and traditions, by fraudulent influence of the individual to forfeit their right sustaining responsibilities, on the premise that they can transfer such to the government... one right at a time, until the means to exercise all rights are supplanted through unlimited power of government, at which time fascism matures into communism.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Capitalism in its pure form doesn't last long.

ROFLMNAO!

Capitalism is the natural order of economics... and as such, it is inherently sustainable.

Nope. When the inevitable negative consequences of capitalism rear their ugly heads...

LOL! PUHlease... .

Sadly, for your would-be point, there are no negative consequences to freely exchanging goods and services to the mutual profit of both parties.

Reader: do ya see how easy this is?

Defeating a Leftist in debate rests upon two fundamental elements:

1: Find a Leftist.

2: Get them to Speak.

 

[Contumacious]

Capitalism in its pure form doesn't last long.

ROFLMNAO!

Capitalism is the natural order of economics... and as such, it is inherently sustainable.

Nope. When the inevitable negative consequences of capitalism rear their ugly heads...

LOL! PUHlease... .

Sadly, for your would-be point, there are no negative consequences to freely exchanging goods and services to the mutual profit of both parties.

Reader: do ya see how easy this is?

Defeating a Leftist in debate rests upon two fundamental elements:

1: Find a Leftist.

2: Get them to Speak.

Skylar claims that he is a "Capitalist" who believes that the system should be regulated according to the communist manifesto .

He is a Capitalist who demands that his neighbors feed him, clothe him, insure him, pay for his education up to community college and of course , quench his thirst.

His "capitalism" sounds more like communism, but he assures you that it isn't.


.

 

[orogenicman]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

Capitalism cannot, does not, and should not run countries. Governments do. End of story.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Capitalism in its pure form doesn't last long.

ROFLMNAO!

Capitalism is the natural order of economics... and as such, it is inherently sustainable.

Nope. When the inevitable negative consequences of capitalism rear their ugly heads...

LOL! PUHlease... .

Sadly, for your would-be point, there are no negative consequences to freely exchanging goods and services to the mutual profit of both parties.

Reader: do ya see how easy this is?

Defeating a Leftist in debate rests upon two fundamental elements:

1: Find a Leftist.

2: Get them to Speak.

Skylar claims that he is a "Capitalist" who believes that the system should be regulated according to the communist manifesto .

He is a Capitalist who demands that his neighbors feed him, clothe him, insure him, pay for his education up to community college and of course , quench his thirst.

His "capitalism" sounds more like communism, but he assures you that it isn't.


.

Can't find a thing to disagree with, except Skylar is a she. But hey, socialism is the feminist perspective...

Which is to say the natural perspective to stem from severe Daddy issues.

 

[Contumacious]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

Capitalism cannot, does not, and should not run countries. Governments do. End of story.

We do not want Capitalism to "run " countries.

We want Capitalism to produce goods and services in a setting where government bureaucrats have no authority to dictate to them.

If that is not acceptable to you then you and your buddy skylar can fly to Venezuela.


.

 

[orogenicman]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

Capitalism cannot, does not, and should not run countries. Governments do. End of story.

We do not want Capitalism to "run " countries.

We want Capitalism to produce goods and services in a setting where government bureaucrats have no authority to dictate to them.

If that is not acceptable to you then you and your buddy skylar can fly to Venezuela.


.

Well, you are going to have to take your business elsewhere then, because our constitution makes it clear that the Federal government has the responsibility of regulating interstate commerce and commerce with foreign entities. Jeez, you right wingnuts really need to read the friggin law.

Commerce Clause - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

Capitalism cannot, does not, and should not run countries. Governments do. End of story.

Governments should never try to run economies... Just as Government should never try to run Climates.

Imagine the temerity of a government who claims to be capable of running an economy, demanding to run the climate... when the government's 'running' of the economy resulted in prolonged stagnation.

I mean the economy is a square wooden block by comparison to something with infinite moving parts which span over hundreds of billions of square miles. It's non-starter.

But HOW STUPID would a person have to BE to even consider approving of such?

ROFL... that is WELL off the stupid scale, right there.

 

[Contumacious]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

Capitalism cannot, does not, and should not run countries. Governments do. End of story.

We do not want Capitalism to "run " countries.

We want Capitalism to produce goods and services in a setting where government bureaucrats have no authority to dictate to them.

If that is not acceptable to you then you and your buddy skylar can fly to Venezuela.


.

Well, you are going to have to take your business elsewhere then, because our constitution makes it clear that the Federal government has the responsibility of regulating interstate commerce and commerce with foreign entities. Jeez, you right wingnuts really need to read the friggin law.

Commerce Clause - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

To "regulate " business among the states merely means to ensure that commerce proceeds/flows FREELY AMONG the states.

Once the Constitution is restored and enforced that is precisely what will happen.


.

 

[danielpalos]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

Capitalism cannot, does not, and should not run countries. Governments do. End of story.

We do not want Capitalism to "run " countries.

We want Capitalism to produce goods and services in a setting where government bureaucrats have no authority to dictate to them.

If that is not acceptable to you then you and your buddy skylar can fly to Venezuela.


.

Well, you are going to have to take your business elsewhere then, because our constitution makes it clear that the Federal government has the responsibility of regulating interstate commerce and commerce with foreign entities. Jeez, you right wingnuts really need to read the friggin law.

Commerce Clause - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

To "regulate " business among the states merely means to ensure that commerce proceeds/flows FREELY AMONG the states.

Once the Constitution is restored and enforced that is precisely what will happen.


.

No it doesn't; it means, to make regular.

 

[orogenicman]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

Capitalism cannot, does not, and should not run countries. Governments do. End of story.

Governments should never try to run economies... Just as Government should never try to run Climates.

Imagine the temerity of a government who claims to be capable of running an economy, demanding to run the climate... when the government's 'running' of the economy resulted in prolonged stagnation.

I mean the economy is a square wooden block by comparison to something with infinite moving parts which span over hundreds of billions of square miles. It's non-starter.

But HOW STUPID would a person have to BE to even consider approving of such?

ROFL... that is WELL off the stupid scale, right there.

The government has a legal obligation to regulate the economy. Get over it already.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

Capitalism cannot, does not, and should not run countries. Governments do. End of story.

We do not want Capitalism to "run " countries.

We want Capitalism to produce goods and services in a setting where government bureaucrats have no authority to dictate to them.

If that is not acceptable to you then you and your buddy skylar can fly to Venezuela.


.

Well, you are going to have to take your business elsewhere then, because our constitution makes it clear that the Federal government has the responsibility of regulating interstate commerce and commerce with foreign entities. Jeez, you right wingnuts really need to read the friggin law.

Commerce Clause - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Regulation of something, does not equate to 'interfering' with the nature of that thing.

The Constitution does not require the Federal Government to INTERFERE with Commerce. The word "regulate" meant to provide for the effective exercise... .

Take the 'well regulated militia', refers to well equipped and trained, effective... not interfered with through inane, irrational bureaucracy.

It's a subtle distinction for the objective thinker, but those limited to subjective reasoning will struggle with this truth, as they struggle with all truth.