Capitalism exists to oppress the bottom and protect the top - change my mind

[Woodznutz]

Charity and volunteering shouldn’t be the solution for an unbalanced social structure. It should be in place even when we have a balanced social structure. No one is advocating socialism and splitting things evenly.. the issue is ALL the benefit is going to the top. Structurally our economy should produce winning at all levels. Not just the 1%. You guys are so dense that you think any attempt to smooth things out is wrong because you have been conditioned by the elite. We thank you for being on our side but seriously have some pride and advocate for more equality not fall to fear mongering about socialism.

Actually, it is the lower quintile that is hurting. Everyone else seems to be doing alright.

Although the figures for the top 5% don't make sense.

Household Income Quintiles

Income limits and mean income for each quintile of household income, 1967 through 2021.

www.taxpolicycenter.org

 

[basquebromance]

Capitalism is a series of rolling recessions for the working-class and the peasantry.

"The real barrier of capitalist production is capital itself" (Marx, Capital, vol. 3, chapter 15).

 

[basquebromance]

The Wealth of Nations is the best book to be read on the subject of money & commerce, unless one can find Jean-Baptiste Say's Treatise on Political Economy, which has a more lucid manner

This week I am reading 'Keynsianism, Monetarism and the Crisis of the State' by Simon Clark. Amazingly well written!

 

[basquebromance]

The economist comes along with his lovely theory of demand and supply, proves to you that ‘one can never produce too much’, and practice replies with trade crises, which reappear as regularly as the comets

 

[Mashmont]

Capitalism is a series of rolling recessions for the working-class and the peasantry.

"The real barrier of capitalist production is capital itself" (Marx, Capital, vol. 3, chapter 15).

Better than socialism which is constant recession/depression. Except of course for the socialist leaders. They live like royalty.

 

[citygator]

More equality, huh? Why don't you tell us how that can be done without taking from one and giving to another, which we have been doing for generations now.

We have been consolidating wealth in the top dipshit. No one takes from the rich and gives to the poor. That’s bull shit. Only really really simpletons think that.

 

[basquebromance]

Better than socialism which is constant recession/depression.

i agree...Venezuela was the 4th richest country in the world in the 1950's after the US, Switzerland, and New Zealand...look what's happening now after they got the socialism disease

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

We have been consolidating wealth in the top dipshit. No one takes from the rich and gives to the poor. That’s bull shit. Only really really simpletons think that.

Yes, we have been electively doing that for many years, and as I pointed out to you, you're responsible for it as we all are. You will send your money to the top several times this week just like everybody else, and happily do it for the products or services you receive.

Dodge noted, so one more time: How do you propose this equity of yours? Tell us in detail how it's done.

 

[Mashmont]

There's something dreadfully wrong when a total incompetent bimbo like AOC who recites Marxist lines handed to her can be worth $30 million after four years in government 'service'.

 

[citygator]

The millions that are currently unemployed.

You mean the least amount of unemployed ever? Ok boomer.

 

[GWV5903]

Charity and volunteering shouldn’t be the solution for an unbalanced social structure. It should be in place even when we have a balanced social structure. No one is advocating socialism and splitting things evenly.. the issue is ALL the benefit is going to the top. Structurally our economy should produce winning at all levels. Not just the 1%. You guys are so dense that you think any attempt to smooth things out is wrong because you have been conditioned by the elite. We thank you for being on our side but seriously have some pride and advocate for more equality not fall to fear mongering about socialism.

You have a pretty low opinion of your fellow man, the majority of my associates are very passionate about philanthropy and almost all are self made, except for a few. Some have egos about it, but most donate privately. What you are advocating is socialism and I would bet a tidy sum you have no understanding about giving. A large majority of what funds research, charity and giving in this country comes from the 1% you claim to be a part of, strange how you don’t know this, could it be that you have never earned this much or is it that you may have inherited it? Or maybe you pretend to be, thus you really have no clue what the 1% does with their money…

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You have a pretty low opinion of your fellow man, the majority of my associates are very passionate about philanthropy and almost all are self made, except for a few. Some have egos about it, but most donate privately. What you are advocating is socialism and I would bet a tidy sum you have no understanding about giving. A large majority of what funds research, charity and giving in this country comes from the 1% you claim to be a part of, strange how you don’t know this, could it be that you have never earned this much or is it that you may have inherited it? Or maybe you pretend to be, thus you really have no clue what the 1% does with their money…

He's not alone. Damn near every leftist on this service claims to be very well off, a business owner, retired early, financially independent. Me? I'm just one in about three truck drivers here, and dog gone it, we all happen to be righties.

 

[Rigby5]

Better than socialism which is constant recession/depression. Except of course for the socialist leaders. They live like royalty.

When there is unequitable division of profits, that is not really socialism at all, but capitalists like Stalin using populist propaganda in order to prevent being assassinated. Stalin was about the most capitalist leader in all history.

 

[Rigby5]

i agree...Venezuela was the 4th richest country in the world in the 1950's after the US, Switzerland, and New Zealand...look what's happening now after they got the socialism disease

What socialism in Venezuela?
Chavez got wealthy, not everyone else, so he was a pure capitalist.

 

[Rigby5]

Yes, we have been electively doing that for many years, and as I pointed out to you, you're responsible for it as we all are. You will send your money to the top several times this week just like everybody else, and happily do it for the products or services you receive.

Dodge noted, so one more time: How do you propose this equity of yours? Tell us in detail how it's done.

I disagree we do it willingly.
The top that gets all the money, is not really creating anything.
They are just middling and doubling the price of everything.
That is especially true with health care, which is over twice what it should be or is in any other country.

One way to achieve equitable outcome would be if government would pool our taxes in order to provide services at half the price we are currently forced to pay.
Such as FHA making housing ownership affordable to everyone, instead of only wealthy landlords who charge rents higher than mortgage payments should be.
Or public health care, that required no prepayment, and instead you paid after the fact and at less than half the cost of health insurance.

 

[Rigby5]

There's something dreadfully wrong when a total incompetent bimbo like AOC who recites Marxist lines handed to her can be worth $30 million after four years in government 'service'.

{... Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is an American activist, educator, and politician with a net worth of $1.5 million. In 2018, AOC was elected as a member of the U.S Congress. However, she started serving in January 2019. ,,,}

 

[Rigby5]

You mean the least amount of unemployed ever? Ok boomer.

Wrong.
We have very low employment compared to before covid, so we just are not counting the huge number of unemployed because they ran out of benefits and gave up looking. Many are simply homeless now, so can't work.
To be able to work they need electricity for an alarm clock, showers, a stove to cook breakfast, etc.

 

[Rigby5]

You have a pretty low opinion of your fellow man, the majority of my associates are very passionate about philanthropy and almost all are self made, except for a few. Some have egos about it, but most donate privately. What you are advocating is socialism and I would bet a tidy sum you have no understanding about giving. A large majority of what funds research, charity and giving in this country comes from the 1% you claim to be a part of, strange how you don’t know this, could it be that you have never earned this much or is it that you may have inherited it? Or maybe you pretend to be, thus you really have no clue what the 1% does with their money…

Wrong.
If we really had anything but greed on our minds, there would not be any homeless.
Socialism is not about "giving", but about preventing extortion of the poor, by the wealthy.
Money the wealthy spend on "research, charity and giving" in this country is all just a tax dodge and really helps no one at all.
For example, Bill Gates has all sort of medical foundations in Africa, but the reality is he is just reducing his taxes by pretending to help people, while using Africans as test cases for medical products it would be illegal to test in the US.

 

[Rigby5]

He's not alone. Damn near every leftist on this service claims to be very well off, a business owner, retired early, financially independent. Me? I'm just one in about three truck drivers here, and dog gone it, we all happen to be righties.

Driving a truck is about the single most independent job one can have.
You were always well paid because truck drivers have always had support from the socialist Teamster Union.
Those who actually have to work under capitalist supervision, without unions, are hosed, and get paid about a forth what you are paid, for even harder labor efforts.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I disagree we do it willingly.
The top that gets all the money, is not really creating anything.
They are just middling and doubling the price of everything.
That is especially true with health care, which is over twice what it should be or is in any other country.

One way to achieve equitable outcome would be if government would pool our taxes in order to provide services at half the price we are currently forced to pay.
Such as FHA making housing ownership affordable to everyone, instead of only wealthy landlords who charge rents higher than mortgage payments should be.
Or public health care, that required no prepayment, and instead you paid after the fact and at less than half the cost of health insurance.

That's still wealth transference. I've been a landlord for 30 years, and I dare somebody explain to me how I can foresee my expenses for the year before they happen, because I haven't learned that secret yet. What you're telling me is that government should be able to regulate how much profit I'm to make on my investment that I worked these decades to secure. If they did that, it would be a violation of my Equal Protections Under The Law rights because they don't regulate profits for any other investments.

As far as healthcare, I reiterate the great Ronald Regain "Government is not the solution to our problems, government is the problem."

Health insurance companies make about the same profit on healthcare as they do anything else they insure like cars, boats, houses, rental insurance. Insurance companies are not the problem. The problem is government only pays 2/3 of the bill for their patients. Doctors and hospitals need to recoup those losses, and they do so on private and insurance pay patients. In other words cost transference. That's why when you see medical facilities close down, they are usually in low income areas. There are not enough private and insurance pay patients to recoup losses.

Doctors, specialists and surgeons pay an enormous amount for malpractice insurance. Years ago when you went to see your family doctor, they would treat whatever ails you. Today, your family doctor is a referral service. If you have an ear ache, they send you to an ear, nose and throat specialist. If you have vision problems, they send you to an optometrist. If you end up in the ER, they run you through every test imaginable. This is called defensive medicine; doctors just trying to cover their ass in case you sue them.

Our government can stop this with a loser pays all law. Sue anybody you like, but if you lose your case, you are responsible for all the financial costs of the person or entity you tried to sue. So why won't government bring about such a common sense practice? Because many of our reps were lawyers, and they are taking care of their own, or perhaps themselves if they don't get reelected and have to go back to practicing law.

Ronald Reagan was right back in the 70's and 80's, and he's correct today.