Capitalism Guarantees Rising Inequality

[georgephillip]

How much do those prison industries add to our GDP?
$1 billion? $2 billion? LOL!

"Corrections Corporation of America

66: number of facilities owned and operated by Corrections Corporation of America, the country’s largest private prison company based on number of facilities

91,000: number of beds available in CCA facilities across 20 states and the District of Columbia

$1.7 billion: total revenue recorded by CCA in 2011

$17.4 million: lobbying expenditures in the last 10 years, according to the Center for Responsive Politics
$1.9 million: total political contributions from years 2003 to 2012, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics
$3.7 million: executive compensation for CEO Damon T. Hininger in 2011"

"The Geo Group, Inc., the U.S.’s second largest private detention company

$1.6 billion: total revenue in year 2011, according to its annual report
65: number of domestic correctional facilities owned and operated by Geo Group, Inc.

65,716: number of beds available in Geo Group, Inc.’s domestic correctional facilities

$2.5 million: lobbying expenditures in the last 8 years, according to the Center for Responsive Politics
$2.9 million: total political contributions from years 2003 to 2012, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics
$5.7 million: executive compensation for CEO George C. Zoley in 2011"

Socialize the cost and privatize the profit
What capitalism does best.

By the Numbers: The U.S.?s Growing For-Profit Detention Industry - ProPublica

What capitalism does best in the private detention system is to save government capital expenditures while making a reasonable profit in the process. Don't forget, the private prison systems are not the persons making the decisions as to who is incarcerated and for how long. That is the justice system.

Is there some corruption in the justice system? Yes, there is always some corruption in any government/socialist system; much more so than in most private capitalist systems.

Why don't you supply some evidence that private capitalist systems produce less corruption than government? Start with Wall Street. Then remind yourself how the parasites in the private detention industry, who earn seven figures annually for their "labor", spend millions more lobbying those responsible for deciding who to incarcerate and for how long how much private profit margins will suffer if US incarceration rates return to where they were forty years ago. Socialize the cost and privatize the profit; it's not rocket science.

 

[bripat9643]

In your opinion, was FDR doing the moral thing when he taxed the rich to fund the TVA?

No.

Point out the immorality in the following:

"U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed a bill that created the TVA on May 18, 1933.

"The law gave the federal government a centralized body to control the Tennessee River's potential for hydroelectric power and improve the land and waterways for development of the region.

"An organized and effective malaria control program stemmed from this new authority in the Tennessee River valley.

"Malaria affected 30 percent of the population in the region when the TVA was incorporated in 1933.

"The Public Health Service played a vital role in the research and control operations and by 1947, the disease was essentially eliminated. Mosquito breeding sites were reduced by controlling water levels and insecticide applications."

CDC - Malaria - About Malaria - History

Capitalists are always too busy getting rich to spend money on little things like malaria.

The money to pay for all of that was expropriated from innocent people using guns. Furthermore, the government expropriated private land where the reservoirs the TVA created were located.

 

[bripat9643]

"Corrections Corporation of America

66: number of facilities owned and operated by Corrections Corporation of America, the country’s largest private prison company based on number of facilities

91,000: number of beds available in CCA facilities across 20 states and the District of Columbia

$1.7 billion: total revenue recorded by CCA in 2011

$17.4 million: lobbying expenditures in the last 10 years, according to the Center for Responsive Politics
$1.9 million: total political contributions from years 2003 to 2012, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics
$3.7 million: executive compensation for CEO Damon T. Hininger in 2011"

"The Geo Group, Inc., the U.S.’s second largest private detention company

$1.6 billion: total revenue in year 2011, according to its annual report
65: number of domestic correctional facilities owned and operated by Geo Group, Inc.

65,716: number of beds available in Geo Group, Inc.’s domestic correctional facilities

$2.5 million: lobbying expenditures in the last 8 years, according to the Center for Responsive Politics
$2.9 million: total political contributions from years 2003 to 2012, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics
$5.7 million: executive compensation for CEO George C. Zoley in 2011"

Socialize the cost and privatize the profit
What capitalism does best.

By the Numbers: The U.S.?s Growing For-Profit Detention Industry - ProPublica

What capitalism does best in the private detention system is to save government capital expenditures while making a reasonable profit in the process. Don't forget, the private prison systems are not the persons making the decisions as to who is incarcerated and for how long. That is the justice system.

Is there some corruption in the justice system? Yes, there is always some corruption in any government/socialist system; much more so than in most private capitalist systems.

Why don't you supply some evidence that private capitalist systems produce less corruption than government? Start with Wall Street. Then remind yourself how the parasites in the private detention industry, who earn seven figures annually for their "labor", spend millions more lobbying those responsible for deciding who to incarcerate and for how long how much private profit margins will suffer if US incarceration rates return to where they were forty years ago. Socialize the cost and privatize the profit; it's not rocket science.

First you'll have to list what you call "corruption." I'm not aware of any corruption on Wall Street.

 

[bripat9643]

Point out the immorality in the following:

"U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed a bill that created the TVA on May 18, 1933.

"The law gave the federal government a centralized body to control the Tennessee River's potential for hydroelectric power and improve the land and waterways for development of the region.

"An organized and effective malaria control program stemmed from this new authority in the Tennessee River valley.

"Malaria affected 30 percent of the population in the region when the TVA was incorporated in 1933.

"The Public Health Service played a vital role in the research and control operations and by 1947, the disease was essentially eliminated. Mosquito breeding sites were reduced by controlling water levels and insecticide applications."

CDC - Malaria - About Malaria - History

Capitalists are always too busy getting rich to spend money on little things like malaria.

Actually that is a huge misstatement. At the time Capitalist were not capable of such investment, even if they could make a fortune off the electric power generated. Since then, many capitalists tried to mimic the TVA but the government controlled at the water ways and even if the capitalist paid for part of the construction, the government maintained control. Those ventures produced huge profits while the collateral effects were control of malaria and the enrichment of the general population because of the power generated. Capitalism almost always trumps government activity as a prosperity for all effort.

Putting aside the fact that capitalism doesn't even exist without government, any "success" capitalists produce is directly proportional to the capitalists' ability to inflict all negative externalities upon government;

Wrong, on both counts. Capitalism is not dependent on government for its existence. Furthermore, very few corporations impose any so-called "externalities" on government. Such claims are all based on the bogus theory that private corporations are somehow obligated to pay some arbitrarily specified wage.

it's the same socialize-the-risk-and-privatize-the-profits paradigm that parasites since Adam Smith's time have used to justify gross inequalities in income and wealth.

That's a feature only of the modern fascist welfare state that ignorant turds like you have been pushing on the public for the last 80 years.

 

[bripat9643]

The 400 highest-earning taxpayers in the U.S. reported a record $105 billion in total adjusted gross income in 2006, but they paid just $18 billion in tax, new Internal Revenue Service figures show. That works out to an average federal income tax bite of 17%--the lowest rate paid by the richest 400 during the 15-year period covered by the IRS statistics. The average federal tax bite on the top 400 was 30% in 1995 and 23% in 2002.

the income of the top 400 comes almost entirely from capital gains. The only way to change that is to tax capital gains at the same rate as ordinary income. Of course, in doing so you will reduce the revenue the government receives from taxing these gains. You will also reduce economic growth and lower everyone's standard of living. All to satisfy your craving to slake your envy of those having a better time in life than you.

 

[georgephillip]

Poverty is not against the law. However, stealing is.

"A story is told about an incident that happened during the thirties in New York, on one of the coldest days of the year. The world was in the grip of the Great Depression, and all over the city, the poor were close to starvation.

It happened that the judge was sitting on the bench that day, hearing a complaint against a woman who was charged with stealing a loaf of bread. She pleaded that her daughter was sick, and her grandchildren were starving, because their father had abandoned the family.

"But the shopkeeper, whose loaf had been stolen, refused to drop the charge. He insisted that an example be made of the poor old woman, as a deterrent to others.

"The judge sighed. He was almost reluctant to pass judgment on the woman, yet he had no alternative. 'I'm sorry," he turned to her, "But I can't make any exceptions. The law is the law. I sentence you to a fine of ten dollars, and if you can't pay I must send you to jail for ten days.'

"The woman was heartbroken, but even as he was passing sentence, the judge was reaching into his pocket for the money to pay off the ten-dollar fine. He took off his hat, tossed the ten-dollar bill into it, and then addressed the crowd:

"'I am also going to impose a fine of fifty cents on every person here present in this courtroom, for living in a town where a person has to steal bread to save her grandchildren from starvation. Please collect the fines, Mr. Bailiff, in this hat, and pass them across to the defendant.'"

"And so the accused went home that day from the courtroom with forty-seven dollars and fifty cents — fifty cents of which has been paid by the shame-faced grocery store keeper who had brought the charge against her. And as she left the courtroom, the gathering of petty criminals and New York policemen gave the judge a standing ovation."

Spirituality & Practice: Spiritual Quotations: Justice, Forgiveness, Stealing, Poverty, Judgment by James N. McCutcheon

Nice anecdote, I am sure their are millions of similar stories all over the world. But none of it is relevant today.

You should get our more:

"It was a county formed 19 years before the Civil War.
But in the towns lying between borders in Owsley, in the coal fields of eastern Kentucky, a portrait of Americans shows a community that appears frozen in time, where many still live without water or electricity.

"According to the 2010 U.S. Census, the Appalachian county has the lowest median household income in the states - a staggering 41.5 per cent of residents falling below the poverty line.

Pictured: The modern day poverty of Kentucky where people live with no running water or electricity | Mail Online

Rising rates of inequality coupled with austerity responses to the failures of the private sector guarantee the relevance of "anecdotes" from the last time capitalism nearly destroyed itself.

 

[georgephillip]

You were talking about prisoners manufacturing goods.
Because if there is one thing we can't do without, it's low skilled manufacturing labor.
So let's try again.
How much do those prison industries add to our GDP?

Socialize the cost and privatize the profit

It's true, criminals socialize the cost of their crimes. Just look what they've done to many poor minority areas around the country.

I was taking about parasite CEOs earning $3.7 and $5.7 million a year from US taxpayers to house "criminals" whose biggest crime was being too poor to afford a lawyer. You were talking out of your ass, as usual.

Maybe he was, but not nearly to the extent you do on a regular basis.

It's true that Wall Street criminals crashed the global economy in 2008, bankrupting millions of productive Americans of all colors. Just look at what happened to them.

Not true! It was the crash of the housing industry, which started in 2009 when real estate prices started and continued to rise above the value of that real estate. That Wall street tried to mitigate their losses is understandable. That Clinton and Bush were inobservant at the upcoming problem from housing inflation is their fault. Get your stories straight.http://www.jparsons.net/housingbubble/united_states.png

Your tale needs five years of backstory.
Start with everything you know about control accounting fraud in 2004

"from Terry Frieden
CNN Washington Bureau
Friday, September 17, 2004 Posted: 5:44 PM EDT (2144 GMT)

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Rampant fraud in the mortgage industry has increased so sharply that the FBI warned Friday of an 'epidemic' of financial crimes which, if not curtailed, could become 'the next S&L crisis.'

"Assistant FBI Director Chris Swecker said the booming mortgage market, fueled by low interest rates and soaring home values, has attracted unscrupulous professionals and criminal groups whose fraudulent activities could cause multibillion-dollar losses to financial ..."

CNN.com - FBI warns of mortgage fraud 'epidemic' - Sep 17, 2004

Have you ever noticed that ignorance and arrogance is deadly?

 

[gnarlylove]

Capitalism is defined by the idea that everyone pursuing their own interests leads to the common good of all.

Society exists not merely for living but for living well in communities. Capitalism says it too aims for living well. But upon learning of the facts, not many Americans live well (let alone nations in which imperialist capitalist policy has destroyed the chance for decent survival). Nearly 60% of Americans will live on or below the poverty line for over a year. The average household debt is between 125%-150% of household income.

Interest payments on past debt reduce the income that households have to spend and maintain a certain standard of living. An income shock (such as a bout of unemployment, the expenses of having a new baby, or a health problem) can lead families to resort to borrowing, which reduces household living standards in the future. Although future income may rise, the economic circumstances of the family will not improve if most of this extra income must pay interest in order to maintain past debt. This problem is ignored in
standard measures of income equality, which take no account of the income lost in order to make interest payments on past consumption debt. They measure differences in personal or disposable income across a large population, but they do not measure differences in living standards, which is what inequality measures are supposed to do.

A contemporary example illustrates this problem. The cost of a college education has
increased by more than any other household spending category over the past two decades
(Newfield 2008). This increase is taken into account in government measures of inflation; so higher college costs lead to lower real household living standards in reported government data.

http://www.lisdatacenter.org/wps/liswps/589.pdf

For those arguing capitalism makes everyone better off, they must demonstrate this in relative and real terms. People are better off in many cases, but those are relative terms (compared to say 1600s). But in real terms, capitalism has ceased providing the good life for the average citizen. But if capitalism has ceased working for the average person, that means it isn't working because society cannot neglect it's most common constituent.

Indeed, American's have picked up on this and have reconfigured "The American Dream."

The 2011 MetLife Study of the American Dream reflects an uncertain era where
Americans no longer seek to become wealthy; rather, they want to achieve a sense of
financial security that allows them to live a sustainable lifestyle.
This has led to new thinking about what the American Dream means, and to a portrayal
of Americans as resilient and adaptive. And while achieving the Dream remains
important — particularly to younger Americans — how it is achieved has changed.

emerging trends that show Americans are less concerned with material issues, and that life’s traditional markers of success — getting married, buying a house, having a family, building wealth — do not matter as much today. Rather, achieving a sense of personal fulfillment is more important toward realizing the American Dream than accumulating material wealth.
This is a significant shift, as it reflects that Americans value close relationships with
family and friends as more important than money and that being content with what
they have and balancing work/life issues are more important than “living large.”
Today, material positions matter less and personal relationships matter more.
And for younger generations, “personal achievement” is the new “opportunity for
all.” Though they show a greater tendency toward this vision of the Dream than their
older counterparts, across generations, less than half of Americans say they need any
of the traditional Dream markers to achieve it.

https://www.metlife.com/assets/cao/gbms/studies/metlife-2011-american-dream-report.pdf

Why have Americans ceased believing in the traditional values of success and wealth? Because it genuinely is not available and thus in order to remain sane, one adapts to personal achievement, including the choice to live out of your car because it's the only way you can attain personal dreams.

Living in Your Car: No Longer Just for Bums - Businessweek

Capitalism generates wealth. No one denies that. Who makes the decisions about that wealth are not those who create it, namely the workers. The workers create the surplus for the capitalists and the capitalists decide to give themselves astronomical pay. This is created an obvious division between Americans and is being played out. As the inequality widens, so does the stress on capitalism.

Capitalism is not the end of history and it will be abolished. The matter is when, not if. The common good has been left in the dust and the world is waking up to it. Those arguing for capitalism for not perceptive enough to see this.

Why capitalism is a failure (because it neglects the common good, the average person):

 

[kaz]

Your lack of understanding is YOUR problem. Not mine. I stand by every word I asserted. Maybe you should visit the slums of Calcutta, India, or Dakka, Bangledesh and see for yourself. No one can explain to you what squalor really is, you have to experience it, and there is no example in the US which is equivalent, even in our worst slums.

I see your point, my political views should be driven my the thought that I could be living in a slum in Calcutta. Check and mate, my friend. Wow, you are good.

 

[kaz]

Again, I don't understand what you're looking for. Do people have the "right" to have those things provided for them by other? No. Do they have the "right" to seek those things out without being artificially impeded by others? Yes. I don't get your implication.

You get it, I just don't think you understand its implication.

The corporate world has enclosed and restricted access to much of the earths resources, granting them exclusive freedoms to extract resources at virtually no cost (subsidies and tax incentives reduce actual costs) and selling them to the people for unsightly amounts of gain--the fact that people survive or are satisfied is secondary to the profit motive. Now why is it ok for much of the earth to be restricted to being exploited for profit instead of the common good of all, the freedom of all?

If you are serious about freedom, you must fight for all people, as I'm sure you agree. Favoritism (giving wild freedoms) towards wealth is cowardice and shallow; defending the freedom of those trampled underfoot is virtue and courage. I'm not saying you are favoring any group, and frankly I think you know not to. Again, if you're serious about freedom, freedom is not to be granted according to what group you belong to but should be a universal matter.

Your post is unadulterated left wing Bullshit. Most of us do fight for all of the people. Only I don't think you do, as you have stated helping the least of our people doesn't count unless he is a US citizen. As was said, "How so ever you treat the LEAST of my people, that you have done to me." Stated by the ultimate humanist of all times.

He's an authoritarian leftist anarchist, no wonder he's so confused...

 

[georgephillip]

Maybe he was, but not nearly to the extent you do on a regular basis. Not true! It was the crash of the housing industry, which started in 2009 when real estate prices started and continued to rise above the value of that real estate. That Wall street tried to mitigate their losses is understandable. That Clinton and Bush were inobservant at the upcoming problem from housing inflation is their fault. Get your stories straight.

Wall Street ran a derivatives based Ponzi scheme that destroyed the world economy.

It was NOT the housing market.

Until the housing market crash, there was no big problem in Wall Street. That the investment bankers tried to prevent loses to them was the effect, not the cause. Learn a little about economics.

Take your own advice; Bill Black can help:

"To understand the crisis we have to focus on how the mortgage fraud epidemic produced widespread accounting fraud..."

"The first document everyone should read is by S&P, the largest of the rating agencies.

"The context of the document is that a professional credit rater has told his superiors that he needs to examine the mortgage loan files to evaluate the risk of a complex financial derivative whose risk and market value depend on the credit quality of the nonprime mortgages 'underlying' the derivative.

"A senior manager sends a blistering reply with this forceful punctuation:

"Any request for loan level tapes is TOTALLY UNREASONABLE!!! Most investors don't have it and can't provide it. [W]e MUST produce a credit estimate. It is your responsibility to provide those credit estimates and your responsibility to devise some method for doing so.

"Fraud is the principal credit risk of nonprime mortgage lending.

"It is impossible to detect fraud without reviewing a sample of the loan files.

"Paper loan files are bulky, so they are photographed and the images are stored on computer tapes.

"Unfortunately, 'most investors' (the large commercial and investment banks that purchased nonprime loans and pooled them to create financial derivatives) did not review the loan files before purchasing nonprime loans and did not even require the lender to provide loan tapes."

William K. Black: The Two Documents Everyone Should Read to Better Understand the Crisis

Wall Street didn't care if the mortgages went bad or not.
They made their money from fees.
Clinton, Bush, Obama didn't/don't care either.
Socialize cost, privatize profit.
How capitalism conquered the world.

 

[dnsmith35]

Point out the immorality in the following:

"U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed a bill that created the TVA on May 18, 1933.

"The law gave the federal government a centralized body to control the Tennessee River's potential for hydroelectric power and improve the land and waterways for development of the region.

"An organized and effective malaria control program stemmed from this new authority in the Tennessee River valley.

"Malaria affected 30 percent of the population in the region when the TVA was incorporated in 1933.

"The Public Health Service played a vital role in the research and control operations and by 1947, the disease was essentially eliminated. Mosquito breeding sites were reduced by controlling water levels and insecticide applications."

CDC - Malaria - About Malaria - History

Capitalists are always too busy getting rich to spend money on little things like malaria.

Actually that is a huge misstatement. At the time Capitalist were not capable of such investment, even if they could make a fortune off the electric power generated. Since then, many capitalists tried to mimic the TVA but the government controlled at the water ways and even if the capitalist paid for part of the construction, the government maintained control. Those ventures produced huge profits while the collateral effects were control of malaria and the enrichment of the general population because of the power generated. Capitalism almost always trumps government activity as a prosperity for all effort.

Putting aside the fact that capitalism doesn't even exist without government, any "success" capitalists produce is directly proportional to the capitalists' ability to inflict all negative externalities upon government; it's the same socialize-the-risk-and-privatize-the-profits paradigm that parasites since Adam Smith's time have used to justify gross inequalities in income and wealth.

You may put aside anything you wish, but of all the modern economic systems there are or have been, Capitalism is the ONLY ONE WHICH DOES NOT REQUIRE GOVERNMENT TO EXIST. What our capitalism needs is regulation, not control; to be in any country which has property rights as a standard option. We have and I approve of the government regulating Capitalism for consumer protection. Your statement, "it's the same socialize-the-risk-and-privatize-the-profits paradigm that parasites since Adam Smith's time have used to justify gross inequalities in income and wealth," is totally warped and nothing but Bullshit. ONLY Capitalism generates sufficient prosperity to allow the government to give aid to the needy. Socialism and Communism do nothing but create more poverty. You have again inserted your head into your excremental orifice.

You are totally incapable of giving us a single example of a successful socialist or communist system, and the only countries who use LVT successfully are the few who collect the LVT, and the occupier of the land has exclusive rights to occupy, and to bequeath his rights as he sees fit. Nothing like the Georgist system some ignorant people tout.

 

[dnsmith35]

Unregulated capitalism is the Mafia.

We don't have unregulated Capitalism. As it is, even with the regulation, capitalism is the most efficient economic system the world has ever known; especially when compared to Socialism, Communism or Georgism, all of which have failed miserably after creating many times more poverty than there was before they were initiated, and losing the only high achievers they had. Whine about capitalism if you wish, but your whines go better with stinky cheese, like limburger.

The idea that capitalism is the only economic system ever to have succeeded in reducing poverty is too absurd to bother to refute.

Don't try to refute it, because you can't. And you can give no example in which any other system has done as much for the least of its citizens. There is no example of a successful socialist or communist system, and the only countries who use LVT successfully are the few who collect the LVT, and the occupier of the land has exclusive rights to occupy, and to bequeath his rights as he sees fit. Nothing like the Georgist system some ignorant people tout.

It isn't the alleged efficiency of capitalism that gives capitalism its awesome wealth creating power. Capitalism, with its inherent boom-and-bust cycles is considerably less efficient that feudalism, not to mention socialism.

Every economic system has boom and bust cycles. The difference? Socialism and Communism keep the majority of their citizens in the "bust" mode all the time.

But capitalism is a world beater at wealth creation, no doubt about that. The core of capitalism's magic is fractional reserve banking, the system that lets a bank lend out ten or even thirty dollars for every dollar it has in the vault. All but one of those dollars are not real, they are a curious kind of counterfeit that exists only on the books. Gambling with counterfeit money can make you rich pretty quick, if you are lucky.

What makes people rich is: Inventiveness, motivation, ambition, personal responsibility, and a strong work effort coupled with knowledge (usually associated with education or training.

If you are not lucky, the bubble inflated by purely notional dollars lent at interest pops and the system crashes. Modern capitalism has invented a safety net of sorts in which the losses of the private sector are assumed by the government and loaded on the backs of future generations of taxpayers. Add to this cruel gimmick a sizable bankroll of extractable natural resources and capitalism can create a lot of wealth fast, at least when it is on a winning streak. The problem is the social effect of where all that new wealth goes and where it doesn't go.

That is the fault of Government which, as Obama and other left wing administrations chooses to bail out unsuccessful businesses under the guise of "government need."

The same chauvinists who proclaim capitalism the only good economic system tend to the view that the USA is the only good nation and that Christianity is the only true religion. Wrong on all counts.

You are correct when you say we are not the only good nation, or that Christianity is not the only true religion. Even Atheism is a religion, and many follow that premise. You really should not try to pigeon hole others when you have not got the slightest idea what they believe and what makes them tick.

I shall reiterate, you are free to give me an example which is a successful true socialist experiment. While doing so, remember what socialism really is (government ownership or control of production, price, and distribution). Most, if not all, countries referred to as "socialist" are not really socialist. They are basically capitalism with more social programs (which do not make socialism) than other capitalist countries. To last even a modicum of time, socialist/communist/Marxist systems MUST HAVE AN AUTHORATIVE/DICTATORIAL GOVERNMENT, to keep the high achievers in check such that (at least for a short time) performing to ability to support the "to the needy according to their needs."

It is an absolute fact, based on the success and/or failure, that Capitalism is the only system which creates sufficient wealth and prosperity to up grade the condition of the have nots instead of lowering the condition OF ALL THEIR CITIZENS, leaving only the autocracy to gain wealth of any nature.

If you won't accept this, show me some proof any other system has lasted more than 2 or 3 generations.

Even Great Britain, which experimented with some (not full) Socialism, was unable to keep up their prosperity under that system.

 

[georgephillip]

Maybe he was, but not nearly to the extent you do on a regular basis. Not true! It was the crash of the housing industry, which started in 2009 when real estate prices started and continued to rise above the value of that real estate. That Wall street tried to mitigate their losses is understandable. That Clinton and Bush were inobservant at the upcoming problem from housing inflation is their fault. Get your stories straight.

Wall Street ran a derivatives based Ponzi scheme that destroyed the world economy.

It was NOT the housing market.

Wall Street ran a derivatives based Ponzi scheme that destroyed the world economy.

How did derivatives do that? Perhaps you can explain their mystical powers?

Ask your pals at Forbes.

"The world’s scariest story: trading in derivatives

"Bad as these scandals are and vast as the money involved in them is by any normal standard, they are mere blips on the screen, compared to the risk that is still staring us in the face: the lack of transparency in derivative trading that now totals in notional amount more than $700 trillion.

"That is more than ten times the size of the entire world economy.

"Yet incredibly, we have little information about it or its implications for the financial strength of any of the big banks."

Big Banks and Derivatives: Why Another Financial Crisis Is Inevitable - Forbes

 

[1776]

Shitstain....do you fight with your losertarian boyfriends on this thread?

Such a bi-polar life you live, but you get to make up lies about the US in every thread.

Wall Street ran a derivatives based Ponzi scheme that destroyed the world economy.

It was NOT the housing market.

Wall Street ran a derivatives based Ponzi scheme that destroyed the world economy.

How did derivatives do that? Perhaps you can explain their mystical powers?

Ask your pals at Forbes.

"The world’s scariest story: trading in derivatives

"Bad as these scandals are and vast as the money involved in them is by any normal standard, they are mere blips on the screen, compared to the risk that is still staring us in the face: the lack of transparency in derivative trading that now totals in notional amount more than $700 trillion.

"That is more than ten times the size of the entire world economy.

"Yet incredibly, we have little information about it or its implications for the financial strength of any of the big banks."

Big Banks and Derivatives: Why Another Financial Crisis Is Inevitable - Forbes

 

[Bush92]

Capitalism is the great equalizer and provides the greatest opportunity for individuals to rise-up and have a good life. "Socialism works fine until you run out of other peoples money"-Iron Lady Maggie

 

[dnsmith35]

We don't have unregulated Capitalism. As it is, even with the regulation, capitalism is the most efficient economic system the world has ever known; especially when compared to Socialism, Communism or Georgism, all of which have failed miserably after creating many times more poverty than there was before they were initiated, and losing the only high achievers they had. Whine about capitalism if you wish, but your whines go better with stinky cheese, like limburger.

The idea that capitalism is the only economic system ever to have succeeded in reducing poverty is too absurd to bother to refute.

It isn't the alleged efficiency of capitalism that gives capitalism its awesome wealth creating power. Capitalism, with its inherent boom-and-bust cycles is considerably less efficient that feudalism, not to mention socialism.

But capitalism is a world beater at wealth creation, no doubt about that. The core of capitalism's magic is fractional reserve banking, the system that lets a bank lend out ten or even thirty dollars for every dollar it has in the vault. All but one of those dollars are not real, they are a curious kind of counterfeit that exists only on the books. Gambling with counterfeit money can make you rich pretty quick, if you are lucky.

If you are not lucky, the bubble inflated by purely notional dollars lent at interest pops and the system crashes. Modern capitalism has invented a safety net of sorts in which the losses of the private sector are assumed by the government and loaded on the backs of future generations of taxpayers. Add to this cruel gimmick a sizable bankroll of extractable natural resources and capitalism can create a lot of wealth fast, at least when it is on a winning streak. The problem is the social effect of where all that new wealth goes and where it doesn't go.

The same chauvinists who proclaim capitalism the only good economic system tend to the view that the USA is the only good nation and that Christianity is the only true religion. Wrong on all counts.

The core of capitalism's magic is fractional reserve banking, the system that lets a bank lend out ten or even thirty dollars for every dollar it has in the vault.

Can you expand on this claim?

Say a new bank opens and I make the only deposit of 100 $1 bills.
How much can the bank lend, assuming a 10% reserve requirement?

He can't, because it is not true.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wall Street ran a derivatives based Ponzi scheme that destroyed the world economy.

It was NOT the housing market.

Wall Street ran a derivatives based Ponzi scheme that destroyed the world economy.

How did derivatives do that? Perhaps you can explain their mystical powers?

Ask your pals at Forbes.

"The world’s scariest story: trading in derivatives

"Bad as these scandals are and vast as the money involved in them is by any normal standard, they are mere blips on the screen, compared to the risk that is still staring us in the face: the lack of transparency in derivative trading that now totals in notional amount more than $700 trillion.

"That is more than ten times the size of the entire world economy.

"Yet incredibly, we have little information about it or its implications for the financial strength of any of the big banks."

Big Banks and Derivatives: Why Another Financial Crisis Is Inevitable - Forbes

If Chris can't back up his claim, maybe you can help him?

 

[dnsmith35]

We don't have unregulated Capitalism. As it is, even with the regulation, capitalism is the most efficient economic system the world has ever known; especially when compared to Socialism, Communism or Georgism, all of which have failed miserably after creating many times more poverty than there was before they were initiated, and losing the only high achievers they had. Whine about capitalism if you wish, but your whines go better with stinky cheese, like limburger.

The idea that capitalism is the only economic system ever to have succeeded in reducing poverty is too absurd to bother to refute.

That's funny, because you utterly failed to refute it.



ROFL! How is this supposed "efficiency" demonstrated? The fact is that under both feudalism and socialism populations have experienced mass starvation. No one has ever starved in a capitalist country because it was unable to produce a sufficient amount of food. No one in the United States has ever starved unless it's do to a freak accident, like being trapped by snow in Donner pass.



If that's the case, then it's far more efficient than socialism or feudalism. What else is an economic system supposed to other than produce wealth?



I agree with you that our system of fiat money is no better than counterfeiting. However, that doesn't explain how capitalism produces wealth. How do worthless scraps of paper cause cell phones and automobiles to come into existence?



What the hell are "notional dollars?" I've never heard of any such thing.



That isn't capitalism. That's the fascist welfare state that morons like you defend and support. No one who supports in capitalism believes the government should bail out private corporations. Only welfare state bootlickers endorse such a policy.

Add to this cruel gimmick a sizable bankroll of extractable natural resources and capitalism can create a lot of wealth fast, at least when it is on a winning streak. The problem is the social effect of where all that new wealth goes and where it doesn't go.

The former Soviet Union had far more resources than the United States. That didn't seem to produce much wealth for them. On the other hand, Japan has almost no natural resources, and that country is wealthy. Your theory that wealth is the result of owning natural resources is obviously flawed.

The same chauvinists who proclaim capitalism the only good economic system tend to the view that the USA is the only good nation and that Christianity is the only true religion. Wrong on all counts.

So far, everything you have posted is wrong.

Your entire post is correct and reasonable, but don't expect the socialist clowns to agree, even though it is impossible for them to refute. They won't try to refute, because they can't. I have lived in two countries experimenting with socialism. One was totally dictatorial in a negative sort of way and people lost wealth almost immediately since the government nationalized all private property and only the commissars got any wealth. The other had a benevolent, and the majority of the population sank into poverty over a longer period. Anecdotes are not proof, but they are personal observations.

 

[dnsmith35]

"Corrections Corporation of America

66: number of facilities owned and operated by Corrections Corporation of America, the country’s largest private prison company based on number of facilities

91,000: number of beds available in CCA facilities across 20 states and the District of Columbia

$1.7 billion: total revenue recorded by CCA in 2011

$17.4 million: lobbying expenditures in the last 10 years, according to the Center for Responsive Politics
$1.9 million: total political contributions from years 2003 to 2012, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics
$3.7 million: executive compensation for CEO Damon T. Hininger in 2011"

"The Geo Group, Inc., the U.S.’s second largest private detention company

$1.6 billion: total revenue in year 2011, according to its annual report
65: number of domestic correctional facilities owned and operated by Geo Group, Inc.

65,716: number of beds available in Geo Group, Inc.’s domestic correctional facilities

$2.5 million: lobbying expenditures in the last 8 years, according to the Center for Responsive Politics
$2.9 million: total political contributions from years 2003 to 2012, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics
$5.7 million: executive compensation for CEO George C. Zoley in 2011"

Socialize the cost and privatize the profit
What capitalism does best.

By the Numbers: The U.S.?s Growing For-Profit Detention Industry - ProPublica

What capitalism does best in the private detention system is to save government capital expenditures while making a reasonable profit in the process. Don't forget, the private prison systems are not the persons making the decisions as to who is incarcerated and for how long. That is the justice system.

Is there some corruption in the justice system? Yes, there is always some corruption in any government/socialist system; much more so than in most private capitalist systems.

Why don't you supply some evidence that private capitalist systems produce less corruption than government? Start with Wall Street. Then remind yourself how the parasites in the private detention industry, who earn seven figures annually for their "labor", spend millions more lobbying those responsible for deciding who to incarcerate and for how long how much private profit margins will suffer if US incarceration rates return to where they were forty years ago. Socialize the cost and privatize the profit; it's not rocket science.

There need not be a competition as to which is more corrupt. We can assume both are. But even with some corruption, capitalism gives more people wealth and prosperity, and gives the revenue to government to fund the social programs that upgrade our least citizens to relative poverty (meaning they have less wealth than those higher up on the money train.