So You Despise Capitalism? Please Give Us Your Alternative...

[Oldstyle]

Anti-profit? So explain flat wages/dropping wages during record profits. Wouldn't that be anti-worker and greed? And the working class is just supposed to keep on accepting that?
It's NOT progressive to want your wages to grow in accordance to the rise with the profits!
But according to some,,that's being anti-profit/anti-capitalism!

What you don't realize is that businesses don't exist to provide high wages to workers...businesses exist to make a profit for the owner of the business. Higher wages come about because of supply and demand, not management largess. Right now we have 14 million people that are unemployed in this country and probably an equal number of people who are under-employed. The reason wages are flat or dropping is because there are far more workers looking for work than there are jobs.

If you REALLY want to see worker's wages increase? It's really quite simple. Tell Obama to stop pushing an agenda that kills employment. As soon as the unemployment rate comes down wages will increase because there will be competition between employers for the best workers and competition means increased compensation offered.

I can see that someone is a tool for the status quo environment where the Main Street America contines to take steps backwards economically and Big Business dictates America's misery index.

I'm a tool for the status quo because I point out economic realities? Did you want to dispute what I've said? Or are you going to try and "label" your way through this debate?

 

[G.T.]

What you don't realize is that businesses don't exist to provide high wages to workers...businesses exist to make a profit for the owner of the business. Higher wages come about because of supply and demand, not management largess. Right now we have 14 million people that are unemployed in this country and probably an equal number of people who are under-employed. The reason wages are flat or dropping is because there are far more workers looking for work than there are jobs.

If you REALLY want to see worker's wages increase? It's really quite simple. Tell Obama to stop pushing an agenda that kills employment. As soon as the unemployment rate comes down wages will increase because there will be competition between employers for the best workers and competition means increased compensation offered.

I can see that someone is a tool for the status quo environment where the Main Street America contines to take steps backwards economically and Big Business dictates America's misery index.

I'm a tool for the status quo because I point out economic realities? Did you want to dispute what I've said? Or are you going to try and "label" your way through this debate?

If people point out the obvious fact that the middle class is shrinking and that the Nation's Wealth Gap is becoming proposterous, they should not be demeaned as "leeches" or anything of the sort. It has absolutely zero to do with work ethic, employment, or how rich or not rich that they personally are, they are pointing out an obvious problem that should NOT be ignored.

It bothers me that, during a recession, Corporate Profits and CEO compensation hits Record HIGHS.

That tells me all that I need to know about why things are the way that they are. The Bigger Corporations in collusion with our Government are serving as "Masters" of the economy, and they are the ones committing class warfare.

Did the Economy crash because these people complaining now, all of a sudden got lazy and stopped working? They started demanding to be handed all kinds of money all of a sudden and wanted to be unemployed for extended periods? They laid themselves off?

Some bigger "hands" are what caused all of this, and conveniently, as a result of this "crash," Corporate PROFITS (key word) are at an all time high.

Meanwhile we magically have a Political narrative telling everyone that the economy is down because the big gubbamint makes it too hard for corporations to do business? Hold the phone.

What's happening is the "economy" is being used as an excuse to keep wages down, and keep workers producing at an all time high, (those leeches in the middle class) in fear of losing their jobs.

As a result of those stagnated wages, people can only afford goods at places like Walmart, etc. because they're so big that they are able to charge the cheapest whole-sale prices. So, magically, if Corporations keep their workers' wages low, the middle class's buying power directs sales right to there door-step while small businesses who necessarily have to charge higher prices are being forced out of competition.

This whole idea that pointing out the absurdity of the growing wealth-gap and shrinking middle class is somehow "class warfare rhetoric" or lazy people who want something handed to them (yes, I know there's retards that say retarded things), is not going to help this Country get back onto its feet.

 

[Dragon]

Got a bit more of an honest & lively discussion on this on another message board. Too many people here want to get defensive and go on the attack. If you're Anti-Capitalism,so be it. And so what? No one's gonna arrest you. It's just a message board.

Nobody's failing to respond out of fear, dickwad, but only because you have presented a straw man and are, in general, full of shit.

Some people here continue to imply there are no Anti-Capitalists in this country too.

No, nobody has said that; what we have said is that there are no anti-capitalists on this board (AFAIK).

Anyway,i was just trying to have an honest discussion

Bullshit. If you want to have an honest discussion, define your terms.

 

[ABikerSailor]

"Well, they want "fairness". Meaning total equality"

I'd say that a majority of Americans do want "fairness" and at least something closer to the wealth/income equality than we have now. They would be thrilled if their share of the National Income was like what it was 1960's & 1970's, when the Middle Class was strong. Too many, that'd would be fair, except for the defenders of today's status qua of a failing Main Street America.

I think a majority of Americans still understand that wealth/income equality accomplished by stripping the wealthy of capital is neither "fair" nor wise. Has the middle class lost income since the 60's and 70's? Without question. We've lost millions of blue collar manufacturing jobs overseas. So explain to me how taking money from the wealthy in the form of higher taxes is going to bring those jobs back? You WILL make the difference between the rich and the poor smaller but it won't be because the poor will be better off...it will be because the wealthy will have much less. Continue down that path long enough and the wealthy won't have enough capital left to finance an economic turnaround. So what do we do at THAT point?

Just think, if people actually saw wage growth that exceeded inflation again and the creation of jobs, they'd probably change their tune about wanting the rich to pay more taxes. That was the fairness people had over three decades ago. Back then no one complained about income and wealth inequality. Of course then, a thriving Middle Class meant more tax revenues and less dependence on government programs.

Back then, the rich paid a bit more in taxes.

What would be my solution? Return back to a time we ALL had a bit more cash in our pockets........the Clinton tax code.

 

[boilermaker55]

Guts and brains?

You accuse people of being "Anti-Capitalism" yet you yourself can't even define what that means! Well, can't define or WON'T define. Not sure yet which.

It's not "anti-capitalism" but rather "anti-profit" that defines the modern progressive. Capitalists are tolerated by the left but only as figurative ATMs for entitlement programs. What really gets a modern progressive's panties in a bunch is someone making a lot of money from running a business. To them profit is a sin. Profit is greed. Profit isn't "fair".

Anti-profit? So explain flat wages/dropping wages during record profits. Wouldn't that be anti-worker and greed? And the working class is just supposed to keep on accepting that?
It's NOT progressive to want your wages to grow in accordance to the rise with the profits!
But according to some,,that's being anti-profit/anti-capitalism!

That is what the right wingers don't understand. Power and greed has become the accepted norm for them, while those that work and toil to make a company profitable keep getting a smaller fee for their work.
Their answer is to exploit workers in third world countries, and they justify that with , "hey, we are making their lives better."
Quite the answer.
It is not anti-capitalism, it's more equality.
Notice they have all jumped on the bandwagon to strip away workers right to organize and to collectively bargain.

 

[DontBeStupid]

What you don't realize is that businesses don't exist to provide high wages to workers...businesses exist to make a profit for the owner of the business. Higher wages come about because of supply and demand, not management largess. Right now we have 14 million people that are unemployed in this country and probably an equal number of people who are under-employed. The reason wages are flat or dropping is because there are far more workers looking for work than there are jobs.

If you REALLY want to see worker's wages increase? It's really quite simple. Tell Obama to stop pushing an agenda that kills employment. As soon as the unemployment rate comes down wages will increase because there will be competition between employers for the best workers and competition means increased compensation offered.

Cowardly response.

Wages have been stagnant for a decade. LONG before Obama took office. Blaming him for some magical agenda you think he has does nothing to address the real situation.

How is my pointing out reality "cowardly"?

Yes, wages have been stagnant for several decades but I don't blame Obama for the loss of blue collar jobs during the 90's and the last ten years. It's reality that we have been losing manufacturing jobs overseas for decades now. What I do blame Obama for is trying to convince naive people like yourself that the problem is corporate "greed" which can be corrected by taxing corporations at a higher rate. I'm sorry but that will not bring blue collar jobs back to the US. It will actually further hasten their departure. We need to do everything we can to make ourselves as competitive as we can with countries like India, Brazil, China and Korea at attracting and keeping businesses. Having the EPA enforce costly new regulations on energy isn't helping our cause. Neither is having the Justice Department sue companies like Boeing for building factories in right to work States or go after companies like Gibson Guitars over laws that protect the rights of Indian workers over American workers.

It was cowardly because you did not talk about reality. Claiming that Obama is killing employment and that when the unemployment rate goes down wages will go up, completely, totally, and utterly ignores what has been happening the past decade. You know, back when we had 5% unemployment and wages were STILL stagnant. I'm glad to see you at least acknowledge it happened, but again, claiming Obama is "pushing an agenda that kills employment", without mentioning a single policy of Obama's is just plain cowardly.

Additionally, you ignored my point about making money at the expense of the workers. Is it because here I am, a liberal, saying I am in FAVOUR of companies making tons of money? That just doesn't sit with your preconceived view?

No company makes record profits while having no workers. We must take care of the working class if we want this country to be successful again. Plain and simple.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Actually, isn't Obama pushing a jobs bill that will create lots of jobs while fixing the infrastructure of this country?

 

[DontBeStupid]

Actually, isn't Obama pushing a jobs bill that will create lots of jobs while fixing the infrastructure of this country?

Yes.

And since he will be outsourcing most, if not all, of the work, it would mean a ton of cash for businesses.

Kind of a, I don't know, pro-Capitalism policy.

 

[thereisnospoon]

We just need more honest discussion on this. It's time to hash this out. No need to hedge on your opinions here either. If you're Anti-Capitalism,just say it and then elaborate on it. And your ideas on an alternative system will be appreciated. Lets have an open & honest discussion on this.

Why don't you start by defining what you think it means to be "anti-Capitalism" ?

Just answer the question. Stop analyzing the OP....Just use your own words and respond honestly.

 

[Full-Auto]

Actually, isn't Obama pushing a jobs bill that will create lots of jobs while fixing the infrastructure of this country?

You mean create a few jobs for unions in every state.

Right right. It worked so well last time.

 

[MikeK]

We just need more honest discussion on this. It's time to hash this out. No need to hedge on your opinions here either. If you're Anti-Capitalism,just say it and then elaborate on it. And your ideas on an alternative system will be appreciated. Lets have an open & honest discussion on this.

Either your thinking has been shaped by the Fox News propaganda machine or you are attempting to promote the mistaken idea that capitalism must exist in whole form (laissez faire) or not at all. The fact is capitalism is a productive system but it must be controlled by expedient socialist regulations, as it was during our most productive and equitably distributed decades.

All of the problems we're experiencing today are the result of deregulation, which began with Jimmy Carter and continued through Reagan, Clinton and Bush-2. All of that tampering with the carefully assembled mechanism of our dynamic economic system caused it to malfunction and ultimately collapse.

Those are the facts but you won't hear them from Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity or the rest of the multi-millionaire corporatist propagandists.

 

[BDBoop]

Actually, isn't Obama pushing a jobs bill that will create lots of jobs while fixing the infrastructure of this country?

Why, yes. Yes - he is.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The problem is that if someone were to say what they would replace it with, everyone would be very quick to point out that that particular system only looks good on paper and has failed miserable everytime it has been tried in the real world

So we are left with bitching and moaning.
Same shit different flies.

 

[Dragon]

Just answer the question. Stop analyzing the OP....Just use your own words and respond honestly.

Are you still robbing banks and using the money to buy drugs?

Just answer the question. Don't analyze it. Just use your own words and respond honestly.

 

[DontBeStupid]

We just need more honest discussion on this. It's time to hash this out. No need to hedge on your opinions here either. If you're Anti-Capitalism,just say it and then elaborate on it. And your ideas on an alternative system will be appreciated. Lets have an open & honest discussion on this.

Why don't you start by defining what you think it means to be "anti-Capitalism" ?

Just answer the question. Stop analyzing the OP....Just use your own words and respond honestly.

How can I answer the question when the OP is too scared to define the term? What does he mean by "Anti-Capitalism"? Anti-regulation of any kind? Anti-profit? Anti-worker safety? Does he think some rules and laws are okay? To what extent?

I mean, it would be the same as me calling him Anti-American and then never saying why I am calling him that. It's a pointless exercise.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The problem is that if someone were to say what they would replace it with, everyone would be very quick to point out that that particular system only looks good on paper and has failed miserable everytime it has been tried in the real world

Yes it will take some guts and some brains to explain an alternative system in an articulate fashion. I suspect many will hedge on their opinions. They may be Anti-Capitalism but i don't think they'll admit it. Because it's very easy to complain and screech slogans but it's very difficult to come up with an idea and then express it honestly and coherently. That's why i asked for an honest discussion on this. I know most will hedge though. But i'll wait for one brave Anti-Capitalist to step up and be honest and open. It could happen.

Guts and brains?

You accuse people of being "Anti-Capitalism" yet you yourself can't even define what that means! Well, can't define or WON'T define. Not sure yet which.

The Left has delivered a clear message that capitalism has run it's course and something new should be tried.
Elaborate on the "something new".

 

[DontBeStupid]

Yes it will take some guts and some brains to explain an alternative system in an articulate fashion. I suspect many will hedge on their opinions. They may be Anti-Capitalism but i don't think they'll admit it. Because it's very easy to complain and screech slogans but it's very difficult to come up with an idea and then express it honestly and coherently. That's why i asked for an honest discussion on this. I know most will hedge though. But i'll wait for one brave Anti-Capitalist to step up and be honest and open. It could happen.

Guts and brains?

You accuse people of being "Anti-Capitalism" yet you yourself can't even define what that means! Well, can't define or WON'T define. Not sure yet which.

The Left has delivered a clear message that capitalism has run it's course and something new should be tried.
Elaborate on the "something new".

Why don't you start with showing us how the "Left has delivered a clear message that capitalism has run it's course" ?

 

[Dragon]

The Left has delivered a clear message that capitalism has run it's course and something new should be tried.

I must have missed that message. I obviously need to update my secret message decoder ring.

 

[thereisnospoon]

You accuse people of being "Anti-Capitalism" yet you yourself can't even define what that means! Well, can't define or WON'T define. Not sure yet which.

Exactly.

It all comes down to what is meant by "capitalism." Some of the possible definitions include:

1) Any economic system in which the means of production are for the most part privately owned.

2) An economic/political system in which all economic activity is organized for the purpose of maximizing the accumulation of capital.

3) A privately-owned economic system in which the government does not impose any regulations or restrictions beyond the protection of property rights and the enforcement of contract law.

Choose which of these definitions you mean when you say "capitalism," or supply your own, and then first ASK whether anyone wants to replace capitalism rather than fatuously ASSUMING that to be the case.

As a follow-up question, you may THEN ask what they want to replace it with. Becaue then you will have established that, in fact, they do. Otherwise, this thread is completely pointless.

So you people don't like the question as it was worded. Your response is "that's not the question you should be asking"...You people want to control the debate. Umm, forget it.
Just answer the question.

 

[ABikerSailor]

The Left has delivered a clear message that capitalism has run it's course and something new should be tried.

I must have missed that message. I obviously need to update my secret message decoder ring.

Any kind of tax is a burden on corporation and the "job creators" who ship our jobs to China and India.

Me personally? I'd like to see us return to the Clinton era tax rates, back then EVERYONE was making money.