Support for Capitalism at a new low

[Mac1958]

"proper and efficient" - that's a trojan horse if I ever heard one.

As long as it's "proper and efficient" in a way the benefits me ...

The problems with modern capitalism, in my view, primarily revolve around limited liability and the corporate charter. As long as investors can make money from the corrupt actions of the companies they own, and not be held accountable for the crimes and corruption that their companies engage in - the shit will flow downhill.

The various players in the financial industry, just like politicians and CEOs, play within the rules that govern them. If the rules let them get away with horrific shit, they'll do horrific shit. And they sure do. And we know who ultimately pays the price. It's going to be paid one way or the other.

After the Meltdown, we were buried in all kinds of new regulations, but they were little more than band aids (on top of old band aids). Some of them were good, such as CEOs being responsible for financial reporting. But there was a ton of redundancy, little was standardized, and gaping holes remain.

Unfortunately, we all knew that Congress is worthless and tribal and paid off, and can't be counted on to start with a fresh slate. More regulation doesn't mean better regulation. But it has to be smart. But we can't do it.

Well, okay, so here we are. Self-inflicted.

 

[Dorian Mode]

"proper and efficient" - that's a trojan horse if I ever heard one.

As long as it's "proper and efficient" in a way the benefits me ...

The problems with modern capitalism, in my view, primarily revolve around limited liability and the corporate charter. As long as investors can make money from the corrupt actions of the companies they own, and not be held accountable for the crimes and corruption that their companies engage in - the shit will flow downhill.

So we should trust politicians to manage the entire economy, and the entire country, and to do the right thing for the people and not be corrupt? That's really a bad idea considering just how corrupt all politicians really are. When there is Big Money involved, everyone is corrupt. At that point, to avoid fascism, we should keep the government and the corporations separated as much as possible.

 

[dblack]

So we should trust politicians to manage the entire economy, and the entire country, and to do the right thing for the people and not be corrupt?

No? Why do you ask that? I'm promoting the opposite.

At that point, to avoid fascism, we should keep the government and the corporations separated as much as possible.

Absolutely. That's why more government regulation isn't the answer.

The problem with our efforts to "de-regulate" is they're never that. They're never just repealing bad regulations. The bad regulations are just "tweaked", or replaced with different regulations that benefit someone else instead.

We don't de-regulate, we re-regulate.

 

[Dorian Mode]

No? Why do you ask that? I'm promoting the opposite.

Absolutely. That's why more government regulation isn't the answer.

The problem with our efforts to "de-regulate" is they're never that. They're never just repealing bad regulations. The bad regulations are just "tweaked", or replaced with different regulations that benefit someone else instead.

We don't de-regulate, we re-regulate.

Do you know what a lobbyist does? They represent the interests of Big Money and go to the politicians and give them favors in exchange for legislation. Capitalism sucks because we have corrupt politicians interfering in the process of a supply and demand market system. Now, capitalism can be a brutal system if left completely unbridled, and it needs close and proper regulation, which we just don't have because the politicians are all corrupt. That being said, the market system still functions, albeit imperfectly, even with the corruption. My fear is that if politicians are able to take away the market mechanism and manage the economy directly, it will be so much worse. Rather than turn to socialism, maybe the people should be much more vocal about the corruption that happens among all the politicians. Almost all the problems in America can be traced back to corrupt politicians.

 

[dblack]

Do you know what a lobbyist does? They represent the interests of Big Money and go to the politicians and give them favors in exchange for legislation.

Yup.

Capitalism sucks because we have corrupt politicians interfering in the process of a supply and demand market system.

Yup.

Now, capitalism can be a brutal system if left completely unbridled, and it needs close and proper regulation, which we just don't have because the politicians are all corrupt.

Yup.

That being said, the market system still functions, albeit imperfectly, even with the corruption. My fear is that if politicians are able to take away the market mechanism and manage the economy directly, it will be so much worse.

Yup.

Rather than turn to socialism, maybe the people should be much more vocal about the corruption that happens among all the politicians. Almost all the problems in America can be traced back to corrupt politicians.

Yup. And the bad voters who keep electing them.

 

[Dorian Mode]

Yup. And the bad voters who keep electing them.

History is replete with new representatives getting to DC wanting to make a difference and enact change, only to find out that DC does not allow that. So they either stay and enjoy the gravy train or they get out of politics. The country has almost 250 years of corruption baked in and currently very few who are even willing to address it. It will take the people to unite and make this a topic that can't be ignored, but that would entail the electorate working together. Now you know why both parties promote hate of the other party; it is to make sure the people are divided and inconsequential to the corrupt system.

 

[Votto]

hitler made a lot of weapons and built quite a lot of tunnels.

Well, as I said, he spent the country into oblivion, which basically burned all their bridges

It was either world conquest or economic ruin.

There is nothing sustainable about socialism.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Support for my Florida Gators are at a new low for the same reason. They are losing. Just like the US is losing under capitalism. The reason for both is coaching. The US economy is undisciplined. The rules are being made by those who benefit from the rules and any attempt to make things more fair for the working class is branded as socialism by opponents and killed. Its a perfect destruction of a once great football team and a once great American economy through the lack of discipline to what made them great.

The US economy is undisciplined.

And the left wants morons like AOC, Biden and Crockett to provide discipline.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

"Fraudulently" is right. The ratings agencies were giving these steaming piles of shit bonds AAA (Treasury-level) ratings. Why? Because they were being PAID to by the banks who submitted them.

Later, those very same banks were SHORTING those very ******* bonds, WHILE they were still SELLING THEM with their AAA ratings.

But we don't need to regulate anything like that! That would be commie!

The banks were shorting shitty mortgage bonds?
Is that why they needed TARP loans, they were making too much money on short mortgages?

DURR

 

[BothWings]

Instead of looking at it as polar opposites with "ISM" at the end of their names, I prefer to look at it as simply being various levels of regulation ranging from a lawless none to a stifling level of too much. I think that any game having a few rules in place keeps it real, as long as the game isn't owned by the referee. If economic entities become big, eventually they can arrange it so they keep getting big...until they essentially run the show. And that won't change unless they run themselves into the ground. Competition doesn't rectify that if competition is prevented from rising up at all. That's how Walmart was cable to kill small business. I don't think any of us really wanted to see that happen.

 

[Thinker101]

Well, this is absolutely no surprise. Support for Capitalism -- by far the most dynamic engine of growth, prosperity and freedom -- is shrinking.

This is what happens when ANY system is perverted and misapplied. In the case of Capitalism, misapplication will INVARIABLY end up creating massive wealth disparity and dead ends for the lower classes.

Many who claim to be Capitalists, for example, have been convinced that any government involvement in the economy, such as regulation, is the bane of capitalism. The reality is that proper and efficient regulation is a CRITICAL COMPONENT of Capitalism.

The Meltdown of 2008 -- from which we are STILL experiencing the effects -- was a prime example. First Clinton repealed Glass Steagall and opened the doors to the derivatives that damn near killed us. Then Alan Greenspan publicly refused to regulate those same derivatives that damn near killed us.

And now it looks like we're going down the same ******* road. Is it any wonder that Americans are so disgusted with this version of Capitalism that a shitty system like Socialism is actually attractive to them?

Image of Capitalism Slips to 54% in U.S. -- Perceptions of socialism remain steady at 39% positive

You tell em, who the heck wants growth, prosperity and freedom. The libs want fairness and equality, they want socialism, where everyone can enjoy the misery together.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Capitalism isn’t a very easy concept to like/support. It isn’t very warm or cuddly.

But, similar to Churchill’s quote about democracy, it’s the worst form of economy except for all those other forms that have been tried

Owners Aren't Earners

It's investor supremacy. It ought to be called "Capitalistism," just like Socialism is really "Socialistism." Both are cliques that have the power to claim they benefit everybody else and have the propaganda power to make the commoners believe it, which is make-believe.

It's outside ownership, which makes it a command economy. And its "free" market makes it mob rule.

The Sissies in Suitcoats may run businesses, but they're not the ones who make businesses run.

 

[berg80]

"Fraudulently" is right. The ratings agencies were giving these steaming piles of shit bonds AAA (Treasury-level) ratings. Why? Because they were being PAID to by the banks who submitted them.

Business for the rating agencies giving scores to those bonds was just too good to pass up. So they gave them a stamp of approval. Perhaps more than any other reason that is how other countries were directly impacted. Financial institutions around the world seeking a high yield in a low yield environment were buying every AAA bond they could get.

If you haven't read it this is a great book on the subject.

The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday... book by Michael Lewis

 

[braalian]

Owners Aren't Earners

It's investor supremacy. It ought to be called "Capitalistism," just like Socialism is really "Socialistism." Both are cliques that have the power to claim they benefit everybody else and have the propaganda power to make the commoners believe it, which is make-believe.

It's outside ownership, which makes it a command economy. And its "free" market makes it mob rule.

The Sissies in Suitcoats may run businesses, but they're not the ones who make businesses run.

So what’s the better alternative?

 

[Frankeneinstein]

No matter the economic system, there are always tiers of economic conditions.

Maybe, but under socialist systems they are known as "tears" of economic conditions

 

[berg80]

Capitalism sucks because we have corrupt politicians interfering in the process of a supply and demand market system.

Capitalism sucks because money has been allowed by Repubs to corrupt the system?

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Instead of looking at it as polar opposites with "ISM" at the end of their names, I prefer to look at it as simply being various levels of regulation ranging from a lawless none to a stifling level of too much. I think that any game having a few rules in place keeps it real, as long as the game isn't owned by the referee. If economic entities become big, eventually they can arrange it so they keep getting big...until they essentially run the show. And that won't change unless they run themselves into the ground. Competition doesn't rectify that if competition is prevented from rising up at all. That's how Walmart was cable to kill small business. I don't think any of us really wanted to see that happen.

Communism Is Capitalism, Jr.

The Walmart heirs' wealth is $432 billion, and they never worked for a dime of it. That is the key to understanding the world's decadent economics. It is not at all what the same spoiled clique pays people to tell us is what is behind the various systems imposed on the commoners.

 

[Conservative from Georgia]

Well, this is absolutely no surprise. Support for Capitalism -- by far the most dynamic engine of growth, prosperity and freedom -- is shrinking.

This is what happens when ANY system is perverted and misapplied. In the case of Capitalism, misapplication will INVARIABLY end up creating massive wealth disparity and dead ends for the lower classes.

Many who claim to be Capitalists, for example, have been convinced that any government involvement in the economy, such as regulation, is the bane of capitalism. The reality is that proper and efficient regulation is a CRITICAL COMPONENT of Capitalism.

The Meltdown of 2008 -- from which we are STILL experiencing the effects -- was a prime example. First Clinton repealed Glass Steagall and opened the doors to the derivatives that damn near killed us. Then Alan Greenspan publicly refused to regulate those same derivatives that damn near killed us.

And now it looks like we're going down the same ******* road. Is it any wonder that Americans are so disgusted with this version of Capitalism that a shitty system like Socialism is actually attractive to them?

Image of Capitalism Slips to 54% in U.S. -- Perceptions of socialism remain steady at 39% positive

Thanks to Trump.

 

[BothWings]

Communism Is Capitalism, Jr.

The Walmart heirs' wealth is $432 billion, and they never worked for a dime of it. That is the key to understanding the world's decadent economics. It is not at all what the same spoiled clique pays people to tell us is what is behind the various systems imposed on the commoners.

IMO, it's just two different approaches to controlling the consumer herd. One by regulation and redistribution and one by bullying the competition. Either way the consumer gets screwed and freedom is "shat" upon.

Also, communism regulates starting with the supply side, controlling what people can have...while capitalism rules starting with the demand side, controlling what others can produce. If I control all cotton production in Georgia, fat chance building a business to compete with me. Conversely, if the government takes control of all cotton production and forces every business to do everything exactly the same, then there is no private ownership and no competition of any kind. There has to be competition but it has to be within the confines of certain rules.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

So what’s the better alternative?

Company Comes from Latin, Meaning "Share the Bread"

Not anything the hired Influencers tell you is an alternative.

I suggest we break out of the box they put us in and reject their whole specious spectrum, which is loaded with self-serving hypocrisy and contradictions.

Abolish outside ownership. The employees would be incentivized to produce only if they had equal shares of the dividends on profits. They would vote on salaries, based on who would create larger dividends. The businesses would be funded by bank loans only, because lenders have no ownership demand on increases in profits.