Originally posted by Bardock42
Well actually, that was just a figure of speech, capitalism is a most natural system though.
Natural? Why?
Originally posted by Bardock42
And well..what's soo bad about monopolies..besides...how do you know that, did it really happen?
I’m hoping the first question is rhetorical, right? How I know that? Because that’s how capitalism works, Bardock. The company making the most profits will start buying up or outsourcing its competition – which is NOT for the benefit of the customer – until one giant technically dominates the market (need I say Microsoft? Who’s the richest man in the USA?).
This will automatically happen. Larger corporations will fuse/merge/buy up the competition and grow in size.
Take a look at Forbes list of companies. Toyato Motors is worth 175 billion dollars (assets worth 227 billion dollars!). Nestlé is worth 113 billion dollars, Pepsi co is worth 97 billion dollars.
Only 26 countries in a world had a 2005-BNP larger than what Toyota Motors is worth.
Lil Bitchiness> One can always hope, huh? 😄
Originally posted by The OmegaYou're thinking of Conservatisum. Which I agree, is selfish and wrong and shit.
And I disagree with you, Bardock. Capitalism thrives on exploitation at its core. That's just the way it works. Make a profit. Capitalism can't FIND anything in anyone... It's merely an economic system that will not necessarly benefit the best - certainly the greediest.
Look at Enron.So I'm not too comfortable with Capitalism, because it generates monopolies and furthers traits like greed.
We often hear this claptrap about how capitalism fails because successful companies will become unassailable.
It is nonsense. Competition is king, in which respect it is ironic that you mention Pepsi. How many of the top 100 companies from a century ago even still exist today? Now compare that to political systems- it took wars to unseat them, and far more are intact than not.
Microsoft got where it was- beating a crowded market- by providing better service. For all the whining of the geek crowd, computing is more accessible to people now than it would have otherwise been, and because of Microsoft. It is a sector where a single format is absolutely desirable. That happens sometimes- it happened with video tapes, and now many are unhappy because the reverse is happening with DVD formats.
Capitalism is the best system there ever was. In depending on greed it succeeds. Other systems depend on the good will of humans, and hence fail.
Originally posted by UshgarakYou bring up a good point Ush. However, you seem to forget that Capitalism causes unfairness towards society. The same with Communism.
We often hear this claptrap about how capitalism fails because successful companies will become unassailable.It is nonsense. Competition is king, in which respect it is ironic that you mention Pepsi. How many of the top 100 companies from a century ago even still exist today? Now compare that to political systems- it took wars to unseat them, and far more are intact than not.
Microsoft got where it was- beating a crowded market- by providing better service. For all the whining of the geek crowd, computing is more accessible to people now than it would have otherwise been, and because of Microsoft. It is a sector where a single format is absolutely desirable. That happens sometimes- it happened with video tapes, and now many are unhappy because the reverse is happening with DVD formats.
Capitalism is the best system there ever was. In depending on greed it succeeds. Other systems depend on the good will of humans, and hence fail.
Socialism doesn't.
👆
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Capitalism is the best system there ever was. In depending on greed it succeeds. Other systems depend on the good will of humans, and hence fail.
We often hear how the biggest companies of course must be the best, and those that provides the best services. Why? Because they are the biggest and has the most advertising money??
And the claim that humans are inherently greedy is as stupid as claiming that humans are inherently evil. Other systems do not - as you seem to think - depend on the good of humans. Merely sense!
If capitalism (and thereby globalization) is such a grand succes why do 16 children die each minute of starvation and hunger-related diseases?
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I'm proud to be a Capitalist Pig! goof
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Capitalism is the best system there ever was. In depending on greed it succeeds. Other systems depend on the good will of humans, and hence fail.
👆
A system which encourages human beings to act animalistic and horde everything they have for themselves is definitely better than any system that plays upon compassion, mercy, kindness, giving, and righteousness.
I also think it makes sense for only 5 percent of a population, to possess nearly 3/4 of all wealth in a nation. Because we all know that most people in Capitalist societies have acquired all of the wealth on their own, and in no way have inherited that wealth from their very wealthy progenitors.
So my point is this, if you were born into a rich family then you are entitled to everything you own. And if you are born into a poor one, you are not entitled to any of what the rich man has.
So my message to the poor man is this, you best work your a$$ off for the rest of your life..and maybe, if you work hard enough for the Rich man who owns everything and to his satisfaction, then maybe..just maybe.. the rich man will give you a little of what he has. This is a fair system that personally..I believe works out well for everyone, particularly the poor man.
Originally posted by The Omega
[B] - depend on the good of humans. Merely sense!
If not from the good of other people where does the "money" come from, especially if it isn't all created equally, more importantly who distributes this money?
If capitalism (and thereby globalization) is such a grand succes why do 16 children die each minute of starvation and hunger-related diseases?
Is this a world wide number? If it isn't then why isn't socialism working the way some people would expect with the respective countries that follow that econimic policy?
Originally posted by lord xyz
You bring up a good point Ush. However, You seem to forget that Capitalism causes unfairness towards society. The same with Communism.Socialism doesn't.
👆
A little tip, cause I like you, just...don't reply in this thread again.
Originally posted by The Omega
Natural? Why?
Originally posted by The Omega
[B]I’m hoping the first question is rhetorical, right? How I know that? Because that’s how capitalism works, Bardock. The company making the most profits will start buying up or outsourcing its competition – which is NOT for the benefit of the customer – until one giant technically dominates the market (need I say Microsoft? Who’s the richest man in the USA?).
This will automatically happen. Larger corporations will fuse/merge/buy up the competition and grow in size.
Take a look at Forbes list of companies. Toyato Motors is worth 175 billion dollars (assets worth 227 billion dollars!). Nestlé is worth 113 billion dollars, Pepsi co is worth 97 billion dollars.
Only 26 countries in a world had a 2005-BNP larger than what Toyota Motors is worth. [B]
For the first thing...not really, a monopoly must have worked really well for some time. You don't just become a monopoly for being evil and ruthless...everyone can be that..You need to be smart and imaginative..and just one of the best to begin with. I guess some sort of luck is part of it as well, but not most of it. So basically to become a monopoly You have to have been good in the first place, so I don't see the big deal with it.
Now, thing is, monopolies don't happen. Not one of those companies You mention is a monopoly.
Even Microsoft got plenty of competition in the fields they participate in. Take Windows for example, sure a very good and user friendly environment, but go ahead, get Linux if You are good enough to use it, I am not, but there are people who swear it is better...well, I like to click on a buttin and have Internet, Windows does that for me, that's why I buy there products. Good thing I live in a Capitalist country where I can decide to buy the product best suited for me.
For the others...Pepsi? Hmm, there is this other company that comes to mind...damn, what am I thinking of..nah, You are probably right, Pepsi is a monopoly, I love their Sprite.....
Seriously, are You arguing that Capitalism greates a huge amount of worth, one that couldn't be matched by any other system, which is shown by the existence of big companies? Is it that? Then yeah, I agree. Where is the bad part?
And this will automatically happen....although it never happened, yet?
Originally posted by The Omega
We often hear how the biggest companies of course must be the best, and those that provides the best services. Why? Because they are the biggest and has the most advertising money??
And the claim that humans are inherently greedy is as stupid as claiming that humans are inherently evil. Other systems do not - as you seem to think - depend on the good of humans. Merely sense!If capitalism (and thereby globalization) is such a grand succes why do 16 children die each minute of starvation and hunger-related diseases?
Humans are selfish though. I mean...they just are. That's nothing bad....but they are.
And how is communism exactly going to make people work if they hardly get anything in return? I see two way, and one of them you deny...the other was shown by all systems that claimed to be communist so far...really ****ing great I have to agree.
As for the children, well I guess they die because no one gives a ****...I know I don't. Because humans are selfish. But if your selfishness makes you think it would be a good thing to help those children, go ahead, capitalism won't stop you.
Also, it is hardly capitalism fault that those children die, they would die anyways, capitalism just happens to be there, because it is such a natural system.
Capitalism provides roadways for trade and commerce. It's what makes any nation increase in richness. Why do 16 children die each minute of starvation and hunger-related diseases? Because their own corrupt and tyranical rulers and their relatives/friends live in grand masions. They don't open themselves to capitalist ideas because they know it will harpen their lifestyle. They know that by allowing capitalism in it will boost others to become prosperous. They don't want that. They want to keep the richness for themselves. So yes, that's why 16 children die each minute in the world.
Capitalism causes problems from the start.
Think of it like this. (Not meant to be accurate in any way.)
Year 1:
Guy 1: $9,000,000
Guy 2: $6,500,000
Guy 3: $5,500,000
Guy 4: $2,000,000
Guy 5: $500,000
Year 2.
Guy 1: $10,000,000
Guy 2: $7,000,000
Guy 3: $5,000,000
Guy 4: $1,500,000
Guy 5: $0
Year 3.
Guy 1: $12,000,000
Guy 2: $7,000,000
Guy 3: $4,000,000
Guy 4: $500,000
Guy 5: $0
Year 4.
Guy 1: $15,000,000
Guy 2: $6,000,000
Guy 3: $2,500,000
Guy 4: $0
Guy 5: $0
Year 5.
Guy 1: $19,000,000
Guy 2: $4,500,000
Guy 3: $0
Guy 4: $0
Guy 5: $0
Year 6.
Guy 1: $23,000,000
Guy 2: $500,000
Guy 3: $0
Guy 4: $0
Guy 5: $0
Survival of the strongest. 😐
Originally posted by lord xyz
Capitalism causes problems from the start.Think of it like this. (Not meant to be accurate in any way.)
Year 1:
Guy 1: $9,000,000
Guy 2: $6,500,000
Guy 3: $5,500,000
Guy 4: $2,000,000
Guy 5: $500,000Year 2.
Guy 1: $10,000,000
Guy 2: $7,000,000
Guy 3: $5,000,000
Guy 4: $1,500,000
Guy 5: $0Year 3.
Guy 1: $12,000,000
Guy 2: $7,000,000
Guy 3: $4,000,000
Guy 4: $500,000
Guy 5: $0Year 4.
Guy 1: $15,000,000
Guy 2: $6,000,000
Guy 3: $2,500,000
Guy 4: $0
Guy 5: $0Year 5.
Guy 1: $19,000,000
Guy 2: $4,500,000
Guy 3: $0
Guy 4: $0
Guy 5: $0Year 6.
Guy 1: $23,000,000
Guy 2: $500,000
Guy 3: $0
Guy 4: $0
Guy 5: $0Survival of the strongest. 😐
Originally posted by Bardock42
A little tip, cause I like you, just...don't reply in this thread again.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Humans are selfish though. I mean...they just are. That's nothing bad....but they are.
Humans are MANY things. We have needs that we seek to meet… is this what you mean by selfish? But humans are also capable of donating money to charity, doctors travel to war zones to help, people spend time collecting money and clothes to help people they have never met. We take time to listen to friends who’re in need… So we are MANY things… Why should our need to fulfil basic needs be what determines our financial system?
Originally posted by Bardock42
And how is communism exactly going to make people work if they hardly get anything in return? I see two way, and one of them you deny...the other was shown by all systems that claimed to be communist so far...really ****ing great I have to agree.
What makes you think Communism is built on people not getting anything? How could any system work, if we did not get our needs met? I do not understand what you mean by “I see two way, and one of them you deny…” Communism cannot work on a national scale (read up on what exactly happened to the USSR when it was first formed).
Originally posted by Bardock42
As for the children, well I guess they die because no one gives a ****...I know I don't. Because humans are selfish. But if your selfishness makes you think it would be a good thing to help those children, go ahead, capitalism won't stop you.
So a financial system that supports “not giving a ****” is considered good and the best by you? Are you proud of your indifference towards people who suffer because of the “great” system of capitalism? I asked you if you consider a system where 16 children die each minute as a success?
Originally posted by Bardock42
Also, it is hardly capitalism fault that those children die, they would die anyways, capitalism just happens to be there, because it is such a natural system.
It is indeed the fault of the financial system that those children die. If we distributed goods better (and the UN has calculated that the world can sustain 10 billion people, where no one would need to starve and live in poverty if we did that), removed toll barriers and the delusion that it’s ok for extremely wealthy to consume more than they need, these children would have had a chance.
Originally posted by tabby999
socialisim is the one that will work the longest and probably the best, personally i think communisim is one of those totally brilliant ideas...that will never work. there is always gonna be someone who wants to be #1 and that cant be in communisim."From a distance, a diamond, up-close, a tear"
Why do you think that Communism requires everyone to be THE SAME? Different people have different skills and different things they’re good at.
Who’d you rather have surgery performed by? A surgeon who’s “in it” because he really, truly wants to help and heal… or the surgeon who’s “in it” to earn big money?
Originally posted by The Omega
Humans are MANY things. We have needs that we seek to meet… is this what you mean by selfish? But humans are also capable of donating money to charity, doctors travel to war zones to help, people spend time collecting money and clothes to help people they have never met. We take time to listen to friends who’re in need… So we are MANY things… Why should our need to fulfil basic needs be what determines our financial system?
Nah, the thing is all this stuff is done for some sort of selfish reason. And that's okay, if one enjoys giving for charity that's great, if one enjoys helping starving children, sweet, but it is done for only their own good. That it happens to help another is not what makes them do that. Their own better feelings is what does.
Originally posted by The Omega
What makes you think Communism is built on people not getting anything? How could any system work, if we did not get our needs met? I do not understand what you mean by “I see two way, and one of them you deny…” Communism cannot work on a national scale (read up on what exactly happened to the USSR when it was first formed).
that's where it comes in that I said "hardly". There is a lot less wealth created by communism and all people, regardless of their skill or usefulness get equal amounts of good in return...or even worse you might get more for some weird social reasons like being a single mother.
Two ways:
1. Idealistic, people behave the way the System wants it because they all the the apparent greatness in it. Won't happen.
2. People are forced. Through punishment or conditioning or whatever. But they are forced. No free will, bullshit system.
Give me a 3rd one if you can, I don't see it.
Originally posted by The Omega
So a financial system that supports “not giving a ****” is considered good and the best by you? Are you proud of your indifference towards people who suffer because of the “great” system of capitalism? I asked you if you consider a system where 16 children die each minute as a success?
It doesn't support it. It just gives everyone the freedom. And well, people generally don't "give a ****". You need to be particular well conditioned or on the receiving side to "give a ****" about others.
The 16 children are hardly a problem, so yes, I am certainly able to describe a system that has 16 children die each minute as a success. By the way, are those only children in capitalist countries?
But I give you that, i could see the point in a sort of social welfare...a slim one obviously, that couldn't do much harm to the advantages of the system but still make sure that everyone has a chance. After all that's what capitalism would be about (like the precious communism never really happened) equal chances for people.
Originally posted by The Omega
It is indeed the fault of the financial system that those children die. If we distributed goods better (and the UN has calculated that the world can sustain 10 billion people, where no one would need to starve and live in poverty if we did that), removed toll barriers and the delusion that it’s ok for extremely wealthy to consume more than they need, these children would have had a chance.
The world in it's capitalistic state? Well maybe, but guess what as soon as that happens most people won't be bothered to do the work they do now. Or as good.
Originally posted by The Omega
Why do you think that Communism requires everyone to be THE SAME? Different people have different skills and different things they’re good at.
Who’d you rather have surgery performed by? A surgeon who’s “in it” because he really, truly wants to help and heal… or the surgeon who’s “in it” to earn big money?
To get the same. Not be the same.
And I'd prefer the better one, really my retarded cousin Willy (so what I made him up, sue me) wants to be a surgeon really, really bad and I am sure it's all hippy happy and stuff, but nah, give me the guy who knows his shit but wants money any day.
If it was about equally skilled ones, then yeah, I guess that I would prefer the one who wants that job. But that's hardly the case, is it?
Originally posted by Bardock42
Nah, the thing is all this stuff is done for some sort of selfish reason. And that's okay, if one enjoys giving for charity that's great, if one enjoys helping starving children, sweet, but it is done for only their own good. That it happens to help another is not what makes them do that. Their own better feelings is what does.
What I wrote just proves that humans can be MANY things, Bardock. We can be greedy one day, charitable the other. And you do not know what make other people tick. Some people want to help because they want to HELP. That you’re incapable of this is no proof the rest of mankind is like you.
Yes, we constantly hear “It will always be necessary to have leaders”, “People are fundamentally selfish”, and “Some people will always want more than others”. These phrases are just built on the old Christian idea of original sin inherited from Adam and Eve. The idea that there is a fundamental flaw in human nature, which makes true equality and corporation impossible, is an easy way to explain many of the bad things in the world like racism and sexism.
So, what, do you believe in original sin? 🙂
Originally posted by Bardock42
that's where it comes in that I said "hardly". There is a lot less wealth created by communism and all people, regardless of their skill or usefulness get equal amounts of good in return...or even worse you might get more for some weird social reasons like being a single mother.
What makes you say a lot less wealth is created in a communist system? How much do you KNOW about communism, Bardock, I’m curious. Have you even read the (in)famous manifesto?
Originally posted by Bardock42
Two ways:1. Idealistic, people behave the way the System wants it because they all the the apparent greatness in it. Won't happen.
2. People are forced. Through punishment or conditioning or whatever. But they are forced. No free will, bullshit system.
Give me a 3rd one if you can, I don't see it.
What behaviour are you talking about?
Originally posted by Bardock42
It doesn't support it. It just gives everyone the freedom. And well, people generally don't "give a ****". You need to be particular well conditioned or on the receiving side to "give a ****" about others.
The 16 children are hardly a problem, so yes, I am certainly able to describe a system that has 16 children die each minute as a success. By the way, are those only children in capitalist countries?
But the system DOES support by creating equality on a mass-scale. And by actually catering to the greediest of people. Yes, there are greedy people (just look at Enron). But there are many more examples of self-sacrifice, courage and compassion. So I am neither well conditioned nor on the receiving side to care about people dying because of the economic system you consider such a great success. I show you proof (factual death of HUMAN beings) that it can hardly BE considered a success – why not en economic system that caters to the traits in us that’ll make the world better for everyone?
We have globalisation, Bardock, capitalist economy rules the world – from China to the USA.
Originally posted by Bardock42
But I give you that, i could see the point in a sort of social welfare...a slim one obviously, that couldn't do much harm to the advantages of the system but still make sure that everyone has a chance. After all that's what capitalism would be about (like the precious communism never really happened) equal [b]chances for people. [/B]
If you don’t give a s*** why would you want social welfare? We have that here in DK along with free hospitals and schools and universities. Our taxes reflect this. Polls keep showing that Danes are willing to pay this kind of taxes to ensure social benefits for everyone. Very selfish of us, huh? 😉 You don’t stand much of a chance in a hyper-capitalistic country like the USA if you don’t have money from the beginning. Yes, there are a few examples of people fulfilling the American Dream. There are thousand of examples showing the opposite.
Yes, everyone should have an EQUAL chance…
Originally posted by Bardock42
The world in it's capitalistic state? Well maybe, but guess what as soon as that happens most people won't be bothered to do the work they do now. Or as good.
Bullshit! We all have a need for social relations, and how we behave depend on the circumstances. History shows that. We all have a need to contribute and act in the world. Maybe you’d just sit in a corner and twiddle your thumbs. I’d get bored stiff.
Originally posted by Bardock42
To get the same. Not be the same.And I'd prefer the better one, really my retarded cousin Willy (so what I made him up, sue me) wants to be a surgeon really, really bad and I am sure it's all hippy happy and stuff, but nah, give me the guy who knows his shit but wants money any day.
If it was about equally skilled ones, then yeah, I guess that I would prefer the one who wants that job. But that's hardly the case, is it?
Okay, what makes you believe that Communism says we ALL get the same? Are you saying all people in the world want the exact same things??
What makes you believe that you can’t find a surgeon who chose his/her profession from a desire and need to heal and help? I’ll hold free lectures in autumn on science. Why? Because I have a drive to bring science and knowledge to other people.
let me do the honour of showing why socialism will never work
behold the Scottish socialist party
http://www.scottishsocialistparty.org/
among their brilliant policies is to increase the national minimum wage to around £7.50 per hour...yet they freely admit that in order to pay for it for the public sector workers...the would have to tax it all back off everyone both in the public and private sector
not to mention the brilliant latest headlines involving members of the SSP
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/65475.html
http://scotlandtoday.scottishtv.co.uk/content/default.asp?page=s1_1_1&newsid=12093
socialism at its best...
or you could look at Cuba as shining example of socialist ideals...where the average monthly wage is $10us a month...all while castro has amassed a wealth estimated at around $900,000,000us