Can capitalism exist without govt

[iamoenaj]

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What a sham. You HAVE to have gasoline to work. You HAVE to have a house for shelter. You HAVE to use a phone for the most basic communication over any amount of distance longer than right in front of you.

You are FORCED to use these services or live in the stone age. There's no choice. It's a monopoly and a farce. They use price fixing to keep profits high and don't ever pass savings on to the consumer. This is capitalism.



Misconception. It was greedy leaders keeping profit for themselves (with assistance from CIA agents aimed at toppling "communism") that led to the fall of the USSR. Someone needs to remind the Republicans in America that you have to actually feed the poor or they will revolt.

Nobody is forcing you. You assume the costs by accepting a greater increase to your way of life. You think a majority of the world has access to these services on a daily basis? You expect everything and whine when you can't get it for as cheap as you want.

Ride a bike to work, buy a moped, walk, take city transport. I'm so sorry you can't arrive to work or live without gasoline. You NEED a house? Im going to assume you meant a shelter. Livable and safe is subjective, do what it takes. You HAVE to have a phone? Write a letter. Do I need to say anymore on this?

[iamoenaj]

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Are you serious? Do you know who Prescott Bush or Dick Cheney are? Or how they might have benefited from demolishing 7 WTC or invading Iraq, respectively?

Do you realise that most congressmen and senators after they retire often sit on boards or are consultants for the corporations that influenced their decisions while in office?



Lol, nothing has been passed in the last four years as the Republican controlled congress is trying to turn Obama into a lame duck.

Trying? He already is. Both parties are to be blamed though. Each side wants its own agenda furthered and neither likes backing down.

[Samoht]

Originally Posted by iamoenaj [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

take city transport. I'm so sorry you can't arrive to work or live without gasoline.

America isn't exactly known for it's mass-transit system and any attempts to set one up has been railroaded (lol puns) by anybody who profits from the existing gasoline based system.

Originally Posted by iamoenaj [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You NEED a house? Im going to assume you meant a shelter. Livable and safe is subjective, do what it takes.

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You HAVE to have a house for shelter.

Isn't that what I just said? You can argue semantics are you please, but the word house does not imply a 7-story, gold-trimmed mansion to the common American.

Originally Posted by iamoenaj [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Write a letter.

Who is going to deliver it? Are you supporting that government involvement is needed, too?

[Kika Maslyaka]

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Misconception. It was greedy leaders keeping profit for themselves (with assistance from CIA agents aimed at toppling "communism") that led to the fall of the USSR. Someone needs to remind the Republicans in America that you have to actually feed the poor or they will revolt.

oh trust me, its not a misconception. No matter how much the leader kept for themselves, USSR, as a state would not have fallen if its economy wasn't a gigantic black hole. Modern Russian "patriots" just LOVE to scream how CIA destroyed the glorious USSR, while in fact USSR destroyed itself.

[iamoenaj]

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

America isn't exactly known for it's mass-transit system and any attempts to set one up has been railroaded (lol puns) by anybody who profits from the existing gasoline based system.




Isn't that what I just said? You can argue semantics are you please, but the word house does not imply a 7-story, gold-trimmed mansion to the common American.



Who is going to deliver it? Are you supporting that government involvement is needed, too?

1. You're clearly missing the point. You're right that mass transit does suck for a lot of cities. Do what it takes to get to work. Traveling for 2 hours a day to get to work on foot sucks, but it can be done.

2. You're going to quote yourself then say you said it?

3. USPS, and yes I am. My argument for less government in regards to economics does not mean government shouldn't exist in any other facet.


I know that I said I'm finished replying to your posts before, but you actually came up with a few things that can be discussed since then. This post, however, just solidifies my argument of your lack of work ethic and general need to be taken care of. Really, go read a book on history and factual information. Not commentary that can be easily digested to control your emotions and thereby actions.



And saying that "be held accountable for your life decisions" is propaganda? rofl man..just rofl. You're a child needing to be taken care of.


*edit* Last sentence said "Do what it takes" instead of "be held accountable for your life decisions"... same thing. Lack of good decisions can be reflected on by your willingness to do what it takes.

[Samoht]

Originally Posted by iamoenaj [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And saying that "be held accountable for your life decisions" is propaganda? rofl man..just rofl. You're a child needing to be taken care of.

This is a line championed by the American "Republican" political party to demean and belittle the common worker. The people that parrot this line have no regard for the rights of others. The government's first responsibility is to take care of its people, whether they're poor, sick, old, or incapable of taking care of themselves. That doesn't mean they're lazy or needy.

Go read a book on philanthropy and stop trying to bleed profit out of a stone.

Originally Posted by iamoenaj [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

your lack of work ethic and general need to be taken care of

In the 2000's, I worked for five years for one of the wealthiest companies in the world - a true conglomerate. When I started, they were listed as one of the top companies in the world to work for. I got good ratings on my reviews, several raises and promotions as I watched them slowly cut benefits and raise costs of insurance. Stock options? Gone. Employee stock purchase program? Gone. 401k matching? Cut in half. Hiring was frozen. Morale was shot. They were no longer a top company to work for.

Yet they continued to flaunt record profits.

When the economy tanked, given their already tarnished reputation, they separated themselves from their workers as fast as possible. They moved many positions overseas (including mine) and bought their CEO's contract out for 12 million dollars. They immediately turned around and signed him on as a consultant with a 7 million dollars a year contract. How did that make any sense? This guy tanked the company and the value of its work ethic and he was getting rewarded while the common worker was left high and dry.

After that, I worked as a contractor at another conglomerate for 18 months before they were willing to offer me any kind of benefits.

Yet they continued to flaunt record profits.

How does any of that portray me as lazy or uneducated? This is how they treat their employees. There's no denying it. You're just spreading your own lies to try to make you feel better about your own agenda.

[Loke]

All these arguments showing places where you perceive capitalism as having failed just go to show that a reasonable capitalist society cannot exist without government - as I said in my original post.

This is way off topic, but these differing in views is exactly why I think America is too big for decisions like this. Why can socialism not exist in a capitalist society? There is nothing saying it can't - it would just have to be voluntary socialism. Trying to get 300 million people, most of which don't have the first clue when it comes to economy theory or models, to all agree upon what the best system is is ridiculous. This is the whole argument for libertarianism - create a free society in which people can enter into voluntary agreements and whatever results will be dictated by what each individual feels is in their best interest, so long as their best interest doesn't involve stripping the freedom they enjoy from others by use of force.

[Aadill]

Loke's post can be applied to Samoht's workplace just as it can be applied to a country - even a business is sometimes too large. The problem is not everyone has the same interests.

[iamoenaj]

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is a line championed by the American "Republican" political party to demean and belittle the common worker. The people that parrot this line have no regard for the rights of others. The government's first responsibility is to take care of its people, whether they're poor, sick, old, or incapable of taking care of themselves. That doesn't mean they're lazy or needy.

Go read a book on philanthropy and stop trying to bleed profit out of a stone.



In the 2000's, I worked for five years for one of the wealthiest companies in the world - a true conglomerate. When I started, they were listed as one of the top companies in the world to work for. I got good ratings on my reviews, several raises and promotions as I watched them slowly cut benefits and raise costs of insurance. Stock options? Gone. Employee stock purchase program? Gone. 401k matching? Cut in half. Hiring was frozen. Morale was shot. They were no longer a top company to work for.

Yet they continued to flaunt record profits.

When the economy tanked, given their already tarnished reputation, they separated themselves from their workers as fast as possible. They moved many positions overseas (including mine) and bought their CEO's contract out for 12 million dollars. They immediately turned around and signed him on as a consultant with a 7 million dollars a year contract. How did that make any sense? This guy tanked the company and the value of its work ethic and he was getting rewarded while the common worker was left high and dry.

After that, I worked as a contractor at another conglomerate for 18 months before they were willing to offer me any kind of benefits.

Yet they continued to flaunt record profits.

How does any of that portray me as lazy or uneducated? This is how they treat their employees. There's no denying it. You're just spreading your own lies to try to make you feel better about your own agenda.

Anyone can polish a turd. Is your profession expendable or unskilled? If so, live with your choice to work in that field. They outsourced? It's no surprise that a business is seeking higher profits no matter the location. It's a business. You work for it and not vice versa.

They are called benefits and not rights for a reason.

My overall argument to you, for this subject, is that you have choices. You can work where you want for what they offer. You are the only person that can decide how you want your value added to be compensated with for what is available to you at the time given your skills or lack thereof. Be thankful for that. It's not preferable to have to do away with things in your life that you have grown accustom to and have been lead to believe that it is your constitutional right to have. Yes, there are people who are corrupt and screw over the "common folk", but they do so right under your nose. You can stop it or mitigate its effects on you before it gets bad. Until peoples' quality of life is severely decreased, the "common folk" do nothing about it. This is what separates your line of thinking from mine. While you complain/whine/half-assed protest that you're getting screwed over in every way possible, I do whatever it takes to keep myself and my family fed, sheltered, and happy. Did I have to protest to demand what you call your basic rights? No, I spent my time wisely doing things I didn't want to do, living without things I wanted to have. Tough shit.


You are not entitled to anything. You are not special. You are the only one that can guarantee your own standard-of-living. I am 100% certain there are a range of things you can be doing to better your situation, but they require hard choices, and that is the problem.

[Samoht]

Right, spoken like a true Republican who's only goal is to protect his profits and trample all over the rights of the common worker. You're the poster child for why regulation on every level is necessary.