Can capitalism exist without govt

[Samoht]

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

You can buy large multi-bedroom houses in Detroit MI for under 50 k. Why?

You're looking at this from the buyer standpoint, but what if you were the home owner? What if you paid 300k+ for that home and are forced to take a 250k loss because of lack of government regulation? Or worse, what if the bank foreclosed on you and stole that home right from under you and your family, and you lost all of that investment?

And why are builders still building in cities with so many vacant homes already on the market? Why would a new buyer pay $150k for a 10 year old home that the owner already took a huge loss on by lowering the price down from 200+ when they can buy a brand new one across the street for less than 125? Do home builders really make that much money that they can drop the cost of making a house by 50% after 10 years and still turn profit? Or are they teamed up with the banks to help drive existing prices down and get more walkout/foreclosures on existing houses while they continue to capitalize on new home mortgages?

Either way, it's crooked.

[Hoggen]

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

You're looking at this from the buyer standpoint, but what if you were the home owner? What if you paid 300k+ for that home and are forced to take a 250k loss because of lack of government regulation? Or worse, what if the bank foreclosed on you and stole that home right from under you and your family, and you lost all of that investment?

Again, what is your solution Sam? Give houses away for free? Who decides what kind of house you live in? Do they all have to be exactly the same? If so, who will build them? You decry Capitalism but still refuse to offer an alternative.

[Hoggen]

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

this statement is extremely facetious. there are a lot of forces at work in the world that have closed down factories and mills, not the least of which is the rapid industrialization of china and their subsequent entry into the international sphere of trading...

You ignore the fact that the US government has the power to impose tariffs and has failed to do so in the face of virtual slave labor and currency manipulation on the part of China. Again the onus is on government, not Capitalism. When government fails to protect the people it supposedly represents, it's hard to blame Capitalism. Transferring wealth to the third world to equalize the misery everywhere does not lead to prosperity, but it seems to be the goal of the US government, and has been for decades. That's not Capitalism.

[pickled_heretic]

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

impose tariffs.

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

That's not Capitalism.

you said it better than I ever could have.

[Samoht]

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

the onus is on government, not Capitalism.

But since Capitalists run the government, your just shifting blame so that they're allowed to skirt the responsibility. Any time such a tariff is proposed, republicans, lobbyists, and corporations cry fowl and pump enough money into the pockets of elected officials to get it overturned.

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

When government fails to protect the people it supposedly represents

Wait, are you supporting or against me? This thread is about government regulation and intervention in economics, not defending the capitalists agenda.

[iamoenaj]

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

Spoken like a true republican! Unfortunately, since either A) the wool is over your eyes or B) you have a rather large investment in sheep, you fail to see that without regulation, a "supply" and "demand" economy quickly turns into a "withhold" and "speculate" economy. Still using modern US as an example, let's look at oil: we have plenty of crude, but the price of gasoline stays high? Why?

A) Manufacturers limit refinement so that they can create false-shortages and drive the prices up.
B) Investors create an OPEC scare saying there's going to be conflict tomorrow/next week/next year, and they drive prices up.

And after all of that, they yell, "Don't tax me, bro!"

Conglomerates need to be outlawed. Futures need to be outlawed. Without regulation at every level, the 1% will control every part of your economy and government as the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

Businesses do NOT pass savings on to consumers. They do NOT create more jobs with their wealth. They privitise their profits and pass the cost along to everybody else.

It's kind of funny how you didn't include that last few sentences of mine so that you could make this argument.

I did say there needs to be some sort of governing body. Not one that gives handouts to make people dependent on your 1%, but one that regulates unfair practices and disputes. That's it.

And once again your arguments that corporations pass their profits to the shareholders and give all the costs to the consumers..lol. Really? Stop buying their product or service if you believe that...boom.

If you're weak, you won't survive. Your way of thinking makes a good humanitarian case, but I think it's obvious to see where that has led us. The US has grown weak with less critical thinkers and ambitious people. Nobody is held accountable for their actions now. That is the problem that results from your argument of heavy regulation and policy. There is no risk but a safe little bed for you to live your life of mediocrity on.

Oh, and I'm not Republican. Like that is a put down to be affiliated with one of the two major parties? Start thinking for yourself.

[Kika Maslyaka]

Capitalism indeed CAN exist without a government
However, at in what form will it exist is a whole different issue.
For example, luck of government involvement, and strong believe that government should not control free market system, is what lead to economical crisis of 30s and great depression in US
On other hand, total government control over economy (socialist planned economy) is what lead to bankruptcy and fall of Soviet Union.

Pick your choice [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Samoht]

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

Stop buying their product or service if you believe that...boom.

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.

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

On other hand, total government control over economy (socialist planned economy) is what lead to bankruptcy and fall of Soviet Union.

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.

[Hoggen]

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

But since Capitalists run the government, your just shifting blame so that they're allowed to skirt the responsibility. Any time such a tariff is proposed, republicans, lobbyists, and corporations cry fowl and pump enough money into the pockets of elected officials to get it overturned.

Since when do "Capitalists" run the government? When has the US ever made a profit from any of its wars, charity giveaways, or foreign aid? The US government takes the product of Capitalism, i.e. Capital, and spends it. It produces nothing. Many in government steal, take bribes, or create policy that leads to them profiting, but to say the government is run by Capitalists is like saying dogs are run by fleas. Just because the government takes from the producer doesn't mean it is a producer or has any meaningful connection to the producer other than the act of taking. The current US government does little to provide for the future of the country or the current prosperity and opposes any change that threatens its hegemony on power.

You mention Republicans, lobbyists, and corporations as if Democrats don't own and run and profit from corporations and you exclude Democrats from those that block any viable legislation that will decrease the flow of wealth out of the country. Apparently you know noting of the legislation that's been approved overwhelmingly by Democrats in the past four years, let alone the laws and policies of the past ten decades. They give money to competitors and enemies to replace US interests. Specifics would be one billion given to Mexico to do deep-water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico at the same time that such drilling was banned in US waters: as if our water isn't touched by the water Mexico drills in. Another billion given to Brazil for the same purpose. Those were "stimulus" bill components.

If you go back to TARP, which was overwhelmingly passed by a Democratic congress and strongly backed by then nominee Barack Obama, you have money being given to multinational and foreign banks.

All of this in just the past three years: none of it benefiting the US in a Capitalist sense, all of it with overwhelming Democratic backing. It would seem you are a football team fan, routing for your Democrat home team that loses over and over again, while railing against the Republican football team that you perceive as the enemy. Try dealing with facts instead of emotion and propaganda.

[Samoht]

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

When has the US ever made a profit from any of its wars

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?

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

Apparently you know noting of the legislation that's been approved overwhelmingly by Democrats in the past four years

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