All economic systems end, including capitalism

[r0cky]

The moment you achieve permanent happiness, you will no longer strive to improve. That is an awful state to be in.

You should really question the above statement, not based on what you've been taught by society, but by what you really feel inside. The hardest part of implemeting a new system will be breaking away from thousands of years of social programming which have made our entire population say statements like yours.

Happiness is what motivates every single thing you do in life. But permanent happiness means the end of progress, and the ego hates conclusions, it always wants more.

 

[JustLurk]

The problem is that today, people don't use the government to uphold the system, but rather to undermine it. Either the corporate leaders offer the politicians campaign money in exchange for uncapitalistic favors, or the impoverished masses offer the politicians votes in exchange for uncapitalistic favors.
The problem is that today, people don't use the government to uphold the system, but rather to undermine it. Each favor granted by the government gives the group paying for it a small boost in the short term, but goes toward undermining the system as a whole.

That's it. We're done here. /thread
... Except, of course, that the rich megacorporations that pull this kind of thing are multinational. Hmm, why does it matter to them to undermine the US economy over the long term? They're not basing production in the US. They're multinational. They can milk this economy, and when the money shifts to another country they'll abandon ship and move there. Of course, the poor are sort of stuck with this system. Heh. Sucks to be poor.

Is it any wonder why most big corporations are moving their factories and offices OUT of the United States? Do you not understand why we don't build stuff in this country (US) any more? Because you have Mr. Obama up there in the White House talking about balancing the budget by "taxing rich corporations". WHY would those companies stay here in America, where they have worked hard to build empires by providing value to you, the consumer, only to have you, the consumer, demand a cut of the wealth YOU paid to them?

Yeah, why? There's so many poor countries with low taxes and low minimum wage they can use, why on earth would they pay taxes in the US? Why would they hire workers in the US? Why not get wealth from US customers, pay taxes and wages somewhere cheapter, and go develop more? Outside of the US? Taking the money outside of the US? LOL at trickle-down economics. More like trickle-out.

The economy in the US is turning south because it just doesn't PAY to do business here any more.

It sure pays to do business here. Lots of rich people buying lots of stuff. It just doesn't pay businesses to SPEND money here. So they move everything that involves SPENDING money OUT of the US and leave only the infrastructure designed to GAIN money.

Also, you can raise the taxes on big business all you want. They'll* just redistribute the profit using tried-and-true loopholes like charging parts of the company for services done pro-bono by other parts of the system. Computer problems? IT department charges your department 200K in funny money. You pay it right out of your profit margin. Raise bonuses all around. Extra goes to shareholders. Result? 0 profit or even negative profit. Thus, you see multibillion dollar coroporations in the US paying exactly 0$ taxes. Hahhhahahahahahhahhahahhahhah. Can YOU do that? Can a small business get away with that? Can Joe Taxpayer get away with that? Hahahhahha try it and get your ass reamed in jail! :yes: :yes: :yes: ( I suppose you can tell me corporations are not people, and that's why this is. You're right! Good for you! But corporations do enjoy legal protections not granted to individuals while also classified in some way MASSIVE OVERSIMPLIFICATION IF THIS IS IMPORTANT TO YOU CONSULT A LAWER/LAW PROFESSOR FOR EXPLANATION as people under US law.
Oh yeaahhhh. To be rich in America, like a BOSS. :trouble: :trouble: :trouble: Take Warren Buffet. Who himself pointed out here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/27/AR2007062700097.html that he paid a lower % of his taxes than his recptionist did. Without using tax shelters. Take GE, who paid 0$ income tax in 2010. (GE: AWWWEEEEE YEEEAAHHHH!!!!)

*SOME. Some companies have a good reputation, pay lots in taxes, are involved in communities, treat workers well, have a CEO that comes around and is actually nice, etc. An example of this often cited by their customers (I'm not one so I'm not sure.) is USAA. I've heard lots of good stuff about them. Funnily enough they're not a shareholder'd (Publicly traded) company. Huh. Just a coincidence, no doubt. Move along.

 

[Inquisitus]

Since its in the best interest of capitalism to have a growing population, they are promoting over population. Overpopulation also leads to scarcity of basic necesities. Scarcity means higher profits for businesses. So it is in their best interest to maintain a production that is always less than the population growth. This means that under capitalism there will always be many people who will lack basic necessities.

Hate to break it to you but wealth actually has the opposite effect on population growth. Quite a few of the wealthiest nations have birth rates which are lower than needed for population growth. The exception is the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub-replacement_fertility

The wealthier the country, the more expensive child rearing becomes.

 

[StateOfMind]

I watched all of the zeitgeist films, i agree with the social and economic aspects of the movie. Peter Joseph outlines very concerning flaws of our way of life, things that I have thought before in the past. He pretty much says to use strictly SCIENCE, using the Scientific Method for social problems.

Also Joseph does explain the economic flaws brilliantly(Watch the films)
He pretty much exposes the scam, how the failing system operates and that this economy is based on DEBT. Also he humors that our economy is really just the opposite. That bussinesses essentially, Create **** products for more money(Having us rebuy same products) I must say i totally agree, how is this an economy if almost every product is created cheaply? Its the total opposite of true economics. Its not pro economic to create a chair out of cheap products for it to just break easily. People call the Prius, "Economy Cars" Why? Because they are economically smart, saves money and reduces emissions to enviroment.

All in all... I take what the films are worth, that our social eqality is ****. You cant argue that(Watch parts 1-3 of the third film)

 

[Kerpal]

Since its in the best interest of capitalism to have a growing population, they are promoting over population.

Who is "they"? The Illuminati? Skull & Bones? The Trilateral Commission?

Overpopulation also leads to scarcity of basic necesities.

You've got it backwards. Capitalism has made people rich beyond comparison throughout human history. Poor people in the US live like kings compared to poor people in centrally planned economies like North Korea. And the poorer people are, the more children they have.

Scarcity means higher profits for businesses. So it is in their best interest to maintain a production that is always less than the population growth.

Huh? You're telling me every business has a team of actuaries studying population growth charts in order to determine just how many widgets to produce? And all businesses are secretly collaborating to make sure each one produces just the right amount?

This means that under capitalism there will always be many people who will lack basic necessities.

There will always be people who lack basic necessities no matter what. No system is perfect. But for some reason I don't see many people emigrating from the US to North Korea.

:crackup:

 

[n00bPimp]

I dont think pure capitalism really ever existed.

 

[r0cky]

Who is "they"? The Illuminati? Skull & Bones? The Trilateral Commission?

Businesses

You've got it backwards. Capitalism has made people rich beyond comparison throughout human history. Poor people in the US live like kings compared to poor people in centrally planned economies like North Korea. And the poorer people are, the more children they have

They have more children, but how many survive to working age? Capitalism has made a few people rich. Moreover, richness is relative. There have always been people with more resources than others. People in the US live like kings at the expense of the poor. For ex. billions of people in the 3rd world work their ass off for pennies an hour in sneaker factories just so that a few millions of us can have a nice pair of sneakers you will be throwing away in a few months. Again, CAPITALISM ENRICHES THE FEW AT THE EXPENSE OF THE MANY.

Huh? You're telling me every business has a team of actuaries studying population growth charts in order to determine just how many widgets to produce? And all businesses are secretly collaborating to make sure each one produces just the right amount?

Its called the law of supply and demand. You profit the most when demand and supply intersect, in other words, when demand is halfway met. In order to know the demand you must know the population. There's no secret meeting going on, its not needed, its all reflected in your profits. Do a little research on the invisible hand.

There will always be people who lack basic necessities no matter what. No system is perfect. But for some reason I don't see many people emigrating from the US to North Korea.

There is no perfect system, YET. I assume you did not watch the video.

 

[Julius_Seizeher]

Capitalism is the only honest economic system because it is the only one that requires man to provide for his own survival. It is the only system that doesn't pretend that the values man requires for his survival can be wished (or printed) out of thin air.

One man grows corn, one man makes steel, another man makes clothes and so on, and money is the living symbol of their desire to deal with each other by means of reason. It is the physical, non-arbitrary value they trade for value. If you negate the principal of money, if you hold money as evil and productive work as a curse, the barrel of a gun is the only physical value that can take the place of money.

Blood or dollars? Prosperity or starvation? Life or death?

Look at what is happening in Europe now. Germany is the only country that could be called "thriving". Strangely, France is keeping its head above water. But the countries that produce nothing, that value sitting around rotting (or "experiencing") over living an honest and productive life, are producing nothing but debt and are begging their neighbors for handouts. Greece is the worst.

An individual must produce the values required for his own survival. My lungs cannot breathe in place of yours, my brain cannot think in place of yours. And the same is true for a nation as it is for a man-it must produce. There is honor in producing the bare minimum for your survival, as at least you are not begging or threatening someone else to provide for you. But is it not ironic that the man who carries the highest personal ambition is the same man who provides the opportunities for other men to live on their own two feet, as men rightly should? The man who knows that he can live only one life (his own) and who desires to go as far as he can take himself, is the man who pulls everyone else behind him.

I know who my heroes are and why I want to be like them-my heroes are industrialists. They are the men who move the world and, if you are religious, "take upon themselves the regeneration of the earth." Without industrialists the world would be a place of mindless ruins and tribal warfare. Before you are so quick to demonize the man who makes it his goal to make money, check your premises.

 

[JustLurk]

Germany is the only country that could be called "thriving".

You're a funny guy, really. Platitudes for Germany while you pine for -lasses- (spelled wrong I know, spellcheck) faire policy of hands-off government? Really?

Germany is the best-case scenario for economic improvement as a result of government regulation!

The brief story is that, despite its reputation for austerity, Germany has been far more willing than the United States to use the power of government to help its economy.
serious regulation. American regulators stood idle as the housing bubble inflated. German banks often required a down payment of 40 percent.
German laws and regulators have also prevented the decimation of their labor unions.The top 1 percent of German households earns about 11 percent of all income, virtually unchanged relative to 1970, according to recent estimates. In the United States, the top 1 percent makes more than 20 percent of all income, up from 9 percent in 1970.
Germany does not have a smaller budget deficit because it spends less. Germany, you’ll recall, is the original welfare state. It has a smaller deficit because it is more willing to match the benefits it wants with the needed taxes. The current deficit-reduction plan includes about 60 percent spending cuts and 40 percent tax increases

 

[Kerpal]

Sorry, double post.

 

[Kerpal]

I always chuckle when people try to draw comparisons between 2 entirely different countries with different histories, populations, demographics, cultures, etc.

As for the housing bubble thing, a lot of that can be blamed ON the government, ie FNMA, FHLMC, and the Fed. I'm no economist, but I think it's a little ridiculous to blame "capitalism" when everything falls apart because the government kept interest rates artificially low, forced banks to make subprime mortgages, and insured those mortgages with taxpayer money. That's the furthest thing from true capitalism.

 

[Kerpal]

They have more children, but how many survive to working age?

Plenty of them, their populations keep growing and growing. Maybe if they allowed true free market principles to take effect they wouldn't have overpopulation and resource shortage problems. Economic development is the best form of contraception.

People in the US live like kings at the expense of the poor. For ex. billions of people in the 3rd world work their ass off for pennies an hour in sneaker factories just so that a few millions of us can have a nice pair of sneakers you will be throwing away in a few months.

But they still take the jobs. What's the alternative, having no jobs at all? How is that a better situation?

Its called the law of supply and demand. You profit the most when demand and supply intersect, in other words, when demand is halfway met. In order to know the demand you must know the population. There's no secret meeting going on, its not needed, its all reflected in your profits. Do a little research on the invisible hand.

Supply and demand curves intersect at equilibrium, not when "demand is halfway met". I learned that in high school. I think you should take Economics 101 before you try to lecture me about the invisible hand.

In a true free market, if businesses colluded to cause shortages and drive up prices by only halfway meeting demand, new businesses would enter the market and drive prices back down. The problem occurs when governments prevent new corporations from entering the market. This situation is not the fault of "capitalism"; in fact, it's the complete opposite of true capitalism.

 

[robert Steves]

I have seen this .This documentary is very best effort but let me share my compliment with you that mixed economy is perfect solution now a days.
obedience training

 

[sstype]

Any economic system is doomed to fail when the people in the system become corrupted with vices like unbridled greed, laziness, and unearned entitlement.

Germany's economy is a powerhouse, even with strong workers rights, high progressive income/VAT taxation, and broad government intervention. By Julius's logic, the country would be a socialist hellhole.

The reason they flourish is because culturally, German people value hard work, efficiency, and the well-being of their society. If overnight, they swapped their mixed economy for a pure free market, they would still prosper.

Norway is the epitome of socialism and big government, yet they are ranked #1 in entrepreneurs per capita. Ranked one of the most transparent and least corrupt nations

And on the flip-side, free market economies in Singapore and Hong Kong prosper. Like Norway, both countries have strong anti-corruption measures.

Whereas here in our country, its all about "ME, ME, ME and my money at all costs, and everyone else can f*ck off" This mentality is prevalent in our culture, from the welfare cheat, to the corrupt government regulator receiving kickbacks, to the CEO getting a bonus for offshoring American jobs, to your neighbor cheating on his taxes. Is it any wonder we're in a such mess now?

The underlying culture of a nation drives the success of its economic system. A strong sense of national pride, civic duty, transparency, and zero tolerance against corruption is what allows innovation, entrepreneurship, and upward mobility to flourish.


It's easy to scapegoat government, the free market, capitalism, socialism, Obama, Bush, high taxes, evil bankers, welfare queens, illegal immigrants, lazy poor people, etc.

The problem with our country starts with looking in the mirror.

 

[n00bPimp]

I am sick to death of hearing the above statements by uneducated idiots.

Have you EVER been to a third world country? If so, tell me which? I have and I can tell you that your assumptions are quite wrong.

Do people in places like India and China get paid less? Yes. But do you think the cost of living there is anything close to the USA? It is NOT. Travel the world before you start making idiot statements.

Myself living the first decade of my life in Peru I have witnessed what it is putting your wife and underage kids to work just to pay for food and housing, forget clothing.

 

[JustLurk]

That problem exists everywhere. Third World countries do not have a monopoly on such problems. And they certainly are not caused by Business coming in to provide work. My main point though is that people say they get paid "pennies" and those same people have done little to no research, it is an urban myth at worst and downright wrong at best.

Has anyone every PRICED products in China or India? Or South Africa? I have been to these places and I can tell you that I bought a VERY nice leather jacket in India for $50. That same jacket would cost almost $400 in the US. In a mall in Durban, South Africa I saw a nice 57 inch flat screen tv for HALF the price you would find in Wal-mart. For god's sake people, stop perpetuating lies and myths.

Also, People need to remember that these third-world countries already had problems with a standard of living. "Greedy Businesses" did not cause that. They are actually providing jobs and making it easier to survive and attain wealth than it was prior to the Business ever arriving.

A rock rolls into a hard place. Will the rock be at fault, or the hard place?

 

[n00bPimp]

Ha, nice quote. My point is that Businesses bring wealth to places, the problem is that EVERYONE has become entitled and are incapable of seeing past this basic fact.

Imagine how poor these places would be without Businesses? How would these people get food or shelter then?

Before capitalism there was no such thing as businesses, people back then used a system of bartering. and ebfore bartering I'm sure people got around just fine. otherwise we wouldnt be here.

 

[JustLurk]

Ha, nice quote.

A modification of a quote. I don't recall seeing this exact quote anywhere. The point is similiar though, I think.

My point is that Businesses bring wealth to places,

Not always. Businesses can form either symbiotic or parasitic relationships with the places they visit. Sometimes they bring men with guns and take resources. Sometimes they pay people on the land to do it for them. Another example is in those various superrich areas surrounded by slums. The wealth in cases like this are very concentrated in a small segment of the population.

is that EVERYONE has become entitled and are incapable of seeing past this basic fact.

What do they feel entitled to?

Imagine how poor these places would be without Businesses? How would these people get food or shelter then?

Pretty damn poor. I don't deny that, in some cases, the advent of international business has increased quality of money. It's just not in every case. In some cases, businesses have taken advantage of power and a weak or manipulatable government to ruin the environment of certain countries and to harvest resources. They've also abused workers by ignoring safely concerns noted in more developed countries. Were they richer off in some cases? Sure. But their health, their land, and their resources were all depleted. Perhaps if they had self-developed they could have taken advantage of their own resources. And then there's the cases (Going back further in history to present times.) where a military, mercenary, or monetary force was brought to bear against 3rd world countries. I would argue, in these cases, that the quality of life and riches was lowered.

 

[Kerpal]

Bartering is still a form of capitalism.

+1

If I cut a tree down and sharpen some stones and make spears, and you kill some animals and skin them, and we trade my spears for your animal skins with no outside interference from anyone else, we just engaged in a free market, capitalist transaction.

 

[r0cky]

I notice that my other thread about the June 14th rebellion was taken down. Wouldn't be surprised if this one does too. Anyways here's a link with the latest info and new sites of protests.
http://ampedstatus.org/activists-to...-met-operation-empire-state-rebellion-begins/

Ps. Largest attack in the history of information coming in the next few days. Make sure you dont use the same password for everything.