DUmmie FUnnies 01-24-05 ("Is 'capitalism' good or bad?")

Hidden beneath the public face of many Democrats is the fact that they are SOCIALISTS. In most other countries Socialists are not afraid to proclaim themselves as such but here in the U.S.A. the liberals are more afraid of the S-word than the L-word. However, among themselves, the hardcore leftist Democrats are not shy about expressing their disdain of Free Enterprise (capitalism) as you can see in this DUmmie THREAD titled, “Is ‘capitalism’ good or bad?” After reading the DUmmie comments, you will know why I put them in Bolshevik Red while the capitalist commentary of your humble correspondent is in the [brackets]:

Is "capitalism" good or bad? And does capitalism add or subtract from a democracy. After all, capitalism is presently rampant in China and they are far from a democracy so we should not confuse capitalism with democracy, per se. One is political and the other is economic. A communist country can have capitalism and prosper...at least for a while. What type of "democracy" would we have if we did not have capitalism within the system? What if we were economic socialists? Would that be better or worse than the current system of government?

[Somehow methinks the VAST majority of the DUmmies will be answering the last question in the AFFIRMATIVE.]

You are absolutetly correct. Capitalism is the survival of the fittest. In a true capitalist society, we would get rid of people who weren't productive: let the terminally sick die, banish the elderly to mountain tops, and the retarded and handicapped might be killed out right. We would have no art, only Hollywood thrillers. We would have no nature, only an outdoor theme park created by Disney. Obviously, this is not what we want as a christian nation. This is the number one reason why I vote democratic: because the republicans want a pure capitalism that would destroy anything that didn't have a dollar value, and all the great things in life are free.

[Does that mean that unborn babies won’t be killed under Socialism? Also I guess that Renaissance Italy must have been Socialist because there was a great artistic flowering back them.]

I've owned a little neighborhood bar for 13 years now. Believe it or not I did save a few hundred bucks a month after the tax cuts but those corporate whores got f*cking billions!!!

[Better take a stiff drink at your bar and figure out how owning a small business will get you tax cuts worth billions. See, if you pay $20,000 in taxes, a 25% cut will save you $5000. But if you pay $12 billion in taxes then a 10% tax cut will save you $1.2 billion. So you want to save a billion bucks in taxes when you currently pay $20,000 at your little bar? Pour yourself yet ANOTHER drink.]

My husband and I are "little guy" self employed 1 man business. We hate bush because his policies hurt our business .

Without capitalism many rights that we as a country cherish either couldn't be provided or would be empty.

[Whisper that gently into Fidel Castro’s ear and he may let you stay the night.]

A very limited private enterprise system with a largely socialist regulatory hierarchy in place.

Capitalism is good because you can work hard to achieve something and hope to get some financial reward for your efforts.

The capitalists use up all of the peoples natural resources without compensating them. They pollute their air, land and water which is theirs by natural right, taking away the peoples rights to clean air, land and water. They are never given anything in return for allowing the capitalist to use their resources. Oil belongs to the earth and its inhabitants not to the people who steal it and sell it for their own gain. We should try to see a different paradigm. A better world is possible if we could only imagine it on a collective level.

[Ah! How fondly we remember that pristine environmental paradise in the former Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics.]

Democracy and capitalism are NOT the same thing. In fact unless its managed and regulated very carefully, capitalism erodes and destroys democracy.

[Regulate and stomp on capitalism before it has a chance of making people wealthy.]

There is absolutely zero positive about capitalism be it small business or big business the parameters of an economy based on capital is incapable of gauging and living within the limits of the land. a more egalitarian way of divvying up a profit-growth based economy still does not take into consideration the sacredness of work and the intrinsic value of non-human beings. Vandana Shiva speaks pointedly of how tired she is of hearing "they're only living on a dollar a day" plaints. She elaborates with stories of how wonderfully the people in her area of Punjab Province were doing living on zero dollars a day. Capital is not a form of economic measurement or medium of exchange it is a form of control. history bears this out from the early forms of 'capita' to our present transnational corps. capitalism and slavery go hand in glove.

[And who produces Vandana’s Bandana? Somehow I don’t think the folks in the Punjab are going to work for zero dollars per day.]

Capitalism is a disaster. It produces an obscene amount of plastic garbage. It wastes countless amounts of precious time of people by pelting them constantly with audio and visual trash (advertising, which is also a major waste of trees and bandwidth as well). It rewards people for being a jerk and punishes them for being born in the wrong place at the wrong time.

[You were definitely born in the wrong place and the wrong time. You should have been born about a hundred years ago in Moscow so you could have joined the Bolsheviks and participated in the Chekhist purge of the bourgeoisie. I bet you salivate over that prospect.]

Normally a thread like this would be overwhelmingly filled with anti-Capitalist diatribes, not the collection of reasonable responses I just finished reading...

Anyway, if you don't know about bioregionalism, you should at least read up a little on it. What is bioregionalism? Bioregionalism is a fancy name for living a rooted life. Sometimes called "living in place," bioregionalism means you are aware of the ecology, economy and culture of the place where you live, and are committed to making choices that enhance them. A bioregion is an area that shares similar topography, plant and animal life, and human culture. Bioregions are often organized around watersheds, and they can be nested within each other. Bioregional boundaries are usually not rigid, and often differ from political borders around counties, states, provinces and nations. Ideally, bioregions are places that could be largely self-sufficient in terms of food, products and services, and would have a sustainable impact on the environment.

Remembering that untill the computer chip the Soviet economy was equal to ours and in being honest with ourselves, we've been taken-in by the glimmer Capitalism sells us on which plays on the natural human sence of greed and other psychological responses, the result has always been and always will be nothing more than a game of 'winner take all' and as always the majority loose. To me it's nothing more than economic/corporate feudalism really, really polished-up. I could be wrong here, but I beleive it was Alexander Hamilton who said that the advent of the corporation would be the greatest threat to individual freedom this country would face. If so: Has he been proven wrong? Capitalism, with or without 'regulation has been nothing but a fight between the political institutions' protection of the wealthy class and corporations against the intrests of the average citizen, the enviroment and the future. Just look at the new article on CBS Market-Watch today about corporations using a loop-hole to make millions in profit on their employees 401 K deductions that the employees never see. This is the equivilant of stealing their money. So? It's legal. One could bang his/her keyboard until one was blind listing all the ways capialism fails, is abusive, is destroying futures, lives, hope and dreams, the enviorment...Norm Chomsky said it best: Corporate Capitaism only wants one thing; they want it all. As far as regulation goes: Phooy. We've done that. For decades. Then we get sold on de-regulation. It's not "how do we fine-tune this machine to run different?" This machine was invented and designed to accomplish one goal: Protect and keep the 'haves' from the 'have-nots'. Don't beleive me? Think about this: Consumerism is the biggest insult to any nations' people. Run down to wal-mart and buy cheap crap you really don't need made by people getting slave wages in the country your job was outsourced to that destroys the other jobs in your community that drive the wages down so you go to wal-mart to buy cheap crap made in the country your job was outsourced to because that is now all you can afford because you are now getting closer to making slave wages...Screw Capitalism. Fire your boss. Socialism is not a dirty word.

[“Screw Capitalism. Fire your boss. Socialism is not a dirty word.” Please enter that into the Democrat Party Platform in 2008. Oh, and don’t forget to tell us from the convention stage how the Soviet economy was the equal of ours until the advent of the computer chip. We could use the comedy relief.]

I'm disappointed that people do not see that most of the problems our country faces right now are mostly due to the corporate greed and capitalism that has covered our nation like a blanket...Capitalism is the problem - not the solution.

[Aww! You’re disappointed! How sad. I’ll sing you the Internationale lullaby at bedtime to cheer you up.]

Greed must be controlled for the good of the people. Indeed, we will destroy our environment and ourselves unless we come to the realization that there must be limits on how far we permit capitalism to go.

[The main thing is not to allow capitalism to permit anybody to earn profits. That type of greed must definitely be controlled for the good of the people.]

The MODERN capitalist system is a dinosaur when it comes to actually responding to new demands. It's unparalleled when it comes to manufacturing wants that comply with the production desires of the captains of industry. But then again, I'm much more of a John Kenneth Galbraith fan than you probably are, and I happen to think that Milton Friedman is one of the biggest crocks of shit out there.

So some time ago, I got sick of hearing a lot of "little people" (people who work for a wage, etc.) saying things like, "Well, we have the best system in the world... the market will take care of it... it all depends on what the market will bear... blah blah blah." So next time I hear someone (unless it happens to be the CEO a multi-billion-dollar corporation, and I seldom talk to such people!) say that, I'm gonna say in reply: "If you are such a believer in PURE capitalism, with NO BRAKES on it, then next time you are hungry, I demand that you be required to immediately go out and kill something if you want to eat. And every time you want to eat, I demand that you go out and kill something before you are allowed to eat." Because that's the sort of world we live in if we have PURE, unfettered capitalism. And if they want to live in it, then IMO, they need to be consistent about it!

Capitalism is as beautiful a thing as man has ever created. No system has ever provided so much for so many, or lifted the standard of living to such remarkable levels. America is not wealthy, powerful, and so filled with opportunity because government makes it that way. It's because economic freedom can bring out the best in mankind. If you don't believe it, ask yourself why so many thousands of people from all over the world flock to this country in hordes, both legally and illegally, some of them dying in transit, to take advantage of the opportunities here. They are not flocking to Cuba or Iran, and with good reason.

It is illegal not regulated.

That line is a bit too fine. Anything that is regulated is done so by defining one or more activities associated with it as illegal.

Cocaine simply has virtually all aspects of its production, distribution and consumption defined as illegal.

Liquor, for instance, is also regulated, but to a lesser degree. Some, but not all, aspects of its production, distribution and consumption defined as illegal. If you are under age, or have an open container where it is prohibited, or if you manugacture more than the regulations allow, the difference between "regulated" alcohol and "illegal" cocaine comes close to vanishing entirely, except for the penalty involved.

The social ramifications of deregulating (legalizing) almost certainly are more dangerous for those people who currently do not consume it soley due to legal risks, but are certainly less dangerous for those people who currently engage in the illegal activities involved with consumption and/or procurement. Those who do not consume it because they simply don't want to could possibly enjoy a slightly reduced risk of robbery, theft due to decreased cost for the addicts, and perhaps increased availability of law enforcement resources that are currently devoted to interdiction.

Is it a wash? I don't know, likey not. Likely more people would become users, and become addicted.

But on your main point, I agree that more controls = more cost, mostly with little added benefit.

I personally would love to live that "back to the land, Mother Earth News" lifestyle.
One small problem-
Taxes- driven by liberal giveaways- ensure that anybody who wants that lifestyle must generate substantial cash income to pay said taxes.
Therefore, it is liberal social programs, and the taxes they spawn, that force people into the capitalist trade economy.
Nowadays, I'd have to bust my butt to raise enough meat, produce and firewood to pay my over $4,000 a year in property taxes- plus there'd be income tax, social security and utilities. There'd be nothing left for ourselves.
Why should I live like a serf on my own land?
So I leave the land fallow and commute to my job in my evil SUV. This way only half my annual income goes to taxes.

Don't know if you were kidding, but. . .

Burr shot Hamilton because he was a Federalist snob, not because he was a Capitalist pig. This was in July 1804.
Hamilton was solid with the monied elite in NYC and would have been a devout capitalist- he surely read Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations" (published in 1776.)

Indiana wasn't admitted as a state until December 1816- was still 'Indian territory' (hence the name) in 1804.
("Treaty? What treaty?")

The Drake well in Titus ville, PA (first commercial oil well) was drilled in 1859.

And it was my man TJ (Thomas Jefferson) who said (in a speech against the creation of a central bank):
"If we allow the banks to control the supply of currency by inflation and deflation, then those banks, and the corporations which grow up around them, will so impoverish this nation that one day our Grandchildren will awaken to find themselves homeless in this land which their Grandfathers conquered."

Remembering that untill the computer chip the Soviet economy was equal to ours

That's a new one. I studied Soviet History for 3 of my 5 college years and I remember one my professors--a former citizen of the USSR--claiming otherwise. But what did he know?--he only grew up in the USSR prior to the "computer chip".

Ya gotta love those "educated" DUmmies in those blue states.

Remembering that untill the computer chip the Soviet economy was equal to ours and in being honest with ourselves,

What a lie! It is this sort of ignorance of the truth that make me crazy when speaking to one of these pseudointellectuals: having bought the lie perpetrated by the New York Times in the 1940s and 1950s, they just keep repeating it and repeating it. AAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGHHHH!

I guess the computer chip is what created our economy. No mention of radio, t.v, sight bulbs, standardized manufacturing, or innumerable other "Capitalistic" inventions.

That's why we call them DUmmies. They have this tendency to forget that free people will foster the likes of Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, Andrew Carneigie and Lord knows who I am leaving out. They also forget that we established and grew a capitalistic economy without the need to commit genocide on our own people as the Soviets did. We did something so stupid and so risky that the world must think us mad. We left everybody alone to do what they wanted to.

And now? Well the left is just sick and tired of it. Why should these stupid Christians be allowed to do what they want to do? They should think, act and DO what WE want them to. To paraphrase Ann Coulter: 'stop sending your lawyers down here to tell us what to do'.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.