Wrong. Liberals erroneously "believe" that capitalism produces losers, but that's stupid enough. I mean, how stupid do you have to be to believe that capitalism "produces" losers? Capitalism may expose losers for what they are naturally, but it cannot "produce" them.
The problem with capitalism though is most people think the only thing motivating it is sheer greed. I don't think so. Those who try capitalism with sheer greed at their roots fail miserably. Only those people who think of ways to save other people money, do things easier, make someone else's life easier, provide some comfort or luxury are the ones who make it.
Really and truly the motivation is adventure, or problem solving, or thinking about the other guy.
Doesn't it suck having to wash clothes by hand? Why not have an electric washing machine?
It saves time, effort, and is designed to make someone's life easier.
Getting rich is just the consquence of an otherwise noble cause. Getting rich is of course factored in there somewhere but its the ideas that serve the public that best that turn the dollars.
Fundamentally its totally moral.
I believe part of the problem arises though when men themselves are morally evil. Say an old time sawmill owner who was the only employer in town...and he used that position to do bad things such as exploit people, force people to work 7 days with no breaks, child labor, etc for people who had little other options...
When they act like Scrooge they are not following moral Biblical teachings to be 'just masters'...
Its from the latter of these two groups that the entire Democrat Party arose and a great deal of our current political divisions are over.
The problem is Democrats equate business to evil greediness. Then they go way over the edge and push it into hysteria and the next thing you know they are trying to redistribute the profits of oil companies.
Republicans though, although there are some who swing way on the other end of the nut spectrum into similar types of hysteria, in general realize that we NEED business. They also realize that not all businessmen are evil greedy SOBs looking to screw the little guy at every turn and that they do good in the world.
Republicans in general are much more appropriately balanced in their views in my opinion.
Money represents the value in a just exchange of goods and services. It is neither morally good, or bad, because it's simply a medium of exchange. The good and bad depend on the particulars of the transaction.
Liberals and socialists are the ultimate materialists. For every social problem their answer is more money thrown at it and more government control. They always discount the influence of spiritual and moral courage, perseverance, hard work and ingenuity.
I've yet to meet a liberal that's a business owner. Not saying they aren't out there, just that I haven't met one.
They feel the winners must be forced into helping the losers.My favorite line on all this, which I first saw right here on FR, is: If it's not your money, it's not charity. I would add that it's thievery.
Libs question the morality of conservatism and capitalism all the time, but what's moral about what they're doing?
Redistribution discourages winners from producing and losers from trying. It leaves everyone bitter.One hundred percent correct. It's certainly had that effect on me. Why break your back working hard when libs have stacked the deck against you?
Consider the tax burden: 39% top rate for the Feds, another 10-12% in state income taxes, for a total of 51%.
But wait, that's not all: About one third of the cost to consumers of all the goods and services they buy is, in effect, a tax charged to companies and legally passed along by them to consumers; corporations don't pay taxes, people pay taxes.
So whenever we hear a socialist saying, "tax the corporations, tax the corporations!" they're really saying, "tax you!" 'Rats refuse, of course, to recognize this as a tax on individuals. But if it is a tax, and individuals end up paying it, what else do you call it? At any rate, we can add another 30% to our total tax burden, because it is a tax, for a total of about 80%.
But wait! We're not finished there either. There's a state sales tax for most of us, which is an additional 8% or 9% tax on almost everything we purchase. Let's say 7%. Now we're up to a total tax burden of 87%.
But wait! We're not done yet: There are property taxes, fees to hunt, fees to fish, fees to smog a car, drive a car, register a car or a boat, tolls to cross bridges, fees for a damned day pass to visit a damned park, unreimbursed mandated expenses like insurance, etc.... And a big, fat, juicy fine if you're late paying any of it! C'mon, that's another 5 to 10% at least for all those fees. That's being conservative, pardon the pun. Now we're up to a total tax burden of 92% to 97% for some of us. If you're in the lucky middle class, it may only be 85% WOOHOO, all you middle class people out there, don't you feel lucky?
Darn right people are unmotivated and bitter. I'm surprised anyone is giving anything at all to charity. Nowadays, when charities ask me for a donation, I'm always tempted to say that I give at the IRS. But anyway, libs tax us at 85-95% and then notice that charitable giving doesn't fill the need. Well, DUH! Their solution? Why, tax us even more to fill that need!
Sometimes I think it'd probably be best if we all just voted for democrats, actually let the libs take over the whole country and tax us at 150% (math is totally irrelevant to democrats and may actually be a hate crime) Then when they come for the clothes off your kids' backs and the food off their plate, maybe then people would finally be motivated enough to fight back.
Big sore point with me. Sorry for the rant.
>>Forced help hurts everyone, say conservatives. Redistribution discourages winners from producing and losers from trying. It leaves everyone bitter. <<
I cannot believe he was able to so succinctly verbalize my views here, right down to the core problem as stated in the four word summary.
The Medieval Jews in Europe, not allowed to own land and having their Mosaically derived ability to trust each other to do pretty much what they agreed to do, invented letters of credit and exchanged bills of lading at appropriate discounts for the risks of shipping, etc. The Christians on the Northeastern European coast learned to do it, too, and had that expectation of performance that came from their religion. Christianity overcame tribalism and Judaic practice, while largely tribal in itself, was spread throughout the Western World by the Diaspora.
In Asia the expectation, in dealings between men was that each will lie to the other and one cannot be expected to keep his word to one outside of the family or clan. The most extreme development of this attitude is among Arabs and Arabized populations. Long range trading remained within trading families and never developed very far until the advent of the Judeao-Christian traders and the necessity to compete with them. Most large-scale movement of goods was between royal courts or the result of raiding and conquest. Even now Chinese companies are, in China, mostly of the family type in that the large ones are government(artificial family) operations and exceedingly corrupt. The great Overseas Chinese Corporations have, until quite recently, been strictly family operations. The first attempts to enter the Western market by hiring foreign executives failed because the family members could not bring themselves to trust the outsiders and the outsiders knew well that they were not trusted.
There is and always been double dealing and villainy among the business class and there are atheists and others but the cultural norm is honesty and the developed free market is such that such dishonesty rapidly removes the villains from the marketplace. Their companies fail because cheating is ultimately inefficient and cannot continue longterm without government protection but that is an outside problem, not part of Judeo-Christian capitalism.