Income Inequality

[Danoff]

I actually don't agree with the whole "different types of Capitalism".

Any sort of Capitalism will always be Capitalism, you can't just give it unique titles when people exploit the system and "hack" it for personal gain.

What about non-capitalism? That's as much capitalism as crony-capitalism.

 

[FoolKiller]

Because people have trouble with the "capitalism" of crony-capitalism, I just call it cronyism.

They still don't really understand what the difference is, but it visually separates it from capitalism. Socialists have done a very good job of convincing the world that cronyism is capitalism. If socialism does one thing well, it is deceiving the masses.

 

[A2K78]

Capitalism has always been perfect as its the most moral system out there, problem is the fact it has become corrupted by its crony form thanks in part to state interventions.

 

[Joel]

"Cronyism" isn't a bug. It's a feature.

 

[Johnnypenso]

"Cronyism" isn't a bug. It's a feature.

Can you name any system of governance or economic management that does not feature cronyism? It's a feature of life, not just capitalism.

 

[mustafur]

The fact is Capitalism isn't compatible with Democracy(a socialist stance) to remain pure.

It gets even worse when you add a twisted view from the constitution which allows corporations to be people and therefore buy the government.

Capitalism + Democracy = Oligarchy.

How strong the oligarchy is depends on several factors but pretty much this across the board.

 

[squadops]

It gets even worse when you add a twisted view from the constitution which allows corporations to be people and therefore buy the government.

Can you show me that please?

 

[mustafur]

Can you show me that please?

what? Im talking about how the Supreme court has allowed this via the 1st amendment.

The 14th amendments definition has been twisted to allow this to happen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood

 

[squadops]

Can you show me that please?

 

[mustafur]

Probably should looked at what I posted then.

 

[squadops]

Well excuse me for missing your ninja edit

Thank you for the link, I shall have a close look and see what you are on about. I'm not sure how 1 = 14 but whatever, I know this argument a little bit and I've never understood what people were so upset about. Something about I'll believe a corporation is a person when Texas hangs one' haha.

If you have further writings about this I'd like to see, I'm not looking for information to throw back at you, I don't really know what the deal is all about 👍

 

[mustafur]

Well excuse me for missing your ninja edit

Thank you for the link, I shall have a close look and see what you are on about. I'm not sure how 1 = 14 but whatever, I know this argument a little bit and I've never understood what people were so upset about. Something about I'll believe a corporation is a person when Texas hangs one' haha.

If you have further writings about this I'd like to see, I'm not looking for information to throw back at you, I don't really know what the deal is all about 👍

Once you go in the direction of saying a corporation is a Person you end up creating situations where Citizens United can pass legalising political bribes.

 

[Danoff]

The fact is Capitalism isn't compatible with Democracy(a socialist stance) to remain pure.

It gets even worse when you add a twisted view from the constitution which allows corporations to be people and therefore buy the government.

Capitalism + Democracy = Oligarchy.

How strong the oligarchy is depends on several factors but pretty much this across the board.

Turns out the US isn't capitalist or a democracy. The US is a constitutionally limited socialist republic (currently). Democracy in its pure form is the rule of the mob, and it doesn't work. The reason it doesn't work is known as the "tyranny of the majority". Why we'd want an economic system that is compatible with the rule of the mob I don't know. 200 years ago the folks that got the US off the ground knew this, and so they created a constitutionally limited republic.

Once you go in the direction of saying a corporation is a Person you end up creating situations where Citizens United can pass legalising political bribes.

So if corporations are people they can bribe politicians like... people? I take it that no campaign contribution is acceptable to you then.

 

[Johnnypenso]

The fact is Capitalism isn't compatible with Democracy(a socialist stance) to remain pure. It gets even worse when you add a twisted view from the constitution which allows corporations to be people and therefore buy the government. Capitalism + Democracy = Oligarchy. How strong the oligarchy is depends on several factors but pretty much this across the board.

Can you show me another way of managing an economy that's been more successful?

 

[Biggles]

Oh ... now it's got it's own thread.

Capitalism has always been perfect as its the most moral system out there, problem is the fact it has become corrupted by its crony form thanks in part to state interventions.

Because people have trouble with the "capitalism" of crony-capitalism, I just call it cronyism.

Can you name any system of governance or economic management that does not feature cronyism? It's a feature of life, not just capitalism.

Turns out the US isn't capitalist or a democracy. The US is a constitutionally limited socialist republic (currently). Democracy in its pure form is the rule of the mob, and it doesn't work. The reason it doesn't work is known as the "tyranny of the majority". Why we'd want an economic system that is compatible with the rule of the mob I don't know. 200 years ago the folks that got the US off the ground knew this, and so they created a constitutionally limited republic.

Can you show me another way of managing an economy that's been more successful?

I would agree with Johnny & Danoff: it's hard to find a system that's been more successful than a "constitutionally limited socialist republic". It may not be "perfect", but it certainly works better than the slave-owning, corrupt, political gerrymandering, genocidal, racist, sexist, child-labour exploiting, labour-in-general exploiting system that was the US in the 19th century. 👍

 

[Danoff]

I would agree with Johnny & Danoff: it's hard to find a system that's been more successful than a "constitutionally limited socialist republic". It may not be "perfect", but it certainly works better than the slave-owning, corrupt, political gerrymandering, genocidal, racist, sexist, child-labour exploiting, labour-in-general exploiting system that was the US in the 19th century. 👍

Yea, human rights violations are not a good thing. That'd be the point of having a constitution. It took the US some time to get that sorted out.

 

[Dotini]

...the slave-owning, corrupt, political gerrymandering, genocidal, racist, sexist, child-labour exploiting, labour-in-general exploiting system that was the US in the 19th century. 👍

Just as the fetal, juvenile and adult phases are part of human maturation, so the 19th century was necessary to the maturation of the (exceptional and indispensable ) US. The great robber barons financed the railroads, oil fields, electrical industry inventors like Edison and Tesla. That they also clamored for the annexation of Mexico and the Philippines and are at the root of the Imperial impulse is also inarguable.

If you had a time machine, would you attempt to fix any of this?

 

[Danoff]

Just as the fetal, juvenile and adult phases are part of human maturation, so the 19th century was necessary to the maturation of the (exceptional and indispensable ) US. The great robber barons financed the railroads, oil fields, electrical industry inventors like Edison and Tesla. That they also clamored for the annexation of Mexico and the Philippines and are at the root of the Imperial impulse is also inarguable.

If you had a time machine, would you attempt to fix any of this?

Woah there buddy, I hope you're not claiming that somehow the US would not have prospered if, for example, we didn't enslave Africans. We learned from our mistakes for sure, but the notion that it was a necessary means to an end is flawed.

 

[Dotini]

Woah there buddy, I hope you're not claiming that somehow the US would not have prospered if, for example, we didn't enslave Africans. We learned from our mistakes for sure, but the notion that it was a necessary means to an end is flawed.

Good question.

No, I utterly condemn slavery in all its forms. It was a human institution for ten thousand years, but got rid of here, painfully. Tho' the institution still flourishes around the world and we sit on our hands.

I appreciate your reference to the question of ends versus means. I'm fond of remarking that "the ends justify the means and might makes right". Although these are flawed as notions, they remain stubborn facts on the ground in our ugly real world.

 

[squadops]

Once you go in the direction of saying a corporation is a Person you end up creating situations where Citizens United can pass legalising political bribes.

They have limited rights however, I'm not really seeing the problem as @Danoff points out, you seem to like your mob rules democracy well enough.

200 years ago the folks that got the US off the ground knew this, and so they created a constitutionally limited republic.

It's sound law too, too bad our leaders fail to follow it.

Is it not as simple as having the right to freedom of association, to exercise their right to peaceful assembly to voice their grievances? I hate the big lobby but in reality I hate the fact that our representation is full of cronies.

I have this strong feeling mustafur that you need to read the constitution and what our fathers had to say leading up to the drafting of it. Then again if you are sold on democracy than I guess you'll just carry on, much of what you say about The United States is incorrect however because you think with emotion; those damn rich, those damn constricting voting rules, how dare we follow our laws sort of thing.

I'll catch some flack for this but so what.

 

[mustafur]

Can you show me another way of managing an economy that's been more successful?

Although not fully relevant I would say China's Growth in the last 15 years is something a democracy couldn't achieve.

Dubai & Abu Dhabi another.

So if corporations are people they can bribe politicians like... people? I take it that no campaign contribution is acceptable to you then.

When it comes to political donations they actually have more rights then the person they supposedly are, as under citizens United they have no limit to campaign contributions where as an individual is capped below 6k.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Although not fully relevant I would say China's Growth in the last 15 years is something a democracy couldn't achieve.

When you are starting from near zero in a massively underperforming economy held down for decades by brutal Communism characterized by a centrally controlled economy, it's not hard to achieve high growth rates. At this point they are just ahead of those industrial power houses Gabon and Botswana so I expect they'll have high growth rates for some time to come. Meanwhile the top of the list, outside of countries that just pump oil out of the ground and make money, is completely dominated by democracies.

By the way, since you brought up China, how exactly has it achieved those growth rates in the last 15 years? Pretty sure it was due in large part to reforms in rural and private businesses, liberalized foreign trade and investment, relaxed state control over pricing and oversight of businesses and the introduction of profit incentives to rural collective enterprises (which are owned by local government but are guided by market principles), family farms, small private businesses, and foreign investors and traders etc. etc. In other words, wait for it, incorporating many of the successful practices of capitalist economies. Surprise, surprise, give people a profit motive and productivity goes through the roof.

 

[squadops]

Although not fully relevant I would say China's Growth in the last 15 years is something a democracy couldn't achieve.

It's a good thing the U.S. is not a democracy, why do you keep saying that?

 

[mustafur]

It's a good thing the U.S. is not a democracy, why do you keep saying that?

It still forms mostly one.

 

[mustafur]

When you are starting from near zero in a massively underperforming economy held down for decades by brutal Communism characterized by a centrally controlled economy, it's not hard to achieve high growth rates. At this point they are just ahead of those industrial power houses Gabon and Botswana so I expect they'll have high growth rates for some time to come. Meanwhile the top of the list, outside of countries that just pump oil out of the ground and make money, is completely dominated by democracies.

By the way, since you brought up China, how exactly has it achieved those growth rates in the last 15 years? Pretty sure it was due in large part to reforms in rural and private businesses, liberalized foreign trade and investment, relaxed state control over pricing and oversight of businesses and the introduction of profit incentives to rural collective enterprises (which are owned by local government but are guided by market principles), family farms, small private businesses, and foreign investors and traders etc. etc. In other words, wait for it, incorporating many of the successful practices of capitalist economies. Surprise, surprise, give people a profit motive and productivity goes through the roof.

You don't need to educate me on why they grew(You asked a Question, I answered it), but that growth has nothing to do with democracy.

Economic growth is a Fiscal issue, Democracy is a Social one, therefore a growing economy has nothing(in the sense it's purely from it) to do with democracy, it can come from it but that can be said about dictatorships just as much.

The fact that soo many countries with democracy are successful is more to do with the fact they practise capitalism or did when they grew to the level they sit at now.

Also maybe you should read up more about the UAE emirates, they have long since had other sectors of the economy surpass the revenue from oil.

 

[squadops]

It still forms mostly one.

Wrong.

 

[mustafur]

Wrong.

1. Can people vote = yes
2. 1 person 1 vote(in the general, yes so long as it reaches a majority)
3. Can you elect leaders of a party = Yes(allthough closed Primarys can ristrict voting ability)

Whilst money does get involved to a level unseen in any other democratic process, the initial voting situation is actually more democratic then even Australia, UK and other 1st world nations(you can actually have a say in party leaders) so yes it still is ''Mostly'' a Democracy.

 

[squadops]

You really know diddly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election

The United States of America is not a democracy, why is that so hard for you to accept? If we were a democracy we would never have achieved the greatness that we have, and if we become one we'll fall real quick.

Please, I asked you already and it's not so hard, I'll even give you the links if you want. Learn who we are. Here I'll just beat this dead horse in hopes you might actually read it for once.

Called upon to undertake the duties of the first executive office of our country, I avail myself of the presence of that portion of my fellow-citizens which is here assembled to express my grateful thanks for the favor with which they have been pleased to look toward me, to declare a sincere consciousness that the task is above my talents, and that I approach it with those anxious and awful presentiments which the greatness of the charge and the weakness of my powers so justly inspire. A rising nation, spread over a wide and fruitful land, traversing all the seas with the rich productions of their industry, engaged in commerce with nations who feel power and forget right, advancing rapidly to destinies beyond the reach of mortal eye -- when I contemplate these transcendent objects, and see the honor, the happiness, and the hopes of this beloved country committed to the issue and the auspices of this day, I shrink from the contemplation, and humble myself before the magnitude of the undertaking. Utterly, indeed, should I despair did not the presence of many whom I here see remind me that in the other high authorities provided by ourConstitution I shall find resources of wisdom, of virtue, and of zeal on which to rely under all difficulties. To you, then, gentlemen, who are charged with the sovereign functions of legislation, and to those associated with you, I look with encouragement for that guidance and support which may enable us to steer with safety the vessel in which we are all embarked amidst the conflicting elements of a troubled world.

During the contest of opinion through which we have passed the animation of discussions and of exertions has sometimes worn an aspect which might impose on strangers unused to think freely and to speak and to write what they think; but this being now decided by the voice of the nation, announced according to the rules of the Constitution, all will, of course, arrange themselves under the will of the law, and unite in common efforts for the common good. All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression. Let us, then, fellow-citizens, unite with one heart and one mind. Let us restore to social intercourse that harmony and affection without which liberty and even life itself are but dreary things. And let us reflect that, having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled and suffered, we have yet gained little if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of as bitter and bloody persecutions. During the throes and convulsions of the ancient world, during the agonizing spasms of infuriated man, seeking through blood and slaughter his long-lost liberty, it was not wonderful that the agitation of the billows should reach even this distant and peaceful shore; that this should be more felt and feared by some and less by others, and should divide opinions as to measures of safety. But every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle. We have called by different names brethren of the same principle. We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists. If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it. I know, indeed, that some honest men fear that a republican government can not be strong, that this Government is not strong enough; but would the honest patriot, in the full tide of successful experiment, abandon a government which has so far kept us free and firm on the theoretic and visionary fear that this Government, the world's best hope, may by possibility want energy to preserve itself? I trust not. I believe this, on the contrary, the strongest Government on earth. I believe it the only one where every man, at the call of the law, would fly to the standard of the law, and would meet invasions of the public order as his own personal concern. Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question.

Let us, then, with courage and confidence pursue our own Federal and Republican principles, our attachment to union and representative government. Kindly separated by nature and a wide ocean from the exterminating havoc of one quarter of the globe; too high-minded to endure the degradations of the others; possessing a chosen country, with room enough for our descendants to the thousandth and thousandth generation; entertaining a due sense of our equal right to the use of our own faculties, to the acquisitions of our own industry, to honor and confidence from our fellow-citizens, resulting not from birth, but from our actions and their sense of them; enlightened by a benign religion, professed, indeed, and practiced in various forms, yet all of them inculcating honesty, truth, temperance, gratitude, and the love of man; acknowledging and adoring an overruling Providence, which by all its dispensations proves that it delights in the happiness of man here and his greater happiness hereafter -- with all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow-citizens -- a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.

About to enter, fellow-citizens, on the exercise of duties which comprehend everything dear and valuable to you, it is proper you should understand what I deem the essential principles of our Government, and consequently those which ought to shape its Administration. I will compress them within the narrowest compass they will bear, stating the general principle, but not all its limitations. Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none; the support of the State governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against antirepublican tendencies; the preservation of the General Government in its whole constitutional vigor, as the sheet anchor of our peace at home and safety abroad; a jealous care of the right of election by the people -- a mild and safe corrective of abuses which are lopped by the sword of revolution where peaceable remedies are unprovided; absolute acquiescence in the decisions of the majority, the vital principle of republics, from which is no appeal but to force, the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism; a well-disciplined militia, our best reliance in peace and for the first moments of war till regulars may relieve them; the supremacy of the civil over the military authority; economy in the public expense, that labor may be lightly burthened; the honest payment of our debts and sacred preservation of the public faith; encouragement of agriculture, and of commerce as its handmaid; the diffusion of information and arraignment of all abuses at the bar of the public reason; freedom of religion; freedom of the press, and freedom of person under the protection of the habeas corpus, and trial by juries impartially selected. These principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation. The wisdom of our sages and blood of our heroes have been devoted to their attainment. They should be the creed of our political faith, the text of civic instruction, the touchstone by which to try the services of those we trust; and should we wander from them in moments of error or of alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety.

I repair, then, fellow-citizens, to the post you have assigned me. With experience enough in subordinate offices to have seen the difficulties of this the greatest of all, I have learnt to expect that it will rarely fall to the lot of imperfect man to retire from this station with the reputation and the favor which bring him into it. Without pretensions to that high confidence you reposed in our first and greatest revolutionary character, whose preeminent services had entitled him to the first place in his country's love and destined for him the fairest page in the volume of faithful history, I ask so much confidence only as may give firmness and effect to the legal administration of your affairs. I shall often go wrong through defect of judgment. When right, I shall often be thought wrong by those whose positions will not command a view of the whole ground. I ask your indulgence for my own errors, which will never be intentional, and your support against the errors of others, who may condemn what they would not if seen in all its parts. The approbation implied by your suffrage is a great consolation to me for the past, and my future solicitude will be to retain the good opinion of those who have bestowed it in advance, to conciliate that of others by doing them all the good in my power, and to be instrumental to the happiness and freedom of all.

Relying, then, on the patronage of your good will, I advance with obedience to the work, ready to retire from it whenever you become sensible how much better choice it is in your power to make. And may that Infinite Power which rules the destinies of the universe lead our councils to what is best, and give them a favorable issue for your peace and prosperity.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/jefinau1.asp

Take the few minutes it actually takes to read the constitution as well, man it's not that hard.
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

BTW is it not true that your government in all it's wisdom can't even repeal a watchdog bs hound that hinders construction? Oh sure, let us just kick out all those elected through the democratic process and have a redo so we can get the results we wish.

Democracy for the win.

 

[Johnnypenso]

You don't need to educate me on why they grew(You asked a Question, I answered it), but that growth has nothing to do with democracy. Economic growth is a Fiscal issue, Democracy is a Social one, therefore a growing economy has nothing(in the sense it's purely from it) to do with democracy, it can come from it but that can be said about dictatorships just as much.

The fact that soo many countries with democracy are successful is more to do with the fact they practise capitalism or did when they grew to the level they sit at now.

Also maybe you should read up more about the UAE emirates, they have long since had other sectors of the economy surpass the revenue from oil.

Exactly.

 

[mustafur]

So you agree Capitalism is the product of growth not Democracy.