I've noticed from the thread "Does capitalism work?" that a lot of people here knows that capiatlism doesn't work. So I wonder which other system could be used...

(1) But first, we need to lay down the imperfections of capitalism,

(2) and to define why we created capitalism in the first place- that is, the purpose of capitalism. That also include the goals we wish to achieve with our new system.

(3) After that, we need to find alternative solutions to the specific problems that capitalism attempts to solve, while keeping in mind the lessons we have learnt from capitalism.

(4) Finally, we need to find a way to work those solutions together in a concise, efficient and precise system.


...
So who's up for all that work? :eek:


PS: A few alternatives that already exist....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communitarianism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism

Tada!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/b9/Anti-capitalism_color.gif/484px-Anti-capitalism_color.gif

Replace the clergy with the media and the aristocracy for the corporations and we have the modern version! :eek:

And here's a list of criticisms of capitalism. That gets us started in no (1)...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticisms_of_capitalism

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/0d/Index2006_EconFreedomMAP.jpg/800px-Index2006_EconFreedomMAP.jpg

Gini coefficients....

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d4/Gini_since_WWII.gif/800px-Gini_since_WWII.gif

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bd/World_Map_Gini_coefficient.png/800px-World_Map_Gini_coefficient.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient

Nominal GDP per capita....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29_per_capita

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/ea/GDP_nominal_per_capita_world_map_IMF_figures_for_y ear_2005.png/800px-GDP_nominal_per_capita_world_map_IMF_figures_for_y ear_2005.png

Let's not forget outliers such as the 5% richest people, which push the GDP per capita up... :rolleyes:

Human Development Index....
Gosh... I luv wikipedia! :D:D

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fc/HDImap_current.png/800px-HDImap_current.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:HDImap_current.png

THE ONLY alternate to capitalism, is.... to regulate it... in moderation and in cycles as needed.

many people like to blame capitalism for poverty.

but poverty is caused by greed, selfishness and heartlessness.

of which many here show an abundance of.

-MT

More regulation? Do you mean more government? That would just make matters worse! :eek:

by regulation... i mean temporary and limited socialism.
socialism... designed to be sold off when things improve.

-MT

Regulation always means bigger government. Bigger government always means more corruption. Try again.

And yet less government means more corporate corruption. There will always be people in power, and power corrupts.

How about a system where there are no fixed leaders, only a "jury system" kind of thing, where the ruling people are randomly selected, rule for a month, say, and then go back to their normal jobs.

How about a system where there are no fixed leaders, only a "jury system" kind of thing, where the ruling people are randomly selected, rule for a month, say, and then go back to their normal jobs.

I don't think the scenario that you described would work. Perhaps it could work for a short period of time if the potential leaders passed a psychological / intelligence test. Perhaps it could be a course that people could complete at college. Hopefully the tests would prevent people like George W. Bush from becoming a leader.

Btw, I don’t think jury systems work very well. I think all jurors should be required to pass a test or complete a course that could be similar to the things that a judge or a lawyer would learn in school. It is very important that jurors learn to think objectively when they are decided if a person should spend the rest of his or her life in prison or die. After a person has passed the test or course, their names could be put on a list of potential jurors for the state or province that they reside in. I also think that it should be a well paying part time job.

Regulation always means bigger government. Bigger government always means more corruption. Try again.

Look again at your own maps.

If I recall correctly, Athens selected its government officials with a lottery drawing.

And yet less government means more corporate corruption. There will always be people in power, and power corrupts.
Who said we need corporations? And who said they have to be controlled by a minority?

It's human nature for a leader to rise among a group of people. Every troop needs an alpha male.

I find anarchism interesting because it is an attempt to reject and even condemn this nature. I think it would work on a small scale given the right conditions.

Look again at your own maps.
Canada, for example, has everything looking great. There is still more corruption in Canada then in Brazil. The amount of money deviated for selfish purposes is just amazing. :eek:

There are lots of issues with large governments. For instance, they tend to be very slow, they have too much redundant data, data is not updated fast enough- and all that decrease efficiency and accuracy. It takes a lot of money to run a government and a lot more is lost due to corruption.

Canada has many issues right now. For instance, child care used to be almost completely funded by the government. Now, the government pays only $100 per month to every child, which is a very tiny fraction of what they used to pay, and consequently, a lot of parents are unable to leave their children on day care- which creates a lot of complications, such as their inability to go to work. Another issue is the constant rise in post-secondary education prices. A lot of people are unable to go to post-secondary education now. Many spend the rest of their lives in debt to paying for education. Those who give up on post-secondary education, spend the rest of their lives in $8 an hour jobs, barely being able to survive (cost of living here is really high). Another problem is the price of housing. It is increasing dramatically, making it nearly impossible to buy a house. Around where I live, the average price for a house is above $500,000. All those issues hurt mostly the younger population. If you compare all those things with Brazil, you will find out that Canada is headed towards becoming a thrid world country. :eek:

It's human nature for a leader to rise among a group of people. Every troop needs an alpha male.

I find anarchism interesting because it is an attempt to reject and even condemn this nature. I think it would work on a small scale given the right conditions.
Anarchism is my heart's greatest hope. But the road to anarchism is hard and treacherous. Amongst all the options, anarchism is my favorite.

Anarchism is more easily attainable on a small scale, yes. Now that we have solar power, it is even easier to achieve it. If we manage to get a cheap renewable source of energy that has a greater output of energy, we will be able to do it on a large scale. But large scale anarchism require A LOT of work to properly set up. With the advent of information systems, we are perfectly capable of achieving anarchism. If we can create the system in an efficient, accurate and scalable manner, we will be able to achieve an utopian kind of anarchism. But of course, we still have to deal with adapting many of our systems. We still have to deal with the problems of crime, violence, ignorance, and many others. Just take a look of the systems we have: legislative, judiciary, political, economic, education, healthcare....

... it's tough work... :eek:

Let's try to follow the outline in the first post. We first need to identify the problems we need to solve. Then we have to brainstorm alternative solutions. Then we can choose a solution we deem to be the best. This outline makes it easier to see the bigger picture and come up with something meaningful....

Look again at your own maps.
Please defend your position, btw. Which system do you think maximizes benefits for everyone on the planet? If your american capitalism outsources slave jobs to China, increasing the gap between the chinese rich and poor, then your system do not work. In this system, you are simply exporting poverty. We are trying to create the best system for the whole planet, right?

You said:

Regulation always means bigger government. Bigger government always means more corruption. Try again.


I said look at the map.


Look at the scandinavian countries. Norway, Highest HDI. Big government. It doesn't show there, but high taxes, lots of government. Low corruption. Same for for instance Finland. Lots of government. Low corruption.

It's kinda ironic that I always argue the scandinavian system is the best, but their system is in the completely opposite side of what I would deem "utopian".... :rolleyes:

I guess I could also argue that Japan has a pretty good evenly distributed society, despite the fact they are capitalists...

So what does Japan and Scandinavia have in common? And why are they successful?

On corruption...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparency_International

Sometimes it is difficult to compare corruption. For example corruption is a legal part of the US political system where it is called lobbying. This kind of lobbying would be considered illegal (hence would be corruption) in many western and northern European states.

So what does Japan and Scandinavia have in common? And why are they successful?

They have a different moral system than for instance in the USA. It is based on society and not the individual.

I agree. You are wise. Are you american?

No. My son is but we kidnapped him and brought him to the safety of a social market economy state.


It's rather easy to come up with alternatives to the current system of American based capitalism. Even ones that would work better.

The problem is of course that we cannot start from a blank slate. The current people in charge will not give away their power so we can have a better system for all.

That's what capitalism has been all about the last few decades/century. To increase the powerbase of a few. To channel the riches to a select few and increase the riches that are channeled to a select few, and make those select few even fewer. That's all there is to it. No magic. We don't really enter the equation as such, other than being the tool with which the select few enlarge their powerbase.

It's obvious to anyone who keeps his eyes open, but still nothing changes. That is because most people are completely and utterly powerless in this system of modern american based capitalism. The only times there have been changes has been through revolutions.

In Europe capitalism took a different course than in America to start with. But globalization killed that off in more recent times. The pressure has increased to adopt to the system of the USA.

Economic Growth uber alles! (above all we need economic growth)

And what is economic growth? More riches for the rich.

What is reality? The pair of pants I bought 3 years ago are just as good as the ones on sale now. Strangely enough the new ones are 5 Euro more expensive. Nothing in the product has changed. Nothing at all. It is still the same pair of pants made in the same factory/sweatshop. How can it be more expensive? Inflation. Inflation doesn't make the select few poorer. It does seem to affect the average person.

How realistic is to have a system that is based on economic growth? It's totally bogus. Economic growth can never be sustained in the long run. Economic growth is a tool to make a few people richer. It's not adding anything to the world.

If a country has on average an economic growth of 2% every year how can it be then that things get worse? What is the whole point of the system then? To make society better? Or to cater for a select few?

No. My son is but we kidnapped him and brought him to the safety of a social market economy state.
Darn! I've been trying to find a wise american for a long time! :D

It's rather easy to come up with alternatives to the current system of American based capitalism. Even ones that would work better.

The problem is of course that we cannot start from a blank slate. The current people in charge will not give away their power so we can have a better system for all.

That's what capitalism has been all about the last few decades/century. To increase the powerbase of a few. To channel the riches to a select few and increase the riches that are channeled to a select few, and make those select few even fewer. That's all there is to it. No magic. We don't really enter the equation as such, other than being the tool with which the select few enlarge their powerbase.

It's obvious to anyone who keeps his eyes open, but still nothing changes. That is because most people are completely and utterly powerless in this system of modern american based capitalism. The only times there have been changes has been through revolutions.

In Europe capitalism took a different course than in America to start with. But globalization killed that off in more recent times. The pressure has increased to adopt to the system of the USA.

Economic Growth uber alles! (above all we need economic growth)

And what is economic growth? More riches for the rich.

What is reality? The pair of pants I bought 3 years ago are just as good as the ones on sale now. Strangely enough the new ones are 5 Euro more expensive. Nothing in the product has changed. Nothing at all. It is still the same pair of pants made in the same factory/sweatshop. How can it be more expensive? Inflation. Inflation doesn't make the select few poorer. It does seem to affect the average person.

How realistic is to have a system that is based on economic growth? It's totally bogus. Economic growth can never be sustained in the long run. Economic growth is a tool to make a few people richer. It's not adding anything to the world.

If a country has on average an economic growth of 2% every year how can it be then that things get worse? What is the whole point of the system then? To make society better? Or to cater for a select few?
My feelings precisely. I remember going to economy class and questioning whether our measurements were the relevant measurements. I also questioned whether there is indeed scarcity. You can see the connection between the two, I'm sure.

First of all, national income is not a good measure because a few people have a lot of money and most people don't. So those few people skew the curve. If those few richer people get much richer and the rest get poorer, then you still have the illusion of growth. Outliers. I learnt them from statistics. The solution comes from the same source. We can create a per capita figure, or even divide the population into income brackets. That would give us a much better picture of the situation.

I'm particularly pleased with the Scandinavians. They are extremely rich and they are still always working for a better world. If the US was like Scandinavia, this world would be different. The opportunity cost of the US' military budget is just tragic......

As for scarcity- bullshit! They look at the poor and they say there is scarcity. I look at the rich and I say there is hypocrasy! That's what scarcity is. Yes, sure, there is a finite amount of resources in the world. And just a couple of centuries ago, you could go to the store many times to try to get something. But that wasn't scarcity. We just happened to not have the great distribution services we have right now. The only scarcity is the one caused by the rich. 5% of the world population holds more then 20% of the world's wealth. And 80% holds something like 5%. Those are simplified figures, but it paints the picture....

Sad sad sad....
*shake head*

Capitalism is like a project held together by duct tape and chewing gum- People tend to ignore the negative aspect and focus on the determination factor.

TruthSeeker: You argue against capitalism, yet you also argue against government control and in favor of anarchy???

Capitalism is what happens when people are free to do what they want (economically speaking) without government interference; buying what they want, manufacturing and selling what they want, setting their own prices, and deciding for themselves what they are willing to pay for things. The only way to get away from capitalism is to have the government interfere with that.

Anarchism is automated government.

ANARCHY... is by definition... the peaceful organization of the people, without a dictating gov't....

but this cannot be done... not so long as there is money in use.

if there is money... it simply become those with money, are in power.


only by giving up on all monetary systems, can any group of people successfully live in ANARCHY... like a jewish kabbutz... BUT without any rules.

-MT

But if you don't want capitolism, you have to have a government (or someone) placing restrictions on what people can and can't do. You can't have it both ways.

Restrictions are there because of lack of education and uneven wealth distribution. Laws are a consequence of the imperfect system. It's like a bandaid that controls the symptoms but do not treat the disease...

Restrictions are there because of lack of education and uneven wealth distribution. Laws are a consequence of the imperfect system. It's like a bandaid that controls the symptoms but do not treat the disease...
Do you really think that people would stop wanting to amass wealth if they were educated and living in anarchy?

problem #1: an unchecked media that continually panders to those in power in order to gain subsidies.
problem #2: an unspoken "caste" system imposed on the western world in the last century (white/blue collar).
problem #3: the entire western world is operating on a fiat monetary system right now. inflation is a second form of taxation we all endure, so long as there is nothing tangible and undepletable backing the currency.


more to come...

problem #3: the entire western world is operating on a fiat monetary system right now. inflation is a second form of taxation we all endure, so long as there is nothing tangible and undepletable backing the currency.

Inflation is about 3-4% annualy. It's pretty trivial compared to income tax.

inflation is the reason the euro is more valuable than the dollar. the purely capitalist system in america affects everything, and under it, the federal reserve could completely tank the dollar overnight..if they so choose.

all because of inflation. inflation is one of the most dangerous aspects of a currency system like the one in place right now.

Do you really think that people would stop wanting to amass wealth if they were educated and living in anarchy?
It's not that simple. The current education system only prepares people to work in the system. We need a system that teaches values and principles. Like a religion's morality, but without all the contradicting crap. Besides, who needs 1 billion dollars? People just need enough to have a decent life. Besides, more then half of the world would be happy enough if they had enough to survive- which they currently don't.

Inflation is about 3-4% annualy. It's pretty trivial compared to income tax.
What is your rate of GDP growth? India is leading the world, with 6%. China is ahead of the US, in second place (5%, I think). So what's the US? Do you see the obvious problem?


EDIT: Also, keep in mind that inflation is different with different products. The figure you showed is just the average. Search for CPI....

Would a gold-backed currency be better? Or no currency at all? Or a nitrogen economy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_nitrogen_economy)...?

It's not that simple. The current education system only prepares people to work in the system. We need a system that teaches values and principles.

Isn't that the parents' job? Any one's values and principles can be different from anyothers. Should we force feed these principles down my throat or someone else's throat? I think it is perfectly acceptable to earn as much money and humanly possible... some do not.

Isn't that the parents' job?
Sure! And most parents have absolutely no idea what they are doing! So if we have schools to teach engineering, which is nearly not as important as parenting, why don't we ever give a shit about parenting!? :rolleyes:

Any one's values and principles can be different from anyothers. Should we force feed these principles down my throat or someone else's throat?
Ok then! So let's allow muslim children to believe that mutilating human beings in the name of Allah is perfectly acceptable, then! :rolleyes:

I think it is perfectly acceptable to earn as much money and humanly possible... some do not.
You mean "steal" from poor third world countries...

Sure! And most parents have absolutely no idea what they are doing! So if we have schools to teach engineering, which is nearly not as important as parenting, why don't we ever give a shit about parenting!? :rolleyes:

Then they shouldn't be parents.


Ok then! So let's allow muslim children to believe that mutilating human beings in the name of Allah is perfectly acceptable, then! :rolleyes:

That's called extremist Islam. That majority of Islamic followers don't want to kill people. Stop learning from the news. Oh wait.. they are sympathetic to the feelings of these extremists.

Anyway I was neglecting extremism.. which is bad in any system. I was talking "in general." Like capitalism verus socialism... or whatever.


You mean "steal" from poor third world countries...

How do I steal from third world countries? Or the US in general?

That's called extremist Islam. That majority of Islamic followers don't want to kill people. Stop learning from the news. Oh wait.. they are sympathetic to the feelings of these extremists.

Anyway I was neglecting extremism.. which is bad in any system. I was talking "in general." Like capitalism verus socialism... or whatever.
Well according to you, extremism is ok.

How do I steal from third world countries? Or the US in general?
Corporations.

Well according to you, extremism is ok.

Well I forgot to mention that. Sorry. In general. However... I ask. How do you know Osama is not correct? I'm not supporting him. I wish him dead. But I ask from an objective standpoint.


Corporations.

List a few and explain why/how they steal. Anyway I asked how I steal from the "third world." However, as you wish. Discuss.

Well I forgot to mention that. Sorry. In general. However... I ask. How do you know Osama is not correct? I'm not supporting him. I wish him dead. But I ask from an objective standpoint.
So killing is ok?

List a few and explain why/how they steal.
Classical examples:
Nike and Walmart- sweatshops in China
Nestle- introduced free baby formula in Africa claiming that it is better then breast milk, and when they ran out of milk supply (ya know, women run out of milk after not breastfeeding for a certain amount of time) they started charging. Millions of children die of starvation.

Anyway I asked how I steal from the "third world." However, as you wish. Discuss.
Outsourcing is the most used practiced of poverty exportation.

Anything that is taken is given freely. Money is offered for services and people, entirely by their own accord, flock to provide. In fact, if you removed that source of supposed 'exploitation', a fair number of people would probably have nowhere to turn except for the grim reaper.

Make sure you don't kill anyone with your charity, ok?

A REAL ALTERNATIVE TO CAPITALISM... is love and sharing.

for 100,000 years or more... mankind, worked as family teams.. tribes.

we had no need of money, or buisness or any such nonsense.

we all simply lived, and shared.. and worked together for common goals.

we could still do that.

-MT

And we can all sit in a circle and sing kumbuyah(sp?) all day?

yeah... such is an example of bad leadership.

-MT

Anything that is taken is given freely. Money is offered for services and people, entirely by their own accord, flock to provide. In fact, if you removed that source of supposed 'exploitation', a fair number of people would probably have nowhere to turn except for the grim reaper.

Make sure you don't kill anyone with your charity, ok?
Not true. Outsourcing destroy local jobs all over the world. Jobs that would give a whole lot more to people, if they weren't destroyed by the big multinationals.

THE ONLY alternate to capitalism, is.... to regulate it... in moderation and in cycles as needed.

many people like to blame capitalism for poverty.

but poverty is caused by greed, selfishness and heartlessness.

of which many here show an abundance of.

-MT

Depends. Poverty is caused by many factors. Geography, disease, wars, greedy capitalist creditors who'd rather see a poor country collapse into further poverty (and see millions die) than see their debt repayments postponed for a year or two, greedy/naive/inexperienced/untrained governments of the poor countries, lack of education, poor economic planning and economic policies, poor central banking decisions, people like us who choose not to donate to the poor countries (but complain about it all the time), famine, drought, and maybe laziness (but that's a very small minority, because there are very very very very few people who'd choose to do nothing and starve rather than work and eat).

The problem is a lot of people assume it's the final reason (laziness). They think that if poor people (in Africa, for example) got off their butts and worked, they wouldn't be in a mess. That right there is the most flawed bit of idiotic reasoning EVER. Compare African climate to the rest of the world. Compare African soil nutrients to the rest of the world. Compare Africa's modern history to the rest of the world (Slavery for a couple of hundred years; then colonialism that ROBBED their countries of advancement, education, nutrition, natural resources, innovation, and natural movement of ideas and technologies; and now tough and unfair import restrictions on African goods flowing to us while trying to force African nations to let down their restrictions on our products, robbing them of a chance to expand their industries and businesses; and crippling debts that we Westerners are forcing down on them, with impossible debt repayment plans. Africa also has no capable road systems and don't have the money to build them. They are racked with diseases like malaria and AIDS, and it's killing their important societal figures: teachers, middle aged workers, children, and farmers. We Westerners give VERY little to Africa in terms of foreign aid. Complain and whine all you want about how generous we are, but that amount itself is pitiful to what would get Africa off it's feet and on to a better path. I think per capita spending on Afican health and medicine is $10. In North America it's in the 100s or 1000s of $ per year, and we're still obese and sick.

If I had to place blame on African poverty, I'd probably put 50% of it on North Americans (like me) and Europe, 40% of it on their natural habitat (bad climate, short growing seasons, bad soil, little rain, ideal tropical conditions for mosquitoes to flourish, etc...), and 10% on the dictators/fake democratic leaders/autocrats/etc... for robbing their own country of money and foreign aid.

In addition, paraphrasing Colin Powell: The war on terror is tied to the war on poverty. You help eliminate poverty, then you'll start a chain reaction that will eventually lead to eliminating a whole host of things that plague us today:

1. Once poverty is eliminated, birth rates will go down to manageable levels. That will free up more resources to spend on less people.

2. With more resources to spend, you can invest in further improving infrastructure, research (e.g. more efficient crop yields, seeds, technology specific to Africa, medicine, etc...). This in turn leads to more jobs.

3. Education will increase as families can afford to send their children to school (because they have less children) and have more disposable income.

4. Increased education means better trained workers of the future and more opportunities to improve their own country.

5. Improved education means a more broad understanding of the world, instead of hateful rhetoric taught by religious leaders and corrupt warlords. With that, terrorism will decrease as people choose to study and work instead of kill and spread fear.

6. All this will lead to better relations with the industrialized countries, breaking down economic barriers, bilateral relations, and a march towards democracy and freedom.

All that, because you rid the developing world of povery.

terryoh,

Aaaaaaaaaawesome!!!!!! :cool:

I would like to add a little bit, though.

There's an opposrtunity cost to this stupid war. The money used in this stupid war, could have been used to erradicate poverty in the Middle East, which would have almost completely stopped terrorism.

Poverty alone is not all. Good parenting can do wonders in this world. Of course, it is way easier to be a good parent when you have enough money.

I've noticed from the thread "Does capitalism work?" that a lot of people here knows that capiatlism doesn't work. So I wonder which other system could be used...

(1) But first, we need to lay down the imperfections of capitalism,

(2) and to define why we created capitalism in the first place- that is, the purpose of capitalism. That also include the goals we wish to achieve with our new system.

(3) After that, we need to find alternative solutions to the specific problems that capitalism attempts to solve, while keeping in mind the lessons we have learnt from capitalism.

(4) Finally, we need to find a way to work those solutions together in a concise, efficient and precise system.


...
So who's up for all that work? :eek:


PS: A few alternatives that already exist....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communitarianism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism



Capitalism is just a system which organizes people. It's a tool, how are you going to organize them?

Not true. Outsourcing destroy local jobs all over the world. Jobs that would give a whole lot more to people, if they weren't destroyed by the big multinationals.

Create new jobs then. Start a local investment club, and fund a local business, and if you can't do this, then start a venture capital company and invest in businesses that arent outsourceable or that would provide the most jobs for the buck.

Capitalism is just a system which organizes people. It's a tool, how are you going to organize them?
The same way modern Human Resource Management does- information technology.

Create new jobs then. Start a local investment club, and fund a local business, and if you can't do this, then start a venture capital company and invest in businesses that arent outsourceable or that would provide the most jobs for the buck.
That only solves the problem in the short-run. How about creating sustainable communities? Overconsumption of goods can never lead to a sustainable system.

A REAL ALTERNATIVE TO CAPITALISM... is love and sharing.

for 100,000 years or more... mankind, worked as family teams.. tribes.

we had no need of money, or buisness or any such nonsense.

we all simply lived, and shared.. and worked together for common goals.

we could still do that.

-MT

Humans have never existed without concepts of "owing" and "being owed". Whether it is sharing the spoils of a kill with someone that provided the last time, or trading other favors. How do we know this? Because almost all mammals have these mechanisms built-in. We see it in the behavior of wild dogs, lions, and most vividly, in other primates.

You are wishing for the return of a fantasyland that never existed, and never could. People, like all other animals, put themselves first in almost all situations. You aren't going to find a culture that ignores the natural tendencies of all living organisms. Anywhere or anytime.

How about Buddhists?

THE ONLY alternate to capitalism, is.... to regulate it... in moderation and in cycles as needed.

many people like to blame capitalism for poverty.

but poverty is caused by greed, selfishness and heartlessness.

of which many here show an abundance of.

-MT

Poverty is due to inefficiency and the irrational human nature. If humans were rational and efficient we would have full employement. The only reason we do not have full employement is because we don't want to be efficient, for whatever reasons. Now I understand some countries have politicial problems and civil wars, but the majority of countries are stable. It's just inefficiency. We don't even have full employement in the USA, thats inefficiency also.

I've noticed from the thread "Does capitalism work?" that a lot of people here knows that capiatlism doesn't work. So I wonder which other system could be used...

(1) But first, we need to lay down the imperfections of capitalism,

(2) and to define why we created capitalism in the first place- that is, the purpose of capitalism. That also include the goals we wish to achieve with our new system.

(3) After that, we need to find alternative solutions to the specific problems that capitalism attempts to solve, while keeping in mind the lessons we have learnt from capitalism.

(4) Finally, we need to find a way to work those solutions together in a concise, efficient and precise system.
This is the flawed approach.

1. Define what a society is and what an institution is.
2. Define what it means to highly functioning.
3. Define an approach to attain a highly functioning society.


The institution serves 2 functions. Both of which are symbiotic.
1. To protect and support the individual.
2. To protect and support the environment.

In order to support the individual, the environment must be supported.
In order to support the environment, the individual must be supported.

Social progress is the capacity in which the institution is capable of fulfilling its purpose. The individual should have full access to support and equal protection of their rights and health. The better and more efficient this is, the higher the standard of progress is.
Laws should prevent human abuse and environmental abuse.


FIRST WORLD
NATROPOLIS
First World is a civilization of high level progress and high standard of living. A standard of living the world has never seen before. Such standard of living is currently only available to the super rich. It is not an excessive lavish standard. It features the provisions of high education, health care, protection of rights, physical and mental wellness, all at high standards. The individual is completely surrounded by high health and abundance throughout all sections of the mondess.

There are 2 very distinct and separate types of environment.
Nature: Protected natural territory.
Mondess: Any area that is not all natural wildreness environment.
You are either in nature or in mondess.

Current capitalist and other social/economic/political systems rely on vast amounts of vehicles and roads for transportation. The amount of human and natural resources required to support and regulate such a system is incomprehensible. Land, material, and human labor needed to build roads. Lannd/Materials/Human Labor needed to build the cars. L/M/H needed to regulate the transportation system. L/M/H needed to handle the waste products and garbage created as a result of this system. Separation of the community because of increasingly separated communes. Not to mention automotive related deaths are the #4 killer of adults 25-44 years old. #1 killer of all ages under that.


The Natropolis is a densely packed city capable of supporting hundreds of thousands of people in a very high standard environment with an internal transportation system. Similar to an Archology. There can be many of these locations all around the world. Each location can be connected by a single highway and railway.

Each location can play a specific function in relation to all other locations. In addition, there are smaller outposts for mining and agriculture.

Natropolis for Technology Development
Natropolis for Acedemics
Natropolis for Healthcare and Elderly.
Natropolis for Administration and Justice.

Natropolis for Manufacturing (1 for each product type).
(Apparel, Furniture, Pharmaceuticals, Technical Equipment, Industrial Vehicles.)

Farming Outpost
Agriculture Outpost
Space Station
Extraterrestrial Settlements


As such, the entire land of the Earth can be vast amounts of nature with small pockets of highly technological human settlements.

Poverty is due to inefficiency and the irrational human nature. If humans were rational and efficient we would have full employement. The only reason we do not have full employement is because we don't want to be efficient, for whatever reasons. Now I understand some countries have politicial problems and civil wars, but the majority of countries are stable. It's just inefficiency. We don't even have full employement in the USA, thats inefficiency also.
You're saying it's possible to have full employment?

cool skill,

I'm not sure about the implications of highly dense human populations. How would you deal with the waste, for instance? How would you create enough space for eveyone in a very densely populated area? How would you get enough food for eveyone?

I don't see how that is possible....

It is very possible.
Waste management is not difficult with the use of advanced recycling technology.
Furthermore, what little waste is left can be transported to a specialized landfill. But will eventually be broken down in to recyclable materials.

Density is an extremely relative term. I do not know about what you think, but I have lots of diagrams. Density simply means take a current city and take out all the large roads and highways. Implement a central transport that can be accessed within 5 minutes of any point on the map. Such a stransport should be able to get the indiviual from one point of the Natropolis to another within 30min max.
Density does not mean stuffy overcowded or under crowded.
What I mean is a swarce city. Swarce meaning rich in population, but not in the least bit over crowded. I'll try to post some images and descriptions later.

Yes, post some images....

How about the mental state of those people? Do you think it's health to live in a densely populated place? How would there be enough space for everyone?

What is an earthquake happens? What if there is a fire?

Yes there is more than enough space for everyone. It is extremely healthy for human psychosocial development. It prevents isolation, and stengthens the community as well. This is not only important for the individual, but an extremely effective defensive strategy against oppression. The less isolated a society is, the stronger the community, and the more difficult it is to oppress. Easily oppressed societies breed isolation to prevent people from getting together to uprise.

There are no outside threats to the natropolis that technology cannot handle.
Natural disasters
Accidents
Military invasion

I'm not an expert on any of these, but I know technology and its capabilities. Furthermore, although there might not be such thing as "foolproof", there is definitely such thing as human intellectual capacity that can forsee any possible disaster, and create measures to ensure the safest disaster free cleanest possible portection for inhabitants.

Stick two rats in a cage that is too small and don't give them a way to get away from the other rat. Within very little time, the two rats will try to kill each other. A similar thing is likely to happen on a much larger scale in one of your cities. Some could argue it is already happening in some of our larger cities.

In a small population center, you can know every inhabitant intimately. You know their names, their faces, who they are related to and what they are doing with their lives. Even if you hate one of them, you will do nothing to harm them. Every last human around you enriches your life somehow. Kill a butcher and you will have no meat, kill the bartender and you will have no beer.

In a big city, people are just a faceless mass. You seemingly lose nothing when a man you do not know is struck down. To you, he was just more competition and a potential threat. One more man to cut you off on the way to work, one more man to mug you on the street, one more man to take your job from you by working an hour longer and a dollar cheaper. A big city does nothing but dehumanize you. It makes monsters out of men.

I totally agree...

Well, almost totally. Big cities have lots of things to do and can be fun... :cool:

Indeed. But fun is scattered into a dozen little remote islands in a sea of annoyance, fear, toil, confusion, and anger.

THE ONLY alternate to capitalism, is.... to regulate it... in moderation and in cycles as needed.

many people like to blame capitalism for poverty.

but poverty is caused by greed, selfishness and heartlessness.

of which many here show an abundance of.

-MT

MT I have been reading some of your post of late and they are really short sighted. For instance, what do you think causes greed, selfishness, and heartlessness in the first place? Interesting thread all the same.
The best way to picture capitalism is a circle inside a square, no matter how you place the circle its always going to leave unoccupied gaps in the square; these gaps are poverty and oppression. Capitalism was not designed to cater every citizen or state and cannot possibly do so, even if it did inflation and insatiable greed will set the vicious cycle running again. So I guess we have to decide whether we truly want a utopian or an asymmetric society. Communism and all other ideas are unengaging and boring, capitalism offers something special...a game. Capitalism is a Game, and as in all games there can only be winners or losers, everything else is straight bullshit. It’s not a game many of us would volunteer to play but its one that as soon as someone starts to play everybody else has no choice but to play to survive(cold war). But there is hope, according to George Soros, an adept international man of business; you can play the game cooperatively or competitively. The US used to be a cooperative player until of recent, not that this is necessarily a bad thing. The truth is that the entire world can't cooperate together because there has to be someone they are cooperating against. When you keep building arms every year you are bound to use them sooner or later. The world is divided between the good players and the bad players- Darwism. Even if we invented a good socioecomomic systme better than capitalism ist only a matter of time before really good players of the system dominate the board, such is the curse of the learning and "figuring shit out" mind of human condition. Another option is to do away with leadership, whch is a one-way and non-stop ticket to disaster.

Chatha, congratulations, you seem to be one of the few people here who knows what you are talking about. I really liked your response. I love capitalism because I love games. I love games becasue I love winning, and becasue I love winning, I will try my best to win. That is waht Capitalism is all about, everyone is trying to win, and competition makes everyone better.

I like to compare it to world class athletes. A bunch of world class runners have a big race coming up, each works hard to imoprove themselves and give them the best chance of winning., so each gets better. In the end, all of them benefit, they improve each other throguh competition. The only losers and poor people are the ones who dont care if they win or lose so they dont train and become fat and lazy. Then they complain that everyone else is in such good shape while they have been left out.

Chatha, congratulations, you seem to be one of the few people here who knows what you are talking about. I really liked your response. I love capitalism because I love games. I love games becasue I love winning, and becasue I love winning, I will try my best to win. That is waht Capitalism is all about, everyone is trying to win, and competition makes everyone better.
It is a game.
Not everybody loves games.
Not everybody should have to love games.
Crappytalism is a game of destruction. It is not a game of production.
It is a primitive death trap game that is not in favor of intellectual resource management. The study of resource management = Economics. This game is not about resource management. It is based on a misunderstanding of resource management. It is based on a misunderstanding of what resources are. The whole foundation of what we know as economics is not only wrong and misleading, but it causes a displaced sort of delusional paradim of resources, what they are, and how to manage them effectively for sake of the planet and the exponentially expanding human population.

It's funny how winners seem to like games and the losers don't. I am a winner, thus, i like games. If you are not a winner, you are perfectly capable of becoming one.

It's funny how winners seem to like games and the losers don't. I am a winner, thus, i like games. If you are not a winner, you are perfectly capable of becoming one.
Does everyone in your games start from a level playing field?

Certainly not.

And why not have a win-win situation?

As a side note, I also love games, and I enjoy capitalism to some extent because it is a challenging game. However, we are not dealing with an abstract game here, we are dealing with people. It's human life that we are dealing with, and we should take it more seriously then that.

It's funny how winners seem to like games and the losers don't. I am a winner, thus, i like games. If you are not a winner, you are perfectly capable of becoming one.
Winners or losers. Not everybody likes games. Your assertion that only winners like games is totally blatantly false and ignorant.
Real winners enjoy fair games with a fair set of rules. Not turning real life situation into a game for the purpose of hurting others.
You really ar a total loser.

We think the same thing coolskill!!

I am not saying that the US capitalism is perfect, you are correct. You say we need fair rules and an even playing field and I completely agree. The flaw with the US econmoy is that it is not a level playing field. Ideally, it would be, and I would like to see it become one, and I believe we should try and create equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome

Where we seem to disagree is that while I want to make a fair game where there are winners and losers but the losers can always imporove and become winners, and nothing is holding tehm back but themselves, you want to eliminate the prospect of winning and losing all togetehr.

Nothing holding them back? Why do you think there is no level playing field?

We think the same thing coolskill!!

I am not saying that the US capitalism is perfect, you are correct. You say we need fair rules and an even playing field and I completely agree. The flaw with the US econmoy is that it is not a level playing field. Ideally, it would be, and I would like to see it become one, and I believe we should try and create equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome

Where we seem to disagree is that while I want to make a fair game where there are winners and losers but the losers can always imporove and become winners, and nothing is holding tehm back but themselves, you want to eliminate the prospect of winning and losing all togetehr.
No you retard. The problem as stated is that it is not a game, and real winners play games that are intended to be games. They do not participate in any playing field that is not intended to be a playing field such as a soccer game. That is an actual game. You are totally ignorant. Stop fucking misinterpreting everything I say.

Winners or losers. Not everybody likes games. Your assertion that only winners like games is totally blatantly false and ignorant.
Real winners enjoy fair games with a fair set of rules. Not turning real life situation into a game for the purpose of hurting others.
You really ar a total loser.

They do not treat real life like a game. Losers and assholes treat real life like a game. Games are meant to be games played as games. When you idiots treat real life like a game, humans get hurt. Real winners have no part in this.

Well like it or not you are in the middle of the game, so you can either move, bitch and moan while your situation gets even worse, or make the best out of it. Just go ahead and move to your Utopia that doesnt exist; nobody will miss you, you are not helping society anyway

Or you can beat the game and change it.

Or get rid of the game altogether by taking down the rich who control it.
Or be a mindless loser bobbling around in the matrix like Jeff.
It doesn't matter how much money you make, you are still a mindless drone in the matrix. No amount of money can buy reality.

You can't magically get rid of the game. cool skill... :rolleyes:

Or get rid of the game altogether by taking down the rich who control it.
Or be a mindless loser bobbling around in the matrix like Jeff.
It doesn't matter how much money you make, you are still a mindless drone in the matrix. No amount of money can buy reality.

You take down the game by mastering the game you idiot. When you master the game, you gain teh power to change the game. Not any old yokel can change the game, you are not worthy to change the game.

The matrix? You are the drone, I am Neo. I have learned to command the system and control it. I bend the rules and succeed and whoop up on agents, you sit there and complain the matrix is unfair and cant make a difference in it.

cool skill,

You can't conquer an enemy like that. You have to get to know your enemy and learn how your enemy succeeds. Once you know your enemy, you can defeat him.

... And mind you, the best way to defeat any enemy is by using his own strenght....

I will put it in terms you can understand coolskill. If you want to shut down and overthrow the matrix, you can't do it from the outside, you have to master the system and use it to your own advantage like Neo and then use your mastery to infiltrate the mainframe of the matrix and overthrow the architect (who i guess is represented by rich people). Become the One, then maybe you will have enough power to actually change something but posting on this silly forum will accomplish nothing

Nobody is talking about changing the game. The point is to get rid of the game. People are not free. Freedom is important. Being enslaved in a game nobody wants to be part of is not the answer.

If you claim to be Neo, beating agents silly changes nothing unless you have the real ability to destroy the game altogether. Unless your cause is the same as Neo's, you are simply a participant in the game just like all of the other drones in the matrix. Like the character Cypher. You choose to forget about the truth in order to participate and have a good life in the matrix meanwhile being a complete part of a demented game.

If you wanna get rid of the game, you also have to master it first.

First steps in mastering the game are to know the rules.

1. Acknowledge that severe poverty exists throughout the world.

2. Understand the cause of this poverty is business interests. Whenver these people decide to set up a free independent democracy for the people such as the USA, business interests in the USA stand to lose money. CIA comes into the country, uses various methods to disrupt their movement towards independence, and installs a dictatorship (friendly to American businesses) to protect American business interests. Massive poverty and oppression is the result.


Idiots that do not know the rules and harms of capitalism should not be claiming that they are masters of the system. They can either be masters of this capitalist system, and perpetuate it, or be masters of this capitalist system to take it down, and allow everybody to be free.

Americans are slaves. The best method of keeping the slave is to make them believe they are not slaves. Therefore, they have no reason to stop being slaves.
All monetary decisions are conducted by a group of crooked individuals that OWN the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is not a government body. Nor is it publicly owned. It is privately owned, and controlled. These are the people that control the monetary system. You and I are not these people. You and I cannot possibly claim to be free when we have no democratic say regarding their decisions.

The only thing you and I can do is attack the flaws in the system to get richer using every resource available to strengthen your organization influence to take these bastards down for good.

In the meantime, continue to improve designs that will minimize any corrpution, and free the people of the United States as well as throughout the earth. Take down the CIA, and set up a new organization for the sake of ridding these countries of their dictators, and allowing them their freedom regardless of effect on American business interests. All knowing that allowing these countries to be free will cause a temporary setback in the US economy as a whole.

Poverty is not intevitable. It is not necessary. It is intentionally created and perpetuated for the business interests of a corrupt terrorist nation called, the United States of America.

cool skill:

Americans are slaves. The best method of keeping the slave is to make them believe they are not slaves. Therefore, they have no reason to stop being slaves.

That is one of the two major methods of keeping the people docile. The other is to make them accept that oppression is merely a fact of life, and to try and exist within the oppression. A good example of this is Vietnam, where the people have 'adapted' to become corrupt, in order to survive.

Such a mentality also occurs to a lesser extent in 'developed' countries, where the workers accept abuse by their employers as a 'natural' occurence, which must be 'tolerated'.

But you're right. Generate the illusion of freedom, and the people will not rise up. It doesn't matter if the current system causes poverty, war and suffering in neighbouring countries. Out of sight, out of mind.

A good parallel is meat consumption. People don't see how animals suffer during the meat production process, and hence have no qualms about eating meat. Out of sight, out of mind. But I bet if they saw just how horrific the meat eating 'system' is, they would not be able to eat meat without a guilty conscience.

Yes. Ignorance is not the lack of knowledge. It is the lack of desire for knowledge. We literally do not live by a code of intelligence. We live with the code of "what I don't know won't hurt me". It is the code of turning the blind eye. The very definition of ignorance. Unfortuantely, what you don't know does hurt you, is hurting you, and is hurting humanity and the environment.

It is the brainwashed installation. They instill in people at an early age that corruption and proverty are inevitable aspects of life. Hence the completely fabricated phrase: "Life isn't fair".
Many years ago, you might tell people that slavery is wrong, and it should be abolished. They would laugh at you, and say it is inevitable, and it is necessary.

We instill in eachother a warped sense of reality. Any format of society can work. It is just a matter of implementing it to work. Why implement a society that works in the favor of few? Because it is simply a mismanagement of resources.

It does not take a supergenius to get rich. Now that you have all this millions in dough, the only thing that springs to mind is all the amazing things I can do with it. Now, I can buy cars, I can create one material after another. I can build statues all over the place, and the list is endless. Of course, what does it take to do all this? Land space, Natural resources, and Human effort. (LMH). The result. Massive poverty. Massive destruction of the environment.

All the wars and problems we know of are the result of American's foreceful assurption of natural resources. We took American land by massacering millions upon millions of indians. We built everything using massive amounts of slaves. We plunder resources in other countries by massacering thousand to millions. The rich oppress the poor everywhere they can in order to get as much from them as they can. The law supposedly protects us from this, but the rich manipulate the law to their own advantage.

Propoganda is a major major tool. Previously, it was communism that was the enemy. Now it is terrorism that is the enemy. From Russia, Vietnam, Iraq, Hitler, etc. Sure there are many dictators around the world. Mostly because we put them there.

You can never get the least bit of information from mass media network news. Almost all of it is false. Especially anything that comes from "official sources". Official sources have no reason at all to tell the truth. 100% of it is false.

We overlook these lies on the basis of classified information. We allow this because we are lead to believe it is important for classified security. Bullcrap. Americans need to be informed. People of this nation should be informed.

coolskill, I agree 100%.

The problem is, how do we fight against a system which has entrenched itself firmly in many parts of the world? How can we fight an immoral system which can 'out-produce' other economic systems, yet does not distribute this surplus in a fair manner?

I think that Trotsky hit the nail on the head. A 'political vanguard' needs to be formed, in order to educate the citzens of all countries about the injustices of the current system, and encourage them to reject the system.

Many countries must undergo a revolution in quick succession, otherwise the new economic systems they form will not be able to hold out against the remaining hostile capitalist nations, which will be able to out-produce and economically cripple them Witness Communist China's collapse due to competition with an economically superior U.S.A, which led to them reverting to a more capitalistic economic system. The same occured with Soviet Russia. Stalin believed that a communist country could exist in isolation, and compete economically with Capitalistic nations. He was wrong. Trotsky was RIGHT.

For one thing, there is no such thing as a hand out per say. "Hand out" is another brainwashing term that tells slaves they are obligated to labor for the rich.
"I don't take hand outs."

Well guess what? The rich do all the time. That is why they are rich.

The populus has the right to First World standard of living without obligation. We should not accept any less, and doing so is fooling yourself into thinking that less than the best is ok. This is not the attitude of a First World society.

Many people try to help impoverished nations build themselves up. We send millions upon millions to these poor people to help them. What is the problem?

The IMF and the World Bank have specific sanctions on these nations that do not allow them to produce anything that will compete with the products of large companies.

First steps in mastering the game are to know the rules.

1. Acknowledge that severe poverty exists throughout the world.

2. Understand the cause of this poverty is business interests. Whenver these people decide to set up a free independent democracy for the people such as the USA, business interests in the USA stand to lose money. CIA comes into the country, uses various methods to disrupt their movement towards independence, and installs a dictatorship (friendly to American businesses) to protect American business interests. Massive poverty and oppression is the result.


Idiots that do not know the rules and harms of capitalism should not be claiming that they are masters of the system. They can either be masters of this capitalist system, and perpetuate it, or be masters of this capitalist system to take it down, and allow everybody to be free.

Americans are slaves. The best method of keeping the slave is to make them believe they are not slaves. Therefore, they have no reason to stop being slaves.
All monetary decisions are conducted by a group of crooked individuals that OWN the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is not a government body. Nor is it publicly owned. It is privately owned, and controlled. These are the people that control the monetary system. You and I are not these people. You and I cannot possibly claim to be free when we have no democratic say regarding their decisions.

The only thing you and I can do is attack the flaws in the system to get richer using every resource available to strengthen your organization influence to take these bastards down for good.

In the meantime, continue to improve designs that will minimize any corrpution, and free the people of the United States as well as throughout the earth. Take down the CIA, and set up a new organization for the sake of ridding these countries of their dictators, and allowing them their freedom regardless of effect on American business interests. All knowing that allowing these countries to be free will cause a temporary setback in the US economy as a whole.

Poverty is not intevitable. It is not necessary. It is intentionally created and perpetuated for the business interests of a corrupt terrorist nation called, the United States of America.
Indeed....

Many people try to help impoverished nations build themselves up. We send millions upon millions to these poor people to help them. What is the problem?

The IMF and the World Bank have specific sanctions on these nations that do not allow them to produce anything that will compete with the products of large companies.
The IMF is sickening. They take all our money away and give it to the americans... :mad:

How do you figure that, truth?

They do! I lived there. We could invest in our education and healthcare, but they take everything! :eek:

Truth, you don't understand. I'm not disputing you. I'm completely ignorant of the workings of the IMF.

Can you explain how the IMF takes 'all our money away', and 'gives it to the Americans'?

Well, you see... we have a national debt, just like the US. But contrary to the US, we actually pay our debt. :rolleyes:

And of course, the IMF is owned by the US, and I can easily bet they stay with all the money. They did that kind of stuff when they impose dictatorship in our country, so why not now?

Money in the form of debt goes directly from the hands of the impoverished countries to the IMF.

The head of the IMF was being interviewed. He was asked if it would not be best to just stop collecting millions per day from these poor countries. The answer of course was no. It would not be best to loose millions in income. Do you really think our donations to relief efforts and rebuilding efforts in poor countries mean shit? The amount of money we donate to them in months is donated from them to the IMF on a daily basis. Furthermore, the IMF has very strong sanctions on impoverished countries that outright do not allow them to participate in trade that would be considered in competition with big business.

The term all big businesses use for sweatshops is "economic processing zone". These are sweatshops. Economic processing zones are the poor areas where the people are pretty much in slave labor.

Thank your for the explaination, cool skill.

What do you propose we do to fix the problem?

The Federal Reserve, IMF, World Bank, CIA, thousands of big business execs, and millions of day traders need to be discontinued.

This is the process that has happened many many times in many many countries:
The CIA sabotages the economy, and installs a dictator.
That dictator borrows money from the IMF specifically so that the country can be in debt to the IMF. (Under the impression that they will be using it to help rebuild.)
The IMF loans the money attatching an interest on it so that the debt will never ever ever ever ever be repaid in full. As time goes forward, the interest raises the level of the debt so that the debt continues to increase.

The US alone is 8 trillion in debt. I believe that Timor was recently able to fee their country from this game, but I am not sure of the whole story.


One of the most recent is Sri Lanka. Thanks to the tusnami, the IMF will now be making even bigger amounts of money from Sri Lanka.

Exactly what I said. That's exactly what happened in Brazil... :eek:

Operation Condor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Condor)

Exactly what I said. That's exactly what happened in Brazil... :eek:
????
This happens EVERYWHERE.

cool skill:

The IMF loans the money attatching an interest on it so that the debt will never ever ever ever ever be repaid in full

What would happen if the country merely refused to pay the extremely high interest?

????
This happens EVERYWHERE.
You are an idiot.

cool skill:

What would happen if the country merely refused to pay the extremely high interest?
They would probably kill our president. They've done it before... :rolleyes:

And they would probably use the old excuse of "national security" to completely destroy our economy again.... :rolleyes:

Finland/Sweden are Ideal economic types? You call losing 50% of your income to taxes Ideal? A flippin six pack costs $20! Are you on crack?

I'll take my capitalistic 20pack of budlight for $18.99 thank you very much.

Maybe we should change this topic to reflect which system is better for A) hard workers who want to control their own futures and B) people who want the government to wipe their butts.

Truthseeker:

They would probably kill our president. They've done it before...
And they would probably use the old excuse of "national security" to completely destroy our economy again....

Where do you live?

And I have a hard time imagining that the U.S would be able to kill world leaders from every country that is in debt to them.

Personally, the U.S reminds me of Rumpelstiltskin...

Finland/Sweden are Ideal economic types? You call losing 50% of your income to taxes Ideal? A flippin six pack costs $20! Are you on crack?
Finnish beer:

Currently I have a crate with 24 Koff (III) beers (0,33l each) in my possession purchased for the total sum of 15,90 Euro. That includes the restitution fee for the bottles and the crate which would make the price even lower. Moreover Koff beer tasts about 10 times better than a bud light.

15,90 Euro translates into almost exactly 20 dollars.

Now less deduct the restitution fees for the bottles and the crate.

24 x 0,15 = 3,60
1 crate = 2,50

15,90 - 6,10 = 9,80

9,80 Euro is 12 dollars.

wait a minute? They are overcharging you for your budlight in capitalistic USA????

http://www.koff.fi/en/products/beers/koff3.html

You are an idiot.
The idiot is:
YOU

The idiot is: YOU

Is that in strict accordance with the rules of debate which you posted on another thread?

Baron Max

A) hard workers who want to control their own futures and B) people who want the government to wipe their butts.
1. This topic has nothing to do with hard workers.
2. Anybody that thinks they are not a slave can never be free. It is difficult enough as it is to escape a maze. Far more difficult if you are unaware that you are trapped in one. Welcome to the game of capitalist death.
3. It is about an alternative to a globally destructive economic system that systematically takes the rights of all people on earth for the sake of plutocratic dictators. The system is called: Capitalism.

Is that in strict accordance with the rules of debate which you posted on another thread?

Baron Max

OOOOH, BURN! :D

2. Anybody that thinks they are not a slave can never be free. It is very difficult to escape a maze. The first step is to be aware that you are trapped in one. Welcome to the game of capitalist death.

I love your analogies.

Truthseeker:

Where do you live?
I'm from Brazil.

I don't think he actually ever killed on of our presidents. But one of them commited suicide to prevent the US from taking over...

Personally, the U.S reminds me of Rumpelstiltskin...
What's that.....? :confused:

It is a portugese midget.

That's a straaaaaange comparison....

Truthseeker:

That's a straaaaaange comparison....

That's because you've never read the fairy tale. If you had, you'd understand. I suggest you google for it.

We need to change our society due to these problems with Capitalism:

1. One of the biggest problems with capitalism is that, because control of the means of producing economic goods in a society resides in the hands of those who invest their capital for production, capital (The money or wealth needed to produce goods and services) has to accumulate before a nation becomes prosperous. This process could take years or even decades before capital has accumulated to an extent to where the masses can harness this capital.

2. Another problematic situation with capitalism: corporations are ruled by individual managers, who take part of the money of the workers, therefore exploiting the workers. :mad: :mad: You Might say that the manager is working harder than everyone else, but who's producing the products of the masses' everyday consumption? It's the worker, or, more known as, the proletariat.

3. Since Capitalism is an economic theory which stresses that control of the means of producing economic goods in a society should reside in the hands of those who invest the capital for production, & private ownership, this concentrates the means of production to rich people. What results is a modern form of Feudalism, since the means of production is concentrated to a small segment of society.

4. This is the worst problem with Capitalism:Since power is concentrated to an individual in a company, The person becomes corrupt.

In what way does a manager/CEO, become corrupt?

Lord Acton once said, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely". This principle not only exists in the political world; it also exists in the economic & social world.

A manager/CEO is the one who benifits the most out of a company, because, when the people buy a manager/CEO's products, this goes to his/her account. Because of all the money a manager/CEO rakes in, PROFIT BECOMES THE ONLY MOTIVE IN BUSINESS DECISIONS. This leads us as a species to do some very odd things. Here's an example: let's just say that humans developed the technology to totally wipe out the AIDS plague. However, we refuse to use it, because our capitalist mentality insists that every person taking a medication must pay equally for it. It does not matter that the cost would be trivial to produce the medication to wipe out the plague now that the difficult work of developing the drugs has been done. Further, we don't wipe out AIDS because that would be unprofitable. Maximum profit demands keeping the virus around infecting new customers. And finally we don't wipe out AIDS because we don't have a way of allocating costs of projects that benefit every world citizen. We have spent about 4 billion on researching new AIDS treatments but only 0.1 billion on finding a vaccine to prevent new infections.

Other examples of profit becoming the only motive in business decisions can be the McLibel case (look it up on wikipedia).

I think that the best way is socialism, because it utilizes workers' councils &, for an economy to become larger, socialism utilizes accumulated labor, not accumulated capital.

The problem with capitalism is that in order to accumulate capital you need to have capital in the first place. It's a big poverty trap! :eek: I couldn't agree more; under socialism, all a nation needs to do is accumulate labor, since Socialism stresses that the control of the means of producing economic goods in a society should reside in the hands of those who invest their labor for production.

I could see hard work + education.Yes; education is extremely important for business, since alot of jobs require knowledge.

Thou
Shalt
Not
Commiteth
Thread
Necromancy!!!
Thus Sayeth The Prince!!!

A problem with capitalism is money devaluation.

The next problem is money accumulation.

The third problem and maybe the biggest problem is the concept of profit. This is especially prevalent in business where a business can not exist unless it makes a profit. An individual on the other hand has no problem with subsistence existence.

There's only one problem with Capitalism -- people who have no natural talent to create it, but who possess the natural talent to take it from those who have it.

The problem with capitalism is that in order to accumulate capital you need to have capital in the first place. It's a big poverty trap! :eek:

:itold:

The problem with capitalism is that in order to accumulate capital you need to have capital in the first place. It's a big poverty trap!

No, you don't. Good hard work will do just fine.

Baron Max

No, you don't. Good hard work will do just fine.

Baron Max

Well if that were true, shouldn't the lower classes be the richest?
Now I could see hard work + education.

Well if that were true, shouldn't the lower classes be the richest?
Now I could see hard work + education.

Work beyond what is required of you.

The people with money don't work 40 hours a week.. they work more, and not because someone told them to.

This thread asks the perfect question because, of course, for all its criticts, capitalism has NO alternative.

It's the only system that makes sense.

Well if that were true, shouldn't the lower classes be the richest?
Now I could see hard work + education.

Where are these people that are busting their butts every day, making good life-choices, and foundering under Capitalism? The only people I see failing under our system are the people who are too lazy to contribute to society. I work in the trades, with blue-collar people that put in 40 hours a week, own their own homes, are putting money away for their kid's education, etc... We are the true "lower-class" of a capitalist system, and we are succeeding. The kids of my co-workers are going to have a better life than they had. This is a major victory when you look at world history.

The people who are failing are the ones who don't like to work. They bounce from an odd job to another odd job. They bitch and moan about the "system", but they aren't even a part of it. They are lazy moochers who rely on the guilt-complex of liberals to give them things they haven't earned.

Mexican immigrants come into our country illegally. They do not have the benefits of citizenship (minimum wage, social security, driving licenses, etc..), English is their second language. They come only with what they can carry. They have almost ZERO political representation. And yet, with hard work and dedication, they make a living, bring in family, raise kids (who learn English, go to college, move up the economic ladder), they improve their neighborhoods, take pride in the things they accomplish. These people do not have the help that the American poor has. When I think of the poorest Americans I think of Whites in their trailer-parks and Blacks in their slums. Their property is dilapidated. Their homes are broken and full of abuse, both physical and substance. They live off of government programs, and hate/distrust the government. They don't work, and feel that the people who do have an "unfair" advantage. They have an enormous drop-out rate. They treat each other like crap (both youth cultures have a big sub-culture of beating each other up for fun). They treat women like crap. These similarities are not racial, they are linked to motivation. What is striking is number of these comparisons between the two cultures.

I came from this culture. The White culture of poverty. And then I lived for 5 years in the poor Black cultures of the Caribbean islands. And I have zero pity for anyone who fails in a meritorious system.

Are there cheats in Capitalism? Yes. But that is a human trait, not an effect of the economic system. The Communist cheats were even more unfair and brutal. As were the feudal cheats, the dictatorial cheats, etc... Such anecdotal evidence is meaningless.

Well these mexicans that come with nothing arent exactly becoming CEOs are they?
But I see your point.

Sandoz:

This thread asks the perfect question because, of course, for all its criticts, capitalism has NO alternative.

It's the only system that makes sense.

Bingo.

Work beyond what is required of you.

The people with money don't work 40 hours a week.. they work more, and not because someone told them to.

What abou the people who work 16 hours a day, 6 days a week?

The problem with Anarchy is the existence of evil in men.

Combined with power and Lord Acton's law that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, Anarchy leads to the most human suffering.
Totalitarian systems and malevolent dictatorships are cruel tyrannies indeed. And many die. But it is centalized and generally inefficient as long as the rulers are happy. But decentalized tyranny, with local tyrants becomes a real nightmare with the rule of law replaced by might makes right.

Anarchy, like communism is a fatally flawed dream ...... sad to say.

Bingo.All right then, so why are you a protectionist?

You can't be a protectionist and a capitalist at the same time.

No, you don't. Good hard work will do just fine.

Baron Max
If your hard work can create enough disposable capital to pay off all your necessaries and accumulate savings in a reasonable amount of time, then, yes, hard work will just do it. But that is not the case in many countries in this planet.

Work beyond what is required of you.

The people with money don't work 40 hours a week.. they work more, and not because someone told them to.
They don't work more. They work smarter.

The problem with Anarchy is the existence of evil in men.
Good and evil is like black and white. Have we forgotten all the other colours?

The problem with capitalism is the existence of evil in men.

There is no "good" and "evil".

Speaking of evil. How is the baby?

I searched the entire thread and didn't find the use of the term NET WORTH.

Just because a person is an employee there is no reason why shouldn't they know accounting and concentrate on increasing NET WORTH. Do you hear banks, politicians or economists saying it should be mandatory in our schools?

http://www.bsu.edu/news/article/0,1370,-1019-11714,00.html

CAPITALISM was phased out around 1900. The technology of the second industrial revolution made CORPORATE CONSUMERISM possible. Consumers are supposed to work their lives away running on a treadmill going into debt buying garbage designed to become obsolete. It is 37 years after the moon landing and we are suppose to believe that economists with PhDs from Harvard and the University of Chicago and the London School of Economics have no idea that planned obsolescence is going on in automobiles. YEAH RIGHT!

http://booksliterature.com/showthread.php?t=236

psik

Speaking of evil. How is the baby?
He is not evil! :frust:

:argue:

:spank:

I searched the entire thread and didn't find the use of the term NET WORTH.

Just because a person is an employee there is no reason why shouldn't they know accounting and concentrate on increasing NET WORTH. Do you hear banks, politicians or economists saying it should be mandatory in our schools?

http://www.bsu.edu/news/article/0,1370,-1019-11714,00.html

CAPITALISM was phased out around 1900. The technology of the second industrial revolution made CORPORATE CONSUMERISM possible. Consumers are supposed to work their lives away running on a treadmill going into debt buying garbage designed to become obsolete. It is 37 years after the moon landing and we are suppose to believe that economists with PhDs from Harvard and the University of Chicago and the London School of Economics have no idea that planned obsolescence is going on in automobiles. YEAH RIGHT!

http://booksliterature.com/showthread.php?t=236

psik

HA! :D

HA! :D

That was very informative.

Have you sought the truth about how much Americans lose on depreciation of automobiles each year?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_vehicles_in_the_United_States#Total_numb er_of_vehicles

psik

Hey man, I believe you! When I said "HA!" I was just expressing how funny it is when someone says the truth so clearly and the truth is so incredibly far from what the majority believe!!!! :D

That was very informative.

Have you sought the truth about how much Americans lose on depreciation of automobiles each year?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_vehicles_in_the_United_States#Total_numb er_of_vehicles

psik
I don't think they bother measuring the depreciation. I'm sure at least half of them don't even know what "depreciation" means!!! :D

Sandoz:

Capitalism under a protectionist system is the only thing that produced and sustained the great nations. Moreover, it is the only system that allows said countries to have had little to no taxes on their populace.

As soon as free trade became dogma, taxes were raised, and monetary policy changed, life turned to crap. Industries left, life quality went down, inflation rose...

The present form of capitalism is not sustainable.

Work beyond what is required of you.

The people with money don't work 40 hours a week.. they work more, and not because someone told them to.
If it is true that work = wealth shouldent the people with mor than one job be the weathiest? Many poor are forced to take second and third jobs to survive. Most of these people work well over 40 hours.

I was wondering whether a system of be paid in bill that say the number of hours worked would work. All people would recieve the same payment for the same number of hours worked. If all people in a country were paid like this we would rid ourselves of exploitation because the price of an item would be the same opportunity cost to all. People would only go to school because the jab they were interested in will need that person to have more knowledge to do it. If school is not your thing you could drop out and do any job you are interested in and qualified for. Therefore the only way to get ahead is to work longer hours. People would be dismissed from their jobs if they were not perfoming at the needed level. Tell me what you think!!
:shrug: :shrug: :shrug:

spectre50:

And if one person can make 50 dolls an hour instead of just 10?

Then we kill him and take his stuff.

Duh.

Oh, and hey, please explain to me why you are such an economically liberal little bitch. It irritates me to no end that you can't get the best bits of conservatism right.

Sandoz:

Capitalism under a protectionist system is the only thing that produced and sustained the great nations. Moreover, it is the only system that allows said countries to have had little to no taxes on their populace.

As soon as free trade became dogma, taxes were raised, and monetary policy changed, life turned to crap. Industries left, life quality went down, inflation rose...

Taxes increased with the rise of the military-industrial complex and social security. If it weren't for all the wealth generated by free trade, nations would have been crushed by the taxes required to pay for bloated governments. Taxes were low prior to the 20th century because government was small. Increase the size of government, and you must raise taxes.

Fiscal policy led to higher taxes, not monetary policy.

Inflation rose due to the percieved trade-off of unemplopyment and inflation. They are well correlated, as per the Philips Curve (look it up). Nixon and his economic advisors didn't realize there was a lurking variable, and ended up sending the economy into a spiral of inflation and recession that didn't stop until Reagan.

Oft misunderstood are Reagan's economic policies. Unlike Bush Jr., he used supply-side economic policies were he cut taxes rather than handed out rebates in demand-side Keynesian fashion. Which is FDR screed. Which increases inflation.

Bush's moves are the type that increase inflation. If it weren't for tight monetary policy, we'd see far greater inflation.

I don't think they bother measuring the depreciation. I'm sure at least half of them don't even know what "depreciation" means!!! :D

So you admit the current form of capitalism isn't sustainable. Do you think depreciation might be a factor in that?

Do we just sit back and let the system crap out and struggle to live among the rubble?

psik

Taxes increased with the rise of the military-industrial complex and social security. If it weren't for all the wealth generated by free trade, nations would have been crushed by the taxes required to pay for bloated governments. Taxes were low prior to the 20th century because government was small. Increase the size of government, and you must raise taxes.

Fiscal policy led to higher taxes, not monetary policy.

Inflation rose due to the percieved trade-off of unemplopyment and inflation. They are well correlated, as per the Philips Curve (look it up). Nixon and his economic advisors didn't realize there was a lurking variable, and ended up sending the economy into a spiral of inflation and recession that didn't stop until Reagan.

Oft misunderstood are Reagan's economic policies. Unlike Bush Jr., he used supply-side economic policies were he cut taxes rather than handed out rebates in demand-side Keynesian fashion. Which is FDR screed. Which increases inflation.

Bush's moves are the type that increase inflation. If it weren't for tight monetary policy, we'd see far greater inflation.

Yeah, wow, you sure know your stuff Roman.
I know.
Of course you know.
Yup, I know.

...Oft misunderstood are Reagan's economic policies. Unlike Bush Jr., he used supply-side economic policies were he cut taxes rather than handed out rebates in demand-side Keynesian fashion. Which is FDR screed. Which increases inflation. Bush's moves are the type that increase inflation....Good post. I remember taking my $300 government check to the bank to deposit it in saving account and thinking while waiting:

"This must be the dumbest way possible for the government to stimulate the economy. - Give money directly to the already rich (size of rebates was proportional to taxes paid up to the $300 limit) when banks already have too much money and consequently interest rates were low." I invented then the concept of "helicopter money" - long before someone important did. I.e. If want to stimulate the economy with X dollars of people's tax money (or increased borrowing & debt as was the case): Fly over poor neighborhoods and toss the X dollars out. - They would have bought things, not saved the money as I did, adding to the current mortgage crisis to grow. etc.

So you admit the current form of capitalism isn't sustainable. Do you think depreciation might be a factor in that?

Do we just sit back and let the system crap out and struggle to live among the rubble?

psik
Wtf? :wtf:

Man, you cannot avoid depreciation. It happens! LOL! :D

Yes, the current form of capitalism isn't sustainable, but it has nothing to do with depreciation.... :D

yes, everytime i type on this mac the only thing i can think of is:

resale...value...dropping...with...every...keystro ke...

yes, everytime i type on this mac the only thing i can think of is:

resale...value...dropping...with...every...keystro ke...

Get rid of it and buy a PC. With an open architecture, there is more competition for parts, which means a superior product at a cheaper price. And they are more easily upgradeable, which means they lose value slower than a proprietary machine with slim market share. Oh, and people actually write software that runs on PC's. You aren't stuck with the pre-installed iCrap. ;)

Wtf? :wtf:

Man, you cannot avoid depreciation. It happens! LOL! :D

Yes, the current form of capitalism isn't sustainable, but it has nothing to do with depreciation.... :D

What technology do you know how to design or repair?

psik

What technology do you know how to design or repair?

psik
None! I'm an accountant! :bugeye:

"PROFIT BECOMES THE ONLY MOTIVE IN BUSINESS DECISIONS. This leads us as a species to do some very odd things"

This is why capitalism did fail and why the current corporate/consumerism will fail.

Not just business decisions are now coming down to the so-called "bottom line". ALL decisions(healthcare/socialistic systems agreed to by the people/non profit endevours) are coming down to the bottom line.

A successful system is one that serves it's beneficiaries the best. What happened to monarchy was merchants/skilled workers decided a new system that best served the new power structure.

Currently the system serves the corporation the best, I personally think it doesn't even serve the weasel CEO's and so-called "elite" the best, but they think it does and so it will continue, until a new power structure comes to pass.

"And so when the power of the good eye can no longer see, the plowshare of evil must come again and again..."

None! I'm an accountant! :bugeye:

Now this is very interesting because it brings up the point of what depreciation is and what it has to do with reality. Depreciation is decline in value of "something" but what it is makes a difference and the financial loss doesn't necessarily tell us the effects.

If someone has $10,000 worth of diamonds in a safe deposit box and their value drops to $7,000, that's $3,000 in depreciation but there is no physical change in the diamonds.

If a man drives his car 30 miles to work every day this puts wear and tear on the machine reducing its value causing depreciation. But eventually this wear and tear will cause the car to fail. So suppose he makes $20 an hour. He leaves for work one morning expecting to be $160 richer when he comes home. His car breaks down on the way to work and he has to pay $40 for a tow and $260 for the repair and he failed to make his $160. So he's $460 below where he expected to be but an economist would say that GDP went up more than it would have if he had gotten to work because he spent more than he would have made. Who knows how much his car lost in depreciation that year?

After all of these decades of making cars and other machines don't you think manufacturers know how to test measure and specify the durability of automobiles? Do you see them competing on the basis of that data?

I have discussed these things with an economist at the University of Chicago and I have seen him on television a few times. If he is typical of economists they are technological morons. And talking about economics over the last 50 without looking at the real effects of technology is absurd.

I am typing this on a used computer I got off eBay for $200. It was made in 2002 and I've had it for a year. It was probably over $1000 new. The wear and tear on a computer is on the disk drive and a crashed drive can cost a lot depending on what was on it especially if it's not backed up. I expect an accountant knows that these days. But a BIGGer new hard drive can be gotten for $50 so a used computer with a new drive can be more useful than it was new. A new 3 GHz Dual-Core would be faster, but at doing what? I can't type any faster. I can't read the screen any faster. I should buy games that need more power just to have an excuse to buy a new computer? NOT ME! I know Macro$cam VISTA.

The point is you need to think about depreciation before you buy things in order to avoid it.

I have this Glencoe Accounting book.

http