Capitalism is depressing

If you are referring to the US, we are not capitalist.DaBrainz

[QUOTE="DaBrainz"]If you are referring to the US, we are not capitalist.ghoklebutter

If you are referring to the US, we are not capitalist.DaBrainz

[QUOTE="DaBrainz"]If you are referring to the US, we are not capitalist.-Sun_Tzu-

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="DaBrainz"]If you are referring to the US, we are not capitalist.DaBrainz

Yeah, while individuals may 'own' some of the means of production in the US you are still greatly constrained by the government in how you use or dispose of the resources you 'own'.

Edit: Basically the problem is that 'owning' property or your livelihood in the US is a more limited term than it was 200 years ago. More demands and stipulations are placed on private property now by the government.

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="DaBrainz"]If you are referring to the US, we are not capitalist.DaBrainz

When you get born, every squre foot of land around you is owned by someone. So you end up taking orders from your parents for the first 18 years of your life. You go to college and explode with debt. And after you need to get a job to pay it off and end up taking even more orders from the land owners. Capitalism is punishing people for existing.RushKing

[QUOTE="RushKing"]When you get born, every squre foot of land around you is owned by someone. So you end up taking orders from your parents for the first 18 years of your life. You go to college and explode with debt. And after you need to get a job to pay it off and end up taking even more orders from the land owners. Capitalism is punishing people for existing.LOXO7

[QUOTE="thegerg"][QUOTE="iHarlequin"]

What?

iHarlequin

No, it doesn't. I don't think the people should pay for that - not directly -, I think the state should.

[QUOTE="LOXO7"][QUOTE="RushKing"]When you get born, every squre foot of land around you is owned by someone. So you end up taking orders from your parents for the first 18 years of your life. You go to college and explode with debt. And after you need to get a job to pay it off and end up taking even more orders from the land owners. Capitalism is punishing people for existing.Abbeten

[QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="LOXO7"] That land is probably owned by the state you live in, if you live in America or the government if not. Unless you have an allodial title. And this system isn't capitalism. It's communism. The government owns you if your parents get a marriage license. They "need" permission to marry. Parents are saying they are not free enough to marry by themselves so they need the states permission first. Messed up? Yes it is. If you have a birth certificate then you are property of the government. At which point did capitalism enter your life?LOXO7

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"] Well, of course not all of those societies were the same. Some of them, for instance, had widespread, institutionalized violence against women. Others did not. And then there were societies based on gift economies and societies that were based on more authoritarian systems. What matters to me is not whether most of those societies were egalitarian, but whether the existence of those truly egalitarian societies says something about the feasibility of anarchy.

surrealnumber5

My initial point had to do with the notion that people can necessarily do whatever the fvck they want in anarchy, and more specifically, parameters of what they can and cannot do will likely have something to do with people. I'm not too familiar with a system of the sort that has ever existed. I'm all ears, however.

To some extent, it might be feasible to implement anarchy, but it hasn't seemed to prove itself on a large scale, yet, unlike modern Western social democracies which do a kinda okay-ish job at ensuring people have access to necessities like safety, food, water, shelter, education, health care and some degree of personal autonomy - moreover, they have for the past several decades been improving on most of these fronts. I'm nary too convinced to agree with implementing a political structure which would necessitate the removal of the on in place, particularly when the current system is reasonable and - more importantly, the trend within the system is positive, Slow, but positive.

The last four years, umm, involved a p. big financial collapse - a temporary problem barring a repeat requiring a number of circumstances. I can survive and thrive under the current system, and live a long and healthy life with a decent education, and keep a substantial portion of my earnings. Is it perfect? No, but I can't really call life under the current system particularly miserable, to say the least.

[QUOTE="LOXO7"]

[QUOTE="Abbeten"] lolAbbeten

How can the government require something of a person in our government system? It can't. If it does, our government has changed from a republic to a communism like state. You have a receipt. That's your birth certificate. You get a sos number to get taxes. You do things things because the government tells you to do them or else you get punished. I fail to see how this is free.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5tYWVpCOPY&feature=plcp

[QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="LOXO7"] This quote proves ignorance is bliss!

LOXO7

How can the government require something of a person in our government system? It can't. If it does, our government has changed from a republic to a communism like state. You have a receipt. That's your birth certificate. You get a sos number to get taxes. You do things things because the government tells you to do them or else you get punished. I fail to see how this is free.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5tYWVpCOPY&feature=plcp

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

My initial point had to do with the notion that people can necessarily do whatever the fvck they want in anarchy, and more specifically, parameters of what they can and cannot do will likely have something to do with people. I'm not too familiar with a system of the sort that has ever existed. I'm all ears, however.

To some extent, it might be feasible to implement anarchy, but it hasn't seemed to prove itself on a large scale, yet, unlike modern Western social democracies which do a kinda okay-ish job at ensuring people have access to necessities like safety, food, water, shelter, education, health care and some degree of personal autonomy - moreover, they have for the past several decades been improving on most of these fronts. I'm nary too convinced to agree with implementing a political structure which would necessitate the removal of the on in place, particularly when the current system is reasonable and - more importantly, the trend within the system is positive, Slow, but positive.

coolbeans90

The last four years, umm, involved a p. big financial collapse - a temporary problem barring a repeat requiring a number of circumstances. I can survive and thrive under the current system, and live a long and healthy life with a decent education, and keep a substantial portion of my earnings. Is it perfect? No, but I can't really call life under the current system particularly miserable, to say the least.

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] i disagree with what you consider "reasonable", i also disagree that western systems are moving in a positive direction. hell when the fed says the US people have lost 40% of their wealth in the last 4 years, i hardly call that reasonable or positive. similar political theft is found all over europe.

surrealnumber5

The last four years, umm, involved a p. big financial collapse - a temporary problem barring a repeat requiring a number of circumstances. I can survive and thrive under the current system, and live a long and healthy life with a decent education, and keep a substantial portion of my earnings. Is it perfect? No, but I can't really call life under the current system particularly miserable, to say the least.

Even if I came to the point of view similar to yours, even with financial blow ups now and then, by and large the system functioned, the market allocated a massive amount of goods necessary to surivival to people and left them with, by historical standards, some degree of autonomy. That's acceptable even if suboptimal, is my point.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"][QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

The last four years, umm, involved a p. big financial collapse - a temporary problem barring a repeat requiring a number of circumstances. I can survive and thrive under the current system, and live a long and healthy life with a decent education, and keep a substantial portion of my earnings. Is it perfect? No, but I can't really call life under the current system particularly miserable, to say the least.

coolbeans90

Even if I came to the point of view similar to yours, even with financial blow ups now and then, by and large the system functioned, the market allocated a massive amount of goods necessary to surivival to people and left them with, by historical standards, some degree of autonomy. That's acceptable even if suboptimal, is my point.

i know BO will be great for me, and i am almost sure romney will be the same and if so, great for me, boo for you. i can continue just being an invester and living off of the "unintended" "unforeseeable" consiquences of government action and putting as much or as little time as i want into my entertainment company, well im a partern not the sole owner, so it is not really "mine" but it is my hobby.

[QUOTE="iHarlequin"]

[QUOTE="SpartanMSU"]

Seems like you need to do a little research on why capital markets exist and why they're important. Without it firms wouldn't be able to raise even close to the amount of capital they do now.

Oh, and you always invest for the "sake of money". The whole point of investing is to consumption smooth.

You basically just told me that what I do for a living is BS.:x

SpartanMSU

My whole argument is that the amount of capital companies ARE raising for a select amount of people is absurd. We could sustain similar production values without nearly as much surplus value exploration. I'm arguing against consumerism - it's implied when I support Communism.

It's not my fault if it is. I'm sorry, but if I worked with anything related to sales or exploration of other people's work I would not be content. If you are content with what you do, me calling it BS shouldn't make a difference to you.

Companies issue securities so they can raise capital for operations. How is the amount they raise a bad thing?

I was kidding with my last statement, I really don't care what you think about my career. However, who exactly am I exploiting and how?

I still want an answer to this. Also, how is it only for a "select amount of people"?

Life punishes people for existing.

Capitalism is wonderful. No other economic system values traditional human rights, freedom, and dignity as highly as it.

Edit: And the great thing about capitalism is that even if you desire some sort of socialism all you have to do is find other likeminded people to join into a socialist agreement or community with you. The only economic sub-system capitalism excludes is the one that forces constraint upon people, otherwise you are free to do whatever you want.

Capitalism is wonderful. No other economic system values traditional human rights, freedom, and dignity as highly as it.

GIJames248

lol

capitalism is never gonna work ,

its either your rich or your in debt, thats the way i look at it , you must be a pop star movie star or lawyer to survive these days without foodstamps and other free angencies ,

capitalism is failing

Capitalism is wonderful. No other economic system values traditional human rights, freedom, and dignity as highly as it.

Edit: And the great thing about capitalism is that even if you desire some sort of socialism all you have to do is find other likeminded people to join into a socialist agreement or community with you. The only economic sub-system capitalism excludes is the one that forces constraint upon people, otherwise you are free to do whatever you want.

GIJames248

for example you run a stop sign cops pull you over you get a ticket , so how is that make it free for you to do what you want when already right there your being told by a cop you ran a stop sign so hes giving you a ticket,

another fine example, smoking in a restarant -----banned , you c ant even light your cigarette in a restaraunt -bad habbit yes but how is banning this making us have freedom ,

yet another fine example of not having freedom , type into youtube guy arrested in garage , youll see how just calling some one a name will land you behind bars !

freedom in this country is no more

[QUOTE="GIJames248"]

Capitalism is wonderful. No other economic system values traditional human rights, freedom, and dignity as highly as it.

Omni-Wrath

lol

lol @ you saying lol

[QUOTE="GIJames248"]

Capitalism is wonderful. No other economic system values traditional human rights, freedom, and dignity as highly as it.

Edit: And the great thing about capitalism is that even if you desire some sort of socialism all you have to do is find other likeminded people to join into a socialist agreement or community with you. The only economic sub-system capitalism excludes is the one that forces constraint upon people, otherwise you are free to do whatever you want.

mariokart64fan

for example you run a stop sign cops pull you over you get a ticket , so how is that make it free for you to do what you want when already right there your being told by a cop you ran a stop sign so hes giving you a ticket,

another fine example, smoking in a restarant -----banned , you c ant even light your cigarette in a restaraunt -bad habbit yes but how is banning this making us have freedom ,

yet another fine example of not having freedom , type into youtube guy arrested in garage , youll see how just calling some one a name will land you behind bars !

freedom in this country is no more

When you get born, every squre foot of land around you is owned by someone. So you end up taking orders from your parents for the first 18 years of your life. You go to college and explode with debt. And after you need to get a job to pay it off and end up taking even more orders from the land owners. Capitalism is punishing people for existing.RushKing

The people of a nation are the reason for governing bodies. Individuals likely grow differently as a part of a culture such as capitalist and communist ones.