has capitalism failed ....

Judas · Dec 16, 2008, 11:49 PM

no..

the explanation of killing people is a long drawn out oventual conclusion to the homeless or people unable to compete in the never ending unnessary battle for being able to climb the steps of the pyramid...

People starving to death, or simply being killed off "unintentionally" due to the bottom feeders being a necessity of the system.

It's unnecessary....

Really if you take a good step back and look at the system in detail, any person with a decent head on thier shoulders would emediately realize that it's counter productive... it promotes corruption and greed, it also promotes the withholding of potentially excellent technology, the divulgance of information in as little as possible, and of course, nothing but nonstop lieing in every extent of the word.

Idealy the system doesn't initially promote this, but the first thing done with it is simply that..... nothing good. It clearly dictates that there will always be more losers then any average not really winners and of course so little true winners...

BlueMak · Dec 17, 2008, 02:27 AM

I think you are confusing the desire to live to the desire to live good. They are not the same thing, they only look like that to the lucky one of us that live in richer countries.

For millenia, most people were glad to have what they have if that gives them steady life.
Of course there will be people who have more and people who have less. Not just because of availability of goods, but of desire to acquire them.

gruntled · Dec 17, 2008, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FuNsTeR

.... even America .... with your banks now nationalised with your car industry heading for the same route to survive .... seems to me America is now going down the road of socialism to protect/save their industry from collapse ... and yes the same is happening to European institutions as well but we are not hung up with nationalising industry as most of our industrial infrastructure was under goverment control right up to the mid to late 1980s .... just goes to show that outright capitalism was the wrong route to go down

And what route would've been better to go down? Communism (ala socialism)?

I think not.

To use the structure of you're own argument in the form of 'giving countries as prime examples' the country Cuba is the very epitome of socialism and they have mostly, across the years I think, been super duper worst off than American (even America in there weakened economic state is better off than Cuba ever was, at least they have some economy). (Cough...Rampant Criminalisation and corruption)

What about China, socialism didn't help them in the 1970-1980's, they're still playing catch up to fully developed OCT nations.

Sorry my friend but I would like more detailed evidence that Capitalism is the sole cause of America's woes.

Like what, the two wars that America contributed didn't weaken they're economy? Like going to war on another country is free or something?

Increase of tax because of war is also another factor of why people have less to spend and can contribute to the economic failure.

Judas · Dec 17, 2008, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueMak

I think you are confusing the desire to live to the desire to live good. They are not the same thing, they only look like that to the lucky one of us that live in richer countries.

For millenia, most people were glad to have what they have if that gives them steady life.
Of course there will be people who have more and people who have less. Not just because of availability of goods, but of desire to acquire them.

i think your taking it a little to lightly, as i'm not referring to people that are pretty bad off..... but surviving... i'm refferring to the millions of people that are dieing a slow painful death due to starvation.

Now while yes we sit here usually thinking of reasons why they are in that situation other then the real reasons and solutions. We are using nothing but stop gaps to solve the problems, most of which aren't working simply due to the capalistic ideals of the system.

Meanwhile countries with less are living far better then us, majority of us "living better people" don't realize this because of our lust for cash and materialistic things. Anyone that figures they are worthwhile human being because they own a corporation or are a judge or doctor or whatever, is a joke.

It's been pretty much proven without a doubt that our materialistic nature and "richness" has actually been detrimental to having a "good life"... .and it's getting worse as we are all competeing with ourself, as our population grows it gets even more delicate, alot of the system relies on us all buying useless material things, tons of it, from ourselves and others in quantities that are unimagineable at this point. The amount of truely NEEDED things being purchased are dwindling. This simply has no logical, makes no sense at all. Why is life getting worse, due to the competition for higher pay, the increases in workload and time spent working increases dramatically. So in all honesty, who's got the better life? Those with enough food in thier belly, a little work to have a little fun, and plenty of time for it, little to no weight on thier shoulders, have a little money vs us who overstuff ourselves, never can get enough fun due to not having enough time to try to, all the weight we can possibly bare on our shoulders, and never have enough money.

BlueMak · Dec 17, 2008, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Judas

i think your taking it a little to lightly, as i'm not referring to people that are pretty bad off..... but surviving... i'm refferring to the millions of people that are dieing a slow painful death due to starvation.

Now while yes we sit here usually thinking of reasons why they are in that situation other then the real reasons and solutions. We are using nothing but stop gaps to solve the problems, most of which aren't working simply due to the capalistic ideals of the system.

Meanwhile countries with less are living far better then us, majority of us "living better people" don't realize this because of our lust for cash and materialistic things. Anyone that figures they are worthwhile human being because they own a corporation or are a judge or doctor or whatever, is a joke.

It's been pretty much proven without a doubt that our materialistic nature and "richness" has actually been detrimental to having a "good life"... .and it's getting worse as we are all competeing with ourself, as our population grows it gets even more delicate, alot of the system relies on us all buying useless material things, tons of it, from ourselves and others in quantities that are unimagineable at this point. The amount of truely NEEDED things being purchased are dwindling. This simply has no logical, makes no sense at all. Why is life getting worse, due to the competition for higher pay, the increases in workload and time spent working increases dramatically. So in all honesty, who's got the better life? Those with enough food in thier belly, a little work to have a little fun, and plenty of time for it, little to no weight on thier shoulders, have a little money vs us who overstuff ourselves, never can get enough fun due to not having enough time to try to, all the weight we can possibly bare on our shoulders, and never have enough money.

Now, I don't know how to put this in a way that doesn't make me sound like an asshole, so, here it is. Why should we do anything about the people dying from starvation in the first place? Perhaps if 70% of them died, the rest would stop starvating (this is my only child), or something. Or perhaps send them free condoms so they can stop having 5 childrend each minimum in countries that can't provide enough food.

As for the rest of your post. No one is forcing you to get anything you don't need. It's your decision to buy all the crap (including the much needed for your survival latest ipod or i7 etc). And you know, it's your right to buy whatever the hell you want. If people in some countries can't cooperate enough to save their own skin(as in person), nation, tribe, human brothers, then screw them.

Now, I am not talking about results of natural disasters or anything, but year in year out conditions going on for decades.

Judas · Dec 17, 2008, 11:05 PM

while you are correct..... it doesn't mean it's right.

Yes there should be forethought put into the whole mess of things, but just because some people are idiots doesn't mean we should all just simply ignore the problem or refuse to try and fix it. The meer fact is that there is plenty of food in the world, it just so happens that money and corporate capitalism dictates where it will go, who will eat 2-6 times more then they could ever need, while others starves. No one should try to ignore that fact, it's selfish.

You and i both have the right to buy whatever we want, sure yes, but so do they, unfortuneately they can't, and we can.... who says in either case it's a good or bad thing though?

I can survive without a considerable number of things.... including most of the gadgets that lay around here. I just don't think turning the clock backwards so the technology doesn't excist is rather stupid and ilogical, it's not technology that hinders us, it's the useless crap out there. The toys and gimmicks and garbage that doesn't have any real true bearing on our future.

The real question though most should maybe ask and think about would be:

Could you, would you, be able to get up and walk out of your house/apartment, whatever, leaveing all your "possesions" behind, including your car.

BlueMak · Dec 18, 2008, 12:18 AM

I have done so in the past so I could again in the future, that doesn't mean I would want to or plan to do so.

I don't believe in good or bad/evil. This in a way includes things like right and wrong. Why can't they go out and buy shit like we do? Because they choose to act like animals and even rape or "rape" their own people/tribe/etc or because the victims don't do anything to defend themselves. If every village actively reisted against the warbands, it wouldn't be too long till they would have peace. But they don't. They prefer to pass on the responsibility and hope for someone else to do something.

Or in cases like Zimbabwe, the people wanted their current Hitler. They wanted the white colonists to leave. What have they done with their land, nothing. They raped and pillaged the land and the properties and had some fun. When there was nothing left to go, they started to slowly suffer. Now their economy is in ruins, and hundrend of people die just from cholera each month. Why should anyone help them? They did this to themselves. No man, screw "them". It's not a natural disaster we are talking about, it is not a defensive war that ruined their (any) food production. It's either greed by the local people or plain stupidity. Let natural selection take its course. African and Asian countries do just fine and they are not dying from hunger. Perhaps those that can't make it, don't deserve to survive.
Look at places like Arabia or Mongolia, even before the discovery of oil (in the first case), people were not dying from hunger and they had much much worse land and resources than other places.

Judas · Dec 18, 2008, 04:41 PM

that is true....

but to suggest that every "acceptable" place is without hunger would be foolish.... i wasn't specifically talking about 3rd world countries..... we can see there is incredible amounts of starving, homeless people.....

Now you'd probably suggest getting a job, ironically, you'd be surprised how many truely homeless are with a job, but still unable to afford to do or have been black listed to do some of the things required to get a home or food or whatever else.

Meanwhile jackasses that claim to be homeless are sitting on the steets stealing peoples money.

It's becoming well known the amount of "homeless" beggers spend a few hours, get up, change thier close... and head off to work, making a few dozen hours worth of cash in a single hour sitting on the street being lazy beggers.

It's not just one system that has failed due to ingenuity, it's all of them.

BlueMak · Dec 18, 2008, 05:02 PM

I worked with homeless people for a while. Some of them were teenagers kicked out of their homes or had to leave. Others were people who without being their fault, lost everything suddently. Others recently released from prison. Some were quite old that were either kicked out from their kids home or something similar.
All tragic in their own and I feel sorry for them. Unfortunately the majority of them, wanted to be homeless. In the UK the state provides weekly income, free housing (not always very good, but it is free) and various bonuses. And while they can't become rich or something, many of them want to live like this. No real responsibilities, and no real effort to improve their financial status. While I can understand them, it's disgusting how they take advantage of the system.

I am in favour of helping people that find themselves losing everything. By helping them, the sooner they are on their feet, the sooner/better for them and the society at large.
Like an investment. Help them now so they can help themselves and then help (taxes mainly) others.

gruntled · Dec 20, 2008, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Judas

It's been pretty much proven without a doubt that our materialistic nature and "richness" has actually been detrimental to having a "good life"...

What do you mean by "good life" Judas?

Do you mean the Aristotelian theory of Eudimonia in where everyone is useing 100% of there full potential or just a life where people can afford enough to eat and live well with the basic necessities.

If it is the later studies have shown that America (and applying to developed Nations I think) has one of the highest rates of people meeting there basic needs (compared to other fully/semi developed or 3rd world countries).

Also, there is a theory, backed up by some studies/surveys, where it concludes that beyond the basic needs of food and shelter people's utility do not increase exponentially (put it simply happiness stays roughly the same level once basics are met).

Hence it's logical to conclude if America has one of the highest rates of basic needs being met, by the general populace, then it's overall (or adverage) general utility in the population should be higher than the utility of other nations that are not proving the basics for there citizens.

As for the homeless, I am not sure for other countries but in Australia (Which I include to be a Capatal Free Market Country) they have homeless programs run to specifically provide the basic needs for the homeless (shelter and food), an occasional place to crash in and also 3 meals per day.

That is also why I think Australia has a nice overall utility adverage for our population.

I would also like to mention, I've also seens and read studies that (In Australia) the mojority of the displaced and homeless are not people who've lost their jobs due to capatalism (So stop saying it's the sole cause for homeless people, well for in Australia anyway because...) it's actually the mentally ill that are homeless (And no this is not a 'coverup' done by the government for all you conspricy people).

So yeah, I was also suprised to see that the majority of the homeless are mentally ill people and not because they are broke. I used to think it was because of the latter.

Judas · Dec 20, 2008, 06:55 PM

depends on what people consider being happy, what they think they are happy with, and what truly will make them happy.... everyone is a little different, but what's more surprising is that fact that alot of people that think they are happy later realized they weren't at all.

While the basic necessities are being met in north america, it's not a win/win result. Actually that's completely absurd to think of it like that. Worse is that fact that majority of people will never be happy with what they got and continue to try and consume more beyond thier capabilities, worse yet that they aren't consuming anything worthwhile/substatial, it's all fluff with nothing at the core for producing or providing anything of true value.

The current system is now showing a breakdown, what has been happening is the demands of our jobs have been exceeding the average persons real needs or capabilities. The compentition to remain employed has increased 10 fold, and to do this, you have to be more efficiently, doing 2-3 times the work in the same period of time and with half the available hands to remain employed. It's been nothing but a slow but progressive transition from freedom to slave like working enviroments.

There is always be the few that are indeed happy with that enviroment, but there is far more that arn't.

We have less time to work with our own interests, and before anyone says "that's for retirement" that's absurd. The system is broken, it continuely and exponention demands more and more and more to an infinite degree, the ending results will always remain the same as a catastrophic failure, and unfortunately, usually a restart of such a system, slow at first, or noticeably inexcistant at first. Maybe a few changes taking place to "solve" the problems of the previous system, but the end result will end up being the same again.

What's even more disturbing is the FACT that the majority is actually hurting themselves in the end. And every bandaid they try to apply to the system, while initially looks like a great idea, is no different then getting stabbed in the back while appling that bandaid. EVERYONE is focusing on the "right now" which is rather selfish, instead of thinking longterm. Everyone wants a quickfix, today majority demand a quickfix, no one is thinking long term, this is utterly frustrating as trying to explain the likely end result of this such rash action is like talking to a brick wall, only the brick wall has a better chance of listening.

I never said capitalism is the sole cause specifically, but it has a direct relation in the end.

Just ask yourself, If everyone was able to do anything they wanted, that was benificial to everyone, and that money was not a factor, would those homeless still be homeless?

Liqourice · Dec 20, 2008, 07:19 PM

Capitalism is flawed, just like all other systems. No matter what system is incorporated there will always be individuals who take control over it. Greed and hunger for power is what controls it, always has and probably always will. It's in our nature to dominate, we wouldn't have become as successful as a spieces if it wasn't. No system can irradicate this.

I am definately not defending the capitalistic system, just as little as I would be defending a completely socialist one. Maybe some kind of mixture would be a bit better. I believe there has to be some kind of control over the economical flows because as it is now it's out of control and we see what happens when it goes out of hand. Problem is, who controls the controller and so on......

Utopia is just that, Utopia. If we would ever reach it we would cease to exist as what we are today. We'd lose the drive and would probably die out completely. Hmm, looking at it from natures point of view that's probably a good thing considering what we're doing to this poor planet!

I've been saying for a long time that the day will come when the "free" market will collapse, when the stock exchange will crash and we will see a recession so big we just can't imagine it. Maybe this is the beginning of it, maybe not, but it will come. Those analysts that for a number of years have said that it will only go up, forever up, just go by their tunnel vision they've always had, sticking their heads in the sand and hope for the best whenever something unexpected happens. They said the same things before the big dip in the 30's..

One thing about humanity is, we never learn!

No, I don't like the system we have but I don't have anything better to offer I'm afraid.

BlueMak · Dec 20, 2008, 10:31 PM

I still believe that the current situation is not a, even temp, collapse of the system. It is a well planned, well executed string of events for some people to make extra money and to gain more power. Then many companies seeing the situation, get an excuse to reduce wages and fire people, after all, it's not their fault the economy is collapsing. Of course that actualy feeds any artificial decline, and makes things worse for many people.

Quote:

Just ask yourself, If everyone was able to do anything they wanted, that was benificial to everyone, and that money was not a factor, would those homeless still be homeless?

Good thing you are not a communist. BTW, if you bothered to read what I said or the australian guy said before you wouldn't have to ask this. Yes, we would still have homeless. The only way to not have homeless is if the state actively searches and removes homeless people from the streets...or you wouldn't have a problem with that either?

BTW, why would everyone, if they could do anything they wanted, want to do something that is beneficial to everyone? this is hippie or commie talk and has no base to reality and human nature.

Liqourice · Dec 21, 2008, 12:20 AM

You know, oddly enough there is a few that would do things for the benefit of others. For different reasons as well.

Tinkerhell · Dec 22, 2008, 08:29 PM

Well... just caught back up with this thread.
Judas you are getting social ethics and morals confused with an economic system. It should not be an economic system's duty to care for people or provide food or shelter or wellbeing. An economic system should provide the possibility for those things to happen.

All that crap about the starving people & the homeless ect... BM has it right. They are doing it to themselves.

The free market capitalist system pumps billions of dollars into those places in various forms of aid and support. That support comes from voluntary donation from all us capitalist pigs making money and knowing we have a good life & wanting to help out those that aren’t so lucky to live here.

What's stopping all those starving people from planting gardens & raising animals & then selling/trading them to each other? Their form of government, or more aptly their lack of an acceptable form of government. Military dictatorship isn't really too great of a way to go unless you are just trying to take over territory or defend some territory that you hold. Even then it’s weak.

Capitalism doesn't suppress anything, just the opposite. If you build a better mouse trap, Capitalism allows you to market it & make a million bucks for yourself just by starting out a little shop in your garage. It also gives you the chance to market your personal skills to the highest bidder. It allows those businesses that are smart & savvy to excel thereby furthering the economy while those that aren't will simply go away or be absorbed.

The problem is government interference in the economic system.

Judas · Dec 23, 2008, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueMak

BTW, why would everyone, if they could do anything they wanted, want to do something that is beneficial to everyone? this is hippie or commie talk and has no base to reality and human nature.

Either you have a ZERO drive for doing anything at all, or your a rather sad person.

There are millions out there that wouldn't just plant thier ass wherever they like and suck the life out of everyone around them. Obviously there would be a few, but to suggest that would be the all round outcome is just a sad realization of either your true wishful nature or a similare lack in confidence that anyone would actually do anything.

You don't think thier are "real" doctors out there trying to save lives reguardless of thier own well being or money? You don't think thier are genuine scientists or researchers that are more interested in thier actual endevours then the sums of money they are receiving? What about fire fighters and the like?

Granted Probably 3/4s of the population is doing something they have no wish to do right now at all, and are only doing it for the money.

Call it hippie talk, but if your going to jump to that kind of conclusion, i'm not sure if i should feel sad for you in what manner for that.

And lets not get to deep into human nature, as nothing is set in stone on that, to much uncontrolled "proof" that is up in the air, considering that what majority think of as human nature is more our upbringing and surroundings dictating the necessity to survive which has corrupted the whole "nature" thing. There is just as much evidence of thing being true.

Pure democratics is bad, just as pure comminist is bad, or pure socialist.. The entire system has to pull from all other systems, taking thier best qualities.

Actually infact, with current technology, there is a plausible system in which a governement would even need to be formed, allowing every individual to vote on any issue presented anywhere in the world. It may be outside the box now, but the prospect of such a system is indeed manageable today.

Judas · Dec 23, 2008, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tinkerhell

Well... just caught back up with this thread.
Judas you are getting social ethics and morals confused with an economic system. It should not be an economic system's duty to care for people or provide food or shelter or wellbeing. An economic system should provide the possibility for those things to happen.

No i'm not necessarily getting them confused or mixed up, just pointing out that the people will ultimately demand thier interactions initially for good, only in the long run resulting in the bad (which we have today in the form of bailouts and other bs). Yes a properly setup economic system would provide the for the needs of the entire planet, the resources are thier in mass, and properly and efficiently used, this very planet should be able to sustain multiple times more then our current total population. Unfortunately due to governments and the selfishness and greed of the current system has destroyed this possibility. And before anyone jumps, "why should someone that is rich provide to the poor", kinda depends where your sitting, specially when something gets so extremely large that there is no chance in hell of any other competition getting thier foot in the door, which is refferred to a monopoly yes, but people aren't identifying them at all.

Quote:

All that crap about the starving people & the homeless ect... BM has it right. They are doing it to themselves.

There is a number of them that are, no doubts, lazy assholes indeed, some of which is just the way they like to live or unfortunately have to live due to any other possible circumstance. However to generalize that they are all doing it to themselves is pretty damn critical. That's just as rediculious as saying that everyone that has money and are rich are 100% self supportive, and genuinely hard working people with the best of intentions. See, not exactly a good representation.

Quote:

The free market capitalist system pumps billions of dollars into those places in various forms of aid and support. That support comes from voluntary donation from all us capitalist pigs making money and knowing we have a good life & wanting to help out those that aren’t so lucky to live here.

How many people from those places have you talked to? We are told they are being pumped up, but from the horses mouth, they haven't seen anything substatial. With the sheer sums of money we have all heard being sent there, they should be better off then any of us. Obviously it's not working. This i would probably accurately call a form of having good intentions, practical application of it, but the end result is a lazy gesture of good will. The only real way to provide your donation is to personally deliver it, and even then you have to be careful depending where you go to do such things.

Quote:

What's stopping all those starving people from planting gardens & raising animals & then selling/trading them to each other? Their form of government, or more aptly their lack of an acceptable form of government. Military dictatorship isn't really too great of a way to go unless you are just trying to take over territory or defend some territory that you hold. Even then it’s weak.

There are just about everything under the sun stopping them from doing all that, other nations, other governements, thier governments, lack of moisture or proper seed or any other thing you could think off. Funds to do so is yet another thing, i mean shit, even with all our technology available to farmers today, we can have some pretty damn bad years where thousands of farmers go bankrupt or fall appart, while quite often due to bad management, still there are dozens of systems in place to help farmers out and it still screws people over, how do you think they are doing over there dealing with basically crap.

Our governments aren't any better, course most people would call them acceptable because we get far better benefits according to the cover of it's book.

Quote:

Capitalism doesn't suppress anything, just the opposite. If you build a better mouse trap, Capitalism allows you to market it & make a million bucks for yourself just by starting out a little shop in your garage. It also gives you the chance to market your personal skills to the highest bidder. It allows those businesses that are smart & savvy to excel thereby furthering the economy while those that aren't will simply go away or be absorbed.

While initially that sounds all great, but everything sounds great on paper, always has usually. But it promotes NOT Working together in the end. Instead of working on a system which specifically promotes the need to build something better to compete with your rival, the system should be designed in such a way to allow them to work together and to produce some incredible technology. Instead they compete, and while it appears to be benificial to us, truely it isn't, specially if one company does everything in thier power to stall or degrade/hinder the progression of it, alot of things we haven't a faintest clue what's going on behind the scenese of such major corporations, hell you don't have to go far even in the small ones to consider the type of scale there would be. Money siginificantly dictates how we progress in all manners of life and technology.

Quote:

The problem is government interference in the economic system.

Not specifically, but the top contributer right now. Politics in general is, Burocratic nonsense.

Esaz666 · Dec 23, 2008, 07:08 PM

well, this has been an interesting read,
there are many factors at play in the way our systems work and then inevitably fall, we have a problem to do with the way wealth is spread,
if a system is failing to support the whole community evenly, eventually that will cause it to fail, we are really lucky in the west and are all pretty much supported to a survivable extent, but the people who are born into high positions, tend to keep the vast proportion of wealth within their own elite and families,there is some trickle down effect but on the whole not a vast amount.

This imbalance is a major cause of the instability, but as long as the majority of people are fooled into believing that they will be happy with more wealth , over consumption and more corruption will persist.

The system has not failed, it is failing, socialist systems also fail because if everything is done for you there is less reason to work , all structures created by us eventually fail, because all structures are unstable.

I don't so much mind that things are failing, i look forward to something better built on the ashes and lessons learned, anything that is false will eventually fall, Our system is built on the false idea's of happiness ,the speech from the 1920's ` we are in the business of manufacturing desire ` comes to mind.

How can a person start to see that his outlook is wrong?.Making money is not wrong(our families must be supported), following a leader is not wrong as we all need guidelines and rules to follow, but selfishness is wrong, even to the point of nationalism, we are a whole, only a system that takes into consideration the whole of society can last, but eventually even that would become outdated, a county is just a collection of people, we need to learn to live in full co-operation, not at the expense of others,that includes other countries too.

RIV@NVX · Dec 23, 2008, 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esaz666

How can a person start to see that his outlook is wrong?.Making money is not wrong(our families must be supported), following a leader is not wrong as we all need guidelines and rules to follow, but selfishness is wrong, even to the point of nationalism, we are a whole, only a system that takes into consideration the whole of society can last, but eventually even that would become outdated, a county is just a collection of people, we need to learn to live in full co-operation, not at the expense of others,that includes other countries too.

Ayn Rand would disagree with this.

I know it's taken out of context. But what would be the motive if it wasn't doing for your own good? Because, I don't expect people to be willing to work just in order for system to not fail. People aren't that "enlightened" or "aware" or "smart", to see that would be the only way (assuming that's the case for now).

Judas · Dec 23, 2008, 10:18 PM

And there in lies the problem, the intelligence and willful realization of long term needs.

What started it all in the first place, someone just decided to pick up a rock and smash another rock to create the wheel and asked for money straight out..... i don't think so. Obviously it was an idea, a good one, and it benefit the entire world. Such inventions and whatnot have been produced since, not out of the need to support thier families or self gradification, but out of knowing that the end result will benefit everyone.

The unfortuneate thing is that thousands of inventions are being held back due to another simple fact, the military emediately absorb it, or the company or persons that are responcible for it, bar it from being available to the public until thier so choosing and then clearly claim that it's necessary for this action to protect it's people, while true, it's undoubtibly just as much of a lie.

BlueMak · Dec 23, 2008, 11:41 PM

Judas I just woke up so I am not going to reply, but there are some huge holes in your logic that I will love to talk about them. Soon.

Judas · Dec 24, 2008, 12:09 AM

theres holes in everyones logic....... it takes a group effort to fill them though

BlueMak · Dec 24, 2008, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Judas

theres holes in everyones logic....... it takes a group effort to fill them though

Sometimes, although sometimes 2 do all the work and 8 just sit around pretending to be working.

BlueMak · Dec 24, 2008, 06:34 AM

I am well awake now, but I have lost interest in the conversation. Let's just accept that you're wrong and move on.

Esaz666 · Dec 24, 2008, 01:21 PM

Ayn Rand , i will read up on this guy.
In the u.k we are also having all kinds of problems within our health service and other systems because of the integration of idea's that are damaging , these idea's stem from people like john Nash, that try to implement game theory and create internal markets, which is meant to improve efficiency.These models are flawed and rely on non co-operation of individuals.

You are right that people are biologically programmed to be successful , but it does not necessarily have to be at the expense of others, a system that works in co-operation should be more successful than one where each individual is working against the next, as something based on opposing forces will eventually separate or collapse.

We have the same problem occurring in the way our society is organized, now how to motivate people to take part in society that is not based on financial reward,this is a tougher question

, the answer is to be helpful together but maybe that is not enough!, a balanced reward system is what is needed in my opinion and radical imbalance in wealth should be eradicated.

BlueMak · Dec 24, 2008, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esaz666

Ayn Rand , i will read up on this guy.
In the u.k we are also having all kinds of problems within our health service and other systems because of the integration of idea's that are damaging , these idea's stem from people like john Nash, that try to implement game theory and create internal markets, which is meant to improve efficiency.These models are flawed and rely on non co-operation of individuals.

You are right that people are biologically programmed to be successful , but it does not necessarily have to be at the expense of others, a system that works in co-operation should be more successful than one where each individual is working against the next, as something based on opposing forces will eventually separate or collapse.

We have the same problem occurring in the way our society is organized, now how to motivate people to take part in society that is not based on financial reward,this is a tougher question

, the answer is to be helpful but maybe that is not enough!

It's a woman. Try this site for view on her ideas.
The Capitalism Site : Laissez-faire Capitalism is the social system based on the principle of inalienable individual rights.

Esaz666 · Dec 24, 2008, 01:59 PM

cool thanks!

gruntled · Dec 26, 2008, 08:41 AM

I do not wish to go off topic by babling what I've learned in the course I did this year at uni called 'The Philosophy of Happiness'

But all I will say is that it is true that different people find happiness in different ways but having the basics keep us from falling into unrest.

If capitalism can provide the basics to the most amount of people/ for the population then overall utility should be greater (Want satisfaction as a source of Happiness is a totally different theory)

Liqourice · Dec 30, 2008, 01:47 PM

Capitalism is based on that some have and some doesn't. That's plain and simple. Everyone can't get rich in a capitalistic system, it's impossible.

Those who defend the system say that it's all equal, it's all up to each and everyone to make their own fortune. Life is fair and everyone has the same chance. This is just bollocks. Life isn't fair, everyone doesn't have the same chance. The wealth of the western world depends on sucking developing countries dry. Most of those countries have been developing countries for as long as industrialism have been around and they will stay like that because the big western corporations don't want them to develop any further.

Maybe I have a dark and gloomy view of how the world works but this is just the way it is. Capitalism is flawed and fails because it will never ever allow every human being to create his or her own happiness on the same terms. Capitalism doesn't give everyone "the basics" and it never will, there is no interest in doing so.

It's easy for Mr John Smith VI who was born with a silver spoon in his mouth to say that life is fair and it's up to everyone to make his own fortune because he has a narrow vision of the world, but try to tell that to the small Ethiopian child that was born in a refugee camp where there's about as much food and water to barely keep half of them alive and everyone suffers from difteria and all other kinds of diseases.

So yes, capitalism is just as flawed as any other system...

BlueMak · Dec 30, 2008, 02:28 PM

Who said life is fair?

Dec 17, 2008, 02:27 AM	#32
BlueMak HH's Asteroids' Dominator Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Hellas->Macedonia->Thessaloniki Posts: 13,248 Rep Power: 328 System Specs	Re: has capitalism failed .... I think you are confusing the desire to live to the desire to live good. They are not the same thing, they only look like that to the lucky one of us that live in richer countries. For millenia, most people were glad to have what they have if that gives them steady life. Of course there will be people who have more and people who have less. Not just because of availability of goods, but of desire to acquire them. __________________ The people who are regarded as moral luminaries are those who forego ordinary pleasures themselves and find compensation in interfering with the pleasures of others(Bertrand Russell)"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil,You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them." - Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis This is slavery, not to speak one's thought. [Euripides-The Phoenician Women (c.411-409 B.C.)] http://www.macedonia.info/FALLACIESANDFACTS.htm *Sic semper tyrannis.*

Dec 18, 2008, 12:18 AM	#37
BlueMak HH's Asteroids' Dominator Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Hellas->Macedonia->Thessaloniki Posts: 13,248 Rep Power: 328 System Specs	Re: has capitalism failed .... I have done so in the past so I could again in the future, that doesn't mean I would want to or plan to do so. I don't believe in good or bad/evil. This in a way includes things like right and wrong. Why can't they go out and buy shit like we do? Because they choose to act like animals and even rape or "rape" their own people/tribe/etc or because the victims don't do anything to defend themselves. If every village actively reisted against the warbands, it wouldn't be too long till they would have peace. But they don't. They prefer to pass on the responsibility and hope for someone else to do something. Or in cases like Zimbabwe, the people wanted their current Hitler. They wanted the white colonists to leave. What have they done with their land, nothing. They raped and pillaged the land and the properties and had some fun. When there was nothing left to go, they started to slowly suffer. Now their economy is in ruins, and hundrend of people die just from cholera each month. Why should anyone help them? They did this to themselves. No man, screw "them". It's not a natural disaster we are talking about, it is not a defensive war that ruined their (any) food production. It's either greed by the local people or plain stupidity. Let natural selection take its course. African and Asian countries do just fine and they are not dying from hunger. Perhaps those that can't make it, don't deserve to survive. Look at places like Arabia or Mongolia, even before the discovery of oil (in the first case), people were not dying from hunger and they had much much worse land and resources than other places. __________________ The people who are regarded as moral luminaries are those who forego ordinary pleasures themselves and find compensation in interfering with the pleasures of others(Bertrand Russell)"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil,You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them." - Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis This is slavery, not to speak one's thought. [Euripides-The Phoenician Women (c.411-409 B.C.)] http://www.macedonia.info/FALLACIESANDFACTS.htm *Sic semper tyrannis.*

Dec 18, 2008, 05:02 PM	#39
BlueMak HH's Asteroids' Dominator Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Hellas->Macedonia->Thessaloniki Posts: 13,248 Rep Power: 328 System Specs	Re: has capitalism failed .... I worked with homeless people for a while. Some of them were teenagers kicked out of their homes or had to leave. Others were people who without being their fault, lost everything suddently. Others recently released from prison. Some were quite old that were either kicked out from their kids home or something similar. All tragic in their own and I feel sorry for them. Unfortunately the majority of them, wanted to be homeless. In the UK the state provides weekly income, free housing (not always very good, but it is free) and various bonuses. And while they can't become rich or something, many of them want to live like this. No real responsibilities, and no real effort to improve their financial status. While I can understand them, it's disgusting how they take advantage of the system. I am in favour of helping people that find themselves losing everything. By helping them, the sooner they are on their feet, the sooner/better for them and the society at large. Like an investment. Help them now so they can help themselves and then help (taxes mainly) others. __________________ The people who are regarded as moral luminaries are those who forego ordinary pleasures themselves and find compensation in interfering with the pleasures of others(Bertrand Russell)"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil,You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them." - Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis This is slavery, not to speak one's thought. [Euripides-The Phoenician Women (c.411-409 B.C.)] http://www.macedonia.info/FALLACIESANDFACTS.htm *Sic semper tyrannis.*

Dec 20, 2008, 07:19 PM	#42
Liqourice HardwareHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Stockholm Posts: 1,551 Rep Power: 84 System Specs	Re: has capitalism failed .... Capitalism is flawed, just like all other systems. No matter what system is incorporated there will always be individuals who take control over it. Greed and hunger for power is what controls it, always has and probably always will. It's in our nature to dominate, we wouldn't have become as successful as a spieces if it wasn't. No system can irradicate this. I am definately not defending the capitalistic system, just as little as I would be defending a completely socialist one. Maybe some kind of mixture would be a bit better. I believe there has to be some kind of control over the economical flows because as it is now it's out of control and we see what happens when it goes out of hand. Problem is, who controls the controller and so on...... Utopia is just that, Utopia. If we would ever reach it we would cease to exist as what we are today. We'd lose the drive and would probably die out completely. Hmm, looking at it from natures point of view that's probably a good thing considering what we're doing to this poor planet! I've been saying for a long time that the day will come when the "free" market will collapse, when the stock exchange will crash and we will see a recession so big we just can't imagine it. Maybe this is the beginning of it, maybe not, but it will come. Those analysts that for a number of years have said that it will only go up, forever up, just go by their tunnel vision they've always had, sticking their heads in the sand and hope for the best whenever something unexpected happens. They said the same things before the big dip in the 30's.. One thing about humanity is, we never learn! No, I don't like the system we have but I don't have anything better to offer I'm afraid.

Dec 21, 2008, 12:20 AM	#44
Liqourice HardwareHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Stockholm Posts: 1,551 Rep Power: 84 System Specs	Re: has capitalism failed .... You know, oddly enough there is a few that would do things for the benefit of others. For different reasons as well.

Dec 22, 2008, 08:29 PM	#45
Tinkerhell Not all fairies are nice. Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Georgia, USA Posts: 989 Rep Power: 42	Re: has capitalism failed .... Well... just caught back up with this thread. Judas you are getting social ethics and morals confused with an economic system. It should not be an economic system's duty to care for people or provide food or shelter or wellbeing. An economic system should provide the possibility for those things to happen. All that crap about the starving people & the homeless ect... BM has it right. They are doing it to themselves. The free market capitalist system pumps billions of dollars into those places in various forms of aid and support. That support comes from voluntary donation from all us capitalist pigs making money and knowing we have a good life & wanting to help out those that aren’t so lucky to live here. What's stopping all those starving people from planting gardens & raising animals & then selling/trading them to each other? Their form of government, or more aptly their lack of an acceptable form of government. Military dictatorship isn't really too great of a way to go unless you are just trying to take over territory or defend some territory that you hold. Even then it’s weak. Capitalism doesn't suppress anything, just the opposite. If you build a better mouse trap, Capitalism allows you to market it & make a million bucks for yourself just by starting out a little shop in your garage. It also gives you the chance to market your personal skills to the highest bidder. It allows those businesses that are smart & savvy to excel thereby furthering the economy while those that aren't will simply go away or be absorbed. The problem is government interference in the economic system. __________________ Stupidity should be painful if not terminal. Darwin for Sainthood!!

Dec 23, 2008, 07:08 PM	#48
Esaz666 BeardHeaven Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Uk,Earth,Universe,3rd dimention Posts: 298 Rep Power: 58	Re: has capitalism failed .... well, this has been an interesting read, there are many factors at play in the way our systems work and then inevitably fall, we have a problem to do with the way wealth is spread, if a system is failing to support the whole community evenly, eventually that will cause it to fail, we are really lucky in the west and are all pretty much supported to a survivable extent, but the people who are born into high positions, tend to keep the vast proportion of wealth within their own elite and families,there is some trickle down effect but on the whole not a vast amount. This imbalance is a major cause of the instability, but as long as the majority of people are fooled into believing that they will be happy with more wealth , over consumption and more corruption will persist. The system has not failed, it is failing, socialist systems also fail because if everything is done for you there is less reason to work , all structures created by us eventually fail, because all structures are unstable. I don't so much mind that things are failing, i look forward to something better built on the ashes and lessons learned, anything that is false will eventually fall, Our system is built on the false idea's of happiness ,the speech from the 1920's ` we are in the business of manufacturing desire ` comes to mind. How can a person start to see that his outlook is wrong?.Making money is not wrong(our families must be supported), following a leader is not wrong as we all need guidelines and rules to follow, but selfishness is wrong, even to the point of nationalism, we are a whole, only a system that takes into consideration the whole of society can last, but eventually even that would become outdated, a county is just a collection of people, we need to learn to live in full co-operation, not at the expense of others,that includes other countries too. Last edited by Esaz666; Dec 23, 2008 at 07:27 PM.

Dec 23, 2008, 11:41 PM	#51
BlueMak HH's Asteroids' Dominator Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Hellas->Macedonia->Thessaloniki Posts: 13,248 Rep Power: 328 System Specs	Re: has capitalism failed .... Judas I just woke up so I am not going to reply, but there are some huge holes in your logic that I will love to talk about them. Soon. __________________ The people who are regarded as moral luminaries are those who forego ordinary pleasures themselves and find compensation in interfering with the pleasures of others(Bertrand Russell)"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil,You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them." - Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis This is slavery, not to speak one's thought. [Euripides-The Phoenician Women (c.411-409 B.C.)] http://www.macedonia.info/FALLACIESANDFACTS.htm *Sic semper tyrannis.*

Dec 24, 2008, 06:34 AM	#54
BlueMak HH's Asteroids' Dominator Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Hellas->Macedonia->Thessaloniki Posts: 13,248 Rep Power: 328 System Specs	Re: has capitalism failed .... I am well awake now, but I have lost interest in the conversation. Let's just accept that you're wrong and move on. __________________ The people who are regarded as moral luminaries are those who forego ordinary pleasures themselves and find compensation in interfering with the pleasures of others(Bertrand Russell)"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil,You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them." - Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis This is slavery, not to speak one's thought. [Euripides-The Phoenician Women (c.411-409 B.C.)] http://www.macedonia.info/FALLACIESANDFACTS.htm *Sic semper tyrannis.*

Dec 24, 2008, 01:21 PM	#55
Esaz666 BeardHeaven Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Uk,Earth,Universe,3rd dimention Posts: 298 Rep Power: 58	Re: has capitalism failed .... Ayn Rand , i will read up on this guy. In the u.k we are also having all kinds of problems within our health service and other systems because of the integration of idea's that are damaging , these idea's stem from people like john Nash, that try to implement game theory and create internal markets, which is meant to improve efficiency.These models are flawed and rely on non co-operation of individuals. You are right that people are biologically programmed to be successful , but it does not necessarily have to be at the expense of others, a system that works in co-operation should be more successful than one where each individual is working against the next, as something based on opposing forces will eventually separate or collapse. We have the same problem occurring in the way our society is organized, now how to motivate people to take part in society that is not based on financial reward,this is a tougher question , the answer is to be helpful together but maybe that is not enough!, a balanced reward system is what is needed in my opinion and radical imbalance in wealth should be eradicated. Last edited by Esaz666; Dec 24, 2008 at 02:03 PM.

Dec 24, 2008, 01:59 PM	#57
Esaz666 BeardHeaven Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Uk,Earth,Universe,3rd dimention Posts: 298 Rep Power: 58	Re: has capitalism failed .... cool thanks!

Dec 26, 2008, 08:41 AM	#58
gruntled DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Sydney Posts: 24 Rep Power: 21 System Specs	Re: has capitalism failed .... I do not wish to go off topic by babling what I've learned in the course I did this year at uni called 'The Philosophy of Happiness' But all I will say is that it is true that different people find happiness in different ways but having the basics keep us from falling into unrest. If capitalism can provide the basics to the most amount of people/ for the population then overall utility should be greater (Want satisfaction as a source of Happiness is a totally different theory)

Dec 30, 2008, 01:47 PM	#59
Liqourice HardwareHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Stockholm Posts: 1,551 Rep Power: 84 System Specs	Re: has capitalism failed .... Capitalism is based on that some have and some doesn't. That's plain and simple. Everyone can't get rich in a capitalistic system, it's impossible. Those who defend the system say that it's all equal, it's all up to each and everyone to make their own fortune. Life is fair and everyone has the same chance. This is just bollocks. Life isn't fair, everyone doesn't have the same chance. The wealth of the western world depends on sucking developing countries dry. Most of those countries have been developing countries for as long as industrialism have been around and they will stay like that because the big western corporations don't want them to develop any further. Maybe I have a dark and gloomy view of how the world works but this is just the way it is. Capitalism is flawed and fails because it will never ever allow every human being to create his or her own happiness on the same terms. Capitalism doesn't give everyone "the basics" and it never will, there is no interest in doing so. It's easy for Mr John Smith VI who was born with a silver spoon in his mouth to say that life is fair and it's up to everyone to make his own fortune because he has a narrow vision of the world, but try to tell that to the small Ethiopian child that was born in a refugee camp where there's about as much food and water to barely keep half of them alive and everyone suffers from difteria and all other kinds of diseases. So yes, capitalism is just as flawed as any other system...

Dec 30, 2008, 02:28 PM	#60
BlueMak HH's Asteroids' Dominator Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Hellas->Macedonia->Thessaloniki Posts: 13,248 Rep Power: 328 System Specs	Re: has capitalism failed .... Who said life is fair? __________________ The people who are regarded as moral luminaries are those who forego ordinary pleasures themselves and find compensation in interfering with the pleasures of others(Bertrand Russell)"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil,You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them." - Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis This is slavery, not to speak one's thought. [Euripides-The Phoenician Women (c.411-409 B.C.)] http://www.macedonia.info/FALLACIESANDFACTS.htm *Sic semper tyrannis.*