Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ask the railroad companies how capitalism worked out for them, ATT, and hopefully soon these cable companies will see their day in court. Just dont go around buying up everything and the only giving the consumer one choice and they are "force" to pay your high rate for it.
I think people bash capitalism out of ignorance. Most of the issues with capitalism are due to crony-capitalism....a rigged or semi-rigged system where one or a few companies dominate an industry/industries. Then they think the only solution to that is socialism, but socialism is all about government regulation forcing industries to do things and it often works against true free market capitalism.
People just don't understand the importance of the distinction between true free market capitalism vs. crony capitalism. Then they think the answer is socialism in some form or other. I do believe in government regulation to get rid of monopolies and in regulation to make sure markets are operating with free and fair competition. Other than that, it's usually (not always) a bad idea.
Nowhere is this more evident than in health care. We've had a private market in health care. But we haven't had a free market in health care in 70 years, where people can choose their own doctors/providers, where prices are transparent, where the insurance market isn't totally oriented toward employers and the government, etc.. People don't think that distinction matters. But it does a great deal. In health care, our current mix of socialism/capitalism is the worst of both worlds. Government regulation actually makes it easy for private companies to dominate the market and limit competition. The result is mediocre care, over-prescribed pills and treatments of every kind, and very high costs.
People just don't understand the importance of the distinction between true free market capitalism vs. crony capitalism.
Is it a Free Market when the consumers don't know enough about the products to evaluate them. And the manufacturers don't supply enough information even if they knew.
The Volkswagen car with the intelligent pollution control that turned of the anti-pollution system when it was being tested is the most hilarious example.
I was listening to users complain about useless variations in word processing software in 2000.
CAPITALISM - An economic system in which the means of production, distribution and exchange are privately owned and operated for private profit.
- - - WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY
PRIVATE PROPERTY - "As protected from being taken for public uses, is such property as belongs absolutely to an individual, and of which he has the exclusive right of disposition. Property of a specific, fixed and tangible nature, capable of being in possession and transmitted to another, such as houses, lands, and chattels."
- - - Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.1217
If you concatenate capitalism with private property, you can see the "inconvenient truth".
❏ - Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production, distribution and exchange are absolutely owned by individuals and operated for their individual profit. -
❏
If you think about it - the Declaration of Independence states that we are endowed with (natural) rights that include absolute ownership - which makes capitalism a "right" not a "privilege."
This definition of absolute ownership (capitalism) does NOT include usury, gambling, speculation, extortion, limited liability, or other predatory practices usually attributed to "capitalism". It excludes corporations because they are artificial persons with only qualified ownership - a government privilege. And it is diametrically opposed to collective ownership (State ownership) of the means of production, distribution and exchange. (And also opposed to compulsory labor for the benefit of another - compulsory charity under socialist slavery). And let’s not forget to include the indirect control over all business and labor via oppressive taxation and bureaucratic regulation, by the collective State. That definitely voids the right of “absolute ownership of private property”!
In addition, EXECUTIVE ORDERS (beginning in 1933) transferred vast powers to the president and the secretary of treasury, over the property of Americans, effectively abolishing absolute ownership by individuals. Remember, if government takes your property for public use and does not pay just compensation, it cannot be private property (constitutionally protected).
In short, since 1933, and the Emergency, no capitalism has existed in the USA. America has been a “benevolent” socialist totalitarian police state since 1933.
(And Ayn Rand didn't even notice it.)
Which means that the denunciations against "capitalism" are actually against the current regime of the People's Democratic Socialist Republic of America, and its minions and supporters.
CAPITALISM - An economic system in which the means of production, distribution and exchange are privately owned and operated for private profit.
- - - WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY
PRIVATE PROPERTY - "As protected from being taken for public uses, is such property as belongs absolutely to an individual, and of which he has the exclusive right of disposition. Property of a specific, fixed and tangible nature, capable of being in possession and transmitted to another, such as houses, lands, and chattels."
- - - Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.1217
If you concatenate capitalism with private property, you can see the "inconvenient truth".
❏ - Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production, distribution and exchange are absolutely owned by individuals and operated for their individual profit. -
❏
If you think about it - the Declaration of Independence states that we are endowed with (natural) rights that include absolute ownership - which makes capitalism a "right" not a "privilege."
This definition of absolute ownership (capitalism) does NOT include usury, gambling, speculation, extortion, limited liability, or other predatory practices usually attributed to "capitalism". It excludes corporations because they are artificial persons with only qualified ownership - a government privilege. And it is diametrically opposed to collective ownership (State ownership) of the means of production, distribution and exchange. (And also opposed to compulsory labor for the benefit of another - compulsory charity under socialist slavery). And let’s not forget to include the indirect control over all business and labor via oppressive taxation and bureaucratic regulation, by the collective State. That definitely voids the right of “absolute ownership of private property”!
In addition, EXECUTIVE ORDERS (beginning in 1933) transferred vast powers to the president and the secretary of treasury, over the property of Americans, effectively abolishing absolute ownership by individuals. Remember, if government takes your property for public use and does not pay just compensation, it cannot be private property (constitutionally protected).
In short, since 1933, and the Emergency, no capitalism has existed in the USA. America has been a “benevolent” socialist totalitarian police state since 1933.
(And Ayn Rand didn't even notice it.)
Which means that the denunciations against "capitalism" are actually against the current regime of the People's Democratic Socialist Republic of America, and its minions and supporters.
Sorry, but under most zoning codes in this country, property owners have impaired rights of disposition.
Sorry, but under most zoning codes in this country, property owners have impaired rights of disposition.
And the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Euclid v. Ambler (in 1926) that zoning ordinances are constitutionally valid. So apparently U.S. capitalism has been dead since at least the 1920's...
About 25 years ago while on vacation, my wife and I spent a hot and humid summer day in New York City (NYC). Our goal was to explore as many Manhattan nooks and crannies as possible. Eventually, as most tourists do, we strolled into the Chinatown neighborhood when something happened that oftentimes happens on hot and humid NYC summer days; it suddenly started raining.
Hot and sweaty one moment earlier, we were now quickly cooling off thanks to a downpour of rain splattering on our heads and soaking our clothes. We were ill-prepared for this rain; however, our quandary was brief as countless solutions immediately presented themselves. In less than two minutes and two seconds, there were brigades of street vendors offering umbrellas for sale.
All of us needing an umbrella were willing to pay a premium price but it wasn’t necessary because competition among these street vendors was intense. Waving their umbrellas for sale, they sang their low prices in non-orchestrated unison in what seemed like a big band performance.
It didn’t take long to decide which vendor would get my business. I pointed to one and told him I’d buy one umbrella, pulled out my wallet, and completed my purchase. My wife and I were now spared of further spoils from this summertime downpour, thanks to these small business capitalist NYC umbrella street vendors.
What an example of small business capitalism at its finest. It gave me a better understanding and appreciation of Adam Smith’s “Invisible Hand” and the economic law of supply and demand than my college economic professor’s lecture 15 years earlier.
Fast forward to the present, I wonder what would have been the outcome that day if a government program was my only solution.
Such a program would have been the result of a study determining how best to respond to emergency umbrella needs. Consultants would have been hired to conduct this study. Purchasing the umbrellas would have followed a complicated and lengthy bidding process but only after stringent and politically-influenced product specifications were lobbied for and determined.
Additionally, eligibility workers would have been hired to determine who among those needing an umbrella qualified for taxpayer-subsidized ones at a lower price, or perhaps qualified for a “free” one.
This summertime shower would have been long gone before umbrellas arrived on the scene to save our day.
This decades-later Monday-morning quarterback reflection made me realize how capitalism fueled by the economic law of supply and demand does the most efficient job of delivering cost-effective and best solutions for taxpaying consumers. Granted my story is a simple example demonstrating this so you may want to use your own more-complex scenario to see if you come to a different conclusion.
CAPITALISM - An economic system in which the means of production, distribution and exchange are privately owned and operated for private profit.
- - - WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY
PRIVATE PROPERTY - "As protected from being taken for public uses, is such property as belongs absolutely to an individual, and of which he has the exclusive right of disposition. Property of a specific, fixed and tangible nature, capable of being in possession and transmitted to another, such as houses, lands, and chattels."
- - - Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.1217
If you concatenate capitalism with private property, you can see the "inconvenient truth".
❏ - Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production, distribution and exchange are absolutely owned by individuals and operated for their individual profit. -
❏
If you think about it - the Declaration of Independence states that we are endowed with (natural) rights that include absolute ownership - which makes capitalism a "right" not a "privilege."
.
The Declaration ain't the U.S. Constitution. Also, the author of the Declaration of Independence noted in other writings that every generation should hold its own constitutional convention as in every 20 years. Jefferson would be the last person to hold future generations hostage to some mystical readings into what he meant....
About 25 years ago while on vacation, my wife and I spent a hot and humid summer day in New York City (NYC). Our goal was to explore as many Manhattan nooks and crannies as possible. Eventually, as most tourists do, we strolled into the Chinatown neighborhood when something happened that oftentimes happens on hot and humid NYC summer days; it suddenly started raining.
Hot and sweaty one moment earlier, we were now quickly cooling off thanks to a downpour of rain splattering on our heads and soaking our clothes. We were ill-prepared for this rain; however, our quandary was brief as countless solutions immediately presented themselves. In less than two minutes and two seconds, there were brigades of street vendors offering umbrellas for sale.
All of us needing an umbrella were willing to pay a premium price but it wasn’t necessary because competition among these street vendors was intense. Waving their umbrellas for sale, they sang their low prices in non-orchestrated unison in what seemed like a big band performance.
It didn’t take long to decide which vendor would get my business. I pointed to one and told him I’d buy one umbrella, pulled out my wallet, and completed my purchase. My wife and I were now spared of further spoils from this summertime downpour, thanks to these small business capitalist NYC umbrella street vendors.
What an example of small business capitalism at its finest. It gave me a better understanding and appreciation of Adam Smith’s “Invisible Hand” and the economic law of supply and demand than my college economic professor’s lecture 15 years earlier.
Fast forward to the present, I wonder what would have been the outcome that day if a government program was my only solution.
Such a program would have been the result of a study determining how best to respond to emergency umbrella needs. Consultants would have been hired to conduct this study. Purchasing the umbrellas would have followed a complicated and lengthy bidding process but only after stringent and politically-influenced product specifications were lobbied for and determined.
Additionally, eligibility workers would have been hired to determine who among those needing an umbrella qualified for taxpayer-subsidized ones at a lower price, or perhaps qualified for a “free” one.
This summertime shower would have been long gone before umbrellas arrived on the scene to save our day.
This decades-later Monday-morning quarterback reflection made me realize how capitalism fueled by the economic law of supply and demand does the most efficient job of delivering cost-effective and best solutions for taxpaying consumers. Granted my story is a simple example demonstrating this so you may want to use your own more-complex scenario to see if you come to a different conclusion.
I see and agree with your point - that competition is great for the consumer.
But look at it from the other side. You are the umbrella seller. You're deadlocked in competition with other vendors, reducing your profit margin to nearly zero. And you stay out in the cold rain for almost nothing. But it doesn't matter anyway. You were born a loser. You and your whole extended family never had the capital to buy the factory to produce the cheapest umbrella, and the umbrella monopoly CEO is the only guy in town that owns land suitable for a cheaponium mine (the cheapest material to build umbrellas). You might as well given up in the beginning.
You inherited 100 acres fortunately. So not making money, you live off the land. Fruits of your labor baby! Oh wait, there's property tax... someone's gotta pay to protect you from getting bombed, right?
Worst of all, Mr. Monopoly ain't happy. He can't give away his fortune, he'll be eaten alive by other capital owners if he slows down his pace in the race. He wants to retire and grow tomatoes, but he would be consumed by the guilt of leaving his sons and daughters with a lesser hand, increasing the chances of THEM being eaten alive. So he toils away.
That last paragraph is my most important point. All in all, extreme competition can bring the happiness of ALL down. It makes me think of the competitive lives of chimps. The Alpha Male gets all the spoils, held to the highest regard, right? Sort of. He also has the lowest life expectancy of all the others. When he's too old, he gets mass-beaten, and if not killed, then exiled. Happy society? Contrast with bonobos. Their style of competition with scarce resources is of submission and more equal rationing, not dominance.
In my humble opinion, I think capitalism should be a competitive game to win all of the extras that capitalism produces. When you leave the whole fight-for-survival aspect, people get a whole lot nicer.
The only problem is, how do we limit the population from exploding? Maybe it'll be limited by the amount of food that the "jobless class" can grow year after year. But then, that would require abolishment of property tax. And then there's the whole military issue...
I think capitalism is better because it seems like it lines up better with human biology. It just makes sense. Back in the days before money, there was bartering. People would trade goods for other goods they needed, they didn't spread out the goods so that everyone could have the same.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
