U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 01:27 PM
 
Location: Manchester NH
7,687 posts, read 2,064,138 times
Reputation: 2254

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colorado^ View Post
God I hate communists.
Communism is the natural state of the human race.

Read Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 01:31 PM
 
Location: Manchester NH
7,687 posts, read 2,064,138 times
Reputation: 2254
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLSFan View Post
The motive for most of those was war... That isn't a better alternative, you want to advance by killing your opponents?
War was only part of it, and it’s related to the main point.

Capitalism is a state invention by which the government can formulate more wealth/power. While wars help expand access to markets or keep US interests in check, they also provide technological advancements that is provided to the private sector to better compete with international rivals.

Pentagon spending in military advancements is not just to keep war going, but to provide jobs and act as a stimulus for the private sector.

Edit: furthermore my point was that profit is not intrinsically tied with profit AND that application of technology is not always good.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:39 PM
 
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
6,624 posts, read 3,689,397 times
Reputation: 16200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324 View Post
Before the state era. Look at Neolithic tribes, Neanderthals, even native tribes.
You need to take a much closer look at those societies. Even in hunter-gather societies, some individuals wielded more power than others. There's never been a human society anywhere on the planet where every person held equal power.

Oh, those early societies break down once the size of the group exceeds about 150 people. It turns out the human memory can only remember about 150 specific individuals, so an egalitarian social model (which can only work when everyone knows everyone else personally, so everyone knows who's shirking and who's being greedy, and conversely who's actually working hard and sharing fairly) breaks down when the numbers climb above that level. More than 150 people in a group, and a formal bureaucratic structure of power of some type or another always evolves.

Quote:
In such a case the needs of society were met by sharing labor...
By use of force.

Quote:
...and resources and sharing the end distribution.
By use of force.

You don't honestly believe that everyone was free to do whatever they wished in primitive societies? Those who refused to cooperate with others were expelled from the group (and that was a literal death sentence). And if they refused to go, they were killed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:45 PM
 
12,160 posts, read 6,318,521 times
Reputation: 22340
I'd be fine with raising the capital gains rate some as long as the cost basis is indexed to inflation. If I own something for 25 years, the cost basis should be multiplied by 1.762 (using the BLS inflation calculator) to account for 25 years of inflation. You can't increase the rate too much or nobody would ever risk their money investing since the reward would all be taxed into oblivion. As a matter of public policy, I think you'd want to make the rate variable depending on the class of investment. You tax things lower that produce economic growth. Buying 1,000 shares of an S&P 500 index fund on the open market isn't helping anything grow. Investing the same amount of money as private equity in a fledgling company that needs the capital to grow is a heck of a lot more risk and benefits the economy far more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:50 PM
 
12,160 posts, read 6,318,521 times
Reputation: 22340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aredhel View Post
You need to take a much closer look at those societies. Even in hunter-gather societies, some individuals wielded more power than others. There's never been a human society anywhere on the planet where every person held equal power.

To nitpick a bit, in a democracy, everyone is politically equal. My vote counts just as much as yours. It's most visible in small New England town meeting where everyone in the town gets to vote on each issue as they're presented to the voters at town meeting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:53 PM
 
Location: Nescopeck, Penna. (birthplace)
11,617 posts, read 7,019,094 times
Reputation: 14980
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
I'd be fine with raising the capital gains rate some as long as the cost basis is indexed to inflation. If I own something for 25 years, the cost basis should be multiplied by 1.762 (using the BLS inflation calculator) to account for 25 years of inflation. You can't increase the rate too much or nobody would ever risk their money investing since the reward would all be taxed into oblivion. As a matter of public policy, I think you'd want to make the rate variable depending on the class of investment. You tax things lower that produce economic growth. Buying 1,000 shares of an S&P 500 index fund on the open market isn't helping anything grow. Investing the same amount of money as private equity in a fledgling company that needs the capital to grow is a heck of a lot more risk and benefits the economy far more.
Please don't burden our OP with such tiresome details; He probably can't understand it, and it's a sure bet that the pointing, grunting, slobbering idiots he seeks to "organize"(?) into a lynch mob can't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:03 PM
 
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
6,624 posts, read 3,689,397 times
Reputation: 16200
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
To nitpick a bit, in a democracy, everyone is politically equal. My vote counts just as much as yours.
But the actual power will accrue to those who are handsome, charismatic, and politically savvy, for they will be the ones who convince the bulk of the voters to back them (even if their ideas aren't as good as those of someone else who isn't so good-looking, charismatic, or a great speaker).

Humans are primates, and we share the same predilection to form hierarchical societies that other primates do. There's simply no getting around that. There's also no getting around the reality that, whatever we may say, some people ARE 'more equal' than others: smarter, stronger, better-looking, healthier, possessing better social instincts, harder-working, more ruthless. Guess who tends to rise to the power positions of any human society?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:24 PM
 
3,974 posts, read 2,198,474 times
Reputation: 6882
Worst idea in the history of the universe ITT, well a close 2nd anyway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:31 PM
 
Location: Manchester NH
7,687 posts, read 2,064,138 times
Reputation: 2254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aredhel View Post
You need to take a much closer look at those societies. Even in hunter-gather societies, some individuals wielded more power than others. There's never been a human society anywhere on the planet where every person held equal power.

Oh, those early societies break down once the size of the group exceeds about 150 people. It turns out the human memory can only remember about 150 specific individuals, so an egalitarian social model (which can only work when everyone knows everyone else personally, so everyone knows who's shirking and who's being greedy, and conversely who's actually working hard and sharing fairly) breaks down when the numbers climb above that level. More than 150 people in a group, and a formal bureaucratic structure of power of some type or another always evolves.



By use of force.



By use of force.

You don't honestly believe that everyone was free to do whatever they wished in primitive societies? Those who refused to cooperate with others were expelled from the group (and that was a literal death sentence). And if they refused to go, they were killed.
All of this further proves my point.

1. I never claimed I wanted to force pure equality on everyone, that would be dystopian; but even in your examples that is on the basis of social capital; not direct legal control of wealth.

For example Chieftains in Native Tribes were mistakenly believed to be like kings whose words were legally codified. In reality they lead by charisma and persuasion, and the tribe would not always follow his words.

2. This shows an incredible misunderstanding of the situation; read Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution. If you are part of a group their is a democratic or unanimous decision on how things work, and if you don't want to cooperate by those rules your allowed to go your own way.

People worked together because they had to and there was no capital owner to collectivize labor by force (which is how capitalism operates). People shared for the mutual benefit of everyone, which is the basis of a more equal society.

If you didn't want to share that is fine, but what purpose would you have in the group then? I don't support all of this, but all of this reiterates my previous point. Even ants and other animal kingdom species operate the same way, it is the basis of human interaction.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:34 PM
 
Location: Manchester NH
7,687 posts, read 2,064,138 times
Reputation: 2254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aredhel View Post
But the actual power will accrue to those who are handsome, charismatic, and politically savvy, for they will be the ones who convince the bulk of the voters to back them (even if their ideas aren't as good as those of someone else who isn't so good-looking, charismatic, or a great speaker).

Humans are primates, and we share the same predilection to form hierarchical societies that other primates do. There's simply no getting around that. There's also no getting around the reality that, whatever we may say, some people ARE 'more equal' than others: smarter, stronger, better-looking, healthier, possessing better social instincts, harder-working, more ruthless. Guess who tends to rise to the power positions of any human society?
Sharing power and sharing respect and social capital are different things.

Some people may produce more and be able to provide more for themselves, some may be famous, etc. but no one should have legal power to control the economic fate of others and control a larger share of freedom than others.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top