Quote:
Originally Posted by callmemaybe
What do you consider the ideal economic system?
|
I couldn't vote, since your poll is totally FUBAR.
Sorry, but these...
Anarcho-communism
State-led communism
State socialism
Capitalism
...are not Economic Systems. Those are Property Theories. Learn, know and understand the difference.
These....
Mixed Economy
Cooperative-based economy
...are Economic Systems, but still FUBAR.
What kind of Mixed Economy? Mixed Free/Command, or Mixed Free/Traditional, or Mixed Traditional/Command or Mixed Traditional/Free/Command?
It makes a difference, you know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by callmemaybe
Because if you work harder, your company will grow...
|
Wrong. That isn't how it works. There are three Laws and you must obey all three Laws and you can never violate those three Laws, and here they are:
1] You must provide goods and services that are in demand;
AND
2] The goods or services you provide must be of the best possible quality;
AND
3] You must market your goods or services at competitive prices.
That is what you must do to be successful, and as you can plainly see, hard work has nothing to do with it. You must comply with all three Laws and if you fail, then your business fails. Are 8-Track Tape Players in demand? No. So, no matter how hard you work, you will never be successful. Are MP3 Players in demand? Yes, but if you market poor quality devices, you will fail. Even if your MP3 Players are of high quality, if you do not market them at a competitive price, you will fail.
See how that works?
It's not rocket science, it's just plain old fashioned unadulterated common sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by callmemaybe
The problem with capitalism is it doesn't reward hard work...
|
Why would it? Why should it?
Capitalism rewards the risk-takers, the visionaries, the intelligent, those willing to make sacrifices and such. As you can see, hard work is not a necessity.
Korean family owns restaurant. Korean family lives in restaurant. Why? Because Korean family is infinitely more intelligent than you will ever be; because Korean family has a vision; because Korean family is willing to take risks; and most important of all....
...because Korean family is will to make a short-term sacrifice for a long-term gain...like living in the restaurant.
You would never lower yourself to do that, because that would entail massive deprivation and hardship bordering on poverty -- no XBox, no Gameboy, no cell-phone, no laptop, no cable/satellite and no Starsucks for you.
Guess what...because Korean family was willing to make a short-term sacrifice that you would never make, they now own the building that houses their restaurant, and the live in the apartments on top of the restaurant, and rent the other apartments out.
My guess is that within a few years, Korean family will buy a $250,000 McMansion and revel in their monthly mortgage payment of $300/month, because Korean family will lower themselves to do something you refuse to do, and that is endure a short-term hardship to save money to make a huge down-payment --- for you 0% financing is the easy way out.
And you're going to end up paying $318,000 in interest for a $250,000 McMansion that will end up being worth $175,000 and then you're going to scream and cry about how oppressed you are, and how the Middle Class is being destroyed and losing their wealth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by callmemaybe
And the American capitalist system did not fail in 2007?
|
No.
Recessions are about getting rid of inefficiency and dead weight, like the 600,000 useless government employees that have lost their jobs (with 100,000s more job losses still to come until efficiency replaces inefficiency).
So if you used any other Property Theory, or any other Economic System, you wouldn't be in a recession? Oh, yes, you would, because you would have inefficiency.
You brought this recession upon yourselves for many reasons, but in part because you violated the Laws of Economics with constant interference. You cannot violate the Laws of Economics without suffering some penalty. That is simply impossible. When you finally understand that, and you finally stop interfering with Economics, then things will improve (but perhaps not to your liking).
You want your housing market to recover? It will, just as soon as you stop violating the Laws of Economics.
Ideally....
Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby
There is no ideal system. Capitalism is simply the best system.
|
Capitalism is not an Economic System; Capitalism is a Property Theory.
To prove the point, you could marry Capitalism with a Command Economy, in which private individuals own all Capital, but an oligarchy sets the prices of goods and services.
Likewise, you could use Communist Property Theory with [Free] Market Economic System in which the people own all of the Capital, but let the Market set the prices of goods and services (such an example has never existed on Earth).
Economically...
Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics
Capitalist Principles CAPITALISM - An economic system in which the means of production, distribution and exchange are privately owned and operated for private profit.
- - - WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY
|
Or operated for non-profit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics
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". |
What I see is that you are incredibly confused.
Type and send this in an e-mail to yourself 1,000 times:
A poodle is a dog, but not all dogs are poodles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero
why should everyone (in their field) have the same salary???
|
Penis Envy.
Everyone has their bowels in an uproar, because they are constantly worried about how much everyone else is getting, instead of focusing on what they need to be doing to be happy and successful.
He's terrified that someone might actually get two more grains of salt than he does.
Jokingly...
Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
The mix of socialist principles, with capitalist economy seems to be the worst economic system we've thought of, that works.
|
That's probably because it has never existed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
Everything else has been tried, and they don't work.
|
Really? Please list all countries that used Communist Property Theory with [Free] Market Economic System in which the people own all of the Capital, but let the Market set the prices of goods and services (HINT: Such an example has never existed on Earth).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
Anarcho-communism seems a bit oxymoronic. Anarchy and Communism do not mix.
|
Yes, it does. It was used successfully in the Niger and Congo River Basins for centuries until British Missionaries arrived and mucked up everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
I read the "wiki" definition of it...
|
And you would waste your time doing that because why, exactly?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
State led communism is what we see in China....
|
No, you do not.
Type and send this in an e-mail to yourself 1,000 times:
"No country in the history of Earth has ever employed Communism."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
... and it doesn't work either. In fact, China's economy didn't start blooming until they allowed private employers to start doing things they wanted to, opening up their economic system.
|
You just refuted your own statement.
Has it never occurred to you that sometimes, just maybe, it is necessary to take action to foster equality of opportunity and to right injustices imposed by Colonial powers?
When the United States, Britain and Germany colonized China, did they not interfere in the natural order of things?
When Spain colonized Cuba, did Spain not interfere in the natural order of things? Did the United States not maintain Spain's failed policies when it gain Cuba (and the Philippines et al) as colonies?
Isn't that the entire issue now in Honduras, Guatemala and Nicaragua, as well as in Venezuela, Colombia, Peru and other countries?
I take it you have no understanding of the dynamics of colonization. Well, there's a modern parallel. Just think of the Jew ass-kissers in the concentration camps who sold out their fellow Jews and beat them and abused them just so they could have a better bed to sleep in.
Same in colonies. A turd will sell out his brothers and sisters for an extra bowl of rice or wheat.
The ass-kissers and boot-lickers gain in unfair advantage. Are they competent? Do they merit their position? No, they're just sycophants, and so when the Colonial Power is expelled, those people have to be removed from power, and sometimes it gets ugly, but it is necessary (and just and proper).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
State socialism is used in Europe.
|
Where? Be specific.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
While its good for a lot of things, it does not stand for large thriving economic growth.
|
Um, those are post-Industrialized States -- by definition, they do not have "
large thriving economic growth."
I fully expect a developing State to grow at 6%-14% GDP annually, but that is impossible in post-Industrialized State. Note that your average annual GDP rate since 1961 is a mere 2.89% and the only reason it is that high, is because the United States did not complete industrialization 100% until the mid-1960s, when your average annual GDP rate was 4+%.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
Mixed economy is probably the best thing on the list, and its kind of what the United States has today. But its far from perfect and needs constant "tweaking".
|
Again, what kind of "Mixed Economy" and mixed to what level/percentage?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
Co-operative based economys...
|
Cooperative-based Economies? Smells like Feudalism to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
Capitalisim, unbridled, doesn't work.
|
You don't know that, since it has never existed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
It assumes that the consumer will make the best decisions on corporate personhood, when in fact most consumers don't know how corporations act outside of the product they are buying.
|
That has no bearing on anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
Take apple, for instance, using slave labor in China for their phones, but people still buy the crap out of them. It needs to be reigned in, which is where we begin having a "mixed economy".
|
And the US does not use slave labor? It most surely does. You might want to spend more time reading about your penal system, and in particular, privately owned correctional facilities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
My ideal system? A completely transparent system of economics. No corporate taxation, but all assets must be audited and accounted for every year, including all disposals, where they are at, and how they were done.
|
Okay, I like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
But then one flat tax system for our federal government, which the rate would fluctuate based on how much money was spent that year.
|
Flat Tax systems are fundamentally unfair.
Might I remind you that you live in the United States, where the cost-of-living varies tremendously from State-to-State, and even from city-to-city within a State, and not some podunk country of 7 Million people that is the size of a couple of US counties, and where the cost-of-living is uniform throughout the entire "country."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
And allow the voter to decide what programs to support, based on their tax rate. Everything else should be left the hell alone.
|
Voters are incompetent.
Can corporations, unions, think-tanks, special interest groups, lobbyists and PACs contribute money to politicians, to the election campaigns of politicians and to the election campaigns of ballot issues (like casinos for example)?
Yes.
Why?
Because voters are incompetent.
Competently...
Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwynedd1
In the case of inherent monopolies they cannot work under market capitalism becuae you cannot create markets. It will either be a monopolistic, and not exposed to market forces, or it will be regulated. Can't want what it can't be.
|
Yes, it can work, but you have to enact bars to influence and corruption in order for it to work, and the incompetent American voters have repeatedly refused to do that (because they are stupid and incompetent).
Capitalistically...
Mircea
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.
