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.
Good post I also agree with many of the other folks here that this does fit the "politics" section more than the "work and employment" section, but since I'm here....
So Alphalogica, it's the rich Capitalists that are making people poor and hungry in America? I think we both know that idea is completely ludacris.
Let's look at the biggest Capitalist in America, or the world for that matter, Bill Gates. Do you think he's an evil, selfish guy? Microsoft products (MS Office, Access, Windows) have completely revolutionized (and I don't use this term lightly) America and create hundreds of thousands of jobs .
Now let's look at the man himself. He's done more for charity and people in need than any other individual whom I know. So mabye you should think twice before you label everyone who is very successful as heartless.
Bot Gates and Buffett are big supporters of Obama. Kind of ironic, don'chya think now?
Bot Gates and Buffett are big supporters of Obama. Kind of ironic, don'chya think now?
While not this isn't entirely relevant to the original post, I'm happy to answer your question. It's common for corporate titans to make donations to both political parties. Bill Gates actually has donated more to McCain than Obama, and more to the Republicans than Democrats.
You're completely right about Warren Buffett, there are a big group of ultra-wealthy who are in the pockets of the democrats. When you have billions of dollars, who really cares if your tax rates go up? You'll still be rich.
However, it's the upper-middle class, moderately rich , and small business owners who are hurt the most by jacking up taxes. This constitutes a much larger population than the handful of limousine liberals out there. Billionaires seem to be pretty split between the parties, but they have different reasons for supporting certain politicians than people like you and me do.
Let's look at the biggest Capitalist in America, or the world for that matter, Bill Gates. Do you think he's an evil, selfish guy? Microsoft products (MS Office, Access, Windows) have completely revolutionized (and I don't use this term lightly) America and create hundreds of thousands of jobs .
It also happens to be that you can acquire most of the equivalents of Microsoft software for essentially at minimal or no cost. (The fact you don't know this is something the investors and executives of Microsoft take advantage of) In fact, my entire family, headed by my dad, a PhD'ed computer scientist on the payroll of a Fortune 500 company, entirely uses Ubuntu and OpenOffice. Be advised, that there are large segments of the computing industry that don't use Windows or MS products. Citydata apparently uses Apache, an open-source competitor to Microsoft IIS. Within computing, hardware companies such as IBM and Intel, I think do us a good service by constantly advancing their products thus enabling them to become more accessible to the lower classes via economies of scale and Moore's Law. Technology firms (particularly hardware) are about the only sector of the US economy that I do have respect for as their products are actually deflating in price. (Mass proliferation of laptops and cell-phones are proof of this.) Microsoft, a software maker, cannot lay claim to that.
Overall, general purpose technologies are sweet as they challenge past business models and leave businessmen scrambling.
It's interesting that you support a company that has had run-ins with the DOJ and EU in regards to anti-trust issues.
Edit: Furthermore, you're a little out-of-date in your statement that Gates is biggest capitalist in the world. Who is it now? A clue for you. He's Mexican.
Last edited by Alphalogica; 05-19-2010 at 11:49 AM..
Reason: Mentioned that Gates is no longer the richest man in the world.
in our economy, goods and services are traded via supply and demand. One supplies what others are willing and able to buy. So hedge funds serve a demand, or otherwise they would not be viable business concerns.
I don't think the only products bought and sold should be those that bring social value, or are absolutely necessary for survival.
Regardless, I refuse to purchase products from a company where (often superior) equivalents exist at a negligible cost. Making the software free and accessible does a favor for greater humanity that can't be quantified in donations.
Last edited by Alphalogica; 05-19-2010 at 08:23 PM..
in our economy, goods and services are traded via supply and demand. One supplies what others are willing and able to buy. So hedge funds serve a demand, or otherwise they would not be viable business concerns.
I don't think the only products bought and sold should be those that bring social value, or are absolutely necessary for survival.
The interesting thing about the Free Market is that many people who claim to be fans get very very antsy and nervous and flustered when goods and services such as drugs and sex are introduced. Those are products that have a huge market and demand.
Same thing with workers willing to work for lower wages (those folks are called "undocumented").
People tend to like "capitalism" only when it works for them. Which is why we don't really have "capitalism" in the US, but rather cronyism.
I often wonder what it would be like to live in a society where people truly were compensated based on their value to said society. Too darn logical for most, I suppose.
(I'm not sure this thread belongs in "Politics", but "Great Debates" might be more appropriate?)
The interesting thing about the Free Market is that many people who claim to be fans get very very antsy and nervous and flustered when goods and services such as drugs and sex are introduced. Those are products that have a huge market and demand.
The interesting thing about the Free Market is that many people who claim to be fans get very very antsy and nervous and flustered when goods and services such as drugs and sex are introduced. Those are products that have a huge market and demand.
I think Nevada got it right as far as the sex trade. Legalize it, regulate it (on a public health basis), keep the minors out of it and away from it, and tax it. A win-win for everyone.
My problem with most drugs is that they lead to crime on the part of the person using them. How many junkies out there lead productive lives? I'd be 100% for the legalization of marijuana (for adults and as a taxable product) as soon as they can come up with something like a breathalyzer to accurately measure the level of "intoxication" of users to be used against an impaired driver.
Quote:
Same thing with workers willing to work for lower wages (those folks are called "undocumented").
They are also ILLEGAL being in this country ILLEGALLY and need to be processed and returned to sender with NO regard AT ALL for any anchor babies they might have spawned. And frankly the idea of giving US citizenship to any kid spit out by an ILLEGAL is appalling to me--ship them back to whatever cesspool their parents came from as well.
Quote:
People tend to like "capitalism" only when it works for them. Which is why we don't really have "capitalism" in the US, but rather cronyism.
I like capitalism when it's done WITHIN THE LAW.
Quote:
I often wonder what it would be like to live in a society where people truly were compensated based on their value to said society. Too darn logical for most, I suppose.
(I'm not sure this thread belongs in "Politics", but "Great Debates" might be more appropriate?)
Some might put a huge value on a minister or rabbi while an aetheist would find zero value in them and tell them to "get a real job." We all have different values.
The interesting thing about the Free Market is that many people who claim to be fans get very very antsy and nervous and flustered when goods and services such as drugs and sex are introduced. Those are products that have a huge market and demand.
Same thing with workers willing to work for lower wages (those folks are called "undocumented").
People tend to like "capitalism" only when it works for them. Which is why we don't really have "capitalism" in the US, but rather cronyism.
I often wonder what it would be like to live in a society where people truly were compensated based on their value to said society. Too darn logical for most, I suppose.
(I'm not sure this thread belongs in "Politics", but "Great Debates" might be more appropriate?)
i guess it's more of a case of the morality of market economics, but the key still is demand. If people want it, people will sell it.
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.
I also agree with many of the other folks here that this does fit the "politics" section more than the "work and employment" section, but since I'm here....
Those are products that have a huge market and demand. 
