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.
Shrug, a democratic republic thats supposed to represent all the people. You're quibbling, and ignoring the point. Which is that while we call ourselves other things, we are really more and more becoming a plutocracy
We are indeed. Money buys votes, and those who have it sadly get to make the rules. It is why I cannot embrace either of the 2 main political parties as most of them have sold out to their corporate cronies. Look, I have no issue with anyone making their way in life and becoming filthy rich. We should all strive to better ourselves, and achieve wealth. But I do take issue with those who use their money and influence to restrict the choices of others via nanny state BS, and then don't live by the same rules that they implement. All for me, but none for thee!
You are inaccurate in many of your statements and assumptions.
1. We live in a democratic republic, not a democracy.
2. In capitalism, workers ARE entitled to the fruits of their labor. Are not many business owners, ALSO workers? In MANY businesses hard work is rewarded with better positions, higher pay, etc.
3. Are not the higher ups, also workers? How did they get to be higher ups?? Maybe, the fruits of their labor?
4. Remember, knowledge is key...
BTW, I am a worker, who CHOSE the job I am at, making a nice wage, Life Insurance, med/denta/vision, 401K with match AND a pension plan, short and long term disability, as well as other benefits. I actually enjoy my job, and where I work, and look forward to going to work.
I have no idea what you're arguing. Before you get ahead of yourself, please read the entire thread.
I knew Mircea was gonna reply with a whole bunch of fallacies he learned about on Wikipedia. That's all he's good for. Lol
This substantive post suggests you are at a loss to counter his so called fallacies. Keep on showing the bankruptcy of your ideas. You still haven't replied to mine yet either.
grewwar, Mircea seems to be on the lines of praxeology. Praxeology is a bunch of bunk that no credible economist takes seriously.
Oh, did you learn that last hour? Before or after lunch period?
I imagine the professor had you all standing up on your desk and ripping up the economics book as he recited poetry.
We are indeed. Money buys votes, and those who have it sadly get to make the rules. It is why I cannot embrace either of the 2 main political parties as most of them have sold out to their corporate cronies. Look, I have no issue with anyone making their way in life and becoming filthy rich. We should all strive to better ourselves, and achieve wealth. But I do take issue with those who use their money and influence to restrict the choices of others via nanny state BS, and then don't live by the same rules that they implement. All for me, but none for thee!
As long as your not voting democrat anymore, i'm happy. Now convert all your friends.
Oh and by the way, there are egalitarian societies that work fine. Look up the Mbuti and Aka pygmies. Humans have been living in egalitarian socities for millenias. Do your research.
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
My understanding of economics far outweighs yours. Let's not kid ourselves now. Lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
I knew Mircea was gonna reply with a whole bunch of fallacies he learned about on Wikipedia. That's all he's good for. Lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
Oh come on, he cut it down to three. progress man, progress!
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
Mircea only throws zingers. That's his counterargument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
grewwar, Mircea seems to be on the lines of praxeology. Praxeology is a bunch of bunk that no credible economist takes seriously.
You started a thread based on a premise that isn't supported.
That's not my fault.
So, now I'm throwing "zingers."
Complaining that someone writes "walls of text" and then complaining that they write "zingers" pretty much says it all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
Economics is not amoral. It's a human construct. We don't have an anarcho capitalist system. If we did, there would be tons more people starving and out of work.
Economics is not a human construct, since it existed before humans existed.
The Laws of Economics precede human existence; aren't dependent upon humans -- meaning they are objective; and apply equally all the time --- the Laws of Economics don't give a damn who you are, who your god is, what color you are, what gender you are, what your intelligence level is, or anything else.
The drought in the West is a great example.
Now, it is affecting hydro-electric generating capacity.
You got 8 more years of drought before the rains come as they used to come.
Quote:
Originally Posted by no1brownsfan
We are indeed. Money buys votes, and those who have it sadly get to make the rules.
Your argument is circular.
You elected the people who enact the laws and regulations that allow money to buy votes.
All forms of Democracy require vigilance, participation and an intelligent electorate.
Why do you think Liberals keep pushing for national government?
The bigger government gets, the more people become disenfranchised and disillusioned and the Pool of Idiot Voters expands.
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
What point? Mircea didn't make any points. He just posted fallacies as expected. That's what he does when he can't debate the issue at hand.
Your total unconditional surrender is accepted (again).
You still cannot grasp the distinction between a Property Theory and an Economic System.
Capitalist Property Theory is 100% democratic and based entirely on Freedom of Choice: either you choose to acquire Capital or you do not.
The Free Market Economic System is purely democratic and based on Freedom of Choice: you either choose to enter into a Consumer Transaction or you don't.
If I have time, maybe I'll explain the difference between government and consumers.
Your lack of win is disturbing....
You started a thread based on a premise that isn't supported.
That's not my fault.
So, now I'm throwing "zingers."
Complaining that someone writes "walls of text" and then complaining that they write "zingers" pretty much says it all.
Economics is not a human construct, since it existed before humans existed.
The Laws of Economics precede human existence; aren't dependent upon humans -- meaning they are objective; and apply equally all the time --- the Laws of Economics don't give a damn who you are, who your god is, what color you are, what gender you are, what your intelligence level is, or anything else.
The drought in the West is a great example.
Now, it is affecting hydro-electric generating capacity.
You got 8 more years of drought before the rains come as they used to come.
Your argument is circular.
You elected the people who enact the laws and regulations that allow money to buy votes.
All forms of Democracy require vigilance, participation and an intelligent electorate.
Why do you think Liberals keep pushing for national government?
The bigger government gets, the more people become disenfranchised and disillusioned and the Pool of Idiot Voters expands.
Your total unconditional surrender is accepted (again).
You still cannot grasp the distinction between a Property Theory and an Economic System.
Capitalist Property Theory is 100% democratic and based entirely on Freedom of Choice: either you choose to acquire Capital or you do not.
The Free Market Economic System is purely democratic and based on Freedom of Choice: you either choose to enter into a Consumer Transaction or you don't.
If I have time, maybe I'll explain the difference between government and consumers.
Your lack of win is disturbing....
Mircea
I applaud you for this well stated post, but I'm doubtful that it's message sunk in. The OP clearly has never taken even a basic course in economics, doesn't understand what capitalism is, much less understand how our Republican government works.
Try not to start topics when you are stoned. It makes your posts very incoherent.
In capitalism the workers most certainly are entitled to the fruits of their labor. It is called their "wage", be it hourly, salary or commission. How big the fruit is, is commiserate with how valuable their contribution is.
If a worker is unhappy with his/her compensation they are welcome to gather capital and start their own business.
Yup. I think the whole thread is a troll. The OP is showing the exact opposite of his username. He simply ignores basic concepts like "fruits of their labor."
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.
