19 Nov 2012, 3:28 pm
19 Nov 2012, 3:41 pm
19 Nov 2012, 3:46 pm
19 Nov 2012, 5:23 pm
19 Nov 2012, 5:49 pm
19 Nov 2012, 5:55 pm
19 Nov 2012, 7:03 pm
eric76 wrote:
ScrewyWabbit wrote:
eric76 wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
capitalists just see the rest of us as their cattle, and their ranch help as utterly disposable. i would no sooner eat anything by papa john's than i would eat a slug.
Capitalism has done far more to reduce poverty than anything else ever. What we call poverty today would have been considered a wonderful life if Capitalism had never existed.
Unless you are willing to endure this new-and-improved form of poverty, you've got no basis to tell anyone else how "wonderful" it is.
Poverty? What would you call the situation of most of the people in the world prior to Capitalism when kids had to go to work at very young ages just to help support the family. When if you were injured on the job (maybe when you were 10 years old), it might easily mean that your only option was to sit on the side of the road to beg for money? When there was no such thing as retirement except for the very privileged few?
Capitalism has brought forth truly marvelous changes in the human condition. Poverty? I have NEVER met anyone who isn't substantially better off economically than if they had lived in a pre-Capitalist society.
There is no such thing as "pre-Capitalist society". Markets and trade, even finance, have existed for thousands of years. There is pre-industrial society. I love how you people like to make it look like money grubbing CEO's and capitalists are solely responsible for "creating wealth" and improving the standard of living. As if the enlightenment and it's attendant advances in science and technology (driven by individuals, corporations, and governments) played absolutely no role. Someone can criticize greedy capitalists who are not contributing to the good of our society without you accusing them of wanting communism or anarcho-primitivism. There are third paths you know. I'm so sick of free-market propagandists acting as though we have to either accept a system of unfettered greed and social darwinism or become berry gathering hunter-gatherers.
19 Nov 2012, 7:13 pm
GoonSquad
Veteran
Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...
19 Nov 2012, 7:20 pm
19 Nov 2012, 7:22 pm
ruveyn wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
eric76 wrote:
A pizza restaurant employee with health care? I wouldn't expect to find any.
...and you think that is okay? As in good for society...?
This may come as a complete shock to you, but the company was formed and is run for the good of its owners, not the good of society.
No s**t Sherlock.
That's why we have a thing called government.Quote:
As long as the company operates according to the requirements of law they are cool. If you don't like it, don't buy from them.
That's exactly what we are suggesting. Remember the topic of this thread is?
19 Nov 2012, 7:25 pm
marshall wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
eric76 wrote:
A pizza restaurant employee with health care? I wouldn't expect to find any.
...and you think that is okay? As in good for society...?
This may come as a complete shock to you, but the company was formed and is run for the good of its owners, not the good of society.
No sh** Sherlock.
That's why we have a thing called government.Quote:
As long as the company operates according to the requirements of law they are cool. If you don't like it, don't buy from them.
That's exactly what we are suggesting. Remember the topic of this thread is?
No, you are suggesting 'punishing' them for some imagined slight, because you think that 'rich people' somehow are cheating you out of something, that's what this thread is about.
The math backs up what the Papa John's Ceo is saying, if you don't like that fact, tough. The facts are the facts.
19 Nov 2012, 7:27 pm
marshall wrote:
eric76 wrote:
ScrewyWabbit wrote:
eric76 wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
capitalists just see the rest of us as their cattle, and their ranch help as utterly disposable. i would no sooner eat anything by papa john's than i would eat a slug.
Capitalism has done far more to reduce poverty than anything else ever. What we call poverty today would have been considered a wonderful life if Capitalism had never existed.
Unless you are willing to endure this new-and-improved form of poverty, you've got no basis to tell anyone else how "wonderful" it is.
Poverty? What would you call the situation of most of the people in the world prior to Capitalism when kids had to go to work at very young ages just to help support the family. When if you were injured on the job (maybe when you were 10 years old), it might easily mean that your only option was to sit on the side of the road to beg for money? When there was no such thing as retirement except for the very privileged few?
Capitalism has brought forth truly marvelous changes in the human condition. Poverty? I have NEVER met anyone who isn't substantially better off economically than if they had lived in a pre-Capitalist society.
There is no such thing as "pre-Capitalist society". Markets and trade, even finance, have existed for thousands of years.
There is clearly such a thing as a "pre-Capitalist society".
Capitalism is all about the division of labor, of doing what you are good at that people will pay for and using your earnings to buy the products of others, of competition between producers. Before Capitalism, the closest thing we had were guilds and those were anything but Capitalist.
19 Nov 2012, 7:38 pm
GoonSquad
Veteran
Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...
19 Nov 2012, 7:55 pm
eric76 wrote:
ScrewyWabbit wrote:
eric76 wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
capitalists just see the rest of us as their cattle, and their ranch help as utterly disposable. i would no sooner eat anything by papa john's than i would eat a slug.
Capitalism has done far more to reduce poverty than anything else ever. What we call poverty today would have been considered a wonderful life if Capitalism had never existed.
Unless you are willing to endure this new-and-improved form of poverty, you've got no basis to tell anyone else how "wonderful" it is.
Poverty? What would you call the situation of most of the people in the world prior to Capitalism when kids had to go to work at very young ages just to help support the family. When if you were injured on the job (maybe when you were 10 years old), it might easily mean that your only option was to sit on the side of the road to beg for money? When there was no such thing as retirement except for the very privileged few?Capitalism has brought forth truly marvelous changes in the human condition. Poverty? I have NEVER met anyone who isn't substantially better off economically than if they had lived in a pre-Capitalist society.
Dude, capitalists were pro child labor and they sure as hell did not push for workers comp and retirement plans...
Progressives, trade unions, and Christian Womens associations from the early 20th century gave us those things even as the capitalists howled that it would end western civilization.... Kinda like you bitching about Obamacare now....
And when was this pre capitalist time of which you speak?
The Romans were hell on wheels when it came to capitalism.... Read Cicero's speech On Pompey's Command... There's never been a better argument made for war to protect commercial interests.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/To_the_ci ... 's_command
Quote:
The kind of war is such as ought above all others to excite and inflame your minds to a determination to persevere in it. It is a war in which the glory of the Roman people is at stake; that glory which has been handed down to you from your ancestors, great indeed in everything, but most especially in military affairs. The safety of our friends and allies is at stake, in behalf of which your ancestors have waged many most important wars. The most certain and the largest revenues of the Roman people are at stake; and if they be lost, you will be at a loss for the luxuries of peace, and the sinews of war. The property of many citizens is at stake, which you ought greatly to regard, both for your own sake, and for that of the republic!
...
For we know that then, when many had lost large fortunes in Asia, all credit failed at Rome, from payments being hindered. For it is not possible for many men to lose their property and fortunes in one city, without drawing many along with them into the same vortex of disaster. But do you now preserve the republic from this misfortune; and believe me, (you yourselves see that it is the case,) this credit, and this state of the money-market which exists at Rome and in the forum, is bound up with, and is inseparable from, those fortunes which are invested in Asia. Those fortunes cannot fall without credit here being undermined by the came blow, and perishing along with them. Consider, then, whether you ought to hesitate to apply yourselves with all zeal to that war, in which the glory of your name, the safety of your allies, your greatest revenues, and the fortunes of numbers of your citizens, will be protected at the same time as the republic.
...
For we know that then, when many had lost large fortunes in Asia, all credit failed at Rome, from payments being hindered. For it is not possible for many men to lose their property and fortunes in one city, without drawing many along with them into the same vortex of disaster. But do you now preserve the republic from this misfortune; and believe me, (you yourselves see that it is the case,) this credit, and this state of the money-market which exists at Rome and in the forum, is bound up with, and is inseparable from, those fortunes which are invested in Asia. Those fortunes cannot fall without credit here being undermined by the came blow, and perishing along with them. Consider, then, whether you ought to hesitate to apply yourselves with all zeal to that war, in which the glory of your name, the safety of your allies, your greatest revenues, and the fortunes of numbers of your citizens, will be protected at the same time as the republic.
Globalism 2000 years ago.
Last edited by GoonSquad on 20 Nov 2012, 1:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
19 Nov 2012, 8:21 pm
19 Nov 2012, 8:35 pm
eric76 wrote:
marshall wrote:
eric76 wrote:
ScrewyWabbit wrote:
eric76 wrote:
ScrewyWabbit wrote:
eric76 wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
capitalists just see the rest of us as their cattle, and their ranch help as utterly disposable. i would no sooner eat anything by papa john's than i would eat a slug.
Capitalism has done far more to reduce poverty than anything else ever. What we call poverty today would have been considered a wonderful life if Capitalism had never existed.
Unless you are willing to endure this new-and-improved form of poverty, you've got no basis to tell anyone else how "wonderful" it is.
Poverty? What would you call the situation of most of the people in the world prior to Capitalism when kids had to go to work at very young ages just to help support the family. When if you were injured on the job (maybe when you were 10 years old), it might easily mean that your only option was to sit on the side of the road to beg for money? When there was no such thing as retirement except for the very privileged few?
Capitalism has brought forth truly marvelous changes in the human condition. Poverty? I have NEVER met anyone who isn't substantially better off economically than if they had lived in a pre-Capitalist society.
That's all true, no doubt. Its also true that as compared to a lord or king in the middle ages, the lifestyle of a typical wealthy capitalist today is orders of magnitude better. So by this same reasoning, the rich, too, have nothing to complain about and when the subject of higher taxes comes up, which would still leave them fabulously wealthy, they too should compare their markedly improved situation to their pre-capitalist ancestors, count their blessings, pay their taxes and stop complaining about it.
In any case, it may be much better to live in poverty today than it was before capitalism. But its pretty lousy to start telling people who are worse off than yourself how wonderful they have it. That was the point I was trying to make to you.
For that matter, the typical American who lives in what we call poverty today is better off in many ways than a lord or king of 500 years ago. It is Capitalism that drove those changes.
If you want to live in a country that is probably the most unCapitalistic country in the world, feel free to go to North Korea.
North Korea is a terrible example. What do you expect from a regime that has cut itself off from the rest of the world? No modern country can prosper without trade. As someone who disagrees with unfettered market social darwinism, you telling me to move to North Korea if I want a social safety net is as idiotic and insulting as me telling you to move to Somalia for you want rugged individualism.
It's a good example.
If you read Adam Smith's book, The Wealth of Nations, you will find out that what he was talking about was fostering trade between countries. Instead of each country trying to produce everything for themselves, one country should specialize in certain products that they can sell to other countries and should buy products that they cannot produce well from other countries. The very foundations of Capitalism are about trade between nations.
North Korea has, as you said, cut themselves off from the rest of the world. Their trade with other nations is minimal. Their entire economic and political model is everything but Capitalistic. They are probably the best example we can hope for in today's world of a country that has sworn off Capitalism. In North Korea, we can see the natural results from moving away from Capitalism.
Years ago, one of the most leftist people I personally knew told me about a conversation with a Soviet communist in which the communist said admiringly of the United States that we were showing the world how to make Socialism work best. I thought that was rather odd, but after thinking about it, he was right. The poorest of Americans are much better off than the average person did in the Soviet Union.
Want to elevate the poor? Do it with Capitalism and bring everyone up instead of just trying to drag the wealthy down to the same level as the poor.
Post-Enlightenment society with its introduction of science, technology, industrialization, and division of labor rose the standard of living as compared to the pre-Enlightenment society of the middle ages. Ergo, unrestrained free markets are the only thing that can lift the poor.
All I see is an invalid extrapolation. America is now a post-industrial service economy with an unsustainable trade deficit. No amount of corporate ass kissing is going to make us richer as a nation as we've already gone over that hump and fallen off the other side.
