Indeed.Hermit wrote:Your most convincing argument yet. Certainly better than the about three previous attempts.pErvinalia wrote:No, it's run on a mixed system. For about the 4th time.
OK, seriously now: I did mention mixed economies and then went on to say that looking at commonly used examples, chiefly one or more of the Scandinavian countries, I find they are chiefly capitalist with an overlay of government regulations. In the end almost no manufacturing capacity is government owned and run. Most of the gross domestic products come from privately owned (either outright or via share holdings) companies and production is ultimately motivated by generating a profit for their owners. That makes those countries social democracies rather than socialist.
They do have progressive tax scales. So do the United States of America. Some economies are more mixed than others, but as long as the means of production are largely in private hands and run on a for-profit basis, they are fundamentally capitalist economies.
Capitalism, The Best Solution to Poverty
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: Capitalism, The Best Solution to Poverty
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: Capitalism, The Best Solution to Poverty
Well, it's not so much that people are annoyed at the idea that "we can all own something together," it's that the notion of all of us owning something together sounds good to some but is ultimately incoherent as a concept. "When everybody owns something, nobody owns it, and nobody has a direct interest in maintaining or improving its condition. That is why buildings in the Soviet Union -- like public housing in the United States -- look decrepit within a year or two of their construction...Nobody spends somebody else's money as carefully as he spends his own. Nobody uses somebody else's resources as carefully as he uses his own. So if you want efficiency and effectiveness, if you want knowledge to be properly utilized, you have to do it through the means of private property." M. Friedman.Brian Peacock wrote:Capitalism, whatever it is, is founded on property, and we all like to own stuff and say that it's ours. As long as that continues there will be capitalism. What ideological capitalist object to are limits being placed on what they can own, which is why they get so annoyed at the idea that we can all own something together.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: Capitalism, The Best Solution to Poverty
Well, it's not exactly as clear as that. You say that "nobody has argued that capitalism is not the best solution for poverty," but is that the impression you get from the responses to my post averring that capitalism is the best solution to poverty? For some reason, my unwillingness to admit that I've been proven wrong on that point has elicited quite a lot of anger and vitriol directed my way. For a thread where not a single person has disagreed with the thesis presented, there certainly are a lot of posts telling me how wrong I am about something.Hermit wrote:Yes. With the possible exception of rEvolutionist who seems to argue that the welfare state is not capitalism, we all made that point at some stage or another. Apart from that possible exception nobody has argued that capitalism is not the best solution for poverty.Brian Peacock wrote:Indeed. In my page-1 post I raised a similar point...
Brian Peacock wrote:...Market economics certainly generates fiscal resources - when those resources are shared around the livings standards of all are raised, and societies become more stable, peaceful and ordered, better educated, more productive and innovative, healthier, infant mortality falls and population growth levels off as a consequence. Given that capitalism is the dominant economic system I guess the questions is, how many dyed-in-the-wool ideological capitalists are interested in raising the living standards of society as a whole - as opposed to simply securing assets for their exclusive use - and what structural influence can we bring to bear in order to ensure that the system works for all those who have little or no choice about taking part in it?
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
-
- "I" Self-Perceive Recursively
- Posts: 7824
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:57 am
- Contact:
Re: Capitalism, The Best Solution to Poverty
Well if M. Friedman said it, it must be true!Forty Two wrote:Well, it's not so much that people are annoyed at the idea that "we can all own something together," it's that the notion of all of us owning something together sounds good to some but is ultimately incoherent as a concept. "When everybody owns something, nobody owns it, and nobody has a direct interest in maintaining or improving its condition. That is why buildings in the Soviet Union -- like public housing in the United States -- look decrepit within a year or two of their construction...Nobody spends somebody else's money as carefully as he spends his own. Nobody uses somebody else's resources as carefully as he uses his own. So if you want efficiency and effectiveness, if you want knowledge to be properly utilized, you have to do it through the means of private property." M. Friedman.Brian Peacock wrote:Capitalism, whatever it is, is founded on property, and we all like to own stuff and say that it's ours. As long as that continues there will be capitalism. What ideological capitalist object to are limits being placed on what they can own, which is why they get so annoyed at the idea that we can all own something together.
[Disclaimer - if this is comes across like I think I know what I'm talking about, I want to make it clear that I don't. I'm just trying to get my thoughts down]
-
- "I" Self-Perceive Recursively
- Posts: 7824
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:57 am
- Contact:
Re: Capitalism, The Best Solution to Poverty
Most of us have not been posting unsupportable assertions. We've mostly been pointing out that your assertions are unsupported.Forty Two wrote:Well, it's not exactly as clear as that. You say that "nobody has argued that capitalism is not the best solution for poverty," but is that the impression you get from the responses to my post averring that capitalism is the best solution to poverty? For some reason, my unwillingness to admit that I've been proven wrong on that point has elicited quite a lot of anger and vitriol directed my way. For a thread where not a single person has disagreed with the thesis presented, there certainly are a lot of posts telling me how wrong I am about something.Hermit wrote:Yes. With the possible exception of rEvolutionist who seems to argue that the welfare state is not capitalism, we all made that point at some stage or another. Apart from that possible exception nobody has argued that capitalism is not the best solution for poverty.
[Disclaimer - if this is comes across like I think I know what I'm talking about, I want to make it clear that I don't. I'm just trying to get my thoughts down]
- Brian Peacock
- Tipping cows since 1946
- Posts: 37953
- Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
- About me: Ablate me:
- Location: Location: Location:
- Contact:
Re: Capitalism, The Best Solution to Poverty
However, what you have done is present a consistent case for broad and deep market deregulation. How do deregulated markets enable Capitalism to be more effective at alleviating poverty?Forty Two wrote:Well, it's not exactly as clear as that. You say that "nobody has argued that capitalism is not the best solution for poverty," but is that the impression you get from the responses to my post averring that capitalism is the best solution to poverty? For some reason, my unwillingness to admit that I've been proven wrong on that point has elicited quite a lot of anger and vitriol directed my way. For a thread where not a single person has disagreed with the thesis presented, there certainly are a lot of posts telling me how wrong I am about something.Hermit wrote:Yes. With the possible exception of rEvolutionist who seems to argue that the welfare state is not capitalism, we all made that point at some stage or another. Apart from that possible exception nobody has argued that capitalism is not the best solution for poverty.Brian Peacock wrote:Indeed. In my page-1 post I raised a similar point...
Brian Peacock wrote:...Market economics certainly generates fiscal resources - when those resources are shared around the livings standards of all are raised, and societies become more stable, peaceful and ordered, better educated, more productive and innovative, healthier, infant mortality falls and population growth levels off as a consequence. Given that capitalism is the dominant economic system I guess the questions is, how many dyed-in-the-wool ideological capitalists are interested in raising the living standards of society as a whole - as opposed to simply securing assets for their exclusive use - and what structural influence can we bring to bear in order to ensure that the system works for all those who have little or no choice about taking part in it?
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.
.
"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."
Frank Zappa
"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.
Details on how to do that can be found here.
.
"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."
Frank Zappa
"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: Capitalism, The Best Solution to Poverty
PsychoSerenity wrote:Well if M. Friedman said it, it must be true!Forty Two wrote:Well, it's not so much that people are annoyed at the idea that "we can all own something together," it's that the notion of all of us owning something together sounds good to some but is ultimately incoherent as a concept. "When everybody owns something, nobody owns it, and nobody has a direct interest in maintaining or improving its condition. That is why buildings in the Soviet Union -- like public housing in the United States -- look decrepit within a year or two of their construction...Nobody spends somebody else's money as carefully as he spends his own. Nobody uses somebody else's resources as carefully as he uses his own. So if you want efficiency and effectiveness, if you want knowledge to be properly utilized, you have to do it through the means of private property." M. Friedman.Brian Peacock wrote:Capitalism, whatever it is, is founded on property, and we all like to own stuff and say that it's ours. As long as that continues there will be capitalism. What ideological capitalist object to are limits being placed on what they can own, which is why they get so annoyed at the idea that we can all own something together.
Do you disagree with the statement?
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: Capitalism, The Best Solution to Poverty
My assertions have not been unsupported.PsychoSerenity wrote:Most of us have not been posting unsupportable assertions. We've mostly been pointing out that your assertions are unsupported.Forty Two wrote:Well, it's not exactly as clear as that. You say that "nobody has argued that capitalism is not the best solution for poverty," but is that the impression you get from the responses to my post averring that capitalism is the best solution to poverty? For some reason, my unwillingness to admit that I've been proven wrong on that point has elicited quite a lot of anger and vitriol directed my way. For a thread where not a single person has disagreed with the thesis presented, there certainly are a lot of posts telling me how wrong I am about something.Hermit wrote:Yes. With the possible exception of rEvolutionist who seems to argue that the welfare state is not capitalism, we all made that point at some stage or another. Apart from that possible exception nobody has argued that capitalism is not the best solution for poverty.
Regardless, according to Hermit, nobody has argued that capitalism is not the best solution to poverty. So, if nobody has argued that, then why all the vitriol? I mean, the posts the "we" have made have included insults, and also arguments that I'm just plain wrong - not merely that my assertion is unsupported.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: Capitalism, The Best Solution to Poverty
Naturally, it depends on the regulation. However, one type of deregulation that helps the poor is the elimination of occupational licensing requirements, because these do very little good and serve as a barrier to entry for low income folks. Different regulations eliminated will help.Brian Peacock wrote:However, what you have done is present a consistent case for broad and deep market deregulation. How do deregulated markets enable Capitalism to be more effective at alleviating poverty?Forty Two wrote:Well, it's not exactly as clear as that. You say that "nobody has argued that capitalism is not the best solution for poverty," but is that the impression you get from the responses to my post averring that capitalism is the best solution to poverty? For some reason, my unwillingness to admit that I've been proven wrong on that point has elicited quite a lot of anger and vitriol directed my way. For a thread where not a single person has disagreed with the thesis presented, there certainly are a lot of posts telling me how wrong I am about something.Hermit wrote:Yes. With the possible exception of rEvolutionist who seems to argue that the welfare state is not capitalism, we all made that point at some stage or another. Apart from that possible exception nobody has argued that capitalism is not the best solution for poverty.Brian Peacock wrote:Indeed. In my page-1 post I raised a similar point...
Brian Peacock wrote:...Market economics certainly generates fiscal resources - when those resources are shared around the livings standards of all are raised, and societies become more stable, peaceful and ordered, better educated, more productive and innovative, healthier, infant mortality falls and population growth levels off as a consequence. Given that capitalism is the dominant economic system I guess the questions is, how many dyed-in-the-wool ideological capitalists are interested in raising the living standards of society as a whole - as opposed to simply securing assets for their exclusive use - and what structural influence can we bring to bear in order to ensure that the system works for all those who have little or no choice about taking part in it?
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
- JimC
- The sentimental bloke
- Posts: 73015
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
- About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Capitalism, The Best Solution to Poverty
There are always going to be some assets, lands, whatever that are privately owned, and some that are collectively owned and managed by a state. Some things, like agricultural land, factories (industry in general) and retailers that most accept as privately owned, and others, such as national parks, defence forces, public parks etc. that most would accept as sensibly owned and run collectively. Then there are other entities, such as some public utilities and infrastructure that attract a lot of dispute as to the best way for them to be owned and managed. Running across this is the need for rational and effective regimes of government regulation, no matter who owns the entities, for public safety, environmental protection and suppression of corrupt dealings and oppression. Each society has to find the balance that works for them...
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!
And my gin!
- Brian Peacock
- Tipping cows since 1946
- Posts: 37953
- Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
- About me: Ablate me:
- Location: Location: Location:
- Contact:
Re: Capitalism, The Best Solution to Poverty
Such as the occupational licensing requirements for doctors and nurses, pharmacists, accountants, the fitters of domestic heating systems, teachers, the disposers of toxic waste, lawyers, etc?Forty Two wrote:Naturally, it depends on the regulation. However, one type of deregulation that helps the poor is the elimination of occupational licensing requirements, because these do very little good and serve as a barrier to entry for low income folks. Different regulations eliminated will help.Brian Peacock wrote:....
However, what you have done is present a consistent case for broad and deep market deregulation. How do deregulated markets enable Capitalism to be more effective at alleviating poverty?
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.
.
"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."
Frank Zappa
"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.
Details on how to do that can be found here.
.
"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."
Frank Zappa
"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
- Hermit
- Posts: 25806
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
- About me: Cantankerous grump
- Location: Ignore lithpt
- Contact:
Re: Capitalism, The Best Solution to Poverty
You've asked that question already just yesterday. I answered it here.Forty Two wrote:Regardless, according to Hermit, nobody has argued that capitalism is not the best solution to poverty. So, if nobody has argued that, then why all the vitriol?
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
- JimC
- The sentimental bloke
- Posts: 73015
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
- About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Capitalism, The Best Solution to Poverty
Double negatives are just so fucking messy...Forty Two wrote:
Regardless, according to Hermit, nobody has argued that capitalism is not the best solution to poverty.
Your argument is ridiculously simplistic - that capitalism is the answer to poverty, full stop, no other complications to be considered. And the main supporting argument is either about the bad things that happened under authoritarian Marxist rule (which does not simply equate to the absence of capitalism), or comparing wealthy first world nations that have benefitted from a host of historical and technological factors other than having a particular economic model with the rest of the world (where ironically, it is often rampant uber-capitalism is the true cause of their horrific poverty).
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!
And my gin!
- Seabass
- Posts: 7339
- Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:32 pm
- About me: Pluviophile
- Location: Covidiocracy
- Contact:
Re: Capitalism, The Best Solution to Poverty
Yes. The thing is, I think he misses the point deliberately, then tosses out a straw man so he doesn't have to concede anything. Then he wonders, probably disingenuously, "why all the vitriol?" It's one of the most annoying things I've ever encountered on the internet.pErvinalia wrote:It, like a number of other points that you've missed in his post, do have plenty to do with your contention that capitalism is the best solution. What you aren't getting is that a lot of our advances aren't specific to capitalism or even related to any economic system. That's the point he is trying to make to you.Forty Two wrote:None of that has anything to do with capitalism being the best solution to poverty.Seabass wrote: Nevermind workers unions that provide a counterbalance to corporate power so that workers might take home decent pay and work in decent conditions.
Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." —Voltaire
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka
- pErvinalia
- On the good stuff
- Posts: 59295
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
- About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
- Location: dystopia
- Contact:
Re: Capitalism, The Best Solution to Poverty
Exactly.
It's inconceivable that he can't understand why we are all so infuriated with him. We've all been trying to argue for nuance, and he's been consistently trotting out a false dichotomy.
It's inconceivable that he can't understand why we are all so infuriated with him. We've all been trying to argue for nuance, and he's been consistently trotting out a false dichotomy.
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Woodbutcher and 29 guests