History and Politics

[Sultan Eren]

I'd disagree. There's more equal opportunity here than most other countries I've been to. I'm not saying it's perfect, just that it's enough. The issue with the girl is that she...didn't have to bang some guy and get pregnant. That was a choice. One whose consequences are covered remarkably well by society in this state, and I assume it's the same in California, though I could be wrong.

Over here, as long as you did reasonably well in high school, you can pretty much get enough financial aid to cover a bachelor's degree. If you chose to work full time while getting your education, you'd get started on saving to pay off your student loans later. If you're latino, you'd get access to more, and there are several other financial avenues for every race and cultural niche, if you look for it hard enough.

Your upbringing is only as easy as you make it out to be.

I grew up elsewhere, as you know, and comparatively speaking, this is the land of opportunity.

There's so goddamn much of it.

I disagree. There're 99 bad examples and 1 good example. You keep saying that you can be that 1 if you work hard enough. If you want a world peace, no men died of hunger, real opportunity equality, then you should design a system which everyone can win.

There's no choice for a poor nigga who born in ghetto. No chance to study no chance to earn a lot of money. People should start equal if you want them opportunities to be equal.

Bunch of workers work for their capitalist, in the end boss wins millions doing nothing. He just financed money. But what? Who did the job? Why they did not win millions? Because their bosses gave them their salary. And that's enough for them. You are being lorded, you keep being lorded if you do not change your mind. You are good now, you living good so capitalism seems just fine but i advice you to think deeper, Kalam.

[Kalam]

I disagree. There're 99 bad examples and 1 good example. You keep saying that you can be that 1 if you work hard enough. If you want a world peace, no men died of hunger, real opportunity equality, then you should design a system which everyone can win.

There's no choice for a poor nigga who born in ghetto. No chance to study no chance to earn a lot of money. People should start equal if you want them opportunities to be equal.

Bunch of workers work for their capitalist, in the end boss wins millions doing nothing. He just financed money. But what? Who did the job? Why they did not win millions? Because their bosses gave them their salary. And that's enough for them. You are being lorded, you keep being lorded if you do not change your mind. You are good now, you living good so capitalism seems just fine but i advice you to think deeper, Kalam.

I've had good times and bad times, like everyone else. Times when hunger was a factor, and times, like now, where I eat as much as I want and have whatever I want.

It just so happens that my wants aren't the same as others wants, and so I'm satisfied.

The fact is, this isn't black vs. white. It's not capitalism vs. communism. We aren't in the fifties. You, above all people- as an economics major, should know that.

I mean, just look at them. Most systems are a mix of socialism and capitalism, because, as in any system (whether it's marriage, vanilla vs. chocolate, or economics), a compromise is often the best route to finding something that works.

[Sultan Eren]

As long as imperialism contunies, mixing systems do not work globally. Yeah we may need something like that, we can discuss and find the right way. But first that evil capitalism should go to where it belongs, hell! Maybe we can limit the private property instead of removing it.

We aren't in fifties, right. Capitalism won and it's getting more disgusting day by day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btQKGvVRnZ8

[bredeus]

As long as imperialism contunies, mixing systems do not work globally. Yeah we may need something like that, we can discuss and find the right way. But first that evil capitalism should go to where it belongs, hell! Maybe we can limit the private property instead of removing it.

We aren't in fifties, right. Capitalism won and it's getting more disgusting day by day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btQKGvVRnZ8

Seems like the lucky ones lives in hell. Point me at least one country where so called communism/socialism/[fair and just system name] really works?

[Alex_C]

As long as imperialism contunies, mixing systems do not work globally. Yeah we may need something like that, we can discuss and find the right way. But first that evil capitalism should go to where it belongs, hell! Maybe we can limit the private property instead of removing it.

We aren't in fifties, right. Capitalism won and it's getting more disgusting day by day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btQKGvVRnZ8

You know the solution right?

Raise an army of like-minded individuals; falsely frame the government for some disaster (series of famines generally works, just make sure there's a way to link said famines back to government policy); use said army to blow some crap up, then leave some clues around linking said army to a more political, intellectual and peaceful organisation which you have also set up, when the government clamps down on said peaceful organisation, set some protest marches, appeals, ad campaigns etc. etc. up; a relatively large amount of the populace should now be on-side; blow some more shit up; storm some important building with your army of zealots behind you and take over. 

[Templar_Ratigan]

I think we should all be part of a big controlling state, all countries combined, where our rich overlords can rule over us fairly.

People clearly cant think for themselves and they need to be controlled.

[Fluffy_Muffin]

Seems like the lucky ones lives in hell. Point me at least one country where so called communism/socialism/[fair and just system name] really works?

Communism/socialism as systems work fine on paper, the human factor always fucks it all up.

Untill we somehow solve the issue of food/resources/housing etc etc there can never be a good system because greed/envy or some other very human reason will fuck it all up.

We want. Eliminating the "we want" and replacing it with "we have" would create the perfect society.

The problem is that people always want something, its a blessing and a curse, it is what drives us forward, wanting knowledge, power, wanting to explore. And it is what will ultimately destroy us as a society. Thats just the way it is and i dont see it changing any time soon.

[Casimir]

I love lamp

[Shaehl]

The problem isn't capitalism or free markets. Hell, we've never had the later and as for the former, only barely. To the OP, you seem to be under the assumption that wealth is finite. It isn't. True, there may be a finite amount of wealth in existence at any given time, but there is no ceiling on potential wealth.

It can be created through sacrifice (i.e. a man forgoing a meal every other day to save for a bike), and through ingenuity (someone inventing a more efficient means of producing something--the cost is the same or less, but production is greater). When left to their own devices, sans government (or religion, or any other polity) imposition forcing a certain way of life, humans in general are upwardly mobile. People can and do make short term sacrifices to improve their station in the long run--it's essentially what happened with every minority group in the US (albeit to a lesser extent with the African American population, but that's due to what was a concerted effort to marginalize and manipulate them post-slavery. It is only when the government interferes and whittles away at your savings and the produce of your labor through wealth consolidation tactics such as inflation and taxation, or through manipulative and biased regulation and legislation, that upward mobility ceases to be an option for the average down-and-out.

And that is not to say that Government, or Religion, or Megacorps are inherently evil. It's just that they are monopolies. A monopoly of force, a monopoly of thought, and a monopoly of trade. And as with any monopoly, they are prone to corruption. Capitalism is no different. Or communism for that matter (although I would say the major downfall of communism is that all three monopolies are contained within one political entity--the State). Right now, the U.S. and the Capitalist world in general are corrupt. But that just means we have to be a little more vigilant in stamping that corruption out and paying heed that it doesn't crop up again thereafter.

There will always be corruption, no matter what monopolies we choose to replace the ones we have now. And it is the eternal duty of mankind to stand watch against it. For a world without corruption can only be to things: a fairy tale or a nightmare. The first is fiction, the second is science fiction.

[Thucydides]

The problem with society is the scarcity of resources, it is what drives ambitions as ownership of said resources bestows power to the owner. Until scarcity is eliminated, we will always see inequity in our society, even in a "perfect" communist society.

We need to eliminate the ideology of "keeping up with the jones" and focus on core issue of true happiness, thats the only way a perfect society can be obtained. Our obsession with materials is what is wrong with economic theory, it doesn't factor in intangibles like happiness. A poor african parent of 4 can be happy knowing that they have a community of friends and family while having just enough to eat. While a rich white divorcee could be unhappy with all the materials in the world.  It is this obsession with wealth that has led to marxism, and it's subsequent failures at the hands of ambitious dictators. Marxism, by relying on a select group of men to distribute resource evenly for all citizens, allowed power to concentrate on too small a group. What naturally occurs when power is localized is that oligarchies form, with a few powerful men exploiting the many peasants while operating under the illusion of "equality".

There is no silver bullet for a perfect society, it requires a complete restructuring of the psychological makeup of each individual in a society, not to mention the elimination of scarcity. This leads me to conclude that a utopia is a pipe dream as long as resources are relatively finite.

Capitalism addresses the issue of scarcity in the best and most efficient form possible given to us. Much of the poverty  we see is due to the community's mentality (or lack of community in general), or an oppressive or corrupt government providing monopolies to private corporations for kickbacks.

[Beauchamp]

aye as said above - the basic problem is in each individual, the system is only what follows. imagine everybody non greedy, noncorrupt, community like, reasonable, responsible, not lazy - such people would not need any system to create successful society. they could as well live very well in anarchy, communism or  capitalism...

but i'm permanent optimist, i think humankind develops really quickly and in less than 2000 years we might be like half way to this goal (if we don't destroy ourselves before as technical evolution by far outspeeds the cultural one).

[Soldier_of_God]

It may not come to anyone as a surprise when i say this, but life is one big rat race as it stands; everyone looks out for themselves, and people in their isolated worlds, and fail to look to the needs of people they don't know that really need it.

Goverment is a system designed to give freedom by taking it, much in the same way someone joins the military to destroy opposition to their country's freedom, but in turn losing some of their own by being forced to serve a term. "Freedom isn't Free"

we as people live on pin needles and walk on eggshells with the unstable economy and the putrid political climate that makes peace only talk, and war a very distinct possibility; anarchy gains an increasingly stronger foothold, and ideals turn underfoot to what essentially is survival.

we hang in a very delicate balance, unlike any previously disclosed time before it; we are running out of room and resources, and everyone is slowely but surely realising that the world will end soon.

there will be no george jetson briefcase cars, or transponders that turn energy into food; there will be no more oil to run cars to fuel the economic growth; there will be no endless supply of fuel alternatives, or food alternatives...

if the end of the world does not happen by 2012, i guarantee it will by 2112.

BTW, i dont mean to sound so depressing, but if we don't figure something out, this is where we are heading

[ArchonAlarion]

Free trade is not zero-sum. If you willingly enter into an exchange with someone, then you are trading something of less value to you for something of more value. The other party is doing the same.

There is no objective value. Some things like drinking water are popular values, but that is incidental, not some inherent factor of the universe. It could change with technology, for example. All value is subjective and best decided by the individual, not by a self-appointed "caretaker".

So no, pure capitalism is not "win-lose". The injustice you see today is from the remnants of old power structures that parasitically subsist off of the products of free market exchange.

[Siiem]

Free trade is not zero-sum. If you willingly enter into an exchange with someone, then you are trading something of less value to you for something of more value. The other party is doing the same.

There is no objective value. Some things like drinking water are popular values, but that is incidental, not some inherent factor of the universe. It could change with technology, for example. All value is subjective and best decided by the individual, not by a self-appointed "caretaker".

So no, pure capitalism is not "win-lose". The injustice you see today is from the remnants of old power structures that parasitically subsist off of the products of free market exchange.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[ArchonAlarion]

visitors can't see pics , please register or login