Capitalism Has Failed

[Hunny]

I've been telling you for some time that the rich people
- and the politicians who make laws to help them with their avarice -
have ruined our society. This video explains it nicely and perhaps
carries more weight as authoritative than just the word of someone
 on the internet. Check it out. It's worth the time.

[Hunny]

ALL because businesses don't want to pay their employees a living wage.
They'd rather have slave labor, or as close as they can get to it!
They cry poverty, while socking away literally TRILLIONS of dollars, and
bribing lawmakers to exempt them from taxation so they can take even more from us that way.

ALL this economic wreckage - all this misery in the lives of millions of people - where there was once a great country; ALL because of the greed of people who have so obscenely much, and for whom we create that wealth after all, and they don't want to pay us.

To rob people, and then to blame them as if their poverty is their own fault.
To lobby our government to keep the minimum wage so low people who work full time
cant afford to live indoors. To sell the people's jobs, and then take their houses too, so
they can be penniless and homeless having done nothing to deserve that fate but get robbed. Sickening.

[Hunny]

What the video leaves out, about the failure of capitalism is that during this same period of time we've gone from being an economy where companies would make products BETTER in order to gain and keep customers, to a "monopoly economy" where there's no competition for companies to worry about anymore, so their emphasis has shifted to the opposite: to make products WORSE in order to extract the maximum profit and maintain their stranglehold on preventing competition.

By this we have become more like a communist economy now than anything. No competition. An attitude of "where else you going to go?" Worsening quality, rising gouging prices.

When I say they've wrecked our country, I'm not kidding around!

[DAS (formerly BushAdmirer)]

This video is pure fantasy. Capitalism is arguably mankind's single greatest invention. We depend on corporations and businesses for our food, clothing, housing, transportation, defense, technology, and much much more. These companies are not the enemy. The standard of living in America, and worldwide, has risen rather dramatically during the past century. Without Capitalism, we're back to living in caves and warring tribes.

It is not about classes, and especially class warfare. The successful people are not the same people all the time. There is a great turnover and change amongst the population of wealthy (successful) people. Capitalism is all about individual opportunity to achieve success based on one's ability, effort, intelligence, and achievement.

Someone who takes a job as a factory worker should not be surprised when they learn that successful entrepreneurs have more wealth than they do. Those entrepreneurs took risks, most of them sought out a higher education, etc. People are in a particular class because that's what they signed up for.

[Deleted]

If capi8=talism really was all about taking risks and merit it would have a lot more going for it.

but because of an accident of birth someone has a rich dad and someone else doens' tnad yet they don't and can't have the same opportunities in life.

i don';t thinko free enterrpsies is a bad system but capitalism is all about controls, cartels, monopolies and exploitation which is just plain wrong.

for what it's worth a lot of countries that were once communists are worse off now even thougha small minority are better off

[Hunny]

Jun 29, 2013 0:34:45 GMT DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) said:

This video is pure fantasy. Capitalism is arguably mankind's single greatest invention. We depend on corporations and businesses for our food, clothing, housing, transportation, defense, technology, and much much more. These companies are not the enemy. The standard of living in America, and worldwide, has risen rather dramatically during the past century. Without Capitalism, we're back to living in caves and warring tribes.

It is not about classes, and especially class warfare. The successful people are not the same people all the time. There is a great turnover and change amongst the population of wealthy (successful) people. Capitalism is all about individual opportunity to achieve success based on one's ability, effort, intelligence, and achievement.

Someone who takes a job as a factory worker should not be surprised when they learn that successful entrepreneurs have more wealth than they do. Those entrepreneurs took risks, most of them sought out a higher education, etc. People are in a particular class because that's what they signed up for.

How could you try claiming that the video is fantasy?
The minimum wage has been driven so low that people who work full time cant afford to live indoors.
The jobs that once gave millions of Americans a life have been sold. Why? Because rich people would
prefer to have slave labor than pay their employees FAIR COMPENSATION FOR THEIR EFFORTS (as evidenced by the jobs having moved all to countries where said rich folk could get away with paying their workers obscenely low wages such as 80 cents a day!). The result of taking Americans' pay away is they cant afford to buy anything, so the economy is in the tank INESCAPABLY. Meanwhile the rich turn to the president who tells them it is only fair they pay SOME of their share of taxes, and say "No, WE don't want to pay ANY taxes. Let America sink!" And they make crappy products with no guarantee  and gouging prices now, rather than how they used to make products better and cheaper to gain customers, because they've managed to institute a MONOPOLY ECONOMY (which works not too differently to how a communist economy works, or doesnt work).

ALL this has happened, we're sitting square in the middle of it, it can't possibly be denied.

So I don't know why you would be motivated to try and trick anyone into thinking the video was bunk, just because someone SAID so. But I suspect you have lots of money, you have employees yourself, and as evidenced by the latter part of your comment, you dont feel they deserve to earn a living wage for working an honest job all week. You think it's ok to underpay them and PRETEND there's no homeless people, and empty houses and empty businesses, AND DEBT - ALL because of employees being underpayed so they cant afford to pay for things anymore.

In short, rich folks have taken all the money, taken all the ABILITY for America to make any money, told the government to piss off when asked where their share of taxes is, caused us to be in debt so bad that this man is comparing us to Greece, saying we will be next.

This is a horrific situation. And it must be nice to be INSULATED FROM IT BY WEALTH, but most of us have to live in reality, and reality of America right now, is what Republicans do hurts us all very badly, and we no longer have a bright promise ahead at all.

You know, I've recently realized (from thinking about our discussion of what members want at this board, which by the way you did a great job of commenting on for us) that my habit of not answering people back when they tell me I'm wrong is exactly the wrong thing to do at a discussion board, if i want there to be discussion!!!

Well, so here I did what i dont usually do and told you "no, you're wrong" back, lol

I want to consider more fully the economy, so I watched the following videos. I know perhaps no one will watch them. They're long, but well, to me anyway, listening to a professor lecture is enjoyable. And I got a full but awful picture from it of what is going on in the world with this recession everyone's having.

Essentially it says that because the rich people 1) don't wish to pay employees and 2) dont wish to pay taxes (talk about avarice), we owe money. Everyone had to borrow to keep their lives going once real wages started going down instead of up. And the government has had to borrow because the rich bribed it not to charge them taxes, while simultaneously expecting it to do costly things for them. So all this debt we're in IS ENTIRELY BECAUSE OF RICH PEOPLE'S GREED.

Surely, there must be a point where what is moral for a society to do must be considered.

But sadly i think morality got shot and killed in the 60's (ie, the kennedies, the democrat agenda). And I'll stop short of saying who (The Fed) would have had an interest in doing that, and who (the republicans, the rich people) would have stood to benefit by KILLING HOPE AND GOODNESS.

No morals. Rich people have zero morals, and they've taken ALL the money, and we are in the sh*tter from it.

And it doesn't satisfy me to say - or hear someone say, in defense -  that old canard about how those who start businesses do it right, and those who are workers, TOUGH NUTS, it's their own fault.

The truth is people who work do it EXACTLY right, and the rich fleece them and make unconscionable excuses to themselves why it was ok and that the bad results don't actually exist.

I thought this one said something worth being angry about too:

iamjumbo synonym

[mikemarshall]

As the poet Matthew Mead once remarked

'good for us; bad for General Motors'

and whatever happened to General Motors?

[DAS (formerly BushAdmirer)]

Hunny - None of that lines up with my own personal experiences. The idea that employers seek to export workers and are greedy just doesn't wash.

On the contrary, the more successful employers seek to attract the best workers and retain them for the long haul. They do that by treating them well, providing opportunities for advancement, rewarding good performance, etc. A mean spirited, exploitive boss would simply drive off workers. Companies compete to hire and retain the best workers.

I can only think of a few scenarios where low labor cost is the pivotal factor for success of the business. That's usually when you have a labor intensive operation like picking tomatoes, and a workforce that is inherently transient and unskilled.

When it comes to jobs going overseas, most of the time that's something that's forced upon employers rather than something they want to do. For example, America once had the world's foremost merchant shipping industry. American flagged ships, with American crews sailed the oceans far and wide. Shipbuilding is regulated by the US Coast Guard (USCG). After problems with Liberty Ships splitting in half, and the sinking of the Titanic due to compartments being breached by seawater flowing through the air conditioning vents, the USCG started issuing more and more safety regulations pertaining to ship building and ship operations. Pretty soon it cost almost twice as much to construct a ship in an American shipyard that would meet the new regulations. Ships had to be loaded up with safety equipment, lifeboats, etc. and frequent drills were mandated requiring more manpower onboard. Meanwhile, militant labor unions were given a green light by Congress, which passed laws implementing the closed shop and giving other advantages to the unions. Pretty soon it just wasn't possible to be competitive if you built your ships in America, hired unionized and militant American crews, and followed onerous USCG regulations. The result was inevitable. Those ships are now built in China and Scandinavia, they're crewed by foreigners, and they fly foreign flags. The once proud American Merchant Marine is practically non existent. All the 'do-gooders' meant well. They wanted to enhance safety, improve working conditions and compensation for the crews, etc. They just made it impossible for the shipping companies to compete against worldwide competition.

[Deleted]

The thing is most big US manufacturers like Mcdonnlela douglas, Bpoeing and so on only kept going so long because they were basically welfare bums 0 reluying on contracts from thye go9vermentm

when the gov had to start trying to cut its bloated spending these corporate welfare bums couldn';t hacki it

and if you rely on slave labour or little better like they do in china and alots of other places you can't compete if you;re ac vilised democrcry

[Hunny]

Jun 30, 2013 17:45:46 GMT DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) said:

Hunny - None of that lines up with my own personal experiences. The idea that employers seek to export workers and are greedy just doesn't wash.

On the contrary, the more successful employers seek to attract the best workers and retain them for the long haul. They do that by treating them well, providing opportunities for advancement, rewarding good performance, etc. A mean spirited, exploitive boss would simply drive off workers. Companies compete to hire and retain the best workers.

I can only think of a few scenarios where low labor cost is the pivotal factor for success of the business. That's usually when you have a labor intensive operation like picking tomatoes, and a workforce that is inherently transient and unskilled.

When it comes to jobs going overseas, most of the time that's something that's forced upon employers rather than something they want to do. For example, America once had the world's foremost merchant shipping industry. American flagged ships, with American crews sailed the oceans far and wide. Shipbuilding is regulated by the US Coast Guard (USCG). After problems with Liberty Ships splitting in half, and the sinking of the Titanic due to compartments being breached by seawater flowing through the air conditioning vents, the USCG started issuing more and more safety regulations pertaining to ship building and ship operations. Pretty soon it cost almost twice as much to construct a ship in an American shipyard that would meet the new regulations. Ships had to be loaded up with safety equipment, lifeboats, etc. and frequent drills were mandated requiring more manpower onboard. Meanwhile, militant labor unions were given a green light by Congress, which passed laws implementing the closed shop and giving other advantages to the unions. Pretty soon it just wasn't possible to be competitive if you built your ships in America, hired unionized and militant American crews, and followed onerous USCG regulations. The result was inevitable. Those ships are now built in China and Scandinavia, they're crewed by foreigners, and they fly foreign flags. The once proud American Merchant Marine is practically non existent. All the 'do-gooders' meant well. They wanted to enhance safety, improve working conditions and compensation for the crews, etc. They just made it impossible for the shipping companies to compete against worldwide competition.

In the 90's, an enormous amount of jobs went to Indian Call Centers and Mexican and Chinese workers etc. Ross Perot referred to this mass exodus of jobs as "that giant sucking sound at the border".

The thing is we cant all be generals, there has to be mostly privates in order for that organization, for example, to work. Or as it used to be said, we cant all be chiefs... Point is most people are NOT business owners, they're not management, they're not scholars - nor can they be expected to be. MOST people are high school educated and no more, they're fit for being working class, and they used to have jobs that could pay to live in a house and raise kids, but when virtually all the factory jobs left and were replaced by either no job at all or one that pays 8 dollars an hour (who can live on that?), a lot of homelessness, joblessness and misery of every attendant type resulted(substance abuse, divorce, domestic violence, theft, etc)

I honestly think, being cocooned in the world of wealth (I've always assumed you are a business owner or management of some type), being insulated away from the much harsher reality most people have to face daily, it all seems fine to you, and you figure everyone had their opportunity and made choices. No. We're the Indians, we're the privates, we're the working class masses, and you business people callously decided to pay us only just a little more than a slave would get. And I have always been convinced that when businesses cry poverty due to employee costs and regulatory requirements, they're just blowing smoke because for example the guy who owns the Extra Mart chain could pay all those employees double the hourly rate they get now and he'd still be taking home millions per year himself. So what's his real problem with adequately compensating those people for what they provided for him? - I'm convinced that when businessmen cry "hardship" due to having to pay employees, all they really mean is they want to take home fifty million instead of twenty million this year. And that's not right at all.

[iamjumbo]

Jun 30, 2013 17:45:46 GMT DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) said:

Hunny - None of that lines up with my own personal experiences. The idea that employers seek to export workers and are greedy just doesn't wash.

On the contrary, the more successful employers seek to attract the best workers and retain them for the long haul. They do that by treating them well, providing opportunities for advancement, rewarding good performance, etc. A mean spirited, exploitive boss would simply drive off workers. Companies compete to hire and retain the best workers.

I can only think of a few scenarios where low labor cost is the pivotal factor for success of the business. That's usually when you have a labor intensive operation like picking tomatoes, and a workforce that is inherently transient and unskilled.

When it comes to jobs going overseas, most of the time that's something that's forced upon employers rather than something they want to do. For example, America once had the world's foremost merchant shipping industry. American flagged ships, with American crews sailed the oceans far and wide. Shipbuilding is regulated by the US Coast Guard (USCG). After problems with Liberty Ships splitting in half, and the sinking of the Titanic due to compartments being breached by seawater flowing through the air conditioning vents, the USCG started issuing more and more safety regulations pertaining to ship building and ship operations. Pretty soon it cost almost twice as much to construct a ship in an American shipyard that would meet the new regulations. Ships had to be loaded up with safety equipment, lifeboats, etc. and frequent drills were mandated requiring more manpower onboard. Meanwhile, militant labor unions were given a green light by Congress, which passed laws implementing the closed shop and giving other advantages to the unions. Pretty soon it just wasn't possible to be competitive if you built your ships in America, hired unionized and militant American crews, and followed onerous USCG regulations. The result was inevitable. Those ships are now built in China and Scandinavia, they're crewed by foreigners, and they fly foreign flags. The once proud American Merchant Marine is practically non existent. All the 'do-gooders' meant well. They wanted to enhance safety, improve working conditions and compensation for the crews, etc. They just made it impossible for the shipping companies to compete against worldwide competition.

so, according to you, ships should be just tossed together, and clowns who are crazy enough to go on kamikaze voyages be the only ones manning ships.
whodda thunk it?
if the government would put 100% tariffs on everything coming into the united states, as every intelligent person knows they should, american companies, and shippers, would have no problem competing with other countries. it would also prevent the greedy american corporations from moving anything overseas.
such a simple solution to the problem, but no one is intelligent enough to implement it

[iamjumbo]

Jun 29, 2013 0:34:45 GMT DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) said:

This video is pure fantasy. Capitalism is arguably mankind's single greatest invention. We depend on corporations and businesses for our food, clothing, housing, transportation, defense, technology, and much much more. These companies are not the enemy. The standard of living in America, and worldwide, has risen rather dramatically during the past century. Without Capitalism, we're back to living in caves and warring tribes.

It is not about classes, and especially class warfare. The successful people are not the same people all the time. There is a great turnover and change amongst the population of wealthy (successful) people. Capitalism is all about individual opportunity to achieve success based on one's ability, effort, intelligence, and achievement.

Someone who takes a job as a factory worker should not be surprised when they learn that successful entrepreneurs have more wealth than they do. Those entrepreneurs took risks, most of them sought out a higher education, etc. People are in a particular class because that's what they signed up for.

what a total crock of pure idiocy.
capitalism is a grand idea, but, unfortunately, capitalism is not practiced in america. it hasn't been since henry ford insisted on paying his employees a living wage.
capitalism is supposed to reward those who work hard. instead, it rewards ONLY those who sit on their dead asses and do the least. those who actually produce are given a meager pittance, while those who do absolutely nothing are given millions.
capitalism as practiced in this country has given us the economic crash that we are still trying to get out of. it is SOLELY the greed of the profiteers who caused the economic collapse, yet this garbage is still swindling the real people.
get a grip lad, your fantasy world has NO redeeming social value to it whatsoever

[♫anna♫]

Capitalism is simply a system of incentives! The more you produce and the more you organize the more you earn.

A plutocracy is a parasitical system that is often confused with capitalism! Plutocrats strive to control the money system then they work to control the country by replacing public opinion with their published opinion. They gradually take over the secret service of a country and finally strive for direct control.

[iamjumbo]

Jul 21, 2013 21:54:12 GMT ♫anna♫ said:

Capitalism is simply a system of incentives! The more you produce and the more you organize the more you earn.

A plutocracy is a parasitical system that is often confused with capitalism! Plutocrats strive to control the money system than they work to control the country by replacing public opinion with their published opinion. They gradually take over the secret service of a country and finally strive for direct control.

by your definition, there is no capitalism, especially in the united states. your definition of plutocracy is what we have, as perfectly illustrated by das' comments.

[♫anna♫]

Jul 22, 2013 18:00:41 GMT iamjumbo said:

Jul 21, 2013 21:54:12 GMT ♫anna♫ said:

Capitalism is simply a system of incentives! The more you produce and the more you organize the more you earn.

A plutocracy is a parasitical system that is often confused with capitalism! Plutocrats strive to control the money system than they work to control the country by replacing public opinion with their published opinion. They gradually take over the secret service of a country and finally strive for direct control.

by your definition, there is no capitalism, especially in the united states. your definition of plutocracy is what we have, as perfectly illustrated by das' comments.

Since the Federal Reserve Act was passed 100 years ago in 1913 the plutocrats have gained control of the US money system and determine how high or how low interest rates will be. They control the value of the dollar as well as inflation and deflation. The plutocrats don't want to provoke a revolution against them, until they have formed an army that will gun down Americans without hesitation, if ordered to do so. This goal hasn't been obtained yet.

There are many honest capitalist enterprises in the US. Sure the boss earns the most because he structured the company, factory or whatever. It was the bosses idea, initiative, etc.. There have been some flawed examples of capitalism, but it's nothing compared to the globalist plutocracy that is gaining more and more control of this country.

[iamjumbo]

There are many honest capitalist enterprises in the US. Sure the boss earns the most because he structured the company, factory or whatever. It was the bosses idea, initiative, etc.

THAT is capitalism. an individual, or a couple of individuals, begin a business, and work their asses off making it prosper. obviously, the boss is, and should, make the most money. no one can complain about that.

it is the perversion of capitalism that is the problem. there are virtually no ceos of large corporations who began the business. bill gates is about the only one that i can think of offhand. there are no ceos who worked their way up through the ranks to become ceo. the overwhelming majority of the get the job because they got a harvard mba.
they know absolutely NOTHING about the company. you have the imbecile who is proud of the fact that he has never set foot inside the manufacturing plant. the ceo can't even tell you what the corporation is selling, much less how it is made. yet, he is paid four hundred times as much for sitting on his dead ass, being nothing but a financial drain on the company, as those who actually do something constructive, and make a profit for the company.
THAT is what is wrong with america

[♫anna♫]

Jul 30, 2013 13:44:43 GMT iamjumbo said:

There are many honest capitalist enterprises in the US. Sure the boss earns the most because he structured the company, factory or whatever. It was the bosses idea, initiative, etc.

THAT is capitalism. an individual, or a couple of individuals, begin a business, and work their asses off making it prosper. obviously, the boss is, and should, make the most money. no one can complain about that.

it is the perversion of capitalism that is the problem. there are virtually no ceos of large corporations who began the business. bill gates is about the only one that i can think of offhand. there are no ceos who worked their way up through the ranks to become ceo. the overwhelming majority of the get the job because they got a harvard mba.
they know absolutely NOTHING about the company. you have the imbecile who is proud of the fact that he has never set foot inside the manufacturing plant. the ceo can't even tell you what the corporation is selling, much less how it is made. yet, he is paid four hundred times as much for sitting on his dead ass, being nothing but a financial drain on the company, as those who actually do something constructive, and make a profit for the company.
THAT is what is wrong with america

Dearest jumbo!
i certainly agree with you about these ceos! They often got a piece of paper from a university, but that doesn't prove they're assets!

The big problem with the US are the plutocrates running the federal reserve system. They just manipulate the economy and the rest of the nation to their own end and are accountable to no one!

The capitalists are much more of an asset than a liability!

[Big Lin]

It's the unaccountable shareholders who are the problem. In the old days (and still in most small businesses) the boss works and the workers work and he or she often earns LESS than his employees because he or she is trying to make the company work and feels a responsibility to his staff.

But shareholders are immoral parasites who are little better than pimps and who suck the life blood out of companies purely for their own enrichment and who contribute nothing.

[♫anna♫]

Aug 9, 2013 21:09:27 GMT Big Lin said:

It's the unaccountable shareholders who are the problem. In the old days (and still in most small businesses) the boss works and the workers work and he or she often earns LESS than his employees because he or she is trying to make the company work and feels a responsibility to his staff.

But shareholders are immoral parasites who are little better than pimps and who suck the life blood out of companies purely for their own enrichment and who contribute nothing.

Of course ordinary share holders can sell their stock if the value falls and buy where they think it'll rise!

The primary share holders are more ruthless than ordinary share holders, which could theoretically be me, you or any of our members.

I really don't know if primary share holders can just sell their holdings, if they are losing money. I don't especially trust them either! They do have a say in how the company operates!

[iamjumbo]

Aug 9, 2013 21:09:27 GMT Big Lin said:

It's the unaccountable shareholders who are the problem. In the old days (and still in most small businesses) the boss works and the workers work and he or she often earns LESS than his employees because he or she is trying to make the company work and feels a responsibility to his staff.

But shareholders are immoral parasites who are little better than pimps and who suck the life blood out of companies purely for their own enrichment and who contribute nothing.

and too many of them are just deadbeats who sit on their ass and do nothing but buy and sell stock, which certainly requires no intelligence