Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
televator said:blah blah capitalism is bad (no I don't have an actual argument) blah blah
Ilikemustard said:televator said:blah blah capitalism is bad (no I don't have an actual argument) blah blah
Urgh.
televator said:I can't really say either way weather or not this is poised at becoming a dominant form of consuming, but I do see a clear and dominating road block... our established form of 'hyper consumption" driven by our currently run away capitalism.
Ilikemustard said:**Visceral reaction to a comment that is critical of the current state of capitalism.**
lrkun said:televator said:I can't really say either way weather or not this is poised at becoming a dominant form of consuming, but I do see a clear and dominating road block... our established form of 'hyper consumption" driven by our currently run away capitalism.
Rachel talked about that run away capitalism and talked about a solution in the video. It's the topic.
Gnomesmusher said:You're new here but how about not altering people's quotes and then saying nothing? What you're doing is trolling.
Ok, here.televator said:How about you read carefully and tell me where I said capitalism is inherently bad. :lol:
What you're saying implies that capitalism has gotten out of control due to lack of regulation or some such.our established form of 'hyper consumption" driven by our currently run away capitalism
You're conflating a type of capitalism, free-market capitalism, with capitalism in general. Free markets may be your preferred form of capitalism but it is not the only type around.Ilikemustard said:What you're saying implies that capitalism has gotten out of control due to lack of regulation or some such.
Regulating capitalism is kind of paradoxical, as it contradicts what capitalism actually promotes: A free market without controls.
Ilikemustard said:Ok, here.televator said:How about you read carefully and tell me where I said capitalism is inherently bad. :lol:
What you're saying implies that capitalism has gotten out of control due to lack of regulation or some such.our established form of 'hyper consumption" driven by our currently run away capitalism
Regulating capitalism is kind of paradoxical, as it contradicts what capitalism actually promotes: A free market without controls. When you impose controls on a free market it transforms into some form of corporatism, such as what you have in the USA at the moment. So you're saying capitalism cannot work without more regulation, thus you're also saying that the core principles of capitalism are inherently bad.
lrkun said:Isn't he trying to say that barter is limited because of our current system? Where what the video suggests is that it will work as an alternative and maybe reputation is a good way to ensure that you'll get your goods?
What type of capitalism isn't for a free market?Aught3 said:You're conflating a type of capitalism, free-market capitalism, with capitalism in general. Free markets may be your preferred form of capitalism but it is not the only type around.
Oh, so in an uncontrolled system corporations can lobby the state for controls to destroy competition? And this makes sense to you?televator said:Plus, "corporatism" is inevitable by an uncontrolled system
Once again this makes zero sense.televator said:It isn't the regulation that begot corporatism in the US
Regulations are what allow corporations to have "pull" in the first place. If a state declares it will not intervene in the market, how can corporations manipulate it in their favour?televator said:Just because other countries may lack the regulations all together, doesn't mean corporations somehow lack pull within their governments
The US market was far more free during the 19th and early 20th century than it is now... Graph of Federal Register Pages:televator said:In fact, that's a pretty backwards way to think about it..... Regulations were in place before corporations started misbehaving?
State capitalism, corporate capitalism, a social market set-up, etc, etc.Ilikemustard said:What type of capitalism isn't for a free market?
Ilikemustard said:Oh, so in an uncontrolled system corporations can lobby the state for controls to destroy competition? And this makes sense to you?
Ilikemustard said:Once again this makes zero sense.
Ilikemustard said:Regulations are what allow corporations to have "pull" in the first place. If a state declares it will not intervene in the market, how can corporations manipulate it in their favour?
Ilikemustard said:The US market was far more free during the 19th and early 20th century than it is now... Graph of Federal Register Pages:
Oh, so how does a corporation manipulate the state in their favour without state intervention in the market? Please explain.televator said:You're naive to think "lobbying" is the only means a corporation has to sway governments. Whether there's a proper channel or not is irrelevant. At some point it is lucrative for business to mingle with government.
No, why?televator said:Do you need a dictionary?
You're not explaining anything. The market will come to them... How? Cut what corners in pursuit of profit?televator said:The "market" will come to them. All the while, they have all the freedom to cut every corner in pursuit of profit.
televator said:......and none of that freedom made them anymore beneficial or productive toward human health standards, living wages, and ethical treatment of laborers. Regulation started for a reason.
Ilikemustard said:Oh, so how does a corporation manipulate the state in their favour without state intervention in the market? Please explain.
Ilikemustard said:You're not explaining anything. The market will come to them... How? Cut what corners in pursuit of profit?
Again, you are greatly conflating things. You assume as though markets have always been "free" and that "free" market is the only way to attain a high standard of living for the West. Let alone, you've also offered no tangible proof of that assertion.Ilikemustard said:If you'll excuse me, but free trade is what made the west the economic superpower it is today. It brought about the industrial boom, increasing the wealth of its citizens well above anything they had ever experienced before, thereby increasing their standard of living well above anything they had ever experienced before.
Exactly what is your source for free trade not being beneficial toward health standards and wages? Why don't you take a look at history, and go back just a few centuries before free trade was openly practiced, when peasant farmers were living in poverty under feudalism.
lrkun said:I'm all for your discussion, but please include the idea from the video. I mean that's why I shared it with you guys because I find it neat.
Well the US, for example, has traditionally run a protectionist economy. By keeping their industries isolated from outside competition they were able to become an economic superpower. Only after the US became a dominant market force did the rhetoric about how great free trade was start. It does make me suspicious that free trade with the US would only be good for the US, not for anybody else.Ilikemustard said:If you'll excuse me, but free trade is what made the west the economic superpower it is today. It brought about the industrial boom, increasing the wealth of its citizens well above anything they had ever experienced before, thereby increasing their standard of living well above anything they had ever experienced before.
So your entire argument here rests on the assumption that citizations in Latin America have less access to water? So your entire argument will crumble if I prove otherwise?televator said:The privatization of water in Latin America. Multinational agricultural businesses have a high demand for water. Along with global banks, they've been attempting to usurp local governments and push policies that give them ownership of fresh water resources.
By redirecting priority over water to themselves, it goes without saying that it leaves a lot of people without water.
Are you against the drug war? If so, why? Is it because you don't like the state telling people what they can do with their own body? Do you dislike it when the state tries to protect people from themselves?televator said:The meat packing industry's unconcern for healthy meat packing practices before Theodore Roosevelt
Actually I said the exact opposite. Markets became more free and as a result the west experienced an economic boom.televator said:You assume as though markets have always been "free"
Yeah, pretty much. Would you like to go join Mao and his communist buddies, and experience a famine that killed around 40,000,000 people?televator said:"free" market is the only way to attain a high standard of living for the West