Can we stop blaming capitalism

[Pessimistic]

what do the dems etc have to do with capitalism?

the real cause of problem that we are facing with our economies today, is we raced too far ahead of the pack and globalisation or protectionism will peg us back. If we go protectionist, the pain will be massive. If we try and adapt to the new world, we will just have pain.

Either way, our medicine is coming and we need to learn to do more with less.



To me, this is not a negative rather a positive. We will have greater equality globally but the real trick is how we adopt socialist framework like social security and medicare globally. That said, that will be our grand kids problem and we just need to learn how to enjoy watching the rest of the world catch up to us.

Funny how we all take it when some numpty wrings his hands and says we all need to share the pain while in the sly he his expensing the crap out of the public purse

Pollie pedal everyone ? Marvellous. Appear like an ordinary battler while claiming as few thousand in expenses

 

[Power Raid]

Funny how we all take it when some numpty wrings his hands and says we all need to share the pain while in the sly he his expensing the crap out of the public purse

Pollie pedal everyone ? Marvellous. Appear like an ordinary battler while claiming as few thousand in expenses

you lost me. what do you mean?

are you talking about slipper or something similar?

 

[Pessimistic]

you lost me. what do you mean?

are you talking about slipper or something similar?

Dont think slipper told anyone to tighten their belt

You obviously realise I mean joe n tone

 

[Power Raid]

Dont think slipper told anyone to tighten their belt

You obviously realise I mean joe n tone

no I wasn't aware

thanks

 

[Power Raid]

Funny how we all take it when some numpty wrings his hands and says we all need to share the pain while in the sly he his expensing the crap out of the public purse

Pollie pedal everyone ? Marvellous. Appear like an ordinary battler while claiming as few thousand in expenses

I still haven't worked out the connection to capitalism. Can you explain?

 

[Pessimistic]

I still haven't worked out the connection to capitalism. Can you explain?

Your prediction that we should all accept "pain" in order for capitalism to work. Frankly its a crock. Capital holders prosper in recessions, even long for them

How about capitalism takes some pain

 

[Power Raid]

Your prediction that we should all accept "pain" in order for capitalism to work. Frankly its a crock. Capital holders prosper in recessions, even long for them

How about capitalism takes some pain

That is not my prediction in order for capitalism to work. That is my prediction for Australia's economy given the emergence of other economies and the spread of wealth across the globe rather than a concentration in the hands of white nations.

With globalisation we have seen the global economy grow which means the pie is bigger but we will also see how the pie is shared better globally. The immediate issue, that we are seeing and will continue to see through a transition period, is the wealth disparity between the rich and the poor.

The only thing that will bring back a balance is a global social welfare system (which could be administered centrally but more effectively if administered local). However, this is decades away and in the mean time we will continue to see pressure on our own systems. That is why I say, we will all feel a little pain. Fighting the system (ie protectionism and socialism) will only increase the pain long term.


oh and capitalism can't feel pain. It is a concept not an entity.

 

[Pessimistic]

So globalisation is really about twenty times more relevant as a concept than capitalism, socialism, feudalism, and all the others rolled together

I wonder what system the most influential country in the world today considers it runs under ?

 

[Pessimistic]

Also as you say, many countries alone cant fight the system as you say

Funnily enough australia is lucky enough to be able to do that, or at least has a fighting chance. Some other countries would think we were mad not to at least try to do that

 

[Power Raid]

So globalisation is really about twenty times more relevant as a concept than capitalism, socialism, feudalism, and all the others rolled together

I wonder what system the most influential country in the world today considers it runs under ?

yep

globalisation is simply a merger of the many and varied economies globally into one. The new global system is immature with no global social welfare, very immature rules governing trade, tax etc. This will eat away at some of the important fabric that make Europe, Canada and Australia great.

However, global co-operation between states will see the emergence of standards, laws and regulations over time and re-establish great welfare concepts. In the mean time, I do believe we will be forced to adapt or face even tougher conditions.

This new system will lead to a better outcome for all citizens of the globe but we probably won't be on the planet to see the finished product as it will take time.

 

[Pessimistic]

yep

globalisation is simply a merger of the many and varied economies globally into one. The new global system is immature with no global social welfare, very immature rules governing trade, tax etc. This will eat away at some of the important fabric that make Europe, Canada and Australia great.

However, global co-operation between states will see the emergence of standards, laws and regulations over time and re-establish great welfare concepts. In the mean time, I do believe we will be forced to adapt or face even tougher conditions.

This new system will lead to a better outcome for all citizens of the globe but we probably won't be on the planet to see the finished product as it will take time.

Plus theres the bottom up influence of the internet

 

[Power Raid]

Plus theres the bottom up influence of the internet

??? I am not sure of the reference but, do you think that will be able to influence Pakistan, Zambia and Niger into rolling out social welfare?

Personally, I can't see that happening until globalisation brings wealth to their nations.

 

[Pessimistic]

??? I am not sure of the reference but, do you think that will be able to influence Pakistan, Zambia and Niger into rolling out social welfare?

Personally, I can't see that happening until globalisation brings wealth to their nations.

I cbf reading it, but didnt marx predict the break down of nations ? Said something like state communism was just a stage on the journey.

I wonder if he anticipated the internet bringing about the said break down ?

 

[Malifice]

Big Business are at heart lefties who push for more and more regulation which impedes competition, as it gives them an advantage of scale.

Just as Adam Smith predicted would happen.

Thats why he supported government regulation of 'free' markets.

 

[Tas]

There is nothing wrong with Capitalism, it is like blaming the gun for murders and not the people who shoot other people.

An economic system is complex, like a machine, and it needs to be structured to suit the social and moral demands of the people. There is no doctrine in Capitalism that says you must have an insanely lopsided distribution of wealth.

What we have is a breakdown in terms of the balance between the economic system, political system and the broader social system in place, there is too much overlap and it leads to distortions in the systems.

For example, constitution overrides laws, laws override the desires of individuals to act in any manner they deem fit. We have not imprinted the desires of the social group adequately into either our constitution or the legal system which has allowed certain freedoms of moral restraint to occur within the economic system.

Capitalism would still work even if you mandated different property rights or enforced constraints on the distribution of wealth. What we lack is leadership in terms of looking to improve the existing system, so we allow those who have chronic psychological disorders (immoral greed is problematic as many other institutional social disorders yet instead of treating these people we allow them to run our industries and our nation).

We need to overhaul our constitution and overhaul our legal system to ensure the economic system works for the betterment of the whole society.

We use taxation as a mechanism to redistribute wealth, however, if you placed limitations on the accumulation of wealth then a lot more of the wealth would be distributed via the incentive system. We see a handful of horribly rich people devote a portion of their wealth to the betterment of society, but this doesn't need to be the whim of the individual. If say there were limitations placed on amassing wealth then Bill Gates wouldn't have been motivated to destroy competition and form a monopoly, more of his workers and investors would have had a greater distribution of wealth directed towards them and it would have empowered them to have the means to also start businesses, employ people and have greater competition.

The way we have fashioned modern capitalism is to suit the minority, the vast majority are trapped in a situation that is extremely difficult to break out of. If there were adequate social and moral controls placed on both corporations and the individuals then we would reap all the benefits of a sound system of allocation but we wouldn't have been burdened by the adverse social problems caused by championing the con artist, the corrupt and the psychologically impaired as the leaders of our society.

 

[Power Raid]

There is nothing wrong with Capitalism, it is like blaming the gun for murders and not the people who shoot other people.

An economic system is complex, like a machine, and it needs to be structured to suit the social and moral demands of the people. There is no doctrine in Capitalism that says you must have an insanely lopsided distribution of wealth.

What we have is a breakdown in terms of the balance between the economic system, political system and the broader social system in place, there is too much overlap and it leads to distortions in the systems.

For example, constitution overrides laws, laws override the desires of individuals to act in any matter they deem fit. We have not imprinted the desires of the social group adequately into either our constitution or the legal system which has allowed certain freedoms of moral restraint to occur within the economic system.

Capitalism would still work even if you mandated different property rights or enforced constraints on the distribution of wealth. What we lack is leadership in terms of looking to improve the existing system, so we allow those who have chronic psychological disorders (immoral greed is problematic as many other institutional social disorders yet instead of treating these people we allow them to run our industries and our nation).

We need to overhaul our constitution and overhaul our legal system to ensure the economic system works for the betterment of the whole society.

We use taxation as a mechanism to redistribute wealth, however, if you placed limitations on the accumulation of wealth then a lot more of the wealth would be distributed via the incentive system. We see a handful of horribly rich people devote a portion of their wealth to the betterment of society, but this doesn't need to be the whim of the individual. If say there were limitations placed on amassing wealth then Bill Gates wouldn't have been motivated to destroy competition and form a monopoly, more of his workers and investors would have had a greater distribution of wealth directed towards them and it would have empowered them to have the means to also start businesses, employ people and have greater competition.

The way we have fashioned modern capitalism is to suit the minority, the vast majority are trapped in a situation that is extremely difficult to break out of. If there were adequate social and moral controls placed on both corporations and the individuals then we would reap all the benefits of a sound system of allocation but we wouldn't have been burdened by the adverse social problems caused by championing the con artist, the corrupt and the psychologically impaired as the leaders of our society.

The obvious problem in our constitution is the inability for the nation to tax property of the states. It is no wonder why property has become so unaffordable given it is taxed so poorly.

 

[Pessimistic]

In capitalism man exploits man, in communism its the other way around

 

[Pessimistic]

In capitalism man exploits man, in communism its the other way around

Just on the gun thing, 80% of the uses are killing or controlling people

 

[Tas]

The obvious problem in our constitution is the inability for the nation to tax property of the states. It is no wonder why property has become so unaffordable given it is taxed so poorly.

One of many problems with the existing system, we have become a very asset rich nation in unproductive assets such as residential investment property which doesn't create a lot of jobs or wealth outside of the individual and those assets are poorly taxed.

However, in saying that, I am not a huge advocate of the taxation of individuals, in theory you want people to spend money and invest money, when that cycle slows down economies slow down.

You want to create taxation incentives for investment in assets which employ people, generate jobs, you want to make static assets less attractive for investment which will free up property for young families rather than investors.

 

[Power Raid]

In capitalism man exploits man, in communism its the other way around

I will use that myself

 

[Pessimistic]

I will use that myself

Im not claiming it as original by the way.

The program " watched over by beautiful machines" said that exploiters found communist or collective micro soceities easy to dominattem the equality rules stopped anyone calling them for their manipulative behaviour.

I can see that, my personal left leanings are from my belief that collective instiutions like medicare and universal health are very efficient use of resources, particularly when they have competition from private institutions

But in those terms most aussies support those things so long as they remain practically relevant, we are far to the left of the us. Where many people see obamacare as treasonous for som reason we will never get over here.

But the us US paradox too. They have some of the most restrictive laws which sees us industries operate overseas to avoid compliance

 

[medusala]

Just as Adam Smith predicted would happen.

Thats why he supported government regulation of 'free' markets.

Have you actually read any of his books?

 

[Malifice]

Have you actually read any of his books?

Yeah.

He clearly supports State regulation of the market. And taxation. And even trade unions.

You think Smith supported players in the market forming cartels and monopolies, engaging in price fixing and so forth?

 

[medusala]

You think Smith supported players in the market forming cartels and monopolies, engaging in price fixing and so forth?

No. That is NOT the same as arguing for a heap of regulation. He sates that government shouldn't encourage such activity ie guilds. He is in fact as below reticent re new laws and regulation. As for needing regulation for a free market, you have it backwards. Property rights enforced by the state are needed for a free market. Property rights and regulation are hardly the same thing.

"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices…. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies, much less to render them necessary."

“The statesman who should attempt to direct private people in what manner they ought to employ their capitals would not only load himself with most unnecessary attention but assume an authority which could safely be trusted to no council and senate whatever, and which would nowhere be so dangerous as in the hands of man who have folly and presumption enough to fancy himself fit to exercise it. ”
―Adam Smith

"To widen the market and to narrow the competition, is always the interest of the dealers…The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order, ought always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never to be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention. It comes from an order of men, whose interest is never exactly the same with that of the public, who have generally an interest to deceive and even oppress the public, and who accordingly have, upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it."

 

[Malifice]

To widen the market and to narrow the competition, is always the interest of the dealers…The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order, ought always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never to be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention. It comes from an order of men, whose interest is never exactly the same with that of the public, who have generally an interest to deceive and even oppress the public, and who accordingly have, upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it."

You realise the 'order of men' to whom he refers to here means peeps like Murdoch, Rhineheart, Packer and co right Meds?

Way to ruin your own argument.