Politics Capitalism V Socialism, or is it?

[The Coup]

that's what you get when you refuse to answer fairly simple objections to the comments you make and the thinly-veiled insults you make.

FYI I was reading radical leftist thought before you even learned to masturbate, so let's get the "OMG you don't understand communism, man!" bullshit out of the way.

You must have forgotten a lot to get this ignorant then.

 

[Long Live HFC]

It's a claim on hours worked.

nope. I can get money all kinds of ways without working for it. it is a medium of exchange, and labour is but one thing that can be exchanged.

 

[Taylor]

nope. I can get money all kinds of ways without working for it. it is a medium of exchange, and labour is but one thing that can be exchanged.

You know that you're validating my point, right?

 

[Long Live HFC]

You must have forgotten a lot to get this ignorant then.

well you're reminding me of the insufferable radical twats on campus if that makes you feel better.

 

[Long Live HFC]

You know that you're validating my point, right?

nope, I was pointing out your narrow definition was incorrect.

 

[Taylor]

nope, I was pointing out your narrow definition was incorrect.

It was never narrow.

All that talk about masturbation has taken the blood from your brain.

 

[little graham]

t

FYI I was reading radical leftist thought before you even learned to masturbate,

No such thing as radical leftists out side of a capitalist society. You don't know what you were reading.

You don't know the political compass of a communist if you think they are left. A communist is more right wing than what you think is right wing, when the cycle requires. Because of common sense. Something a capatlist doesn't have (common sense)

Imagine the greens in Australia introducing a 1 child policy

 

[Long Live HFC]

No such thing as radical leftists out side of a capitalist society. You don't know what you were reading.

You don't know the political compass of a communist if you think they are left. A communist is more right wing than what you think is right wing, when the cycle requires. Because of common sense. Something a capatlist doesn't have (common sense)

Imagine the greens in Australia introducing a 1 child policy

makes perfect sense!

 

[Long Live HFC]

It was never narrow.

narrow AND wrong.

 

[little graham]

makes perfect sense!

Capitalism need money material and people. Communism just need people.

 

[The Coup]

well you're reminding me of the insufferable radical twats on campus if that makes you feel better.

That's cause you have been preconditioned to hate the very people who would make things better for you.

Step outside the echo chamber.

 

[Long Live HFC]

That's cause you have been preconditioned to hate the very people who would make things better for you.

lol, the arrogance!

 

[The Coup]

lol, the arrogance!

I wouldn't go so far as to call you arrogant, just really misinformed and easily duped.

 

[Long Live HFC]

I wouldn't go so far as to call you arrogant, just really misinformed and easily duped.

says the guy that believes in a system he can't even prove is possible or workable

 

[skilts]

It seems to me that the OP emphasises two words in particular - 'power' and 'control'. It also seems to lean toward an economic and political explanation for the world, as one person sees it. Very interesting thoughts, particularly in regard to the actual and real powerlessness of voters, in a system as we have here, and in most other democracies, where everyday voters never get to actually select those they want to elect. Along with the promise of eternal life, democracy is the best and most cunning method of mass control ever devised.

Personally, I'm still developing power over, and control of, my self. This has been a lifelong project. I think I might be making some progress, but I'm not sure I'll know whether I've achieved this, if and when I do. All useful measures of progress seem to be movable feasts.

 

[carloss]

View attachment 92829

Who is this one man? Bill Gates? Steve Jobs? Bill Bowerman?

 

[Todman]

The first is based on greed. The second is based on egalitarianism. The second for me every time.

If you look at egalitarianism, take the AFL draft. The bottom side gets the top pick and the top side gets the last pick etc. Designed so every club has a opportunity to win a flag every sixteen to twenty years.

Yet since the draft was introduced there has not been a equal sharing of the premierships. If we allow several years for it to take effect, the best run clubs are the ones that have the success. Since 2000, the Hawks, Cats and Lions have 3 flags, Swans 2, Power, Eagles, Magpies and Bombers one each. Poorly run clubs, Blues, Tigers, Demons, etc have not got any. Every club will have periods of administrative malaise, the smart clubs recognize the symptoms and make changes sooner.

 

[AM]

If you look at egalitarianism, take the AFL draft. The bottom side gets the top pick and the top side gets the last pick etc. Designed so every club has a opportunity to win a flag every sixteen to twenty years.

Yet since the draft was introduced there has not been a equal sharing of the premierships. If we allow several years for it to take effect, the best run clubs are the ones that have the success. Since 2000, the Hawks, Cats and Lions have 3 flags, Swans 2, Power, Eagles, Magpies and Bombers one each. Poorly run clubs, Blues, Tigers, Demons, etc have not got any. Every club will have periods of administrative malaise, the smart clubs recognize the symptoms and make changes sooner.

Think you'll find genuine egalitarianism is a much broader concept than the corrupted AFL system.

 

[SpuriousPea]

I see so many arguments on this forum, as there are everywhere in the world, about capitalism v socialism, when discussing economic disparity, oppression of rights and free-will, with the majority of posters heavily one way or the other. There are so many examples everywhere to illustrate the problems of both of those sides.

Yet, is it really the form that is the problem or is it the nature – the human traits of greed and wanting power to control others?

No matter what system you have if you allow any small minority group to have control of the system you will have massive abuse of that system.

Personally I am very much pro-capitalism and free enterprise – it is the best efficient allocator of resources. [my earliest lesson about efficient use of resources was when i was about 5 and a Disney cartoon with a 5 second grab of a massive tree trunk being whittled down in a factory to make a perfect toothpick – lol, showing my age]. But it must be tempered with regulations that prevent any one or minority group from having the ability to control the overall agenda, because they will always manipulate conditions to suit themselves – that is the very human nature of power and the most important continual problem facing the human race.

We kid ourselves that we live in democracies. Unfortunately we do not have true democracy in any country of the world. We live in Oligarch states. We are limited by who we can vote for – that is controlled by the financiers of the very politicians careers that we are allowed to vote for. You will all say that anyone can run for office – but realistically you have no chance unless you have the $ to campaign and get your message across. Unfortunately the political systems of all countries are such that they are hand-tied to the $ that enabled their careers.

Furthermore we do not have true competition in any of the major industries in any economy or the world economy. They all work in collusion to manipulate markets for their own collective benefit and thus not a true free enterprise – this is in every industry and market.

We have experienced the biggest financial frauds of all time culminating in the GFC and the currently playing out FX market manipulations. Yet is the general public truly aware of these frauds? Do they realize that the banks behind the FX market manipulation are being fined massive amounts, yet those amounts are miniscule compared to the profits that were made from the manipulations and that no-one is being prosecuted for these market manipulations. There is ample history of market manipulators being prosecuted (when they are not among the “too big to fail” elite). But none in these cases involving the mechanisms the elite use to profit. Ask anyone on the street and they are more likely to remember the “doubling down gambling” financial fraud of Nick Leeson at Barings than they are of the current FX manipulation (yet the scales of this make the Barings (individual not colluded bank policy) fraud seem like a primary school kid “stealing” a 5cent coin inadvertently left behind by a teacher on their desk). As usual you have to look behind the situation to understand it – the banks involved are the “too big to fail”, suffer significantly from “moral hazard” in their endless pursuit of ever greater profit making opportunities and through their influence (which there is vast supporting evidence of if you bother to look) of control over the CB’s, politicians (who funds their political careers) and regulators, do whatever they like and if something does come out which they cannot suppress (like this FX manipulation) they succeed in limiting the true penalties that they should be incurring, with no personal prosecution of individuals involved, just fines which are less than the profited amounts.

People think that if there are more than 2 individuals involved in something it cannot be a conspiracy and thus all must be legitimate and talk of it is bunkum, they believe this in regulation, control and business (ie competition). Wrong – time and time again we see massive collusion and the manipulation of others by the powerful for purely self interest. That is not competition and free market efficiency – it is very clear conspiracy to manipulate for self interest. Collusion exists everywhere between large organisations and of course the power mongers of the world.

Regulation and government should be about setting policy to ensure equal opportunity to all and limiting the ability of individuals or minority groups from controlling others. Government should not be about controlling others otherwise it becomes the very thing it is supposed to be limiting.

In my opinion decentralised localized government is where any discretionary power of government should be and where those it effects can hold that govt responsible, with central government only in place to set policy to achieve these aims and to defend these aims, not to manipulate – all require significant regulation of the government itself, not the people. The same applies to business, free enterprise is the best allocator of resources, if that free enterprise is assured through limits of power to control others then true competition exists and it limits ability of minority groups to control their industry or others. Significant regulation is required to prevent business and minority groups becoming powerful. Less regulation is required of small free enterprise systems, other than the set policies of workers, environmental and consumer rights.

When is too much too much. How much does someone really need in wealth and power – logically it would be enough to ensure financial freedom, self determination and a highly enjoyable quality of life. Anything beyond is purely for the egoistic power over others – using the belief that they are better at determining (manipulating) the course of others than others are of making their decisions for themselves (ie god syndrome) – it really is just a cover for self benefiting the powerful and wealthy and enslavement of others.

Free will and the right to determine your own life without enslavement to others is what humankind should be striving for, not the power mongering of a minority to subrogate all others to their will.

It is power and excess greed (beyond what one needs for themselves) that is the root of all evil in humankind – it always results in subrogation and enslavement of others.

Ask yourself the question: why do you need power and wealth beyond your own (and family) financial freedom and independence, and enjoyment of life without detriment to others? If you cannot answer this question honestly you are probably using the line of “wanting or using power to help others” (do you truly believe that or using it as an excuse for self interest? and thus have a god complex or at least believe you are better than most others).

It is about time society turned their attitudes about those seeking power – it is not something to be admired, it has always been a tool for self interest and enslavement of others to your will.

The problem here is that the framework required to regulate the system (any system), is the only necessity for an inevitable descent into oligarchism, as per the iron law of oligarchy (who says organisation, says oligarchy).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy

 

[The Coup]

says the guy that believes in a system he can't even prove is possible or workable

This is again an incredibly stupid thing to say. I'm sensing a pattern.

 

[The Coup]

The problem here is that the framework required to regulate the system (any system), is the only necessity for an inevitable descent into oligarchism, as per the iron law of oligarchy (who says organisation, says oligarchy).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy

Another tick in favour of Communism.

 

[Long Live HFC]

This is again an incredibly stupid thing to say. I'm sensing a pattern.

most likely you just didn't understand the claim. that's ok, socialists can be a bit slow.

 

[The Coup]

most likely you just didn't understand the claim. that's ok, socialists can be a bit slow.

You haven't figured it out yet, I'm a Communist.

Even you are making fun of you.

 

[Freo2012]

The problem here is that the framework required to regulate the system (any system), is the only necessity for an inevitable descent into oligarchism, as per the iron law of oligarchy (who says organisation, says oligarchy).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy

Princeton University released a study into USA in April - it found iUSA no different to Russia, an Oligarchy - all modern democracies are oligarchies, controlled by a very small but very wealthy minority - and the divide is getting massively greater.

The problem they don't realise, or attempt to solve, is that in the most basic "nutshell" explanation economies are consumer driven. Oppress economically to too great a level (wealth transfer) and the vast majority cannot afford to spend (eg US bottom 80% going backwards in real wage rates for the last 3 decades) and there does come a tipping point - history shows this continually. So expect massive oppression of rights in the coming years and wars, given the world economic situation - those are the only methods that power can hang onto power when they turn the majority into serf's. The smartest capitalists understand you have to keep the masses growing in prosperity (it must be shared) - but even that small minority don't really appreciate the limits of growth in mature economies or the world.

We are in for some very interesting (and extremely hard for many) times ahead - and not too far in the future either, closer than you all think.

http://journals.cambridge.org/downl...95a.pdf&code=9bd5b27d5fcde6a66cb278dbfe6e39fd

http://www.academia.edu/6778583/USA_NO_DEMOCRACY_-_LIKE_RUSSIA_AN_OLIGARCHY

 

[Borry]

Most people are too self-centered and aspirational in nature to allow socialism to work. The only way it can be implemented over a large population is by force (e.g. dictatorship).