Voters steer Europe to the right
POSTED BY: Geezer
UPDATED: Tuesday, August 18, 2026 16:35
VIEWED: 24282
PAGE 18 of 23
Quote:
KPO_ when three reasonably intelligent people "misunderstand" your posts all pretty much the same way, I suggest the problem is not with the readers.
It can be both. I post a somewhat ambiguous sentence that probably needs expounding, and you three who are pre-disposed to a certain view of pro-capitalists (or 'extremists' as citizen calls us) all jump to a shared, comfortable conclusion, with varying degrees of certainty. I don't know, either that particular dog-eat-dog view abounds among some capitalists, or it's what all of your left wing blogs tell you that pro-capitalists believe. Either way some of the direct responses I got to my quotes were bizarre and mystifying.
Quote:
You also say that it's "natural" because it includes competition... but not "dog-eat-dog" competition.
I would say competition and survival of the fittest for businesses, but not that same kind of ruthlessness towards people, that's just callous.
Quote:
If capitalism is a "solution", what PROBLEM is capitalism trying to solve?
Making money as effectively as possible, I've been saying - where do you think it came from?
Heads should roll
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:But how do you suppose capitalism works???? You pay people the very least you can get away with-- less than starvation wages if you can-- so you can pocket the profit. And EVEN IF you're a capitalist with a heart of gold, those who take in higher profits will eventually either buy you out or simply out-compete you. There isn't any room for charity in capitalism, no matter how generous a business owner feels because he will simply be swamped by those less charitable, and go out of business.
I would say competition and survival of the fittest for businesses, but not that same kind of ruthlessness towards people, that's just callous.
Quote:So, is capitalism all about "making money", and is THAT what you consider to be inherent in human nature? Or is capitalism about becoming more productive- making more goods with less effort. There's a difference.
Making money as effectively as possible, I've been saying - where do you think it came from?
----------------------
We should have strapped him into a glider, filled it nose heavy w/ explosives, and dropped his Allah lovin' ass into a large, empty field. After which, release wild boars into the area so they could make good use of his remains. Now THAT's justice.- rappy
Yeah, that's what Sheikh Issa said. Seems you both have a lot in common.- signy
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
KPO- Do you want to know where I think capitalism shines?
Enhancing productivity.
In the quest for ever-greater profits, capitalism has sought to remove humans from production as much as possible. The profits they acquire are inevitably bent towards making more stuff with less input. Sometimes it drives towards lower wages, but sometimes the result is automation. Wonderful, blessed automation that keeps our lives from being one of unending dawn-to-dusk toil.
HOWEVER.
It ties distribution with production, but squeezes more and more people out of the production system. You wind up with two economies: the dispossesed (people live on dumps, in shantytowns all around the world) and the lucky few who "get" to be exploited but also get to enjoy some of the benefits of an advanced system.
Surely, there is a better way to improve productivity.
----------------------
We should have strapped him into a glider, filled it nose heavy w/ explosives, and dropped his Allah lovin' ass into a large, empty field. After which, release wild boars into the area so they could make good use of his remains. Now THAT's justice.- rappy
Yeah, that's what Sheikh Issa said. Seems you both have a lot in common.- signy
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Another is that wealth distribution is somehow NOT an economic problem. It is. There is literally NO POINT to generating more wealth UNLESS it can be distributed. Beyond that, the inevitable concentration of wealth under capitalism is not only unfair, its self-destructive.
Okay so it's an unstable natural system (perhaps politically as well as economically, as you claim), and some interference to distribute wealth (to some extent) is necessary? Just like regulation, I'm for it - can it be done in the form of social welfare, because I'm for that anyway?
Quote:
Marx's point (I believe) is that this process is the seed of capitalism's own destruction.
But not if we distribute wealth with social welfare, right? Phew. I guess social welfare is like the enemy of socialism then - citizen's not going to be happy about that, haha.
Quote:
Another problem is the assumption that wealth creation is somehow inherent in the human psyche. If by wealth you mean "money" then I can assure you that it is not.
Well I'm dubious, and I would prefer if we kept with the term 'wealth'. But affluence to me basically has the future promise of more harmonious, liberal societies around the world(better educated, and morality is a luxury), conquering of world hunger, and more resources for science/the arts.
With my first assumption I'm surprised to hear you knocking evolution, but maybe evolution sometimes produces dead ends? In any case remember that we're in the realms of analogy and perhaps here one can stretch the metaphor too far. With businesses I think even revolutionary (not evolutionary) things like socialism can still catch on if they are demonstrated to work at making money effectively - but that never seems to be the main purpose of it. I like the way you've prompted me to think here though.
As for my second assumption I'm not interested in recreating 'natural' for natural's sake, or because I think natural is best. Bottom line is what is best for humanity.
Heads should roll
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
I post a somewhat ambiguous sentence that probably needs expounding, and you three who are pre-disposed to a certain view of pro-capitalists (or 'extremists' as citizen calls us)
In response to you calling me and everyone else who were disagreeing with you extremists, lest we want to forget that.
Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
But not if we distribute wealth with social welfare, right? Phew. I guess social welfare is like the enemy of socialism then - citizen's not going to be happy about that, haha.
Why do you insist on putting words in my mouth and prescribing thoughts and ideas to me, when it's clear you haven't a clue what you're talking about in that regard? Perhaps you have to prescribe this hard line attitude to someone so that you can feel justified with your own?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Freedom?
Originally posted by SignyM:
[I did, but under a different login, so the header name was jkiddo and the answer was "freedom".
*BSCM stares blankly at screen*
In one word you've demonstrated a gulf between us that can never be spanned. I see you now as the Alliance. Not a force for freedom, but as absolute control packaged with a pretty bow. You value no freedom for the indivudual economically and yet you'd use that very word in answer. In your world I'd not wish to comply. I'd insist upon living my life as I see fit and then your society would be forced to aggress upon me. The words Freedom and Liberty are centric to the fibre of my being. You're using them as a punchline.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
In response to you calling me and everyone else who were disagreeing with you extremists
No I didn't.
Quote:
Why do you insist on putting words in my mouth and prescribing thoughts and ideas to me,
Lol, no just a swipe at you (and geezer in effect) and your rival definition of socialism that encompasses social welfare.
Heads should roll
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
No I didn't.
Just like you never said Capitalism is natural. Whatever.
Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Lol, no just a swipe at you (and geezer in effect) and your rival definition of socialism that encompasses social welfare.
As I said, please refrain from projecting thoughts and ideas on to me, because you clearly lack the ability to even get within an order of magnitude of reality.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
KPO, you waste your time talking with him.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by bluesuncompanyman:
KPO, you waste your time talking with him.
And you waste your time posting, since you've proven you can't back up word one of your crazy lies (beyond irreverent way off the mark insults). One question, since when has giving up personal freedoms so the government can keep us safe from the bad people been a libertarian goal, you deluded Authoritarian troll?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME