Despite what doom/gloomers say, economy roars on.

POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Thursday, October 23, 2025 22:23
VIEWED: 13580
PAGE 4 of 19

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE

RUE

Thursday, May 4, 2006 12:40 AM

I heard a good name for the adminitration - it was called the 'kleptocracy'.

Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Thursday, May 4, 2006 12:56 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Now you're being fey. You implied it with your capatilism-hater's line.

I don’t generally, nor did I this time, use terms like “pinko-commie” or even capitalism-hater. I do however recognize broad differences of opinion on the issue of capitalism (the anti-capitalist argument and the pro-capitalist argument).

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
The class-gap is tied to economic factors, and grows wider due to this country's economic practices. Don't act like it's not an element of the topic just because you don't have an answer.

Which is the anti-capitalist argument. And whether or not it is an element of the topic, it is not the only element, nor is it the principle element. The principle element of the topic is that the economy is improving, which is good news, though people who are voicing the anti-capitalist argument, didn’t even give the principle element of this topic a nod. Anti-capitalists don’t want to admit when the economy is doing well.

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Really? So, it's not acceptable in this thread to tie the economy to the administration?

It’s not the administration in AURaptors original post that is saying things are "hunky-dorey". It’s the S&P500. So if you would like "to tie the economy to the administration," then you go right ahead, but all you’re doing is implying that the administration is improving the economy, according to S&P numbers. Is that what you mean to say?

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

GINOBIFFARONI

Thursday, May 4, 2006 1:32 AM

Just Curious

If the US economy is roaring...

why is the US dollar tanking in comparison to the Euro, the British pound, the Canadian dollar, etc

http://www.x-rates.com/d/USD/GBP/hist2006.html

not an economics guy myself, just seems weird

" Over and in, last call for sin
While everyone's lost, the battle is won
With all these things that I've done "

The Killers

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/killers/allthesethingsthativedone.html

REAVERMAN

Thursday, May 4, 2006 1:34 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Finn, I hear tell that you enjoy a good beer on occasion (as long as it ain't cold-piss-like), but would you drink that fine brew to the point of alcohol poisoning?
I don't necessarly see a lot of anti-capitalism here, what I see is anti-extremism. Capitalism, like Communism, taken to an extreme is oppressive. Extreme Capitalism (Corporatism) just means you can have a nicer TV to watch your owners tell you what to buy.
Capitalism, when combined with other, balancing ideals, works. Balancing is the trick.
That’s an anti-capitalist argument. The reason is because the US is not an extreme oppressive capitalist state. And if you look at the good economy in the US and all you see is “evil,” “oppressive” capitalism, then you are not seeing the truth. If you don’t have the perspective to see the good, then you analysis of the “bad” is probably flawed to.

He never said the U.S. is an "extreme opressive capitalist state. Do you actually think before you post? We aren't even 100% capitalist, because people a hell of a lot smarter than you decided a long time ago that we needed balance to survive economically. If we went too capitalist, you end up with corporations doing pretty much whatever they want. Too Socialist, and you'd have the same slow economy that was the Soviets' primary disadvantage in the cold war. You ever been to a public school? That is a socialist institution. Social security? Also socialist. Trade unions? Socialist. Minimum wage laws? Socialist. Welfare? Socialist. Regulations on corporate activity? Socialist.

You fail to understand that nothing is black and white. Not culture, not politics, and definitely not economics.

Crisisall wasn't being "anti-capitalist", he was being intelligent. You should try it sometime.

P.S. Okay, I can see why you might think the economy is doing well. But why dont you factor in the $9 TRILLION that we owe the rest of the world? Or, as others have mentioned, the widening social gap? Or (also previously mentioned) the relatively little social mobility in this country? The economy still lookin' peachy to you? 'Cause it sure as hell ain't to me.

You're welcome on my boat. God ain't.

CHRISISALL

Thursday, May 4, 2006 2:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
if you look at the good economy in the US and all you see is “evil,” “oppressive” capitalism, then you are not seeing the truth. If you don’t have the perspective to see the good, then you analysis of the “bad” is probably flawed to.

You're correct about being able to see the good and bad for clear analysis. I was focusing on what I perceive as problems, this is a great country, with a solid economic structure (could be improved, but it works)- it's the politics tied to and controling the economy I disapprove of and find suspect. Our (quasi-) Capitalist society allowed for the jobs I've had, and the nice computer I'm typing on right now.

Quote:

This was a guy who knew what real persecution and real extremism was, and he did not take the freedoms that he found in this country for granted. This was a guy who understood, first hand, that when you try to take way the class struggle, you take away the freedom.

Thanks for the story, it was cool.
But just because the Chinese government sucks big time, that's no excuse for not noticing instances where we as a country seem to drift in that direction, as small as the increments might be, because our freedoms at this time are so much grander. Class struggle is one thing, class oppression is another, and it seems to me we might be on the verge of a terrible shift in human value here. Of course, things might swing back in the direction of truth and virtue, always in motion is the future, it's not like we're damned or anything, but like all else it won't be easy. Like they say in China, it will be 'interesting'.

OCP does not rule this country, and I want to make sure it never does. I also am no frog; I notice the when the pan gets hotter.

BTW, still do Tai Chi? It is the ultimate martial art.

Chrisisall, anti-evil corruptor of any system

CITIZEN

Thursday, May 4, 2006 10:14 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Which is the anti-capitalist argument. And whether or not it is an element of the topic, it is not the only element, nor is it the principle element. The principle element of the topic is that the economy is improving, which is good news, though people who are voicing the anti-capitalist argument, didn’t even give the principle element of this topic a nod. Anti-capitalists don’t want to admit when the economy is doing well.

It works both ways Finn. I could easilly say your not prepared to deal with anything that goes counter to the pro-capitalist argument. If the economy is all it's cracked up to be you should have no problem addressing the points raised.

AURaptor has, it's all the fault of the illegals, those bastards ruin everything don't they?

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
And as you know, these are open forums, you're able to come and listen to what I have to say.

RIGHTEOUS9

Thursday, May 4, 2006 4:16 PM

It's actually a fallacy to suggest that wanting to stop the effects of corporate greed and government collusion is anti-capitalistic. It's just plain incorrect to suggest that wanting regulation in business is against the free market.

It's the only thing in the world that can save the free market. I love capitalism. I love the significance of competition. But if you haven't been paying attention, which just might be the case if you've been watching Fox News, the reality is that every time we deregulate a market further, that markets competition shrinks.

The reality is that these huge companies have so much access to our government that they get to go after their competition for using 'vicious' business practices like something as simple as saying 'our milk doesn't have this chemical in it."

so powerful that the legislation for auto-companies giving incentives on hybrid cars is taken away if they produce too many.

so powerful that the credit card companies get to write the bankruptcy bills that our congress passes into law.

So connected that they get no-bid contracts in Iraq(and Louisiana), and so far have not had to account for their overcharges and/or sheer bad faith, such as giving the troops contaminated water.

Does any of that sound like it fosters capitalism to you?

If you have faith in the system, then protect it already. Put money into social programs so that more people can start from a place where they can venture into entrepraneurships, make the government look out for the little guy.

that's always the argument for no minimum wage increase right? it's gonna hurt the little guy? Hell, lets make some laws that say companies employing a certain amount of workers are responsible for a higher mean wage, since they are already responsible for killing competition in their areas. Big companies are so homogenous in their operations that they can do away with regions and regions of skilled employees.

Why should they be continually rewarded for doing damage to the system that we hold so dear?

SIGNYM

Thursday, May 4, 2006 7:31 PM

Quote:
Because good news is good, and we don’t hear enough of it.

Hey, I just heard that fifty more people in Iraq were bombed to death!! That's GREAT news!!! YAAAY

Oh, yeah... if you're an insurgent. The point Finn is: good news for whom? For the rich- great news! For the rest of us- not so much.

Quote:
Part of the reason is that anti-capitalists don’t want to hear about a capitalist economy doing well so that they can continue convincing themselves that capitalism doesn’t work.

Capitalism requires competition with all parties more or less equal in power*: consumers having the ability to walk away from one store to the next, workers having the ability walk away from one job to another, and owners having the ability to pick and choose among workers and fight over market share. But since small imbalances in power tend to snowball into great big ugly monopolies unless restrained, we don't have capitalism any more. What we have is a system where not only do the great corporations have oligopolic control over their economic spheres, they also have control over the law through campaign contributions, lobbying, and that wonderful revolving door that is this nation's capital.

IF we had capitalism I'd say "Hell yeah!" But we don't.

* Wealth of Nations Adam Smith. You might have heard of it. Then again- mebbe not.
---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

SIGNYM

Thursday, May 4, 2006 7:42 PM

Quote:
I would help him learn English, teach him to drive a car and basically help him assimilate into American culture, and in return he would teach me taichi. He was a kungfu master, believe it or not. I really didn’t even know there was such a thing as a kungfu master before I met him, as far as I knew it was just something that I saw on tv. But he was and I study taichi from him for three years

THIS is capitalism. THIS is free enterprise. Enron, Exxon-Mobil, Halliburton (hangin' from the spurting gummint teat) is not capitalism.

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Sunday, May 7, 2006 3:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Class struggle is one thing, class oppression is another, and it seems to me we might be on the verge of a terrible shift in human value here. Of course, things might swing back in the direction of truth and virtue, always in motion is the future, it's not like we're damned or anything, but like all else it won't be easy. Like they say in China, it will be 'interesting'.

Well, I’m going to go into one of my big long verbose rants here, because I was in Washington last week and I’m going to Albuquerque on Monday so I won’t have time to really get into all this at length. I’m just going to dump it all on you now and sort it out later.

I don’t think the US is teetering on the edge of the Dark Side. The truth is that this is an old argument. I don’t know when it began, but I know Karl Marx was fond of predicting the collapse of America. Marx believed that eventually the rich would become so rich and the poor would become so poor in America that the poor masses would rise up and take power in the so-called Communist Revolution. It didn’t collapse, and Marx is long dead.

The truth is that while there are many flaws with the American system, as there are with any system, it works. The poor masses will not rise up because, in reality, they don’t exist. By most people’s understanding of what “poor” means there are very few such people in the US. Only a fraction of America’s ~36 million “poor” meet the criteria of actually being poor as Marx, or even the common person today, would understood it. So while the rich did get richer, the poor didn’t get poorer. People who are oppose to the American system have paraded all kinds of statistics to show that the poor are getting poorer, and they’ve been doing this for years, and I’m sure they’ll continue to do it, but in the end, the poor in America are living much better lives then they lived 50 or even 30 years ago and much better lives then the bulk of the world poor. What I have just told you is considered blasphemy among Socialists.

Marx saw what he wanted to see, but the fundamental concept of his reasoning is still true. A capitalist economy earns wealth largely, not from labor, but investment in capital. Poor people who are unable to invest in capital, either through entrepreneurship or indirectly through savings and stocks, will not be able to take the fastest path to wealth, and are less advantaged then the rich who can do this easily. That doesn’t mean they are stuck there. Labor can lead to wealth as it has for many people who are willing to start low and work hard. It just sometimes takes longer then investment. For those that don’t want to wait, education can catapult people way up the scale (that was my method). Privatization of social security would provide poor Americans with immediate investment, which I supported, but unfortunately, it failed. For most people social mobility is an exponential curve and you spend a long time at the bottom, until it finally turns up. It is something that is usually measured in generations, not individuals. I hope that for many American families who have been working hard to gain their momentum, the American system will still be there for them when the curve turns up.

As for other developed nations, there are pro’s can con’s to all them. Before the tumultuous years of the first half of the 20th centuries many of these countries, particularly Britain, France and Germany, represented some of the major powers of world. It’s only natural that they should reclaim their position as economic powerhouses, and I’m glad to see them do it. The Nordic countries are often praised by the Left for being working examples of socialism, but they are small economies with little defense budget and large oil reserves, and they have their pro’s and con’s as well. Slow growth is a problem for the Nordic countries, but still under good governmental management the Nordic states have relatively low corruption and strong competitive economies.

But just because c

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE