capitalism, by definition, is a stupid and foolish human system
POSTED BY: 1kiki
UPDATED: Monday, January 13, 2025 18:50
VIEWED: 28147
PAGE 23 of 28
There should be an internet equivalent to godwin's law
Select to view spoiler:
Godwin's law (or Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies)[1][2] is an Internet adage asserting that "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"?[2][3]—? that is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Hitler or Nazism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
only for "communism" instead.
Clearly, "T", you don't have a clue what communism is. But if that's YOUR definition of communism, then you just made communism sound pretty attractive, compared to the current alternative! Keep up the good work!
And hey, thanks for the thread bump!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Don't spend too much time judging people still enthralled by a "human" system.
Everything you humans do is stupid.
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
What do I think of as intelligent, the opposite of stupid? I think it means being able to look at a wide range of information and to examine it in its own right - without reference to our own fears and wishes - to reach an understanding of what it is. So for example, not looking on solar eclipses as portents from gods regarding our human fortunes, but as celestial mechanisms running in their own way. In that regard, capitalism is extremely stupid. It looks at the entire universe of data and asks only one human-related question - can it make a profit? That makes it incredibly stupid.
And what do I think of a wise, the opposite of foolish? It means looking at the range of information we've gotten through our intelligence, and understanding what does it mean for us. In that regard, capitalism is extremely foolish, because having looked at only one question - can it make a profit? - it automatically concludes it should be done. That makes it incredibly foolish.
So why do we trust our lives to this stupid and foolish human system?
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Clearly, "T", you don't have a clue what communism is. But if that's YOUR definition of communism, then you just made communism sound pretty attractive, compare to the current alternative! Keep up the good work!
And hey, thanks for the thread bump!
You live in a fantasy signym. So what you perceive to be, is inconsequential in the real world. This applies to what you think about what I say as well.
si shen
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So, you're absolutely correct- you're not being reasonable, you're not even "pretending" to be reasonable. You keep making the point that we can't have change, because this is the way things are, ignoring the rather vast fact that not only have things changed in the past, they are different in different parts of the world, and are changing even as we speak. Hubby says, in listening to your posts That idiot thinks his suburb is the world. Anyway, if you could at least pretend to be reasonable, that would be far preferable to what you're doing now.
Quote:First of all, you're imputing motives to me that don't exist. Can you PLEASE separate out your opinion of my motives from the real world out there?? I have no desire to "get even", I am trying to solve a real problem "out there" (in the real world) where too much money is in one place and not enough in another.
You say such unbelievably naive things like, "we'll simply take the money from the wealthy..." It's hard to take you seriously. I don't give a shit about the wealthy, they are just fine. I want their money redistributed as well, but trying to take only satisfies your desire to get even, it's petty and small.
Quote:Here you claim that they will do "something" - you apparently don't know what that might be- in order to keep their wealth (in actuality) while "making me think I "got even". First of all, since you INSIST, if only to yourself, that my goal is to "get even", then your imaginary rich people are directed to an entirely imaginary goal. GOOD!
They didn't get wealthy by letting people control them, they will make you think you got even, took your pound of flesh when you will have not accomplished your end goal.
Quote:Do these foundations ever donate to the poor? No. The poor NEVER see any of that money. What they see is whatever form of "charity" the rich choose to give them... GMO seeds or GMO food aid, or vaccine trials where they get to be used as guinea pigs (when they really need mosquito nets), or "privatized" education, or treated drinking water that they have to pay for.
Like the history of all of philanthropy maybe? So a couple trillion examples. How much did the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation donate just this year?
So, as examples, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation would never to anything as simple as give money to the poor - which is, BTW, the most effective way of dealing with poverty. NOPE! The B&MG Foundation "gives money" to efforts which increase centralized control- the Svarlbard Seed Bank (try getting those seeds back out, unless you're a corporation or a rich person) and vaccine trials (investing in Big Pharma). ALL of the philanthropic organizations that I can think of- even the ones that claim they are "doing well by doing good" - are trying to remake the world in the image and likeness of whatever the donors want it to be, whether it is Zuckerburg's attempt to "reform" (ie privatize) New Jersey schools, or Bill Gates' attempt to corner future seed availability, or Pierre Omidyar's attempt to vacuum up all relevant investigative journalists.
So even when donating, the wealthy retain control. Because just instituting fair trade practices which would have prevented the accumulation too much wealth to begin with... I mean, how much fun is that??.
Quote:YOU don't know about Basel and the FDIC? I'm sorry but... what do you think you're adding to the conversation, from such a point of ignorance?
So who the hell are they? Now we're trusting the US Gov?
Quote:Yes. But the great thing is, if you don't like THOSE observers... maybe you feel they're biased... you can always send in more, from a different source. Imagine
Do you know who these observers are?
Select to view spoiler:
oh, wait, I fo
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Don't take the bait.....G...It's all subjective nonsense. 
si shen
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Nice pictures, T!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Nice pictures, T!
I know, when I posted it I took a second look. It's great work. Norman Rockwell ish.
si shen
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
G
And you claim all you want is intelligent discussion. Is a snark-fest part of that?
BTW, so I went back to check out the 'solutions' you proposed. Where are they?
It's a viscous [sic] cycle. Consumers want to pay less, so businesses have to find ways to make their products for less to compete and stay in business. Consumers will often value Cost ahead of Safety, Health, Quality, Sustainability - many of the same things corps are faulted for they can also be blamed for. That's one reason WalMart works so well - just damn cheap prices. It's also why they try and squeeze costs on the backside, employee benefits. This won't change no matter what the system is, people being people on both sides. So I say fix the current one, don't dump it for something unknown. Raising minimum wage sounds great and maybe it would be. Or maybe the cost of goods and services would go up as well. Catch-22.
Would you voluntarily reduce your income? If someone tried to regulate your income would you accept it easily, or would you fight it? Or go around it (i.e., find ways to not pay)?
How would you regulate profit equally so Hong's Noodle Shop does not get an unfair advantage over Wang's?
Also - this is such a loosely defined issue. Is the issue that all profit is bad? Is it that there are too many people without enough money? Wages are too low, prices too high? For everything?
I think more focus would be helpful - just saying "Capitalism must go" is so broad and undoable, a conversation stopper imho.
Jobs - the engine that drives all economies (or so I've read). I think right now the problem is the very rich 1% have their money invested in paper instead of things that create jobs. Just a guess though.
I think kitty broke your logic board ;)
For one: it may mathematically be a zero sum game technically on paper (though I doubt that), but in day to day reality the amount of wealth in the world is so vast that just in it's trillions of transactions hourly anyone can accrue their own little island of modest wealth and security. I buy from someone and they get my money, then they give what was my money to someone else for something else's, on and on times a million million. Only when it is stored does it have some negative effect. That's why it's been cited that one of the biggest drags on the economy is the very wealthy are not spending their money like they have in the past, they are not creating jobs as they have. That's also why it was suggested a great way of unsticking that wealth is to get the 1% to sponsor infrastructure projects. "Buy a Bridge." This appeals to their desire to be well liked by Society (lessens their guilt if they have any) while it creates jobs and repairs or builds the stuff we need. I've worked parties where the very wealthy get together and drink and nibble caviar and write checks for blank charity. We just need it on a larger scale.
I think Chris is a capitalist. He produces a good or service that he then sells for a profit. Um, you are making a profit aren't you Chris? What if Chris got an order for 1000 phasers from a wealthy Chinese Trekkie? He'd probably have to hire someone to help, Sonisall perhaps + all of his friends. He's also probably going need to take out a small business loan so he can buy the raw material needed to make the phasers. Along comes TGHIRR who loans Chris the money at a specific rate. Without the money Chris couldn't fill the order, bills go unpaid, etc. For the majority of the small businesses out there, that you and all of us use, that is the way of it. Loans allow someone to work for themselves instead of for someone else.
Profit is money for doing nothing??? I get this overwhelming feeling that you do not have any real world experience. As essential as they are, reading and thinking are not doing, just the start.
Chris's scenario is a great example of where paper logic let's you down.
First, since you and Ki
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
And right on cue, T answers for G.
SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME