Why capitalism is important and why we aren't capitalist

[Death Magnificent]

The rose in spring

Death Magnificent

The rose in spring

The truth is that Capitalism is the only economic system in which someone who is dirt poor can become a billionaire while someone who is a billionaire can end up dirt poor. It's really revolutionary in a sense. Free market has its drawbacks. Hell it's even self-destructive at times, but the ability for the rich to be held accountable and the poor to run the rich out of business because he/she has a better idea.

If you think "******** it, just let anything happen" is a viable economic system...
tsk tsk tsk.

Anything happening is better than our system in which the wealth gap is constantly widening.

I wholeheartedly agree about this and I'm just going to say that this is the only thing here what really matters.

Quote:

Quote:

It's not just automotive. We use old designed M-16 AR's instead of newer H&K416's. We use the M9 which is Italian over the M1911, but the 1911 was old anyway. We use American planes, we use American boats (Not ships for some reason), we have banks that are bailed out when they should have failed, we use a lot of things that are American and planned to be obsolete. The reason they last is because of laws that give the rich a safety net. The same way mercantilism used to work. Keep the rich rich and the poor poor.

Plutocracy! Party if you're rich, ******** off if you're not.

If you're not even listening, then what's the point of talking to you?
I'm listening. I just take what they say and run with it. Run far away.

[low iq 111]

low iq 111

we have been almost capitalist though. we have had our taxes pretty low. but it is obvious that most americans are selfish and do not wish to give to other down trodden americans or other countries. americans need to be forced to give at least at this point in time. i don't think we should be giving away everything. before you assume i don't believe in the way europe does healthcare. however i'm pretty certain that americans would not want to help even a little bit with education and other basics that i feel are human rights. before you assume again-i think we need reform in education and that college is a waste right now. but we should never just get rid of education. i would be "for" libertarianism if i didn't feel our society is retarded.

americans should have been doing a lot more giving in the 90s and 00s but spent it on themselves. i look around plain and simple. i see that most houses and most things go to waste. most people have a dining room and china that gets used no more than 5 times a year. that is simply disgusting.

We have enough resources on this planet to meet the basic needs of every human alive, and yet we'd rather let a small percent of our populace hoard those resources than to keep innocents from starving to ******** death. Why?

why is this overlooked?

[Complex Systems]

Je Nique vos Merdiers

See, but it's been repeatedly shown by scientific study that incentive is not necessary to motivate creativity, and may possibly even be detrimental to it.
I do agree that technology being important for growth is only half the answer, but with another necessity being open access to information and resources. .

Incentive structures are really ******** difficult to work out. I'm pretty much leaving it at that, because having to debate how well statistics and other techniques can properly work out incentive structures. There are a lot of omitted variables, and some things that are totally untestable.

Quote:

I am reading it, albeit slowly. I don't know if it's one you linked or one I searched for myself, but there's too much math on the first page I read, haha. It's too early in the morning and today's my long day of classes.

I'm not sure why I mentioned both private property and markets, since private property is a requirement for markets.

If you don't like reading math or statistics, you're going to have a lot of problems with any of the papers I link.

Private property is not a requirement for markets.

[EvilSquitty]

Capitalism works, it fails when other forms of isms are introduced into it.

[Je Nique vos Merdiers]

Blind Guardian the 2nd

How many times must I point out the concept of grassroots governance as a de facto state? Communism as a 'stateless' society depends on the rigid interpretation of what constitutes a state.

Anarchist philosophy in general is that the state is defined as a body with the legitimized use of force, iirc. Therefore a stateless society would be one where force would always require the burden of proof. Is that really too rigid?

Quote:

One definition of communism is the only permitted? News to me.

Yes, if you're going to talk about a system, why give it a name if it can be interpreted in more than one way? That completely defeats the point of naming it.

Quote:

I didn't say they were not related. I said they are not interchangeable. Same goes for capitalism: the fact it usually has state involvement does not deny the prospect of anarcho-capitalism.

Anarcho-capitalism makes no sense, capitalism requires winners and losers and thus a ruling class and a peasant class.

[Je Nique vos Merdiers]

Complex Systems

Je Nique vos Merdiers

See, but it's been repeatedly shown by scientific study that incentive is not necessary to motivate creativity, and may possibly even be detrimental to it.
I do agree that technology being important for growth is only half the answer, but with another necessity being open access to information and resources. .

Incentive structures are really ******** difficult to work out. I'm pretty much leaving it at that, because having to debate how well statistics and other techniques can properly work out incentive structures. There are a lot of omitted variables, and some things that are totally untestable.

Quote:

I am reading it, albeit slowly. I don't know if it's one you linked or one I searched for myself, but there's too much math on the first page I read, haha. It's too early in the morning and today's my long day of classes.

I'm not sure why I mentioned both private property and markets, since private property is a requirement for markets.

If you don't like reading math or statistics, you're going to have a lot of problems with any of the papers I link.

Private property is not a requirement for markets.

How do you trade unless you own what it is you are trading?

I don't love reading math or statistics, I'd rather do math or just read, especially on days that I have school.

By the way, what would be a good place to look for energy industry production/consumption figures? If it's a research database, which one?

[shoeless joe]

Je Nique vos Merdiers

Anarcho-capitalism makes no sense, capitalism requires winners and losers and thus a ruling class and a peasant class.

The economy is not a zero sum game.

[Je Nique vos Merdiers]

shoeless joe

Je Nique vos Merdiers

Anarcho-capitalism makes no sense, capitalism requires winners and losers and thus a ruling class and a peasant class.

The economy is not a zero sum game.

You're saying it's possible to have a competitive economy in which there are neither winners nor losers?

[Complex Systems]

Je Nique vos Merdiers

How do you trade unless you own what it is you are trading?

I don't love reading math or statistics, I'd rather do math or just read, especially on days that I have school.

By the way, what would be a good place to look for energy industry production/consumption figures? If it's a research database, which one?

What makes up a market? A market consists of demand, and some form of supply. There is nothing that implies "owernship" so much as the transfer of the ability to use goods, or one doing service in exchange for another. Since all things can be reduced, at a bare minimum, to a time cost, there is at least a tacit opportunity cost imbedded in the value of goods (see: Ricardo or O'Sullivan's Urban Economics)

Do the system of equations then, solve the Solow growth model or the endogenous growth model, they're pretty fun dynamic/differential systems.

I don't know energy stuff, Department of Energy, Bureau of Economic Analysis? They're might be some private trade groups that report the data.

[shoeless joe]

Je Nique vos Merdiers

shoeless joe

Je Nique vos Merdiers

Anarcho-capitalism makes no sense, capitalism requires winners and losers and thus a ruling class and a peasant class.

The economy is not a zero sum game.

You're saying it's possible to have a competitive economy in which there are neither winners nor losers?

Pretty much. The meaning of winning and losing is lost in the endless sea of arbitrary desired outcomes where victory or defeat can mean any number of things. Victory for me is a big catamaran and an island with some elevation to it.

[[M.S.T]]

The rose in spring

I support free enterprise. People living off of my hard work, freely and with government aid pisses me off. Let them fend for themselves or let them prove they are physically/mentally unable to do it.

ѕтєаιтн | ғюяїѕн | cоιιєcт

[Complex Systems]

[M.S.T]

Holy balls, most annoying post set up ever.

[[M.S.T]]

Complex Systems

[M.S.T]

Holy balls, most annoying post set up ever.

You're the first to say it like that instead of saying it's the most annoying style to quote.

ѕтєаιтн | ғюяїѕн | cоιιєcт

[Complex Systems]

[M.S.T]

Sorry, you said what? I tried quoting you, had a witty answer and everything planned, but I just got lines of BBC code and forgot what you had written.

[[M.S.T]]

Complex Systems

[M.S.T]

Sorry, you said what? I tried quoting you, had a witty answer and everything planned, but I just got lines of BBC code and forgot what you had written.

Good day to you.

ѕтєаιтн | ғюяїѕн | cоιιєcт