Capitalism by rue

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Oh, but Rue! Don't you know? MONEY ALONE can't create oppression! Capitalists are the GOOD guys!

----------------------
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 | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 7:01 AM

SERGEANTX

Slavery is bad, no doubt about it. From the title, I thought the thread was going to be about capitalism.

SergeantX

"It's a cold and it's a broken hallelujah"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 7:03 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Capitalism: private ownership of the means of production (includng people).

Sarge, you keep saying that gubmint is the root of all evil. Nonetheless, if you put economics strictly in charge of the functioning of society, you WILL get some people with overwhelming power: the power to buy their own security, the power to own people, the power to kill, the power to exploit many, the power to form a monopoly, and the power to issue company scrip.

What countervailing force do you propose to keep things "fair"? Aside from wishful thinking, that is?

----------------------
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 | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 7:19 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

So....?

I read your other post about "Socialism". The answer to government oppression is, of course, a functioning democracy. What is YOUR answer to economic oppression, if any? (Other than to say it doesn't exist. Which it clearly does.)

----------------------
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 | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 7:52 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

And according to your other thread, the answer is

*closes eyes, plugs ears, sticks head firmly in sand*
LA LA LA! I CAN'T HEAR YOU! IT DOESN'T EXIST!

Go run your little world.

----------------------
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 | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 8:37 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

He apparently didn't read this:

"... exploitation of people, including children, for the purposes of forced labor, sex and stolen organs."

Not by gummint - by BUSINESS - for PROFIT.

Well, I guess in his mind, this just doesn't exist.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 8:44 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

So, Rue. As usual you forgot to provide a cite for your quote, and also left out a good bit of the text. Cherry-picking, perhaps?

http://www.amin.org/Print.php?t=ENews&id=2959

Also, maybe you should have provided a link to the actual Human Trafficking report, rather than an article by someone who's obviously not a fan.

http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2009/

Third, this relates Capitalism to human trafficking in about the same way an earlier thread tried relating the demonstrations in Iran with President Obama taking his kids for ice cream - in other words, not at all.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 8:57 AM

Well... I actually don't know if the link is that forced, Geezer. If there weren't demand for sex slaves, organs, and labour... would this sort of activity exist?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 10:25 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Well... I actually don't know if the link is that forced, Geezer. If there weren't demand for sex slaves, organs, and labour... would this sort of activity exist?

Was there a demand for sex slaves and slave labour in the 17th century, prior to capitalism? The 10th century? the 1st? The 5th BCE? You don't think there was slave labour or sex slavery in Soviet Russia, or today in North Korea?

Conflating capitalism with slavery is like conflating the need to eat to survive with obesity.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 10:46 AM

SERGEANTX

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Was there a demand for sex slaves and slave labour in the 17th century, prior to capitalism? The 10th century? the 1st? The 5th BCE? You don't think there was slave labour or sex slavery in Soviet Russia, or today in North Korea?

Only to the extent that they were proto-capitalists. And, all this stuff will go away if we achieve worldwide socialism. Bad people will just give up when profit is against the law.

SergeantX

"It's a cold and it's a broken hallelujah"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 10:51 AM

...I know everyone likes to credit Mr. Adam Smith with the invention of the idea in the 1700s, but capitalism existed LONG, LONG before then.

Or what do you think the Spanish Armada was looking for in South America?

Or what do you think the Romans and Greeks were using for currency?

Do you think America is the first country in the world to EVER have a market system?

It's not.

Capitalism existed in the times you mention, and, yes, I do think that the accumulation of wealth in those times enabled Sultans to have harems, and Egyptians to go to war, and bring back spoils such as slave labour. I believe all of this was DRIVEN by metal coinage.

In a barter system, back when women were considered possessions, yes, people could probably trade objects for a man's daughter and get themselves a wife. So non-capitalistic systems don't necessarily preclude human trafficking.

But, capitalism is set up to create gaps between haves and have nots, and is built upon exploiting a labour class. I would say that capitalism exacerbates the problem, and I think the link here is stronger than you give credit for.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 11:04 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
...I know everyone likes to credit Mr. Adam Smith with the invention of the idea in the 1700s, but capitalism existed LONG, LONG before then.

Capitalism is a distinct economic system, largely epitomised by the use of Capital as a means and an end, rather than just a means as in previous economic systems. That's why it's called Capital-ism.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 11:32 AM

I think you lost me. Are you saying those economic systems, the ones that had markets and a bourgeois, aren't capitalism?

As opposed to, say, the political/social systems of the time, like feudalism, or democracy, or despotism, or a republic?

An economic system is always married to a political system. Unless you are saying that Capitalism in the modern day is a rejection of the political/social pairing? Or is that the more extreme supporters of Capitalism?

I consider myself Anarcho-Socialist, but I think that still means I believe in a political system. The same goes for Libertarian Capitalists, of which there are many on this board.

Personally, Capitalists, I have no beef with you, so long as you are Libertarian. I think any Anarcho-Socialist community could allow for an individual to create an idea and live in a sort of niche market. Like in a market system, the community would reward such an individual by desiring their product and trading for their product in such a way that the Capitalist profits, if that is how the Capitalist chooses to distribute... So long as the production means do not turn into slavery.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 11:46 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I think you lost me. Are you saying those economic systems, the ones that had markets and a bourgeois, aren't capitalism?

Yep. Capitalism is a particular type of economic system that uses markets and companies in a particular way, and sees trade and companies etc. in a unique way also.

Quote:
As opposed to, say, the political/social systems of the time, like feudalism, or democracy, or despotism, or a republic?

Those are social systems, capitalism is purely an economic system. It can, conceivable, exist alongside any of those.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 11:52 AM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I think you lost me. Are you saying those economic systems, the ones that had markets and a bourgeois, aren't capitalism?

Today's capitalism means that it's not enough to have all the toys, but that no one else can have as many as YOU.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 11:53 AM

But corporate capitalism didn't exist in the 1700s either, unless you count the East India Company. In the 1700s, most of the market was still small business owners and an apprenticeship system. I think you are focusing on modern capitalism too much, and dismissing the influence capitalism has had historically.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 11:55 AM

However, I will agree that capitalism as it operates today presents a large problem, that must be addressed. Corporations can't be trusted, anymore than the rich upper classes of centuries past could.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 12:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
But corporate capitalism didn't exist in the 1700s either, unless you count the East India Company. In the 1700s, most of the market was still small business owners and an apprenticeship system. I think you are focusing on modern capitalism too much, and dismissing the influence capitalism has had historically.

No, I'm saying that Capitalism in any form didn't exist prior to the 1700's. Mercantilism may have had similar problems to Capitalism, but it's approach to trade and economies is distinct. Modern Corporations didn't exist prior to the late 1930's, but the term company has been used to describe business partnerships since the very early days of Mercantilism, the 1500's maybe earlier.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 12:12 PM

Um.

Quote:
Mercantilism is an economic theory that holds that the prosperity of a nation is dependent upon its supply of capital. ~wikipedia

I mean, I guess if you don't think they're synonymous... But I do.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 12:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Um.

Quote:
Mercantilism is an economic theory that holds that the prosperity of a nation is dependent upon its supply of capital. ~wikipedia

I mean, I guess if you don't think they're synonymous... But I do.

Maybe you should read that entry, because Adam Smith was actually arguing against Mercantilism when he published The Wealth of Nations, so it's hard to see how a system proposed to replace another can be a synonym of it. Even your quote refutes the charge.

Mercantilism says the prosperity of a nation is based on is supply of capital, or more correctly how much precious metals the nation has in reserve. Capitalism measures prosperity by annual turnover, not capital supply. Capitalism sees trade as a Positive Sum game, both sides can profit from the deal, while Mercantilism sees trade as a Zero-sum game, one party takes advantage of the other. There's more differences, but those alone show they're not synonymous.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 26, 2009 1:40 PM

The way I see it, he was just proposing mercantilism in a different form. But, I can see we aren't going to agree on this.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 27, 2009 12:14 AM