Sunday, September 21, 2008

Capitalism

Monday, September 15, 2008
Readers comment regarding Capitalism

"The Americans want peace. The gangster government does not. The people you allude to are not capitalist's if you define capitalism the way Galambos does. Capitalism is the mechanism that best produces freedom. Freedom is the societal condition that results when every person is 100% in control of 100% of his property 100% of the time. Anything less is socialism. All forms of politics are criminal activities and will only produce total collapse in the end. These activities always employ coercion, either through force or fraud or both."

Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Posted by Horatio Green

If you purchase a beautiful new car in the color that pleases you and of a sleek new design, but the internal workings of that vehicle are faulty and not made of quality inner parts, than what is the factual value of that car?

The internal workings of capitalism (that beautiful car) are the capitalist (the car's mechanical parts). Capitalism is not working because capitalist are gumming up the system.

Likewise, in a democracy its people are the working inner parts. While democracy itself might be a beautiful concept, its working inner parts are a failure. If the government does not want peace, and they prefer war over peace and non-violent resolution, then it's the people in that democracy using the tool of a democratic republic, the inner workings and mechanics of a democracy, that also do not desire peace.

Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Readers comment regarding Capitalism

“The problem is you are using a different definition of capitalists and capitalism than Galambos which is fine. It just means the arguments are not reconcilable until you agree on using terms which both parties understand to mean the same thing. You are saying capitalism is a faulty mechanism if I understand you correctly. Yet if you use capitalism in the sense that Galambos uses it, it is not faulty. What you have been experiencing is not capitalism at all, it is National Socialism. And as socialism produces poverty more and more socialists blame capitalism for the failure and scream for more and more government intervention i.e. socialism. And your getting it. Soon the whole economy will totally collapse and Adolph Hitler will come out of the woodwork to "save you' and the mob will clamor for him. Congratulations the mob will end up marching off to the death camps singing songs to freedom.”


Tuesday, September 20, 2008
Posted by Horatio Green

I am saying that in theory capitalism and free market may be beautiful economic systems. The problem with the system is not its paradigm or its ideology, not its framework, but its working parts, which is the capitalist; capitalist, the human beings that do their work within the capitalist system called capitalism.

And you are absolutely right; the system as we know it is qua socialism because of government intervention.

Capitalist, working within a manipulated, yet unregulated environment, have been free to develop and implement “creative” accounting practices, “creative” lending practices, and “creative” ways to avoid risk, within a free market. If the latter does not define a discombobulated system, then I wouldn’t know of how to otherwise define it. But, perhaps I am wrong; I guess it must be capitalism: if you use syllogistic logic in that capitalist support capitalism and work within capitalism, they are capitalist; therefore it must be capitalism at work.

Capitalist are profit motivated, for profit is the core value of the capitalist system. There are absolutely no human values associated with capitalism. Capitalist do not have a sense of responsibility for the human condition. Government and capitalist strive to understand praxeology, and the human condition, so that it can be utilized to manipulate human conduct for monetary gain.

America’s strange mix of corporate oligarchy associated with quasi-socialism and quasi-capitalism is quite a paradox. A system that fails to benefit the average Joe and Jane.

Our capitalistic, quasi-socialistic economic system is based on a Reaganistic “trickle down” ideology, where wealth is achieved at the top, and therefore those at the bottom consequently will do well because that wealth eventually trickles down to them. The government wins, large corporations and their governing leadership win, but it never substantially trickles down to the folks that really make it all work for them in the first place. It is not a win-win for all, only for the high rollers.

Within our current economic crises, the helping hand fundamentally is given to the investor, and not to your average Joe and Jane. The average Joe and Jane only gets lip service and feel-good so-called solutions, along with an unacceptable amount of blame when things go wrong.

The system should be based on free market, where demand energizes supply and therefore there becomes a need to produce the goods and services to satisfy the demand, a bottom up system.

But the problem is that capitalist will create demand. Some will come up with flim-flam confidence games in promotion, advertising and selling. Many folks do not have the where-with-all to filter out these shenanigans, to know a shameless self-promoter who is working on their confidence for the sale. Many do not have the ability to come up with good choices that will benefit themselves or their family.

Our economic problem all boils down to one keyword: avarice.

It is avarice, the unquenchable quest for unreasonable get-as-much-as-you-can profit that is the problem, and capitalist, as well as every American that I know, are responsible for that.

That is the reason capitalism is a faulty system.

In our quasi-socialism, government intervention always comes too late. America has a history of being reactive instead of proactive in economics, foreign relations and in other ways, of which the response to our current economic crisis is an outstanding example.

I don’t mean to ramble on, but when are Americans going to work on improving our national character, common decency and compassion for all people? Now I don’t want to hear that I am an egalitarian, utopian, that it is a Kum ba yah view, or be condescending as if it’s a liberal view, because that’s not what this is all about. National character, common decency and compassion are not irrelevant to a discussion of American Capitalism.

Congressman Ron Paul said it best: "Each of us should choose which course of action we must take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes, but let it not be said that we did nothing."