Capitalism is economic tyranny Socialism is economic democracy.

You are aware of the fact that geoism offers greater liberty and justice than capitalism. Or were you referring just to the options within political socialism?

And that's fine, but don't complain when geoism outcompetes you.

It's democracy.

 

Under capitalism you have the freedom to seek any and all opportunities that are available to you or that you make for yourself through entrepreneur endeavors without limits or controls from the government.

 

Nope. Private ownership of land creates a positive feedback effect that inevitably concentrates landownership (and thus all wealth) in fewer and fewer hands. It's obvious in the USA: 100 years ago, ownership of land was widely distributed, and homeownership was within reach of almost everyone. Today, homeownership is declining and is now out of reach for anyone who does not already own land; rent absorbs an increasing fraction of household income; and land is concentrated more and more in fewer and fewer corporate hands.

 

No, that is just objectively false. Under capitalism your freedom to access opportunity has been forcibly stripped from you by government, without compensation, and converted into the private property of the privileged, especially landowners. You have to pay the privileged full market value just for their permission to work, shop, access desirable public services and infrastructure, etc. -- i.e., to live. The notion that that is any sort of freedom or equality of opportunity is absurd, and qualifies as a Big Lie.

 

Private ownership of land means that everyone has been forcibly stripped of their liberty to use what nature provided to survive. They are therefore forced involuntarily to pay landowners full market value just for permission to survive.

Nope. Just a law against using natural resources to survive without paying their owners for permission.

Pay just for permission to use what would otherwise have been perfectly available to use, or starve to death.

Imagine if someone owned the earth's atmosphere, and charged you rent for air to breathe. Would that be involuntary servitude? Then how is that different, in its essentials, from owning land?

 

Hey, capitalism, run by advocates of capitalism with advice from capitalists, has led to what we have, and that’s what I described. So your “cause” and “result” dichotomy seems to be pointless. You have what you have. It is what it is. And it’s degenerating.

 

No, you sound too cute by half. What you said was also said by the pro-feudalism crowd of ten after the first hundred years of guilds and serfs escaping to towns to work in trades.

Cool. Now tell me where you got that incorrect idea. What is your evidence?

How do you know it is impossible? What’s your evidence?

HOW in HELL is that an analogy for a socio-economic system with a hierarchy including a top figure (prime minister, president, chief executive) and businesses with elected CEOs and elected managers?

Here’s the problem you and I are up against: you have a favored picture of socialism and a story of how impossible, how disastrous, how inhumane it is, and you cling to it tenaciously with closed eyes, ears, and mind. Facts and reason cannot break through. You’re fully resistant to the truth. You have a substitute “truth” made up of your preconceived notions and biases. And you have proven this to me for years now.

Need evidence for this? I’ll show you AGAIN after you answer my above questions.

 

I said the word factamour that means my statement is more factual isn't that how we were doing this? That's exactly what you're doing.

 

The fact that it's not already being done, when conditions for it are perfect (ie a capitalist democracy).

Remember, this doesn't require an act of Govt .. it's entirely in the hands of those who are interested in pursuing it. It's a ground up movement, yet it's never left the ground.

 

Depends on what means socialism I suppose ... but in general ... power corrupts and more power corrupts more .. like getting eaten by the Borg these days but only on one side of the fence .. ours is not a system of one or the other .. it is a system of Both .. where we have managed to combine the worst elements of both extremes into an ugly monster referred to as the "Oligopoly-Bureaucracy Fusion Monster"

Ours is a "Pay to Play" System .. a big bureaucracy for the elite and run by the elite .. Pay to Play ensures this structure.

Once you understand the structure .. or the kind of structure .. it is relatively simple predict how things will go knowing a few basic rules of the Crowd ... for example .. would you shoot the golden egg laying goose ? .. knowing that in attemptig to do so you will be running against a herd of stampeding bulls ? .. or just leave that one alone ...

Health care .. how many times we heard some lone voice calling out price fixing .. cost of drugs 10 x higher here than in the rest of the first world .. same pill .. same company.

What happens -- Everyone points to that lone voice and says "Look Look" Freedom of speech in this nation .. what a great system we have" That lone voice is then quickly drowned out by the cacophony on the take .. some lipstick on a pig measure like Obamacare.

Here's a number to stick in your poker .. 3.5 Trillion .. Was the Total HC cost in 2018 .. Fed Revenue came in at 3.6 Trillion for comparison.

We pay double what the rest of first world pays for equivalent care (and don't even try to give me the iffs, ands, or but but but) is a system of Healthcare extortion. Our "Private" system should cost half that of the bloated first world bureaucracies .. just obscene in much of the first world .. with a few notible exceptions .. Portugal being one .. but I digress .. "HALF" the cost .. should tomorrow we switch to one of the other "socialist" systems blow for blow.

The Conservative Case for Universal Healthcare
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-conservative-case-for-universal-healthcare/

The point of all this however is not to debate HC .. but to show how the Monster has managed to enslave . this being just one of the many heads .. of this multi headed beast . sodomizing in a number of different directions.

 

No .. and no ... clarified somewhat in post 1035

 

Totally incorrect. You just described socialism.

 

A free person does not need natural resources per se, other than his own property, to create a product.

 

All because of ineffectual playing rules.

 

4 million new businesses are started every year. What do they pay to play?

You should compare total health care costs with total health care costs. Most of the government provided single payer health care systems bury their actual costs in hidden taxation accounts.

 

I didn't see anything in that post describing the law/force responsible for INVOLUNTARY servitude.

Are you having trouble coming up with something to justify your use of the word INVOLUNTARY?

 

So @RodB , no reply for post 1032? Why am I not surprised.

 

The term Feudal system was used .. were you unaware that this was involuntary servitude ?

 

If you believe that and are not just teasing him, how was it involuntary servitude?

 

You have no clue what was posted to you .. and no clue about how Gov't healthcare works.. making up nonsense as you go.

 

If you can't figure out how "Work for Food" is involintary servitude .. I can help you not.

 

Serfs normally swore an oath of loyalty to the landlord. The serf raised crops and the landlord required a share. It was work in exchange for payment. The payment was what the serf kept of the crops. So if that was “involuntary servitude”, then capitalism is also. But I wouldn’t agree with any of it. Not literally.

 

No. That's how you are doing this.

Nope. But you continue to just make $#!+ up.

 

No, it is objectively correct as a matter of objective physical fact.

No, that is objectively incorrect as a matter of objective physical fact.

 

No, it's inherent in the definition.