Capitalism is economic tyranny Socialism is economic democracy.

Facts facts facts facts facts.

I said it more than you that means I win.

 

Agree with me or you're wrong doesn't seem like democracy at all

 

It's always fascinating to listen to Progressives express their hatred of democracy. Almost as fascinating as their dislike of equality.

They mostly just seem like snide little N@zis, when they start spouting their intolerances and their eugenics.

 

I'm beginning to think progressive means the same thing as dictator. The only people I ever encounter that are called that seem to think forcing people to agree is the only acceptable way to live.

Yeah I agree. Authoritarian trolls nothing more.

 

The mystery is how they got there, from where the Left once was. Or rather it's no mystery how (the more vacuous and vain Rightist elites moved across because they wanted to be down with the kool kids), but mystery as to why the Leftists who are still liberal, allowed it. Maybe Leftism was just a dying ideology - having outlived its utility - so we took anyone prepared to play along.

 

I think it's a simple natural progression. Younger people want to rebel some people will say but I see this expressing individuality and people do this in a conformist sort of way, send for my entire life that is being more and more left but once you have nowhere left to go on the left that's it.

 

I think we were very necessary in the second half of the 20thC .. to fix racism, sexism, and gay marriage. The problem is that Progressives (the snotty poseur branch of the Left) are bloody late to the party, and think that stuff is still a thing. They're like 1980's moms wearing 1960's hair, and it's causing no end of obstacles to progress.

 

Got things half backward .. so only 1/2 "unadulterated hogwash .. as opposed to the pure stuff.

I will give you a hint .. about the part you got wrong by saying that you got the last sentence correct !?

Now tell me - why is the claim "Capitlism ... Liberty" so false ? Vut ist problemo mit premise.

 

I just love to listen to failures discuss ways to have someone else penalized to save them from their own failure.

 

I'm not sure I follow, but I think: there cannot be capitalism without individual freedom and liberty.

 

"Capitalism is the epitome of individual freedom and liberty. Involuntary servitude is the essence of socialism"

Your statement is false but, the main point is the inferred falsehood that involuntary servitude is not the essense of Capitalism. Quite the reverse I am afraid .. and have you not been party to one of my rants on the topic ? -- how Extreme socialism and Extreme capitalism meet at the far end of the spectrum .. in both cases you end up with few elite owning most resources and means of production - the rest at the level of "Serfs" similar in ways to the Feudal days.

 

What @RodB missed is that economies continually change as they evolve over time, and while capitalism WAS once a great opportunity and freedom for capitalists with good ideas and good plans, that time is long gone and capitalism has evolved to the late-stage form that creates more problems than it can solve for most people.

 

I'm not following. Capitalism is capitalism once and forever. As long as there are basic regulations stating the legal playing rules, it just gores on forever as long as their is individual freedom and liberty.

 

There is a thread of truth in what you say. However, socialism inevitably leads to a concentration of wealth and a mass of immobile serfs, if you will. Capitalism also has the potential for that but it is not inevitable, and won't happen, if the appropriate playing rules are enacted.

 

You need to look again! …—with FRESH EYES!

Capitalism once was an incentive for solving problems like poverty, healthcare needs, desire for improving lifestyles, producing long-lasting durable appliances, healthy food without glyphosate or hydrogenated oil and other contaminants. Now it’s just a story of increasing failure and problems, unless you’re wealthy and would like a joy-ride in space.

 

You just described FAILED socialism, … —not “socialism”.

HUH???
Are you completely unaware of the current and growing income and wealth disparities????????????? It “won’t happen”??? IT’S ALREADY HERE!!!!

And exactly who is going to pass laws and regulations to reverse it?

 

You are putting the cart before the horse. What you describe is the result, not the cause, of regulated capitalism. The cause of capitalism is a natural innate one -- not a man made construct of incentives -- of allowing an free individual person to make something on his own that he thinks he can sell to make money. It is as simple as that. It is not an incentive for but does solve problems of poverty, healthcare, and lifestyle indirectly by hiring and paying workers. It produces durable appliances if the entrepreneur is smart enough to design one. It provides healthy foods (as determined by whomever does that sort of thing) only if that's what the people want or the government adds that to their playing rules.

 

I don't mean to sound cute, but by your definition FAILED socialism is the only physically realizable kind; "socialism" is not possible. Socialism is a central ownership or all production and distribution. That central ownership dictates precisely what each worker will do and what he gets paid, will concentrate the wealth, and will become smaller and smaller though more powerful. The ideal but impossible socialism is where the actual ownership is spread among the workers who decide what to make and distribute and how much wealth to spread around. Its problem is like a football team with 300 million players and no coach. That team will never ever play or finish one football game.

Yes, there are things not working out perfectly with our system, primarily the increased concentration of wealth, and partly (but growing fast) the increased immobility of workers of the new capitalists who build data and personal control but not useful things to buy like the old capitalist moguls of the past. However, while maybe not easy, these are fixable with astute and cogent modification of the playing rules by either state governments or the federal government. Socialism's problems are not fixable.

 

First you had to evade the facts, and I guess you found a way to do that: pretend that identifying facts as such is somehow self-contradictory. Now you need a way to evade the fact that you are evading facts, and you seem to have contrived a way of doing that, too. It's always the same.

 

How is servitude 'involuntary' under capitalism? To be true, that would mean there are laws against wealth building, private property, enterprise, etc.

Be very clear about the mechanism of force which makes servitude involuntary.

 

Capitalism hasn't changed, people have.

Capitalism still works very well for those who haven't taken to their armchairs.

 

Since there is no alternative which isn't totalitarian, it's on us as individuals to pursue any interest in socialism/collectivism.

It's capitalist democracy which allows us to pursue those interests.

 

Capitalism has nothing to do with freedom or liberty; it is purely about property relations. In fact, people cannot have freedom or liberty under capitalism because it requires private ownership of natural resources, which forcibly removes everyone's rights to liberty and converts them into the resource owners' private property. The only difference between owning a natural resource like land and owning slaves is that when you own a slave, you own all of one person's rights to liberty, while when you own land, you own one of all people's rights to liberty.

 

Capitalism has definitely changed. Industrial capitalism, with its emphasis on competition, production, and investment in physical capital has evolved into finance capitalism, where the emphasis is on monopoly privilege, debt, and rent seeking.

No. It only works for the rentier class, who are borne upward on the escalator of privilege that is powered by the treadmill the honest, productive class is consigned to toil on.

 

As I've proved many times, there cannot freedom, liberty or free markets under capitalism because by definition, it requires private ownership of natural resources, which forcibly removes people's rights to liberty. Apologists for capitalism just refuse to know that fact.