The problem of Capitalism

So you have no views over neoliberalism and how it was enabled by the fake libertarians? Gosh, its like you don't want to upset your chums

 

Anyone like to help crank? How about either support for neoliberalism or a critique of how fake libertarians enabled that disaster? For the latter, please start with how Thatcherism was reliant on Friedman and Hayek. That'll show at least a passing resemblance to knowledge...

 

Reivs, you know I'm happy to offer any wisdom gleaned from decades of sharing, but I doubt I can help at this point. You're still heavily invested in using words as handcuffs ..... "see? I can't do anything!"

 

Please don't be repetitive to hide. You have your question. Answer it or not. I don't really care

[It does amuses me, mind you, how fake lefties can't even hide their nature. A proper lack of imagination!]

 

LOLlies

 

Well done in your confirmation

 

Every response is another little indicator that your armchair is growing uncomfortable. I believe in you, Reivs. I know you're serious about change, and not just one of the posturers, so it's only a matter of time before you're moved to act. Don't rush it though, wean yourself out with increasingly feeble rejoinders. Cold turkey doesn't work for everyone.

 

I know -- and so do you -- that they haven't. YOU know you are too terrified even to attempt to refute them, because you know you will be demolished and humiliated again, and your beliefs conclusively proved false and evil.

I have always had, and always will have, an absolute right to take any property that consists of my rights.

<yawn> Is that what happened when the landless peasants of France took the "property" of the aristos? Is that what happened when the Meijji Japanese took the "property" of the parasitic landowning samurai class?

LOL! I AM doing it. I am merely, unlike you, able to think beyond the range of the moment and plan for the long term rather than just pursuing my own immediate gratification.

I have proved they are not only comparable, not only similar, but equivalent.

 

That's the only word I can quote as you didn't say anything. I asked you to critique neoliberalism. Big subject! You mustered nothing. You seem irrelevant.

 

No, because under the current system the productive have to pay for government twice so that landowners can pocket one of the payments in return for nothing.

<yawn> GARBAGE.

“When the emancipation of the African was spoken of, and when the nation of Britain appeared to be taking into serious consideration the rightfulness of abolishing slavery, what tremendous evils were to follow! Trade was to be ruined, commerce was almost to cease, and manufacturers were to be bankrupt. Worse than all, private property was to be invaded (property in human flesh), the rights of planters sacrificed to the speculative notions of fanatics, and the British government was to commit an act that would forever deprive it of the confidence of British subjects.”
– Patrick Edward Dove, The Theory of Human Progression, 1850

Sound familiar...?

 

Yep, as long as they are resident citizens.

I'm the one who respects human nature, and knows how to make the economy suit human nature.

 

1850? eighteen hundred and fifty? as in, the High Victorian era?

I'll assume you're not serious.

 

Respecting is not at all the same as accepting its limitations. You seem entirely unable or unwilling to do that.

What's your ulterior motive for that, I wonder.

 

Why wouldn't I be serious? Do you think truth has an expiry date? Do you think Pythagoras's Theorem is somehow wrong because he died more than 2000 years before Dove was born? You are literally now at the stage where you will say, do, and believe ANYTHING WHATEVER in order to avoid knowing the self-evident and indisputable facts of objective physical reality that prove your beliefs are false and evil.

 

This is a comedy routine now, yes?

No clue how you're able to call those getting their hands dirty 'evil' while those who pontificate from their armchairs 'good' with a straight face, so it has to be a running joke.

 

I don't accept that dishonesty, greed, ignorance, dishonesty, cowardice, indolence, conceit and dishonesty are limitations of human nature. Stupidity, yes. "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." -- Schiller

Please identify the limitation of human nature you claim I take insufficient account of.

Oh, please.

 

When the former are getting their hands dirty with human blood, it makes perfect sense.

 

Yep, helping (at considerable personal cost) multiple families move or stay out of poverty via access to shared land is terribly bloody, I know.

Unlike reclining in a private armchair, in a private home, pontificating. That's ****ing saintly.

 

When you rationalize and justify massive, systematic, institutionalized, and wholly gratuitous injustice that has killed literally BILLIONS of innocent people, their blood is on your hands, Grasshopper, and I will thank you to remember it.

That depends entirely on what you are pontificating.

 

one persons production is another persons trash

what possibly could the productive offer to a Land Owner that is of value? the product of their labor is owed to the Land Owner for having the privilege of working on the Queens Land, slaves do not have such privilege.

the British Royalty only become dependent upon the peasants when they are deprived of their rights to Land Ownership.

 

The 'innocent people' not helped - in any way - by your armchair lectures are totes appreciative of your efforts. They can sense that you care, and that you have angry and impassioned thoughts on their behalf. While resting comfortably in your private armchair, in your private home, on your private plot of land.

 

I suspect that's why he's furious.

 

The result is the same: injustice. Crikey, its proved by history and it's also.a tad obvious!

 

No it isn’t.

 

The quality of your arguing informs me everything!