Regulated Capitalism is not Capitalism, a free market means just that, free from any restrictions. Monopolies do not exist in the American market, every business has a competitor, a monopoly has no competitor. Now the market has natural corrections, if big banks and businesses are making short term profits they will fail as they have. But a free market makes its own natural corrections, government intervening with burdensome regulations to correct behavior does not promote capitalism.. That sully's the entire market fundamentals, that is why around the world today all the rally's have been phony because they are stimulated by government intervention not free market capitalism. What that means is it will not be long lasting....regulated capitalism is socialism.
BULLL(*)(*)(*)(*) There are many examples of monopoly Cartels in the USA. Medicine being a prime example. - - - Updated - - - BULLL(*)(*)(*)(*) There are many examples of monopoly Cartels in the USA. Medicine being a prime example.
Capitalism only exists for the well connected Elitist ,who have the financial power to monopolize........ Anyone else who believes differently or think they are capitalist, are simply fooling themselves......
PPP which system that has actually been tested and proven gioves more wealth to the average person than Capitalism?
Looks like the libs are stumped with that one. Oh well, another slow death to a great OP, while the libs are out trying to figure a way to exalt their socialism.
'Liberals' are 'capitalists', not 'socialists'. 'Socialists' are 'socialists', strangely enough. The clue is in the name. 'Socialist' and 'socialism' - quite similar words, so it shouldn't be too hard to notice that they are derived from the same source. 'Liberal' and 'liberty' - also quite similar words derived from the same source, and 'capitalism' could easily be described as essentially a manifestation of 'liberty' in economic terms (with people free to own property, set up companies, conduct business, make money, etc.). It's really quite important to understand the essence of such very basic terms in order to hold any kind of realistic or meaningful political discussion.
BTW I was a big Marillion fan too. They actually did a concert at my school in 83 -before they were famous.
Liberals are capitalists? Wow, I guess I've been fooled by obama and the liberally controlled Senate these past 4+ years, where they've instituted European Socialism via obamacare and via the management of a collectivized government that is currently running roughshod over our freedoms/liberties and our take home pay. Would love for you to give us the names of these liberals who you think are capitlaists, and then top it off by telling us what policies they support or have enacted that actually have any resemblance to capitalism.
Again. difficult for you to understand but the rest of the world uses the term 'liberal' very differently than the USA. Cennyd and I are liberals. We beleive in the rights of INDIVIDUALS not countries, classes, races or any other arbitery distinction. That means we back the rights of individuals to buy and sell their own property and labour as they see fit. "obamacare' isn;t socialist. Its a very poorly managed alternative to a National health system but having a national health system is no more socialist than having a national school system ( I'm presuming that you don;t want to end free public schooling). Our ideology comes from Locke, Adam Smith, Bentham and Mill NOT Marx, Engles or Gramsci. Thomas Jefferson was an 18th century liberal (for example). Through the usual American need to bastardise language so that it no longer means what the word implies Liberal in the US means something very different from everyone else. In Australia the Liberals are the Right Wing party.
I don't care how the rest of the world uses the term liberal. So you don't see some if not all of obama's policies as being a threat to individual freedom with his penchant to sidestep the Constitution and to bypass Congress at will by issuing executive order privileges? Any and all policies signed or created by obama and company center around the use of the federal government. Remember, "you didn't build that by yourself!" He doesn't have any respect or any faith in small and large businesses to succeed and prosper. He continues to use our tax monies to fund failed green energy industries, while giving the finger to private businesses. Obamacare is the perfect entity that describes socialism to a tee. National anything almost always becomes socialism, save for our military. Hitler ran a national socialist economy where private industries were under lock and key....same as what we're witnessing under obamunism. And yes, I would love to see public schooling die a natural death. I don't know that much about you and Cen, but for the present day liberals and progressives alike--they get their marching orders from Karl Marx--whether they know it or not. Thomas Jefferson was a Conservative, or perhaps you could call him a Classical Liberal which in other words is a Conservative. Thomas Jefferson said..."our peculiar security is in possession of a written constitution," and warned Americans not to "make it a blank paper by construction." Today's calls for a "flexible Constitution" betray the principles for which many early Americans gave their lives. Another Jefferson warning about our government was when he said this..."Certainly no power over religious discipline has been delagated to the general government." Thomas Jefferson once wrote. "It must thus rest with the states as far as it can be in any human authority." Jefferson the civil libertarian had no appetite for liberties established at the point of a federal gun. The Federalists, a political party to which Hamilton belonged, generally favored a strong central government and a broad construction of the Constitution--the very opposite of Jefferson's Republicans, who were anxious to defend the rights of the states and insisted upon a strict construction of the Constitution....."The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History" No doubt the word liberal connotes what I would call anti Americanism, but libs of today cannot keep running from their other monikers such as commies, progressives, statists, marxists and such. And liberal today is not what classical liberalism was of yesteryear. In fact, its just the opposite.
Enjoy your ignorance then i'm not an Obama fan in any way whatsoever. In fact the man repulses me. I think he a a sociopath. He is no liberal. What do you mean 'private industries were under lock and key under National socialism? Explain exactly Oh so you can use liberal properly when you want to. Conservatives in your country constantly whine about Jesus and want to get the government to tell you what you can do with your own body. Despite the proud ignorance that many Americans (of all political persuasions) seem to revel in I am not anti american, Indeed I Have lived in the US and loved it. The people I hate are generally enemies of the US. I served my nations army (no doubt you are going to insult that too) proudly for 8 years. Then they aren't liberals, they are some sort of 'progressive'. I am no 'progressive'. I am into personal liberty and the state out of my wallet and my bedroom. I'm not a Libertarian- we still need an effective state for all sorts of reasons but their veiws and mine come from the same root.
Exactly. The ideals of Marxism in government and economy are every bit as alien as the ideals of government by either theocracy or aristocracy to a Liberal. The major difference between Liberals and Libertarians economically is really jut the recognition of the need to take practical steps to protect economic freedom and opportunity for all against powerful private interests, as much as against oppressive governments (and in more general terms, the associated recognition that steps need to be taken to help reduce the imbalance of opportunity that already exists within society to protect freedom for everyone, rather than creating an ever expanding opportunity gap which robs the liberty of those 'at the bottom of the social scale'). Thomas Jefferson was not a conservative at all. He was a Liberal. Modern Liberalism may have evolved somewhat in the practicalities of implementation from his days as the context of the world around us has changed with new ideas and technologies (and he was certainly not resistant to recognising the new ideas of his time, of course), but our principles and aims remain very much the same as his.
Oh my god, I see you didn't read some of Jefferson's quotes that I so happily gave you here, where he warns against Hamilton's centralized government in lieu of Americans adopting and or forming states' rights.
Localism, and bringing democratic government as close as practically possible to the people, is an entirely sound Liberal principle, and one with which I wholeheartedly agree, as a Liberal. Local and accountable democratic government within a strong framework of international friendship and cooperation is a liberal ideal. If the question is 'do I think that the federal government in the US has become too powerful and elitist, too intrusive and control-minded, too remote from its electorate, and as a result of that last one too influenced by the interests of large corporations and wealthy private interests?', my answer would be a resounding 'Yes'!'. If, however, the question were related directly to whether that is primarily a result of Obama's actions over the past few years, my answer would be a resounding 'No' - the problem has been developing for a while, and both 'sides' are equally to blame for it. It wasn't the 'Liberals' (by any definition) who created the Patriot Act, for example.
I am opposed to capitalism. It is horrible for the environment. Capitalism doesn't ensure equality. It is very primitive, honestly.
I support capitalism because all other options have managed (*)(*)(*)(*) the bed thus far, capitalism just wets the bed. But with capitalism, I can higher a maid to do laundry at a wage we both agree on to clean the sheets and make the bed.
Capitalism is why America is the best country in the world, our companies are all over the world. Go anywhere without seeing Coca Cola or Macdonalds, it just doesn't happen.....In a capitalist country like America, the businesses control the government. In a socialist country like Europe, the government has all the power. In a capitalist country with Liberty the economic winners decide how the country is run, that will be unfortunate for the economic losers... You see Thomas Jefferson and the founding fathers were all liberals like myself, and they would want the wealthy business owners to run the country instead of government. They in fact staged a revolution against government, King George's government of England to be precise. The founding fathers of the United States were all wealthy landowners, so that alone should provide context of where their interests would be today.
Can you show me the alternative to Capitalism which is GOOD for the environment? One that has actually been in practice rather than one that is theoretical?
I love how you use Capitalism to support Capitalism. Europe is definitely not a country. It's a continent. So, let's totally neglect the economic losers. That's the Capitalist Way. Because the stock market is so stable and reliable. Notice that they were all wealthy land owners. It is so interesting how quickly this social hierarchy built up. Then I assume you have never studied Norway and their economics.
I am very very familiar with Norway. It is a Capitalist country. The means of production are mostly directly owned privately by shareholders. Like EVERY capitalist country it is a Mixed market where the Government provides services through taxation and exploitation of natural resources and a certain number of publicly listed companies. In Norway it is higher than average but never more than a third and these are concentrated in Natural resources, national telecom provision and the state bank.
No. It is a capitalist country where the bulk of production is owned by private companies. There are state owned companies like Elf, Total and (partly) Renault but the massive bulk is privately owned.Agriculture is all in private hands All EU countries are capitalist countries. They only vary in the amount of social provision and state ownership of certain strategically important businesses. Make sure you don;t conflate A socialist economy- where the state/workers control all the means of production (as In Cuba) to a Social Democratic government which has private ownership of M.o.P. but generally high taxes to pay for services. Kiel bone vi parolas Esperanton? Estus granda se la tuta mondo parolas ĝin SED kaj estas granda SED mi ne povas vidi ĝin pasante.
I appreciate the explanation. There is no environmentally friendly socialist nation currently existing.
