Misperception of Capitalism

hatrickpatrick · 30-11-2011 05:18PM

stevenmu wrote: »

An American who was living in Ireland went out for a walk one evening. He was walking down a quiet country lane when he walked past a huge big house, nearly a mansion. It had lovely big landscaped gardens, and a brand new BMW and Jaguar parked out on the marble slabbed driveway. Looking in the huge bay window he could see the man of the house sitting watching a giant flat screen TV and his gorgeous young wife sitting beside him, and he thought to himself "that lucky b@stard, I'm going to be him one of these days", and went off on his way.

A few minutes later and Irish guy came walking down the same road. He looked in and saw the same house, saw the same gardens and the BMW and Jaguar parked outside. He looked in the window and saw the flat screen TV and the wife, and thought to himself "that lucky b@stard, I'm going to get him one of these days".

Capitalism is dirty word here because we're a nation of begrudgers. Our national mentality is that we should be happy with what we have, and anybody who tries to be a success is rising above their station. And god help anybody who manages to make some money, they've obviously done it by trampling on the decent honest hard working folk, and every penny should be taken off them.

If that big house and the cars were gotten through an honest, hardworking individual or someone who invested and got very lucky, I would have absolutely no problem with it whatsoever.

When it was got through buying politicians, committing rampant white collar crime and getting it covered up by friends in high places, and asking the taxpayer to bail out companies when they become insolvent so as the executives can walk away unscathed - THAT is when I begrudge it.

Success is fine. But I refuse to pay for their failure when things go belly up. If I'm not going to get bailed out when I bet on the wrong horse, I don't see why they should be either.

AhSureTisGrand · 30-11-2011 05:18PM

OneArt wrote: »

There is nothing ethical about murdering innocent plants.

True. I only eat fruit, and I make sure to disperse the seeds when I'm finished

hatrickpatrick · 30-11-2011 05:19PM

mconigol wrote: »

Capitalism isn't a cut throat system where you're encouraged to walk over the perceived weak.

No, but it appears that is is a system wherein walking all over the weak is tolerated rather than punished.

Ontological Epistemologist · 30-11-2011 05:21PM

Does my job define me? Does the accumulation of money have a limit, if not, why? Do I strive to work the rest of my days in an office, a cog in a machine, a hierarchy I will never break out of. Do I wish for no better than to simply keep my boss wealthy while I struggle to ends meat? Or do I wish for something better? Do I seek refuge in the beauty of nature, to be self sufficient and to live a simple life? A life without much wealth or possessions, yet one in which I am happy?

Do I compete with my neighbour, to keep up with them with that artificial construct which is money? Or do I co-operate with them and work together towards a better community in conjunction with a respect for and to live in harmony with mother nature? I am a man in a world with an abundance of beauty of freely ordained bounties. I have laughter and love, I do not need this economic system which runs my life, making me a slave for the corporate hierarchy, all for the sake of making more of a man made invention, money.

foxyboxer · 30-11-2011 05:30PM

Ontological Epistemologist wrote: »

Does my job define me? Does the accumulation of money have a limit, if not, why? Do I strive to work the rest of my days in an office, a cog in a machine, a hierarchy I will never break out of. Do I wish for no better than to simply keep my boss wealthy while I struggle to ends meat? Or do I wish for something better? Do I seek refuge in the beauty of nature, to be self sufficient and to live a simple life? A life without much wealth or possessions, yet one in which I am happy?

Do I compete with my neighbour, to keep up with them with that artificial construct which is money? Or do I co-operate with them and work together towards a better community in conjunction with a respect for and to live in harmony with mother nature? I am a man in a world with an abundance of beauty of freely ordained bounties. I have laughter and love, I do not need this economic system which runs my life, making me a slave for the corporate hierarchy, all for the sake of making more of a man made invention, money.

Sure why don't we go back to living in caves in that case.

fishy fishy · 30-11-2011 05:39PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

A fundamental aspect of capitalism is that if you take risks, you pay for them yourself if they go wrong.
In Ireland, ordinary people who had nothing to do with your choices have to bail out out, presuming you're a personal friend of people in government.

Capitalism itself isn't the problem. The problem is, very simple, corporate money in politics. You can't possible have a one person, one vote, everyone has an equal voice society if it's so easy to buy politicians.

Ban all corporate donations and vigorously pursue anyone found to be involved in the slightest bit of corruption, and capitalism would work a whole lot better than it does.

the eircom shares come to mind here - the govt telling people they were safe as houses - people taking loans out to purchase them and what happens - they lose their value - and people lose their money the term "your investment can go down as well as up" was used here to explain away the loss.

not so with anglo.

a different group of people -

its okay to burn the little hamsters making the wheel turn but god forbit the fat cats get burned.

if capitalism is the form of life people want - let's at least keep it fair - keep the rules consistant.

Eric Cartman · 30-11-2011 05:47PM

stevenmu wrote: »

Capitalism is dirty word here because we're a nation of begrudgers. Our national mentality is that we should be happy with what we have, and anybody who tries to be a success is rising above their station. And god help anybody who manages to make some money, they've obviously done it by trampling on the decent honest hard working folk, and every penny should be taken off them.

this right here folks, right here is the truest statement in this thread

RichieC · 30-11-2011 05:52PM

We cant blame "capitalism" for the monstrosity currently taking over the globe.

Killer Pigeon · 30-11-2011 05:53PM

Capitalism: Reality.
Socialism: Emotion driven fantasy.

Take your pick.

Killer Pigeon · 30-11-2011 05:55PM

RichieC wrote: »

We cant blame "capitalism" for the monstrosity currently taking over the globe.

You can blame corporatism, monetarism and general government meddling in economic affairs ... not capitalism.

Shattered Dreamer · 30-11-2011 05:59PM

Greed & corruption are the problem not capitalism & there are a lot of people who find that hard to grasp from either through a cloud of weed smoke, over the smell of overpriced coffee or from atop of a bar stool.

Ontological Epistemologist · 30-11-2011 05:59PM

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

Capitalism: Reality.
Socialism: Emotion driven fantasy.

Take your pick.

Socialism is as bad as capitalism. It is just capitalism with a social face painted onto it. This illusion holds no water when one peels the paint and sees that Socialism is just a puppet on a string used by the capitalist merchants who make us believe we live in an equitable society, while they continue to make their billions in the background when we are not watching. I believe that anarchy and the abolition of property and money is what is truly needed, so that we can return to nature again and work in co-operation with one another and in harmony with Gaia, and respect her boundaries, which capitalism and its greed does do through its rampant greed, pollution and corruption.

foxyboxer · 30-11-2011 06:00PM

fishy fishy wrote: »

the eircom shares come to mind here - the govt telling people they were safe as houses - people taking loans out to purchase them and what happens - they lose their value - and people lose their money the term "your investment can go down as well as up" was used here to explain away the loss.

not so with anglo.

a different group of people -

its okay to burn the little hamsters making the wheel turn but god forbit the fat cats get burned.

if capitalism is the form of life people want - let's at least keep it fair - keep the rules consistant.

The eircom shares fiasco was simply a case of pure and utter greed for the most part. Case in point is those who borrowed money to invest FFS.
Any one who invested and made money on those shares had a bit of discipline.

People got greedy and when the price collapsed they put it down as some kind of stitch up and confidence trick and swore off stock investing as a mugs game. It's like a mug saying I'm putting 10k into Anglo or BOI during the boom with no exit plan or risk management. Then when they tanked they blamed anyone but themselves.

Anyone with discipline investing would have considered how much they had to play with, how much they were willing to lose and what price they would cut their losses at or realised any profit. It's simply a case of being right. People hate being wrong.

The shareprice started to fall and the disciplined cut their losses, whilst those who were greedy watched the price fall in the vain hope that the price would rebound so they could salvage something from the fiasco.

Eric Cartman · 30-11-2011 06:01PM

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

You can blame corporatism, monetarism and general government meddling in economic affairs ... not capitalism.

really you can blame socialism on a higher scale , its kind of funny to see the socialists and the occupy people going and saying capitalism is evil, capitalism would have let the banks rot , the socialists want people who made mistakes to be given free money (the dole) but when a company gets free money then suddenly its a tragedy.

capitalism gives nobody free money and so teaches everyone to be more responsible and rewards risk takers

Jopari87 · 30-11-2011 06:08PM

I don't think it is the systems that are wrong but human nature.

As long as there are Gordan Gekkos in this world economic systems will be corrupted, regardless of whether it is socialism or capitalism.

hatrickpatrick · 30-11-2011 06:08PM

foxyboxer wrote: »

The eircom shares fiasco was simply a case of pure and utter greed for the most part. Case in point is those who borrowed money to invest FFS.
Any one who invested and made money on those shares had a bit of discipline.

People got greedy and when the price collapsed they put it down as some kind of stitch up and confidence trick and swore off stock investing as a mugs game. It's like a mug saying I'm putting 10k into Anglo or BOI during the boom with no exit plan or risk management. Then when they tanked they blamed anyone but themselves.

Anyone with discipline investing would have considered how much they had to play with, how much they were willing to lose and what price they would cut their losses at or realised any profit. It's simply a case of being right. People hate being wrong.

The shareprice started to fall and the disciplined cut their losses, whilst those who were greedy watched the price fall in the vain hope that the price would rebound so they could salvage something from the fiasco.

That doesn't address my point about Anglo, which was bailed out, it seems, solely because its managers were in bed with the government.

fishy fishy wrote: »

its okay to burn the little hamsters making the wheel turn but god forbit the fat cats get burned.

if capitalism is the form of life people want - let's at least keep it fair - keep the rules consistant.

This. This this this this this this this this.
If I make a bet on a horse and the horse doesn't win, it's my own tough luck. The same should apply to Drumm, Fitzie and their associated cronies, along with everyone whose property portfolio has ended up in NAMA.

They wouldn't pay for MY mistakes, why the hell should I pay for theirs?

Occupy Dame Street had a very simple poster to this end: Banksters don't share their profits with the people, why should the people share their losses?

foxyboxer · 30-11-2011 06:10PM

Money is something we use everyday.

But what is the major hole in our education system?

There are no lessons in how money works, how it is acquired, how to protect it and how to grow it to protect your future.

Perhaps there is a reason for this, as he who pays the piper calls the tune.
Schooled ignorance is a major contributing factor IMO for the reason we are in the mess we are today.

A classic example is buying a car. Say we need a car for work. What we don't need is a big fancy one (which is really about impressing other people). What we need is a reliable car regularly serviced and maintained for as long as it lasts at a price that we can afford. Not necessarily getting into major debt for.

You could buy the big fancy one on lease at 30k over 5 years and end up paying 40k over the 5 years for a depreciating asset that's worth a fraction of that after the full term. Having failed to determine what the compound interest will do to the initial loan.

Eric Cartman · 30-11-2011 06:10PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Occupy Dame Street had a very simple poster to this end: Banksters don't share their profits with the people, why should the people share their losses?

people without jobs dont give to society, why should they get the dole ?

stevenmu · 30-11-2011 06:11PM

Grumpypants wrote: »

Capitalism has successfully lowered the standard of living for the vast majority of people in the Western world since the 1970's when it peaked.

Seriously, you think living standards were higher in the 70's?

What about longer life spans, healthier lifestyles, better access to healthcare, better access to education (what percentage of the Irish population went to college in the 70's compared to now), no more kids running around barefoot in shorts in the snow because they couldn't afford shoes, an average of nearly 2 cars per household, an average of 2 to 3 TVs per household, food over the last 10 years or so is pretty much at an all time low price, and significantly higher purchasing power.

Ray Palmer wrote:

Rehash of something said a million times except it doesn't fit in this case. Capatilism is not a catch phrase for success. Capatlism is actually the raising of something regardless of who suffers. Fire all your staff and move the company to a cheaper labour force and still charge the same for the product.

Capitalism is actually just about rewarding success, it's as simple as that, it's not about suffering.

I still don't take the begrudgery story for the entire nation or for the US nation being a nation of go getters. They have one of the highest ratio of people in prison to those not. Their country has a large financial power but actually don't control the world's financial reserves. Their national debt has steadily increased. Their form of capatilism put the world in financial trouble. That is what capatilism has brought. It is a flawed system based on gambling and a ponzie scheme.

Well the joke is just an exaggerated stereotpye, but it's based in enough truth to make it (IMO at least) funny.

The 'form of capitalism that put the world in financial trouble" is actually an interesting point, I would argue that it was actually a perversion of capitalism. The core principle of capitalism is that if you work harder, build a better product, supply it cheaper, or in some other way provide a better service then you get rewarded more for it, and in turn benefit society as a whole.

We were brought to our current situation though because people cheated the system, they lied and stole, they bribed politicians, they ignored the inherent values of things and built up percieved wealth based upon percieved/inflated values of things where no inherent value existed, and they built this layer upon layer by lying to themselves and to each other until it all inevitably came crashing down.

This wasn't capitalism, it was actually anti-capitalistic behaviour which caused the problem, and a lack or regulation against (and casued by) such anti-capitalistic behaviour.

Interestingly this is very similar to why communism in the soviet union failed.

If that big house and the cars were gotten through an honest, hardworking individual or someone who invested and got very lucky, I would have absolutely no problem with it whatsoever.

When it was got through buying politicians, committing rampant white collar crime and getting it covered up by friends in high places, and asking the taxpayer to bail out companies when they become insolvent so as the executives can walk away unscathed - THAT is when I begrudge it.

Success is fine. But I refuse to pay for their failure when things go belly up. If I'm not going to get bailed out when I bet on the wrong horse, I don't see why they should be either.

Well in that case I think we agree. But I would point out that the first scenario (hoonest hard work) is true capitalism and the second (buying politicians, crime etc) is not (as above).

My name is URL · 30-11-2011 06:11PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

capitalism gives nobody free money and so teaches everyone to be more responsible and rewards risk takers

Quite a conflicting point tbh

foxyboxer · 30-11-2011 06:15PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

That doesn't address my point about Anglo, which was bailed out, it seems, solely because its managers were in bed with the government.

Have a read off Anglo Republic. If you're not appalled already by that fiasco.

hatrickpatrick · 30-11-2011 06:17PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

people without jobs dont give to society, why should they get the dole ?

I would agree with this being applied to people on the dole indefinitely. Unfortunately, however, a lot of people have ended up out of work through no fault of their own, BECAUSE of the mess "croney capitalism" has created.

Time limits on it, or else linking it to rejecting job offers, for instance, is something I would support.

There's a fundamental flaw in your logic though. People who go on the dole after being employed generally experience a gigantic drop in standards of living, a gigantic drop in income.

Drumm, on the other hand, still has a multi million euro pension. Which is now being paid for by you and me in taxes, seeing as the company which was supposed to provide it is now insolvent.

Another crucial difference here is that people on the dole (if the system worked properly) actually need it - they would need it to live on. The cronies who have been bailed out already had their millions, the millions they walked away with from the scene of the car crash.

Capitalism isn't such a terrible thing. Crony capitalism, on the other hand, is what we've always had in Ireland, and it is a cancer on society. The sooner it is stamped out, the better.

hatrickpatrick · 30-11-2011 06:18PM

foxyboxer wrote: »

Have a read off Anglo Republic. If you're not appalled already by that fiasco.

Hehehe... Anyone who's read ANY of my posts related to the economy and injustice knows that my disgust with that whole situation is pretty much maxed out! But I'll give it a go anyway.

Is it going to upset me any more than I already am? :mad:

foxyboxer · 30-11-2011 06:22PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Hehehe... Anyone who's read ANY of my posts related to the economy and injustice knows that my disgust with that whole situation is pretty much maxed out! But I'll give it a go anyway.

Is it going to upset me any more than I already am? :mad:

If you suffer from a heart condition you may require a doctors note though!

XORAND · 30-11-2011 06:25PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Unfortunately, however, a lot of people have ended up out of work through no fault of their own, BECAUSE of the mess "croney capitalism" has created.

From my own research, non classical liberalism and conservatism tend to aid these practices. With no competition and mostly vested interests, there is no real incentive to be fair with the ordinary person.

Government should only exist as a form of moral arbitration, not as a super entity to control peoples lives through orwellian practices and high taxation.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Capitalism isn't such a terrible thing. Crony capitalism, on the other hand, is what we've always had in Ireland, and it is a cancer on society. The sooner it is stamped out, the better.

Agreed.

Ontological Epistemologist · 30-11-2011 06:30PM

XORAND wrote: »

From my own research, non classical liberalism and conservatism tend to aid these practices. With no competition and mostly vested interests, there is no real incentive to be fair with the ordinary person.

Government should only exist as a form of moral arbitration, not as a super entity to control peoples lives through orwellian practices and high taxation.

Agreed.

Government only exists nowadays to support the corrupt capitalist merchants and protect the things and property they have stolen through capitalism. We need to abolish government and capitalism because they are making us compete to the death, when we should work in co-operation with one another. Greed is not natural, and neither is capitalism.

Eric Cartman · 30-11-2011 06:36PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I would agree with this being applied to people on the dole indefinitely. Unfortunately, however, a lot of people have ended up out of work through no fault of their own, BECAUSE of the mess "croney capitalism" has created.

Time limits on it, or else linking it to rejecting job offers, for instance, is something I would support.

There's a fundamental flaw in your logic though. People who go on the dole after being employed generally experience a gigantic drop in standards of living, a gigantic drop in income.

Drumm, on the other hand, still has a multi million euro pension. Which is now being paid for by you and me in taxes, seeing as the company which was supposed to provide it is now insolvent.

Another crucial difference here is that people on the dole (if the system worked properly) actually need it - they would need it to live on. The cronies who have been bailed out already had their millions, the millions they walked away with from the scene of the car crash.

Capitalism isn't such a terrible thing. Crony capitalism, on the other hand, is what we've always had in Ireland, and it is a cancer on society. The sooner it is stamped out, the better.

im glad you said croney capitalism but I think to a certain extent my point still stands, taking the company as a person , it payed tax for years and now is in difficulty and wants money , same as a person ,

Benny_Cake · 30-11-2011 06:44PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

people without jobs dont give to society, why should they get the dole ?

Let people starve in the streets and see how long "capitalism" survives for.Seriously - do you actually think about this stuff?Question - do all people without jobs not want to get jobs?

XORAND · 30-11-2011 06:50PM

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Let people starve in the streets and see how long "capitalism" survives for.Seriously - do you actually think about this stuff?Question - do all people without jobs not want to get jobs?

Socialism is one of the root causes of unemployment. Remove the incentive for governents to monopolise peoples lives, and watch things improve. Of course it's not that simple, but you cannot deny Socialism fuels poverty.

Benny_Cake · 30-11-2011 06:55PM

XORAND wrote: »

Socialism is one of the root causes of unemployment. Remove the incentive for governents to monopolise peoples lives, and watch things improve. Of course it's not that simple, but you cannot deny Socialism fuels poverty.

I've seen the word "Socialism" used in so many ways here that I'm not even sure what it means anymore.But for our purposes let's assume you mean the modern welfare state as it's existed in Western Europe since World War 2 - is there more or less poverty in the last half-century?The welfare state is responsible for providing an educated and healthy workforce allowing capitalism to thrive, not to mention providing a safety net which insures that the wealthy can sleep soundly at night knowing that their property won't be seized by bands of the starving poor.

Misperception of Capitalism

Comments