Most capitalist action you can imagine.

diograis · 20-12-2013 05:17AM

Plenty of things wrong with capitalism, just because the OP think it's some scary big bad corporate device for firing people doesn't give people licence to be so condescending does it?? Correct me if I'm wrong

WoollyRedHat · 20-12-2013 05:57AM

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Why do you associate capitalism with that? Do you consider capitalism a bad thing?

Would you like to go back in a time machine and live in the USSR instead?

Your way of categorizing the world is pretty narrow if you think like that.

Reekwind · 20-12-2013 11:20AM

Stainless_Steel wrote: »

Yes but the Danes work hard.

'High protections for workers' in Ireland = getting away with being lazy

God, I hate this self-loathing nonsense. Irish workers are amongst the most productive in the world and yet we've somehow internalised this notion that we're all lazy and work-shy layabouts, just looking for an excuse to bunk off

camel jockey · 20-12-2013 11:22AM

errlloyd wrote: »

I work as a contractor for a multi-national company in the tourism sector. (Makes it sound a lot better than it is). Anyway the company has a very small staff in Dublin which is a lead by a "manager". The CEO of this company is a bit of a paranoid, sociopathic maniac. So he often completely fires his staff and replaces them with people who will unquestioningly and ruthlessly do what he asks. It is not uncommon to hear of him asking his managers to fire people, just to test their loyalty - but that is not the most capitalist thing I have ever seen.

The most capitalist thing I have ever seen is just related and needed the context. Our internally promoted manager quit a few months back, and the company told us they were sending someone from abroad. Now someone they send in will inevitably get fired very quickly - I think they often move people here just to fire them. (We are a separately registered company, so they terminate their contract with our "Berlin" office and the company promises them a contract in Dublin, they move to Dublin, never get a contract and two weeks later get told they're fired, its pretty awful).

The most capitalist thing I have ever seen was when the new manager got announced, on the contractor FB page, we had an open betting pool on how long it would be till he got fired. The person who won is the most left wing, union loving, rights activist I know. Which is an amazing amount of horrible irony.

TL;DR: We had a bet in work on how long till someone got fired.

At least you don't have Siberian gulags (forced labour camps) to worry about.

Karl Stein · 20-12-2013 11:24AM

jank wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guild

Yeah...

Karl Stein · 20-12-2013 11:25AM

donegal__road wrote: »

not if your living in Cuba... we are talking on a world-wide perspective here I take it?

.

Hey ⇧ What's with the little full stop there?

ScumLord · 20-12-2013 11:28AM

This one time, I bought something in a shop and then sold it to someone else for more money than I paid for it.. It was alcohol for a kid in case you're wondering why they didn't just go buy it in the shop themselves.

Capitalism is crude, it is very survival of the fittest which is why I think it doesn't suit humans fully. We're not a very survival of the fittest type of species, sharing and fairness has always been the underlying default state of human communities.

burnhardlanger · 20-12-2013 11:31AM

ACTION

stevedublin · 20-12-2013 11:34AM

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Would you like to go back in a time machine and live in the USSR instead?

Actually capitalism predates communism!

topper75 · 20-12-2013 11:37AM

The communist leader in Russia, Uncle Joe, was the biggest sociopath of them all. Biggest mass murderer in human history.

He was a sociopath. Bad.

A capitalist is something entirely different- someone who invests in an enterprise. Good.

camel jockey · 20-12-2013 11:47AM

topper75 wrote: »

The communist leader in Russia, Uncle Joe, was the biggest sociopath of them all. Biggest mass murderer in human history.

He was a sociopath. Bad.

A capitalist is something entirely different- someone who invests in an enterprise. Good.

Inflicting famine on his own population among other things.

Stainless_Steel · 20-12-2013 11:47AM

Reekwind wrote: »

God, I hate this self-loathing nonsense. Irish workers are amongst the most productive in the world and yet we've somehow internalised this notion that we're all lazy and work-shy layabouts, just looking for an excuse to bunk off

Maybe so. I guess my experiences working in semi-state (high protection through Union) cloud my perspective.

Captain Farrell · 20-12-2013 11:49AM

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

theres a high percentage of psychopaths working as CEO's, its been researched and documented

i'm a CEO and got 76% on that psychopath test thingumajig on here the other day. I'm farly normal compared to many that i meet....

Reekwind · 20-12-2013 11:51AM

topper75 wrote: »

The communist leader in Russia, Uncle Joe, was the biggest sociopath of them all. Biggest mass murderer in human history.

He was a sociopath. Bad.

A capitalist is something entirely different- someone who invests in an enterprise. Good.

I'm sorry but that's ridiculous on so many levels. Let's take the two most obvious:

1) Like him or not, Stalin was not the "biggest mass murderer in human history". That's simply a false claim. In the 20th C alone (and there were plenty of murderous bastards before then) his 'deathcount' is comfortably exceeded by, say, Hitler's

2) Your logic implies that there is no such thing as a murderous capitalist. Which is, again, pretty obviously false. As even the briefest glance at European/colonial history should demonstrate

aidoh · 20-12-2013 11:52AM

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

add another zero and apparently you can blow up something 2legged..

I wouldn't be paying 1000 quid to blow up a chicken anyway.

Ostrom · 20-12-2013 01:16PM

Stainless_Steel wrote: »

Yes but the Danes work hard.

'High protections for workers' in Ireland = getting away with being lazy

The average Dane works almost 200 hours less per year than we do. In productivity terms, their economy comes out worse so this has nothing to do with culture. During the height of the boom, the Irish economy was at full employment, so I don't think there is anything inherently lazy about the Irish labour force - when conditions are historically favourable, everybody is at work.

The protections are more a recognition on the part of both state and employer that a sustainable economy means protecting your workers from the threat of downgrading - either of labour conditions or labour costs.

donegal__road · 20-12-2013 01:37PM

Carlos Roca wrote: »

Hey ⇧ What's with the little full stop there?

you know when you edit a post you've made, and re-post it.. right underneath the post there is a sentence which says 'last edited at 12:35 by XXXXXXX'

I think that this line appears too close to the post, which isn't easy on the eye, so to put a bit of distance between my post and the line which comes up automatically, I do this

. <--- full stop here separates my post from that annoying 'last edited by' line

Stainless_Steel · 20-12-2013 02:08PM

Ostrom wrote: »

The average Dane works almost 200 hours less per year than we do. In productivity terms, their economy comes out worse so this has nothing to do with culture. During the height of the boom, the Irish economy was at full employment, so I don't think there is anything inherently lazy about the Irish labour force - when conditions are historically favourable, everybody is at work.

The protections are more a recognition on the part of both state and employer that a sustainable economy means protecting your workers from the threat of downgrading - either of labour conditions or labour costs.

Ok. See my more recent post re experiences working in semi states.

Femme_Fatale · 20-12-2013 02:44PM

Lol at the "Would you prefer to live in the USSR?" posts - as if that's the only alternative to what the OP describes. :pac:

It's an example of greed and ruthlessness - and while the basic principles of capitalism are not a bad thing (we in the West get to take advantage of these tenets, e.g. being able to set up our own businesses; being rewarded for hard work/training) the OP is an example of capitalism going too far. And then Stalin's regime was an example of socialism going too far.

I think most people would agree somewhere in the middle is the ideal.

Karl Stein · 20-12-2013 02:48PM

donegal__road wrote: »

I think that this line appears too close to the post .. so to put a bit of distance between my post and the line which comes up automatically

That's mental.
trollface

Clandestine · 20-12-2013 02:58PM

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

I think most people would agree somewhere in the middle is the ideal.

If far-left is socialism and far-right is neo liberalism, the middle would be a mix of both yes? Which would mean a large amount of government interest in the countries economy....

Which would be a terrible idea, the government should stay as far away from the markets as possible. I think capitalism is a fine system but when the government interferes with it ends up becoming an inefficient and poorly managed system. The government is constantly wasting tax payers money on costly schemes and most government programs and services would be better provided for by private companies who would minimize waste and provide a better service.

Karl Stein · 20-12-2013 03:02PM

Clandestine wrote: »

a large amount of government interest in the countries economy....

Which would be a terrible idea

Em.. in what developed country in the world is there not considerable government interest in the economy?

Go on google like mad..

topper75 · 20-12-2013 03:31PM

Reekwind wrote: »

I'm sorry but that's ridiculous on so many levels. Let's take the two most obvious:

1) Like him or not, Stalin was not the "biggest mass murderer in human history". That's simply a false claim. In the 20th C alone (and there were plenty of murderous bastards before then) his 'deathcount' is comfortably exceeded by, say, Hitler's

2) Your logic implies that there is no such thing as a murderous capitalist. Which is, again, pretty obviously false. As even the briefest glance at European/colonial history should demonstrate

I stand corrected on Uncle Joe. He only killed something like 7m of his 'comrades'. Accusation retracted!

I don't think I need fear communism becoming a problem here in Ireland anyway. There is no market for it, which is a delicious irony.

Clandestine · 20-12-2013 03:34PM

Carlos Roca wrote: »

Em.. in what developed country in the world is there not considerable government interest in the economy?

Go on google like mad..

Hong Kong... which has the highest IQ in the world, 13th highest HDI, 7th highest GDP per capita, longest life expectancy in the world etc.

All this in an area the size of Longford.

Reekwind · 20-12-2013 03:45PM

Clandestine wrote: »

Hong Kong... which has the highest IQ in the world, 13th highest HDI, 7th highest GDP per capita, longest life expectancy in the world etc.

So your example for a state with minimum government intervention is one in which half the population lives in state-provided housing?

Karl Stein · 20-12-2013 03:48PM

Clandestine wrote: »

Hong Kong... which has the highest IQ in the world, 13th highest HDI, 7th highest GDP per capita, longest life expectancy in the world etc.

All this in an area the size of Longford.

Hong Kong is a City State so comparing it to other countries is ridiculous.

Clandestine · 20-12-2013 03:59PM

Carlos Roca wrote: »

Hong Kong is a City State so comparing it to other countries is ridiculous.

It is often considered a country and it has a completely different government, legal system, police force etc. to China's.

Suryavarman · 20-12-2013 04:12PM

Reekwind wrote: »

1) Like him or not, Stalin was not the "biggest mass murderer in human history". That's simply a false claim. In the 20th C alone (and there were plenty of murderous bastards before then) his 'deathcount' is comfortably exceeded by, say, Hitler's

Wrong.

Indeed, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the literary giant who wrote harrowingly about the Soviet gulag system, claimed the true number of Stalin’s victims might have been as high as 60 million.

Most other estimates from reputed scholars and historians tend to range from between 20 and 60 million.

Reekwind · 20-12-2013 04:29PM

Suryavarman wrote: »

Most other estimates from reputed scholars and historians tend to range from between 20 and 60 million

Well that's wrong for a start. Academic consensus (ie the likes of Davies, Wheatcroft, Harrison, Nove, Ellman, Getty and Allen, to name but a few) over the past twenty years has settled on a figure of approximately 7-10m excess deaths over the years of Stalin's reign. Of which the vast majority (6-8m) were the product of famine. And, no, not even the likes of Conquest seriously contend these days that the 1930s famine was deliberate genocide

Indeed, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the literary giant who wrote harrowingly about the Soviet gulag system, claimed the true number of Stalin’s victims might have been as high as 60 million.

Most other estimates from reputed scholars and historians tend to range from between 20 and 60 million.

Yeah, anyone who claims today that the Soviet regime murdered over a third of its own citizens (over half of the 1928 population if you include Nazi victims) is a moron. Those figures were just about believable in the 1960s but are entirely unsustainable following the last two decades of archival research

KyussBishop · 20-12-2013 04:42PM

Clandestine wrote: »

If far-left is socialism and far-right is neo liberalism, the middle would be a mix of both yes? Which would mean a large amount of government interest in the countries economy....

Which would be a terrible idea, the government should stay as far away from the markets as possible. I think capitalism is a fine system but when the government interferes with it ends up becoming an inefficient and poorly managed system. The government is constantly wasting tax payers money on costly schemes and most government programs and services would be better provided for by private companies who would minimize waste and provide a better service.

A 'free market' only exists in theory though - the entire idea behind free markets, is that they only operate efficiently when they are 100% free from government interference - and that means no government at all, because having government means taxes and laws (i.e. regulations), and these automatically 'distort' free markets (and as I explained earlier, or maybe in a different thread, the idea that we can have literally no government at all, is itself purely theoretical and nobody has shown such a system which actually works in reality, that isn't riddled with fatal practical flaws).

It's impossible to actually have free markets - and past history shows that trying to move closer to 'free markets', without having a pure free market, is actually nothing like the ideal free-markets you hear people fetishizing about.

Pure free markets are purely theoretical and are not possible in reality; the problem with the free-marketeers, is they are trying to make reality fit an impossible theory, and failing - the result is not the theoretical efficient free-markets (it would be great if it were - but it's not), but instead a very ugly and unequal society, that ends up making a lot of peoples lives much worse.

When people say "the economy works better/more-efficiently when it is a free market" - they are literally not talking about reality at all, only about their theory.

Remember also, that the economy is there to work for the benefit of the rest of society, not for society to work for the benefit of the economy (to try and meet an impossible goal, of efficient 'free-markets', that just grinds society down harder, the more you try to meet those conditions).

Most capitalist action you can imagine.

Comments