havok579257 Posted March 11, 2014 Author Share Posted March 11, 2014 In the broad sense you could say there is only capitalism and communism (ie. marxism.) It depends on how one defines them. Neither are very precise and most people (including yourself as I pointed out early in this thread) misunderstand the meanings of both.) you obviously misunderstand a lot if you think the only 2 ways of doing things are either capitalism or communism. even in broad sense there are more than just those 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havok579257 Posted March 11, 2014 Author Share Posted March 11, 2014 if they pay more taxes that socialism. absolutely no way the rich should have to pay an equal share of taxes. you support socialism. you will be shamed and ignored by everyone from now on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotreDame Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 you obviously misunderstand a lot if you think the only 2 ways of doing things are either capitalism or communism. even in broad sense there are more than just those 2. OK, then give examples of other types of economic systems that don't fit into either capitalist or marxist definitions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 if they pay more taxes that socialism. absolutely no way the rich should have to pay an equal share of taxes. you support socialism. you will be shamed and ignored by everyone from now on. Dude, Im a liberal, feminist, hippie, marxist. Didnt you know bra? Come sip on the kumbaya with me! Everything is rainbows and unicorn farts from where I stand! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pliny Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 yes sir mr.foxnews. if your don't support capitalism and giving the rich more money through more tax breaks you must be a liberal. life is so black and white. well since all people who don't tow the foxnews line must be liberal then i gladly stand with the catholic church who must also be liberal since they have issues with capitalism I don't watch fox news or read fox news and I don't need it to have common sense or to refrain from hating on "the rich," of which I am not. So what are the "issues" THE CHURCH has with capitalism? You've rambled on about yours and how the rich have everything and the government gives them more and how they have piles of gold coins in their basements and they take from the poor, etc. etc. That was why I asked to start a new thread--to see what were the issues our Pope has with capitalism. What would be one of them? The problem here is that you are focusing on "the rich" as if their presence and wealth means that capitalism is a bad thing, yet you benefit from it greatly, and punishing the rich with another system would do nothing to better your condition or that of the poor, but would only make those who have envy problems feel a little better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 You've rambled on about yours and how the rich have everything and the government gives them more and how they have piles of gold coins in their basements and they take from the poor, etc. etc. Srsly you dont know? Well the rich are very glad that you are blind to their schemes. And of course take note that we arent talking about all rich people, just the banks, politicians, corporations etc. The problem here is that you are focusing on "the rich" as if their presence and wealth means that capitalism is a bad thing, yet you benefit from it greatly, and punishing the rich with another system would do nothing to better your condition or that of the poor, but would only make those who have envy problems feel a little better. No, the problem here is that we have a HUGE income inequality gap that is enabled BY unregulated capitalism and greedy corporations who exploit the lack of rules. We arent saying being rich is BAD, we are saying the way in which they are getting rich is BAD. If you continue to let them cheat at monopoly youre gonna get screwed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Conservatives are ALWAYS complaining about how their tax dollars go towards funding things for obama that they dont approve of...what about the rest of yoru money??? People are literally stealing it from you and keeping it. They are not creating jobs, they are not letting it trickle down, they are not investing it back into the middle class. They are hoarding it or sending crap overseas because they can save even MORE money! Yet they have so many people convinced that they need more money and less taxes to do what they should have done 40 years ago and been doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotreDame Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 No, the problem here is that we have a HUGE income inequality gap that is enabled BY unregulated capitalism regulation and greedy corporations who exploit the lack of rules.We arent saying being rich is BAD, we are saying the way in which they are getting rich is BAD. If you continue to let them cheat at monopoly youre gonna get screwed. Fixed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 (edited) You clearly have 0 idea of how the housing bubbled worked and why we had to bail out the banks then....sad day for people who want to see a better america http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_housing_bubble http://youtu.be/FzrBurlJUNk Edited March 11, 2014 by CrossCuT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Same central cause as every other bubble: http://mises.org/books/historyofmoney.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Quotes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotreDame Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 No, the problem here is that we have a HUGE income inequality gap that is enabled BY unregulated capitalism and greedy corporations who exploit the lack of rules. You clearly have no idea of how the housing bubbled worked and why we had to bail out the banks then....sad day for people who want to see a better america http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_housing_bubble Crosscut, I'm not unsympathetic to some of your conclusions, but some of your premises need to be examined. Our banking industry is incredibly regulated by not just one, but a number of federal and state agencies with vast power and responsibilities and thousands of pages of law and possibly millions of pages of regulation. So when you refer to "unregulated capitalism" it just doesn't exist - quite the opposite. Our regulations did not help mitigate the bubble, they made it worse, possibly even caused it. Our regulations did not force the bailout, either. We would have done well to let the banks rely on private capital for bailouts and to prosecute banking executives. Our solution was the worst possible for taxpayers and the best possible for wall street. This was a bipartisanship lack of leadership. It wasn't caused by regulation, per se, but regulation did protect banking execs and regulatory agencies enabled their bailouts. In a hypothetical free-market the banking execs would have been personally accountable to depositors and they'd all be poor now, with many in jail. It was regulation that protected and shielded them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 My question: If trickle-down economics work, then why does 1% of the population hold all the wealth? When does the trickling down part happen? Are the rich not rich enough yet to have it start trickling down? How much more money do they need? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now