Capitalism Is Perfect Or Not?

[NotreDame]

FP,

 

How do you define "trickle down economics" and what does it have to do with the 1% holding a disproportionate percentage of wealth? 

 

The inequality is even greater in latin america, none of whom - with the possible exception of Chile - have anything resembling a "right wing" economic system. 

[havok579257]

Dude, Im a liberal, feminist, hippie, marxist. Didnt you know bra?

 

Come sip on the kumbaya with me! Everything is rainbows and unicorn fluffy air extractions from where I stand!

 

 

i know, i was trying to make a joke.  dang you internet.

[havok579257]

 

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. 

 

 

 

making it fair all around is not punishing the rich.  i love how political conservatives think this.

 

communism makes the state a god.  capitalism makes money a god.  its really quite simple.

[havok579257]

FP,

 

How do you define "trickle down economics" and what does it have to do with the 1% holding a disproportionate percentage of wealth? 

 

The inequality is even greater in latin america, none of whom - with the possible exception of Chile - have anything resembling a "right wing" economic system. 

trickle down the same way republicans use the term.  that if we give rich business owners more tax money, more tax breaks and let the rule themselves that all this imaginary money will trickle down to the poor and all these jobs will be created and no one will be poor.  their solution is give more money to the rich in hopes they give that money back to the poor worker through good paying jobs which has yet to happen as evidence by unemployment which has been bad no matter if the president was a democrat or a republican.  the issue is the rich business owner doesn't do this.  trickle down economics does not work.  study after study shows this.  instead the wealth gets more and more concentrated at the top even though they get tax breaks and poor people's tax money.

[NotreDame]

First, capitalism isn't a form of government.

 

Second, no capitalists claim that capitalism will form a utopian society; it's only anti-capitalists that have ever laid claim to the keys to utopia.

 

So... Are you sure you understand enough on the subject to engage in, let alone initiate a debate on the subject?

Why do you keep ignoring my first questions to you?  ^^^

 

capitalism makes money a god.  its really quite simple.

No, it's not that simple, but per my first post, you don't know what capitalism is, so I'm not surprised you make this mistake.

 

trickle down the same way republicans use the term.  that if we give rich business owners more tax money, more tax breaks and let the rule themselves that all this imaginary money will trickle down to the poor and all these jobs will be created and no one will be poor.  their solution is give more money to the rich in hopes they give that money back to the poor worker through good paying jobs which has yet to happen as evidence by unemployment which has been bad no matter if the president was a democrat or a republican.  the issue is the rich business owner doesn't do this.  trickle down economics does not work.  study after study shows this.  instead the wealth gets more and more concentrated at the top even though they get tax breaks and poor people's tax money.

Havok,  this is one of your most confused posts yet.  If you are actually willing to engage in a back and forth, then respond to my first post.  Until you do that, any more time spent conversing with you is time wasted for me.

 

BTW - republicans don't use the term "trickle-down" economics.  It's a pejorative used to describe what were initially called "supply side" economic policies.  I'm not surprised you don't know that.  I'm just pointing out where you might be out of your depth.

[CrossCuT]

 

 

BTW - republicans don't use the term "trickle-down" economics.  It's a pejorative used to describe what were initially called "supply side" economic policies.  I'm not surprised you don't know that.  I'm just pointing out where you might be out of your depth.

Ive heard tons of republicans use it.  :unsure:

At least until they found out it doesnt work then they decided not to mention it anymore lol

Edited March 11, 2014 by CrossCuT

[Winchester]

It's not the tax breaks that are the problem. It's the special protections they enjoy. Large corporations socialize their losses thanks to government power.

[CrossCuT]

It's not the tax breaks that are the problem. It's the special protections they enjoy. Large corporations socialize their losses thanks to government power.

 

Its all the same thing. Big corporations own the government. They pass what they want because they can buy power with the money they stole from us. And continue to do so.

[CrossCuT]

Our regulations did not help mitigate the bubble, they made it worse, possibly even caused it. 

 

Im talking about a very specific thing that was unregulated and still is unregulated that made this mess possible.

Derivatives.

 

The people who decided to bail out the private banks with public money had personal stakes in those banks.

So, the important thing to note here is that it's all the same people creating the problems and executing "solutions" (federal bailouts)

It was a former CFO of Goldman Sach's who pulled the trigger on the bail outs. This is clearly not a decision made by public people with public interest.

And you can directly blame George W Bush and his staff for appointing Henry Paulson because the GOP has direct ties with every major bank (many democrats do too, but not to the extent of the GOP) therefore the banks & oil control the Republican party.

 

And what happens when banks & oil are in charge?

housing bubbles

financial recession

bank bailouts

record corporate profits

increased unemployment

... take your pick, it's all a shitstorm

 

[NotreDame]

Ive heard tons of republicans use it.  :unsure:

At least until they found out it doesnt work then they decided not to mention it anymore lol

Yes, it's a pejorative.  Republicans don't use the term to describe their own policies:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickle-down_economics :

 

"The term is mostly used ironically or as pejorative."

 

 

 

Edited March 11, 2014 by NotreDame

[NotreDame]

 

Im talking about a very specific thing that was unregulated and still is unregulated that made this mess possible.

Derivatives.

Well, derivatives did not cause the housing bubble or the crash.  They did exacerbate the damage for a few firms, especially for AIG.  The relevant derivatives in this case were called CDO swaps.

 

CDO's, however, are not derivatives, were regulated, on the books, and were covered by rating agencies.   CDO's imploded and are what affected bank capitalization... 

 

I woudn't say it's fair to say that CDO's themselves caused the financial crisis, but it is fair to say that the system which spawned so many CDO's was a major contributor to the financial crisis.  

 

I need to run, but could write more tonight. 
 

[NotreDame]

It's not the tax breaks that are the problem. It's the special protections they enjoy. Large corporations socialize their losses thanks to government power.

And large firms love anything (tax rates, regulation, etc.) that crowds out competition. 

[Winchester]

 

Im talking about a very specific thing that was unregulated and still is unregulated that made this mess possible.

Derivatives.

 

The people who decided to bail out the private banks with public money had personal stakes in those banks.

So, the important thing to note here is that it's all the same people creating the problems and executing "solutions" (federal bailouts)

It was a former CFO of Goldman Sach's who pulled the trigger on the bail outs. This is clearly not a decision made by public people with public interest.

And you can directly blame George W Bush and his staff for appointing Henry Paulson because the GOP has direct ties with every major bank (many democrats do too, but not to the extent of the GOP) therefore the banks & oil control the Republican party.

 

And what happens when banks & oil are in charge?

housing bubbles

financial recession

bank bailouts

record corporate profits

increased unemployment

... take your pick, it's all a shitstorm

 

 

 

 

How do banks get in charge in the first place?

[havok579257]

Why do you keep ignoring my first questions to you?  ^^^

 

No, it's not that simple, but per my first post, you don't know what capitalism is, so I'm not surprised you make this mistake.

 

Havok,  this is one of your most confused posts yet.  If you are actually willing to engage in a back and forth, then respond to my first post.  Until you do that, any more time spent conversing with you is time wasted for me.

 

BTW - republicans don't use the term "trickle-down" economics.  It's a pejorative used to describe what were initially called "supply side" economic policies.  I'm not surprised you don't know that.  I'm just pointing out where you might be out of your depth.

 

 

oh no, you wont talk to me.  oh the humanity...

 

to answer your first question... yes. now let's move on.

Edited March 11, 2014 by havok579257

[havok579257]

It's not the tax breaks that are the problem. It's the special protections they enjoy. Large corporations socialize their losses thanks to government power.

 

 

its also the fact that we the poor and middle class have to pay taxes but the rich get out of it.  equality for all.