Distributism

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1074773' date='Sep 25 2006, 02:58 PM']
And captiolism is as morally wrong as abortion?
[/quote]
Some would argue so. I'm not sure if I would say that yet, but I'm not sure it's that far off-base to think so. Certainly the way it is applied. I can't think of one country that has put it into use morally for the good of all people. But by all means, I'm open to suggestions.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1074774' date='Sep 25 2006, 02:00 PM']
Some would argue so. I'm not sure if I would say that yet, but I'm not sure it's that far off-base to think so. Certainly the way it is applied. I can't think of one country that has put it into use morally for the good of all people. But by all means, I'm open to suggestions.
[/quote]
LOL.
What are the moral principles that are violated in capitolism that approach the gravity of abortion?

And I really don't know how the address the ignorance of "I can't think of one country that has put it into use moraly for the good of all people." I'd put a laughing smilee by that if it wasn't so sad.

Edited September 25, 2006 by Anomaly

[Aloysius]

how warped did I say capitalism was? it is good that there are lots of small businesses... i know this first hand as my dad is a small business owner. of course, the ideal that should be strived for is one in which a large majority of people in local places own the businesses in those local places.

I have taken a few economics courses, I know practical economics. my last economics teacher was actually very interested in my in-depth theories on how I think things should work, and he was a very good defender of capitalism.

chesterton stopped being a socialist because he recognized big government was just as evil as big business. he said the problem of capitalism was not too many captialists but too few... and in that sense his distributism might be called an even purer capitalism; he merely wanted to distribute the capitalism around especially to the local people to control their own local businesses.

Capitalism is not as evil as socialism, and certainly not as evil as abortion. in capitalism as it stands, some sins like usury are committed institutionally, and this leads to certain societatal ills. In socialism, there is a direct sin against the seventh commandment. in abortion, a direct sin against the fifth commandment.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1074775' date='Sep 25 2006, 03:02 PM']What are the moral principles that are violated in capitolism that approach the gravity of abortion? [/quote]
That approach the gravity of abortion? I'd say there are very few things that rival abortion. Doesn't change anything at all for this discussion however.

[quote]
And I really don't know how the address the ignorance of "I can't think of one country that has put it into use moraly for the good of all people." I'd put a laughing smilee by that if it wasn't so sad.[/quote]

Well maybe instead of laughing, which always is a sign to me that someone is buying time to think..., you could give some examples? USA is already out so if that's what you would show as an example then I've already made my decision.

[Aloysius]

nothing in human institutions will ever approach the good of all people... i think that's probably why he laughs

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1074784' date='Sep 25 2006, 02:12 PM']
nothing in human institutions will ever approach the good of all people... i think that's probably why he laughs[/quote]Not only that, it's an oxymoron. Capitalism is not a 'government institution' that is effected by governmental decree. Capitalism is a system that allows people the opportunity to succeed or fail. Government only tweaks the extremes by applying laws that may limit compention, promote competition, or provide limited protection for the consumer. Basically, government creates the economic atmosphere to allow the possiblity for a capitolist economy to succeed.

Socialism or communism is a government controlling the entire economy.


g-child,
While I'm still chuckling, please provide your 'analysis' why captiolism in the US has already 'failed'.


[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1074781' date='Sep 25 2006, 02:08 PM']
That approach the gravity of abortion? I'd say there are very few things that rival abortion. Doesn't change anything at all for this discussion however.
[/quote]You are the one who brought abortion into this argument as an example of being able to argue moral principle alone without having to qualify arguments with reality. Well, let's have some moral principle that is a clear as the principles that surround abortion. It's your suggestion, not mine.

Edited September 25, 2006 by Anomaly

[Justified Saint]

The thing to keep in my about capitalism is that it is based on a suspect metaphysic. Basically the idea is that we all live alone on our little islands and God commands us to be rich and hoard the wealth, etc. But eventually we have to start cooperating before we kill each other off. So we start banding together and forming communities -- now I think that order is horribly reversed no matter how much "scientific" support it purports to have.

Sure, this so-called "realism" can be quite sobering and useful, but let's not forget that this ("Enlightenment") philosophy is just as idealist and abstractionist as any other economic or political theory. At one point people would have been saying "ah, capitalism -- sounds like a good theory, but nothing but pie in the sky!"

So in reality, it is actually the vulgar capitalist who collapses the distinction between politics and economics since from the start man is only concerned with his own greed.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1074862' date='Sep 25 2006, 04:06 PM']
The thing to keep in my about capitalism is that it is based on a suspect metaphysic. Basically the idea is that we all live alone on our little islands and God commands us to be rich and hoard the wealth, etc. But eventually we have to start cooperating before we kill each other off. So we start banding together and forming communities -- now I think that order is horribly reversed no matter how much "scientific" support it purports to have.

Sure, this so-called "realism" can be quite sobering and useful, but let's not forget that this ("Enlightenment") philosophy is just as idealist and abstractionist as any other economic or political theory. At one point people would have been saying "ah, capitalism -- sounds like a good theory, but nothing but pie in the sky!"

So in reality, it is actually the vulgar capitalist who collapses the distinction between politics and economics since from the start man is only concerned with his own greed.
[/quote]

What? Was that just someting you think you read in a book or something you think a teacher said somewhere?
Do you even know what captitalism is? For your education, it's a market driven system. It's supply and demand. If you hoard everything to yourself, you have no opportunity to make it grow or work for you. You have to do everything yourself. Capitalism is a system where people can exchange services or goods for other services or goods.

Where does God or Jesus tell us that it is always sinful to be rich or wealthy?

Edited September 25, 2006 by Anomaly

[Justified Saint]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1074880' date='Sep 25 2006, 03:29 PM']
What? Was that just someting you think you read in a book or something you think a teacher said somewhere?
Do you even know what captitalism is? For your education, it's a market driven system. It's supply and demand. If you hoard everything to yourself, you have no opportunity to make it grow or work for you. You have to do everything yourself. Capitalism is a system where people can exchange services or goods for other services or goods.

Where does God or Jesus tell us that it is always sinful to be rich or wealthy?
[/quote]

You must not have read what I said, I was attempting to describe the philosophical presuppositions of capitalism, not necessarily capitalism as such. Perhaps it is my mistake for assuming too much from other readers. As long as one assumes this "natural" description of pre-societal humanity, then capitalism has a kind of convincing logic to it. As long as humans are seen as basically selfish and greedy, then the drive to survive and compete can be translated into the forces of production.

Surely there can be little doubt that capitalism is somehow not prone-free from a rather uneven distribution of wealth. As an historical observation, that insight is beyond reproach. As Chesterton said, who was quoted earlier, the problem with capitalism is that their are too few capitalists. Thus it seems capitalism still remains rather idealistic.

As one who seems to pride themself on being "realistic" and free of "intellectual snobbery" you should know how naive it is to think you can just up and start a small buisness as if it were some kind of cooking recipe. I know plenty of people who tried it and it didn't work. Most small buisnesses fail and that is the first thing you learn in Marketing 101.

BTW, I never said that being wealthy has some kind of divine prohibition -- though I hear it is pretty hard to get to heaven for a rich man.

Edited September 25, 2006 by Justified Saint

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1074807' date='Sep 25 2006, 04:01 PM']g-child,
While I'm still chuckling, please provide your 'analysis' why captiolism in the US has already 'failed'. [/quote]
I'd like some examples of countries in which it's successful and why. As soon as you do that I'll get to your request. I did ask first .

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1074807' date='Sep 25 2006, 04:01 PM']You are the one who brought abortion into this argument as an example of being able to argue moral principle alone without having to qualify arguments with reality. Well, let's have some moral principle that is a clear as the principles that surround abortion. It's your suggestion, not mine.
[/quote]

Abortion still stands as my example. There is absolutely no need for something to be AS evil as another thing for it to work in comparison. I used abortion to show that men can oppose it but they can't be pregnant. Why? Because there are basical concepts involved that anyone can understand that makes it evil. Same with this, just because one doesn't support themselves financially doesn't mean they cannot recognize the problems with something.

Now instead of dancing around things, let's just get to the point shall we?

[Anomaly]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1074930' date='Sep 25 2006, 05:27 PM']
I'd like some examples of countries in which it's successful and why. As soon as you do that I'll get to your request. I did ask first .
Abortion still stands as my example. There is absolutely no need for something to be AS evil as another thing for it to work in comparison. I used abortion to show that men can oppose it but they can't be pregnant. Why? Because there are basical concepts involved that anyone can understand that makes it evil. Same with this, just because one doesn't support themselves financially doesn't mean they cannot recognize the problems with something.

Now instead of dancing around things, let's just get to the point shall we?
[/quote]
So get to the point. I've responded. There is no such thing as a perfect economic system that provides for all people since we don't live in Eden. Tell us what you mean about 'provide for all people' and why the US does not meet whatever criterea you seem to have dreamed up. They're your statements.

I challenged you to provide the clear moral principles about an economic system that doesn't require some knowledge of economic reality.

Because you don't support yourself financially, you are in a poor position to make qualitive judgements about what sacrifices are worthwhile to make a living and what a living really is. How many hours of labor is it worth to eat certain foods compared to being able to dress a certain way. You can't concieve of the choices the main wage earner has when the food, clothing and health of their spouse, children, aged parent, are their sole responsibility. You haven't been in the business world and experienced how different buisinesses operate. Seen how people with compeltely different values and priorites effect the working atmosphere and those around you. There are way too many important aspects that can't just be read about in a book or learn from a teacher or two.

I'm not dancing. I've challenged you to explain and defend your statements because I don't see any evidence of deep understanding supporting you. I may be wrong, but you have to show me. I'll make it easy for you:
-What do you think capitalism is?
-What are the moral principles associated with capitolism?
-What are your standards for a successful economic system and show how you believe capitolism in the US fails.

The music is playing, I'm letting you lead.

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1074928' date='Sep 25 2006, 05:22 PM']
You must not have read what I said, I was attempting to describe the philosophical presuppositions of capitalism, not necessarily capitalism as such. Perhaps it is my mistake for assuming too much from other readers. As long as one assumes this "natural" description of pre-societal humanity, then capitalism has a kind of convincing logic to it. As long as humans are seen as basically selfish and greedy, then the drive to survive and compete can be translated into the forces of production.

Surely there can be little doubt that capitalism is somehow not prone-free from a rather uneven distribution of wealth. As an historical observation, that insight is beyond reproach. As Chesterton said, who was quoted earlier, the problem with capitalism is that their are too few capitalists. Thus it seems capitalism still remains rather idealistic.

As one who seems to pride themself on being "realistic" and free of "intellectual snobbery" you should know how naive it is to think you can just up and start a small buisness as if it were some kind of cooking recipe. I know plenty of people who tried it and it didn't work. Most small buisnesses fail and that is the first thing you learn in Marketing 101.

BTW, I never said that being wealthy has some kind of divine prohibition -- though I hear it is pretty hard to get to heaven for a rich man.[/quote]I did read what you said and completely disagree with you assertation that capitalism is based on humans being selfish and greedy with the drive to survive (or meet the needs of greed) drive production forces.

Since the whole Eden thing, we have to toil to eat. There's your drive for production. Selfishness would be just working the bare minimum in order to survive. Your observation holds about as much water as a sieve.

I'm not priding myself on being realistic or free of intellectual snobbery. I'm just pointing out the necessity to know much more about economic realities. If your profile's birth date is true, I'm more than twice your age and have spent more time in the business world then you've been able to go to wipe your own behind. I took business class, and I have a broader experience of people who have started businesses and failed as well as succeeded. Naivety?

As far as getting to heaven, I hear it's hard for everyone. I guess Job was cursed by job before and after the Devil put him on the right path when Job was broke. And I guess the Prodigal son really screwed up when he was in abject poverty and returned to his dad.
I guess I was getting things all wrong. Poverty saves.

[Justified Saint]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1074957' date='Sep 25 2006, 05:01 PM']
I did read what you said and completely disagree with you assertation that capitalism is based on humans being selfish and greedy with the drive to survive (or meet the needs of greed) drive production forces.

Since the whole Eden thing, we have to toil to eat. There's your drive for production. Selfishness would be just working the bare minimum in order to survive. Your observation holds about as much water as a sieve.

I'm not priding myself on being realistic or free of intellectual snobbery. I'm just pointing out the necessity to know much more about economic realities. If your profile's birth date is true, I'm more than twice your age and have spent more time in the business world then you've been able to go to wipe your own behind. I took business class, and I have a broader experience of people who have started businesses and failed as well as succeeded. Naivety?

As far as getting to heaven, I hear it's hard for everyone. I guess Job was cursed by job before and after the Devil put him on the right path when Job was broke. And I guess the Prodigal son really screwed up when he was in abject poverty and returned to his dad.
I guess I was getting things all wrong. Poverty saves.
[/quote]

I'm not saying that capitalism is inherently evil if that is what some people are saying, but firstly trying to point out its philosohpical presuppositions (which you can't really disagree with since many capitalists concede them) and the fact that it is just as idealistic as its alternatives, and the fact that it is the rule of thumb doesn't change that qualification.

Maybe we have had to toil to eat since Eden, but that is a bad pretext for an economic system. Who should have to work all day just to avoid starvation (i.e. the history of "capitalism")? Note: I am not advocating laziness, just pointing out the logic of the system and how its conception of the "good life" can become incredibly base.

Also, I'll try to ignore the fact that your main argument is that you are older than me and therefore de facto correct.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1074957' date='Sep 25 2006, 07:01 PM']
So get to the point. I've responded. There is no such thing as a perfect economic system that provides for all people since we don't live in Eden.
[/quote]

There you go. This was much harder than it needed to be. Why didn't you just say this at the beginning? Instead of defending Capitalism like it sprang down from God, why didn't you just say this start with? Nothing is perfect. Distributism isn't perfect, I never said it was either. We're talking about which is [b]better[/b]. I believe it is better than capitalism, though not perfect, as nothing on earth is. I do believe it escapes much of the morally "questionable" (I'll put it that way for now) properties of capitalism such as greed for instance.


Not to mention that capitalism leaves much to be desired on the purely functional level as well, not just the moral level. I mean how can it continue on and still work for any significant length of time? If we continue to make cheaper things then yes they will be more affordable. But the product will be carp, and the people will eventually not be able to afford even the cheaper item as they are earning less and less exactly [b]because[/b] of the cheaper product, which is only cheaper because they are recieving less money. So the only one this process benefits is the owner of the company of such products. And eventually even he will have to adapt the system because people will at some point become so poor that they will not be able to afford his product anymore no matter how cheap it is.


P.S. Actually you haven't responded to anything I've said except to quite clearly point out that you were laughing at me. While quite effective at establishing your belief in your position, it doesn't accurately convey why you believe your position. Why is Capitalism good? Why is Distributism bad? In which countries is Capitalism working in the way that it should? Instead of laughing, how about answering these questions this time.

Edited September 25, 2006 by goldenchild17

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1075000' date='Sep 25 2006, 06:18 PM']
I'm not saying that capitalism is inherently evil if that is what some people are saying, but firstly trying to point out its philosohpical presuppositions (which you can't really disagree with since many capitalists concede them) and the fact that it is just as idealistic as its alternatives, and the fact that it is the rule of thumb doesn't change that qualification.

Maybe we have had to toil to eat since Eden, but that is a bad pretext for an economic system. Who should have to work all day just to avoid starvation (i.e. the history of "capitalism")? Note: I am not advocating laziness, just pointing out the logic of the system and how its conception of the "good life" can become incredibly base.

Also, I'll try to ignore the fact that your main argument is that you are older than me and therefore de facto correct.
[/quote]I do disagree with your philosophical assumptions if you had read my post. Stick to the facts.

Who has to work all day just to avoid starvation in the US or an capitlisitic society? There are people that do, but ask why, how many. How would those people fare in other economic systems? Where are they better?

My main argument is not that I'm older, I'm trying to get you to look beyond theoretical 'ideals' that a book or teacher might say. Ask more questions and look for answers in the what's really happening now.


[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1075019' date='Sep 25 2006, 06:51 PM']
There you go. This was much harder than it needed to be. Why didn't you just say this at the beginning? Instead of defending Capitalism like it sprang down from God, why didn't you just say this start with? Nothing is perfect. Distributism isn't perfect, I never said it was either. We're talking about which is [b]better[/b]. I believe it is better than capitalism, though not perfect, as nothing on earth is. I do believe it escapes much of the morally "questionable" (I'll put it that way for now) properties of capitalism such as greed for instance.
Not to mention that capitalism leaves much to be desired on the purely functional level as well, not just the moral level. I mean how can it continue on and still work for any significant length of time? If we continue to make cheaper things then yes they will be more affordable. But the product will be carp, and the people will eventually not be able to afford even the cheaper item as they are earning less and less exactly [b]because[/b] of the cheaper product, which is only cheaper because they are recieving less money. So the only one this process benefits is the owner of the company of such products. And eventually even he will have to adapt the system because people will at some point become so poor that they will not be able to afford his product anymore no matter how cheap it is.
P.S. Actually you haven't responded to anything I've said except to quite clearly point out that you were laughing at me. While quite effective at establishing your belief in your position, it doesn't accurately convey why you believe your position. Why is Capitalism good? Why is Distributism bad? In which countries is Capitalism working in the way that it should? Instead of laughing, how about answering these questions this time.
[/quote]I am chiding you because you extropulate 'urban legend' to an extreme and make assumptions. Use your assumption that things are made cheaper and cheaper and see of ou can apply it to some real life examples here in the US.

I've challenged you to put your money where your mouth is. Look at your post (#6 in this thread) and explain that statement. I'm asking you challenging questions. Provide an answer, if you can.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1075159' date='Sep 25 2006, 10:12 PM']I am chiding you because you extropulate 'urban legend' to an extreme and make assumptions. Use your assumption that things are made cheaper and cheaper and see of ou can apply it to some real life examples here in the US.

I've challenged you to put your money where your mouth is. Look at your post (#6 in this thread) and explain that statement. I'm asking you challenging questions. Provide an answer, if you can.
[/quote]

You're joking right? You would deny that the quality of products in the US is consistently getting worse?

And yes I think it is consistently used for morally impermissable purposes such as greed and taking advantage of others. Unfortunately those who are being taken advantage of are asking for it yes, but this doesn't make it right nonetheless.

Edited September 26, 2006 by goldenchild17