:haha:Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Ladies and gentlemen.
Printable View
:haha:Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Ladies and gentlemen.
Capitalism is alive and well because it is moderated, and heavily regulated. Again, I'd still doubt that you'd be happy with a system of capitalism lacking moderation and regulation. The bit of slander is a nice touch though, I don't think I've espoused communism as being a good idea either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Edit: I'd also still like an answer to a thought problem I posed to you a while ago, answer using only the tenets of capitalism.
A miracle drug is developed that can cure all known diseases. The side effect of complete sterilization of the third generation of people taking this drug are known only to the company that discovered and intends to sell it (ie. if you take the drug, and your children take the drug, their children will be reproductively sterile). Selling the drug will make the company untold billions of dollars, however, humanity will see a crisis, the likes of which were portrayed in Children of Men, about 3 to 4 generations from now, long after anyone involved in this decision would be dead. The cause of this crisis will not be traceable back to the company.
Should the company disclose the side effects of the drug? (Doing so will result in far less profit than not disclosing the side effects)
Should the company sell the drug? (Not doing so will result in not recouping the cost to develop the drug, in addition to never acquiring potential billions of dollars)
Loki, I recommend that you change your avatar:
http://www.brainygamer.com/photos/un...carecrow_1.jpg
For what it's worth, there are by my count five of us who accuse you of non-stop straw manning. At what point do these observations become meaningful?
Let's create a fake world: (this will be quick, and good written, I have the dumbest sense of humor haha :P). Okay whooo... Alright laughing done. Let's say there are three toothpick makers. Let's pretend tooth picks are very important, they double a person's strength for a day. Bear with me. Of, these three makers one is very smart and improves their product the other makers don't have a chance to copy it before the brand recognition of Tooth Pick Elite X 9000 takes over. They further do R&D make the product better, hire other bright people etc.. etc... They gain a huge lead. Then they have a huge amount of profit, but they still have competitors, trying to compete based on price and other new ideas they come up with. To get rid of them this TPEX9000 company lowers their prices to very cheap, in fact so cheap they are losing money on every sale of their Tooth Pick, but they can weather the storm as their competitors products don't sell, yet they still have huge structural expenses they have to pay. Eventually they are forced to close, they repeat this process for any new companies starting up. They begin to dictate the price of tooth picks as they are the only seller. They keep output low, and keep the price high. This lower progress for all parts of society, and their is also no more need to improve the tooth pick as they have no competitors. This is a possible outcome in a free market situation, it's called a monopoly.
Another outcome, let's say this society has government. People pay taxes and this goverment spends things that all people will benefit from but it is worth it for no one individually to have one, Such as a standing army, large network of roads, public libraries, a convienient way to pool resources, ideas, information, and establish policy. All the reasons goverment is necessary and the logical progression of any sufficiently advanced society. There is small group of representatives designed to take these resources and operate in what maximizes public welfare and needs. Suppose a person per chance comes up with Floss, and it works completely different than TPEX9000, but actually performs the same job better and way cheaper. Now TPEX9000 is behind the curve from seemingly out of nowhere. So what do they do. Well one thing they can do is go to this goverment, our fellow citizens that we've elected, this necessary evil, this very powerful body that is morally and legally obligated to work for us, and aid in certain people that support TPEX9000 views and help get them into office, and for those who don't have views that are pro TPEX9000, to give them perhaps some free Tooth picks, to encourage them to use their voting power to make laws that promote TPEX9000. This will result in 10's of millions from the TPEX9000 giving out, but that money is all saved, many times over, by the company with the new tax exemptions they now have, with the new laws protecting them... perhaps in addition they "convince" these representatives, through supplies of tooth picks, and money that they should make it difficult for Floss to start up (they put imbalanced laws on Floss like start up companies, perhaps launch investigations that eat up Floss's resources and time). TPEX9000 also go to the people starting up FLOSS to try to buy them out, they try to pressure the distribution avenues to not distribute Floss. Some of the techniques are perhaps legitimate, but all of the techinques are anti-competitive, and bad for us socially. Esepcailly the abuse of our own tax payer money, which is their greatest offense.
Now that you can see how when we have goverment, which we need, there are dangers of corrupting those people that we gave so much power to, and entrusted a very noble and complex task to... These dangers monopolies and the like... exist in a completely unregulated free market system.
On a side note:
It is true at one time these goverment leaders were our fellow citizens, but now goverment is largely occupied by the wealthy, not the intelligent, or informed... it's sad and sickening, I think we need to revise how we elect candidates, we need to push our society more toward academics to wake up our youth. If we could find a way to make the topics more about discussing the issues, and break free of the need for massive financing... Then and only then could we tap into a boader pool of brilliant leadership oriented minds.
Capitalism is the underlying method of exchange. A failure to regulate it would lead to attempts to create command economies, which would inevitably fail, and therefore revert back to market exchange (which is the default position in any state that guarantees contracts). Just because democratic socialism is the way most of the developed world chose to respond does not in any way suggest that capitalism would be destroyed if they failed to do that. I don't think you realize how causation works. Just because B followed A doesn't mean that A caused B.Quote:
Originally Posted by Illusions
The company in question would be forced into bankruptcy and have every one of its employees shot for treason in every country in which it operates for damages caused by the drug. I.E. No sane company would do it. And of course the odds of something like this staying secret, without someone blowing the whistle (in exchange for a lot of money) are nil.Quote:
Edit: I'd also still like an answer to a thought problem I posed to you a while ago, answer using only the tenets of capitalism.
A miracle drug is developed that can cure all known diseases. The side effect of complete sterilization of the third generation of people taking this drug are known only to the company that discovered and intends to sell it (ie. if you take the drug, and your children take the drug, their children will be reproductively sterile). Selling the drug will make the company untold billions of dollars, however, humanity will see a crisis, the likes of which were portrayed in Children of Men, about 3 to 4 generations from now, long after anyone involved in this decision would be dead. The cause of this crisis will not be traceable back to the company.
Should the company disclose the side effects of the drug? (Doing so will result in far less profit than not disclosing the side effects)
Should the company sell the drug? (Not doing so will result in not recouping the cost to develop the drug, in addition to never acquiring potential billions of dollars)
Yeah, that's what happened to the tabacco industry. :rolleyes: Or did Capitalism fail there?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Ouch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
Considering the difference between wiping out civilization and giving lots of people cancer, I think the fact that tobacco companies were forced to give up over $200 billion proves my point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
Of course it does, in your esoteric way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Do we have socialists posting here?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Pro-TipQuote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
Available on a socialist torrent site near you!
Chaloobi, Being, Nessus, and Khen.
Oh noes! Socialists! Run for teh hills!
Seriously, I don't quite see where my supposedly being "socialist" invalidates my criticism of Lewk's obvious hipocrisy.
I contend everyone on this board is socialist to a degree. You singling out a few just shows your refusal to accept that the quality of life you enjoy is riddled with socialist values.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
When did I say that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro
When you say Socialists, do you mean Social Democrats?
Anyone who wants a predominant role for the state in managing the means of production. So yes, social democrats would be included, as would democratic socialists, national socialists, and communists.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust
I believe he means anyone who recognizes the limitations of Capitalism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust
I mean when labelling those specific people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Loki uses it as a slur, not an objective opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust
Yeah, that's why I didn't include Tear or Illusions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust
You have absolutely no objective reasoning to back this up. But I'm willing to play with you. What industries do I want nationalized?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Captain Nuance strikes again, my work is done here.
What a crappy name :(
What do you even mean by that? I hope you're not aiming at "evil regulations"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Well, I am not a socialist. And who is this Chaloobi character. I haven't seen any posts of his, but by the talk around here he must be a fairly clever guy. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
So you are a Capitalist?Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
Well fuck me, I'm totally being ignored in this thread. Fuck you.
Is that how it is? One or the other? Capitalism is very useful, very powerful in the right circumstance, but needs to be regulated strictly and accompanied by social safety nets to aid those left out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
:|Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
Then it is not Capitalism so why call it that and give people like Loki a word to use in arguments that distinguish one from the other?Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
You just want the government to decide which domestic industries will succeed and which will not. You want it to decide which industries are allowed to compete internationally and which are not. You want the government to tell companies where they can and cannot hire workers, and where they can and cannot invest money. You want the banking sector to be virtually controlled by the government. Full nationalization would make a minimal difference from the system you'd prefer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
You are wrong on all accounts. I want the government to help us be competative in the global market for goods, not just services. Services doesn't seem to be capable of paying the bills. Let's get back to basics a manufacture stuff that the rest of the world will buy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
By being competitive, you mean not allowing "outsourcing" and forcing companies to pay union wages? Pray tell how increasing their labor and non-labor costs would make these companies competitive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
By which you mean you want the government to treat manufacturing the way we treat domestic sugar farming.Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
What on Earth does sugar subsidies have to do with manufacturing goods?Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
Do you even want Americans to have jobs? Never mind, all you'll ever have to do is teach them how to live without.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Nice dodge. Please tell me how inflating labor and non-labor costs of American firms would boost their competitiveness.Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
Tell me who is inflating the cost. To make it easy for you, just reference my quote from Warren Buffett about Squanderville.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Sorry for expecting a straightforward response from you.
How much more staightforward can a person be? It's not that our labor costs are high, it's that their manufacturing costs are artificially low. They don't have to pay for clean air or clean water...yet. Why can't we compete with that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
How else do you think you're going to get companies to make a return on unprofitable investments? What bit of magic do you think makes manufacturing here profitable but something companies simply choose to ignore? If you want manufacturing here, you're going to have to do the same thing we do with sugar. They're the same market problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
You do know that article you posted isn't talking about manufactured goods, right? Imports/exports are not synonyms for manufactured goods.