Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mainiac]

If you can stockpile enough the stuff then completely shut down global production, you'd make a killing.  Then you can resume production in a few years.

[SalmonGod]

Chris Hedges: Zero Point of Systemic Collapse

I agree with most of what he says here.  The only parts I disagree with are the idea of building small, isolated communities and of mass communications being a bad thing.

[ChairmanPoo]

http://torrentfreak.com/riaa-and-homeland-security-caught-downloading-torrents-111217/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Torrentfreak+%28Torrentfreak%29

[Truean]

17 acres? How can you make money with only 17 acres of poppies?

Drugs.

[Kogut]

Destroy capitalism. Excellent idea. Planned economy is sooooo effective... </sarcasm>

This is a false dichotomy that needs to go away.  We can come up with other methods of dynamically allocating resources to our wants and needs.  Currency is not the only possible means of facilitating an unplanned economy.

Other method? Like...

Personally, I think our economy and politics need to evolve into a memetic form.  I'm not talking about stupid jokes.  I'm talking about direct communication that spreads in a natural fashion and unites people into action that they have a direct interest and belief in.  I think that this is the natural way for civilization to progress at this stage of mass communication.  It's already happening in many ways.  The right tools have just not been made to facilitate it with the proper procedures and scale that we need.

Well, you described capitalism ("people into action that they have a direct interest and belief in").

Planned economy can work pretty well, in the right circumstances. Capitalism can work pretty well, in the right circumstances. Let's not jump into the standard generalizations.

There is one difference. Capitalism works more often than planned economy (note: I noticed that proper version of capitalism should limit "Screw the Rules, I Have Money!" problem and establish rules to avoid typical problems with monopoles, price fixing, poor people that really needs help etc).

[mainiac]

Seeing as there has never been a fully capitalist or fully planned economy, why are we having the debate again?

[Kogut]

Seeing as there has never been a fully capitalist or fully planned economy, why are we having the debate again?

It may be "somebody is wrong on Internet, I must fix it" attitude, but sb said that he wants to destroy capitalism because it is bad. Without thinking about better (realistic!) system. I know about similar successful attempt (communism) and results were bad.

[Kogut]

Seeing as there has never been a fully capitalist or fully planned economy, why are we having the debate again?

BTW, it main drawback of planned economy - it is impossible to create and maintain. Capitalism is not perfect, may be improved but it is working.

[thobal]

I thought that the goal of OWS wasnt to hurt capitalism but to destroy the fascist system that is currently in place in favor of Adam Smith style capitalism.

[Criptfeind]

You should stop using terms vaguely if you are going to interpretat them strictly Kogut.

I am fine with people using ether, but not both at the same time.

[ChairmanPoo]

There is one difference. Capitalism works more often than planned economy

Yeah, tell that to someone who doesn't live in a developed nation (aka, the vast majority of people. By virtue of living in the west the 99% are already living better than most people in other places).  For those, capitalism doesn't work that well.
Hell, it isn't working too well here, either, what with this subprime mortgage crisis BS. (and don't start saying that wasn't "true capitalism" )

As a counterpoint, public healthcare has been repeatedly shown more efficient than private systems at producing results. In fact, the more public, the better it works: socialized healthcare systems produce better results than social security, and social security produces better results than free market approaches to health management. So yes, planned approaches can work better than free market ones, at least in certain settings.

In my opinion, based on my own experiences, the problem with planned economies, as a whole, is the same as with large corporations: the bigger they get, the less the guys who can spend the money actually care about efficiency.

[scriver]

Seeing as there has never been a fully capitalist [...] economy, why are we having the debate again?

It's called the 19th century. No rules, no regulations, every last safeguard of traditional law and the old feudal system abolished by and in favour for the liberal bourgeois, with the goal of, almost literally, treating people like cattle. It wasn't pretty, but it sure was capitalist heaven.

[kaijyuu]

In the US at least, while there weren't regulations, there was plenty of government meddling. See: the railroads, that one canal whos name escapes me...

It is not (pure) capitalism if governments are giving advantages to certain people and not others.

[Kogut]

There is one difference. Capitalism works more often than planned economy

Yeah, tell that to someone who doesn't live in a developed nation (aka, the vast majority of people. By virtue of living in the west the 99% are already living better than most people in other places).  For those, capitalism doesn't work that well.

I never said that capitalism will result in happy, long, safe live. It is better. All attempts at planned economy or destroying capitalism in other way completely failed. And it is quite hilarious to tell many people that there are among the extremely rich people, compared to rest of world.

Hell, it isn't working too well here, either, what with this subprime mortgage crisis BS. (and don't start saying that wasn't "true capitalism" )

Well, I can respond only with variation based on "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.".
My favourite defence of capitalism is reversed true Scotman - it is possible to create working capitalism but it is impossible to create working planned economy.

As a counterpoint, public healthcare has been repeatedly shown more efficient than private systems at producing results. In fact, the more public, the better it works: socialized healthcare systems produce better results than social security, and social security produces better results than free market approaches to health management. So yes, planned approaches can work better than free market ones, at least in certain settings.

In my opinion, based on my own experiences, the problem with planned economies, as a whole, is the same as with large corporations: the bigger they get, the less the guys who can spend the money actually care about efficiency.

Of course there are things where capitalism is bad and ineffective - private army is a Certified Bad Ideaź. Main problem with socialized healthcare and socialized something is that often it is funded from borrowed money, what may end in interesting way (see Greece). And planned approaches can work better than free market ones - but it is different than

Soooo....
Down with Capitalism? Cause that's starting to look more and like the only answer.

without providing reasonable alternative.

In general - there are problems with large companies, broken regulation, bad regulations, very large companies, stupid regulations and random bailouts. But proper response is not "destroy capitalism and later find something better".

[scriver]

And it is quite hilarious to tell many people that there are among the extremely rich people, compared to rest of world.

What are you even saying here.

In the US at least, while there weren't regulations, there was plenty of government meddling. See: the railroads, that one canal whos name escapes me...

It is not (pure) capitalism if governments are giving advantages to certain people and not others.

It was their government. It did as they wished. Capital ruled supreme.