So Inflation Is Killing Me - Video In Thread

[DC0]

Capitalism: Private ownership of the means of production
Communism: Public ownership of the means of production
(taken from L. v. Mises)

It's wrong, because it omits very important characteristic of personal freedom and responsibility.
And in real communism state owns everything. Not public.

It was very easy to check. In USSR there was a poem, created by the people:
Ты здесь хозяин, а не гость,
Тащи с работы каждый гвоздь!

Translation:
You are owner here, not a guest,
Tote from your work every nail!

If you did as said in poem, you would go to jail.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I prefer to keep each -ism definition unique without overlap, what is the integral unique thing about the -ism. Othervise it is impossible to use the words in conversation because they would always mean too much to be applicable.

It's the propaganda that many have been raised on that purposefully tied the two concepts so that they could not be seen as differing in the minds of those conditioned.

Communism: everything should be transferred to a nebulous "collective" and from that "collective" to me. Because I like free stuff.

IF that is communism, then it bears no similarity to the term socialism as I would perceive socialism to mean. I don't think anyone would deny that people should at least have the right to their own personal property. There's always going to be a taxation, however, and any application of that taxation IS socialized industry. This includes the military. NO nation gets away from some degree of socialism.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Exactly. Current situation in USA is a result of crapitalism (crony capitalism), which is in essence oligarchy.

Financial institutions lobby government to pump up financial sector. All currency is being herded by government (using regulations and taxation) into securities market and other financial instruments. Just look at derivatives market cap. It's from alternative universe.
And "sub-prime" derivatives... It was a fraud. Obviously. Paid by future taxpayers.

This sucking of currency from entire economy into financial sector makes all CEOs worry about short term gains on shares prices. So they are busy with cutting expenses and falsification of accounting books. Nobody thinks about long term development of the company.

Here's the thing, total unchecked Capitalist economy, the absolute ideal of Libertarianism, will always gravitate straight into the crony capitalism you speak of because it paves the way for a steamroll effect for those who get out ahead, just like what happens in C2C that we struggle to fight all the time here - when you get out ahead, you get all the benefits and it makes it even easier to keep gaining ground in general. The rich will always get richer and the poor poorer and the longer the unchecked capitalist system goes on, the more pronounced it will get until the poor are enslaved to save their lives because their lives can never amount to the generation of enough wealth to pay for their basic needs.

 

[Noriad2]

Thunderbrd: it seems you consider the economy a zero-sum game. That means that if the rich get richer, the poor MUST get poorer. I think that that is incorrect.

Say there is a shoe maker who can make three shoes an hour using simple tools. Then an "Evil Kapitalist" comes along and offers him a machine, that allows the shoe maker to quadruple his production to 12 shoes an hour, but the Evil Kapitalist demands half of all the shoes produced. If the shoe maker accepts, both the Evil Kapitalist and the shoe maker become richer, as he gets to keep 6 of the 12 shoes he makes per hour instead of the 3 he used to make.

 

[raxo2222]

Thunderbrd: it seems you consider the economy a zero-sum game. That means that if the rich get richer, the poor MUST get poorer. I think that that is incorrect.

Say there is a shoe maker who can make three shoes an hour using simple tools. Then an "Evil Kapitalist" comes along and offers him a machine, that allows the shoe maker to quadruple his production to 12 shoes an hour, but the Evil Kapitalist demands half of all the shoes produced. If the shoe maker accepts, both the Evil Kapitalist and the shoe maker become richer, as he gets to keep 6 of the 12 shoes he makes per hour instead of the 3 he used to make.

Or that humans are flawed, or resources are limited.
In unchecked capitalism you still would have scams, frauds, hoaxes and other such crimes.
You would need highly educated population and good law and justice system.

I heard theory, that we didn't really changed since 200 000 years.
That is if you brought newborn from 200 000 years ago he would live here just fine.

 

[Usul13]

Thunderbrd: it seems you consider the economy a zero-sum game. That means that if the rich get richer, the poor MUST get poorer. I think that that is incorrect.

Say there is a shoe maker who can make three shoes an hour using simple tools. Then an "Evil Kapitalist" comes along and offers him a machine, that allows the shoe maker to quadruple his production to 12 shoes an hour, but the Evil Kapitalist demands half of all the shoes produced. If the shoe maker accepts, both the Evil Kapitalist and the shoe maker become richer, as he gets to keep 6 of the 12 shoes he makes per hour instead of the 3 he used to make.

It depends. If you have space to expand then it isn't a zero sum game. If you don't have space then it is.

If you have the market for the 12 shoes then they both get richer. If you have market for 6 shoes and the evil capitalist can sell his shoes cheaper than the shoe maker, then the evil capitalist will get richer and the shoe maker will die of hunger.

 

[tmv]

And in real communism state owns everything. Not public.

It just takes a bit of semantics to make that transition, because someone / something has to act for the public, right? Even in democracies, you can speak of the "public sector" when you simply mean all the different levels of the government (country, state, local). The members of the bureaucracy are called "public servants". "Minister" is latin for "servant".

And in the GDR (I know less about the USSR) production was performed by the "Volkseigene Betriebe" (Publicly Owned Operations). Of course, in reality someone will exert control over them.

Restricting this to the "means of production" is important, though. You can buy and eat an apple, even in communism. But you cannot buy a factory, and you cannot invest (perhaps the easiest way to tell in which system you live).

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Capitalism: Private ownership of the means of production
Communism: Public ownership of the means of production

I can also agree with this one.

Yes, exactly. And it can be simulated in game. Certain civics should be enactable only if certain other civics are active.

This is not possible with the current coding of Civ IV. Each column is independent of the others.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Thunderbrd: it seems you consider the economy a zero-sum game. That means that if the rich get richer, the poor MUST get poorer. I think that that is incorrect.

Say there is a shoe maker who can make three shoes an hour using simple tools. Then an "Evil Kapitalist" comes along and offers him a machine, that allows the shoe maker to quadruple his production to 12 shoes an hour, but the Evil Kapitalist demands half of all the shoes produced. If the shoe maker accepts, both the Evil Kapitalist and the shoe maker become richer, as he gets to keep 6 of the 12 shoes he makes per hour instead of the 3 he used to make.

It's not zero sum, but it's for those who already have all the cards held in their hands to play them and succeed at capturing all new economic growth and opportunity as well. Try defending the idea that a person can run his own independent merchant ship through seas already swarming with pirates. That's the US economy and what it's like trying to do business. And it always eventually ends up that way when governmental protections and some degree of basic wealth redistributions are not provided for the small guy.

I am NOT trying to say that capitalists are evil. I'm trying to say that the system cannot run unchecked or it leads to suffering after huge growth. Our whole money system is a ponzy scheme borrowing against a future that expects that the planet is infinite in size. You think that's going to be proven wrong someday? Maybe? Perhaps through space colonization we can keep borrowing against a future that will always expand, but the likelihood of catastrophic collapse is much more likely going to outpace that growth. It almost happened already.

 

[tmv]

Our whole money system is a ponzy scheme

... known as FIAT money

 

[Usul13]

I am NOT trying to say that capitalists are evil. I'm trying to say that the system cannot run unchecked or it leads to suffering after huge growth. Our whole money system is a ponzy scheme borrowing against a future that expects that the planet is infinite in size. You think that's going to be proven wrong someday? Maybe? Perhaps through space colonization we can keep borrowing against a future that will always expand, but the likelihood of catastrophic collapse is much more likely going to outpace that growth. It almost happened already.

Especially because sometimes you or me or any other Average Joe is the capitalist. If you have a pension fund, an education fund for your children, a life insurance, or if your money sits in a bank, you expect them to grow your money. They will invest it. Some of it maybe goes to a shoe factory. You haven't got the faintest idea that some shoemaker loses his business hundreds or thousands of miles away from you just because your pension fund must grow. Are you evil?

 

[Tajo]

but the likelihood of catastrophic collapse is much more likely going to outpace that growth. It almost happened already.

Not likey... inevitably and it has happened countless times through the history. When the whole economy of a planet is built on a lie that is fiat currency, printed at will, there can be only one outcome and the citizens of the nation that holds the current reserve currency, lose the most.

I thinks that it not that the systems that are faulty. Humans are fautly and have created the systems that they themselves do not obey, even if they preach everyone else to do so. The joker speech (...you know their morals and their code... is a bad joke. Dropped at the first sign of trouble..) suits here perfectly.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Especially because sometimes you or me or any other Average Joe is the capitalist. If you have a pension fund, an education fund for your children, a life insurance, or if your money sits in a bank, you expect them to grow your money. They will invest it. Some of it maybe goes to a shoe factory. You haven't got the faintest idea that some shoemaker loses his business hundreds or thousands of miles away from you just because your pension fund must grow. Are you evil?

No... but I am one of the many who sink further into poverty because I don't have enough to invest into such growth.

 

[Usul13]

No... but I am one of the many who sink further into poverty because I don't have enough to invest into such growth.

That's unfortunate. The being on the wrong side of the equation part, not the not being evil part. My question was rhetorical, I tried to make a point about the "evil capitalists" and the system.

 

[Thunderbrd]

That's unfortunate. The being on the wrong side of the equation part, not the not being evil part. My question was rhetorical, I tried to make a point about the "evil capitalists" and the system.

Yeah but I HAVE clawed my way up into a position where I can start making some dent in the hole that I'm in. Hopefully it lasts long enough to help me get out of this pit.

 

[JosEPh_II]

No... but I am one of the many who sink further into poverty because I don't have enough to invest into such growth.

I can understand this. Started working when i was 15. By the time I was 40 I finally got a job that had a 401K plan. But during the next 20 years the Company changed hands 3 more times. 2 of the companies that took over ravaged the employees 401ks. The 1st take over was the worst. $60K balance in the 401K that then plummeted to $13K before I could yank it out. Then the next take over had to start over. It was a good company but was 1/2 owned by the last company to take over. So by the time I retired I had just enough in the 401K to pay the house off and the car (which was 4years old by then) and put a few $K into my savings. After all that my S.S check each month is less than 1 of my last bi-weekly pay checks from the Company I retired from. It took me 40 of my 45 working years to get above the $20/hour wage. All because of where I lived. Same company but a city 60miles away and the same level employees as myself with the same Training and Certifications were making $30+/hr. But the Mrs and I raised 4 children and have a house free of debt. Now all we have to worry about is the Property Taxes getting too high before we die. And that is a whole 'nother story! States that base the income off of property taxes to run the state Gov't are the worst. Blood suckers that never let up, even when the housing market bottoms out, because your Property taxes go higher every year.

 

[DC0]

Here's the thing, total unchecked Capitalist economy, the absolute ideal of Libertarianism, will always gravitate straight into the crony capitalism

This is a false statement. And it's a clever lie promoted by those who aim to get power through power of the state.

Crony capitalism is possible ONLY with ever growing power of the government.

I totally agree: in real capitalism, praised as ideal by libertarians, every economic subject will compete for increasing his market share. You can say "will compete for domination".

The trick is that this domination is not achievable without abusing power of the government.

If government has a power to set "minimum quality of service standards", or "licensing in order to ensure quality and safety of product or service provided", or just enacts countless rules and regulations, countless reports and statistics forms to be filled and sent to government, it all removes freedom. It decreases competition. And large corporations love this crap. As it all increases the cost of entering the market, therefore decreases competition. And then those corporations lobby from the government "exceptions" from regulations for themselves. And that's how crapitalism is born. It is not capitalism.

 

[raxo2222]

This is a false statement. And it's a clever lie promoted by those who aim to get power through power of the state.

Crony capitalism is possible ONLY with ever growing power of the government.

I totally agree: in real capitalism, praised as ideal by libertarians, every economic subject will compete for increasing his market share. You can say "will compete for domination".

The trick is that this domination is not achievable without abusing power of the government.

If government has a power to set "minimum quality of service standards", or "licensing in order to ensure quality and safety of product or service provided", or just enacts countless rules and regulations, countless reports and statistics forms to be filled and sent to government, it all removes freedom. It decreases competition. And large corporations love this crap. As it all increases the cost of entering the market, therefore decreases competition. And then those corporations lobby from the government "exceptions" from regulations for themselves. And that's how crapitalism is born. It is not capitalism.

Only if deception, cheating, ignorance, scams, hoaxes, frauds and such didn't exist....
Who wouldn't play foul to gain edge in such system?

 

[DC0]

I heard theory, that we didn't really changed since 200 000 years.
That is if you brought newborn from 200 000 years ago he would live here just fine.

Wrong theory. Evolution never stops. Mutations are going constantly.

First of all, a newborn from 200000 ago would look "funny", and that's would make his assimilation difficult. But most importantly, brain has undergone huge changes. Most probably this person would be considered ret-ar_ded by modern people.

On the other hand, people from 16 century could have been smarter, than modern people. This is based on studies conducted by some 16 century scientist. He made a machine which measured reaction time of people. And he recorded results.

In modern times, two scientists of Russian origin have built the same machine. Using instructions made by 16 century scientist. Funny, but that machine gave more precise measurements of reaction time. Because modern computers add several milliseconds to measured result because of all sorts of lags existing in the computer system.

So what the modern scientists found, is that reaction time of 16 century people were slightly better, than of modern people. And that with same measuring instrument.

It means that they probably had higher IQ. Because reaction time has very high correlation with general ability of brain (G-factor, which can be measured by IQ tests).
You can easily check it by trying to be beat Chinese guy in table tennis, for example. Average IQ of Chinese people is 106, while white Europeans have 100.

 

[DC0]

If you have the market for the 12 shoes then they both get richer. If you have market for 6 shoes and the evil capitalist can sell his shoes cheaper than the shoe maker, then the evil capitalist will get richer and the shoe maker will die of hunger.

Why you despise shoe maker so much? In your image shoe maker is complete i-di_ot without free will.

You consider him unable to understand that there is market for only 6 pairs of shoes.

And then you hold him unable to stop making shoes for "evil capitalist" if he recognizes the fact that market is only 6 pairs wide.

If he is indeed, unable to recognise 6 pairs wide market, it means he went to government school and maybe even (God forbid) modern college, where he was completely brainwashed and deprived of any basic knowledge of economics. Kids have basic knowledge of economics from like 2 years old. Contemporary college graduates don't.
So it's government with it's indoctrination and slave making programs is to blame. Not freedom or free market.

And if shoe maker is in fact can't stop making shoes, then again: he is a slave! There is no freedom or free market in his situation!