All things Politics

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reader mode
Carringbush2010 said:
Oh yes JB of the greatest intellect ever known to humanity.

How could I not see my failings?

Apologies everyone, JB has spoken.

Not gonna apologize for my sarcasm.

Get off ya high horse JB.
Click to expand...

Says the bloke who's been pontificating for 24hrs that he alone knows the true nature of capitalism.

See what I mean? Clowns aren't funny.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

NMBB said:
Damn shame too what

View attachment 1909245
Click to expand...

i think it's better to have them home running the economy, rather than using them as cannon fodder.

I had this idea with Windy's post about robot ships. I can see the day when israel uses the robots to do their raids on the west bank.....save casualties ...and people like us can subscribe to it and it's real war. It would be the next step in online entertainment. You could pay a higher subscription and take the controls...
 
Carringbush2010 said:
Lol, mock away Leon.

Don't see you mocking those that somehow see a non sentient economic model as something to place guilt on, which is the whole point.

If you all wanna go down that path, well then you all deserved to be mocked.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you've got the impression that the people responding to you are blaming or attributing guilt to capitalism (mark never counts). I don't even know what you think I'm accusing it of being guilty of. Price gouging is your bag not mine. I'm a tight arse so I shop from the price gouging aholes - because they're cheaper (except for veg which I can get cheaper at the market). The whole carry on about price gouging makes little sense to me.

The debate between a planned economy and capitalism is dead. Nearly everyone wants capitalism to underpin the economy with some involvement from the government to modify the inequality that can result from capitalism - which is growing and going to be tough to keep in check as a global economy dominated by multinationals is a different kettle of fish to what we're built for and I don't think anyone has worked out the appropriate modifications to maintain a majority middle class rather than heading for a two tier economy - actually China with far greater Government ownership and control over their multinationals might have worked it out.
 
Markfs said:
i think it's better to have them home running the economy, rather than using them as cannon fodder.

I had this idea with Windy's post about robot ships. I can see the day when israel uses the robots to do their raids on the west bank.....save casualties ...and people like us can subscribe to it and it's real war. It would be the next step in online entertainment. You could pay a higher subscription and take the controls...
Click to expand...
It would make PR easier.

Apologies. That ethnic cleansing was a system malfunction. We're working really hard to get to the bottom of it and hope to have the issue resolved as soon as possible. In the meantime we're asking all residents to relocate to Jordan.
 
sr36 said:
I don't know where you've got the impression that the people responding to you are blaming or attributing guilt to capitalism (mark never counts). I don't even know what you think I'm accusing it of being guilty of. Price gouging is your bag not mine. I'm a tight arse so I shop from the price gouging aholes - because they're cheaper (except for veg which I can get cheaper at the market). The whole carry on about price gouging makes little sense to me.

The debate between a planned economy and capitalism is dead. Nearly everyone wants capitalism to underpin the economy with some involvement from the government to modify the inequality that can result from capitalism - which is growing and going to be tough to keep in check as a global economy dominated by multinationals is a different kettle of fish to what we're built for and I don't think anyone has worked out the appropriate modifications to maintain a majority middle class rather than heading for a two tier economy - actually China with far greater Government ownership and control over their multinationals might have worked it out.
Click to expand...
Quick economic comparison - capitalism vs planned f### up (aholes in both places though.. )

Sth Korea vs Nth Korea
 
so all you guys are getting pensions from share schemes it seems. i share the love of capitalism...

as long as I get to the end before the planet does..
 
sr36 said:
A lot of North Korean trucks run on wood, which I think is pretty cool. So I'm voting for them.
Click to expand...
Go right ahead - hope your vote is counted and then counts....

(Fat fu###n chance).

kim jong un GIF
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

sr36 said:
I don't know where you've got the impression that the people responding to you are blaming or attributing guilt to capitalism
Click to expand...
Then why are people contesting the original definition? Haven't seen anyone attributing blame to actual humans that are actually profiteering / gouging not in the spirit of capitalism. Apart from below.:arrowdown:

Tell me this narrative doesn't exist.
sr36 said:
The debate between a planned economy and capitalism is dead. Nearly everyone wants capitalism to underpin the economy with some involvement from the government to modify the inequality that can result from capitalism - which is growing and going to be tough to keep in check as a global economy dominated by multinationals is a different kettle of fish to what we're built for and I don't think anyone has worked out the appropriate modifications to maintain a majority middle class rather than heading for a two tier economy - actually China with far greater Government ownership and control over their multinationals might have worked it out.
Click to expand...
And where have I said different to this? This is exactly what I'm talking about.
 
Carringbush2010 said:
Then why are people contesting the original definition? Haven't seen anyone attributing blame to actual humans that are actually profiteering / gouging not in the spirit of capitalism. Apart from below.:arrowdown:

Tell me this narrative doesn't exist.

And where have I said different to this? This is exactly what I'm talking about.
Click to expand...
People are contesting your definition because it's wrong. Competition can occur in capitalism, but it doesn't always. Monopolies can occur too. Governments want competition which is why they add non capitalist measures which reduce freedom in the market to try to stop monopolies from occurring. Profit maximization is central to capitalism and why it is so efficient and effective.
 
Last edited:
sr36 said:
People are contesting your definition because it's wrong. Competition can occur in capitalism, but it doesn't always. Monopolies can occur too. Governments want competition which is why they add non capitalist measures which reduce freedom in the market to try to stop monopolies from occurring.
Click to expand...
Competition is meant to occur in capitalism, to make profit among other competitors in a free market.

As for the rest of your post, I totally agree, monopolies happen because of greed, not just because economic models or capitalism enables them, which seems to be the popular narrative.

I have previously more than several times here posted that social elements / govt. policies are required to encourage competition to keep capitalism capitalism.

But nah, no one is to blame for our monopoly situation, capitalism enabled it.

I think we've exhausted this conversation.
 
leon123 said:
thats the core difference I say, donkeys do inhale (and don't mind a beer)

tumblr_n39uorZbTx1qap9uuo1_500.gif
Click to expand...
When I was little, we were at a neighbours farm and a donkey stuck his head over the fence and bit my brother's balls.

My brother hates donkeys. I like them.
 
Carringbush2010 said:
Competition is meant to occur in capitalism, to make profit among other competitors in a free market.
Click to expand...

With respect, that is where the definition is incorrect. That is what multiple people have tried to tell you.

Capitalism by it very nature does not 'desire' competition, it is in conflict with the firms objective of profit maximisation.

Competition (resulting in marginal cost pricing) is a public policy and consumer desire
 
leon123 said:
With respect, that is where the definition is incorrect. That is what multiple people have tried to tell you.

Capitalism by it very nature does not 'desire' competition, it is in conflict with the firms objective of profit maximisation.

Competition (resulting in marginal cost pricing) is a public policy and consumer desire
Click to expand...
I get that competition is at odds with pure profit making. Then yes I guess the definition is incorrect.

Multiple posters have been trying to tell me that it's not the definition, but 'competition in a free market' has been widely used to define it by many economists. It's not my definition. Whether or not that is at odds with the original definition who GAF?

The model itself has, however one wants to define it, has worked well up until the last 5 minutes (figuratively speaking time wise).

Again, that's not the point I'm making, the point I'm making is that it seems the narrative is that a non sentient economic model is the cause of our current monopoly situation. It isn't.

Sure, it enables monopoly, but it is not the cause, the cause is greed which barely anyone wants to state.

That's all I've been trying to say all along, but nah, posters have been doubling down on the definition debate, which isn't the pertinent factor, so I reply what has widely been used to define it and it's 'nah you're wrong'. My fault for getting sucked into a definition debate which isn't my point to begin with.
 
Reader mode
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

Markfs
  • Locked
Australian politics
2
Replies
44
Views
1K
Chief
Chief

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top