Home | About | Donate

What America Needs to Understand About Capitalism

Re. your portion of my post, you already understand the /United part of it. During WWII FDR asked for plans for postwar Germany. Secy. Morganthau advocated splitting Germany up into >= four smaller countries, and restricting their economies to agricultural.
- At first the victorious allies started such a plan. All the manufacturing equipment was removed as ‘reparations’ to other countries, and Germans were prevented from reopening certain worksites. Eventually US economists concluded that recovery in Western Europe would go faster if Germany was allowed to recover as well. And persuaded other European nations of that. - The political division turned into East Germany and West Germany, and Austria by the Austrian State Treaty ending WWII for the Austrians forbade Austria from ever politically combining with Germany. Those divisions lasted to 1990 for East and West Germany, and a few years later everyone agreed that Germany and Austria in the EU did not violate the Austrian State Treaty.

Divide up the USA. May be a “Velvet divorce” like the Czech Republic" and “Slovakia”. Don’t know into how many pieces, but would we be better off divided up? Then only some of us would have Trump or ‘son-of-Trump’ as President.

As for the Skeptic Tank portion, put a question and I will try to answer.

One of the misconceptions people have when one speaks up against Private property . is that people would not have homes and not be able to live lives with privacy instact. This is a misconcpetion.

In Helsinki as example , 70 percent of all land withing the city is owned by the city itself . This means the city can dictate what kind of housing goes in each area and the mixture of the same, The city can also ensure that all people, no matter the income , can afford a home. While these homes are on public pproperty the people living inside them are still entititled to their privacy and the ability to keep posessions there. They just can not decide they are going to sell the land to some other. (They might sell the HOME but the land is not theirs).

Here in British Columbia there a number of homes built on land belonging to the First Nations peoples. Again individuals can buy these homes and are entitled to their privacy but they do not own the land on which the home is built. Usually the sale of that home includes a 99 year lease. Again the individual just can not of a sudden decide s/he going to sell the land to some person offering big bucks to buy land because the land not owned by that individual. it owned in common by that First nations tribe.

One recent example of this and how it played out was in a very well to do neighborhood of big house with multiple expensive cars parked in driveways in what became one of the most desired neighborhoods in the region. The people buying these aims some 50 years back paid pennies on the dollar for that land under lease arangements that were very favorable to them. The lease ran out, the First nations tribe raised proerty values to market values and the people who had lived there all those years complained about having to pay higher taxes. I had no empathy for them as the tribe had asked they pay higher lease payments prior, based on those esclating land values but the leasees outright refused claiming the Tribe had to honor its contract.

China in olden times had a dynasty where after years of war and civil wars, as the Noble land owning class continued to war on one another to build up their land holdings , where the ownership of land privately was forbidden. Instead the state owned the land. Individuals could live a lifetime as their children after them in a given home on that piece of land but they could not sell it nor could it be absorned into anothers estate. This helped lead to one of the most peaceful and prosperous periods in Chinese History. This experiment ended after an uprising against a weak Emperor in that dynasty by the ex noble class who then re-instituted the concept of estates and private land. The wars started anew.

4 Likes

Right there with you and Allen1.

Right. Why keep paying politicians to undermine democracy when great direct democratic and proven alternatives exist?

So here we have the conservative position that there is no alternative to capitalism and the reiteration that whatever faults and flaws it holds can be mended by new policies rather than the whole system ended.

Scratch a liberal progressive and a capitalist apologist bleeds.

What is required is system change, not palliative reforms or has Eugene Debs been entirely forgotten by political commentators.

Socialism is the issue, not a “better” capitalism.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/debs/

6 Likes

“Capitalism” was not too long ago an almost unspoken word.
More and more articles, but only on progressive sites.

1 Like

“Velvet divorce”

One nation: Hawaii, California, Oregon, Washington.
Another: New York and New England states.

The South and the Midwest deserve one another.

Can’t help but wonder how excited the citizenry of the first two groups would be about maintaining Military Industrial Complex.

It would be interesting to see how much migration.

2 Likes

I’m on the side of people as in human beings. Evidence of Pelosi taking bribes? Well, she’s against single payer and importation of drugs from Canada to help the average American out on healthcare expenditures. So just look at her “donor” list. United Healthcare, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Pfizer and other pharma giants.

Enjoy.

Seems everyone is enjoying this anti-capitalist discussion on this decadent/profiteering capitalist/computerized forum.

And wow! This author managed to write an article about the AmeriKan economy without using the “F” word – Fascism! Again, Fascism is when the government and corporations collude for their mutual benefit and to the greater detriment of the citizenry. Big money buys up the government – elections, reps, lobbyists and voila – we have the best government money can buy. Hence – senseless immoral wars, bloated government/health care, frankenfood…well it’s a long list. Of course our corporate media keeps us all up to date on all this with their corporate perspective so we know what is going on and of course how to fix it…vote in another Demopublican Fascist! Where in the hell is the reset button… Gopherit

2 Likes

Progressive circles are usually where awakenings, mass movements and social counter trends begin, so i am slightly optimistic.

Here’s guy who wants to take out Pelosi. He’s very articulate and he understands what Bernie Sanders fails to – just tell people about the policies you want to implement, don’t says its socialism or even democratic socialism. Better to call it (as this article does) “progressive capitalism”:

I also would like people to consider one of the presidential candidates who everyone is just totally ignoring, and that is Marianne Williamson. I read an article in New York Times explaining how the book “A Course in Miracles” changed her life and made her what she is today (I actually got interested in her a bit when I was living near Washington DC and went to hear one of her talks back in the 1990’s). She is actually not just a flake or something. She is also quite articulate and has lots of good ideas:

2 Likes

On social level, US to me is divided, broadly, in about three segments: 1, The wealthy class, 2, The servile servants of the wealthy class, 3, The Deplorables or Les Miserables.
The two top classes probable possess about 98% of all political power; includes powers over healthcare, education, information, laws making and enacting, police chiefs, army, clergy, army echelons or brass…

Duh! Looks like the troops are out to defend this system of exploitation. If we actually understood our connections as in “All our Relations” we would have a gift economy based on particular ecosystems.

1 Like

I have a hunch that this article is intimating an apology of Warren’s claim of being a proud capitalist. Yeah, I’m cynical, but I sense a set-up.

"In fact, it includes all economic systems with private ownership of property,"

No one’s going to call this out as being simply false? Kings and “nobility” had private property long before the philosophical roots of Capitalism. This isn’t just nitpicking, because the claim is an excuse for the immorality of capitalism.

The notion of a self-regulating economy is fundamental to capitalism. Capitalist economies are indeed self-regulating, but they tend toward the wrong kind of regulations. Also basic to the idea that Capitalism is morally positive is that the self-regulation will lead to an economic homeostasis. Economic self-regulation does not lead to homeostasis, by the simple fact that when you start out with unequal wealth and acknowledge that those with more wealth have more power to control the regulation, you MUST acknowledge that Capitalism, by its essence destroys equality and economic homeostasis and MUST lead to progressively greater inequality.

Take private health insurance, for example. Someone who believes in the morality of capitalism would say that if one insurance company invests its money in finding ways to deny as many claims as possible, then people would simply stop using that insurance company and go to another. No one is naïve enough to think this could ever happen, and only Republicans and their Democrat and Independent cohorts can be cruel enough to claim that insurance companies should be allowed to arbitrarily deny claims because “the markets will even out.” The fact that the insurance business is self-regulating means that insurance companies have established, for themselves, the regulation that allows them to rip customers off.

So yeah, I’m asserting my right to say that Capitalism is fundamentally immoral. If you want to argue that social security, welfare, etc can all be parts of a capitalist society, ok, but please realize that they are not parts of Capitalism itself.

4 Likes

It is a simple choice; do we want corporations making the rules or do we want WE THE PEOPLE making the rules.

Fascism is when Corporations are making all the rules, Socialism is when WE THE PEOPLE are making the rules.

Republicans and Right Wing Conservatives hate Government because Government is comprised of WE THE PEOPLE.

In a True Democracy we would throw out Representative Governance and decide our fate based on a Democratic System of 1 vote for every person instead of having a Bribed Representative casting a vote for us.

What most people fail to realize is that Government is WE THE PEOPLE and we should have a True Majority rules System based on a True Democracy of everyone voting without this nonsensical Representative Government, which cannot be trusted to reflect the demands of the Majority because of a Legal Bribery System.

Only BERNIE understands this dilemma and is trying to rectify a broken disastrous so-called Democratic System of Government. Right Now Fascism Rules.

4 Likes

Very good, compact analysis, totally agree…them Cubbies yeah, cool, but…gotta go with the Giants!

On lower revenue/profits, a Disney or other incorporated entity will become unattractive to investors looking for decent returns. The stock price will go down, hence the shareholder “value” of the company – it’s market cap – will go down. When they want to spend money to produce a blockbuster starring name brand actors, they won’t have the capital to do so. Which will be fine: Their audience won’t have money to waste on movies anyway.

1 Like

In the economy you describe, pretty much nothing has great returns. But as long as ‘return of money’ is good quality and ‘return on money’ is better than under the mattress there will be something for stock brokers to do.

So they will make Mexican-style telenovelas instead.
What sort of crappy resource-depleted impoverished economy are you envisioning?

Looks like we’re already well into the graveyard.
Is that a whistle I hear?