patrick.net

If you think that communism is the one and only alternative to capitalism, you are an idiot whose opinion counts for shit. There are an infinite number of possible economic systems, not just communism and capitalism. And out of this infinite set, an infinite subset uses commerce and markets, neither of which is intrinsic or unique to capitalism.

Dan8267 says

There are an infinite number of possible economic systems

Regale us so as to prove you are not the idiot.

Dan8267 says

In fact, the De Beers monopoly could only be broken by enforcing the very anti-trust laws that Reagan had destroyed.

De Beers lost their monopoly because the soviet union collapsed and mines in russia started selling directly to the market. Argyle mine in australia, the largest diamond mine at the time, followed suit then the big canadian mines started selling directly also. De Beers tried to buy on the secondary market but couldn't afford the price. De Beers went from 90% market share to below 60% market share in the 90's. Anti trust laws were not a factor. The anti trust lawsuit was filed in 2001 and was finally ruled on in 2012., De Beers market share was down to 35% by then. http://www.kitco.com/ind/Zimnisky/2013-06-06-A-Diamond-Market-No-Longer-Controlled-By-De-Beers.html

bob2356 says

Anti trust laws were not a factor.

What do you know Dan

indigenous says

Regale us

And what proof would you consider sufficient to contradict your religion?

Here is an excerpt from an article:

Hart said that De Beers first courted colonial rulers and then their African successors. Gun-toting mercenaries defended its empire.

http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/diamonds/mystique1.html

indigenous says

I remember going through this and found information that they did this through government manipulation. But of course you do not remember that part as only you know the right answers

I remember quite clearly. Your "information" was a bunch of mises opinion stuff backed up by nothing other than it's true because I feel it should be true. Sad really.

Dan8267 says

And what proof would you consider sufficient to contradict your religion?

You mean the facts. An example of what you are talking about.

bob2356 says

I remember quite clearly.

Not that I see of... sad really

indigenous says

Hart said that De Beers first courted colonial rulers and then their African successors. Gun-toting mercenaries defended its empire.

Is this some kind of joke? He courted? Great documentation. One sentence of he said. I rest my case.

indigenous says

Dan8267 says

And what proof would you consider sufficient to contradict your religion?

You mean the facts. An example of what you are talking about.

No, I mean what specifically would it take to convince you that capitalism is flawed and is not the best possible economic system. I have presented facts up the wazoo in many threads demonstrating the utter failure of capitalism to solve many specific problems. The NPR radio broadcast also presented indisputable, specific facts that show unquestionably that capitalism caused a five-fold increase in the cost of health care. Facts clearly are not enough to convince you to abandon your religion.

So what specifically would it take to get you to accept that capitalism could be replaced with a much better economic system?

Dan8267 says

Facts clearly are not enough to convince you to abandon your religion.

Show me the facts spare me the blather

bob2356 says

Is this some kind of joke? He courted? Great documentation. One sentence of he said. I rest my case.

So you think they did it by above board means?

indigenous says

Show me the facts spare me the blather

Fact. Capitalism has had over half a century to solve the health care problem. It failed.

Fact. Capitalism creates war profiteering which creates wars and instability. Capitalism works against ending terrorism and creating world peace.

Fact. Capitalism has had a century to cure cancer, but treating cancer is much more profitable.

Fact. Capitalism has had several centuries to solve unemployment. Capitalism has consistently failed to fully utilize the productivity of all people willing and able to perform useful work.

Fact. Capitalism has had several centuries to solve the problem of economic bubbles and busts, the so-called business cycle. It has epically failed.

Fact. Capitalism has failed to address the corruption and greed in the financial industry that has so far caused two great depressions and many smaller ones.

Fact. Capitalism has failed to prevent the pollution of the air and oceans and climate change.

Fact. Capitalism has failed to prevent over-fishing.

Fact. Capitalism has failed to move society off of fossil fuels and onto clean, renewable energy that can be sustained.

Fact. Capitalism has failed to provide a stable currency whose value is a constant store of purchasing power.

Fact. Capitalism caused the problem that 1% of the population controls 99% of the wealth. That 1% did not produce 99% of the wealth.

I could go on for hours, but somehow I doubt any of these facts mean shit to you or would convince you of the failings of capitalism.

indigenous says

bob2356 says

Is this some kind of joke? He courted? Great documentation. One sentence of he said. I rest my case.

So you think they did it by above board means?

Who is they? Cecil Rhoades bought up the mining rights/mines and formed the De Beers company. Some from miners/mining companies, some from tribal chiefs, some from colonial governments. I've got 2 extensively researched books (Colonial South Africa the Origins of the Racial Order and Becoming Zimbabwe) on my bookshelf that go over this in detail. You do realize that's how extractive industries work don't you? You buy the rights from the owners or government then drill/dig. Been going on for thousands of years, still going on today. Is it above board means in your odd libertarian world? I have no clue.

Dan8267 says

Fact. Capitalism has had over half a century to solve the health care problem. It failed.

The life span of it's patients would indicate otherwise, unless you are saying government created the medical benefits?

Dan8267 says

Fact. Capitalism creates war profiteering which creates wars and instability. Capitalism works against ending terrorism and creating world peace.

Who starts the wars?

Dan8267 says

Fact. Capitalism has had a century to cure cancer, but treating cancer is much more profitable.

The free market has made a lot of progress too.

Dan8267 says

Fact. Capitalism has had several centuries to solve the problem of economic bubbles and busts, the so-called business cycle. It has epically failed.

The meddling with the business cycle is the very cause of the bubbles we are seeing. The business cycle is the very process that keeps the economy healthy.

Dan8267 says

act. Capitalism has failed to address the corruption and greed in the financial industry that has so far caused two great depressions and many smaller ones.

If fact the only real ethics in the economy is the free market, because a business has to satisfy a need better than the competition or it goes out of business. The Great Depression was caused by an oversupply of money in the 20s, this was the sole purview of the Federal Bank.

Dan8267 says

Fact. Capitalism has failed to prevent the pollution of the air and oceans and climate change.

This is the problem with the tragedy of the commons, the solution would be to put it under private ownership.

Dan8267 says

Fact. Capitalism has failed to move society off of fossil fuels and onto clean, renewable energy that can be sustained.

Same

Any advances in this area have come from the private sector,. the simple fact is that gasoline is the most efficient way to power a vehicle. The government meddling in this area has not worked out well e.g. Solyndra and a good candidate to short Tesla.

Dan8267 says

Fact. Capitalism has failed to provide a stable currency whose value is a constant store of purchasing power.

That would be the gold standard, which we are taken off of by FDR and Nixon.

Dan8267 says

Fact. Capitalism caused the problem that 1% of the population controls 99% of the wealth. That 1% did not produce 99% of the wealth.

Wealth inequality has been the greatest when the government has intervened the most which are now and the late 1920s.

Dan8267 says

I could go on for hours, but somehow I doubt any of these facts mean shit to you or would convince you of the failings of capitalism.

I'm sure you could... You are simply regurgitating leftest crap.

bob2356 says

You do realize that's how extractive industries work don't you?

So then the Blood Diamonds would be a standard commodity?

indigenous says

I'm sure you could...

And once again you indicate that no facts will make you question your religion, and that is why your opinion doesn't count as much as dog shit.

Economic systems are technologies. Capitalism is a Bronzed Age with a few Industrial Age refinements, but it is still a technology. It is always reasonable to seek improvements of technologies as well as replacements that are revolutionarily better. Only religions are stagnant and unquestionable, set in stone, and to question them is blasphemy.

The fact that you are completely closed minded and refuse to even consider the possibility that capitalism is a limited and obsolete technology and there may be better technologies to replace it, is all we need to know to disregard your opinion on this and any other subject.

indigenous says

You are simply regurgitating leftest crap.

The fact that you think anything I've said is leftist demonstrates your misuse and misunderstanding of even basic vocabulary. Calling me a leftist makes even less sense than calling Nixon a leftist as I'm farther away from both the left and the right than he was.

indigenous says

Dan8267 says

Fact. Capitalism has had a century to cure cancer, but treating cancer is much more profitable.

The free market has made a lot of progress too.

Another example of your foolishness. You think the terms "free market" and "capitalism" are synonymous. They are not. They are independent concepts. Free markets are neither intrinsic nor unique to capitalism. Unregulated capitalism almost by definition means elimination of free markets. The fact that you cannot grasp this simple truth shows how ignorant and delusional you are.

indigenous says

Wealth inequality has been the greatest when the government has intervened the most which are now and the late 1920s.

Wealth inequality spurs government intervention. Any society is just three meals away from violent revolution.

Dan8267 says

capitalism is a limited and obsolete technology

It is not a technology. You appear to not know the definition of the word!

Dan8267 says

Wealth inequality spurs government intervention. Any society is just three meals away from violent revolution.

You are saying that inequality is created by by big corporations. That is wrong. Big business goes out of business when it does not serve it's customers. This would have been the case with GM and AIG if not for government meddling.

Inequality is created through the central bank and inflation.

indigenous says

Dan8267 says

capitalism is a limited and obsolete technology

It is not a technology.

And that is why you have the world view of a barbarian.

Dan8267 says

And that is why you have the world view of a barbarian.

You left out the part where I indicate that you do not know the definition of capitalism.

IOW you do not know what you do not know.

You can define a word however you want. That does not change the nature of the thing you refer to with that word.

But hey, prove to me that you really do understand the concept of capitalism better than I do. What is the single most important defining attribute of capitalism as oppose to any other possible economic system?

I'll suck your cock if you get the answer correct. That's how confident I am that you won't. You have one chance, so don't blow it, and you have to answer by midnight EST.

Dan8267 says

That does not change the nature of the thing you refer to with that word.

Say What.... It is imperative to define a word the same way the rest of the world does, otherwise you are talking gibberish.

an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

Dan8267 says

I'll suck your cock if you get the answer correct.

Go fuck yourself.

indigenous says

Go fuck yourself.

No man deserves that much pleasure.

indigenous says

an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

Congratulations, you can Google "capitalism definition" and then copy and paste the Oxford definition. Of course, Oxford is entirely correct, but you failed to answer the actual question posed.

The key word in the definition is owners, not producers of wealth. Additionally, the wealth generated by the productive members of society are also controlled and distributed by the owners. And that is the fundamental flaw of capitalism. Capitalism does not reward wealth production, but rather only bargaining power and it gives all that bargaining power almost exclusively to the owners rather the wealth producer. This does not maximize productivity or effeciency. Nor does it establish a free market as all markets are rigged by owners, especially the labor market. Furthermore, allowing owners unrestricted control over the distribution of wealth they did not create cause corruption and perverse incentives that generate systemic poverty and waste the potential production of vast numbers of people.

An obvious improvement over capitalism is to distribute wealth based on productivity rather than ownership, especially since the ownership model invariably concentrates wealth and thus further ownership in the hands of a few individuals. Not only does this cause most of the population to have to permanently endure a lower quality of life than supported by the technological level of a society, but it also massively decreases productivity and total wealth by disrupting the virtuous cycle of production and consumption.

Of course, all criticism of a religion falls on deaf ears. The brainwashed zealots refuse to accept any evidence or reason that contradicts their dogma.

By the way, the single most important defining attribute of capitalism as oppose to any other possible economic system is those who have wealth use it to gain exclusive control of production and trade and use the profit from these to gain further control of production and trade at the expense of all those who perform the actual production and trade. All economic systems depend on production and trade. The fundamental flaw of capitalism is that it punishes those who produce in order to unjustly and counter-productively reward those who own. This flaw is amplified by the fact that owners, having siphoned off productive people's wealth creation, then use that profit to own more and push out all productive people from being owners. So you have a class of worthless, parasitic fat cats whose opulence slows economic growth, stability, and sustainability. Meanwhile, capitalism discourages being a productive member of society and encourages non-productive zero-sum games.

You will not hear what I'm about to say, which begs the question, why bother. You are the one who conflates religion with economics.

The ONLY time there is a monopoly is with the help of government, fucking period. Standard Oils share of the market at it's height was 88% by the time Roosevelt got around to his bullshit, Standard Oil's share had dropped to 64%.

The ONLY exception yous can come up with is De Beers, and their use of government in their business was definitely dubious.

The market place in a relentless, incessant, unabating task master that keeps the owners of production constantly changing. All to the benefit of the standard of living of the world.

You need to inspect your ideas because they do not add up...

indigenous says

The ONLY time there is a monopoly is with the help of government, fucking period

That's a thinly veiled No True Scotsman argument. All monopolies use their money and power to corrupt government to maintain and expand their monopoly. This is the effect, but not necessarily the cause, of monopolies. The De Beers monopoly was not formed by government, but rather by independent diamond mining companies that realized their "precious and rare" diamonds were at best common semi-precious gems. You are simply wrong.

The Standard Oil Trust was formed by Rockefeller, not government. In fact government fought against the monopoly as was common back then.

The Standard Oil Trust was formed in 1863 by John D. Rockefeller. He built up the company through 1868 to become the largest oil refinery firm in the world. In 1870, the company was renamed Standard Oil Company, after which Rockefeller decided to buy up all the other competition and form them into one large company.

The company faced legal issues in 1890 following passage of the Sherman Antitrust Act. That also brought unwanted attention to the company by Ida M. Tarbell, a McClure's Magazine reporter, who began an investigation. Following publication of her report, the Standard Oil Company was forced to break up into separate state companies — the "Seven Sisters" — each with its own board of directors.

The problem is that Republicans, not government, are responsible for most monopolies today, but those corrupt politicians help monopolies form because of outright bribery from the owner class. Again, the problem stems from capitalism, allowing owners to control the distribution of wealth created by others.

indigenous says

The ONLY exception yous can come up with is De Beers, and their use of government in their business was definitely dubious.

There are plenty of examples. Of course my listing them won't convince you to admit your mistake, but it will demonstrate your hypocrisy.
International Harvester and American Tobacco
Standard Oil
U.S. Steel
Microsoft
Hudson’s Bay Company
Luxottica
Monsanto

And those are just the famous ones. But we should also include oligopolies, which are just as bad and almost all industries are controlled by oligopolies. Remember Tucker?www.youtube.com/embed/0Y_Bqn-6uko

And here's a documentary on Tucker.

www.youtube.com/embed/5i7mNynGLmM

indigenous says

You need to inspect your ideas because they do not add up...

You're just bad at math. Another thing that comes from being religious rather than scientific. Engineers are good at math. Disciples are not.

You are not an engineer... Which may be why your logic is so flawed. Conjecture does not equal a fact.
Once again The ONLY time there is a monopoly is with the help of government, fucking period

indigenous says

Conjecture does not equal a fact.

No shit Sherlock. Thanks for coming around to my point.

indigenous says

Once again The ONLY time there is a monopoly is with the help of government, fucking period

An empirically false statement does not become true no matter how many times you repeat it.

Ironman says

indigenous says

Conjecture does not equal a fact.

In Dan's world, it absolutely does!

A retarded statement does not become intelligent no matter how many village idiots like it.

bgamall4 says

Maybe that is why God, in the Old Testament, determined

If your god is real, let him govern the world. We can stop all taxation, eliminate the military, drop all social services and infrastructure, and stop researching a cure for cancer. Put everything in the hands of god. I'm sure the only reason people live twice as long as they did in the Bronze Age is because god wants it that way, not because of technology and human effort.

Ironman says

Yet, you'll keep repeating the same shit, over and over...

Dan8267 says

An empirically false statement does not become true no matter how many times you repeat it.

There are no examples of a monopoly without government:

International Harvester and American Tobacco

Standard Oil, I already showed that their market share went from 88% to 64% by the time Roosevelt "regulated" them.

U.S. Steel, went from 67% in 1901 to 50% in 1911

Microsoft, went from 95% in 2000 to 20% today

Hudson’s Bay Company, After 1821, a group of independent free traders among the Métis population at the Red River Colony opposed the company's monopoly rights, which had been renewed by Parliament for another 20 years in 1838. Read more at the Wiki

Luxottica they have 29% of the market, not a monopoly

Monsanto, they have about 30% of the market, not a monopoly

NO, Once again The ONLY time there is a monopoly is with the help of government, fucking period

So the only argument you can make in defense of capitalism is that eventually the parasitic monopolies it creates are crushed under their own weight. That's a pretty weak defense and offers no reason to object to developing alternative economic systems.

Why do I bother.

No, GFD. The standard of living of their customers is raised otherwise the customer would NOT shop there, is that so hard to understand???

And when they no longer are competitive they get thrown to the scrap heap.

indigenous says

Standard Oil, I already showed that their market share went from 88% to 64% by the time Roosevelt "regulated" them.

You're wrong, and we've been over this ground in another thread. SCOTUS broke up Standard Oil in 1911, after more than two decades of attempts to trust bust it.
learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/15/may-15-1911-supreme-court-orders-standard-oil-to-be-broken-up/

Monopolies arise in the unregulated free market - as Standard Oil did in the 19th Century, the golden age of unregulated capitalism so celebrated by Austrians and Glibertarians.

thunderlips11 says

You're wrong

No you are, we have been over this before and you're still wrong. There market share went down because of competition.

thunderlips11 says

indigenous says

Standard Oil, I already showed that their market share went from 88% to 64% by the time Roosevelt "regulated" them.

You're wrong, and we've been over this ground in another thread.

Of course, no facts or evidence will convince an idiot that he's wrong. However, presenting them does convince everyone else that he's an idiot, and that's the point really.

There is no way indigenous is man enough to admit he's wrong. So he just repeats his dogma as if repetition trumps evidence and historical records.