This is a correction about Etherealsadness

To jimbobhickville: Lock your doors and windows at night man.


i am a capitalist too. socialists are the ones that should be killed.
Yeah. Typical thing for a brainwashed American to say.


Capitalism is evil people... look what happened to Argentina
 
So you are saying that capitalism is not in any way responsible for the crisis in Argentina?

Argentina's leadership did everything the pro-capitalists said they should do and were given some $ 40 billion or so in support. And the result? Everything's fucked up over there. Now Argentina used to be one of the richest countries in the Western Hempisphere. So why did capitalism fail?

Yeah now you'll go like look at the US it's the richest country in the world, but fuck that, capitalism can't be applied everywhere -and shouldn't be applied anywhere-... It's far from "the best of all possible worlds".


edit-- to Hawk: of course I do, it'll be a pleasure killing the Pres, but I didn't really know he was into heavy metal
 
Dude Argentina is not even a Capitalist country. Could you name some of these Pro-capitalist that you are talking about ?

I hope that you are not refering to those crooks of the IMF because they are hated by everyone that is commited to Capitalism.

If you would like to be informed about the nature of the economic crisis go here:

http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=965

BTW are you Greek?
 
Yes I was talking about the IMF whose theories were applauded by lotsa pro-capitalist theorists (Hoover Institute - Chicago School)

My guess would be that pro-capitalist theorists are commited to capitalism are they not?
 
In reality, communism is not so much a political order, as a social one. It attempts to do through a social revolution what democracy failed to do in a political one; make all citizens equal. It was the philosophers’ answer to the industrial revolution and all the evils brought with it. Unfortunately, the ideology was lost on men like Stalin, who transformed the Soviet Union into a world super-power, but sacrificed true communism to do so. In theory, communism begins with a revolt by the proletariat. Once the revolution is achieved, a social system in which all possessions are distributed equally among all is established. The government is originally strong, in order to create unity and peace in a recently war-torn nation, as well as to over-see the distribution of goods. In theory, the government of communist states is to begin large and powerful and slowly dwindle away until a state of anarchy, or libertarian communism, is achieved. In this system, people would have lived their whole lives in a communistic society, and would therefore have no qualms about working together for their common good.

This (libertarian communism) would be the best form of government -or lack thereof-, unfortunately it's very difficult to achieve since in real life whenever a government is given wide control over a nation, they do not want to let go of their power.


From the forms of government that currently exist, I believe that socialism kicks the shit out of capitalism.
 
Originally posted by Black Winter Day
guerilla, you bitch about capitalism, yet you have not proposed any other form of government. do you want to be constantly regulated by the government? granted, capitalism has it's downfalls, but dammit, at least we have freedom
no we dont. we are CONSTANTLY regulated. socialism is, and will always be a theory. theres no way it would ever work in the real world becuase those few greedy fucks would fuck it all up for everyone else anyways. so whats the answer? fuck me, i dunno.
-neal
 
To The_Witch_King:
lol right, like I was the one that started this flame war. I guess what you said applies more to Black Winter Day

neal, do you want one brand of soda to choose from? if so, then socialism would be for you.
May I have your attention please...
And the award for the dumbest statement of the day goes to......... Black Winter Day!!
Congratulations, stop by our offices to pick up your prize: a life size, Adam Smith sex doll!!!
 
Originally posted by Guerrilla
Yes I was talking about the IMF whose theories were applauded by lotsa pro-capitalist theorists (Hoover Institute - Chicago School)

My guess would be that pro-capitalist theorists are commited to capitalism are they not?

Have you read the article that is behind the link?

http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=965

There you will find a hard-core Capitalist organisation explaining that the policies IMF were one of the reasons behind the crisis in Argentina. You see the IMF acts as a *regelatory* organisation.

That is *against* the very idea of Capitalism. Capitalism is laissez-fair. *No* government intervention at any level. Not national or international.

For this debate it does not matter if you disagree with the non-intervention principle. What does matter however is that you understand what Capitalism *really* is. It is not the welfare state most country's of the west have now. That is a mixed economy with loads of government intervention. It has nothing to do with what Capitalism is.

As long as you don't understand this you are attacking a strawman.

I do grant you that there are organisations that support the IMF but I will put it to you that, that that in itself makes them, nor the IMF a Capitalist organisation.

Look at the policy they are advocating. If they allow for government interference at *any* level they are not Capitalist.

I want to make it clear here that point I am arguing is NOT that you should support a Laissez-fair policy. What I am trying to do here is simply explaining what a Capitalist economy is. It is an
economy were the government [if there is even a government as we know it] does not interfere *at all* in the economy.

Any institute that advocates a policy of government interference in the economy is not a Capitalist think tank or Intitute.

Can you show me links of the Chicago school applauding the policies of the IMF?

I would like to see them. I already have many doubt about the Chicago School and their economic ideas. This means I do NOT agree with Milton Friedman and his pandering of the conservative party which I consider to be very *anti*Capititalist.
 
That's is true neal. that was my point.
Therefore there are no capitalists economy's in the world. My wider point however was describing the pre-condition for a Capitalist economy. What do you mean by "pure governments"I have not used that term. Could you explain please?
Because I was arguing that Capitalism or a free market would be defined by *absense* of the government in the economy. So why are you starting about government?

O and I found an article on the Hoover Institute website that criticizes the IMF because it is not compatible with a free market.

Here it is:

http://www-hoover.stanford.edu/pubaffairs/newsletter/99fall/epps.html

==========================
Guerrilla

Could you show a an article or something that shows me that the Hoover Institute is Pro IMF?

Thanks in advance dude!
 
'pure' government as in anarchy, monarchy, democracy, etc. almost all governments are a combination of many kinds, theres very few true monarchies left and all democratic countries are pretty much 'democratic socialist' countries. democracies are heavily influenced by the government. and so on blah blah.
-neal