Abolish capitalism to save the planet?

[Voluntary]

Quote by: nerdvincent All the communist experiment tried were incomplete marxist revolution.

I knew this argument was coming. A free market nation has never been achieved either.

Luxemburgism is non-revolutionary and doesn't imply a dictatorship of the working class (which caused every "communist" countries to stick with a ex-farmer dictator).

From reading up on it, it lacks economic theory except that it is based off of Marxism...which lacks economic theory.

As for the socialists ideas, well your talking without thinking. As far as I know, Norway got the highest HDI, not America, and Norway is the most socialist country in the world.

You should do you homework before making snide comments. The top 500 Norwegian companies are mostly privately owned or publicly traded. List of the largest companies of Norway - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Norway, like most countries are a mixed economy. Norway's economy is primarily capitalism while their politics are influence by socialism.

Ok I'll explain: capitalism needs consumerism to survive. If the country stop consuming good, the economy fall.

People also die when they stop consuming. What economic system can survive without consumption?

But consuming more and more leads to wicked production, and wicked production leads to pollution, pollution leads to global warming.

"Wicked" consumption. You made the is/ought fallacy. You made an "ought" claim. I'll make an "is" claim below.

You do know that increasing gdp/capita decreases infant mortality, increases life expectancy, curbs population growth, increases human capital via education.

[gela]

People also die when they stop consuming. What economic system can survive without consumption?

Theres eating food so you will live.

and there is needing a new TV, a new Fridge, a new outfit every season, a holiday, a boat, a brand new car, a new phone ever year, and a new ipod.

[BobbyO]

But I'm talking about abolishing capitalism, which is taking another economic system which is not based on hardcore consumerism, stock exchange, wage, and offshoring to use cheap worker and to get cheap ressources.

[/quote]

How is it beneficial to the environment to use MORE resources in the production of goods and services?

[BobbyO]

[quote]

Quote by: nerdvincent All the communist experiment tried were incomplete marxist revolution. Luxemburgism is non-revolutionary and doesn't imply a dictatorship of the working class (which caused every "communist" countries to stick with a ex-farmer dictator). As for the socialists ideas, well your talking without thinking. As far as I know, Norway got the highest HDI, not America, and Norway is the most socialist country in the world.

Norway, however, remains a capitalist community, at least from logical point from your end. It has stck markets, cheap goods (it outsources), and practices all the usual devilry.

[xyzer]

This one cracks me up!

You haven't even signed the Kyoto protocol. As far as I can tell, your government has done nothing to help global warming.

That bit of idiocy exempted two of the largest pollution producing nations of the world? Would that have been fair of effective? Only in your dreams!

I don't know how the US government or any government can do anything to help global warming? The latest cooling trend which has occurred as anthropgenic CO2 is increasing suggests that we humans really can't do much about it? If the globe cools and we can't attribute it to humans what the hell are we supposed to do to warm it, or vice versa?

Suggest maybe we go up to the sun and change its combustion processes so it wont flicker so brightly And its magnetic fields wont shift?
By the way capitalism gave us the computer technology we use to converse with on this thread. It wasn't developed in (Socialist/Communist)Cuba or Russia? or even Norway with its near 50% income tax. It was developed as a result of the capitalistic free enterprise system.
Last time I looked Al Gores deciding vote on the ethanol Bill in this country(in the 1990s) has led to a rise in food prices and hasn't stopped OPEC from inflating oil prices?

[Morality Games]

There is no logic in his statements, it would be more logical to abolish communism since Communist China is responsible for the majority of the world's pollution and it is capitalist America that seems to be the only country that gives a damn about global warming, so where is this guy's logic?

To put things in perspective, Communist China is only recently responsible for the majority of the world's pollution and capitalist America doesn't care all that much about global warming. It has become something of a business gimmick for some companies (playing on people's fears and sense of guilt to make a buck), but there have been no substantial reductions in emissions whatsoever.

I don't know how the US government or any government can do anything to help global warming? The latest cooling trend which has occurred as anthropgenic CO2 is increasing suggests that we humans really can't do much about it? If the globe cools and we can't attribute it to humans what the hell are we supposed to do to warm it, or vice versa? Suggest maybe we go up to the sun and change its combustion processes so it wont flicker so brightly And its magnetic fields wont shift?

Junk science. The sun may have contributed somewhat in different periods due to solar forcing or some other process, but even the majority of scientists doing research in that area agree greenhouse gasses are probabalistically responsible for increases in temperature across the board.

It's wonderful when ideologies distort judgment to the point they make ignoring the nature of reality a moral imperative.

[Century 25]

Quote by: LadiesMan217 gela, century 25, nerdvincent, what do suppose we replace capitalism with? I really hate when people crap all other capitalism and have no solutions and then it ends up that they really want communism or socialism and then once we get that far, I can stop pretending to take you seriously.

Vist: Capitalism is a Pyramid Scheme

Then look at the 'home' link. I think you will see what we are getting at.

[Century 25]

Quote by: Voluntary I would love to hear this theory. I am sure that excessive military spending to police the world, a declining educational system, providing health care and educational services to illegal immigrants, wasting money on unnecessary programs, agricultural subsidies (which also hurt 3rd world farmers), pork barrel spending, etc. has nothing to do with a declining America. Let's point the finger at capitalism.

I am. Read here: Capitalism is a Pyramid Scheme

The home link is there or start here: Will America Replay the Roman Empire's Fall?

[gela]

That bit of idiocy exempted two of the largest pollution producing nations of the world? Would that have been fair of effective? Only in your dreams! I don't know how the US government or any government can do anything to help global warming? The latest cooling trend which has occurred as anthropgenic CO2 is increasing suggests that we humans really can't do much about it? If the globe cools and we can't attribute it to humans what the hell are we supposed to do to warm it, or vice versa? Suggest maybe we go up to the sun and change its combustion processes so it wont flicker so brightly And its magnetic fields wont shift?

There is a very big thread for the global warming debate. Argue your brains out there.

Secondly, the government of USA compromised some kyoto goals, but then they refused to sign it.
Its not kyotos error that USA isn't on it.

[Voluntary]

Quote by: Century 25 I am. Read here: Capitalism is a Pyramid Scheme

There is nothing wrong with owning the fruits of your labor. You have the right to sell your labor or not.

The home link is there or start here: Will America Replay the Roman Empire's Fall?

If you have points of contention, then be original and bring them up yourself instead of leading me to an obscure and biased website.

Granted the author had some degree of intelligence when discussing Keynesian economics. He lacks understanding of other schools of macroeconomics. Supply-side economics is not a macro-school of economic thought. Why he compared Keynesian economics to supply side economics is beyond me. I lost IQ points reading that article. Name me 6 academic economist who subscribe to the supply sider school of thought, besides Laffer.

I am unimpressed by that site. Again, if you have specific contentions, then bring them up and debate them. Or you can just post links to random websites. Your choice.

[nerdvincent]

Quote by: BobbyO Norway, however, remains a capitalist community, at least from logical point from your end. It has stck markets, cheap goods (it outsources), and practices all the usual devilry.

Of course. But it was just a justification against Voluntary who was saying that "socialism does not have a history of succeeding", not that Norway's socialism is communism.

[nerdvincent]

Quote by: Morality Games To put things in perspective, Communist China is only recently responsible for the majority of the world's pollution and capitalist America doesn't care all that much about global warming.

Yes. And we must not forget that there is 5 to 6 times more people in China than in America. But of course America is holy, it doesn't count.

[Voluntary]

Quote by: nerdvincent Of course. But it was just a justification against Voluntary who was saying that "socialism does not have a history of succeeding", not that Norway's socialism is communism.

Using Norway is not a rebuttal nor a valid justification when I stated that "socialism does not have a history of succeeding". Did I not state that you could make cases for Yugoslavia and the Mondregon experiment in post #15?

I even supplied you with ammo, but you choose to use Norway as a justification of socialism which I refuted.

[BobbyO]

[

QUOTE=nerdvincent;499755]Of course. But it was just a justification against Voluntary who was saying that "socialism does not have a history of succeeding", not that Norway's socialism is communism.

[/quote]

Socialism does NOT have a history of succeeding. Norway is a capitalist country, not a socialist one (from YOUR angle).

[LadiesMan217]

Quote by: Century 25 Vist: Capitalism is a Pyramid Scheme Then look at the 'home' link. I think you will see what we are getting at

From your website it said that the selfish rulers who hoarded all the wealth were responsible for the fall of Rome, sounds like an argument for lower taxes if you ask me. How would Socialism prevent more selfish rulers from hoarding the wealth, it seems it would be much easier since the state already owns everything anyway. I fail to see how this remains capitalism's fault.

[nerdvincent]

Duplicated post.

[nerdvincent]

Quote by: BobbyO Socialism does NOT have a history of succeeding. Norway is a capitalist country, not a socialist one (from YOUR angle).

Eh...socialism doesn't imply non-capitalism. Communism does: communism is a kind of extreme socialism with the abolition of the wage system. But saying Norway isn't socialt is plain stupid.[/quote]

[Century 25]

Quote by: Voluntary There is nothing wrong with owning the fruits of your labor. You have the right to sell your labor or not. If you have points of contention, then be original and bring them up yourself instead of leading me to an obscure and biased website. Granted the author had some degree of intelligence when discussing Keynesian economics. He lacks understanding of other schools of macroeconomics. Supply-side economics is not a macro-school of economic thought. Why he compared Keynesian economics to supply side economics is beyond me. I lost IQ points reading that article. Name me 6 academic economist who subscribe to the supply sider school of thought, besides Laffer. I am unimpressed by that site. Again, if you have specific contentions, then bring them up and debate them. Or you can just post links to random websites. Your choice.

You asked or stated:

"I would love to hear this theory. I am sure that excessive military spending to police the world, a declining educational system, providing health care and educational services to illegal immigrants, wasting money on unnecessary programs, agricultural subsidies (which also hurt 3rd world farmers), pork barrel spending, etc. has nothing to do with a declining America. Let's point the finger at capitalism."

So I did point the finger at 'capitalism' - that being my response (see below) agreeing with the premise of this thread; "Abolish capitalism to save the planet? " So, for your benefit I gave a quick link to you. I could care less if you don't like it. There is no "theory" to debate. Get it..?? The ball is in your court, you show me/us how great 'capitalism' is for us.

America is declining, for sure.. and it is due to the slobbering greed of 'capitalism' unchecked. "Capitalism" is not a government. But it uses our so-called "democratic" republic to attain it's.. need.. read that greed..

I stand by what I said, the only way capitalism could work is with checks & balances.. and those with the $$$ aren't about to have their bankrolls checked & balanced. So.. eventually, as in past history, the USA is gonna tank. Picked clean by the greedy 'capitalists'.

Capitalism without diligent checks & balances is like a fire in the house without a furnace/fireplace/oven.. etc, to control it.



.

[Century 25]

Quote by: LadiesMan217 From your website it said that the selfish rulers who hoarded all the wealth were responsible for the fall of Rome, sounds like an argument for lower taxes if you ask me. How would Socialism prevent more selfish rulers from hoarding the wealth, it seems it would be much easier since the state already owns everything anyway. I fail to see how this remains capitalism's fault.

Anti-capitalism is not a form of government. Canada is "socialistic" - France.. often rated as the # 1 country on the list of best places to live, is socialistic. Socialism.. is like a family. I think we would be far better off running the USA like a family, not a 'business' - a 'business' is all about the bottom line. They don't care if you live or die.. a business will outsource jobs and pander for illegal aliens to replace you. A family wouldn't dump you on the street, not take care of you when you are sick.. or allow unlimited hordes of 'aliens' into your home. Think about all of the crap business gets away with.. and how they have bought into our government.. they 'own' it.. not we, the people.

'Capitalism' would be okay, but only under a strong system of checks & balances. Why should astronomical differences in income be allowed..?? That is how a pyramid scam works. The rich are only at the very top.. and the base must.. must ever widen/broaden in order to continue. That is not feasable for very long. Just look at what is going down right now. .

.

[Voluntary]

Quote by: Century 25 You asked or stated: So I did point the finger at 'capitalism' - that being my response (see below) agreeing with the premise of this thread; "Abolish capitalism to save the planet? " So, for your benefit I gave a quick link to you. I could care less if you don't like it. There is no "theory" to debate. Get it..??

I understand that there is no theory to debate since the author and yourself show a complete lack of understanding of basic economics.

The ball is in your court, you show me/us how great 'capitalism' is for us.

For it to functional properly, capitalism requires individual freedom. You must be free to sell or hire labor. Capitalism is great at generating. There are strong correlations between gdp/capita and reduction in infant mortality rates, increases in life expectancy, and curbing population growth. Capitalism also spurs innovation and increases the standard of living.

Capitalism without diligent checks & balances is like a fire in the house without a furnace/fireplace/oven.. etc, to control it.

Capitalism is checked in the United States since we do not live in a pure capitalistic free market society. Like most developed countries, the US is a mixed economy. Perhaps, you don't like the checks but you like the standard of living. Someone who thinks the US is a pure capitalistic country is on some serious drugs. You cannot critique the free market by thinking we live in a free market. It is a mixed economy.

Anti-capitalism is not a form of government. Canada is "socialistic" - France.. often rated as the # 1 country on the list of best places to live, is socialistic.

More nonsense from you. Both Canada and France have market-oriented economic systems.

Chirac came into power in 1986 since the socialist movement in France was seen as a failure. Within a month of coming into office Chirac's plan called for the privatization of 65 industries and 900,000 thousand jobs. France is more capitalistic now, then 20 years ago. Pick up a history book.