Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Capitalism and the State are mutually exclusive.

Expand Messages
  • Bob Wynman
    Randist Bo7b aka Bob Wynman WWP Email Member (bobalou@wynman.com) Laissez Faire Capitalism and the State are mutually exclusive. Capitalism is the free market,
    Message 1 of 7 , Apr 22, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Randist Bo7b aka Bob Wynman WWP Email Member (bobalou@...) Laissez Faire Capitalism and the State are mutually exclusive.

      Capitalism is the free market, people exchanging value for value vountarily, without coercion.

      The State is force, coercion.

      this is not complicated stuff, Al, but the State-controlled schools and media make it seem complicated so that people will swallow the myth that they need a king (the State) toi run their lives.

      We don't.

      --bob & lou'

      Al J WWP Email Member and Baha'i(Algae5636@... ) You said:
      "There SHOULD be a 'separation of economy and state', but there isn't because governments keep using force to violate the main points of capitalism; respect for private property and free trade."
      I said:
      "There should be a separation of economy and state-- but private enterprisers (aka capitalists :-) won't leave the government alone."

      I pointed that out because the "separation of the economy and state" is absurd. There is no such separation, and never has been. The economic/political system is a single entity, not two systems. You're advocating the separation of heads and tails of the same coin. The government doesn't go looking for deserving people to whom to grant "monopolies, subsidies, or restrictions". It only does such grants in response to pressure from the private sector.

      The "ism" under discussion is "capital", not "Catholic".
      Your so-called definition of capitalism, however, makes no reference to capital. It's no more than a description of people having some common courtesy and respect for each other.
      That's what Catholicism says to do, too.
      So by your definition, Catholicism = capitalism.
      :-)
    • audiolaw@...
      Automatic Lie, a liberty loathing loony lowdown larcenous litigious little ol LA living lying lightfooted liberal lawyer lacking legitimacy (AudioLaw@aol.com)
      Message 2 of 7 , Apr 22, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Automatic Lie, a liberty loathing loony lowdown larcenous litigious little'ol LA living lying lightfooted liberal lawyer lacking legitimacy (AudioLaw@...) Bob Wynman:

        I suppose the natural response to any pretense that a "Voluntary
        Society" will ever even be attempted (which would be bad business for those who
        profit from marketing the fantasy sermons and lectures), would be:

        In the absence of the state, why would businessmen perceiving the
        opportunity not conspire amongst themselves to fix prices, fabricate "research"
        and "tests" to hype the purity and efficacy of their products, and all the
        other sorts of routine capitalist behaviors that go on even in state
        regulated economies?

        Why would anyone pretend that if all restraints were taken away,
        businessmen would suddenly become honest, and fiercely competitive, when history
        shows that false advertising and anti-competitive consortia are ALWAYS
        more profitable?


        Randist Bo7b aka Bob Wynman WWP Email Member (bobalou@...) Laissez Faire Capitalism and the State are mutually exclusive.

        Capitalism is the free market, people exchanging value for value
        vountarily, without coercion.

        The State is force, coercion.

        this is not complicated stuff, Al, but the State-controlled schools and
        media make it seem complicated so that people will swallow the myth that they
        need a king (the State) toi run their lives.

        We don't.
      • Algae5636@...
        Al J WWP Email Member and Baha i(Algae5636@aol.com ) Lol. They re mutually exclusive? In mid-18th century France: Quesnay had the ear of the King of France,
        Message 3 of 7 , Apr 22, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Al J WWP Email Member and Baha'i(Algae5636@... ) Lol.
          They're mutually exclusive?
          In mid-18th century France:
          "Quesnay had the ear of the King of France, Louis XV, and in 1754 persuaded him to give laissez faire a try. On September 17, the King abolished all tolls and restraints on the sale and transport of grain, and for more than a decade the experiment was a success. But then, in 1768, there was a poor harvest, and the cost of bread rose so high that there was widespread starvation, while merchants exported grain in order to obtain the best profit. In 1770, the edict allowing free trade was revoked." --
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laissez-faire

          1. Separation? The "state"-- a king with dictatorial powers-- established laissez-faire capitalism by edict.
          2. Then when push came to shove, the "laissez-faire" practitioners:

          (a) ran the price of bread up so high there was widespread starvation; and then
          (b) refused to even sell the grain at home because they could make more profit exporting it.

          And the free marketeers did that voluntarily, in their sacred process of exchangng value for value, and in the absence of any state coercion. Then the evil "state"-- that tyrant Louis XV-- revoked free trade for no better reason than to keep a bunch of worthless eaters alive-- people who were too damn poor for the free traders to make a profit off of them, ya know.

          Also from the same Wiki page:
          "As a system of thought, laissez faire rests on the following axioms:[24]

          1. The individual is the basic unit in society.
          2. The individual has a natural right to freedom.
          3. The physical order of nature is a harmonious and self-regulating system.

          These axioms constitute the basic elements of laissez-faire thought, although another basic and often-disregarded element is that markets should be competitive, a rule that the early advocates of laissez-faire have always emphasized."

          (1.) is false. The individual can't reproduce. The basic unit of ongoing society is the family.
          (2.) is based on a religious concept, not on anything in the "natural world". As evolution makes clear, the natural world doesn't know from "rights". It operates on biological imperatives.
          And tell (3.) to the dinosaurs, who had their "harmonious and self-regulating physical order" ever so rudely interrupted by an asteroid.
          :-)
          Al J

          Randist Bo7b aka Bob Wynman WWP Email Member (bobalou@...) Laissez Faire Capitalism and the State are mutually exclusive.

          Capitalism is the free market, people exchanging value for value vountarily, without coercion.

          The State is force, coercion.

          this is not complicated stuff, Al, but the State-controlled schools and media make it seem complicated so that people will swallow the myth that they need a king (the State) toi run their lives.

          We don't.
        • Bob Wynman
          Randist Bo7b aka Bob Wynman WWP Email Member (bobalou@wynman.com) Al, if one were so inclined, one could likely research the 1754-1770 period in France &
          Message 4 of 7 , Apr 22, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            Randist Bo7b aka Bob Wynman WWP Email Member (bobalou@...) Al, if one were so inclined, one could likely research the 1754-1770 period in France & discover what really happened. And, if one were so inclined, one could likely effectively rebut your claims attempting to falsify the foundation of the free market. Perhaps someone here is so inclined.

            If not, mebbe you're right & the best we can hope for humanity are the systems you support, based on the morality of theft and collectivism, that so far, in 6,000 years of written history, have produced consistent war, poverty & servitude. Perhaps we don't need to further experiment with freedom that has produced, whenever it's been allowed to exist, peace and prosperity.

            --bob
            Al J WWP Email Member and Baha'i(Algae5636@... ) Lol.
            They're mutually exclusive?
            In mid-18th century France:
            "Quesnay had the ear of the King of France, Louis XV, and in 1754 persuaded him to give laissez faire a try. On September 17, the King abolished all tolls and restraints on the sale and transport of grain, and for more than a decade the experiment was a success. But then, in 1768, there was a poor harvest, and the cost of bread rose so high that there was widespread starvation, while merchants exported grain in order to obtain the best profit. In 1770, the edict allowing free trade was revoked." --
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laissez-faire

            1. Separation? The "state"-- a king with dictatorial powers-- established laissez-faire capitalism by edict.
            2. Then when push came to shove, the "laissez-faire" practitioners:

            (a) ran the price of bread up so high there was widespread starvation; and then
            (b) refused to even sell the grain at home because they could make more profit exporting it.

            And the free marketeers did that voluntarily, in their sacred process of exchangng value for value, and in the absence of any state coercion. Then the evil "state"-- that tyrant Louis XV-- revoked free trade for no better reason than to keep a bunch of worthless eaters alive-- people who were too damn poor for the free traders to make a profit off of them, ya know.

            Also from the same Wiki page:
            "As a system of thought, laissez faire rests on the following axioms:[24]

            1. The individual is the basic unit in society.
            2. The individual has a natural right to freedom.
            3. The physical order of nature is a harmonious and self-regulating system.

            These axioms constitute the basic elements of laissez-faire thought, although another basic and often-disregarded element is that markets should be competitive, a rule that the early advocates of laissez-faire have always emphasized."

            (1.) is false. The individual can't reproduce. The basic unit of ongoing society is the family.
            (2.) is based on a religious concept, not on anything in the "natural world". As evolution makes clear, the natural world doesn't know from "rights". It operates on biological imperatives.
            And tell (3.) to the dinosaurs, who had their "harmonious and self-regulating physical order" ever so rudely interrupted by an asteroid.
            :-)
            Al J


            Randist Bo7b aka Bob Wynman WWP Email Member (bobalou@...) Laissez Faire Capitalism and the State are mutually exclusive.

            Capitalism is the free market, people exchanging value for value vountarily, without coercion.

            The State is force, coercion.

            this is not complicated stuff, Al, but the State-controlled schools and media make it seem complicated so that people will swallow the myth that they need a king (the State) toi run their lives.

            We don't.
          • Robin Crane
            Robin Crane WWP Invitee (patriot451@gmail.com) Bob & Lou know the OPPOSITE of legitimate scholarship and intelligent thought. It s almost as if someone made
            Message 5 of 7 , Apr 25, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              Robin Crane WWP Invitee (patriot451@...) Bob & Lou "know" the OPPOSITE of legitimate scholarship and intelligent
              thought. It's almost as if someone made a long, long list of the
              scholarship of western thought, at least about government and economics,
              then intentionally rewrote each finding to say the OPPOSITE, and then Bob &
              Lou memorized it.

              These folks can't POSSIBLY have a decent education! No university (except
              maybe Oral Roberts, Regent, Liberty) teaches this kind of crap....and I
              wonder if these religious pseudo-universities even go this far.

              *Robin Crane*



              *================================================*

              “If there is no struggle, there is no progress. This struggle may be a
              moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may be both moral and
              physical, but it must be a struggle. Find out just what any people will
              quietly submit to — and you have found out the exact measure of injustice
              and wrong, which will be imposed upon them. . . . Power concedes nothing
              without a demand. It never did and it never will.”

              Frederick Douglass, August 3, 1857

              *================================================*


              Automatic Lie, a liberty loathing loony lowdown larcenous litigious little'ol LA living lying lightfooted liberal lawyer lacking legitimacy (AudioLaw@...) Bob Wynman:

              I suppose the natural response to any pretense that a "Voluntary Society" will ever even be attempted (which would be bad business for those who profit from marketing the fantasy sermons and lectures), would be:

              In the absence of the state, why would businessmen perceiving the opportunity not conspire amongst themselves to fix prices, fabricate "research" and "tests" to hype the purity and efficacy of their products, and all the other sorts of routine capitalist behaviors that go on even in state regulated economies?

              Why would anyone pretend that if all restraints were taken away, businessmen would suddenly become honest, and fiercely competitive, when history shows that false advertising and anti-competitive consortia are ALWAYS more profitable?
            • Algae5636@...
              Al J WWP Email Member and Baha i(Algae5636@aol.com ) Lol. Historically, capitalism developed at a time when by your own definition and admission, a free market
              Message 6 of 7 , May 3, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                Al J WWP Email Member and Baha'i(Algae5636@... ) Lol.
                Historically, capitalism developed at a time when by your own definition and admission, a free market did not exist. It was in fact formulated, adopted and expounded in and by the European nations who were colonizing as much of the world as they could get their hands on (by brute force :-).

                That behavior evidenced a blatant disrespect for other people's property, besides which, colonization was the antithesis of allowing free trade in and/or with those parts of the world. And, the exchange of people for value instead of value for value was moreover a common practice among the capitalists of that time. One cannot respect another person less than that-- let alone their property.

                All you have described as "capitalism" is people having a little respect and consideration for each other in the marketplace-- but that is expected of people in all aspects of their social dealings with other people, not just at market. It is thus not a defining feature of their behavior in the marketplace in particular, hence cannot be claimed to be a defining feature of "capitalist" behavior in particular.

                In short, I don't think your definition of capitalism has any foundation in reality.
                :-)


                Randist Bo7b aka Bob Wynman WWP Email Member (bobalou@...) Laissez Faire Capitalism and the State are mutually exclusive.

                Capitalism is the free market, people exchanging value for value vountarily, without coercion.

                The State is force, coercion.

                this is not complicated stuff, Al, but the State-controlled schools and media make it seem complicated so that people will swallow the myth that they need a king (the State) toi run their lives.

                We don't.

                --bob & lou'

                Al J WWP Email Member and Baha'i(Algae5636@... ) You said:
                "There SHOULD be a 'separation of economy and state', but there isn't because governments keep using force to violate the main points of capitalism; respect for private property and free trade."
                I said:
                "There should be a separation of economy and state-- but private enterprisers (aka capitalists :-) won't leave the government alone."

                I pointed that out because the "separation of the economy and state" is absurd. There is no such separation, and never has been. The economic/political system is a single entity, not two systems. You're advocating the separation of heads and tails of the same coin. The government doesn't go looking for deserving people to whom to grant "monopolies, subsidies, or restrictions". It only does such grants in response to pressure from the private sector.

                The "ism" under discussion is "capital", not "Catholic".
                Your so-called definition of capitalism, however, makes no reference to capital. It's no more than a description of people having some common courtesy and respect for each other.
                That's what Catholicism says to do, too.
                So by your definition, Catholicism = capitalism.
                :-)
              • wv
                WV WWP Email member and special friend of the cyber personality known as Automatic Lie (microdhses@gmail.com) Way to go at giving us yet another example of how
                Message 7 of 7 , May 4, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  WV WWP Email member and special friend of the cyber personality known as Automatic Lie (microdhses@...) Way to go at giving us yet another example of how you don't operate by
                  logic.  You say the respect for private property cannot be a 'defining
                  feature' of capitalism, because it's expected anyway in all aspects of
                  their social dealings not just the market.

                  That doesn't follow, you idiot.  And indeed, it's NOT expected in
                  OTHER systems.  Most systems historically have NOT respected private
                  property, like; mercantilism, feudalism, socialism, communism, etc.
                  Capitalism came up with the brilliant idea that we really SHOULD
                  respect private property, AND allow free markets.

                  You're comparing capitalism not with those alternative system, but
                  with what YOU say is expected anyways;  false logic….yet again.

                  Another mistake is when you say 'a little respect'.  That's NOT what
                  it says, but they mean absolute respect, not just 'a little', you
                  idiot.

                  Our gov. shows 'a little' respect, when they feel like it, but other
                  times violate it. Yes, it's expected of them to respect it, but they
                  don't, sorry to destroy your illusions.

                  Al J WWP Email Member and Baha'i(Algae5636@... ) Lol. Historically, capitalism developed at a time when by your own definition and admission, a free market did not exist.  It was in fact formulated, adopted and expounded in and by the European nations who were colonizing as much of the world as they could get their hands on (by brute force :-).

                  That behavior evidenced a blatant disrespect for other people's property, besides which, colonization was the antithesis of allowing free trade in and/or with those parts of the world.  And, the exchange of people for value instead of value for value was moreover a common practice among the capitalists of that time.  One cannot respect another person less than that-- let alone their property.

                  All you have described as "capitalism" is people having a little respect and consideration for each other in the marketplace-- but that is expected of people in all aspects of their social dealings with other people, not just at market.  It is thus not a defining feature of their behavior in the marketplace in particular, hence cannot be claimed to be a defining feature of "capitalist" behavior in particular.

                  In short, I don't think your definition of capitalism has any foundation in reality.
                  :-)

                  Randist Bo7b aka Bob Wynman WWP Email Member (bobalou@...) Laissez Faire Capitalism and the State are mutually exclusive.

                  Capitalism is the free market, people exchanging value for value vountarily, without coercion.

                  The State is force, coercion.

                  this is not complicated stuff, Al, but the State-controlled schools and media make it seem complicated so that people will swallow the myth that they need a king (the State) toi run their lives.
                  We don't.
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.