First let me set this straight. When we define a word, or talk about a concept, we don't define it based on what it was 50 or 100 or 200 years ago. We define it based on what it is today.

For example, I would not say marriage is when a father decides to give his daughter away to wed a man anymore because that is not the way most people experience marriage today. I would not define a television as a CRT...and so on.

We can no longer define capitalism as the great, incentive based economic system because that system no longer exists. Capitalism must be defined as the 2011 condition of our global economic system in which an evil system funnels money towards a few people at the expense of the masses.

By this definition, a capitalist is an evil person, not someone who is creative, works hard, or has a special talent, but a person who intentionally exploits the masses for economic gain.

The old capitalists were factory owners or inventors who employed hundreds and made 50 times what their workers made.

Today's capitalists trade derivatives and make 500 times what workers make.

The old capitalistic system is symbolized by main street consisting of a few markets, blacksmith, sporting stores, pet stores, etc. These are all family owned businesses that are run by the owners who make a lot more money than their workers because they are providing the capital and taking the risks to employ dozens of workers. These owners want to provide great service to keep the customers coming so their goal is to serve the customers. The best way to serve their customers is by treating their employees in a fair manner so that the employees will share their philosophy. They also care about their community and the people in it because these are their neighbors and the environment is the one in which they live and raise their children. They care about the long term condition of their business and community providing stability for all families involved. Everyone wins.

Today's capitalistic system has destroyed the old one and is now symbolized by a ghost town main street where all of the commerce has been consolidated into a walmart type place. This walmart type place employs just enough people to make sure the public doesn't steal goods. They attract business through low prices, not quality or service so their goal is to make prices as low as possible which means they have to pay their employees as low as possible. If the few dozen employees don't like it, they can leave because the several other dozen former employees of main street will gladly take slave labor over starvation. The owners (who don't actually work or create anything of value) make 5000 times their employees, don't care about the community (they don't live there probably have never been there) and don't even care about their business lasting in the long term. Everyone loses.

People are finally starting to realize that we don't have the old system anymore, even though capitalists continue to use the word capitalism to sugarcoat what they are doing. In the next few years, a revolution will take place in much of the world and a system for the people will be put in place. This current system will probably be given a new name by history as it is capitalism run amuck and never what was intended by a true capitalist.

We don't even have democracy anymore. We have a capitalistic monarchy where money is permanently in power and represented by whichever of the two parties resonates with the right mega corporations at the right time. Any third party is crushed by the money machine.

The best way to revolt against this system is to not vote at all. I would be glad if we had the smallest turnout ever. We cannot use the current system to bring about justice. We have to unplug ourselves from the current system before we can end it and begin to replace it.

10/30/2011 1:08:24 PM

There are still plenty of CRT televisions out there

10/30/2011 1:18:21 PM

Good point. There are also several levels of evil when it comes to corporations. Some are out there still going by the old system. Some towns in Oregon are still living the dream. I look at whole foods as a less evil corporation. They sale high quality products, treat their employees relatively well, provide great service and support the local community.

10/30/2011 1:31:57 PM

We define terms based on their essences: A television was never defined as a CRT, and a marriage was never defined with reference to a man giving his daughter away; rather, a television was defined by its property of allowing people to see remote visual signals, and a marriage was defined as the union between two individuals (usually a male and a female human, but it still did make sense to claim that a man was made to marry a horse after violating hir).

Similarly, capitalism has been defined as an economic system based on private ownership of capital and its profit-seeking use in a competitive market; government assistance toward the many (as in the welfare state) or the few (as in corporate welfare, no-bid cost-plus contracts, or massive quantitative easing) are neither part of nor incompatible with capitalism.

Finally, refusing to vote does not help you at all; it does not aid the revolution you seek, and prior voting is still compatible with it.

10/30/2011 1:34:43 PM

Voting further perpetuates the false illusion that the people have a say in what is going on.

10/30/2011 1:43:06 PM

So we destory Walmart by piercing the heart of it, but then eventually, over the course of decades, another store grows as large as Walmart and is able to do the exact same thing.

Or do you propose making a law that says no company is allowed to be so big?

Any third party? Perot had a damn good chance of winning in '92 had he not backed out and reentered the race.

10/30/2011 2:11:55 PM

voting is a system of organization. What would you like to replace it with?

Quote :

"we don't define it based on what it was 50 or 100 or 200 years ago"

But not ever in history has capitalism been the system, not 50 or 100 or 200 years ago. Capitalism of the 19th century is what it is today: a mixed system of private ownership with social and governmental pressures on top. Government spent its time invading Mexico for oil instead of invading Iraq for oil, but the structure was the same.

All your complaints against Walmart were directed at A&P back in the first half of the 20th century and dime stores in the 19th century. Big box chain stores are nothing new.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904875404576530894140394126.html

[Edited on October 30, 2011 at 2:21 PM. Reason : .,.]

10/30/2011 2:19:17 PM

it's not capitalism thats the problem. In fact capitalism is the only thing that could get us out of this mess.

What we have is crony capitalism where rich people like Buffet have too much influence on the government and they continually stick it to the people by influencing how the confiscated taxpayer money is spent.

10/30/2011 2:50:42 PM

Quote :

"Or do you propose making a law that says no company is allowed to be so big? Any third party? Perot had a damn good chance of winning in '92 had he not backed out and reentered the race."

Yeah, you can't let companies get so big. Every business should be ran by workers on site.

Theoretically, a third party candidate who integrates himself into the system can gain enough financial support to be elected.

Quote :

"voting is a system of organization. What would you like to replace it with?"

a different voting system. the current voting system is so far gone that we have to just scrap it and start over.

10/30/2011 3:03:48 PM

I can't understand why walmart is picked on so much as if people are being forced to shop or work there

10/30/2011 3:07:43 PM

Their exploitative prices drive all the good places out of business FORCING former customers and employees to go there.

10/30/2011 3:09:51 PM

Quote :

"Every business should be ran by workers on site."

sup komrade

10/30/2011 3:16:25 PM

atleast when you CHOOSE TO spend money at walmart you get something in return...as opposed to money being TAKEN out of your paycheck by the government where your hard earned money disappears into a complex racket of inefficiency that benefits the people who contribute the least

10/30/2011 3:19:04 PM

You choose how that money is spent when you vote for someone to represent you. This is why it is so important to make sure we stop voting all together.

10/30/2011 3:35:55 PM

^ huh? I don't recall Obama saying in his campaign speech that he was going to spend the money on wars, giveaways to the banks, etc.

Yes he did say he'd give away money to poor people so that they wouldnt have to get jobs but that pales in comparison to all the things he's wasted money on that he forgot to mention.

10/30/2011 3:50:56 PM

Quote :

"You choose how that money is spent when you vote for someone to represent you. "

waaaitt a sec... i thought the corporations controlled the government??

10/30/2011 4:36:16 PM

"Every business should be ran by workers on site. "
Every business should be run by the owners of that business, whoever they might be. Be they the workers on site, owner-managers on site, or owners half a world away.

"You choose how that money is spent when you vote for someone to represent you."
I'd rather just spend it myself, thank you. Why are you so eager to have someone else spend your money for you? Especially after seeing what they choose to spend it on (Invading Iraq).

"a different voting system. the current voting system is so far gone that we have to just scrap it and start over."
Such as? How would you arrange things? Was it you that wanted to remove the franchise from homemakers, the retired, and the involuntarily unemployed?

[Edited on October 30, 2011 at 4:56 PM. Reason : .,.]

10/30/2011 4:54:12 PM

Quote :

"They sale "

Oh goddammit

Quote :

"Yeah, you can't let companies get so big. Every business should be ran by workers on site"

Jesus fuck I'm rolling my eyes

10/30/2011 6:53:23 PM

Quote :

"Their exploitative prices drive all the good places out of business FORCING former customers and employees to go there."

You know, you're right. It was just last week a Wal Mart employee showed up at my door and held a gun to my head until I went to the local Wally World to pick some things up.

10/30/2011 6:55:21 PM

The worst part of it is that the police won't do anything about it.

10/30/2011 7:51:58 PM

They were actually providing the escort to the store I think they were paid for with Wal Mart dollars, not with my taxes like I had assumed.

10/30/2011 7:55:54 PM

Quote :

" "Their exploitative prices drive all the good places out of business FORCING former customers and employees to go there.""

Wait, I thought the old definition of capitalism was ok, and just this newfangled group of derivative-trading (still don't get the hate for this) fat cats are bad?

10/30/2011 8:13:19 PM

Quote :

"^ huh? I don't recall Obama saying in his campaign speech that he was going to spend the money on wars, giveaways to the banks, etc."

short memory
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3P7NrmzHwY
It doesn't matter though because no candidate delivers on campaign agendas and the only way to hold them accountable in this system is to elect someone else who will do the same.

Quote :

"waaaitt a sec... i thought the corporations controlled the government??"

they control the politicians who control the government. They are the representatives in this capitalistic monarchy.

Quote :

"or owners half a world away. "

this hurts society because they have no vested interest in the environment or quality of anything. someone who lives in a town is a lot less likely to destroy that town.

Quote :

"Wait, I thought the old definition of capitalism was ok, and just this newfangled group of derivative-trading (still don't get the hate for this) fat cats are bad?"

global monopolistic mega corporations are not the "good capitalism". They are thee reason why people have shitty working conditions, damaged environments and rampant unemployment.

You joke about it but they might as well take you at gunpoint if they are going to shutdown all the alternatives. Most american towns literally have nothing but walmart. there couldn't be a worse economic scenario than that.

10/30/2011 8:27:16 PM

Quote :

"they control the politicians who control the government. They are the representatives in this capitalistic monarchy. "

so then this:

Quote :

"You choose how that money is spent when you vote for someone to represent you."

isnt true

10/30/2011 9:42:41 PM

Yes it is. The corporations give us candidates to choose from, all who support different groups in different ways. We then choose which candidate to choose how to give our money to the corporations for us.

10/30/2011 9:45:01 PM

So wait, where do the one world government black helicopters fit into all of this?

10/30/2011 10:14:43 PM

Quote :

"You joke about it but they might as well take you at gunpoint if they are going to shutdown all the alternatives. Most american towns literally have nothing but walmart. there couldn't be a worse economic scenario than that. "

I never really understood this line of reasoning. Before wal-mart came to town, prices for something at the local stores was $X, after wal-mart came to town, the prices at the local stores were still $X, but at wal-mart it was $X-Y. If the people of the town wanted their local shops and the products there, nothing at all prevented them from continuing their lives exactly as it was before wal-mart came into town. So either the people wanted lower prices, in which case wal-mart gave them exactly what they wanted, or the people didn't have any options before, in which case wal-mart gave them that which they didn't have before, or you are suggesting that somehow wal-mart actually made the local stores raise their prices or otherwise be uncompetitive.

10/30/2011 11:28:26 PM

To a degree, a big box store would actually have a major direct effect on those small town retailers. This is mostly because a larger business is able to buy more supply themselves at a cheaper price. A small town store just wouldn't be able to keep up with that; their competition immediately has lower prices, and when a few people do start to make that change, the small town store has to up its prices just to stay in the black, and eventually they get run over.

It's not even necessarily maliciousness on the part of the big box store, but the effect is pretty much unavoidable in most cases.

10/30/2011 11:37:34 PM

Beating capitalists: Redefine capitalism

10/30/2011 11:39:23 PM

^^ nobody is arguing that. that's not the point.

10/31/2011 12:12:15 AM

I was in the mountain a few weeks ago, and I walked into a convenience store that was in the middle of nowhere and saw nothing but Pepsi/Nestle/Busch products. It was disgusting. There was a Hardees across the street, set against an amazing mountain/stream vista.

It would be great if instead of seeing the exact same product in every store in the country, we had a true competitive environment, but we don't and wall street and corporations love things this way. This isn't real capitalism.

10/31/2011 12:27:54 AM

10/31/2011 1:23:15 AM

^^ haha I thoroughly enjoyed that post. You managed to subtly poke fun at liberals on so many levels.

I don't understand why Eman hates poor people. E, why do you think poor people should be forced to pay more for the products they need just so a few greedy local store owners can make a lot of money by selling products for higher prices than they buy them for?

I like altruistic companies like walmart who are willing to sacrifice their profits so that they can sell goods to poor people for barely more than it costs to produce and distribute them.

[Edited on October 31, 2011 at 1:31 AM. Reason : a]

10/31/2011 1:28:16 AM

Quote :

"The old capitalistic system is symbolized by main street consisting of a few markets, blacksmith, sporting stores, pet stores, etc. These are all family owned businesses that are run by the owners who make a lot more money than their workers because they are providing the capital and taking the risks to employ dozens of workers. These owners want to provide great service to keep the customers coming so their goal is to serve the customers. The best way to serve their customers is by treating their employees in a fair manner so that the employees will share their philosophy. They also care about their community and the people in it because these are their neighbors and the environment is the one in which they live and raise their children. They care about the long term condition of their business and community providing stability for all families involved. Everyone wins."

So what are these folks called now if they aren't capitalists?

10/31/2011 6:39:41 AM

Quote :

"I like altruistic companies like walmart who are willing to sacrifice their profits so that they can sell goods to poor people for barely more than it costs to produce and distribute them."

Lmao this has to be sarcastic but I wont bother to read the whole thread

10/31/2011 10:11:08 AM

God Bless the Waltons, they are truly modern saints of charity. Traveling the world to find the lowest cost goods and bringing them to America to sell to the working poor, pulling in just enough profit to pay their mortgages and have a steak dinner once a month.

10/31/2011 10:14:05 AM

“By directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention.” Adam Smith

10/31/2011 4:26:34 PM

Wal-Mart isn't all that altruistic, it just uses a combination of economies of scale, crackdowns on unionization, and pressure on suppliers to look the other way at deplorable labor conditions in the Third World; in this way it gets super-low supply costs and passes the savings on to you.

10/31/2011 4:35:31 PM

while we are on the subject of wal*mart I would like to share that I started using the straight talk cell phone service they offer there and pay $32.00 a month with no contract instead of the $75 I was paying to Sprint (2 year contract) for pretty much the exact same thing...so if you are looking to trim your budget it is worth looking into

10/31/2011 6:17:17 PM

I pay $25 a month with virgin mobile (a sprint subsidiary) for better service than I had with Sprint. Go figure.

10/31/2011 6:56:23 PM

^ I will look into that as soon as I lose/destroy/get my money's worth out of this phone I just bought

10/31/2011 7:25:09 PM

shee-it

What carrier was that? with my Verizon Wireless phone (also from Wal-Mart lol) the cheapest monthly plan is now $50/month (but it has talk, text, and data), while my current plan is pre-paid, where I have to pay at least $16 at a time after tax.

11/2/2011 9:58:51 PM

god bless boostmobile.

11/3/2011 10:52:04 AM

Name another feasible form that exists and is better than capitalism? What has done more to bring people out of poverty than capitalism?

11/3/2011 12:06:02 PM

Quote :

"Trickle-Down Economics is when poor people who die from obesity and no healthcare are liquefied and fed intravenously to their young, like in The Matrix. It is a government subsidized program and is perfectly legitimate. Many argue that Trickle-Down Economics is a half-baked excuse for the top 1% to shirk on their taxes, while others consider it to be yet another grace of the free market. America is one of the only countries where poor people are fed intravenously to their young by way of a complex tubular irrigation system, which is even more like in The Matrix than in other countries. In the Third World, children must scoop the liquified poor out of cholera-ridden puddles, since they cannot afford to purchase the distilled version sold by Dasani in local villages. In order to better understand Trickle-Down Economics, we must first grasp its place in the greater context of Economic Precipitation, as a corollary to The Evaporation Effect. The Evaporation Effect begins when poor people are placed in an situation of sufficient pressure—such as a sweatshop or welfare office, or having to tell their kid they won’t be going to college. When the poor are placed in such environments, heat energy is accumulated from their weary lives of toil and suffering, eventually causing their particles to combust and evaporate into the atmosphere. Then, through an elaborate distillation method patented exclusively by Monsanto, the particles are reconstituted into liquid and stored in a reservoir where illegal immigrants stir and stir the mixture with big paddles in a non-air-conditioned warehouse for $1.67 a day. Sometimes the warehouse workers take a piss in the reservoir because they aren’t furnished with an employee bathroom, or one of them falls in and burns to death. It is said that one time Ronald Reagan himself visited the warehouse. He told everyone to call him “Ron,” then addressed the workers all by name, presenting each one with a box of fancy cigars and a copy of How to Win Friends and Influence People by Dale Carnegie. Then, he extracted himself from his britches and took a shit in the vat. It’s also said that no sooner had he evacuated his bowels, swift and silent as the night, than he was standing in his very own britches and having a hearty laugh over cigars with Esposito, the foreman of the warehouse. Reagan then recruited the top scientists to maintain a live culture of his evacuations in the Warehouse to this day, so that they can add a little bit to each batch and ensure that it is a true product of “Reagonomics.” When the contents of the vat are ready, they are siphoned into a complex tubular irrigation system and fed intravenously to the young, everyday more and more like in The Matrix. It works out perfectly and is the cycle of creation and destruction as God intended it. Only children of poor people consume the liquid intravenously, of course. This way, poor people can be totally self sufficient and really make their way in the world, in the true spirit of fronteirsmanship."

11/3/2011 2:27:45 PM

E Man, it sounds like you have a point in there somewhere. Large owners can just sit back and control things and make most of the money in the process. Sometimes it offends my sense of fairness too. But surely you can think of a better solution than not voting? That's not going to break the system down and replace it with a better voting system. Maybe raise estate taxes so this kind of financial control can't last forever? Lessen the number of hours people work per week? The existence of an efficient supply chain and one-stop shopping should be a good thing, right?

11/7/2011 6:29:14 PM

Quote :

"But surely you can think of a better solution than not voting?"

Nah, I think that's a pretty good solution for him. If you're a dumbass and/or totally ignorant, you shouldn't be voting.

Of course, if you're intelligent, there's nobody to vote for...but that's because they're too busy catering to a bunch of dumbasses who are too dumb to be self-aware and realize that they really should just sit at home on election day and let people with a clue decide the fate of the country.

11/7/2011 6:45:02 PM

Quote :

"But surely you can think of a better solution than not voting? "

Its not a great idea but I can't figure a better one out for the life of me. The voting system is controlled by money and corporations spit out money for politicians who will feed them pudding. I don't see a way around it aside from drastic voting reform. How else can we get leaders who aren't clients to capitalism?

Quote :

" Nah, I think that's a pretty good solution for him. If you're a dumbass and/or totally ignorant, you shouldn't be voting. "

anyone who disagrees with you is just ignorant.

Quote :

"The existence of an efficient supply chain and one-stop shopping should be a good thing, right?"

monopolies are the dark side of capitalism.

Quote :

"Name another feasible form that exists and is better than capitalism? What has done more to bring people out of poverty than capitalism?"

not this kind of capitalism. what we have today is a perversion of capitalism. main street capitalism is the best form. anything is better than a system where a few take all.

That quote was a typical example of the people who have destroyed capitalism using the old advantages of capitalism as a reason to prolong this bullshit we have now.

11/7/2011 7:12:50 PM

Quote :

"anyone who disagrees with you is just ignorant. "

No, just when you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

11/7/2011 7:21:57 PM

Quote :

"How else can we get leaders who aren't clients to capitalism?"

As all humans are clients to their own interests, it shouldn't matter what voting system you create, the politicians selected will always be clients to someone. The only idea that has ever actually worked (if only for a time) was pitting self interested politicians against one another, as the founders tried to do by pitting the federal legislature (house of reps) against the state legislatures (Senate). As the two houses were elected using radically different voting systems, their clients tend to be different and often cancelled each other out. Of course, we scrapped that system in favor of the current system where both houses answer to the same election process with predictable results (the politicians in both houses are clients to the same group of special interests).

An interesting thought experiment: what if we changed the voting rules such that only women could vote for senate? Perhaps picking one city in each State whose job was to choose Senators?

11/7/2011 7:25:56 PM