Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> >   You are equating capitalism with racism? 

> No, I think that last bit is equating capitalism with unrewarded labor of 
> poor people who don't get to participate in the capitalism they're driving. 
> Child labor, "sweatshop" labor, etc. Of course, in a lot of cases, 
> "sweatshop" labor is better than the current alternatives in that place. 
> It's just a question of whether there would be better alternatives if the 
> sweatshop type factories weren't there at all.

> It just happens that Africa has (and always had) a lot of slavery-type stuff 
> going on, regardless of economic system being used. It's not racist per se, 
> but just a fact that most of the economies where this abusive-type labor is 
> prevalent are of a different "race" than the economies that benefit (whether 
> it be in china, africa, or whatever).

  I was referring to "If they want lunch counters completely free of persons
with dark skin, then the marketplace will provide it."

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> On 30-12-2009 18:22, Warp wrote:
> > gregjohn <pte### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> >> What the free market IS very good at is giving consumers exactly what they want
> >> in the marketplace. If they want lunch counters completely free of persons with
> >> dark skin, then the marketplace will provide it. If they want gas guzzlers that
> >> pose fatality risks to neighbors in collisions, and raise sea levels, the
> >> marketplace will provide them.  If they want sustainably grown organic coffee,
> >> the marketplace will prove them.  If they want the absolutely cheapest
> >> chocolate, the market will provide it using (literal) slave labor from Africa.
> > 
> >   I'm sorry, but that was one of the most ridiculous things I have read in
> > a long time.
> > 
> >   You are equating capitalism with racism? That must be the most far-fetched
> > comparison I have ever heard in my life.

> That deserves a price as one of the most far fetched straw man arguments 
> I heard in a long time.

  And that deserves a price as one of the most far-fetched straw man cards
I have heard in a long time.

  You would have to explain why you pulled the straw man card in this
situation.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> gregjohn <pte### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> > What the free market IS very good at is giving consumers exactly what they want
> > in the marketplace. If they want lunch counters completely free of persons with
> > dark skin, then the marketplace will provide it. If they want gas guzzlers that
> > pose fatality risks to neighbors in collisions, and raise sea levels, the
> > marketplace will provide them.  If they want sustainably grown organic coffee,
> > the marketplace will prove them.  If they want the absolutely cheapest
> > chocolate, the market will provide it using (literal) slave labor from Africa.
>
>   I'm sorry, but that was one of the most ridiculous things I have read in
> a long time.
>
>   You are equating capitalism with racism? That must be the most far-fetched
> comparison I have ever heard in my life.
>



us all happy free comfortable, or as many as can possibly ever be happy and
comfortable.  Capitalism, the market mechanism, tends to produce what the
consumers want.  The consumers are corrupted by sin.  Sometimes they either
openly want bad things or they out of ignorance don't realize that something is
bad until it's nearly too late (CFC's, CO2).

Without the nagging, the marketplace has in history done things like give us
black-free lunch counters. The Jew-free business block. Or Hummers.  My solution
is more and more nagging of what choices people are making.  Reminding them of
the externalities, holding them accountable to standards whether they like it or
not.

And nonviolent use of the soapbox in the public square to inform persons of the
negative externalities of their actions is what the capitalists call socialism.

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   I was referring to "If they want lunch counters completely free of persons
> with dark skin, then the marketplace will provide it."

Oh, OK. You realize it wasn't *that* long ago in the USA that such things 
were mandated, and somewhat later disallowed, yes? Near enough in time that 
there's some people around who really would want to have such a thing 
available?  I read it as just one example of things regulated by the 
government that wouldn't be regulated under a completely free market, and 
that might very well show up in that situation.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
   much longer being almost empty than almost full.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> >   I was referring to "If they want lunch counters completely free of persons
> > with dark skin, then the marketplace will provide it."

> Oh, OK. You realize it wasn't *that* long ago in the USA that such things 
> were mandated, and somewhat later disallowed, yes? Near enough in time that 
> there's some people around who really would want to have such a thing 
> available?  I read it as just one example of things regulated by the 
> government that wouldn't be regulated under a completely free market, and 
> that might very well show up in that situation.

  I realize that, and I'm not defending it. I don't think capitalism implies
such discrimination, and it was not because of capitalism per se that there
was (and is) discrimination in the US (or in other countries).

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

gregjohn <pte### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> No, I'm saying there is a faulty naivet? to think that "blind capitalism" gets
> us all happy free comfortable, or as many as can possibly ever be happy and
> comfortable.

  Maybe, but from what I see, it seems to be the economic system which works
best overall. It has its drawbacks, of course (such as big gaps between rich
and poor), but overall it's more beneficial than most other economic systems.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   I realize that, and I'm not defending it. 

Right.

> I don't think capitalism implies such discrimination, 

No, but unfettered capitalism allows it. If enough people want it, and it's 
legal, it'll happen.  I don't think that means capitalism causes racism.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
   much longer being almost empty than almost full.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Stephen wrote:
>> Sabrina Kilian wrote:
>>> Why do people from the USA want to shout about socialism?
>> It sounds that (in the US) “socialism” is becoming a synonym of
>> “Communism”
> 
> What do *you* think the difference is?  They sound pretty similar,
> except one has stuff owned by "the government" and one has it owned by
> "the people".
> 

Seeing that in the USA, the "government" is "of, by, and buy" the
people, they must be the same thing, right? ;-)

Post a reply to this message

Sabrina Kilian wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> Stephen wrote:
>>> Sabrina Kilian wrote:
>>>> Why do people from the USA want to shout about socialism?
>>> It sounds that (in the US) “socialism” is becoming a 
synonym of
>>> “Communism”
>> What do *you* think the difference is?  They sound pretty similar,
>> except one has stuff owned by "the government" and one has it owned by

>> "the people".
>>
> 
> Seeing that in the USA, the "government" is "of, by, and buy" the
> people, they must be the same thing, right? ;-)

That was kind of my point. Hence the question. Once again, please do not 

interpret my asking a question as my implying an answer. :-)

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
   much longer being almost empty than almost full.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> > I don't think capitalism implies such discrimination, 

> No, but unfettered capitalism allows it. If enough people want it, and it's 
> legal, it'll happen.  I don't think that means capitalism causes racism.

  I don't understand how an economic model causes racial discrimination.

  If capitalism can cause racial discrimination, why wouldn't, for example,
communism do the same?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message