Invisible wrote:
> What's capitalism?
> 
> And, for that matter, we still have socialism, fashism, fuedalism, and 
> all those other isms that nobody understands...

Ooh!  Ooh!  Obligatory:
http://www.cyberclass.net/ref2cows.htm
http://www.manbottle.com/humor/capitalism_and_cows
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_have_two_cows )

--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net

Post a reply to this message

On 08/14/09 07:45, Warp wrote:
>    Of course capitalism seems to work best with democracy because they are
> both based on the same concept: Freedom.

	It can't be freedom if the goods aren't free.

-- 
Doctor to patient: Although it's nothing serious, let's keep an eye on 
it to make sure it doesn't turn into a major lawsuit.

Post a reply to this message

On 08/14/09 02:49, Warp wrote:
>    I find it rather amusing that you think that "capitalism caused the
> economic crisis", when it was capitalism that caused the economic growth
> in the first place. The "economic crisis" is only a recession in relation

	The two are not contradictory. And let's not forget that interference 
with capitalism is playing a big role in getting out of the mess that 
capitalism created - although no doubt many will dispute that.


-- 
Doctor to patient: Although it's nothing serious, let's keep an eye on 
it to make sure it doesn't turn into a major lawsuit.

Post a reply to this message

On 08/14/09 06:18, Warp wrote:
>    Btw, that's true to *all* forms of economy. It's not exclusive to
> capitalism.
>
>    At its core, a government has two roles: Managing resources and stopping
> people from hurting other people. How well different forms of government
> succeed in these two goals depends, in the end, on how much they limit the
> freedom and rights of their citizens.
>
>    As far as I can see, democratic capitalism is the form of government which
> succeeds in this with the least amount of freedom and rights limits. Other
> forms of government and economy may sound good on paper, but they don't seem
> to work very well in practice.
>
>    That doesn't mean that capitalism is perfect. It just means that it seems
> to be the best we have. Other forms don't seem to work in practice, no matter
> how utopistic they sound in theory.

	I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying.

	I don't know your view of the economies in Europe, but when many 
(most?) ordinary people in the US talk about capitalism, they don't view 
most European economies as capitalist (and Scandinavian countries are 
probably the least likely to be considered capitalist).

	Likewise, when folks in the US speak negatively of capitalism, they're 
often speaking positively of the economy in places like Germany, or even 
the Scandinavian countries. Again, that's because they just don't call 
it capitalism.

	I think the people of every country view their system as "centrist" or 
a good balance. So the capitalism in the US is the "standard" for them, 
and the stuff in Europe is too far off to be called it the same thing.

	I just thought I'd point that out to everyone because it will likely 
cause confusion in the discussion.

-- 
Doctor to patient: Although it's nothing serious, let's keep an eye on 
it to make sure it doesn't turn into a major lawsuit.

Post a reply to this message

>> What's capitalism?
>>
>> And, for that matter, we still have socialism, fashism, fuedalism, and 
>> all those other isms that nobody understands...
> 
> Ooh!  Ooh!  Obligatory:
> http://www.cyberclass.net/ref2cows.htm
> http://www.manbottle.com/humor/capitalism_and_cows
> ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_have_two_cows )

Well, that conclusively proves... something.

(I can't help noticing that not a single one of these systems makes 
sense...)

Post a reply to this message

Neeum Zawan <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
> On 08/14/09 07:45, Warp wrote:
> >    Of course capitalism seems to work best with democracy because they are
> > both based on the same concept: Freedom.

>         It can't be freedom if the goods aren't free.

  Now you are confusing the two completely different meanings of the
word "free". Most other languages have completely separate words for
these two meanings.

  "Freedom" in this context does not mean "no monetary cost".

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 08/14/09 02:51, Warp wrote:
> Neeum Zawan<m.n### [at] ieeeorg>  wrote:
>> On 08/13/09 17:48, Warp wrote:
>>>     At its core, capitalism is about free commerce, and it's precisely free
>>> commerce which keeps the cash flowing.
>
>>          In which direction?
>
>    It's impossible for cash to flow into one single direction. It has to
> circulate for the flow to keep going.
>
>    You may be thinking that cash tends to flow towards big companies. However,
> people paying money to those companies have to *get* that money from somewhere
> first. Where do you think they get it from?

	It's a question of rates. In the US, the percentage of the overall 
wealth owned by the top 1% keeps increasing (depending on who you ask - 
I'm seeing some contradictory figures). That's a net flow in that 
direction.

	I meant my statement as a half joke, but now you've got me thinking...

-- 
Doctor to patient: Although it's nothing serious, let's keep an eye on 
it to make sure it doesn't turn into a major lawsuit.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> >> What's capitalism?
> >>
> >> And, for that matter, we still have socialism, fashism, fuedalism, and 
> >> all those other isms that nobody understands...
> > 
> > Ooh!  Ooh!  Obligatory:
> > http://www.cyberclass.net/ref2cows.htm
> > http://www.manbottle.com/humor/capitalism_and_cows
> > ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_have_two_cows )

> Well, that conclusively proves... something.

> (I can't help noticing that not a single one of these systems makes 
> sense...)

  While the pages are humoristic, the "pure capitalism" actually *does*
make sense to me:

  "You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull."

  That's rational behavior, looking towards the future and welfare.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Neeum Zawan <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
>         I don't know your view of the economies in Europe, but when many 
> (most?) ordinary people in the US talk about capitalism, they don't view 
> most European economies as capitalist (and Scandinavian countries are 
> probably the least likely to be considered capitalist).

  I think too many people only concentrate on the (sometimes only perceived)
negative aspects of capitalism while outright ignoring the positive aspects.
Then they define "capitalism" purely based on these negative aspects.

  It may be true that economy is somewhat more controlled in Europe, and
particularly in the northern countries, than it is in the US, but it's still
capitalism.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

>>         It can't be freedom if the goods aren't free.
> 
>   Now you are confusing the two completely different meanings of the
> word "free". Most other languages have completely separate words for
> these two meanings.
> 
>   "Freedom" in this context does not mean "no monetary cost".

Libre / gratis, the bane of the OSS movement. ;-)

Post a reply to this message