Here's a Capitalist I really like

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_MIKE_MAYO_QA?SITE=RIPRJ&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Here's a Wall Street insider who thinks our current form of capitalism is really more of an entitled elitism.

Are you sure its not just Adam Sandler?

Any time the government is choosing winners and losers with bailouts, you don't have capitalism.

Toyman01 wrote: Any time the government is choosing winners and losers with bailouts, you don't have capitalism.

Anytime you allow government to bias to the tax system toward a particular way of earning money, you don't have capitalism. You also don't exacly have fair economics, either.

I tend think it's relatively safe to say that most of the people criticizing our current political and economic structures are capitalists...

We don't have a level playing field in my opinion. Business does what business does. As a shareholder, I want them to do everything they can to make me money. But as a citizen, I don't want my life ruled by the bottom line - especially a bottom line I don't have a stake in. So I want government to draw some lines in my best interest. It seems like we have plenty of government to give me hell when I put in a water heater or try to register a car, but where I actually need some protection, not so much. It's all kind of out of whack.

Tim O'Reilly said something interesting recently when he was discussing the Solyndra debacle. He thinks that,

https://plus.google.com/107033731246200681024/posts/5eQacBJD5wA
"the Chinese have driven solar panel prices down via vertical integration of the manufacturing process. No technological breakthroughs, just better market coordination through top-down planning."

The government money might have delayed this outcome a bit, but it didn't change the situation. Tim's idea is that when the government tries to choose winners companies, they're more likely to make mistakes. He thinks that instead, the government should spend money creating platforms that will support many new companies (...and the jobs they create.)

The best analogy I can think of for this is that Solyndra was a case of the Government betting on horses, trying to choose the one that would win the race. It would have been smarter for the same money to be spent creating racetracks used by MANY horses (companies)....

alfadriver wrote:

Toyman01 wrote: Any time the government is choosing winners and losers with bailouts, you don't have capitalism.

Anytime you allow government to bias to the tax system toward a particular way of earning money, you don't have capitalism. You also don't exacly have fair economics, either.

Who's allowing them? They do what they want. We have no control over the tax system except in the indirect way of voting. But that doesn't matter, since they just tell us what we want to hear to get elected and then do what they want. Don't blame the capitalists, blame the government.

bravenrace wrote: Who's allowing them? They do what they want. We have no control over the tax system except in the indirect way of voting. But that doesn't matter, since they just tell us what we want to hear to get elected and then do what they want. Don't blame the capitalists, blame the government.

Who incentivizes them to do what they do with taxes or anything else? There's a significant influence from capitalists who have identified the significant ROI of investing in political influence. It could be argued that the greater wrong is peddling that influence, but neither party in such a transaction is innocent.

The line between business and government is way too blurry.

Pretty much typical of the whole thing. One elitist criticizing other elitists.

fast_eddie_72 wrote: So I want government to draw some lines in my best interest.

That only works when your self-identified interests parallel with those of government, not so much when there are those with different interests.

Hence the debate....................

JoeyM wrote: Analogy: [If the] government [were] betting on horses, [they would be] trying to choose the one that would win the race. It would have been smarter for the same money to be spent creating racetracks used by MANY horses (companies)....

Thats an excellent description, I hope you dont mind me stealing that for later discussion on this topic...cuz Im gonna

ransom wrote: Who incentivizes them to do what they do with taxes or anything else? There's a significant influence from capitalists who have identified the significant ROI of investing in political influence. It could be argued that the greater wrong is peddling that influence, but neither party in such a transaction is innocent. The line between business and government is *way* too blurry.

this!!!

ransom wrote:

bravenrace wrote: Who's allowing them? They do what they want. We have no control over the tax system except in the indirect way of voting. But that doesn't matter, since they just tell us what we want to hear to get elected and then do what they want. Don't blame the capitalists, blame the government.

Who incentivizes them to do what they do with taxes or anything else? There's a significant influence from capitalists who have identified the significant ROI of investing in political influence. It could be argued that the greater wrong is peddling that influence, but neither party in such a transaction is innocent. The line between business and government is *way* too blurry.

Also, note the explosion of housing values starting in 1998. They skyroketed. Not because we had a housing shortage, or a land shortage, no- that's the year the capital gains taxes started applying- so if you take a year to flip a house, you only pay 15% tax on the profits.

You also see a big jump in the stock market due to the same thing.

So by making money in these certain ways, I can lower my taxes from +30% to 15%, thus making more money.

By choosing the market to make money, do you not think that there are ways to manipulte the market to make more money at low taxes, or find new ways to make money at these low tax rates?

Or did you not notice the recent crash in both the stock AND real estate markets?

For some reason, that way of making money was chosen above all others to have a very low tax rate. That's choosing winners and loosers. Warren Buffet knows all about this.

4cylndrfury wrote:

ransom wrote: Who incentivizes them to do what they do with taxes or anything else? There's a significant influence from capitalists who have identified the significant ROI of investing in political influence. It could be argued that the greater wrong is peddling that influence, but neither party in such a transaction is innocent. The line between business and government is *way* too blurry.

this!!!

Communism is when the government owns and controls all the businesses. What is it when the businesses own and control the government?

In reply to Salanis:

Msinummoc

In reply to N Sperlo:

LOL!

I was trying, but couldn't come up with anything...

Salanis wrote: Communism is when the government owns and controls all the businesses. What is it when the businesses own and control the government?

Um. That would be capitalism, i.e. America in the year 2011.

1988RedT2 wrote:

Salanis wrote: Communism is when the government owns and controls all the businesses. What is it when the businesses own and control the government?

Um. That would be capitalism, i.e. America in the year 2011.

Wouldn't that be corporatism. Or even fascist corporatism.

What it really is, is sucky for the rest of us.

Salanis wrote: Communism is when the government owns and controls all the businesses. What is it when the businesses own and control the government?

The Diet?

alfadriver wrote: Also, note the explosion of housing *values* starting in 1998. They skyroketed. Not because we had a housing shortage, or a land shortage, no- that's the year the capital gains taxes started applying- so if you take a year to flip a house, you only pay 15% tax on the profits. You also see a big jump in the stock market due to the same thing. So by making money in these certain ways, I can lower my taxes from +30% to 15%, thus making more money. By choosing the market to make money, do you not think that there are ways to manipulte the market to make more money at low taxes, or find new ways to make money at these low tax rates? Or did you not notice the recent crash in both the stock AND real estate markets?

That is the reason I do not own a home. I could have bought one back then.. but because home prices here are/were already inflated due to the casinos and the presence of the ocean, all I could get were loans that I considered "shakey"

Now I consider myself pretty smart for not doing it

Toyman01 wrote:

1988RedT2 wrote:

Salanis wrote: Communism is when the government owns and controls all the businesses. What is it when the businesses own and control the government?

Um. That would be capitalism, i.e. America in the year 2011.

Wouldn't that be corporatism. Or even fascist corporatism.

Hmmmmmm. I dunno. I'm going to have to ask my unionized, tax payer subsidized professor and get back to you. He's really smart. That's why he's a teacher!

1988RedT2 wrote:

Salanis wrote: Communism is when the government owns and controls all the businesses. What is it when the businesses own and control the government?

Um. That would be capitalism, i.e. America in the year 2011.

what the hell is the matter with you?