Tucker Carlson: What is destroying rural America?

[acptulsa]

Correct, there's a million reasons a person cannot work, but one of them should not be "because means of production is privately owned". it may not be the biggest reason, but it's the easiest to solve.

Does that ever happen? Yeah, employers try to convince other employers to blackball people, but eventually someone says, "Screw you. I need this person's skill set."

Go get yourself a low social credit score in China and see how many things you can't do.

[susano]

capitalism is forced morality.

Not true. I'm reading a great book, ATM, "The Demon in Democracy", written by a Pole who lived through communism and now, liberal democracy. The book is about how the two systems are similar and discusses both claiming the mantel of morality and so much so that both require total integration of language with the system, such as framing everything being about "economic justice", "human rights", etc, when it's never true.

[susano]

but you're ignoring the fact that the winners were already winners, they were just reinforced.

That isn't always true. Jeff Bezos started out with a home business selling books and it wasn't until Amazon grew beyond books that he got govt contracts and got out of the red.

[susano]

There is nothing wrong with socialist fabrics or capitalist hierarchies. True socialism is the relationships we have with families, friends, mutual aid societies, and churches. True capitalism is the relationships we have in unregulated; un-taxed markets. The problem is the state; the mafia; criminal gangs who's power comes not from economics or love, but violent psychopathy. Once it gets involved our social fabric becomes frayed as our dependency moves from being cared for to being kept. Likewise our free markets become skewed away from economic efficiencies toward depredation by politically chosen parties. Across the board inefficiencies develop; resources and incentives are no longer aligned with the needs of individuals but instead with corrupt desires of bureaucracies.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to presence again.

[susano]

Just becauss there isn't a lot of capitalism doesn't mean we should get rid of it. We should aim for as much capitalism as possible and weed put as much corruption as possible.

I agree and this says it perfectly:

There is nothing wrong with socialist fabrics or capitalist hierarchies. True socialism is the relationships we have with families, friends, mutual aid societies, and churches. True capitalism is the relationships we have in unregulated; un-taxed markets. The problem is the state; the mafia; criminal gangs who's power comes not from economics or love, but violent psychopathy. Once it gets involved our social fabric becomes frayed as our dependency moves from being cared for to being kept. Likewise our free markets become skewed away from economic efficiencies toward depredation by politically chosen parties. Across the board inefficiencies develop; resources and incentives are no longer aligned with the needs of individuals but instead with corrupt desires of bureaucracies.

[PRB]

That isn't always true. Jeff Bezos started out with a home business selling books and it wasn't until Amazon grew beyond books that he got govt contracts and got out of the red.

how is that contradicting what i said?

[PRB]

Not true. I'm reading a great book, ATM, "The Demon in Democracy", written by a Pole who lived through communism and now, liberal democracy. The book is about how the two systems are similar and discusses both claiming the mantel of morality and so much so that both require total integration of language with the system, such as framing everything being about "economic justice", "human rights", etc, when it's never true.

capitalism isn't forced morality? so people voluntarily respect each other's property without threat of force or starvation?

[PRB]

Does that ever happen? Yeah, employers try to convince other employers to blackball people, but eventually someone says, "Screw you. I need this person's skill set."

rarely has it happened, doesn't mean it shouldn't be tried.

Go get yourself a low social credit score in China and see how many things you can't do.

social credit score is a euphemism, it's actually a ration system within their capitalism.

[PRB]

Slave mentality is wanting someone to lorde over you and make choices for you because you aren't smart enough.

which is basically what capitalism is.

[acptulsa]

rarely has it happened, doesn't mean it shouldn't be tried.

Happens all the time. You just don't hear about it.

social credit score is a euphemism, it's actually a ration system within their capitalism.

So, everything bad that happens is capitalism, even in Communist China? The only problem is, only government rations stuff. Capitalism just raises the price.

No, Communist China's social network score isn't market-driven. It's classic Stalinism.

which is basically what capitalism is.

Capitalism makes your choices for you, and government doesn't?

Sounds like comedy. Problem is, comedy has to be at least as smart as The Three Stooges to work, and that ain't.

[PRB]

So, everything bad that happens is capitalism, even in Communist China?

When communist China has a few things done under capitalism pretenses, yes. Communist China is hardly immune from criticism if thats what you're asking.

The only problem is, only government rations stuff. Capitalism just raises the price.

Capitalism IS government. How is property protected?

No, Communist China's social network score isn't market-driven. It's classic Stalinism.

i never said market driven

Capitalism makes your choices for you, and government doesn't?

Again, government IS capitalism.

Sounds like comedy. Problem is, comedy has to be at least as smart as The Three Stooges to work, and that ain't.

capitalism doesn't work

[acptulsa]

Capitalism IS government. How is property protected?




i never said market driven



Again, government IS capitalism.


capitalism doesn't work

Capitalism is not government. If it were, yes, it wouldn't work. But it is not.

Your third eye seems to be interfering with the other two.

[susano]

how is that contradicting what i said?

Per the subject of the govt picking winners and losers, you said the ones picked are already winners. Amazon was in the red. Perhaps you mean that someone like Bezos had demonstrated business ability when he was picked as a winner (dunno). Anyway, I took your implication to be that only the in club of the rich are granted favors and that's always so. Whatever I think about Amazon aside, Bezos built it on his own.

[PRB]

Per the subject of the govt picking winners and losers, you said the ones picked are already winners. Amazon was in the red. Perhaps you mean that someone like Bezos had demonstrated business ability when he was picked as a winner (dunno). Anyway, I took your implication to be that only the in club of the rich are granted favors and that's always so. Whatever I think about Amazon aside, Bezos built it on his own.

yes, i admit i poorly worded it.

amazon was in the red, but it was still better at anybody in the space at the time. it was also, as you admitted, growing.

winners and losers don't always specifically mean rich or poor, but even if it did, growing with a secured potential from free competition, is itself having capital.

[PRB]

Capitalism is not government. If it were, yes, it wouldn't work. But it is not.

Your third eye seems to be interfering with the other two.

capitalism requires government, and force

[susano]

capitalism isn't forced morality? so people voluntarily respect each other's property without threat of force or starvation?

Capitalism is an economic system, independent of govt., and amoral. Govt in any type of economic system creates and enforces laws. In a communist country, such as Cuba, I'm pretty sure a murderer gets charged with homicide, just like in the US. It would be more accurate to say that govt enforces morality (and then it's done selectively).

[PRB]

Capitalism is an economic system, independent of govt., and amoral.

Capitalism cannot exist without government

[susano]

yes, i admit i poorly worded it.

amazon was in the red, but it was still better at anybody in the space at the time. it was also, as you admitted, growing.

winners and losers don't always specifically mean rich or poor, but even if it did, growing with a secured potential from free competition, is itself having capital.

You wouldn't expect the CIA to give a 600 million dollar contract to a bunch of hoodrats would you? Of course, it's going to go someone capable of doing the job. Never mind that I think the CIA should abolished but, I think, you know what I mean. You don't want to award a contract for something like bridge construction based upon some stupid sh*t like "social justice". You want the best engineers at a good price.

[susano]

capitalism requires government, and force

As does communism and even more so.

[susano]

Capitalism cannot exist without government

Crony capitalism yes, but free markets not so. Think of the ancient world of of producers and traders peddling their wares from Asia to Europe. Govt didn't create that or control it. Interference came later, in the form of both capitalist and communist govt organizational structures.

[CCTelander]

Capitalism cannot exist without government

How's that?

[PRB]

As does communism and even more so.

communism is not the only alternative.

[PRB]

How's that?

capitalism requires private property, which cannot be protected without force and government.

[PRB]

Crony capitalism yes, but free markets not so. Think of the ancient world of of producers and traders peddling their wares from Asia to Europe. Govt didn't create that or control it. Interference came later, in the form of both capitalist and communist govt organizational structures.

all forms of private property, even unregulated capitalism, requires government to enforce.

[Gumba of Liberty]

all forms of private property, even unregulated capitalism, requires government to enforce.

No, they require respect and men. Two things the corporate media desperately wants to get rid off, btw.

[PRB]

No, they require respect and men. Two things the corporate media desperately wants to get rid off, btw.

you think people naturally and instinctly respect property? then you're either naive or dishonest.

Easy to prove, give me your address and keep your door unlocked. Let's see how many people respect your property in absence of guns.

[susano]

communism is not the only alternative.

Agreed but I think that's what you're advocating when you're quoting the ideas of Karl Marx.

[susano]

all forms of private property, even unregulated capitalism, requires government to enforce.

No way. I periods throughout history people did their own enforcement. Even as recently as the wild west, beofre some place had a marshal or sheriff, someone messed with your homestead, you killed em and it was all good.

[PRB]

No way. I periods throughout history people did their own enforcement.

Meaning they used force it wasn't voluntary.

Government was merely the extension and outsourcing of people who already wanted to use force.

Even as recently as the wild west, beofre some place had a marshal or sheriff, someone messed with your homestead, you killed em and it was all good.

sounds totally voluntary

[PRB]

Agreed but I think that's what you're advocating when you're quoting the ideas of Karl Marx.

Quoting Marx doesn't make me a communist.