Webmaster Forum

Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues

Controversial Social Issues Discussions concerning controversial social issues. Topics include politics, religion, culture, social and economic issues, etc. Respect required at all times.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Share |
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2014, 11:11 AM
Weebitty's Avatar
v7n Mentor
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 09-18-10
Posts: 1,010
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Unhappy What Happened to Capitalism?

http://www.naturalnews.com/043183_po...ews_media.html

For those of us that are the older generation understand how bad this really is. We need to educate the younger generation what this means. When 4 banks own 54 precent of the money? I hope you will take the time to read this short article. I hadn't realized it was this bad.
 
Reply With Quote

Advertisement

Advertisement

  #2 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2014, 11:52 AM
G10's Avatar
G10 G10 is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 05-10-04
Location: UK - Cheshire
Posts: 11,763
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Not sure I fully understand the question as surely this is a by-product of capitalism?
Quote:
Meaning of Capitalism - an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations.
With this in mind, a corporation is totally within its (let's call it) "Capitalistic Jurisdiction" to buy whatever it wants in the pursuit of company growth.

In our systems, companies are free (within reason) to do what they want and the dangerous side to this is that as they get bigger and bigger, they swallow up more and more smaller companies and in the end, we are left with the situation that we have now.

That said, don't think that this is the end of it as many people have been saying for the last 15 years or so that there will come a time when almost everything will be run by just 1 or two companies, and this is looking more and more possible as time moves on.
__________________
Click Here for Chester Carpet Cleaners
Sequential Labeling - Sticker and Decal Printers
 
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2014, 12:42 PM
Weebitty's Avatar
v7n Mentor
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 09-18-10
Posts: 1,010
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Yes you are right about the definition, it is in your statement about the dangerous side effects of this scenario. That is where the concern comes in. Particularly with only 4 banks controlling 54% of the money. Maybe that was the wrong title? Does anyone have any concerns about this? Maybe I am wrong?
 
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2014, 07:02 PM
Katt's Avatar
Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 12-14-13
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,563
iTrader: 0 / 0%
The problem is that we haven't had true capitalism in a long time (if ever?).

Take the myriad of federal regulations, many that favor big banks and big corporations over the little guys, then add in the "too big to fail" concept, and you're just starting to get the picture of how far away from capitalism we really are. So maybe the subject title wasn't so far off.
 
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2014, 10:28 PM
Jim Gillum's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: 11-17-09
Location: Deland, Florida
Posts: 7,263
iTrader: 0 / 0%
And the mega corporations influence the government that is supposed to protect the public from the .....
Wait......bank troubles....fuel prices.....food prices...
See something there.....

.......
__________________
Help For New Marketers
www.For-New-Marketers.Info/blog
 
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 02-01-2014, 07:12 AM
Katt's Avatar
Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 12-14-13
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,563
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Yes, we "the masses" have failed in our duties to pay attention to what our elected officials are doing and hold them accountable. When Franklin said we had "a Republic, if you can keep it" he knew we wouldn't. He knew that as soon as good times came along, people would get complacent and shirk their civic duties.

Now, without a true republic, it is pretty hard, if not impossible, to have true capitalism. It's pretty hard to nutshell it, but if you study the history of England and the US, you can see how true Capitalism (or pretty darn close to it) raised the living standard for millions of people.

Then central banks manipulate money, corporate interests sneak into DC, and we end up here - blaming Capitalism, when we should be blaming ourselves for being too lazy to keep things in check.

When the people in the US said in overwhelming numbers that they did not want the wall street bailout, then Congress ignored them and did it anyway, I thought "This is it! This is the catalyst that will finally wake people up, and we will once again hold government accountable and turn off this road toward financial collapse." So we told them what we expected them to do, they ignored us and did what they wanted, then we did nothing about it.

I do see some hope in a growing number of the younger generation (who have the most to lose unless things really change) who are educating themselves and trying to take back control of our republic. I support their causes when I can, but I feel like my generation is a lost cause. My generation (and my parents' generation) reaped the benefits of capitalism while shirking the responsibilities of holding government accountable.

A few relevant quotes :

Quote:
"It's not capitalism when the system is plagued with incomprehensible rules regarding mergers, acquisitions, and stock sales, along with wage controls, price controls, protectionism, corporate subsidies, international management of trade, complex and punishing corporate taxes, privileged government contracts to the military-industrial complex, and a foreign policy controlled by corporate interests and overseas investments. Add to this centralized federal mismanagement of farming, education, medicine, insurance, banking and welfare. This is not capitalism!"

-- "Has Capitalism Failed?" - Ron Paul
Quote:
"In trying to make sense of our recent financial difficulties, a key point that most commentators miss, is that capitalism is not merely a profit system, but a profit and loss system. As unpleasant as the losses may be, they serve a therapeutic function of utmost consequence. By withdrawing that therapy, such policies as TARP, ZIRP (zero-interest rate policy), quantitative easing, and too-big-to-fail, socialize the losses of you guessed it the cronies of those who wield power."

-- "How the World Was Made Safe for Crony Capitalism" - Robert Batemarco
Quote:
"Many regard "capitalism" as a dirty word, and it is tarnished most of all by its supposed guardians. Wall Street giants fancy themselves capitalists even as they live off the taxpayer and thrive on the state's gifts of privilege, inflation, and barriers to entry. In the military-industrial complex, they champion capitalism by name as they produce devices of murder for the state. In the Republican Party and every conservative institution, they talk it up while making such vast exceptions to the principle as to swallow it whole. When many think of capitalism, they think of the corporatist status quo, leading even some who favor economic freedom to abandon the term."

-- "Why Capitalism is Worth Defending" - Anthony Gregory
 
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 02-04-2014, 03:22 AM
Contributing Member
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 02-03-14
Posts: 86
iTrader: 0 / 0%
See this is what happens when you let employees run the show.

An employee can never understand entrepreneurship.
 
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 02-06-2014, 01:21 AM
Contributing Member
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-14
Posts: 98
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Capitalism has been criticized for its underlying focus on profit, and how that focus can lead to social and economic inequality. Further, it is also criticized for its emphasis on consumption, as the constant purchase of goods and services is necessary for capitalism's success as explained by investopedia.
 
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 02-06-2014, 03:22 AM
John Scott's Avatar
Individualist
 
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Wherever I want.
Posts: 28,046
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weebitty View Post
http://www.naturalnews.com/043183_po...ews_media.html

For those of us that are the older generation understand how bad this really is. We need to educate the younger generation what this means. When 4 banks own 54 precent of the money? I hope you will take the time to read this short article. I hadn't realized it was this bad.
I don't see the problem. Those big companies are still, for the most part, owned by people - stockholders. And those big companies are still at the mercy of the people - consumers. Being big doesn't make them invulnerable; it makes them all the more vulnerable. If P&G were small, they could probably offset losses rather easily. But when you are that big, you cannot turn on a dime, because you have millions of dollars in expenses daily. So you need your market share. They don't have the luxury of being in a position to piss off the public, like you are I.
__________________
Japan Car Auction
 
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 02-06-2014, 08:11 AM
Katt's Avatar
Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 12-14-13
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,563
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Scott View Post
I don't see the problem....
...They don't have the luxury of being in a position to piss off the public, like you are I.
But speaking specifically about banks, they DID piss off the public when they helped build up the real estate bubble (which was bound to crash), invested heavily in derivatives (a sneaky and risky business which was only "legal" because it fell outside every definition on the books, but was highly profitable) then after taking all these huge risks to make huge profits, when it fell apart (and they should have known it would) they wanted taxpayers to bail them out. We said no. Congress said yes and gave them the money. "Too big to fail" became forever etched in our vocabulary, which literally means "private profits, public losses" and that is contrary to the whole idea of capitalism.
 
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 02-06-2014, 11:21 AM
sfod_d223's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Join Date: 12-07-06
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,005
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Where's the personal responsibility

Quote:
Originally Posted by Katt View Post
But speaking specifically about banks, they DID piss off the public...
I don't recall the thousands of banks that were twisting arms and making the "public" sign up for "zero-down" mortgages.

As a person that lived in the liberally corrupt and constant drum beating of the poor masses in Newark,NJ, it was like free money for free housing on every block. You simply had to sit your rump in a chair and listen to a briefing on the beuaties of owning your own house.

Forget about showing any kind of income. simply signup for an A.R.M. and you were moving in within two months.

No bank was involved. It was the lawmakers that allowed the madness of no/lo doc loans to be green lighted. The banks became the victims of liberal "do-goodiness" for the "poor". The poor were merely irresponsible for attempting to take advantage of the barriers that were ripped away.
__________________
Register to Guest Post |tonygreene113 - Pizzeria

 
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 02-06-2014, 11:51 AM
Katt's Avatar
Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 12-14-13
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,563
iTrader: 0 / 0%
I wouldn't paint banks as the victims here. There was plenty of blame to pass around - and you're right, the idiots buying houses they couldn't afford was part of the problem. But banks could have legally denied many of these loans - they didn't because they couldn't see past all the interest these crappy loans were earning. Many banks gave their employees bonuses based on the number of loans, with no consideration of the risk of the loans. They acted like they KNEW they would get bailed out when it all went sour.

It's a complicated issue, and even the "experts" argue about who is most at fault, but nearly all agree that the lenders hold a fair share of the blame, but a few "experts" want to blame it ALL on the government - who should claim their fair share of the blame, but again, the blame really falls on everyone involved.

Show me a government regulation that required banks to give NINJA loans (no income, no assets - and they doled out plenty of these just before it blew up) and I will rescind my statements.
 
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 02-06-2014, 05:03 PM
G10's Avatar
G10 G10 is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 05-10-04
Location: UK - Cheshire
Posts: 11,763
iTrader: 5 / 100%
I know this probably sounds a little counter productive, but the problem you have here is you are then giving out "toxic loans/mortgages" and this is where either the government or banks should have done something about it.

That said, society played a huge part in this as so many people decided to go down the GREEDY route and say they were on more than they actually were so that they could get the better stuff instead of living by their means.

There is no real finger of blame to point to because everyone wanted a piece of that toxic pie, and they got it.
__________________
Click Here for Chester Carpet Cleaners
Sequential Labeling - Sticker and Decal Printers
 
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 02-06-2014, 07:13 PM
ScriptMan's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: 02-10-07
Location: Central Kentucky
Posts: 13,145
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by G10 View Post
I know this probably sounds a little counter productive, but the problem you have here is you are then giving out "toxic loans/mortgages" and this is where either the government or banks should have done something about it.
Just one old pharts opinion coming next.

We outsourced all the medium wages jobs and paid the companies to do it. Then came 911. About the only industry that wasn't dead or outsourced was the home building one. China has not figured out how to build an exportable hut.

So what do the idiots in Washington do? They promote home ownership for people to dumb to make the payments. Government logic. Make loans at up to 125% of market value to people who can;t even balance a checkbook.
__________________
I do not put ads or pop-ups in my posts and I have no control of what shows there. I do not endorse any product displayed in my post.
Scriptman's Playhouse || Ramblings from an old man
 
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 02-06-2014, 10:35 PM
Katt's Avatar
Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 12-14-13
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,563
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScriptMan View Post
So what do the idiots in Washington do? They promote home ownership for people to dumb to make the payments. Government logic. Make loans at up to 125% of market value to people who can;t even balance a checkbook.
True they've been pushing "the american dream" for a long time - with regulations to encourage more lending for first time home buyers. BUT - MANY of those subprime loans to people who couldn't balance a checkbook could have easily and legally been denied by the banks. The borrowers were stupid. The lenders were greedy. And the gov't fouls things up as it always does.
 
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 02-07-2014, 07:55 AM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,755
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfod_d223 View Post
I don't recall the thousands of banks that were twisting arms and making the "public" sign up for "zero-down" mortgages.

As a person that lived in the liberally corrupt and constant drum beating of the poor masses in Newark,NJ, it was like free money for free housing on every block. You simply had to sit your rump in a chair and listen to a briefing on the beuaties of owning your own house.

Forget about showing any kind of income. simply signup for an A.R.M. and you were moving in within two months.

No bank was involved. It was the lawmakers that allowed the madness of no/lo doc loans to be green lighted. The banks became the victims of liberal "do-goodiness" for the "poor". The poor were merely irresponsible for attempting to take advantage of the barriers that were ripped away.
What a joke!
Yes. People were responsible for taking out loans that they couldn't afford.
But banks were responsible for granting loans that they knew the borrower couldn't afford.
Banks were responsible for betting on risky derivatives.
Banks were responsible for illegally foreclosing on mortgages they didn't even hold the papers for.
Banks were responsible for raping the taxpayer when they decided they were too big to fail, against the will of the people.
Banks were responsible for initially getting the Clinton administration to do away with Glass-Stegal, which kept them in check.

Are you not going hold the banks accountable for anything?
 
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 02-07-2014, 08:53 AM
Katt's Avatar
Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 12-14-13
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,563
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Agree with Zap 10000% - I think I've found a kindred spirit! (And I like your sig too!)
 
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 02-07-2014, 09:24 AM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,755
iTrader: 5 / 100%
The people certainly share blame, but they were only part of the puzzle.
 
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 02-07-2014, 09:54 AM
G10's Avatar
G10 G10 is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 05-10-04
Location: UK - Cheshire
Posts: 11,763
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katt View Post
Agree with Zap 10000% - I think I've found a kindred spirit! (And I like your sig too!)
10,000%?

With unreal figures like that being bandied about, are you sure you don't work for the banking industry?





Just pulling your leg and making light within this topic Though you did make one fatal flaw within your post... You said you "Agree with Zap".... You really have no idea the kind of trouble agreeing with a Canadian can get you into!!
__________________
Click Here for Chester Carpet Cleaners
Sequential Labeling - Sticker and Decal Printers
 
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 02-07-2014, 10:10 AM
Katt's Avatar
Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 12-14-13
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,563
iTrader: 0 / 0%
LOL I know a lot of Texans don't trust anybody north of the Red River (state line between TX and OK) but I like Canadians!

And maybe I should add a few more zeros... but I wouldn't want to give anyone a Zero Stroke
 
Reply With Quote
Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues

Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Capitalism: A System Run By and For Psychopaths rabble Controversial Social Issues 0 05-27-2010 08:11 PM
Is Ethical Capitalism Possible? Franc Tireur Controversial Social Issues 21 03-19-2010 12:14 PM
Capitalism in Japan John Scott Controversial Social Issues 1 04-24-2008 02:57 AM
Liberals versus Capitalism John Scott Controversial Social Issues 113 04-15-2008 12:10 AM
Is capitalism all good? StrongInTheArm Controversial Social Issues 10 08-16-2007 07:59 PM


V7N Network
Get exposure! V7N I Love Photography V7N SEO Blog V7N Directory


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:27 PM.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Copyright © 2003 - 2014 Escalate Media




Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 2 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.