Capitalism: A Love Story

Originally posted by Wajoma
"...the massive transfer of U.S. taxpayer money to private financial institutions."

Doesn't know what capitalism is, oh dear, mikey is about to go down in flames.

haha! how many times have we heard from these people: socialism is not Stalinism!?!?

Originally posted by rwingett
Capitalism had its moment in the sun. It fulfilled its historic role of building up the means of production. But its time has come and gone, its time to let go and move on.

In a capitalist society, i.e. a free society i.e. a society based on individual rights, you are free to 'let it go' and sign your own life over to any collective you desire, good luck and good bye.

Originally posted by Sam The Sham
Sounded like what you meant. You have some other kind of magic economic system in mind?

I am a socialist, but not a Marxist.

Originally posted by spruce112358
I'm not sure why you think history should follow some sort of script. What was the purpose of the collapse of Rome, the Dark Ages, and feudalism?

Speaking of which, I would classify socialism as more of a throwback -- "i exist, my lord, under your protection. Provide for me all my daily needs, and I will labor faithfully for you."

Capitalism and d ...[text shortened]... because they allow the maximum of free choice -- coupled with the maximum of responsibility.

FMF is correct in pointing out that not only are capitalism and democracy not synonymous, but that they are frequently at odds with one another. We have a political democracy, but that makes us only half free. When we have economic democracy as well, then we will have full freedom. When you can vote for both your President and for your boss, then you will have a fully functioning democracy. As it stands now, you can only vote for one. Thus we are only half free.

Originally posted by rwingett
FMF is correct in pointing out that not only are capitalism and democracy not synonymous, but that they are frequently at odds with one another. We have a political democracy, but that makes us only half free. When we have economic democracy as well, then we will have full freedom. When you can vote for both your President and for your boss, then you will h ...[text shortened]... functioning democracy. As it stands now, you can only vote for one. Thus we are only half free.

Why don't you start a company then let people vote you off the top seat.

Originally posted by Wajoma
Why don't you start a company then let people vote you off the top seat.

Why not implement a program to foster and accelerate employee buyouts of corporations? If you are an advocate for democracy, then this would seem to be the best of both worlds. You would have capitalist corporations that are democratically owned and operated. Capitalism AND democracy, what a novel concept.

Originally posted by rwingett
Why not implement a program to foster and accelerate employee buyouts of corporations? If you are an advocate for democracy, then this would seem to be the best of both worlds. You would have capitalist corporations that are democratically owned and operated. Capitalism AND democracy, what a novel concept.

But if you're a socialist, then why would you say that?

Originally posted by daniel58
But if you're a socialist, then why would you say that?

You take what you can get. A market socialism might be a transition into real socialism, or it might end up being an ideal solution on its own. At any rate, implementing socialism by force is both contradictory and doomed to failure. So a gradual democratization of the capitalist workplace would be the best method forward.

Originally posted by rwingett
You take what you can get. A market socialism might be a transition into real socialism, or it might end up being an ideal solution on its own. At any rate, implementing socialism by force is both contradictory and doomed to failure. So a gradual democratization of the capitalist workplace would be the best method forward.

"Heaven is your home".

Originally posted by rwingett
Why not implement a program to foster and accelerate employee buyouts of corporations? If you are an advocate for democracy, then this would seem to be the best of both worlds. You would have capitalist corporations that are democratically owned and operated. Capitalism AND democracy, what a novel concept.

I like the current system better.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
It's a pity Michael Moore doesn't use his audience to get a real message across instead of just some vague pseudo-emotional nonsense. I guess it's just the American way of getting a message across, but still.

No...

It's the Michael Moore way of getting a message across.

Originally posted by sh76
No...

It's the Michael Moore way of getting a message across.

Well, talk radio doesn't exist here.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Well, talk radio doesn't exist here.

It should though.

Originally posted by daniel58
It should though.

There is no market for it.

Originally posted by sh76
No...

It's the Michael Moore way of getting a message across.

And what a thoroughly tabloidized message it is. He makes me laugh, for sure. But one can only shake one's head to think that he may be America's most famous 'dissident'.

Michael Moore's messages are bitty and inconsistent, and he covers nothing new. He dwells on certain matters, moreso when he thinks can score cheap shots. Meanwhile, he sprints - in his inimitably facetious and fatuous way - past the major issues and more genuine analysis.

His messages begin and end at the same intellectual points. He doesn’t seem to conceive of much more at the end of his 'explorations' than he knew at the outset, and so, neither does his audience. And we have his incessant - and for many, ultimately irritating and even alienating - tone. All this is carried out in order to allegedly widen the popularity and traction of his "thesis". Sorry, but as funny as he can sometimes be, I blow a rasberry at this kind of 'politics'.

He is a dissembling, distracting tabloid hack in a dissembling, distracting tabloid media culture. His contribution to mature debate about the vital issues he purports to address, in my estimation, is minimal.