Why do you blame Capitalism, for the failures of your elected representatives?

Question

A good businessman will do what it takes to get a leg up on the competition. A good politician should say no to graft and corruption.

And an informed electorate should vote out politicians who are bought out by the Capitalists...

Am I wrong? Please explain. And use small words, I am naught but a simple minded Conservative.

Answer 1

I have spotted the fatal flaw in your theory: It depends on "an informed electorate".

Have you ever stood in line at the motor vehicle department or a sporting event and marveled at the idiots surrounding you? They vote. They ain't got no "Capital", they are employees. They spent their lives in the "mixed economy" which is half Socialist. Many of them are union members.



Not one in a million understands how our monetary system works.

http://www.trtam.com/category/money-101

The real story behind downward class migration

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy5Bw_7jgds

http://www.trtam.com/the-video-every-member-of-occupy-wall-street-needs-to-watch-about-50-times

http://www.trtam.com/the-robbery-of-the-american-people-explained-with-pennies

And finally, General Patton:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyUX6wV1lBQ



After assimilating all that .....oh, small words, right? Uh, after watching a few videos, any sane person is going to need another beer, or more duct tape to prevent head explosion.



EDIT: @Jim S: I am not #1, I am #6. I am trying to find out who is #1 ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4MfLXYdAPk&feature=related

Answer 2

There is a BIG difference between capitalism and outright fraud.



The core concept of capitalism is rent. The idea is that capital, some resource which can be owned, earns money for its owner. You build or buy an extra house, rent it out for enough to keep it maintained plus a little extra for yourself. That's capitalism.

The financial sector is not capitalist in nature. Finance is purely a service industry based on extracting profits by acting as a brokerage, by making a profit from what others own.In effect, they gamble with other peoples money, and when they win, they profit, and the owners of the money profit.When they lose, the banks profit and the owners of the money (investors) lose and the public loses money

Whoa!! the bankers profit even when the investors and the public lose? That's right.In addition to getting a percentage of the winnings, the banks collect fees and service charges for their services.

Ths is why Jamie Dimon's $1,000,000 salary is not threatened by the $2,000,000,000 losses a few days ago..



The political side is not so much a problem of graft and corruption as it is one of a fanatic belief in supply side economics Supply side economics is the belief that by limiting the control of good and services, you can increase the price of those goods and services. Historically supply side economic policy has favored wealth disparity, concentration of wealth, fraud, graft, corruption and formation of monopolies.

How can we have an informed electorate when the source of political information is dominated by superpacs representing an elite few of the wealthy of fraudsters. They tend to favor unsuccessful businessmen turned politician that honestly believe an ideology where the foreign and multinational financial corporations are expected to act in the best interest of the nation financial corporations that are anti democracy.



They have found it much more cost effective to buy polictical offices for "user friendly" politicians than to pay off the corrupt ones.

Answer 3

A good businessman can still fail in a depressed economy... you can only work with the tools you have within your hand and even if you'd be skillful enough to manage a successful business in situation A, maybe can't you in situation B -- you need a demand for your product and means to finance your economic activities, both of which aren't always present and both of which are totally independent of your control.



As for politicians, they are like everyone else. They follow the incentives; it's not that they are personally immoral or dumb... they ensure themselves a successful career. I doubt that they are personally and individually bought, but I may certainly supposed that there's always a strong inclination to favor good campaign contributors by certain policies or at the very least that, when spending your days hearing always from the same lobby groups, you tend to lean toward certain interests at the unfortunate sacrifice of others. For all we might know, they can be profoundly and honestly convinced that they do the right thing... and we certainly have a case for supposing it is true since, regardless of the politician in place, similar tendencies are seen with only mildly varying results.



All presidential campaigns are in fact a national auction for the presidency: the candidate with the best founding almost always win -- I can't recall at which % it is accurate, but it's well over 90%. Last time, Obama got the best founding, so he won the elections and, unsurprisingly, his policies favored his most generous contributors -- the financial institutions. But do not be fooled... Republican or Democrat, they'll do the same thing. A Republican would cut in social expenditures, but he'll then subsidies high tech industries with the excuse of military needs... he'll simply be answering back his contributors, period.





The only way to avoid that is a good education and an active civic participation: people need to be able to reason logically to some degree, be critical of sources and conclusions made and participate in political affairs enough for the government to be forced to consider their interests when making decisions. It will take more than our weak 40% average on mid-terms to produce an effective democracy. However, when people on the right condemn OWS protesters, they aren't helping the issue... even if you disagree with them, they're doing what's right: they defend their interests through active political participation. They deem that they deserve a chance to have a job and that the government could help them successfully, so they root for that. Regardless of what you have to defend, if you don't defend it, be certain that then money will rule the world and it's the interests of the few and of the rich which will be favored, not that of the society, not that of the poor, not that of the world in general. And, with regards to this, individualism is certainly the surest way to make sure someone can buy himself the policies which favor his activities: divide to better rule, they said. Instead, stand as a unite front, all trying to bring up your concerns so that the compromise which forms out of it doesn't make only few people, but all people satisfied.



EDIT

Letting people do everything on their own only works when they're capable of doing it. If not, you need to educate them into doing it and only a fool would wish his neighbor to be less good than he could be. Making education more accessible and reduce the incidence of risks such as health issues doesn't hinder society that much; it actually proves to increase social mobility and that means people at the top are likelier to be there out of effort more than out of a favorable circumstance.

Answer 4

All governments have been manipulating Adam Smith's financial ideology (grant and insist politics) when you consider that its commencing up (1700's). You point out the chimp's rules the place "Oil expenses are up, inflation is up, nutrition is up, housing is a multitude" ... I believe you. this is authentic that economics are manipulated in desire of the prosperous - (humorous how the wealthy administration each and every thing, and the undesirable merely attempt to get via, huh?) the place has inflation long gone this year? you're able to admit that this is uncontrolled and that it must be in double digit selection - yet while the cost of living transformations are made for 2007, it's going to be lots decrease than what's unquestionably the reality. what's going to YOU do? i visit be an energetic activist as I even have been for the extra beneficial area of my life - yet of direction our latest stack of politicians won't pay attention and there are no longer any applicants for president (from each and every social gathering available) that have the air of secret it takes to win over the persons and enterprise and make the suitable variations in coverage which could be made to be sure that worldwide survival. of direction issues will proceed because it constantly has and activists would be overwhelmed down interior the streets via the police and SWAT communities, the media will checklist the activists are incorrect and that the politicians are insensitive to the desires of the persons .... it is going to proceed till revolution unquestionably occurs (via the way do no longer supply up your weapons through fact in case you do, in common terms the police, government officers, enterprise protection forces, crooks and Mafia could have them). What we've is an international financial community it is uncontrolled. what's going to YOU do????

Answer 5

Joke for ya



Q. Why did the crew of the Titanic abandon ship before the passengers did?

A. The Captain was a liberal, and looking for someone else to blame.



#1 is also correct. The average-IQ is 100. As pathetic as 100 is, half the people walking around (somewhat stooped), are dumber than that.



Futurama said it best. "... and everything is back to normal, well, as normal as things get on this primitive dirt-ball inhabited by psychotic apes."

Answer 6

"A good politician should say no to graft and corruption"?

I say a good politician should say no to socialism which has been the goal of democrats for a very long time:



1/11/44, democrat FDR’s Address to Congress: “We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights...”

His new “rights” list included:

-The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation

-The right of every family to a decent home

-The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health

-The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment.



Decades before FDR came out of the closet with his socialism another democrat president, Woodrow Wilson almost did, saying: “You are not here merely to make a living. You are here to enable the world to live more amply, with greater vision, and with a finer spirit of hope and achievement. You are here to enrich the world. You impoverish yourself if you forget this errand.”

Wilson may have been the first socialist to realize the potential of multiculturalism in deconstructing America, saying: “No nation is fit to sit in judgment upon any other nation.”



And today the democrats can trumpet their successes:

-2/4/10 Gallup poll: 61% of liberals have a positive view of socialism.

-6/2/11 Gallup poll: 71% of democrats favor re-distributing wealth.

Answer 7

1) Capitalism is not an acting agent. Nobody blames capitalism, they blame capitalists.



2) I blame politicians as well and their degree of corruption varies but in a case in which the capitalist corrupts the politician, I consider the degree of guilt greater for the capitalist. The corrupting agent is the contaminant and we never know what the target of the corruption might or might not otherwise have done. The politician certainly is not innocent but the capitalist is not only guilty of the same corruption, but initiates it in addition. I think that is a reasonable explanation for 'blaming' the capitalist (and without excusing the politician either). Is that okay with you? Does that satisfy your rigorous standard of intellectual integrity? What do you think you are suggesting? Corruption is the capitalist's nature, we knew he was a scorpion before we carried him on our backs over the pond so if he stings us and we die we only have ourselves to blame for our unrealistic expectations? Why does that excuse not also apply to the politician? Does that excuse work for me? How about armed robbers, rapists and serial killers? Is everybody entitled to the excuse "hey, it's just my nature, you should have known better" or is it under reserve just for the miscreants you like most? These are codified institutions of civilization, there are no special 'nature' exemptions, we are all rational agents exercising judgment and we all know the rules before we act. 'Responsibility' and 'accountability' are your ideals, not mine, and it should humiliate you that I have to admonish you on your own damn principles. You embarrass yourself with so patently absurd and hypocritical a suggestion as to plead not guilty by reason of nature.



-- grandiose sense of entitlement / no sense of proportion --



3) "A good businessman will do what it takes to get a leg up on the competition." Precisely! That is what is wrong with the ideal of capitalism and that is why our expectations of 'good' results from it are unrealistic. A businessman will always do what it takes... and a scorpion will always sting us in the back if we try to carry it across the pond. We don't let our children play with matches or polar bears for a reason. We burned ourselves with matches once when we were children and we learned through observation and discovery that polar bears will eat children. We have learned ten thousand times over through history that men with power are hazardous. That is why we advanced from the communal social model to institutionalized government. Government is not the consolidation of absolute uncontested power, it is the prohibition of power because (not all but) some men will always ruin the world for the rest of us with power and we never know which ones until after they have the power. How many times do you think we should repeat that mistake and learn that lesson before we alter our behavior? Conservatives are in a perpetual state of denial over our evolutionary heritage, our history and the lessons we learn from it. It's always just one more try... and this time we will surely prove once and for all that men with power will always only do heroic productive beneficial things with it and make the world a paradise for the rest of us.



Do you also always blame the victim in cases of rape? If not, you are a hypocrite. You blame the politician and the electorate for our weaknesses, for our desire to find the good in people, to trust the motives and intents of one another, to allow one another to live as each sees fit without suspicion and constant invasive supervision, but the malevolent malcontent that lies, cheats, corrupts and ruins the world for the rest of us? Totally innocent! It's not his fault, he's not to blame, he can't control himself, he can't help it, it's just his nature. -and this is the one and only guy you think should never be constrained by the tedious inconvenience of rules, regulations and restrictions. Don't try to argue with me. You forfeit EVERYTHING with your opening statement:



"A good businessman will do what it takes to get a leg up on the competition."



It says it all. You absolve him of all responsibility and it is the rest of us that are to blame for his actions. If he ruins the world for the rest of us, that's our fault, not his.



Yes, you are wrong. I explained (I didn't necessarily use small words but hey, I'm a liberal, it's my nature to condescend and try to impress with my expansive vocabulary).



EDIT: Please concentrate really hard on the following...



(You): "You blame the capitalist, for the politician being willing to be bought?"

(Me): YOU DON'T BLAME THE CAPITALIST FOR BUYING THE POLITICIAN?



I blame the capitalist for HIS CONSCIOUS POSITIVE ACTION, get it?

You are never responsible for anything, are you?

Everything is always society's fault, isn't it?

Answer 8

in a utopian world you are correct....however, people are stupid...they believe the BS ads they see on TV and they don't do their own research. You are naive as all hell if you think all these people that give money to one politician or another do not expect something in return some where down the line.....Haliburton ring a bell...Solyndra ring a bell.....come on....get your head out of your butt....

Answer 9

because Capitalism is the cause of all the failures not the President.

Answer 10

Socialistic dimwitted democrats always blame someone else for their dismal failures, look at Obama



-- DOUBLING the price of gasoline exactly as he said he would.

-- HIGHEST number of unemployed Americans IN HISTORY.

-- HIGHEST number of poverty level Americans IN HISTORY.

-- HIGHEST budget deficits IN HISTORY.

-- HIGHEST national debt IN HISTORY.

-- HIGHEST rate of increase of national debt IN HISTORY.

-- WORST depression in 70 years.

-- WORST housing market in 70 years.

-- WORST job market for African Americans IN HISTORY.

-- Most divisive political climate since the Civil War.

-- Unprecedented Chicago thug-like bullying and threats against the Judicial Branch.

-- Unprecedented pompous and narcissistic behavior.

-- Condescending and derisive contempt for everyday Americans.

-- Most arrogant First Family IN HISTORY.

-- Buttugly, Marie-Antoinette-snob wife constantly taking luxury vacations while the rest of Americans suffer through a depression.