• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Next Capitalist Revolution

Lafayette, although the right wing of USA's political spectrum do not explicitly acknowledge their positions, they're proponents of government's policies and laws that favor employers

that is a silly lie of course. Republicans are for capitalism and thus let 10,000 employers go bankrupt each month.
 
, they're proponents of government's policies and laws that favor employers and effectively hinder organization of employees

another silly lie of course. Republicans favor capitalism so prevent workers and owners from organizing each other.
 
Most of those same USA right wingers are opposed to the federal minimum wage.

right wingers have intelligence and compassion so don't want a minimum wage that makes it illegal to hire someone not worth the minimum wage.
 
Annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs.

so you want tariff taxes on the American people to cripple our industries so they are even less competitive in world markets?? Notice how a liberal will get everything perfectly backwards?
 
another silly lie of course. Republicans favor capitalism so prevent workers and owners from organizing each other.
James972 aka EdwardBaiamonte, an employer's normally increase or decrease their enterprise's production to satisfy market conditions. This in many cases means increasing or decreasing their employees numbers or work hours.

If employees could simultaneously work for more employers when wage offers were greater, they'd still benefit, but they'd have lesser need to organize. Workers sell their time, and they cannot store their time to be consumed when there's greater demand and higher prices offered for their laboring hours. Equate all labor organizations with monopolies or oligopolies is nonsense.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
right wingers have intelligence and compassion so don't want a minimum wage that makes it illegal to hire someone not worth the minimum wage.
so you want tariff taxes on the American people to cripple our industries so they are even less competitive in world markets?? Notice how a liberal will get everything perfectly backwards?

James972 aka EdwardBaiamonte, cannot explain how USA adopting the policy described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article would not be to our economic benefit, but he's opposed to it.

He's also opposed to a general tariff, (which differs from import certificates) but he doesn't understand the difference and can't explain how he believes that would be detrimental to our economy.

He's ready to argue the case against a tariff exclusively applicable to bananas, if anyone should be a proponent of such a policy.

He doesn't believe USA's chronic annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to our annual GDPs. No reputable economist that would deny that fact, but some rather argue that the detriment is not of significance.

He cannot explain how a nation can have a sufficient median wage rate, if their effective minimum-rate's less than sufficient.
He cannot explain how USA can have an effectively sufficient minimum rate, if we don't have a sufficient federal minimum wage rate. But he is opposed to the federal minimum wage rate.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
In their rush to wealth the 1% killed the goose that laid the golden egg … the middle class. Trickle down economics is proving to be suicide capitalism. Now rather than try to fix the problem, and do what is necessary to make everyone economically healthy, they have moved to a piranha feeding frenzy with the goal of "getting theirs while the getting is good". Trumps "tax cut" is Trickle Down v.2. Trickle Down is what got, all of, US in this bubble/crash cycle … it's not going to get us out of it and in fact, this new version, will make things exponentially worse.

Let's not pretend that Democrats aren't also responsible and complicit, even if the Republicans are generally worse/more blatant offenders in championing the interests of the rich above all else; this has been a problem with US governance in general since SCOTUS idiotically decided money was speech and unlimited political spending was both legitimate and constitutionally protected per Buckley v Valeo 1976, thereby destroying (and precluding) any meaningful campaign finance law, and setting the stage for legalized, systemic corruption of the political system by a monied elite.

Both parties are bought by wealthy private interests in balance, as are the vast majority of their politicos.

Though America is probably the worst offender in this respect (in the first world that is), other developed countries across the world are facing similar issues.
 
Last edited:
Both parties are bought by wealthy private interests in balance,

A silly liberal lie, which is why after being asked 5 times the liberal you cant provide an obvious example of Republican party being bought. Embarrassing!
 
A silly liberal lie, which is why after being asked 5 times the liberal you cant provide an obvious example of Republican party being bought. Embarrassing!

https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites...testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf

Also no one asked me personally for any examples.

And if you think that corps spend hundreds of millions to billions collectively on lobbyists, campaign contributions, PACS, and other avenues of political influence without expecting a return on investment of some kind, I don't know what to tell you.
 
It's a global depression that is coming but I want to talk about these idiots who were forged on Victim Culture and are looking for someone to take care of them.

They are future serfs for their betters.

Everybody is a serf or future serf...for the capitalist. The 'betters' could simply be defined as those with capital.
 
So you are in the group that feels something important is of kilter....that is a start.

Look, there pretty much is no America anymore...... there is no longer a single thing that binds us together, there is nothing that we all believe in, the social glue has been allowed to degrade to the point that the society is breaking down....And we tend to be unwilling to maintain our borders...And we are in the middle of a civil war over what America should become......And the Left especially has decided that running over people is fine, that getting to UTOPIA demands that the unfit be thrown overboard "SHUT UP AND DIE!"

Actually you describe the right, our future capitalist fascists and your kids will be taking 3-4 jobs ea. to get by as the new capitalist proletariat.
 
Trickle down to small, medium and large US businesses is a thing...and it's a good thing. If that also requires trickle down to globalists, so be it.

Trump tax policy is a very good thing for workers, small, medium and large US businesses. Trump has other policies that are not so good for the globalists, their lobbyists and their Congressional toadies.

Ask yourself why the US Chamber of Commerce is against everything Trump does. Then look at who they donate to and lobby for.

Globalists are enormously threatened by Trump.

trump's tax policy did nothing for workers or any small businesses. It was more fiscal child abuse and if necessary,

then it portends the abject failure of capitalism.

Get ready now, the 'communists' own well over a trillion$ of capitalist debt. Isn't that precious ?

And trump is on the way to being the most useful idiot of all...for the globalists.
 
https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites...testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf

Also no one asked me personally for any examples.

And if you think that corps spend hundreds of millions to billions collectively on lobbyists, campaign contributions, PACS, and other avenues of political influence without expecting a return on investment of some kind, I don't know what to tell you.

I lived just a few miles from and off and on 50 worked years in D.C. K St. is well known as the street of lobbying firms.

I have read that for every $1 of free speech [sic] they invest in govt., they get..$30 in return.
 
A silly liberal lie, which is why after being asked 5 times the liberal you cant provide an obvious example of Republican party being bought. Embarrassing!

Being so obtuse is no defense.
 
Being so obtuse is no defense.

After being asked "6" times now the liberal you cant provide an obvious example of Republican party being bought. Embarrassing!
 
,
then it portends the abject failure of capitalism.
.

we're all about to get self-driving cars, socialism just killed 120 million, and you think capitalism is about to fail? LIberalism is 100% absurd.
 
Get ready now, the 'communists' own well over a trillion$ of capitalist debt. Isn't that precious ?

China is capitalist, they were communist before they switched to capitalism in 1980. Do you have any idea what you mean when you say its precious??
 
After being asked "6" times now the liberal you cant provide an obvious example of Republican party being bought. Embarrassing!
James972, IMO, both major parties are terrified by the National Rifle Association but the Democratic Party will likely be the first of them to overcome their fears.
It seems apparent that President Donald Trump's owned by the Russian government. I ask, is it of his own free will, or blackmail, or he naturally believes whatever's to his own best financial interests must be to our nation's best interests?
China is capitalist, they were communist before they switched to capitalism in 1980. Do you have any idea what you mean when you say its precious??
I'm among those classifying People's Republic of China's political system as a fascist. To the extent a government's fascist, it controls everything else that's subject to people's will; that includes the nation's economic system.
China's government is only as capitalist or socialist as it's leadership determines it should be at any moment of time. China is no more capitalist or socialist than was the National Socialist German Workers', (i.e. Nazi) Party.

Respectfully, Supposn

Excerpted from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism :
Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a form of radical authoritarian ultranationalism,[1][2][3][4] characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy,[5] which came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.
 
I'm a proponent of the federal minimum wage rate being gradually increased until it reaches the designated purchasing power, and there after monitored and annually updated to retain that purchasing power.

And I am a proponent of changing fundamentally the way the economy works.

Which I feel is best expressed here (from Wikipedia) by Manuel Castells: The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture

The Information Age is an account of the role of information in contemporary society. Manuel Castells describes the shift from an industrial society to an informational society, which started in the 1970s. This Network Society is structured around networks instead of individual actors, and works through a constant flow of information through technology. Castells emphasises the interrelationship of social, economic and political features of society, and argues that the 'network' is the defining feature that marks our current epoch.

Specifically as regards the Information Age per se, this work here is a suitable explanation as well: Information Age

Excerpt:

The Information Age (also known as the Computer Age, Digital Age, or New Media Age) is a historic period in the 21st century characterized by the rapid shift from traditional industry that the Industrial Revolution brought through industrialization, to an economy based on information technology.[citation needed] The onset of the Information Age is associated[by whom?] with the Digital Revolution, just as the Industrial Revolution marked the onset of the Industrial Age. The definition of what "digital" means (or what "information" means) continues to change over time as new technologies, user devices, methods of interaction with other humans and devices enter the domain of research, development and market launch.

During the Information Age, digital industry shapes a knowledge-based society surrounded by a high-tech global economy that exerts influence on how the manufacturing and service sectors operate in an efficient and convenient way. In a commercialized society, the information industry can allow individuals to explore their personalized needs, therefore simplifying the procedure of making decisions for transactions and significantly lowering costs both for producers and for buyers. This[clarification needed] is accepted overwhelmingly by participants throughout the entire economic activities for efficacy purposes, and new economic incentives would[original research?] then be indigenously encouraged, such as the knowledge economy.

The above seems a bit utopian but it is nonetheless doable ...
 
we're all about to get self-driving cars, socialism just killed 120 million, and you think capitalism is about to fail? LIberalism is 100% absurd.

Excerpted from googling of “isms”:
ism
/ˈizəm/
noun
informal•derogatory
plural noun: isms
A distinctive practice, system, or philosophy, typically a political ideology or an artistic movement.
"of all the isms, fascism is the most repressive"

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Excerpted from googling of “absurd”:
ab·surd
/əbˈsərd,əbˈzərd/
adjective
adjective: absurd; comparative adjective: absurder; superlative adjective: absurdest
1. wildly unreasonable, illogical, or inappropriate.
"the allegations are patently absurd"
synonyms:
preposterous, ridiculous, ludicrous, farcical, laughable, risible, idiotic, stupid, foolish, silly, inane, imbecilic, insane, harebrained, cockamamie; More
unreasonable, irrational, illogical, nonsensical, incongruous, pointless, senseless;
informalcrazy, daft
"what an absurd idea!"
antonyms:
reasonable, sensible
arousing amusement or derision; ridiculous.
"gym shorts and knee socks looked absurd on such a tall girl"
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

James972, “isms”, such as “socialism” or “capitalism” do not preserve or terminate lives. I'm a proponent of populism, capitalism, and of liberalism. I consider some of your posts to be absurd.
 
And I am a proponent of changing fundamentally the way the economy works.

Which I feel is best expressed here (from Wikipedia) by Manuel Castells: The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture



Specifically as regards the Information Age per se, this work here is a suitable explanation as well: Information Age

Excerpt:



The above seems a bit utopian but it is nonetheless doable ...

Getting money out of politics would be the necessary and essential first step towards making a more workable and equitable system that doesn't overwhelmingly favour those on top at the expense of everyone else.
 
Getting money out of politics would be the necessary and essential first step towards making a more workable and equitable system that doesn't overwhelmingly favour those on top at the expense of everyone else.
Surrealistik, I'm a proponent for the tasks of selling, distributing, or purchasing electronic transmission time be “unbundled” from all other commercial tasks, and no reduction of taxable income should be granted for purchase of time or use of electronic transmissions.
Respectfully,Supposn
Make commercials more expensive and elections more equitable.

The purposes of public announcements or advertising is to inform and/or influencetheir audiences. Government should not presume to determine what is or is not a political message. …
… The availability of electronic broadcasting is of greater advantage to wealthier political factions, and its lesser availability to less wealthy factions is to their greater disadvantages. …
Supreme Court's decision in favor of Citizens United effectively and severely reduced government's ability to decrease high bidders advantages and/or greater increase their costs within our political auctions, (i.e. our political elections). ...
… Even wealthier shareholders will no longer appreciate their enterprises' electronic advertisements with substantially political purposes. It will reduce wealth's ability to influence those who read less, and not likely increase their influence upon those who read more.
 
Getting money out of politics would be the necessary and essential first step towards making a more workable and equitable system that doesn't overwhelmingly favour those on top at the expense of everyone else.

Favoring "those on top" is simply a matter of taxation.

Our taxation system is not "progressive". It should be.

From here: Progressive Taxation

Excerpt:
A progressive tax is a tax in which the tax rate increases as the taxable amount increases. The term "progressive" refers to the way the tax rate progresses from low to high, with the result that a taxpayer's average tax rate is less than the person's marginal tax rate. The term can be applied to individual taxes or to a tax system as a whole; a year, multi-year, or lifetime. Progressive taxes are imposed in an attempt to reduce the tax incidence of people with a lower ability to pay, as such taxes shift the incidence increasingly to those with a higher ability-to-pay. The opposite of a progressive tax is a regressive tax, where the relative tax rate or burden decreases as an individual's ability to pay increases.

And it would look like this.

And it would also include a near-confiscatory estate tax upon death. There is no sense whatsoever in accumulating mindless riches just to show the world how well one has succeeded. What is MOST IMPORTANT is happiness of the most individuals and not a select few ...

If, that is, money can make one happy. Which is a highly dubious contention ...
 
Last edited:
Surrealistik, I'm a proponent for the tasks of selling, distributing, or purchasing electronic transmission time be “unbundled” from all other commercial tasks, and no reduction of taxable income should be granted for purchase of time or use of electronic transmissions.
Respectfully,Supposn

TBH, Citizen's United is merely a symptom and outgrowth of the root of evil/idiocy that is Buckley v Valeo 76, where money was moronically determined to be speech, thus opening the floodgates to unlimited political spending under the providence and protection of the 1st amendment, which is the fundamental problem.

I definitely believe that far more stringent limits on either political spending, and/or the effective market for political spending need to be put into effect, or you will end up with an intensification of the defacto plutocracy we have now; sadly it will take a constitutional amendment at this point to make things right.

Favoring "those on top" is simply a matter of taxation.

Our taxation system is not "progressive". It should be.

Right, I agree, but you'll never end up with the sort of progressive taxation you propose until you temper and diminish the vastly disproportionate influence of the wealthy.
 
Back
Top Bottom