(Hopeville Pond Specific)
0 messages
Updated
Lakes Online Forum
84,091 messages
Updated 11/8/2024 10:28:12 AM
Lakes Online Forum
5,204 messages
Updated 9/14/2024 10:10:50 AM
(Hopeville Pond Specific)
0 messages
Updated
Lakes Online Forum
4,172 messages
Updated 9/9/2024 5:04:44 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,262 messages
Updated 11/6/2024 6:43:09 PM
Lakes Online Forum
2,979 messages
Updated 6/26/2024 5:03:03 AM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
| Name: |
lotowner
- 
|
|
| Subject: |
Newspaper Reporter, Views on Capitalism
|
|
Date:
|
12/21/2010 7:47:31 AM (updated 12/21/2010 7:49:42 AM)
|
We have mentioned the Liberal Media, the Obama Administration, and Progressives view on Capitalism many times on this forum. Recently, I corresponded with a reporter on on article written on Capitalism. Below in bold letters is is the meat of the response that I received. Folks - Redistribution of Wealth is NOT a myth - It's real. Our country is in the midst of a revolution. The leaders of this movement are intelligent, dedicated, and want change IMMEDIATELY.
My view is that U.S. capitalism is teetering on the edge of a cliff. It survives because the masses irrationally believe they have a chance to accumulate wealth. For the same reason people keep buying lottery tickets -- every once in awhile someone wins big -- they support capitalism despite being oppressed by it. They even oppose higher taxes on millionaires, because the lottery mentality convinces them they will one day be in that class.
In a democracy, the masses can change the economic system. The people, if they realize their dreams of riches are unrealizable, can impose confiscatory taxes on the wealthy. They can exact 100 percent estate taxes. They can give government control both of production and of allocation of capital.
Some believe socialism is the answer. The majority does not receive the desired benefit from our economic system, so the majority should change it.
My view is that capitalism is the most efficient method devised for allocating resources.
The change I want to see is one that gives the masses a realistic route to accumulation of capital. I want the smart kid in ………….. to have a realistic chance at success in a capitalist system. I want this in part because I care about the child. Also, though, I believe it is the only way capitalism can survive in a democracy. As wealth polarization increases, the lottery mentality that props up capitalism must finally crumble.
So yes, I want higher taxes on the rich. Not so high that they eliminate the incentive for continued innovation, but high enough to fund programs that give the poor a realistic path to capitalist success.
I love America. I accept capitalism as the best economic system available, provided it is tweaked in such a way that all those in the democracy that allows it to function have a realistic opportunity to succeed
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Newspaper Reporter, Views on Capitalism
|
|
Date:
|
12/21/2010 8:08:31 AM
|
Is this really a "movement" or just the opinion of a few people, most notably this reporter.
I would submit the opinion that the majority of people think that the very wealthy should pay more taxes, because they believe that the rich are rich enough to pay people to figure out how to pay less than their fair share. Hedge Funds, Charitable Foundations, tax loop holes, etc.
As far as the lottery mentality, I have always thought that those that play the lottery are in desperation thinking. They believe that the only way out of their situation is to win money via the lottery. That is why a large percentage of the people that buy lottery tickets are from the lower economic level. I doubt they spend much time thinking about tax laws and how it might impact on their winnings. They have visions of big houses, fast cars and no money worries. Which is why so many of the biggest winners come to a bad ending or end up broke a few years down the road.
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Newspaper Reporter, Views on Capitalism
|
|
Date:
|
12/21/2010 8:11:33 AM
|
What most don't understand is that the US is not a true democracy, but a republic ruled by law. The citizens elect representatives and those representatives enact laws. Citizens don't impose their will on others directly.
So in a way we are democratic in that the citizens decide who will represent them - but the idea that citizens could directly enact a 100% estate tax won't fly.
All one has to do is travel and visit a few foreign countries to realize that even the lower economic strata in the US is quite well off compared to others. I wish that a requirement for full time citizenship would be to spend at least a year living in some foreign country. It would make our populace much wiser and open their eyes to what we really have.
|
| Name: |
Yankee06
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Newspaper Reporter, Views on Capitalism
|
|
Date:
|
12/21/2010 11:00:24 AM
|
-i don't know who Lot's writer is. Could be smart person, ...or realtively dumb. Some of his words reflect correct interpretations while others are flawed on facts not just opinions or conclusions.
-Discussions must realize that democracy, republicanism, etc., are political systems. Capitalism, socialism, etc are economic systems. No pure non-science theoretical system ever works out in implementation.No pure system seems to work well other than Plato's benevolent prince.
-So we have to find the right mix. It's clear from teh American experience that pure capitalism didn't work when you had 8 year olds working in coal mines at slave labor rates, etc.,. Gevernment regulations and interventions were necessary. teh Soviet experience makes it clear that too much government intervention leads to total political and economic system ineffectiveness. The trick is finding the right mix of freedom and governemnt, Our constitution over two hundred years has done a pretty good job of that. Hopefully, it will work again and pull us back from this present destructive rush to the left.
-Estate tax. Originally implemented to avoid the growth of a ruling class similar to europe's formed over several generations by receiving weath and weath building institutions/means from one's forebears. Seeems to have worked for us so far. Most American really don't mind taxing the really rich. What they do mind is giving that money to people who work less than they do (..this mindset works at whatever level people are at). The American people would rather see these taxes going for improving general use projects like roads, parks, space, defense, etc.
-What is needed is to keep the ideologues on teh sidelines and margins and let those, who can find the best of all systems, meld them into a truely workable system,
-There is a core failure in the socialist/communist system's main mantra of weath distribution i.e., "From each according to his ability to each according to his need." The failure is "WHO" determines need. History shows that this "WHO" almost always (with the exception of Plato's benevolent prince) turns out to be a group of power hungry revolutionaries who are good at destroying existing social and political organizations but totally inept at building or running effective ones. If we leave the present group of liberals in charge, we'll be able to see this trajedy played out yet again!
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Newspaper Reporter, Views on Capitalism
|
|
Date:
|
12/21/2010 3:25:30 PM
|
You are certainly corect about that. I have traveled a lot, and I can't tell you how many times I've thought about all the basic things we take for granted. Even our poor for the most part are doing a lot better than the poor in some countries.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Newspaper Reporter, Views on Capitalism
|
|
Date:
|
12/21/2010 3:30:24 PM
|
Yankee, while I would agree with most of your points, I wonder if you can say Communism has really failed when you look at China. After the Cultural Revolution just about destroyed the country, they came back and you can't argue that they have become an economic powerhouse. They seem to be adjusting to some form of Communism governing model with a capitalistic economic model. I don't think they are going away.
|
| Name: |
Yankee06
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Newspaper Reporter, Views on Capitalism
|
|
Date:
|
12/21/2010 6:32:58 PM
|
Hound,
-China is an interesting example. It is trying to develop a new model which retains strong centralized political control while loosing some economic control. It just ain't gonna work.
-The Soviet Union had great success in its initial industrialization. Leftists here and around the world in the 1930's pointed to Russia, not America, as the role model for social progress moving along with industrial progress. We see where it resulted. Centralized government contraol cannot effectively control the economy. Teh Soviet Union's industry eventually faulted, petrified, and died. ..and I could give you a hundred examples of stupid government decision that caused. When Gorbachev realized he had to loosen economic controls to improve his economy, yet still try to retain strong political control, the handwriting was on the wall.
-China is going to find the same problem. Right now there is a lot of room to grow into the initial stages of the industrial age. Because of the size of the population, constraints might not appear as fast. However, when the economy pushes against the political power constraining it, one of two things will happen, First, the party will either tighten political power and teh economy will suffer, ...or two, the party will loosen political power and the economy will grow. But if the later course is taken, the communist party will lose control. Party leaders today, much like our own politicians, have one primary concern, retention of power. However, under the communist system, retention of power is a very important driving concern. For when communist leaders lose power, they don't retire to their Nantucket homes and big bank accounts. They retire to the gallows.
|
|
|
New Post
Search
Off-Topic Forum
Reply
»
Connecticut Lakes
»
Hopeville Pond
Login
|
Home
