Although you want to believe you've overturned everything I said, for the most part, you simply ignored it, and in some cases, supported it while adding personal insults.
For example, "Two different things, Igor." Of COURSE they were two different things, which is why I set them apart as independent, single sentence paragraphs. Please pause in your biased attacks, long enough to read what I actually say, and stick to that.
Your pretense that nothing was done wrong by businesses during Republican administrations is abject nonsense. Much of what I described took place during the Reagan and Bush administrations.
I didn't at any time say that ONLY Republicans do things wrong, either.
And going back to your rather rude repetition that the bad behaviors I described are not "capitalism" is nonsense entirely. Unless you can prove that capitalism was declared at an end repeatedly, and was openly replaced by "mercantilism" or "cronyism," your claim that my points are invalid, is without merit.
And by the way, mercantilism and cronyism are subsets of capitalism, not alternatives to it. They are known dangers of UNREGULATED capitalism, as many other abusive behaviors are.
And by the way, you failed to read many other things I wrote, including that it is FALSE to say that some of the turn-of-the-previous-century very rich people, accomplished what they did "on their own." No one does that. They all depended on Government enforcement of property rights, ownership of patents, and most important, the ability to ignore worker concerns if they wished to.
To be sure, there have been employers over the centuries who did treat their employees well, and I never even HINTED otherwise, though you appear to be certain I did so explicitly.
Please go back and read what I ACTUALLY said, and respond accurately.
IgorFrankensteen
And yet you insult me very cleverly I might add, no matter what I say or how I say it , it will come across as rude to you Igor.
I'm not saying you are wrong because you disagree with me, Im saying you're wrong about certain facts and Ive tried to post relevant facts to back up my opinion on why you are wrong.
Okay so I will start over again, you mentioned most of your facts stems from the Reagan and Bush(41) era... fine, even though you did mentioned the golden era/gilded age.
My original point was people making money because of the gold exchange, vs the gold standard vs fiat money cannot be compared.
You talk about finance during the Bush and Reagan years, while its true men and some women got super rich on paper because of the result of fiat money when Nixon took America off the gold standard.
Bond traders before the 80's barely made a living most had to get a second job just to survive and fiat money replaced the gold standard and the feds(The federal reserve) manipulated the money supply and interest rates, Bond traders like Bill Gross saw opportunities and ran with it, today a bond trader earns 100 X more than their predecessors in the 1970's and early 80's.
Do you blame capitalism for that or government policies?
And by the way, mercantilism and cronyism are subsets of capitalism, not alternatives to it. They are known dangers of UNREGULATED capitalism, as many other abusive behaviors are. IgorFrankensteen
Again, I don't know how to say this without sound rude... here goes.
You are wrong sir, mercantilism and capitalism are not the same thing, they are not subsets.
mercantilism was a system where the government or monarch incentivized businesses or merchants to trade on their behalf and they were giving monopolies and protection, they were an extension of the state.
In mercantilism only the privileged got rich and remained wealthy
Capitalism quite simply is a political and economic system that advocates the means of production, distribution and trade owned by individuals for profit by way of a free market, it advocates the importance of private property and your rights, and it advocates liberty and free market principles govern by objective laws.
Adam Smith referred to this as “laissez faire” , anyone can get rich in Capitalism.
We wont get into crony capitalism, too long of a discussion, by the way there is no such thing as
unregulated capitalism, it has never existed.
And by the way, you failed to read many other things I wrote, including that it is FALSE to say that some of the turn-of-the-previous-century very rich people, accomplished what they did "on their own." No one does that. They all depended on Government enforcement of property rights, ownership of patents, and most important, the ability to ignore worker concerns if they wished to. IgorFrankensteen
No, I understood everything you've posted I tried to address it.
That isn't what I said when I posted they did it own their own, I said on their own meaning
without government help or connection and I gave you examples like Leland Stanford and jay Frick who had connections with the government vs Rockefeller who did not have connections with the government and who simply made his products better and cheaper than the competition and outsold them.
Edited by
chairman_z
on Mon 07/23/18 05:13 PM
