Anticapitalistic demonstration - Page 2

On April 08 2011 19:58 exeexe wrote:

I think it can be described like this but i dont know. Seems hard to describe something that should be happening over the whole European continent:

But something along the line of this. The right wing people somehow managed to set the order of the day in the media and then they deluded the people to think that if they gave up their rights then that would benefit everyone. So a lot of people voulentarily accepted that it would be better to not fight and let the government take control, and then they hoped that if they stayed loyal to the state, then the state would also stay loyal to them. LOL what a joke that was, but thats sort of what happened roughly.

..As the right wing state got enough power it opened the door for capitalism to enter..

And then capitalism got a bridgehead in the society and from here it grew stronger and stronger day by day. once a firm base was established it worked to divide the people not only between rich and poor but forexample also between ethnic european and arabic muslims etc. Because the more divided the people are, the weaker are the people, and the more exploitation can be achieved and subsequently more humans will go thorugh a life full of misery. The people had no idea that they had let a trojan horse inside and that it was already on the run. The people was deluded to beleive that if they harashed the arabic muslims then everything would become better, and the strong capitalist state would remain loyal to the people who helped in this moral case. But little did they know that a capitalist state does not know of such concepts as "thanks" or "owe you a favour", instead what they got was a state that now turned its focus on to the ethnic people, and i guess thats where we are today.
The question is, will people let them self be divided further into smaller groups or will they stand united and repel back what the state let in?

On April 08 2011 22:26 laee wrote:
cajpitalists want deregulated markets, wages to maximise profits. its good for you, because you will benefit of cheap products due to the competition. LOL
What free market is leading to is mass unemployment. Bosses dont care about people, they care about profit. If they can produce the same prodcut with only 50% of the people )=productivity gain) they will unemploy 50% of them. WHILE the profit is his own.
Communists or socialists want that the economy cant do that. they wawnt the good thing rom competition (productivity) with aboiding the bad )unemployment). The way to go is that the ppl who arent needed anymore (50%) will take the gains from the productivity increase and do something new with it (investing). So no profits, but investing.
If theres no thing to invest, then the 50% ppl would share the work to be done, so the worker hours would be 50% for all the ppl.

On April 08 2011 08:55 jdseemoreglass wrote:
Libertarian Socialist.....

Someone who wants to maximize liberty by centralizing all power over material goods. Makes perfect sense.

On April 08 2011 22:26 laee wrote:
cajpitalists want deregulated markets, wages to maximise profits. its good for you, because you will benefit of cheap products due to the competition. LOL
What free market is leading to is mass unemployment. Bosses dont care about people, they care about profit. If they can produce the same prodcut with only 50% of the people )=productivity gain) they will unemploy 50% of them. WHILE the profit is his own.
Communists or socialists want that the economy cant do that. they wawnt the good thing rom competition (productivity) with aboiding the bad )unemployment). The way to go is that the ppl who arent needed anymore (50%) will take the gains from the productivity increase and do something new with it (investing). So no profits, but investing.
If theres no thing to invest, then the 50% ppl would share the work to be done, so the worker hours would be 50% for all the ppl.

Most socialists want greater welfare given to the disadvantaged and greater social equality for all. Capitalist countries are marked by social inequality (the flip side is the "incentive" viewpoint), i.e. the rich accumulating power over the poor. Socialists believe in greater government control over the markets to prevent market failure and undesirable market results. They believe that a sacrifice in economy is worth the benefits in the standard of life of the average person that some government control can bring.

On April 09 2011 03:39 xarthaz wrote:
Wage is profit.

There. Marxism debunked, the fallacies of demonizing profit debunked, a lot of leftist moral premises debunked. All in one three word sentence. And to be realist, that sentence is true, which leaves little else for discussion.

To be more percise, wage is a subset of profits that have no money cost of labour. Where the universal definition of profit is the money cost of producing a good subtracted from the money revenue from sale of good

Equality cannot exist, discrimination cannot be eliminated, property ALL MUST EXIST due to one single reason. The scarcity of time and space. Thats it! We live in a scarce world, and thus those are the implications we must necessarily face, whatever the policies in place are. By the way, government is a subset of the market(it is namely the market of trading tax payer money in exchange of government assurance to not use violence, or some similar scheme depending on technicalities), hence the claim of it being a fix to markets is nonsensical.

On April 09 2011 03:39 xarthaz wrote:
We live in a scarce world, and thus

On April 09 2011 03:26 tyCe wrote:
Socialists believe in greater government control over the markets to prevent market failure and undesirable market results.

This is where differences in socialism begin to emerge. Should a government control the means of production or should only certain industries be under such control? Should the people control the means of production more than a government? Do people who control production plan in advance for what they will produce or do they look at what the market demands and produce accordingly?

They believe that a sacrifice in economy

On April 09 2011 04:39 qdenser wrote:


i see people use this assumption a lot, it's completely baseless

On April 09 2011 01:47 SkytoM wrote:


Oh my god.

On April 10 2011 01:13 exeexe wrote:


Watch this video:
http://www.democracynow.org/2011/4/7/nobel_economist_joseph_stiglitz_assault_on

Right, did Nobel Economist Joseph Stiglitz just said that the US was more fractionated than Europe? Oh shit, i beleive that he infact did!! And a fractionated society is the same as a people that is divided, and where is capitalism strongest? In the US! Now go connect the dots...

Joseph Stiglitz also wrote this interesting article about the distribution of wealth in the US for those who wants to read more:
http://www.vanityfair.com/society/features/2011/05/top-one-percent-201105?currentPage=1

Its very funny, because he forgets to use the word socialism. Aah well i guess he went to american schools and perhaps there he learned that socialism is the same as hell on earth, but he could easily have included the term socialism in the article if he had enough cojones.