Libertarians

Discussion in 'Politics' started by dubaba, Sep 26, 2011.

  1. What was it that happened to the poor when China introduced capitalism... I forget...
     
  2. Libertarians dont provide facts nor do socialists, we provide opinions. :D
     
  3. fixed for ya there
     

  4. And who can free people from this explotation? The State?
     
  5. I thought capitalism hasnt ever existed?

    I would call chinas introduction of privatization very minimal. It may have helped a bit but there where many factors that effected it. Mao wanted to make china self sufficient which is foolish for an emerging political system. No new socialist country can survive completely on its own, as it needs other socialist countries to trade with which there are few. Instead Deng transitioned there economy so that it is more suited for trade with western countries, which cuba is doing to an extent. There was some privatization because of this, but the government still had most of its marxist policies in tact including the nationalization of most industries. Because of these marxist policies, the profits recieved from trading with western countries where spread to all individuals instead of a few(which would be the case if they really introduced capitalism), and thus reducing poverty.
     
  6. Themselves through mass action and revolutionary politics
     

  7. Nah that's the Free Market.
     

  8. Fact | Define Fact at Dictionary.com
    fact
    noun /fakt/ 
    facts, plural

    A thing that is indisputably the case
    - she lacks political experience-a fact that becomes clear when she appears in public
    - a body of fact

    Used in discussing the significance of something that is the case
    - the real problem facing them is the fact that their funds are being cut

    A piece of information used as evidence or as part of a report or news article

    The truth about events as opposed to interpretation
    - there was a question of fact as to whether they had received the letter

    [​IMG]
    source: Freedom and Economic Growth in the Poorest Countries - Ken Zahringer - Mises Daily

    This is called a graph. It is used to compile and correlate data from the 'real world' into a readable form for humans to understand. See that line at the bottom, wanna guess what kind of leadership those people have?
     

  9. Uh..

    fact: capitalism provides the definition of poverty. and rich. there is enough food and resources and money to sustain the worlds population

    also,

    but wait!

    and what's more?
    actually fuck it. Read for yourself: Hunger

    this takes care of the # one reason for even having currency. A simple solution for housing would be that, in return for getting peoples crop to redistribute, the government gives you a simple house, built by people in exchange for crops.

    food and shelter are now taken care of.

    clothing: same source as the housing

    food shelter and clothing are all taken care of. and there is no need for capitalism or even money.

    anything that happens from there, like people getting bigger homes for providing more crop, starts from a baseline that excludes the possibility of poverty.
    from there, we could even follow the constitution in terms of laws, of course without capitalism.

    so the simplist cure for poverty is to provide the poor with basic needs that can be met by abundant resources.

    public education can be free in exchange for building homes or making clothes or manning solar panels, energy exchanged with the central govt for the other basic needs.

    and the energy is free to the people in exchange for the other things.

    etc etc.
     
  10. "True" or absolute capitalism hasn't existed on such a large scale.

    True capitalism exists in some places... like at music festivals. :smoking:

    Chinese economic reform - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Just a refresher for you. Their private sector includes a larger percentage of their GDP than the US. They have national industries, but market liberalization has done nothing but improve the conditions of the poor. :)
     

  11. So who provides the means and resources of producing and distributing all this food the impoverished masses?

    That's why Socialism is magic!
     
  12. As I said before, the only reason this has improved the conditions of the poor is because of marxist policies that spread the wealth attained through market liberalization to the poor. In a capitalist society this wealth would of been concentrated in the hands of a few and expected to "trickle" down to the poor, which was not the case.
     
  13. The people
     

  14. Agreed. But in Socialism isn't there some group of "bureacrats" that disperses proper housing, food, and work?
     

  15. Yeah, half 'The People' couldn't sprint to their mailbox if a jelly donut was waiting for them. Let alone distribute thousands of lbs of food across the entire globe.

    I think you guys are better off enlisting Harry Potter
     
  16. In some forms of socialism yes.
     
  17. Oh yes rich people are the only ones capable of doing this :rolleyes:
     

  18. Because there are no fat poor people. :rolleyes:
     

  19. Yes, it's true that China's privatization really helped it's economy grow, however it would probably not have been as beneficial if there weren't redistibutive policies before hand, to even out the wealth. Same thing with India. If there was a straight transition into a neo-liberal economy, it
    would probably have been similiar to Chile. Lots of wealth tied in the hands of the mining chiefs. You know, with Chicago boys you guys all love.

    PS- This does not mean I support the Chinese policies, just giving a another perspective.
     
  20. The poor are in fact the true workers of the world. I don't think anyone except neo-CONS will argue that. The issue is which is the fairest and best way to allow the people to prosper. That would be unbridled captilism. I do think we should have a safety net but that should come from state governments not the federal. The federal government should only make money off of tarriffs (1%) and anyone who doesn't pay our tarrif or raises tarrifs on us doesn't get to trade with us. The people should not be taxed. Why does the poor ass kid who only has 1$ to his name have to pay sales tax it BS.


    You suggesting the idea to take away from those who work and give it to those who don't. I suggest giving more to those who work plus more ( I don't consider work as a CEO or pencil pusher or bearucrat I view work as growing vegetables making a car, building a house. Actually contributing something.) The true workers are the ones who should have the power not the ones in suits. We are not in a capitilist system right now we are in a command economy. And I can see how it's stripping the wealth from the people. If their were no taxes and shit the people would be much richer. What if MJ was legalized i can go on and on but really dubbaba or whatever the heck your name is stop fucking clinging to an ideal so hard and go with what makes logical sense. Not the shit thats been proggrammed into your mind.
     

Share This Page