Will capitalism survive?

C I
I beg your pardon.
I have no idea about the unchecked capitalism.
I peruse Bible where i find no answer.
So I presume capitalism is a new philosophy or way of life.
Do you mind to explain the age of capitalism.?

Double entry book-keeping.

No sir
I am serious to learn from you and others.
CI is one of the few in this forum who can give some FOOD FOR THOUGHTS.

Actually--ahem--Yes sir. The Double Entry Book-keeping.

And if you want to learn something from A2K here's something you should consider. CI has never been able to provide FOOD FOR THOUGHTS whilever he has had a hole in his arse. Except maybe one of astonishment.

He doesn't even know how to slag somebody off properly.

BTW Rama-

The industrial revolution provided the motive force of the gearing. Together with a certain religious orientation of course.

You could try researching double-entry book-keeping. It is fairly interesting if you take it even mildly seriously.

If you don't choose a few things to take seriously in some degree you'll never learn anything about anything of significance even if you are good at pub quizes.

It's done electronically now of course. Faster than the twinkling of an eye. That's why you can't see it.

Rama-

CI places this-



at the end of his posts presumably as a pearl of wisdom.

What it means is that posts with a high number of thumbs-up are those with the highest stupidity quotient. You have CI's word for it and he has Albert Einstein, no less, as witness.

It lines CI up with theoretical physics you see.

The big laugh is that were a thread for an A2K gathering organised by CI to appear it would be at the high end of the thumbs-up ratings in no time flat.

spendi, Why is it that you have difficulty explaining the simplest of ideas? Thumbs up or down has no bearing on anything that has to do with bright or stupid. Why you even mention physics shows how lost you are from reality.

You'll be saying next that newspaper editing has nothing to do with bright and stupid.

Imagine, if you will, a Just Hatched coming on A2K because he had noticed a Google entry saying it was a highly-rated American discussion forum.

Where might he begin looking inside?

You mentioned physics by quoting Einstein just like I would be mentioning boxing if I quoted Mike Tyson.

You quote him saying, with your evident approval, emphasising even, that human stupidity is infinite. It seemed to me that it logically follows that the stupidest threads will have the most positive thumbs-up rating and the cleverest and wittiest and most challenging will have the most negative thumbs-down rating.

So our Just Hatched sees A2K's tabloids first which have, necessarily, a feminine leaning of the common run. Being a man of experience and sound education who seeks the cut and thrust of challenging intellectual battles he will very quickly click back to Google. By such a process the evolutionary drift, fitting as it will Einstein's witticism, like a glove so to speak, will be ever more leaning, selected in, in the feminine interest and we men will become even more emasculated than we already are.

I am passing no opinion here by the way in case you should jump to that conclusion in your usual style. I have not the expertise to judge whether or not that is a good thing. I feel quite sure that many on here will think it is a jolly good thing. And even I will agree that in some respects it is so.

But, as you might expect, not in all respects.

One thing I do know for sure and that is that it is difficult to make money out of men of experience and sound education. Even the bell-hops in Madison Ave will confirm that for you.

Never fear though c.i. I will do my duty and fight on.

spendi, You now only offer your opinion, but many assumptions that are just plain wrong. That's where your own contradictions makes your posts impossible to understand.

I will agree c.i. that my posts are not particularly easy to follow. But that is a long way from it being impossible.

I suppose it is too much to ask that you give the post some study.

There's nothing to "study." You know that old computer saying, garbage in - garbage out.

It's one way out c.i. The easiest of course.

Well sir
I can only assess a person's nobility and civility thro the words he use in this forum.
In that respect I have no negative comments about CI.
Anyway CI had not appointed me as an unpaid advocate nor he needs one.

How about bestowing out attention about the title of this thread.-?

If capitalism is to survive, it'll have to change from the current beneficiaries that benefit the top one percent to the workers below the officer level - so that the CEOs earn a reasonable multiple of the average worker of the company rather than the over 300 percent. No CEO is worth millions of dollars in salary and benefits every year when the workers are earning five figure salaries.

That's a watered down version of Bernard's Shaw's socialist agenda.

It is watered down so that c.i. doesn't frighten the ladies as much as Mr Shaw did.

The fact that it is completly contary to every line of Charles Darwin's masterpiece is neither here nor there. The explanation for that is that c.i. doesn't know which way up he is.

The latest bad news is that the FDIC that insures bank deposits is also going broke, because so many banks are going bankrupt. With very little cash available to borrowers, the economy will be further depressed that will affect jobs. This does not bode well for our long-term economic outlook - nor for the world economy as a whole.

I'm not sure there are any magic tricks that will save capitalism as it now exists. Our governments handout programs only exacerbates the problems; they can't keep spending money that doesn't exist. Their battle against inflation is a lost cause; you can't keep adding dollars in the world marketplace without it affecting price. The feds are concentrating their efforts in the wrong arena; it's not about quarter percent point changes in interest rates that matters.

Any system whether communism or capitalism which helps the rich one percent of the population and allow the rest to struggle for survival will face a slow and steady death.
American capitalism is like the old type feudalism
Here is a very very lengthy report to substantiate my above comment.

Feudalism aka American Capitalism
by David F

In 1982 there were 13 billionaires; in 1983....15; in 1984....12; in 1985....13; in 1986....26; in 1987....49. Note carefully that prior to 1986 the number of American billionaires had averaged around 13. Then the Reagan administration drastically altered the wealth distribution patterns by introducing new tax legislation favoring the top 1%. In 1986 the number of billionaires DOUBLED, and by 1987 the number of billionaires had virtually QUADRUPLED to 49!! By 1988, there were 68 individuals or families that each had net wealth in excess of $1,000,000,000. By 1989, the number had risen precipitously to 82. And by 1990, the Forbes survey reported the staggering total of 99!! {B3} With favorable tax laws in place, the super rich can enjoy bonanza years even during recessions!! The tax laws that allowed this to happen are still in place, and will remain in place till enough people get sufficiently concerned to insist that they be changed. What should cause the American people to sit up and take notice, once and for all, is the fact that this explosion of wealth took place during a period when:
1. The stock market crashed harder than in 1929.
2. Hundreds of American banks and Savings and Loan thrift institutions declared bankruptcy and saddled the taxpayer with a debt to pay that may ultimately exceed $500 billion dollars.
3. Thousands of farmers lost farms that had been in the their families for generations.
4. Millions lost their jobs.
5. Wage earners were having to take massive pay cuts and reductions to their benefits.
6. Social programs and health and education programs were being drastically cut back or terminated.
7. Waves of pan-handlers were flooding onto the streets.
8. Shelters for the homeless, and grocery handout centers were springing up like mushrooms in practically every city throughout the nation.
It should not take an Einstein to observe that equal opportunity, and equitable prosperity is an outright hoax for all but a small minority. Unlike Britain, France, and Germany which can point to their Feudal pasts to explain their existing wealth distribution inequities, America can point to no such excuse
http://mindmined.com/public_library/nonfiction/david_f_feudalism_aka_capitalism.html

What I always ask my neoconservative friends is this: If Europe is so moribund and America so economically strong, why is the dollar continuing to devalue against the euro? It's because the investment community says we don't think the economic fundamentals are sound enough to guarantee pay off.

I keep telling my European friends that this is what you'll get if you go with the American model. You'll get a winner takes it all system, a greater disparity in income, you'll have increased poverty. You'll get debt for your family. The only other country that has really followed our lead is Britain, and it now has the worst consumer debt ratio in the world -- an achievement it has accomplished in just five years. The average Brit spends 120 percent of his or her income.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,366944,00.html

Pure capitalism or socialism will not survive; it must be a mix of both to provide the motivation of individuals to succeed under capitalism. It's when the rewards are given to the few when it becomes a problem - not only for the middle class and poor, but also for the wealthy. There is only so much the wealthy can buy into happiness when everybody around them live in misery. Greed is a disease that only looks at self-interest, but actually harms them more than they realize. That's the reason that third world countries that never seem to advance economically only reward the people who govern with an iron fist. It's a lesson many people with wealth never seem to understand.