The definition of "Capitalism" doesn't have much to say about producing.
It does say more about ownership of inputs.

Ownership of inputs could just as easily be collective, and work just as well,
if people just weren't so selfish.

Capitalism only makes selfishness a defacto standard by way of the
synthetic attribution of "First Ownership" and it's derivative of "Property Rights".

In the "End" socialism "WILL" win!

Whilst people feel they should be rewarded for their efforts through work then
there will always be Capitalism present. Whilst people feel they should be
rewarded through other peoples efforts and work then there will always be
followers of Socialism. Presently this world can not survive on Socialism
alone for it would just not pay the rent for most of us presently residing
on this planet. Capitalism is an ability, Socialism is a belief and there is
no way a belief can conquer an ability if most people wish they had this ability
themselves. Communism tried it's hand at conquering this ability and in the
end it totally failed.

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

The definition of "Capitalism" doesn't have much to say about producing.
It does say more about ownership of inputs.

Ownership of inputs could just as easily be collective, and work just as well,
if people just weren't so selfish.

Capitalism only makes selfishness a defacto standard by way of the
synthetic attribution of "First Ownership" and it's derivative of "Property Rights".

In the "End" socialism "WILL" win!

Whilst people feel they should be rewarded for their efforts through work then
there will always be Capitalism present. Whilst people feel they should be
rewarded through other peoples efforts and work then there will always be
followers of Socialism. Presently this world can not survive on Socialism
alone for it would just not pay the rent for most of us presently residing
on this planet. Capitalism is an ability, Socialism is a belief and there is
no way a belief can conquer an ability if most people wish they had this ability
themselves. Communism tried it's hand at conquering this ability and in the
end it totally failed.

Where do you get that Socialism is being rewarded for other people's successes?
From each ... to each ... .. I think your way is stretching it.

The definition of "Capitalism" doesn't have much to say about producing.
It does say more about ownership of inputs.

Ownership of inputs could just as easily be collective, and work just as well,
if people just weren't so selfish.

Capitalism only makes selfishness a defacto standard by way of the
synthetic attribution of "First Ownership" and it's derivative of "Property Rights".

In the "End" socialism "WILL" win!

Whilst people feel they should be rewarded for their efforts through work then
there will always be Capitalism present. Whilst people feel they should be
rewarded through other peoples efforts and work then there will always be
followers of Socialism. Presently this world can not survive on Socialism
alone for it would just not pay the rent for most of us presently residing
on this planet. Capitalism is an ability, Socialism is a belief and there is
no way a belief can conquer an ability if most people wish they had this ability
themselves. Communism tried it's hand at conquering this ability and in the
end it totally failed.

Where do you get that Socialism is being rewarded for other people's successes?
From each ... to each ... .. I think your way is stretching it.

Sarge, replace "successes" with my original word of "efforts"...you
naughty boy !...

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

We have pure socialist "economies" on this planet today. You likely can't name them however. Something to ponder.

I put the word economies in quotes because the pure versions of them are so brilliantly successful that they don't even register in the scheme of this world.

Where can you find them? Look in places like the Amazon for lost tribes, look to the South Pacific islands where the local language doesn't have a word for ownership or time. This is the best success of pure socialism on the planet.

Is this what you pine for? Subsistence?

The successful parts of the world are in part based on Capitalism.

Capitalism is the worst form of economy except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

---

Gary, true, but that does not mean we should not try to do better.

---

We have pure socialist "economies" on this planet today. You likely can't name them however. Something to ponder.

I put the word economies in quotes because the pure versions of them are so brilliantly successful that they don't even register in the scheme of this world.

Where can you find them? Look in places like the Amazon for lost tribes, look to the South Pacific islands where the local language doesn't have a word for ownership or time. This is the best success of pure socialism on the planet.

Is this what you pine for? Subsistence?

The successful parts of the world are in part based on Capitalism.

Capitalism is the worst form of economy except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

DO I personally pine for subsistence? No. I think you and I have some common ground. Did you not say something in the last few months about people being driven to buy things they do not really want or need all that much, and that one of the driving forces is external? Madison Avenue? How about capitalism based on legitimate wants and needs? Not produce whatever, convince people they need it, make them want it, etc. ... .

Gary, true, but that does not mean we should not try to do better.

Yes, we should try for better. We also should not repeat the mistakes of the past. There is a saying to remember; "A stupid decision made by millions of people, is still a stupid decision."

---

OK -- so socialism is a mistake, communism is a mistake, and as we've seen over the past decade, capitalism is a mistake. I'd also suggest in the 'mistakes not to be repeated' we can include fascism, autocracy, autaky (that's single nation economies), oligarchy. Any others to exclude -- trying to figure what that would leave us with as well.

[/quote]
Yes, we should try for better. We also should not repeat the mistakes of the past. There is a saying to remember; "A stupid decision made by millions of people, is still a stupid decision."
[/quote]

---

What we need is a benevolent, all knowing dictator. They are few and far between, Lee Kwan You (Harry) in Singapore comes close as far as I know.

What we need is a benevolent, all knowing dictator. They are few and far between, Lee Kwan You (Harry) in Singapore comes close as far as I know.

I suspect you do not really mean that. Besudes ... "all knowing"? Dream on!

Well, not really, and they vary in 'performance' a great deal from one to another. Further, that design definitely does not scale well.

Kibbutz's seem to work quite well, or did, but there has been radical re-structuring since the collapse of communism.

Gary Charpentier said in the UK Riots thread:

The root cause of the riots is Madison Avenue. They have done such a fantastic job of creating demand that people who have no chance in life of owning an item now have a burning desire for it and feel entitled to have it. The result is criminality to obtain it to satisfy the false desire. Uh, is that like lying on a loan application to buy a house?

Perhaps governments should prevent children under the age of 15 from watching the telly or at least advertiser supported telly. Same for the net, a no ads net for kids. Kids are not mature enough to resist the scientifically crafted ads aimed at them. Ask any parent near XMAS about their children screaming gimme gimme gimme! They feel entitled, when they are not. They carry this through life. Life is: "The survival of the fit." Not "The survival of the entitled."

Sigh.