What Liberals Don't Get About Hating Capitalism

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

We have all heard the mindless rants from the Liberals about Big Business, and the evils of Corporate America. We are constantly reminded of the greed and corruption being uncovered, and the downright jealous nature of their contempt for capitalist ventures, which might net the benefactor a profit.

The Obama administration has made no secret of their intentions regarding Big Business, it is after all, the hallmark of the liberal movement. But when we hear Liberals attacking big business, or any capitalist venture, we are really hearing them attack the individual. Big Business = People!

This is what Liberals fail to understand. Taxing and punishing Big Business, is really just taxing and punishing people. You can't "tax" a corporation, you can't "punish" a corporation, because a corporation is a group of individual people, those people make up the corporation. The corporation IS people. You can tax and punish people, not corporations. Add a surcharge, increase a regulatory fee, impose a penalty or fine... and the inherent "cost" to the "corporation" is transferred to... yes, you guessed it... people! Not the people who run the corporation, but those who depend on the corporation in some way. Because, for the corporation to remain viable and prosperous, the new 'cost of punishment' imposed by the liberals, has to be recovered from the consumer, there is no other place for the money to come from.

Liberals have this fantasy notion that people who are prosperous, are willing to sacrifice their prosperity for implementation of liberal ideology, and that just isn't the case. Even in the most extreme cases of liberal socialist thinking... look at the very wealthy George Soros, Oprah Winfrey, and Michael Moore! Do we see them giving up their fortunes for their political ideology? Nope! Because, when it comes to prosperity, we are very selfish creatures... we want it, and don't like to give it up! It doesn't matter what our political ideology may be, our personal prosperity always means more, we can't help it.

 

[evince]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution#Social_effects

 

[Onceler]

Dixie, you're such a moron. Liberalism is not by its nature "anti-capitalist," and the vast VAST majority of liberals that I know & konw of are not against capitalism.

However, unfettered, unregulated capitalism HAS led to abuse & corruption, which has hurt many INDIVIDUALS. Do you deny this? Do you need a history lesson on the last few decades?

 

[Topspin]

dixie is such a retard that he doesn't even know that Capitalism thrives better under democratic presidents. LOFL

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Dixie, you're such a moron. Liberalism is not by its nature "anti-capitalist," and the vast VAST majority of liberals that I know & konw of are not against capitalism.

However, unfettered, unregulated capitalism HAS led to abuse & corruption, which has hurt many INDIVIDUALS. Do you deny this? Do you need a history lesson on the last few decades?

No, unfettered and unregulated capitalism has led to unfettered and unregulated prosperity for individuals. Abuse and corruption occur regardless of capitalism or profit margin. In fact, they become much more prevalent when traditional profit mechanisms are removed, because they are then incentivized. A man content with his prosperity is much less likely to try and cheat the system, it is the man who is not content with his prosperity, who's prosperity is being threatened, which has to be worried about.

Liberalism is indeed "anti-capitalist" because it is socialism. Capitalism and Socialism do not mix at all, they are the antithesis of one another. What you mean to say is, many liberals PRETEND to not be anti-capitalist, because they understand the stigma of that. It's much easier to implement socialist policies while talking out of the other side of your mouth about supporting capitalism. Kind of the same way liberals do regarding the troops... or like your "strong condemnation" of Obama invading Yemen, but you'll still vote for him because you're not a 'single issue' voter.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

No, unfettered and unregulated capitalism has led to unfettered and unregulated prosperity for individuals. Abuse and corruption occur regardless of capitalism or profit margin. In fact, they become much more prevalent when traditional profit mechanisms are removed, because they are then incentivized. A man content with his prosperity is much less likely to try and cheat the system, it is the man who is not content with his prosperity, who's prosperity is being threatened, which has to be worried about.

Well, because 1 dollar contents a man make 500k a year much less than a man make 20k a year, doesn't wealth redistribution disincentivize cheating? Most rich people don't mind paying 40% taxation. The +250k group was one of the strongest supporters of Obama, and that's the only group he PROMISED to raise taxes on.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Liberalism is indeed "anti-capitalist" because it is socialism. Capitalism and Socialism do not mix at all, they are the antithesis of one another. What you mean to say is, many liberals PRETEND to not be anti-capitalist, because they understand the stigma of that. It's much easier to implement socialist policies while talking out of the other side of your mouth about supporting capitalism. Kind of the same way liberals do regarding the troops... or like your "strong condemnation" of Obama invading Yemen, but you'll still vote for him because you're not a 'single issue' voter.

The antithesis to capitalism would just be dropping nuclear bombs on the US. The antithesis to socialism would be taking all the money in the US and giving it to one person.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

Capitalism and Socialism do not mix at all, they are the antithesis of one another.

But they are mixed quite often. It's called fascism. There are still markets, but the businesses are highly regulated, and favored vendors are propped up and bailed out selectively. Some social services are added as well. It's rule by private/public partnership oligarchy, and it's what we have now, a fascist state.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Most rich people don't mind paying 40% taxation.

Most people DO mind paying 40% of what they earn in taxation! It doesn't matter if they are rich or poor! But socialist nitwits like yourself, want to tax "the wealthy" at a rate of about 90%, so why are you talking about 40% as if that is realistic in the mind of a socialist?

 

[cawacko]

Well, because 1 dollar contents a man make 500k a year much less than a man make 20k a year, doesn't wealth redistribution disincentivize cheating? Most rich people don't mind paying 40% taxation. The +250k group was one of the strongest supporters of Obama, and that's the only group he PROMISED to raise taxes on.

Hey Watermark I live around a lot of rich people. I can let you in on a secret nobody likes paying 40% in taxes. Yes they may have voted for Obama but it doesn't mean they want to pay 40% taxes themselves.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

But they are mixed quite often. It's called fascism. There are still markets, but the businesses are highly regulated, and favored vendors are propped up and bailed out selectively. Some social services are added as well. It's rule by private/public partnership oligarchy, and it's what we have now, a fascist state.

Fascist policy is often used to implement Socialism in the face of Capitalism, I will agree with that. Fascism is not the result of mixing Socialism and Capitalism, it is the result of Socialist policy trying to destroy Capitalism. You see, Capitalism can't thrive in a Socialist society, it is not allowed to. The State doesn't compete fairly with Private Enterprise, because The State sets the rules and Private Enterprise doesn't. The State gains resources from taxation and legislation, while Private Enterprise gains resources from Capitalism. Therefore, in a Socialist society, The State has to control Capitalism to limit Private Enterprise, and create the need for more Socialism. Fascism is often the means Socialists use to do this.


What we need to happen, is for people to understand that attacking Big Business, is really just attacking individuals. Restricting capitalism and corporate free enterprise, is really just restricting individual prosperity. Punishing "The Rich" is really just punishing success and encouraging failure and dependency for the individual. The entire notion of this hatred we see for "Corporate America" from the left, is flawed and misguided. It is Corporate America comprised of The People of America, every single one of them... in some way or another! Attacking Corporate America, is attacking The People!