Metal Reviews

Because credit cards don't exist? We're not in record amounts of debt for no reason. People can't afford what they need and capitalism can't sell what it has that people don't need. Credit closes those gaps.

Yes! They're "hired at wages below those paid to American-born workers for comparable positions"! That's what I'm trying to say. Extra laborers drive down costs.

You can't be this stupid, all due respect.
You seriously don't get it, you can't think outside of your marxist bubble. Capitalism is (in and of itself) good. It's corporatism that is bad. And anybody that continues to both conflate the AND suggests the answer is to pile up debt isn't really worth discussing this with.

Capitalsim has benefitted man vastly; innovation, personal wealth, job creation and all that comes with those things.
the most prosperous, innovative nations and peoples have been driven by one form or another of capitalism.
Name five technolgical advancments that benefit humanity that can be laid at the alter of marxism. Marxism = gray stagnation.
I mean, just look at all the examples of thriving successful marxist nations (and China's backdoor capitalism doesn't count)... yeah, maybe not.

There you have it folks; credit cards!

Fucking unbelievable. I've said this before and I'll say it again; if this is what our institutions of "higher" learning are producing, may whatever gods there be help us all.

No, they drive down WAGES and eliminate jobs for American citizens... while many of those with HB 1 visas hightail it back to wherever they came from. I'll bet a months salary that the spot left open at the end of the visa is either
a. filled by another visa or
b. a "temp" job
Either way, the American worker gets the shaft.

Oh and costs on some cheap gadgets may have dropped but the overall cost of living has skyrocketed. But, hey at least we have our useless distarctions, so it's all good, right? I mean GTA V just came out!!

Anybody wonder why western civilization is circling the drain?

Some of that stuff is pretty basic economics. Extra/uneeded workers obviously wouldn't be needed for a service that is widely available or has been supplemented with either technology or better trained domestic employees. Workers don't drive costs down either its the consumers that do that.

With all due respect, I think you misread some of his post. He certainly wasn't advocating the piling up of private debt as a good thing like we see in our fair country.

With all due respect yourself, how else could



be interpreted in context with my post?

At best, it's irrelevant to the topic at hand.

He seems to be arguing for imported labor, on the basis that it "drives down costs", with a little swipe at capitalism thrown in for good measure.
If that were the case, there would be no need for credit.
No, credit is not what is needed to "close the gaps", a moratorium on imported cheap labor is what is needed.

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/05/16/bulgarian-fraud-threatens-the-eu-welfare-state/

Cheap labourers? I think not.

Whether capitalism is or isn't a good thing is largely irrelevant though isn't it? I mean barring some dramatic uprising the system won't change in any western country. At least in Australia the people who cross into our country illegally (via boat I mean we're surrounded on all sides by ocean so they can't really walk across the border) get stuck in really shitty jobs so it doesn't hurt Australian workers all that badly I take it that isn't the case in America.

We have a similar problem.

http://www.cis.org/immigrant-welfare-use-2011

To RelentlessO:

For the topic at hand, yes the merits of capitalism are largely irrellevant. I mention it because every reply to the topic at hand by our resident marxist has been a roundabout attempt at blaming capitalism, as opposed to corporatism (the original article I posted a page or so back regarding the corporate lobbying of the US gov for more cheap labor), as per usual. I have neither the tolerance nor patience at this point for any of that nonsense. It's always the same old marxist propaganda, and frankly I've grown quite sick of it over the years.

At any rate, in the US we "import" both the unskilled, uneducated and the skilled and educated. So our native labor force is hit from both ends.

It's not as much of an issue here. The native labor force generally get better paying jobs then the "imported" labor force. In fact it seems most of those "imported" workers wind up driving taxis (somewhat of an inconvinience when you're a vision impaired person catching a taxi at night and the driver wants you to direct them because they have no fucking clue where anything is).

haha, i have people that can barely speak english using gestures to ask questions where I work. It's ridiculous. And trying to figure out some of the e-mail correspondence is both amusing and irritating at the same time.

It's insane. I mean really how difficult can it possibly be to use the GPS/Satnav/whatever the hell it's called in your taxi to key in an address. It's hilarious sometimes at uni though hearing the foreign bloke (with almost no trace of an accent) complaining about how bad his foreign taxi driver was.

give me a second I'm sure I can find some way of making this relevant. Oh, um, let's see. Ok got it. This wouldn't be an issue if big business were willing to...actually I got nothing.

/thread

Ok now I got it. This being a politics thread it's a parody of sorts. Yeah I'll go with that. By avoiding the topic at hand I was making a mockery of politicians who, it seems, do nothing but avoid the topic at hand.

You said cheap labor would result in lower wages for all, I completely agree. You then claimed that would lead to less money for people to spend and hence not purchase the products being produced. I completely agree. I then state that is what has happened. Credit cards enter the picture. People are paid less and continue to make the same amount, products need purchased, credit cards enable them to make said purchases. Piling up debt is how capitalism keeps itself from nosediving. Looking at the economic grand scheme of things I'm not sure how you could argue. Credit plus weird finance derivative bullshit. Student loans defaulting, fucked up mortgages given to people who couldn't afford them, unprecedented credit card debt widespread. Blame individuals for lacking personal responsibility if you want, but it sounds like a widespread structural symptom of a system that can't support itself without its junkie fix.

I've gotten V's panties in a bunch. Sorry.

@Karma's article: yup, bureaucracy blows.

Negatory, no panties bunched here. Credit and capitalism are not the same thing. credit is a banking scheme, which again is more in line with corporatism.

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/20 ... tween.html

Yes, Indian immigrants are the richest and most educated group in the USA. And one of the fastest growing.

http://india.nydailynews.com/newsarticl ... -education



Big business, especially big tech businesses like Zuckerberg and his ilk have been loudly willing to push for immigration reform to make their access to these above said Indian immigrants easier. When one considers the vast brain/talent pool of the world's biggest country coming here there definitely is a topward and push on American labor. I'm surprised that immigration reform to the great benefit of these tech captains of industry hasn't passed yet.



When V throws out the ad-hominems it means he likes you.

I mean this with no offense, buddy, but that article is rubbish. If that passes for what definitions that are circulating in right wing/independent circles then I now realize that there is a huge problem that probably can't be bridged. Obv Moore is a jackass, but not where the problem is. It's the definitions.
Not an economic system? That definition is actually the definition of classical liberalism as defined by John Locke. That dude who influenced TJ Tommy Jeff once upon a time. When the constitution is defining rights and property is included in that, they aren't defining capitalism.

Capitalism is a system of production/consumption. It has a particular mode of producing things that, defined by Adam Smith who was kinda an important dude in America, was rooted in the division of labor as seen in factories and assembly lines. Capitalism produces a surplus of goods. It's not me and you at home being self-sustaining, but it is us going out in the world and producing a shit ton of stuff that will take care of us, but in addition that we will sell to other people insofar as we exist within a capitalist system. Capitalism produces goods for a market that are dependent upon being sold and a particular ideological code of freedom of speech and property rights are tied to it, but are not necessary as we've learned in China. This has a lot of implications that aren't necessary for the definition, but the fact that what you cited totally missed how, for lack of a better example for something so steeped in swinging around the Constitution, the Founding Fathers used words, definitions, and concepts is appalling.

I'm not even going to mess with the definition of corporatism, because it is pretty fucking inconsequential. Yeah, a lot of goofy ass shit in America's economy could be label corporatist, but as to why those things happen blaming a boogeyman authoritarian govt is pretty fucking weak. Instead there are economic reasons established by the economic structure, i.e., capitalism, that determine how folks act. Not the desire to take your guns, jobs, and freedom.

I really do respect you, V, but that shit is rubbish. Read Wealth of Nations and you'll be way better off.[/quote]

[/quote]

Yes, I understand all that, and the main focus is the differences in what is labelled "capitalism" and "corporatism".

Capitalism is an economic system, yes, but it is also a social one.
Capitalism in the simplest terme is the freedom to produce and keep whatever wealth is the result of ones labor, with minimal government inteference, as long as it is within the confines of the law.

Corporatism, in the way that I see it, is the lobbying and controlling through political power and money of government by corporations to exempt them from the law (or make exceptions: in this country one must be a legal resident or have a visa to be employed. The law limits the amount of visas allowed per whatever period of time. Corporations lobbying the government to "bend the rules" for them is an example of this. same with corporate welfare).

cap·i·tal·ism
/ˈkapətlˌizəm/
noun
noun: capitalism1. an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

cor·po·rat·ism
/ˈkôrp(ə)rəˌtizəm/
noun
noun: corporatism1. the control of a state or organization by large interest groups.

I can't make it any simpler than this.

Corporatism by the defintion above, all due respect, is far from "pretty fucking inconsequential". Surely you can see why.

Is it a coincidence that the only ones that are experiencing an economic recovery are... big corporations and banks?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/1 ... 13882.html