Re: Your english sucks, mine is better.

["Larry Elmore" <ljelmore@montana.campus.mci.net>]

billg@jk.pst.com wrote in message ...

>Human nature is one thing, but to condone the ugly parts of it and to
>even promote it (and capitalize because of it), given that we are now
>"civilized" and "able to think and reason", is another.  Unbridled
>capitalism is the petri dish for those oppressing and repressing crimes
>against humanity not to mention blatant stealing.


I must disagree here. Capitalism certainly doesn't condone any of that, let
alone encourage it. That sounds a whole lot more like the origins of most
European nobility (centuries before capitalism), not to mention the general
workings of the Roman Empire, among others. Capitalism has _reduced_ such
crimes to the degree that it has been implemented (which is not even close
to completely, anywhere in the world). It was capitalism that ended slavery,
not communism (just another form of slavery, else why border defenses to
keep the population from voting with their feet?).

>> These are behaviors that may work in the short run quite well, but not in
>> the long run. Impeccable honor and integrity are not absolutely required,
>> but a relatively high degree of it certainly is if one intends to run a
>> legitimate, long-term business.
>
>> That's the really good thing about capitalism -- the companies either
>> changed their ways or went out of business (or are limping along on the
>> verge of going out of business) because their products are shoddy, and
their
>> productivity low because most of their workforce is crap.
>
>That's not true most of the time as evidenced by the company's that win
>via marketing as opposed to quality.  Case in point: MS.  They're
>continually trying to stifle the little guy and lock their (unknowning)
>customers into their products.  (aside: Sun has learned from MS's bad
>example, so has Borland, to market deceptively and use technology as a
>weapon of submission (dependency)).  Their philosophy is written all over
>their products if you know how to read them.  Unfortunately, "there's one
>born every minute".  Their ethics as a corporation are questionable at
>BEST.  They are first on my list as forfeiture candidates.

But the examples you cite (and there are much better ones in history) are
examples of attempts to restrict the free market -- anti-capitalist actions,
that is. Those are actions that cannot succeed in the long run without the
aid of government regulations and laws. Unfortunately, many such
anti-capitalist structures have been in place for many years, bought by the
big boys to secure their position by restricting competition. You seem to be
arguing that most people are too greedy and nasty to be trusted to run
companies and corporations (I'm not too hot on corporations either), so we
should what? Turn it all over to a government composed of other greedy,
nasty people? Unless you've got a way to filter them out? At least when the
greedheads/crooks screw up when they're running a company, that's all they
screw up -- the company and those in contact with it. When a government
screws up economically, the whole country and everyone in it is screwed. And
since government has a monopoly on the use of organized force, there's not
much one can do about it, either....

When you put politicians in charge of regulating buying and selling, the
very first things to be bought and sold are politicians....

Larry