From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,4873305131bf4d94 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,4873305131bf4d94 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: fdb77,4873305131bf4d94 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-Thread: 10261c,90121986704b5776 X-Google-Attributes: gid10261c,public X-Google-Thread: 10c950,90121986704b5776 X-Google-Attributes: gid10c950,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,4873305131bf4d94 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public From: billg@jk.pst.com Subject: Re: Your english sucks, mine is better. Date: 1997/11/25 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 292631269 References: <65ab3u$v07$1@news.nyu.edu> <65bo2c$d9l$1@news.nyu.edu> <65d7i8$jt@netra.montana.edu> <65drlj$66g@netra.montana.edu> Organization: IDT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.lang.pascal.ansi-iso,comp.lang.pascal.misc Date: 1997-11-25T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <65drlj$66g@netra.montana.edu>, ljelmore@montana.campus.mci.net says... > > 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. Again, the definition is one thing, the implementation is another. Observe the results of a capitalistic enterprise at any large corporation. Politics rule... everyone else is on 20, 30, 40 yr maintenance plans. The ones on top are kings, the ones on bottom are peasants. The social classification hierarchy is alive and well in big business. Are the ultimate results good or not? Your _response_ probably depends where you stand in the hierarchy, but the simple "knowing right from wrong" test may give a different answer. The ones at the top are there (or stay there) because they have successfully "played" a large group of people into following them. Most times these people are the manipulators (hence requiring all the corporate controls) and not true leaders. Cat's out of the bag now for those trusting people that are the salt of the earth. > It was capitalism that ended slavery, Transformed (abstracted) it. > 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. Wealth is being successfully accumulated this way in a capitalistic setting. Period. Capitalistic "success" is determined between the lines of the definition, has been and will continue to be. Hence one must conclude that any original specification or intent is just a facade or was never meant to be taken seriously accept as a manipulation device. > 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.... A top down approach probably won't work because as we all know, corruption floats. I know.. how about something like "for the people, by the people". They won't like it. They have guns. billg