The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 27    Average: 4.1/5]
50 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 7079
Rating: 4.1
Category:
Date: 11/05/12 11:37 AM

50 Responses to Occupy The Mind: Challenging Capitalism

  1. Profile photo of CreamK
    CreamK Male 40-49
    1423 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 11:38 am
    Link: Occupy The Mind: Challenging Capitalism - Dr. Richard Wolff and let the I-A-B Politicos figure it out... Socialism? Democrazy in workplace?
  2. Profile photo of FoolsPrussia
    FoolsPrussia Male 30-39
    3446 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 12:13 pm
    That was a fascinating talk. And Cornell West`s laugh is so distinctive. I recognized him even though I was just listening.
  3. Profile photo of AvatarJohn
    AvatarJohn Male 30-39
    1059 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 12:20 pm
    Amazing how seemingly intelligent "professional economists" can think that capitalism somehow played a part in the collapse of 2008. Once again, for the "useful idiots" out there, here is the timeline of the statists:

    1) Notice that some aspect of capitalism is not 100% perfect in every way. Disregard common sense that would otherwise dictate that nothing is 100% perfect.

    2) Inject a tiny bit of government. Disregard common sense that government always makes everything worse.

    3) Notice that the problem got worse. Disregard common sense and repeat steps 2 & 3 as necessary.

    4) Declare that "capitalism has failed", completely take over said system. Disregard commons sense that every single time this has been done in the past, #5 occurs:

    5) Bankruptcy, riots, misery, collapse. Examples: Greece, Spain, USSR, Obama`s America. Disregard common sense and vote again for 4 more years of this! Go to step 1.
  4. Profile photo of Cherrybawls
    Cherrybawls Male 18-29
    167 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 12:24 pm
    I don`t know that outright communism is a good answer to the problems our economy faces, but I think it pretty clear that trickle-down economics has failed our society fantastically
  5. Profile photo of Mikeoxsbiggg
    Mikeoxsbiggg Male 30-39
    1502 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 12:36 pm
    You can`t put "moral" and "capitalism" in the same sentence, ever.
  6. Profile photo of chalket
    chalket Male 50-59
    2712 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 12:39 pm
    Wow. That was awesome. Unfortunately, it was much too intelligent (and accurate) for many IAB`ers (as witnessed by AvatarJohn`s inane response). How can anyone, regardless of political belief, NOT realize that capitalism had everything to do with the recent collapse?
  7. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 1:09 pm
    chalket: How can you NOT realize that capitalism had everything to do with the current high standard of living we enjoy?
  8. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 1:11 pm
    You can`t put "moral" and "capitalism" in the same sentence, ever.
    Because capitalism is an economic theory and morality is a social issue. Thus, capitalism (rightfully) leaves morality to be an issue of society.

    How can anyone, regardless of political belief, NOT realize that capitalism had everything to do with the recent collapse?
    By this logic then, you suggest that government (and by extension, George Bush Jr.) had NOTHING to do with the economic collapse; that seems to be a bit on the wrong side of the argument to me...
  9. Profile photo of scapegoat7
    scapegoat7 Male 18-29
    210 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 1:15 pm
    The banks and corps. own america and have for a very long time. When a few people have so much power that they can buy elections, there is no more democracy.

    "If the American people ever allow private banks to control their currency, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all the their prosperity until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." ~ Thomas Jefferson.

    End The Fed.

    "All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise, not from.... want of honor or virtue, but from the downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation." ~ John Adams

  10. Profile photo of chalket
    chalket Male 50-59
    2712 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 1:54 pm
    Crakr: I never anything about standard of living, did I? I am well aware that capitalism has a great deal to do with standards of living, our high standards as well as some low standards for others. The real question is: At what cost do we get our high standard of living?

    HumanAction: No, that is not a logical conclusion at all. In fact, government (or really, LACK of it) enabled the current recession. Reasonable and judicious government regulation is the only thing powerful enough to stave off capitalism-caused economic collapse (or at least it used to be).
  11. Profile photo of wiscesq
    wiscesq Male 30-39
    112 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 2:04 pm
    crakrjak: How can you NOT realize that the American standard of living has stagnated and declined over the past 30 years, and that the country with the fastest RISING standard of living is China?
  12. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 2:12 pm
    @chalket: Allow me to point you to the following two quotes; they should be fairly recognizable.

    A - "How can anyone, regardless of political belief, NOT realize that capitalism had everything to do with the recent collapse?"

    B - "In fact, government (or really, LACK of it) enabled the current recession."

    So, in (A) you argue that capitalism - a system that, by definition, is devoid of government - is solely and entirely to blame for the economic collapse. Then, in (B) you state that government enabled the recession.

    Logically then, given your statements, you MUST accept that government, not capitalism is at fault. If a lack of government caused the collapse (which is wrong), then government is to blame for deregulating. Otherwise, government is not to blame at all, and therefore, Bush cannot be held responsible.

    Simple logic for simple people.
  13. Profile photo of AvatarJohn
    AvatarJohn Male 30-39
    1059 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 2:42 pm
    Community Reinvestment Act. There, I said it. Very simple. Look it up. Carter + Clinton + Dodd + Frank + Obama = complete economic collapse. Capitalism has nothing to do with it.
  14. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 2:58 pm
    @AvatarJohn: Some additional reinforcement...

    "So, by the middle of 2008, there were almost 27 million subprime and Alt-A loans in the U.S. financial system. This amounted to almost 50 percent of all mortgages. More than two-thirds of these mortgages were held or guaranteed by government agencies like FHA (about 4.8 million), and the GSEs Fannie and Freddie (12 million loans), and by U.S. banks (a residual of about 2.2 million) that were required to make them under the CRA. This is a vitally important fact, because it shows that the underlying cause of the large number of subprime and Alt-A mortgages in our economy was not the lack of regulation at the origination level but the government’s own demand for these loans."

    From Cato while discussing research by Edward Pinto. Source
  15. Profile photo of Andrew155
    Andrew155 Male 18-29
    2579 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 3:02 pm
    Capitalism has done more to advance the human condition than any other system. Capitalism is the economic system of those who wish to see scientific progress. Those against it are scientific regressionists.

    Plus, I hate to point this out to you, failure is vital to capitalism. When you inject too much government and central banking, though, you start to F things up.
  16. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 3:05 pm
    Plus, I hate to point this out to you, failure is vital to capitalism

    Just nitpicking here, so long as the lessons are learned from said failures yes. But I do agree with gist of your statement. All-in-all government CAN and DOES easily distort the messages from such failures.
  17. Profile photo of DavidXJ
    DavidXJ Male 30-39
    1106 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 3:08 pm
    This guy is some scary poo. He sounds so eloquent, uses examples that sound so good... but he`s really just putting pretty wrapping paper on communism.
  18. Profile photo of wiscesq
    wiscesq Male 30-39
    112 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 3:51 pm
    @Andrew155- what you`ve said isn`t true. NASA, supercolliders, our great research universities- these are government institutions. The private sector would not fund purely scientific research, and if it did, it wouldn`t submit it to peer review and publishing, it would patent it and keep it secret. Product innovation is not the same thing as scientific advancement. For example, Apple builds an iPad using touchscreen technology developed by CERN. They didn`t invent touchscreens, they created an application for them. The private sector rides along on government funded scientific advancement.

    Any private sector "advancement" you care to name- I can point to the publicly funded research institution that made it possible.
  19. Profile photo of Daegog
    Daegog Male 30-39
    1359 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 4:02 pm
    You cannot have a capitalist democracy (or republic for you nitpickers).

    They are fundamentally opposite to each other.

    Our.. republic as it were is a absolute sham. The united states is an absolute plutocracy.
  20. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 4:07 pm
    Apple builds an iPad using touchscreen technology developed by CERN

    Actually no, the capacitor touchscreen was developed by two engineers, one of them related to CERN, and manufactured and used by CERN. That`s the public sector taking ideas from the private sector.
    In fact the touchscreen we know today is the "resistive" touchscreen pioneered by George S Hurst and produced the company he founded with the technology Elographics Incorporated.
  21. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 4:09 pm
    @wiscesq

    Any private sector "advancement" you care to name- I can point to the publicly funded research institution that made it possible.

    Pumpkin spice latte.
  22. Profile photo of DuckBoy87
    DuckBoy87 Male 18-29
    3233 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 7:03 pm
    Sorry Chalket but, even some that are living in the poorest conditions, sans homeless, in America have a higher standard of living than that of medieval kings.
  23. Profile photo of wiscesq
    wiscesq Male 30-39
    112 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 7:25 pm
    @Cajun247: George Hurst was working at the University of Kentucky when he developed the resistive touch screen, and it was originally patented by the UK Research Foundation. Private sector taking ideas from the public sector.

    @Humanaction: that would be from the publicly funded National Academy of Pumpkin-tologists.
  24. Profile photo of ledzeppeloyd
    ledzeppeloyd Male 18-29
    2385 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 7:56 pm
    the thing is all political systems would work on paper, but human greed gets in the way; communism creates black markets, socialism puts people in power to control the resources which they take advantage of, capitalism creates competition and choice of products, but corperations take advantage of cheap labor and sell an mac for 2000 plus dollars when it takes mabey 200 dollars worth of parts and labor, i mean its all just drating greed and the people who control the money control more of it and its a vicious cycle of winner taking most and then more and pretty soon all of it. This is how rome eventually fell and it will be true of america too. TAKE OFF YOUR dratING BLINDFOLDS WAKE UP TO THE TRUTH!!!
  25. Profile photo of banur
    banur Male 18-29
    250 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 9:09 pm
    Wow. That was disgusting.
  26. Profile photo of scapegoat7
    scapegoat7 Male 18-29
    210 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 10:42 pm
    No matter the party, most politicians (Corporations) want to privatise profit and publicise risk.
  27. Profile photo of OldOllie
    OldOllie Male 60-69
    15841 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 10:48 pm
    He and his Marxist colleagues have almost nothing to say about the cataclysms we`re living through, because they are the ones who caused them.

    On the other hand, capitalist economists, such as Thomas Sowell, Walter E. Williams, and Arthur Laffer have PLENTY to say, in particular, that you and your idiot Marxist colleagues have always been, are now, and always will be wrong about everything.
  28. Profile photo of CreamK
    CreamK Male 40-49
    1423 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 2:01 am
    Nice, my first accepted piece, i`m so happy this got selected. And how come i`ve missed this guy all together.. Workplace democracy is logical next step in the democratic process, people should get to reap the profits from what they sow. Just think about the motivation of workers who work for themselves.
  29. Profile photo of CreamK
    CreamK Male 40-49
    1423 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 2:19 am
    Capitalism is not a fail, it just have been taken to extremes and there everything fails. Totally privatized future scares me the most. It means huge inequality, a principle that i see is so ingrained to right side of table that not only it`s accepted, it`s expected.

    Middle class is not on their minds even they are living part of it, they are still going "i will be a millionaire someday" mentality. Why should people who have not done a days worth of labor reap all the profits? Why won`t wages rise at the same pace as companys profits? And how can anyone think that`s fair?

    No one wants to go full communism but going full capitalism surely is not working. It unfair, it causes tremendous amount of suffering, skeves the whole society. Trickle down doesn`t work, how about trickle-up? A little from many going towards the more fortunate/skilled/talented on top, that sounds way more probable than a little frow few going towards many. Oh wait, that happens naturally
  30. Profile photo of CreamK
    CreamK Male 40-49
    1423 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 2:31 am
    I`m actually in favor of no government what so ever. Rather see things working out without that horrible bureaucracy. But... Thing s don`t work that way. Privatizing everything is horrible idea.

    Corporations don`t have moral. None what so ever. Pollution, abuses of workers, mass layouts because of profits, none of this bothers mr corp. We need counterbalance and that is the masses, the people themselves joined together. That means unions, local governments, federal, all those things that slowly have evolved first during tyranny and then thru out democracy.

    Corporations don`t care about what happens to you once you`re not there. They don`t care if you mangled your hand while sweating for profits and are now disabled. They haul your ass out.

    What i think most forget is that government is us. We choose who rules us and what principles the country operates. Or do we? I think that is te main question, the country is not ours anymore (not just US, almost every west
  31. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 4:42 am
    CreamK: Corporations don`t have moral..

    Not true at all, these days political correctness rules. Companies get hammered if they step out-of-line, case in point Chik-Fil-A. They are loosing franchises at colleges and universities because of their owners political stance.

    Corporations have to be PC these days, be good `corporate citizens`, or else. Gone are the days when companies had no social responsibilities or conscious.
  32. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 4:51 am
    Daegog: You cannot have a capitalist democracy or republic...

    We`ve had one here in the USA for over 200 years now, and aside from some market bubbles and their corresponding crashes, things have gone relatively smoothly. We`ve learned that some regulation is needed, but I don`t know whether or not we`ve learned that too much regulation is counter-productive.
  33. Profile photo of CreamK
    CreamK Male 40-49
    1423 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 5:29 am
    I stand by my words, corporations don`t have moral. The fact that some has to be forced upon them proves my point. How can they, they are modeled to produce maximum profit and there`s no ethics in it.

    I`m not against profit either, some is essential, companies need to invest in new facilities, equipment etc. It`s just the distribution of that profit that`s really unfair.

    Things aren`t efficient anymore, for prices of objects is way higher than what it could be and still have healthy market system. Our consumption of goods is also way higher than it should, it`s really inefficient and shamefully dirty business with inbuilt fail mechanism to keep it artificially high.

    That`s just morally wrong to produce goods that are designed to break and not last.. That`s all because pf profit, not so that humanbeings in general would have better lives, our high standard of living could be produced for all living humans with much less resources and waste per global capita
  34. Profile photo of CreamK
    CreamK Male 40-49
    1423 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 5:38 am
    The size of the economy that is not connected to anything real is just staggering. Artificial numbers created out of thin air. If it disappears not a single atom in the world exchanges ownership, few memory locations in few computers reset to zero and all the money you have in your pocket stays there, your cars don`t just magically disappear, houses will stay nicely rooted to the ground. No one loses anything real if derivatives just vanish.

    If everyone just wants to, all debts could be erased without a single loss of life. We can feed everyone, cloth everyone but we choose not to. Why? So one individual can feel great about himself because he has more something than others. More inequality, the more great that person feels. In comparison he must then feel better everytime someone else suffers more.
  35. Profile photo of CreamK
    CreamK Male 40-49
    1423 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 6:08 am
    Hunger when there food thrown away, homelessness when there`s empty houses. Sickness when there`s cure ready for them and all this because of profit. How in the hell can any one thing that is justified, right thing to do?

    I don`t care one bean about how those goals are met. But show me one side of capitalism that cares about those things at all by default.
  36. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 6:08 am
    Our consumption of goods is also way higher than it should
    Some argue that capitalism creates false needs in consumers to sell their products.

    Corporations have to be PC these days, be good `corporate citizens`, or else
    So every average person has to be a watchdog for corporations now? Your argument also implies that if they can get away with something without being found out, that they will inevitably do so. The problem with your definition of corporate morals is that their default position, according to you, is amoral.
  37. Profile photo of CreamK
    CreamK Male 40-49
    1423 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 6:09 am
    typos so far..
    * there`s
    * think
  38. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 6:12 am
    Our.. republic as it were is a absolute sham. The united states is an absolute plutocracy.
    I`d say it`s more inverted totalitarianism.
  39. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 6:14 am
    Pumpkin spice latte.
    lol. I`m not sure that qualifies as there`s nothing close to a pumpkin in it. XD
  40. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 7:44 am
    and it was originally patented by the UK Research Foundation

    Which was done at the request of Prof Hurst et al, so the public sector`s contribution was marginal. Checked the original patent as well Univ of Kentucky appears no where on it.
  41. Profile photo of banur
    banur Male 18-29
    250 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 9:07 am
    patchgrabber: "The problem with your definition of corporate morals is that their default position, according to you, is amoral."
    And they should be amoral, but if an outside source forces them to be political correct to maximize profits, they will be. Even if that means they won`t get the best overall results.
  42. Profile photo of banur
    banur Male 18-29
    250 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 9:14 am
    CreamK: "If everyone just wants to, all debts could be erased without a single loss of life."
    Sure, those that owe want that, but as a lender you would be a moron to just erase debt and throw away what is yours.
    If you would enforce it without the lenders consent you can bet that people are going to die.
  43. Profile photo of banur
    banur Male 18-29
    250 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 9:22 am
    CreamK: "If it disappears not a single atom in the world exchanges ownership, few memory locations in few computers reset to zero and all the money you have in your pocket stays there, your cars don`t just magically disappear, houses will stay nicely rooted to the ground. No one loses anything real if derivatives just vanish."
    Until the real owners show up and kick you out of the house where you live but that you don`t own and take the car that you were driving but which is not yours.
  44. Profile photo of banur
    banur Male 18-29
    250 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 9:34 am
    CreamK: [quote">"But show me one side of capitalism that cares about those things at all by default."[/quote">

    EVERY side of capitalism cares.
    Whatever you want can be done you just need to pay enough.
    You want those Davids pizza? You may not get much for a dollar but for 5 you could get a big one. For 10 the chef wouldn`t spit that much on it. For 50 he may even use fresh ingredients and at some point he will bring you a delicious pizza on a gold plate.
    All you have to do is pay for it. Or find someone that provides it for less. And that is where the free market starts again.
  45. Profile photo of Draculya
    Draculya Male 40-49
    14620 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 9:42 am
    So his solution to the recession is a communist revolution?
  46. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 9:45 am
    Hunger when there food thrown away,

    Every household below poverty line in the US today has negligible difficulty feeding itself.

    homelessness when there`s empty houses

    95+% of homeless people are only so for no more than a day. The rest are primarily due to some form of mental illness.

    Sickness when there`s cure ready for them and all this because of profit

    Blame govt-corporate cronyism, NOT capitalism.
  47. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 9:48 am
    That`s just morally wrong to produce goods that are designed to break and not last

    If you could innovate tangible, durable goods that last a lifetime I`d like to see it. Otherwise you`re wasting your breath.
  48. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 9:54 am
    Blame govt-corporate cronyism, NOT capitalism.
    AKA crony capitalism.
  49. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 9:55 am
    And they should be amoral
    orly? Why exactly *should* they be? Their only obligation is to pursue profits, to be sure, but that doesn`t explain why they should be.
  50. Profile photo of banur
    banur Male 18-29
    250 posts
    November 6, 2012 at 3:15 pm
    "orly? Why exactly *should* they be? Their only obligation is to pursue profits, to be sure, but that doesn`t explain why they should be."
    It taints the objective perspective by injecting an outside weighting of actions.
    Does the profits go up if they lay off unused staff? Does the public think they are moral by cutting down to half of their employees?

Leave a Reply