From iGeek
(Redirected from Category:Capitalism)
Jump to: navigation, search

Capitalism is the only free-market economic system. It is based on the liberty, private ownership, and the idea that people should be able to keep as much of what they produce as possible. It's also based on "Capital" (money) and that you should be able to invest, produce, and voluntary exchange: the prices are set by the two sides (producers and consumers) and not bureaucrats or politicians (the law of supply and demand).

It was the most productive and free system ever created, and it raised billions out of poverty: though since it allows unequal results for unequal abilities or unequal effort, it allows for incomes to vary wildly based on the contributions made to humanity (as seen by consumers). The misinformed bigots (Marxists) think that it exists only through exploitation of the working class, or that it prioritizes profit over social good, natural resources and the environment. Or that it promotes inequality (kinda), corruption (false), or economical instability (also false). While in truth, Socialism does all of those, more than Capitalism: the political class is always empowered with more rights and money, and centralizing power always empowers corruption (you can't bribe someone that has no power), and Socialist systems underperform and usually collapse back to free'er markets, where they take off and become more stable. Innovation through competition, encouraging wealth to all productivity and decentralization of power, creates strong economic growth and yields productivity and prosperity that greatly benefit society.

Capitalism : 8 items

American Exceptionalism -
Is America exceptional? Yes. In so many ways. Those that can't recognize that, like many on the left, are demonstrating an anti-American bias that it out of touch with reality. Examples include: first country to give the world a people's Constitution, a Bill of Rights, to have the people govern, the only country to protect the right of self defense (2A), the least imperialistic for how much power we had. We fought a civil war to free another people (the slaves), and fought most of our wars to protect others: Europe from the Nazi's, prevented the USSR from taking over Europe (Cold War), freed the Iraqi's from a tyrant, stopped the enslavement of Korea and slowed the enslavement of South East Asia from the communists. The most philanthropic, and one of the most open to trade. We had the most entrepreneurial freedoms. We pay more in healthcare in order to subsidize the world's medical innovation (over half is done by the U.S., more because of our free market). We gave the world more than any other country in economics, culture, science and technology: from the Internet to microprocessors, going to the moon, Smart Phones, Search, Social Media, various drugs and medical innovations, the airplane, and so on. No other 5 countries combined have done as many innovations because our economic and personal freedoms, our capitalism, and our willingness to invest in making the world a better place. That's not just jingoism, that's recognizing an exceptional global performance.

Anti-American - Are Democrats more Anti-American that Republicans? Yes. Does that mean they're less American? No. Look, you can't have dozens (or more) examples of being for undermining the nation or our interests (foreign or domestic), mocking patriotism (jingoism), degrading religion and traditions, the Constitution, the rule of law, our founders, the flag, the pledge, our music, not knowing or taking pride in our History, and values, and Holidays, and way of life, being for internationalism (diluting our independence), being against the capitalism (that made us great), make excuses for or supporting our enemies (or those that degrade us), hating even the term "American Exceptionalism" (without admitting what it is, or that it exists), and dividing us by intersectional victimhood status instead of being proud of our blending and common interest in the American Dream... and then after all that, claim you love the country.... well, I guess you can. But no one should take you seriously. The left (progressives) don't love the country for what it is, or was, or even will be... they only love it for what they hope to change it into. They're the girlfriend that loves you and all -- but only as a potential project, to mold into something that they truly can be proud of. And since nothing can live up to their expectations, they really love your failure, which allows them to feel superior. But that's not loving America, that's more loving the ideal of the Progressive USSA.

Anti-Americans - Are Democrats more Anti-American than Republicans, on most issues? Of course. That doesn't mean they aren't Americans, but they don't love the country for what it is, or was, they love themselves and their vision of being able to fix things (through tyranny and bullying) into America into becoming something better. Look at all the voices most willing to bash Americas past, present and future, based on a distorted view of a all three, and virtually all those voices are from the left. Here are some examples of them.

Financial crisis of 2007-2008 -
What caused the financial crisis of 2007-2008? This is a comparison of the two (or three) most popular theories: whether Glass-Steagall, CRA and FannieMae/FreddieMac, or the Big Fraud caused the meltdown. Along with a full explanation of the strengths and weaknesses of them (which holds up to scrutiny). Links and resources provided.

Keynesian failures -
It would be great if Keynesianism worked, governments could manipulate economies, and our lives would be better. But history shows us the opposite: it has failed every time it has been tried. Examples: the new deal, the new new deal, after WWII (Keynesians predicted a depression cutting all those military jobs, instead we had huge growth), 1970's Stagflation broke their models completely, Japan's lost decades (Abenomics) all went the opposite of Keynes predictions. Every country that converted from centralized planning and communism to free'er economies (Russia, China, Vietnam, East Germany, etc), should have had a depression, instead of massive growth. The history of central planned economies like North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, should have all outgrown places like South Korea, Brazil or Hong Kong: but the opposite happened. Heck, if it would have worked, then Obamanomics would have given us the highest labor participation rates in our history, instead of the lowest since the Great Depression. So what did we learn? Keynesians learned nothing because reality doesn't fit their desires. But the rest of us learned that Keynes was wrong.

The Great Depression - The Great Depression wasn't all that great. We'd had many depressions before that, many triggered by the Federal government meddling with trade or monetary policy, and we bounced quickly back within a year or two. What made the Great Depression so grand, was that the Federal Government not only caused it, but tried to fix it with Keynesian spending. That extended it from 2 years, to long enough to have another depression in a depression.

The Jungle -
A relatively unknown and failing author and Socialist by the name of Upton Sinclair wanted to write a political propaganda book, so he went under cover in 1904 in Chicago meat packing plants, and by 1906 he completed his semi-fictional hit piece called, "The Jungle". Teddy Roosevelt had immediately put a team of government inspectors on it, and they concluded in the Neill-Reynolds Report that the book was, "intentionally misleading and false", "willful and deliberate misrepresentations of fact", and "utter absurdity". Now it was the Progressive era, so the truth doesn't matter as much as the opportunity to regulate, so Teddy suppressed the release of the report to the public and used the book (by an author he had dismissed as a "crackpot"), as an excuse to create more federal government (the Pure Food and Drug Act, and the Meat Inspection Act), which later became the FDA. While the book and its ideas were completely debunked at the time, it's still taught in schools (Marxist re-education camp) today.

This was the start of what we called crony capitalism and the explosion of corruption: once the fed had control over things like this, you could pay-off the correct politicians to get past inspections, or guarantee your competition did not, which resulted in consolidation (reduced competition, and higher prices).

Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez -
Thomas Piketty is a French Economist (and woman-beater), who used Emmanuel Saez's discredited research (study) on how things haven't gotten better for the middle class, as the basis for his new socialist manifesto called Capital in the 21st Century (a play on Marx’s Das Kapital). Economically, the study/book was crap: politically, it was gold. It told the left leaning and their media what they wanted to hear. So it made the NYT best seller list in Fan Fiction, and everyone talked about it. It was peer reviewed and debunked in spades, but not before the gullible gobbled it up as a tasty plate of confirmation bias. Nom nom.


📚 References