Quote from: blablahblah on June 12, 2013, 10:34:52 PM

Quote from: NewLiberty on June 12, 2013, 09:04:35 PM

Quote from: ktttn on June 10, 2013, 07:38:18 AM

Quote from: NewLiberty on June 10, 2013, 05:20:58 AM

Quote from: ktttn on June 10, 2013, 03:11:47 AM

They don't ignore it, even though they might try.
To analyze "pure" capitalism, one has to ignore the state's influence.
The problem is that what one winds up analyzing, by ignoring the state, is an independently oppressive, albeit incomplete picture of what capitalism is.

There you have it. That may be the essence of your disagreement with them.
Your claim is that capitalism is basket of things that includes states.
Their claim, (which is inherent in their very name), is that capitalism can exist without a state, and that this would solve the problems that you have in the capitalism basket.

Even that hypothetical "pure" Capitalism needs to have wage slaves indentured with economic coersion to generate profit for a profiteer -otherwise it's just squirrelish stockpiling.
I object to capitalism because it is not sustainable without constant privatized violence and because it is an inefficient way to create and trade things.

Help me understand this please.
Why does their hypothetical "pure" Capitalism, which uses wages for working people who are enticed with economic benefit so tragic? Why is it necessarily violent? Why is it inefficient?

Because:
-stealing to survive
-stealing, ripping people off and so on, due to greed

Only petty theft is tragic. On a proper scale, it's rather glamorous! Nine out of ten capitalists agree.

Quote

-exploiting easy targets (e.g.: immigrants who are desperate for a little bit of money).

Within the capitalistic framework, this practice is referred to as entrepreneurship, rational self-interest, opportunity, and, more colloquially, PROFIT!

Quote

-Capitalism seems to reward society with short-to-medium term gains (e.g.: technology, gadgets) while potential problems (e.g.: depleted resources, pollution) are easy to ignore because they tend to creep up very slowly.

Elegant & self-consistent -- the human life's so short! Leaving the place neat & tidy when you ~~leave~~ die epitomizes irrational self-interest.

Quote

-Ignoring morals seems to be more "efficient" than being righteous, at least in the short term.

The wonderful thing about morals is ... there are so many to choose from!

Quote

I'm sure there are more reasons, but that's plenty for starters.

So many blatantly subjective & emotion-laden terms here (tragic, slave, coercion, exploiting [people], [being] righteous, [appeal to] morals) Roll Eyes