-Caveat Lector-
SCIO-LTD wrote:
>
> -Caveat Lector-
>
> Let me address some of your false conclusions as follows nurev: (and let's
> dispense with the puerile value judgements, "You get a little self serving
> here don't you buddy?" )
I don't think I care to dispense with my value judgments, and there
was
nothing puerile about pointing out your self serving statements.
> [Without competition to balance greed, the system is sold under false
> pretenses.]
>
> the system is sold under false pretenses? Utter nonsense! competition in no
> way balances greed, indeed competition is the result of greed and is its
> active force in commerce.
We are saying the same thing. Greedy GE and greedy Westinghouse
compete to
sell you a refrigerator by offering you a lower price. This is the "
Magical
Mystical Market " at work. This of course is bullshit, since the
companies
are part of an oligopoly and often collude to fix prices.
But Capitalists keep spouting on and on about " invisible hands " and
other
superstitious crap.
>
> [Adam Smith who made the case that with competition the system benefits
> all, and, without competition we are simply destined for some form of
> slavery. Smith made clear that without competition the system is merely an
> oinkfest for oinkers and wanabe oinkers. He didn't much like businessmen. He
> saw them as greedy, conspiratorial, and obsessed with money. Some things
> never change.]
>
> Adam Smith, that racist communist, read Anton Chaitkins Treason in
> America ---- from Aaron Burr to Averall Harriman, for a detail treatment on
> the heretical pronouncement this fool made and how his writings have became
> a tool to propagandize the opposite of what he seems to stand for,
Racist? Communist? Heretic? Compare him to thieves like Fallwell,
Robertson,
and the Pope.
The Pope has finally started to gently chastise capitalism now that he
is no
longer afraid of being put out of the lucrative god business by the
Commies.
He must after all. Jesus did say that it's easier for a camel to hump
a
Dachshund, than for a rich man to get to heaven.
> the
> statement above is a non-sequiter, that doesn't address the what the
> relationship between competition and business. As for businessman being
> greedy, conspiratorial, and obsessed with money, indeed some are, but as
> with most generalized statements it is patently wrong. There has always
> been that breed of merchantislist (which is who Adam Smith was addressing
> here who sought to out right monopolies everything.)
Oh please. Sell it somewhere else. This is a list which is more than
familiar
with the machinations of businessmen. Go to the archives and save the
bullshit.
> [No??? Why no? Does this make capitalism good?]
>
> There needs to be a distinction between an aspect or attribute of capitalism
> and its core tenets.
This is irrelevant. It's behavior which drives an economy, not theory.
It's
greed which drives thieves and their paler alter egos, capitalists.
> Monopolies are not capitalism but are a feature of it in the global economy,
> there are private as well as governmental monopolies. The most obvious and
> glaring example of monopolist action which stifles innovation is the
> electric utility industry which is on the verge of technological
> obsolescence, which is raking up enormous profits while actively suppressing
> innovation. go figure.
I have figured. It makes money. Innovation is not important unless it
makes
more money for the same people.
>
> [ Wrong. Sheer greed has ALWAYS been the driver of capitalism.]
> bullocks, bullshit, balderdash, complete sheer and utter crap.
> Greed is not the driver of capitalism, you would impute that wealth
> formation is an evil activity,
That is precisely what I impute.
> it is only is when the rights of others are
> violated in its acquisition.
Now you've got it. If one can get rich from one's own labor, then one
deserves
all that he worked for. If one gets rich off of someone else's labor,
that is
theft. There is not enough time in a lifetime to accumulate fortunes
based on
one's own work.
> Wealth is good and desirable.
Even that is a wrong assumption. Although I'm sure you need to believe
otherwise. Wealth in society behaves like a dense star in space. It
distorts
EVERYTHING towards itself. This is why the rich get richer, wealth
concentrates
into the hands of the very few, the have nots become a destabilizing
force, and civilizations collapse.
> However most
> people including yourself it seems confuse wealth with mal intent.
It takes mal intent to accumulate it. It takes mal intent to make it
grow. It
takes mal intent to keep it. Yeah. I guess I'm right.
> Obviously, wealth has been use to cartelize the world economy, it has been
> use to prohibit the free exchange of ideas to other nations, it has been use
> to subjugate and use the common and natural resource for a foreign gain.
... and then you say...
> Is
> wealth or its formation a bad thing. I say no a thousand times.
Your a funny guy. Ha ha ha ha.
> Remember it is the love of money, and not money itself which is the root of
> all evil.
Don't quote me that biblical crap. It's both. And you don't expend
energy
to get rich unless you love money and what it can get you.
> [That's right. Pet rocks, hair in a can, minimum wages, externalization of
> costs, and a petroleum based automotive industry 100 years old which will
> not change as long as capitalists have the oligopoly in the oil industry.
> That's innovation baby. What % of innovations are really advances for
> humanity? I don't know. Vare to guess?]
>
> The fact that we can communicate our ideas is an advance.
Yes it's an advance. So what. Beating drums was also an advance.
Television
was an advance with enormous potential. Look what capitalist
innovators did
to the best damn learning tool ever invented to date. If businesses
are
permitted to control and dominate the NET, then its potential will be
pissed
away too.
> Pet rocks,
> hair in a can? Who gives a fuck? (you're more intelligent than that: aren't
> you). minimum wages, yadda, yadda yadda, features of some capitalist,
> not capitalism. Let me clear the cobwebs from your understanding. The
> computer industry alone, is responsible for a great deal of innovation and
> material benefit.
Oh come off it. I'm in the computer industry. It put millions out of
work.
It's tedious , annoying, inefficient, labor intensive, poorly
conceived and
executed, and will wind up costing everyone much more than any
benefits it
brought. We can discuss this after next New Year. If cars ran as
poorly as
computers, we'd still have to keep horses.
% wise, who knows, why ask a question you can't
> yourself quantify, unless you are speaking rhetorically?
>
> [ I am assuming here that folks agree that monopoly is a baaad thing.]
> Absolutely categorically agree with you.
And I would guess that you agree with me because your business is
still in
a competitive stage. If you were Bill Gates you wouldn't agree with
me.
Would you?
> [What bullshit! People don't eat information. You get a little self-serving
> here don't you buddy? The internet has promise in several areas, none of
> which are necessary for sustaining life.]
>
> Did I say people eat information?
C'mon. Stretch a little here. I know you can do it.
> What a fantastic leap in logic you've
> accomplished. I sorry you can't understand what is patently understandable.
> People thrive on information, data and intelligence, yes it is necessary to
> life, schools, training institutes and news agencies, the government
> (unfortunately the largest producer of information), businesses; media,
> entertainment all feed an open mind.
But feed it what? People have gotten stupider and more distracted.
> It is the driver for wealth
> acquisition.
Oink, oink.
> If I know something then I am in a position to act on it.
> This fact was known a long time ago. Remember man shall not live by
> bread alone but every word that proceedith out of the mouth of God.
God and money. What a combination. Let me remind you that Jesus hated
and fought against the rich. This is why they had him killed. He
threatened
the source of their wealth, which came from collaborating with the
Romans in
exploiting the land and the people. The ordinary people wound up as
virtual
slaves and hated the Romans and their own rich enough to revolt. The
rest,
as they say, is history.
Look, you want to make a lot of money? Go ahead and try. But don't try
to
justify your avarice with bullshit.
" Say it strong.
Say it loud.
I'm a pig,
and I am proud!"
Joshua2
>
> ============================
> Jeffrey C Hearon
> Founder & CEO
> SCIO-LTD
> http://www.scio-ltd.net
> http://www.scio-ltd.com
> http://www.scio-ltd.org
> ============================
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
