Comments on: The Difference http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752 make it happen Sat, 11 Feb 2012 01:12:14 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2 By: darwin http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11158 darwin Fri, 31 Aug 2007 13:08:58 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11158 No, I'm pretty sure that all current corporations are capitalistic. No, I’m pretty sure that all current corporations are capitalistic.

]]> By: steve http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11150 steve Thu, 30 Aug 2007 20:32:06 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11150 In fact it has been scaled up. It's called corporations. In fact it has been scaled up. It’s called corporations.

]]> By: darwin http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11148 darwin Thu, 30 Aug 2007 19:03:20 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11148 Marxist socialsism- not the crap that politicians tried to implement, but a simple free-market system where workers invest in and own the means of production, own their own labor, and own the products of that labor. This exists in the small scale all over the world, any time an individual or group runs their own business without any employees, but it's never been scaled up to a larger level. Marxist socialsism- not the crap that politicians tried to implement, but a simple free-market system where workers invest in and own the means of production, own their own labor, and own the products of that labor. This exists in the small scale all over the world, any time an individual or group runs their own business without any employees, but it’s never been scaled up to a larger level.

]]> By: steve http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11146 steve Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:29:08 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11146 If a capitalist invests in machines and train labor but is denied ownership of what the process manufactures it's unclear how that would be a free market. One might say, please point to a system that has free markets but lacks capitalism as another way to approach your definitions. If a capitalist invests in machines and train labor but is denied ownership of what the process manufactures it’s unclear how that would be a free market.

One might say, please point to a system that has free markets but lacks capitalism as another way to approach your definitions.

]]> By: darwin http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11145 darwin Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:08:40 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11145 ? The hell are you talking about? ? The hell are you talking about?

]]> By: steve http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11136 steve Thu, 30 Aug 2007 14:46:04 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11136 Quick question: How are markets free if a capitalist does not own the products his machines and trained labor produce. Quick question: How are markets free if a capitalist does not own the products his machines and trained labor produce.

]]> By: darwin http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11135 darwin Thu, 30 Aug 2007 13:57:20 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11135 Free markets mean an economy in which different goods can compete freely to be purchased. Capitalism is a system in which the means of production and the products produced are funded and owned by people other than the workers making the products. Free market s rock, capitalism has been a marked improvement as we've emerged from systems of serfdom and slavery, but is not neccessarily needed for the benefits we get from free markets. To be fair, our forefathers revolted against taxation WITHOUT REPRESENTATION; I'm willing to bet I care much more about making sure all people have equal representation in the government than you do (after all, you've specifically argued that rich people should have more control over our country, since being rich proves how smart they are). Free markets mean an economy in which different goods can compete freely to be purchased. Capitalism is a system in which the means of production and the products produced are funded and owned by people other than the workers making the products.

Free market s rock, capitalism has been a marked improvement as we’ve emerged from systems of serfdom and slavery, but is not neccessarily needed for the benefits we get from free markets.

To be fair, our forefathers revolted against taxation WITHOUT REPRESENTATION; I’m willing to bet I care much more about making sure all people have equal representation in the government than you do (after all, you’ve specifically argued that rich people should have more control over our country, since being rich proves how smart they are).

]]> By: steve http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11130 steve Wed, 29 Aug 2007 19:18:03 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11130 Why don't you tell me the difference between Free Markets and Capitalism. Over time words have shifted in meaning. Our forefathers, considered liberals at the time, revolted over TAXATION. Liberals today seem to have a slightly different view on taxation. Why don’t you tell me the difference between Free Markets and Capitalism.

Over time words have shifted in meaning. Our forefathers, considered liberals at the time, revolted over TAXATION. Liberals today seem to have a slightly different view on taxation.

]]> By: darwin http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11129 darwin Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:48:29 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2007/752#comment-11129 One of these days you're going to have to decide whether Capitalism is good, or whether Free Markets are good. And when you do, half of your arguments are going to collapse on themselves. BTW, our fouding fathers were conservatives? Going heavy on the crackpipe eh? One of these days you’re going to have to decide whether Capitalism is good, or whether Free Markets are good. And when you do, half of your arguments are going to collapse on themselves.

BTW, our fouding fathers were conservatives? Going heavy on the crackpipe eh?

]]>