now you're being ludicrous. you obviously have no idea of where the
rich people get their money from. The overwhelming majority of wealth in
this country is in real estate. Something which EVERYONE needs. If
someone makes an ugly house, on a toxic waste dump, its not gonna sell,
and if it does, they won't be in business too long after.
> >
> > I vote for those who most effectively service my needs. A cruel
> > task master am I. My ballots are limited only by the degree to
> > which I do or do not service the needs of others. Democracy
> > cannot possibly give all candidates an equal share of the
> > votes, such would be the logical abolition of the demo-
> > cratic process, and yet that's exactly what the soc-
> > ialist yearns for.
>
> You have more ballots than most people. If you become rich enough, it
> doesn't matter what other people think, you can impose your will on them.
> That's what I think will happen with unrestrained capitalism. You will
> either get an dictatorial oligarchy with more money than everybody else,
if someone has more bucks, they are obviously doing something right, and
would be more likely to know how to properly manage things than some
bum.
> or you willget a traditional Marxist revolution type thing. I don't like
> either ofthose things.
>
If you stop listening to your customers, they will stop listening to
you. YOU have never been in business successfully have you?
>
> Why is an utopia illogical?
>
> I'm advocating voluntary socialism, pretty much. No I can't
> impose this by force, because that's just not right.
no one will voluntarily become a slave. Socialism enslaves people to the
will of the majority in power.
Free market does not care what you look like, what you beleive, etc..
What it cares about is 1)what can I do for you today? (when was the last
time you saw a gov't bureaucrat say that with a smile?) 2) When do you
need it? and 3) How much do you want to pay for it? If an equitable
voluntary agreement is reached on those terms, then a sale is made, and
a consumer is happy. Free market breeds hapiness. Ask any salesman,
who is not just out to make a buck, but a real salesman, what they like
the most about their jobs, and 9 times out of 10 they'll say they like
making people happy. Bet you can't get the same response from 10
bureacrats.
>
> I like democracy, but only when there's options for the minority as well
> as the majority.
Freemarket capitalism means there is a nich for everyone and the
cumulative demands of individuals motivate producers to produce as much
as is neccessary, unlike in an oligopoly or socialist state, where one
size fits all, and if there isn't enough, too bad.
>
> Okay, thought experiment:
>
> We get rid of all coercive institutions, both government and corporations.
> Then we see what social structures turn up. You say the natural
> relationship between humans is trade. I say it's cooperation. I
> think our ability to cooperate was vital to our evolutionary
> success.
Fortunately, we are working on just that. haven't you noticed that since
government has deregulated businesses that 1) prices have gone down, and
2) they've gotten a lot more sensitive to consumer pressure to do the
right thing.
>
> Only when a small minority obtain power through generally nasty means, can
> they tell everybody else that these are the rules they must follow.
>
> Why do you equate the desire for a good life for all with central
> planning. I hate and fear government just as much as you do. But I also
> hate and fear the business interests which lie to me with their
> advertising and poison my water with their pollution. Uggh, there must be
> a better way than unrestrained capitalism.
>
>
Sorry, the USSR and East Block countries made much bigger messes of
their environment than any western country ever did. You just don't hear
abou them much because of the secrecy of those governments, and a media
bias not wanting to make leftists look like bigger polluters than big
bad capitalists.
More environmental cleanups and preventions have happened in the west
because business has become more responsive to consumer disgust with
pollution. WHy? because business, more than ever, HAS to. The government
approved monopolies like AT&T, Cable, Elecrtic Utilities, etc. are no
more, and industry must compete for public approval, or risk wholesale
boycotts by consumers. This IS what a free market is about.
Naturally, unrestrained capitalism is NOT the same as free market
capitalism. Unrestrained capitalism is unresponsive to consumers (see
what happened to IBM? Evolution in action). Free Market capitalism is
totally responsive to consumers. A free market also means there is room
for private nonprofit type advocacy groups, like Greenpeace, etc. THis
has always been available in market economies, and not in socialist
ones. You can go back to the early church, which provided services to
the sick and poor when the feudal government would not.
I highly recommend that rather than being a "sometime math student" that
you make a full time study of economics before you come back here with
your drivel.
Mike