You are viewing nonliberalpagan

For Conservative and Moderate Pagans
There Are Four Types of Capitalism 
13th-Apr-2009 12:32 am

I see alot of libertarians, and people claiming to be this, that, and the other. So I’m going break it down for you. I’m going to show you the types, their strengths, their weaknesses, and my opinion. Read carefuly. As I don’t tolerate trolls who don’t read the damn thread.

MARKET LED CAPITALISM: (Wholly the united states, or atleast use to be)
Strengths:
Primarily private markets
Insistence on well defined property rights
Entrepeneurship is celebrated
Quick, radical innovation. Especially in the field of technology.
Creative destruction of old markets.
Majority of jobs are sedentary/little physical labor resulting in comfort for the masses.
Deeply adaptive financial market.
Very flexible labor markets.

Weaknesses:
Highly politicized, causing some to turn away and try more anti-market ideologies.
Highly selective nature of social benefits.
Underinvestment in public infrastructure.
Increasing social inequialities.
Poor education, healthcare, and public safety systems.


Corporate Capitalism: (China’s a great example, America may soon be this)
Strengths:
Dominate by large conglomerate firms resulting in little buisness failures.
Mobility of competent workers, managers, etc do to more incentive to work harder.
Good education, health systems, and social cohesions through job benefits.
Interdependence. Every single worker is invaluable because there’s only one or two big companies besides them who’d be glad to use them against big company A. People are more loyal to their line of work, because they feel like it’s a unit, rather then simply a paycheck.

Weaknesses:
Presence of large corporations styfels innovation and creativity. There’s no incentive to move because there’s no competititon to make them.
Though shocks are rare, does not adjust well at all when there ARE market shocks.
Rationing of jobs and services causes some to go without. More authoritarian control is eminent.
Is dependent on public spending infusions.


Social-Democratic Capitalism: (What the randroids keep talking about)
Strengths:
Negotiated compromises between all groups. Employer, worker, etc. Resulting in little to no coercion of power or service.
Export-led, quality market. Responsive to change, highly adaptable, and has many growth spurts.

Weaknesses:
Children, the elderly, the disabled, and the enviorment suffer the most.
Little to no public sector results in large class gaps that cause many people to do jobs they’d rather not do, but technicaly it’s consentual.
The "me first" attitude is so enriched that it hampers innovation in the global market with new technology. People work just hard enough for themself.



State-Led Capitalism: (What is commonly known as communism, and where America might be headed)
Strengths:
Good where private markets fail. Such as transportation, healthcare, education, basic research and development.
Highly predictable economic evolution resulting in little downturns.
No need for active bargaining among interest groups. (The state does it)

Weaknesses:
Nationalization ussualy creates inefficient products and services because they lack competitive edge. It’s not like you can take your buisness somewhere else.
Constant preassure to create demand via public spending resulting in inflation.
High degree of state institulization makes it vunerible to shocks. What if people just stop buying something?
Ultimately a system people will rebel against. Being overly controled socialy and fiscaly being told what they can and cannot buy, how they can buy it, how much they can buy, etc. The working class may distrust entrepeneurs, but they distrust beurocrats even more!



Where America is headed is either going to become a corporate or state run capitalism. We use to be a market-leg, and that’s why we were the envy of the world. Libertarians laseiz-faire shit is just completely unrealiable and impractical.. Where our future lies depends on just how much of a socialist Obama actually is. Will we ultimately be at the mercy of trans-national corporations? If so, libertarians may atleast somewhat get their wish. You best be prepared for patriotism to come in a new form. You’ve seen how people get over sports. Immagine if Pepsi owned The Red Socks or something. Now immagine entire states were basically Pepsi consumers. This is a very likely future. And if you support the wrong company. You’re liable to breakup with your spouse, get beaten to a pulp, or maybe even arrested. The confederate states will return and there will be Pepsi states, Wal-Mart states, and Microsoft states.

Then the other alternative is we actually do become communists, we just won’t use the word communist because it has such a negative condontation. We’ll use words like "state influenced capitalism", "fair markets", "free but regulated". "State run free markets". At the end of the day it’s all the same crap. One big ass monopoly. Where if you get fired, you’re pretty much fucked. Oh sure, you might still get covered as most state run capitalisms tend to have indiscriminate social programs. But if you have a family to feed they’re pretty much fucked more then you. This is why the left supports the de-centralization of religion, family values, and population control. So they can run state run capitalisms without the fear of it crashing down on their heads. That’s the only reason. Babies can’t work, babies can’t vote, babies can’t buy shit. Therefore they need to die.


Now I do hold the theory that procreating might be GOOD for the economy. That is to say in the longrun. As more kids equals more potential buyers, more potential workers, more potential creators, more potential EVERYTHING! Which is good for growth, innovation, and healthy competition. But I’m thinking like a real market-led conservative. As obviously it’s the exact opposite of how a state-led capitalist would think, a social-democratic capitalist would simply want a more quick and easy route to success and advertise abortion clinics like a used care salesman, and a corporatist would only think that way if there was some evidence that they were loyal consumers of their company’s products. Otheriwse they’d be sabatoging and compelling them to get abortions all the same. Probably even opening up their own clinics and making them really cheap as to kill off their opponent’s offspring.



I might be a single issue voter. But that doesn’t mean I don’t know how the world works... Ending abortion won’t be easy. There’s alot of greedy, stupid, and downright evil people out there. It’s going to take alot more then some good idea, loudass arguments, and religious unions to stop the flow of child genocide. There’s alot of profit to be made in it. And it doesn’t matter what system of governing you live under. They will oppress and kill those who can’t defend themselves. Always. Especially when they can make money out of it. And there is ALWAYS money to be made in ANYTHING if you look hard enough!

This is why I don’t support a totally free market. As if the market was completely free. Yeah, abortion would probably reduce because birth control would be widely avaliable. And I’m ok with birth control. But there will always be people out there who will get an abortion anyway. Because they’re supersticious, because they’re lazy and the clinic is closeby, because there was a sale, because because because! Maybe they just like the thought of killing babies. And especially is "laseiz-faire" capitalism, that would be A-OK!

Technological advancement alone cannot end abortions. Nor can simply regulating and subverting peoples lives. You need a healthy medium of innovation and regulation. I can’t say I’m a social conservative. Besides abortion I don’t really care WHAT you do.. But I see how conservatives come to their conclusions of regulating people’s personal lives and how it can actually be GOOD for the economy..

Case in point drugs. If drugs were succesfuly regulated instead of halfass with this war on drugs. People would be more competent workers. You ever seen a drug addict employee? They come to work fuckedup, and only keep their job cause the boss feels sorry for them. That can’t last forever... They are a cancerous tumor on the body of an evolving marketplace. So what? We’re going to bar all use of drugs so people can’t be bad workers? Ofcourse not. But I can see why the state would confiscate drugs, and maybe sell them for medical reasons, but keep a firm eye on the flow and level of narcotics in the country. This is ofcourse if you believe the market is a vaccuum. The lolbertarians generally believe if you fuckup, someone more willing and less fuckedup is willing to take your place and the market will recover. I’m not that optimistic.


Ironicaly, the leftists of the forum I originaly wrote this on were estatic over this. They did not think I of all people would be the one to post in detail that just because you don't support laseiz-faire, doesn't make you a communist...
Comments 
13th-Apr-2009 11:37 pm (UTC)

One thing I'd like to make note of is that I despise the notion of universal healthcare. Infact, anything that lacks discrimination is probably bad. Discrimination is good. Especialy when it involves being against people.

See, not everyone deserves healthcare. Most people, infact deserve to die on the street. Now, I obviously support a "free market" approach to selling medicines. People should be able to get what they desire to curb their illness without a Spanish Inquisition. Cheap, avaliable drugs. It leaves room for abuse. But since I'm not for universal healthcare anyway, what do I care? I'm not opposed to someone denying people entry to a hospital based on the color of their skin, creed, etc... The more radical capitalists will agree with me saying "that's the price you pay for freedom". But that's not it at all. It's the price you SHOULD HAVE TO PAY for being human. Because humans suck..

The only time I'd consider healthcare for anyone is

A: Children
B: The handicapped
And C: As part of military benefits

Other then that. I do not want to see anybody covered for any reason. And even the handicapped it should be watched carefuly not to be abused. I only give exceptions to them because I've never really met a handicap person who was all that bad.

I got alot of reading to do. I get rants from all sides. Democrat tards claim I sound like the rantings of Adolf's irl blog "Mein Kamf", lolbertarians think I'm the most authentic nihilist probably ever, Republifags think I'm taking stuff straight out of the communist manifesto, and frankly I'm intreagued by Ayn Rand's work, even though I fucking hate objectivists as a whole. Because social darwinism appeals to my misanthropy.

I have thought about writing my own fictional book. Write now I'm reading Atlas Shrugged. And it's big. I mean really fucking big! Bigger then my penis! (But only slightly.. lol!)

The irony is the main antagonist is named Jim. And he is completely at the mercy of some chick. If Julz was my sister, and I owned a railroad monopoly, I'd totally be this guy. So it'd be funny if I wrote a sequal to Atlas Shrugged, trolling the Ayn Rand institute, (not that that's very hard. They got a speaker who has a lisps for crying outloud!) and do to objectivism what JarJar Binks, Ewoks, and The Christmas Special did to Star Wars. HAHAHA!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJIgEA-gAJA

This is actually fitting because as much as I rave about corporatism, my biggest allies are Christian evangelycals and other radical religious people from all sects of spirituality. I got a Satanist bitch who totally wants my penis. I'd let her have it too if I wasn't a taken man LOL! I would give government checks to churches, as they seem to do alot of good for the community. Both in their charities, organizing the masses, and assilimating other countries to America's ideals through their missionary bullcrap. I don't agree with them on alot of things, but they're a firm ally. Hense the corporate ministry.
This page was loaded Dec 27th 2014, 10:52 am GMT.