Final scene in S1: Axe defends values America are built upon, Capitalism and competition, while Chuck supports Socialism for the working man. Axe goes all Ayn Rand as Chuck espouses Marxist socialist virtues that protects working class against dominating corporations of the upper class. Discuss:
Each economic system has its limitations if gone unchecked to extreme; human nature manifests greed and power, e.g. Wall St. and USSR)
katie keene
I'm swedish and looking at american news apparently we're communists. (Communism and socialism is NOT the same, lol)
Joking aside we're a so called mixed economy, both capitalistic and socialistic. Both systems are fine ideas and work, the devil is corruption. Who's to say which breeds more corruption? I believe the key to a corrupt-free country is to have as low gap between rich and poor as possible.
And fellas, bernie sanders is honestly quite mild. In our country he'd be right of center. I would vote for him not because his politics (even if i do tend to agree) but because he isn't corrupt.
Having a strong safety net and regulation isn't socialism. It's a more egalitarian form of capitalism. Most of the things that form as a solid base for society help capitalism as well, happy healthy educated workers and citizens help any economic system.
In their argument Chuck was more right than Axe.
Axe had a point when he said Chuck picks and chooses who he goes after and him going after Axe as aggressively as he did was about far more than Axe simply breaking the law.
But bottom line is Axe does break the law. He might extoll the virtues of capitalism and competition but those things are based on the premise of fair competition where everyone is on a level playing field. Axe wants to play a rigged game where he has all the advantages and when he breaks the rules he complains they are only going after him because he is successfully completely ignoring why he is successful.
Competition is fine but government does a have a roll to play to set the rules to ensure the game is fair and that all citizens have as much of a fair shot as possible.
From Axe's perspective no doubt, "rules and regulations" are things created by those that failed, or feared to try.
The thing is, you can only pervert a system for so long before it breaks down. Any system which is built upon lies is one that is going to eventually fail because there is no solid base to support it, and the best sign of a failing system is the degree to which the truth is suppressed. Our first amendment annoys many, but it is what has kept America mostly honest for 240 years, way longer than 95% of the other countries on the planet. And our second amendment ensures that the first exists. Those who attack the second also have the first in their sights, and thanks to old Billy Klinton, we now have another 10M AR-15's in between the socialists and the constitution. Trust me, in the distant future, Waco will be looked upon like Lexington and Concord. The black boots are coming! Of course, Europeans, who have never evolved above the peasant mentality see this as crazy, but in the long run it is better to lose 20K a year (of which 90% needed killing anyway) than to have the periodic slaughter of 10's of millions.
I would argue that most of our financial crises in the last few decades have been brought about more by regulation. From what I've seen the sole purpose of the EPA is to move jobs overseas. The entire housing crisis was due to legislation that mandated banks loan money to people for houses who had no business buying a house. The increased demand inflated housing prices, 0% down loans and sub-prime variable rate mortgages, and people using second mortgages as 5% interest credit cards as the paper value of their house rose was a top heavy system that couldn't last. Everyone tries to fault the investors who scored big in The Big Short, but it was regulations which created the problem in the beginning.
There is no pure capitalism in America anymore, The second someone creates a system which brings in returns above 10%, .gov is there with regulations to start skimming their share off the top (beginning with the EPA). Everything I need to know about Portland, OR government I learned from watching The Sopranos. I think our local gov is in charge of more vice operations these days than the gangsters that they eliminated. The big issue now is land value, because .gov has restricted the growth boundary, which means demand exceeds supply, and they are SHOCKED, I say SHOCKED that property values are rising. I think I know who was below the curve in econ classes. So now they are knocking down every 2 BR house close in to town to build a couple of tall 4 BR houses on the now split lot, which means anything affordable is now way on the outskirts. The city has come back with a $25K fee to demolish a house as a solution, that will kick in next year, and of course they will benefit from the $$. Just as many houses will be knocked down, but now .gov will get their taste of the developers action. As long as they preface every statement with "affordable housing," the sheep buy it.
Tomorrow we'll discuss how .gov has made health care more affordable, NOT! ;-)
I think my percentage of Chimp DNA is higher than others. Cleaver Greene
sluggr-2 says
There is no pure capitalism in America anymore, The second someone creates a system which brings in returns above 10%, .gov is there with regulations to start skimming their share off the top (beginning with the EPA). Everything I need to know about Portland, OR government I learned from watching The Sopranos. I think our local gov is in charge of more vice operations these days than the gangsters that they eliminated. The big issue now is land value, because .gov has restricted the growth boundary, which means demand exceeds supply, and they are SHOCKED, I say SHOCKED that property values are rising. I think I know who was below the curve in econ classes. So now they are knocking down every 2 BR house close in to town to build a couple of tall 4 BR houses on the now split lot, which means anything affordable is now way on the outskirts. The city has come back with a $25K fee to demolish a house as a solution, that will kick in next year, and of course they will benefit from the $$. Just as many houses will be knocked down, but now .gov will get their taste of the developers action. As long as they preface every statement with "affordable housing," the sheep buy it.
One more thing, Sluggr-2 said that Dems don't get (or want to):
"I would argue that most of our financial crises in the last few decades have been brought about more by regulation. From what I've seen the sole purpose of the EPA is to move jobs overseas. The entire housing crisis was due to legislation that mandated banks loan money to people for houses who had no business buying a house. The increased demand inflated housing prices, 0% down loans and sub-prime variable rate mortgages, and people using second mortgages as 5% interest credit cards as the paper value of their house rose was a top heavy system that couldn't last. Everyone tries to fault the investors who scored big in The Big Short, but it was regulations which created the problem in the beginning. "
While it is clear to me that both you and ”sluggr” have a right-wing mindset, I feel compelled to shed a little light on this matter.
Rules and regulations that governed all US financial institutions were conceived and imposed after The Great Depression of the 1930s. They were crafted with the specific purpose of preventing said financial institutions from going out of control - with potentially disastrous effects for a vast number of people.
As all went well for quite a while, US administrations (both Democratic and Republican), starting with Reagan's, began to deregulate the ”industry” (not a real industry btw.). And thus they've restarted the bubbles and bursts cycles. Unknown to many is that these cycles that unavoidably end in some sort of a crisis are actually catered by the banks themselves. The rules that prevented them to do exactly that were shot down one by one. Their lobbyists say those rules were ”obsolete,” ”obstructive” or whatever, but am I stupid enough to believe them? Nope. They simply want to ”make” more money, to speculate more.
”Speculation” is an interesting word. In basically the entire rest of the world - bar the US - it means taking advantage of someone or something, usually by dishonest means. Pretty close to profiteering. But speculators and profiteers are heroes on Wall Street. And they are the ones who want more profit and less regulations. Regulations exist in order to level the field and taking them down can only allow for the game to be rigged. So no, it isn't the regulations that are causing financial crises, it's the lack thereof (or regulations that are too lax and permissive; therefore ”regulations” only in name).
In order to be fair, any game has to have strict rules, mandatory for all players. How can anyone think that the banking game is any different is beyond me...
The reason for the housing crisis was not the loans per se, it was the legislation from the clinton administration (and neoliberals in general) that took billions from the economy via welfare reform and sent jobs to other countries via free trade agreements. Most people cry about free money for the poors, but what that was was free money for middle class businesses and necessary resources for the poors. Since reform the cash assistance has dropped by more than 2/3. Guess where that money is now? Sitting in some rich dickholes bank account doing nothing for the economy. They purposely screwed the country by pulling the rug out from under hard working people just trying to make a life.
In their argument Chuck was more right than Axe.
Axe had a point when he said Chuck picks and chooses who he goes after and him going after Axe as aggressively as he did was about far more than Axe simply breaking the law.
But bottom line is Axe does break the law. He might extoll the virtues of capitalism and competition but those things are based on the premise of fair competition where everyone is on a level playing field. Axe wants to play a rigged game where he has all the advantages and when he breaks the rules he complains they are only going after him because he is successfully completely ignoring why he is successful.
Competition is fine but government does a have a roll to play to set the rules to ensure the game is fair and that all citizens have as much of a fair shot as possible.
apophianstudios
I agreed with Axe. The government is just a extortion and racketeering syndicate. And like all things it strives to get bigger and more powerful, and with the power of law that is very potent. Corporatism is very much related. We haven't see true free market capitalism in the US. What people bitch about mistakenly is not capitalism but Corporatism,or crony capitalism.
There is no such thing as 'socialism for the working man', socialism is socialism for everyone. Redistribution is not socialism you crazy person. The corporatism you seem to think is capitalistic is 100% socialism. Unless suddenly owning the means of production and controlling the economy via the labor market and keeping people from money isn't socialism.
MythicCDXX asserts :
There is no such thing as 'socialism for the working man', socialism is socialism for everyone. Redistribution is not socialism you crazy person.
MythicCDXX:
"Unless suddenly owning the means of production and controlling the economy via the labor market and keeping people from money isn't socialism."
I'm replying to the op. I don't even see you in this thread other than this reply to me?
MythicCDXX
I'm replying to the op. I don't even see you in this thread other than this reply to me?.
Ok, thanks for nothing. I listed reality's terms. The op author stated that each has its limitations, but what the op is talking about is two socialistic systems. I don't think some of you know what proper capitalism is, guess what, the state, regulation and redistribution are a part of it, and the only limitations it has is whiny right wingers looking to rig the system every chance they get so they don't get put out of business.
IV.8.49share
Consumption is the sole end and purpose of all production; and the interest of the producer ought to be attended to only so far as it may be necessary for promoting that of the consumer. The maxim is so perfectly self-evident that it would be absurd to attempt to prove it. But in the mercantile system the interest of the consumer is almost constantly sacrificed to that of the producer; and it seems to consider production, and not consumption, as the ultimate end and object of all industry and commerce.
http://www.econlib.org/library/Smith/smWN18.html
Leave poor old Marx out of this .
He was a philosopher and economist , and his ideas and those of his fellow thinkers were used to shape modern western societies .
All of which are socialist, including the USA , yet economically based on a regulated capitalist market system .