Capitalism

[hhiusa]

Are you accident prone or just a clumsy oaf ? Apple by your standards should have told you to bog off and stop pestering them. It was your fault believe it or not ! OR did you sell them on for a profit ? I mean that's capitalism, isn't it ?

Don't bother to thank me for correcting your English ( American ) BTW

You, who said I correct people's grammar instead of making points. You just did the same thing. If you want to play that game, you will lose. I will find far more grammar mistakes in your posts than you will in mine. You make so many errors that I just don't have the time to correct them all. By all means let's start pointing out grammar errors with the moderators' consent. They got mad at me because I was correcting Forexmospherian's grammar in every post.

I guess Apple just decides to treat people in Newport Beach better. It is likely; however, I think it is more likely that you just like to complain about how expensive it is. I doubt you have ever purchased any of their products.

 

[Forexmospherian]

So, all this time you've been calling yourself a Capitalist and you don't even know what that is, right?

I am not taking about the tenth amendment to the US constitution - you say your are not American - maybe your Canadian then ??

If you are English then you know what i mean

I need to know your understanding of whether you want Capitalism with no intervention by any government please ?

 

[Pat494]

You, who said I correct people's grammar instead of making points.
I guess Apple just decides to treat people in Newport Beach better. It is likely; however, I think it is more likely that you just like to complain about how expensive it is. I doubt you have ever purchased any of their products.

You seem to be confusing me with someone else. I said don't bother to thank me for help with your spelling. Which you haven't.
It doesn't bother me too much if you mangle the English language a bit. English may not be your mother tongue.

 

[postman]

I am not taking about the tenth amendment to the US constitution - you say your are not American - maybe your Canadian then ??

If you are English then you know what i mean

I need to know your understanding of whether you want Capitalism with no intervention by any government please ?

Hang on he's just reading the book again, he will reply when he's found the relevant text to copy.

All of his arguments come from this text.
https://mises.org/library/economic-policy-thoughts-today-and-tomorrow


References to railroads, downfall of the USSR, England without forrests ... I'm sure the answer will involve a reference to Gasoline.

"People who do not agree with this definition of the
functions of government may say: "This man hates the
government." Nothing could be farther from the truth.
If I should say that gasoline is a very useful liquid, useful
for many purposes, but that I would nevertheless not
drink gasoline because I think that would not be the
right use for it, I am not an enemy of gasoline, and I do
not hate gasoline. I only say that gasoline is very useful
for certain purposes, but not fit for other purposes. If I
say it is the government's duty to arrest murderers and
other criminals, but not its duty to run the railroads or
to spend money for useless things, then I do not hate the
government by declaring that it is fit to do certain things
but not fit to do other things...."

 

[hhiusa]

I am not taking about the tenth amendment to the US constitution - you say your are not American - maybe your Canadian then ??

If you are English then you know what i mean

I need to know your understanding of whether you want Capitalism with no intervention by any government please ?

How can you be so thick? Capitalism without intervention from the government does not mean capitalism without a government. Capitalism has nothing to do with the legality of murder or speed limits. The kumbaya group hug club keeps posting the same anarchy article from Wikipedia. Did you bother to read it? Anarchy means no government, which means that nothing would be regulated or policed. Capitalism just says that the economic policy should be laissez-faire and not applied to the entire government.

How did you make such a faulty inductive leap from economic policy to the entire government?

I remind you to look up the fallacies of composition and division.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fallacies/

Should I bring out the red sharpie for all these posts? :smart:

 

[postman]

Hang on he's just reading the book again, he will reply when he's found the relevant text to copy.

All of his arguments come from this text.
https://mises.org/library/economic-policy-thoughts-today-and-tomorrow


References to railroads, downfall of the USSR, England without forrests ... I'm sure the answer will involve a reference to Gasoline.

"People who do not agree with this definition of the
functions of government may say: "This man hates the
government." Nothing could be farther from the truth.
If I should say that gasoline is a very useful liquid, useful
for many purposes, but that I would nevertheless not
drink gasoline because I think that would not be the
right use for it, I am not an enemy of gasoline, and I do
not hate gasoline. I only say that gasoline is very useful
for certain purposes, but not fit for other purposes. If I
say it is the government's duty to arrest murderers and
other criminals, but not its duty to run the railroads or
to spend money for useless things, then I do not hate the
government by declaring that it is fit to do certain things
but not fit to do other things...."

How can you be so thick? Capitalism without intervention from the government does not mean capitalism without a government. Capitalism has nothing to do with the legality of murder or speed limits. The kumbaya group hug club keeps posting the same anarchy article from Wikipedia. Did you bother to read it? Anarchy means no government, which means that nothing would be regulated or policed. Capitalism just says that the economic policy should be laissez-faire and not applied to the entire government.

How did you make such a faulty inductive leap from economic policy to the entire government?

I remind you to look up the fallacies of composition and division.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fallacies/

Should I bring out the red sharpie for all these posts? :smart:

Loooooool.

New traders quotes come from that book too. :whistling

 

[hhiusa]

Loooooool.

Looooooool is not an intelligent argument. Keep those ad hominem argument coming.

 

[Pat494]

There was a fierce debate between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson as to what path should the fledgeling USA choose in the 18th century. The Congress sided with Jefferson mainly because he was a more flamboyant character. But his ideas led even to his own bankruptcy.
I will have a closer look sometime.

 

[Forexmospherian]

How can you be so thick? Capitalism without intervention from the government does not mean capitalism without a government. Capitalism has nothing to do with the legality of murder or speed limits. The kumbaya group hug club keeps posting the same anarchy article from Wikipedia. Did you bother to read it? Anarchy means no government, which means that nothing would be regulated or policed. Capitalism just says that the economic policy should be laissez-faire and not applied to the entire government.

How did you make such a faulty inductive leap from economic policy to the entire government?

I remind you to look up the fallacies of composition and division.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fallacies/

Should I bring out the red sharpie for all these posts? :smart:

We may as well be living on different planets lol

We really are coming from different angles

I look upon a Government as more than just an office function

Its duties should include covering laws and regulations - and it also should act as a " referee" - ie makes decisions in the interest of the common good

I am just not interested in the American government - that's a different ballgame


Please just tell me - who is going to referee your free Capitalism ??

That's all I need to know

Thank you


Regards


F

 

[hhiusa]

We may as well be living on different planets lol

We really are coming from different angles

I look upon a Government as more than just an office function

Its duties should include covering laws and regulations - and it also should act as a " referee" - ie makes decisions in the interest of the common good

I am just not interested in the American government - that's a different ballgame


Please just tell me - who is going to referee your free Capitalism ??

That's all I need to know

Thank you


Regards


F

The government should not act as a referee. A symbiosis between customer and producer exists. It will self-regulate.

 

[hhiusa]

The government should create laws around the economic policy.

 

[new_trader]

Your 'arguments' against capitalism are unoriginal and as old as the hills. They have all been refuted by Scholars and Nobel prize winning economists. I have quoted some of their work in reply to your incorrect assumptions. I too could go on and on about how wrong you are.

Some people just don't read do they? Maybe some of the foam spewing from their mouths got blown into their eyes and obscured their vision!

 

[barjon]

................. A symbiosis between customer and producer exists. It will self-regulate................

And that's your experience of life so far is it? Bit like trading without stops you've got a nasty shock coming.

 

[hhiusa]

And that's your experience of life so far is it? Bit like trading without stops you've got a nasty shock coming.

I don't need stop loss measures. I don't trade with money I cannot afford to lose and I don't trade instruments that can create a negative balance. It sounds to me as though you are the one who will have a nasty shock.

I am reminded by a moderator about this "criticising peoples grammar and spelling will not be tolerated. Some people suffer from learning disabilities. Please do not insult them."

 

[tar]

I don't need stop loss measures. I don't trade with money I cannot afford to lose and I don't trade instruments that can create a negative balance. It sounds to me as though you are the one who will have a nasty shock.

Your whole account is your stop .

 

[barjon]

I don't need stop loss measures. I don't trade with money I cannot afford to lose and I don't trade instruments that can create a negative balance. It sounds to me as though you are the one who will have a nasty shock.

I am remind by a moderator about this "criticising peoples grammar and spelling will not be tolerated. Some people suffer from learning disabilities. Please do not insult them."

No, I thought you didn't - just tickled by the analogy, that's all. Correct my grammar 'til the cows come home if you like - no problem.

 

[hhiusa]

No, I thought you didn't - just tickled by the analogy, that's all. Correct my grammar 'til the cows come home if you like - no problem.

It is not just you. I too am tickled by the fact that they said "some people suffer from learning disabilities". I did not want to say anything about it but they seem to have addressed the elephant in the room.

 

[barjon]

It is not just you. I too am tickled by the fact that they said "some people suffer from learning disabilities". I did not want to say anything about it but they seem to have addressed the elephant in the room.

Aye, try as you might, we will keep arguing the toss. Must be because we are just too thick to understand you I guess.

 

[Forexmospherian]

The government should not act as a referee. A symbiosis between customer and producer exists. It will self-regulate.

There's your massive Flaw

Self regulation - You are going back to the jungle again

Dominate Producer/ market leader - the Lion - unintelligent / weak consumer- the Deer - - yes - who's going to get eaten alive lol

You have to add a third party to the equation

For me the third party as to be an elected government - ideally with a mixture of cross parties - open book policy - no corruption etc

18 th / 19th century and 20th century theory and ideas are about as relevant as me thinking crossing the Atlantic by the Titanic was ground breaking . Maybe it was before Concorde. Shame thats now old hat.

Come on start living in the 21st century - we now need change

 

[new_trader]

Capitalism ruins good products in the name of profit, and kills off competition.

I suppose if this is the premise I can infer that the conclusion is; Therefore "we" need Government to prevent that from happening, right?

Now, I am taking a chance with the following, however I heard it from a highly reliable American source, and hopefully hhiusa can confirm it.

The US GOVERNMENT forbids international airlines from selling empty seats as domestic flights in the USA in order to protect local airlines FROM competition.

Discuss!