0.1% guys hold 50% Bitcoins, that's too CENTRALIZED!

[Anonymous]

The only raise you wouldn't be able to sustain yourself on a low wage is inflated costs on housing, food and other essentials due to regulation. That's what we are experiencing today: costs that are too high caused by government. Your dilemma is a liberal pipe dream.

Housing, debatable. Food and other essentials? Not a chance. Food and water is heavily subsidized by the government.

The building codes are very discriminatory against the underclasses. Houses are forced to be built extremely oversized.

In addition, it's the subsidies that raise the price. It only gives the corporations incentive to be less efficient since they get paid anyways.

[ParrotyBit]

The building codes are very discriminatory against the underclasses. Houses are forced to be built extremely oversized.
In addition, it's the subsidies that raise the price. It only gives the corporations incentive to be less efficient since they get paid anyways.

Do you drink, cook, and bathe exclusively with bottled water? Because that's what the free market will charge you for it.

[Anonymous]

The building codes are very discriminatory against the underclasses. Houses are forced to be built extremely oversized.
In addition, it's the subsidies that raise the price. It only gives the corporations incentive to be less efficient since they get paid anyways.

Do you drink, cook, and bathe exclusively with bottled water? Because that's what the free market will charge you for it.

I rather drink, cook and bathe exclusively with purified bottled water because it won't be lovingly pumped full of sodium fluoride and heavy metals. However, I doubt people exclusively want bottled water. Companies don't make money on products people don't want. I do know that people do not want water full of chemicals none of us asked for nor had any scientific-backing in the first place.

Anyways, the free market will charge the price people are willing to pay. If a company's product is too high in price, it will fail or have to compete to one who charges a lower price. There are no monopolies in a free market except natural ones that are only sustaining because consumers continue to like it. It will soon collapse if its not meeting people's desires.

You only get monopolies when a monopoly on force called a government enables them.

[ParrotyBit]

You only get monopolies when a monopoly on force called a government enables them.

Or when there's a limited resource where people can't join the production club without significant capital investment. You can't exactly start pulling oil out of the ground nowadays with just a shovel, bucket, and can-do attitude. There's some waiting for you deep beneath the ocean floor, and no government will stop you! Come and get it!

[rainingbitcoins]

I never raised such a point. Wal-mart is actually a pretty moral company. They receive little government-welfare and turn most markets they enter into efficient and productive ones.

It's telling that your test for morality is based completely on money with zero regard for the real world effects of those profits.

Also, the notion that if you don't take too many subsidies, but you pay so little that your workers need government assistance to survive, that's the workers' fault, not their employer. Lazy moochers.

The building codes are very discriminatory against the underclasses. Houses are forced to be built extremely oversized.

Yes, I already know you think it's perfectly acceptable to house people in tin-roofed shacks built by untrained drunk people with no safety standards. This is part of why I call libertarian ideology sociopathic.

[Anonymous]

You only get monopolies when a monopoly on force called a government enables them.

Or when there's a limited resource where people can't join the production club without significant capital investment. You can't exactly start pulling oil out of the ground nowadays with just a shovel, bucket, and can-do attitude. There's some waiting for you deep beneath the ocean floor, and no government will stop you! Come and get it!

Actually, you can. You prove your experience and skills, solicit investors and in a free-market you can facilitate the construction of a oil company; anybody can if they have the desire for the required knowledge.

[Anonymous]

I never raised such a point. Wal-mart is actually a pretty moral company. They receive little government-welfare and turn most markets they enter into efficient and productive ones.

It's telling that your test for morality is based completely on money with zero regard for the real world effects of those profits.

Also, the notion that if you don't take too many subsidies, but you pay so little that your workers need government assistance to survive, that's the workers' fault, not their employer. Lazy moochers.

The building codes are very discriminatory against the underclasses. Houses are forced to be built extremely oversized.

Yes, I already know you think it's perfectly acceptable to house people in tin-roofed shacks built by untrained drunk people with no safety standards. This is part of why I call libertarian ideology sociopathic.

My morality is irrelevant. The argument here is over results and the creation of wealth for everybody.

I would prefer no subsidies at all. They only exist to enable certain corporations over others through political power. I never blamed the worker. I don't blame the employer either. I blame the corrupt system of power that fucked over the small companies that can't compete with highly-subsidized companies and that ruined a competitive and fair wage system for employees through said subsidies.

My great-grandmother lived in a very small self-made home with no government intervention. They were quite happy. I don't think anybody wants to pay for nor live in a poorly-made house. It's in nobody's best-interest to create nor purchase bad housing. Affordable and equitable housing is another story.

[rainingbitcoins]

Actually, you can. You prove your experience and skills, solicit investors and in a free-market you can facilitate the construction of a oil company; anybody can if they have the desire for the required knowledge.

And when the private army of Monopoly Inc. murders you for trying to horn in on their profits, there's nobody to punish them for it. Presumably the people will get very angry and boycott Monopoly Inc. just as soon as they read about the murder in the newspaper, which is also published by Monopoly Inc.

[ParrotyBit]

Actually, you can. You prove your experience and skills, solicit investors and in a free-market you can facilitate the construction of a oil company; anybody can if they have the desire for the required knowledge.

And the investors will go with you (no oil tankers, rigs, submarines, laborers) rather than CompanyX (has oil tankers, rigs, submarines, pays their workers the smallest amount they can survive on) because you have experience and skills in

[Anonymous]

Actually, you can. You prove your experience and skills, solicit investors and in a free-market you can facilitate the construction of a oil company; anybody can if they have the desire for the required knowledge.

And when the private army of Monopoly Inc. murders you for trying to horn in on their profits, there's nobody to punish them for it. Presumably the people will get very angry and boycott Monopoly Inc. just as soon as they read about the murder in the newspaper, which is also published by Monopoly Inc.

A private army that has a monopoly? Sounds like a government.

[Anonymous]

Actually, you can. You prove your experience and skills, solicit investors and in a free-market you can facilitate the construction of a oil company; anybody can if they have the desire for the required knowledge.

And the investors will go with you (no oil tankers, rigs, submarines, laborers) rather than CompanyX (has oil tankers, rigs, submarines, pays their workers the smallest amount they can survive on) because you have experience and skills in

You have to have an eye for new innovations and strategies that will enable a greater profit margin than Company X which is not unfeasible. There's room for more efficiency everyday and a free-market system only encourages more efficiency.

More efficiency equals greater profits, greater profits equals more wealth to be invested into society, more investment creates more innovation, more innovation is more consumer desires met and more desires met means greater happiness for all.

See how capitalism works now?

[rainingbitcoins]

See how capitalism works now?

I see how it works in a vacuum. Now let's check out the real wor-OH SHIT!!!! Damn. Better blame the government.

[Gabi]

Capitalism= the investor want as more profit as possible.

[Anonymous]

Capitalism= the investor want as more profit as possible.

Yep and having a profitable service is the most charitable thing you can for society. If you're making massive legitimate profit, you have to be bringing an equivalent value to society. It's a beautiful thing.

[ParrotyBit]

You have to have an eye for new innovations and strategies that will enable a greater profit margin than Company X which is not unfeasible. There's room for more efficiency everyday and a free-market system only encourages more efficiency.

More efficiency equals greater profits, greater profits equals more wealth to be invested into society, more investment creates more innovation, more innovation is more consumer desires met and more desires met means greater happiness for all.

See how capitalism works now?

No, it's completely unfeasible. Innovations in fields like this are essentially a blackbox to anyone not in the industry already.

You never got a chance to figure out these new innovations and strategies. The leaders of CompanyX figured them out long before you did, and you have no way of knowing about them, as they keep their process secret. Why? Logically, they wanted more profit. Their direct experience in overseeing the entire oil extraction process is far more insightful than a future armchair CEO who doesn't even own a rig.

Maybe you're wondering why couldn't you learn all about the whole process in your spare time while if you were working at CompanyX? You had no spare time. CompanyX paid you exactly how much you could survive on. They're that efficient (gotta maximize that profit).

See how capitalism really works when there are no rules?

[Anonymous]

You have to have an eye for new innovations and strategies that will enable a greater profit margin than Company X which is not unfeasible. There's room for more efficiency everyday and a free-market system only encourages more efficiency.

More efficiency equals greater profits, greater profits equals more wealth to be invested into society, more investment creates more innovation, more innovation is more consumer desires met and more desires met means greater happiness for all.

See how capitalism works now?

No, it's completely unfeasible. Innovations in fields like this are essentially a blackbox to anyone not in the industry already.

You never got a chance to figure out these new innovations and strategies. The leaders of CompanyX figured them out long before you did, and you have no way of knowing about them, as they keep their process secret. Why? Logically, they wanted more profit. Their direct experience in overseeing the entire oil extraction process is far more insightful than a future armchair CEO who doesn't even own a rig.

Maybe you're wondering why couldn't you learn all about the whole process in your spare time while if you were working at CompanyX? You had no spare time. CompanyX paid you exactly how much you could survive on. They're that efficient (gotta maximize that profit).

See how capitalism really works when there are no rules?

Hah, your whole theory is unrealistic. Trade secrets don't mean that nobody else can study in the field and discover new things. If they have reached 100% efficiency in their company, well, they must have a way of creating endless oil. It sounds like society is a lot better off with this company having a monopoly. No problem in your scenario. Otherwise, there is always a way to improve something. If there is a desire, it will be solved.

Anyways, all I have to do is open up a company that respects its workers and gives them better pay and I'll have all their employees coming to me. CompanyX destroyed. It's really simple. You're forgetting the workers have choices and needs.

[ParrotyBit]

Hah, your whole theory is unrealistic. Trade secrets don't mean that nobody else can study in the field and discover new things. If they have reached 100% efficiency in their company, well, they must have a way of creating endless oil. It sounds like society is a lot better off with this company having a monopoly. No problem in your scenario. Otherwise, there is always a way to improve something. If there is a desire, it will be solved.

Anyways, all I have to do is open up a company that respects its workers and gives them better pay and I'll have all their employees coming to me. CompanyX destroyed. It's really simple. You're forgetting the workers have choices and needs.

Good luck getting those workers off CompanyX's rig. They haven't paid their rent to CompanyX off yet.

[Anonymous]

Hah, your whole theory is unrealistic. Trade secrets don't mean that nobody else can study in the field and discover new things. If they have reached 100% efficiency in their company, well, they must have a way of creating endless oil. It sounds like society is a lot better off with this company having a monopoly. No problem in your scenario. Otherwise, there is always a way to improve something. If there is a desire, it will be solved.

Anyways, all I have to do is open up a company that respects its workers and gives them better pay and I'll have all their employees coming to me. CompanyX destroyed. It's really simple. You're forgetting the workers have choices and needs.

Good luck getting those workers off CompanyX's rig. They haven't paid their rent to CompanyX off yet.

There is no reason why your idiotic, non-existent company would exist in the first place. Nobody would work for it nor sign their lives away in the first place. Reasonable companies would have taken its place from the start. This argument is completely asinine and topped off with a pair of liberal rose-tinted glasses.

I'm sorry a market built on actual desires doesn't fit your perception of the corporatist state we live in today which ISN'T A FREE MARKET.

[Gabi]

Capitalism= the investor want as more profit as possible.

Yep and having a profitable service is the most charitable thing you can for society. If you're making massive legitimate profit, you have to be bringing an equivalent value to society. It's a beautiful thing.

Or maybe not. How are the two things related?

[rainingbitcoins]

There is no reason why your idiotic, non-existent company would exist in the first place. Nobody would work for it nor sign their lives away in the first place.

And yet... they have. His scenario is remarkably similar to what happened in a number of industries in turn-of-the-20th century America. The stuff he's saying actually happened right here in the real world, while all of your ideas are utopian fantasies based on the inherent goodness of capitalism, a goodness that's so strong you can apparently corrupt it completely with a single regulation.