Solution to poverty - Socialism or Capitalism?

[gts476]

Would I prefer a bullet from an unemployed crowd instead of changing my views? I don't understand what you mean. Do you mean would I rather conform to the ideological irrational belief system of the socialist state indoctrinated masses and abandon truth, Socratic reasoning and the scientific method?

I think you clearly understand what I have meant!
BTW, economics laws are not "law of physics" and depend from human behavior (which is not unchangeable).

Of course economics laws are the laws of physics.

1. Money is a store of economic energy.
2. The behaviour of energy is described in the laws of physics.
3. Thus 'economic laws' are an abstraction of physical laws.

[Rayban34]

Is it me or do our governments need to get back to the ol' drawing board? It seems we're all getting hyped up on tried and tested means of failure here. Socialism, Fascism, Conservatism and a whole lot of other "isms" - fact is, there's still a shit load of poor people out there and rising by the day.

Can't we break free of the prophecy that we're all doomed to make the same mistakes over and over? I mean lets get real. Until this very moment and beyond, every Economic theory that's ever existed has doomed a whole lot of people to desperate poverty, be that a few or many.

So the question should really be:

"Does anyone have a forward thinking solution to poverty?"

Rather than a question related to what already works - we are conversing between two very narrow parameters here folks. Time to work up a new Economic theory and break away from the normal traditional bullshit that we are all force-fed and destined to regurgitate it every time the topic arises.

Not that it will make any difference - asking our Governments to do that would be like, "Hey guys, stop asserting power over us and make us all your equals" that'd make some very powerful guys with really small dicks very angry lol

[BCEmporium]

Not complicated at all. Cutting welfare is not seizing assets. It's refusing to gift fuher assets to the unemployed.

You better have money for cops and private security then...
You are misguided about money; it isn't any sort of energy at all, it's just a value to bargain with.
And that's what life is about; negociating with others, for good or for bad. Just try to place yourself in an economic cycle, ie the people needed to design and build the computer/phone/tablet you are using to read this.

[Nicolas Dorier]

I like Ron Paul definition of political division.
Instead of dividing "Socialism versus Capitalism" he divides by "Statism versus Free market".

In france for example, the left wing and the right wing are just beating each other for pushing the balance on the corporate welfare or social welfare side, with the help of more and more regulations.
But under Ron Paul definition, both wings are the same party : Statism.

The right wing will call itself Capitalist, but at the same time, they preach for state intervention to funnel funds to the private sector, which is a socialist idea (seize and redistribute).

So to prevent any amalgam, I think a better separation is "Statism versus Free Market" and not "Socialism versus Capitalism".
The meaning of Capitalism have been manipulated too much by politicians, so I fear that when two persons employ this word, they are not always speaking of the same thing.

Capitalism and socialism are not really opposed concepts, "State Capitalism" is an example.

The real debate between socialist and libertarians in this thread is more "free market vs statism" than "capitalism versus socialism".

[gts476]

I like Ron Paul definition of political division.
Instead of dividing "Socialism versus Capitalism" he divides by "Statism versus Free market".

In france for example, the left wing and the right wing are just beating each other for pushing the balance on the corporate welfare or social welfare side, with the help of more and more regulations.
But under Ron Paul definition, both wings are the same party : Statism.

The right wing will call itself Capitalist, but at the same time, they preach for state intervention to funnel funds to the private sector, which is a socialist idea (seize and redistribute).

So to prevent any amalgam, I think a better separation is "Statism versus Free Market" and not "Socialism versus Capitalism".
The meaning of Capitalism have been manipulated too much by politicians, so I fear that when two persons employ this word, they are not always speaking of the same thing.

Capitalism and socialism are not really opposed concepts, "State Capitalism" is an example.

The real debate between socialist and libertarians in this thread is more "free market vs statism" than "capitalism versus socialism".

I really like this, do you have any good ron paul videos you could recommend?

[gts476]

Not complicated at all. Cutting welfare is not seizing assets. It's refusing to gift fuher assets to the unemployed.

You better have money for cops and private security then...
You are misguided about money; it isn't any sort of energy at all, it's just a value to bargain with.
And that's what life is about; negociating with others, for good or for bad. Just try to place yourself in an economic cycle, ie the people needed to design and build the computer/phone/tablet you are using to read this.

Very astute of you bro! If a government is about to cut off free lunches to the welfare class they should have alot of money put aside for protection from the rioting masses....

http://rt.com/news/186352-spain-riot-gear-protests/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2013/03/11/1-6-billion-rounds-of-ammo-for-homeland-security-its-time-for-a-national-conversation/
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jun/10/boris-johnson-london-mayor-water-cannon-metropolitan-police

I would be very appreciative if you could explain how money is not a representation of energy, perhaps you could begin by explaining how you personally or someone you know acquires money?

I would also be interested in what properties you think is required of a good money?  

Perhaps then you could talk about the monetary price of potential energy (gas, coal, oil, food)?

[Nicolas Dorier]

I like Ron Paul definition of political division.
Instead of dividing "Socialism versus Capitalism" he divides by "Statism versus Free market".

In france for example, the left wing and the right wing are just beating each other for pushing the balance on the corporate welfare or social welfare side, with the help of more and more regulations.
But under Ron Paul definition, both wings are the same party : Statism.

The right wing will call itself Capitalist, but at the same time, they preach for state intervention to funnel funds to the private sector, which is a socialist idea (seize and redistribute).

So to prevent any amalgam, I think a better separation is "Statism versus Free Market" and not "Socialism versus Capitalism".
The meaning of Capitalism have been manipulated too much by politicians, so I fear that when two persons employ this word, they are not always speaking of the same thing.

Capitalism and socialism are not really opposed concepts, "State Capitalism" is an example.

The real debate between socialist and libertarians in this thread is more "free market vs statism" than "capitalism versus socialism".

I really like this, do you have any good ron paul videos you could recommend?

I don't have a specific video to recommend, I have seen lot of them on youtube, all are great.
But I advice you also to read the articles of Ron Paul on Mises http://mises.org/daily/author/392/Ron-Paul

Aside from his video, I advice you to see the good evidences of the statists -ie democrats and republicans alike (calling themselves capitalists) - hacking the media to protect themselves against libertarians.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keWX55SpYmU
That's why it is preferable not to speak of capitalism but of free market.

[username18333]

I would be very appreciative if you could explain how money is not a representation of energy, perhaps you could begin by explaining how you personally or someone you know acquires money?

I would also be interested in what properties you think is required of a good money?  

Perhaps then you could talk about the monetary price of potential energy (gas, coal, oil)?

Potential energy doesn't cost money, it costs acceptance of nothing for something.

[gts476]

I like Ron Paul definition of political division.
Instead of dividing "Socialism versus Capitalism" he divides by "Statism versus Free market".

In france for example, the left wing and the right wing are just beating each other for pushing the balance on the corporate welfare or social welfare side, with the help of more and more regulations.
But under Ron Paul definition, both wings are the same party : Statism.

The right wing will call itself Capitalist, but at the same time, they preach for state intervention to funnel funds to the private sector, which is a socialist idea (seize and redistribute).

So to prevent any amalgam, I think a better separation is "Statism versus Free Market" and not "Socialism versus Capitalism".
The meaning of Capitalism have been manipulated too much by politicians, so I fear that when two persons employ this word, they are not always speaking of the same thing.

Capitalism and socialism are not really opposed concepts, "State Capitalism" is an example.

The real debate between socialist and libertarians in this thread is more "free market vs statism" than "capitalism versus socialism".

I really like this, do you have any good ron paul videos you could recommend?

I don't have a specific video to recommend, I have seen lot of them on youtube, all are great.
But I advice you also to read the articles of Ron Paul on Mises http://mises.org/daily/author/392/Ron-Paul

Aside from his video, I advice you to see the good evidences of the statists -ie democrats and republicans alike (calling themselves capitalists) - hacking the media to protect themselves against libertarians.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keWX55SpYmU
That's why it is preferable not to speak of capitalism but of free market.

Thanks Nicolas, gunna check it out now!

[BCEmporium]

You're reversing the view.
If I need energy and have coal, providing I have all needed equipment, I can generate energy. If I have money, unless I have 10 usd worth in 1 zimbabwean dollars bills for the furnace, I will have to look for someone selling coal. And this is thw role of money, provide a somewhat accountable value for the exchange. But money itself powers nothing, if the coal seller just accepts bitcoin or gold or potatoes, my money will render 0 watts of energy.

About welfare, we have issues with its distribution and its value, on too many situations it's better to sit flat and wait for SS check than to work. That's subversive and dangerous! Unoccupied people is always dangerous... Reason why you now get riots of "poor" waving their pimped with bling-blings iPhones...

[giantdragon]

Not complicated at all. Cutting welfare is not seizing assets. It's refusing to gift fuher assets to the unemployed.

You better have money for cops and private security then...
You are misguided about money; it isn't any sort of energy at all, it's just a value to bargain with.
And that's what life is about; negociating with others, for good or for bad. Just try to place yourself in an economic cycle, ie the people needed to design and build the computer/phone/tablet you are using to read this.

Very astute of you bro! If a government is about to cut off free lunches to the welfare class they should have alot of money put aside for protection from the rioting masses....

http://rt.com/news/186352-spain-riot-gear-protests/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2013/03/11/1-6-billion-rounds-of-ammo-for-homeland-security-its-time-for-a-national-conversation/
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jun/10/boris-johnson-london-mayor-water-cannon-metropolitan-police

Police forces are humans the same as rioting masses. So they can change minds at any time and join rioters with all these weapons to fight again capitalists!
Remember history, e.g. Russian revolution of 1917.

[Ibian]

Cops are not humans. They are cops. They literally give up their individuality when donning the uniform. That's what that word means - uniform means "the same". As in every cop is the same as any other cop. They don't just wear it so we can easily identify them, it's also a way to control them.

[gts476]

Not complicated at all. Cutting welfare is not seizing assets. It's refusing to gift fuher assets to the unemployed.

You better have money for cops and private security then...
You are misguided about money; it isn't any sort of energy at all, it's just a value to bargain with.
And that's what life is about; negociating with others, for good or for bad. Just try to place yourself in an economic cycle, ie the people needed to design and build the computer/phone/tablet you are using to read this.

Very astute of you bro! If a government is about to cut off free lunches to the welfare class they should have alot of money put aside for protection from the rioting masses....

http://rt.com/news/186352-spain-riot-gear-protests/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2013/03/11/1-6-billion-rounds-of-ammo-for-homeland-security-its-time-for-a-national-conversation/
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jun/10/boris-johnson-london-mayor-water-cannon-metropolitan-police

Police forces are humans the same as rioting masses. So they can change minds at any time and join rioters with all these weapons to fight again capitalists!
Remember history, e.g. Russian revolution of 1917.

37 pages of information and you still can't correctly differentiate free market capitalism from fascism?

oh and the Russian revolution of 1917 was state sponsored so.........

and with Ibian on this, police are not people. police have the right to initiate force, people do not.

[gts476]

You're reversing the view.
If I need energy and have coal, providing I have all needed equipment, I can generate energy. If I have money, unless I have 10 usd worth in 1 zimbabwean dollars bills for the furnace, I will have to look for someone selling coal. And this is thw role of money, provide a somewhat accountable value for the exchange. But money itself powers nothing, if the coal seller just accepts bitcoin or gold or potatoes, my money will render 0 watts of energy.

About welfare, we have issues with its distribution and its value, on too many situations it's better to sit flat and wait for SS check than to work. That's subversive and dangerous! Unoccupied people is always dangerous... Reason why you now get riots of "poor" waving their pimped with bling-blings iPhones...

I ain't reversing nothing. You haven't answered how you or someone you know acquires money, do you perhaps have a job?

[BCEmporium]

But what IS money?
You seam to think money is more than what it actually is. Money is a mere tool to facilitate trade, absolutely nothing else. It even had many shapes along history, gold, salt, copper, silver, paper... and now is mostly a number in a database.
You shouldn't want money, you should want to trade and money is currently the best tool to it.

[gts476]

But what IS money?
You seam to think money is more than what it actually is. Money is a mere tool to facilitate trade, absolutely nothing else. It even had many shapes along history, gold, salt, copper, silver, paper... and now is mostly a number in a database.
You shouldn't want money, you should want to trade and money is currently the best tool to it.

I answered the question what is money. Money is the representation of economic energy. As a representation of energy it may then be described with natural laws and natural laws will in fact answer questions such as how to solve poverty, poverty being described as wealth (as represented by monetary value) inequality in a society (closed system).

You have not answered my questions.

1. How do you or someone you know acquire money?

2. What do you consider to be required characteristics of good money?

[Nicolas Dorier]

But what IS money?
You seam to think money is more than what it actually is. Money is a mere tool to facilitate trade, absolutely nothing else. It even had many shapes along history, gold, salt, copper, silver, paper... and now is mostly a number in a database.
You shouldn't want money, you should want to trade and money is currently the best tool to it.

The best definition ever is from Atlas Shrugged : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkivn_3zn5I

[BCEmporium]

1. You get money by goods and services. But this has a very wide definition. Ie services can be provided by both, acting or restrain to act. Security forces are mainly paid to not act.

2. There's no good money, it depends on what you want not on money itself. Being a tool, money is like a hammer, it depends on the nail and material you want to nail it to.
For a regular employee it may be good for it to hold value and be stable, for the economic cycle to work it better don't or hoarders will become a problem, for speculators better being volatile, and so on and so on.

[gts476]

But what IS money?
You seam to think money is more than what it actually is. Money is a mere tool to facilitate trade, absolutely nothing else. It even had many shapes along history, gold, salt, copper, silver, paper... and now is mostly a number in a database.
You shouldn't want money, you should want to trade and money is currently the best tool to it.

The best definition ever is from Atlas Shrugged : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkivn_3zn5I

Deep. I need to read Ayn Rand. Thx.

Money defined as a representation of the effort and work of man. A restatement of the energy of man.

[gts476]

1. You get money by goods and services. But this has a very wide definition. Ie services can be provided by both, acting or restrain to act. Security forces are mainly paid to not act.

2. There's no good money, it depends on what you want not on money itself. Being a tool, money is like a hammer, it depends on the nail and material you want to nail it to.
For a regular employee it may be good for it to hold value and be stable, for the economic cycle to work it better don't or hoarders will become a problem, for speculators better being volatile, and so on and so on.

I asked for how you get money and how you define good money, you still havn't answered the question.