Refuting 20 Capitalist Myths (1 of 2)
Refuting 20 Capitalist Myths (2 of 2)
Duplicated.
no. troll. no.
Shall we title this thread Delusions of an ugly troll? I think so.
Hey john how come you are a BE? come play on daggerspine/alliance.
Any other race is practically beneath me.
In a free market the seas will turn to lemonade. How is that for a capitalist myth?
Heh heh, been a while since we had a good intellectual lynching on this forum. Can’t wait to see how this thread pans out. fingers crossed
These videos really deliver on my expectations. They are filled with emotive pleas, please to authority, to populism etc.
Basically, you are entitled to own property, like a toothbrush or bed, but you’re not allowed to employ capital, because that makes your employees similar to chattel slavery, which he brings up at least a dozen times over the two videos.
Apparently capital is just profit, not productive gain or underconsumption, and profit is bad because…
you guessed it!
Profit is value stolen from workers!
The irony of someone making a YouTube video (on corporate Google’s servers) to complain about capitalism is not lost on me.
“The irony of someone making a YouTube video (on corporate Google’s servers) to complain about capitalism is not lost on me.”
That point is also refuted in #20
No wonder you think you’re right–you don’t bother to listen to opposite points of view.
No, we just know a troll when we see one. And we the mods will thank you to not troll here, ok? Yeah, that’s a warning.
#1 Isn’t capitalism the only alternative to a totalitarian communist tyranny?
#2 But aren’t people naturally greedy? without the profit motive, how will people work or be creative?
#3 isn’t having to work for a boss in capitalism the same as having to work for a living in nature?
#4 But don’t people want bosses?
#5 But didn’t capitalist bosses provide you with improvements in standards of living.
#6 But didn’t the framework of capitalism allow for the improvements those workers fought for?
#7 But don’t political freedoms go in hand with capitalism?
#8 But isn’t inequality and poverty in capitalism, especially in places like Bangladesh, Malasya, Burma, Indonesia etc justified because of social mobility?
#9 What’s wrong with not controlling your workplace with your fellow workers?
#10 OK, the workers don’t control the workplace, but don’t they at least control the consumer system?
#11 But what is wrong with capitalist non-labor income?
#12 But some capitalist bosses work hard, don’t they?
#13 But without capitalism, won’t everyone be able to use my home, bed and my toothbrush?
#14 But isn’t capitalism historically just?
#15 OK, a “work for a boss or else” status quo isn’t perfect, but shouldn’t capitalists be rewarded because of the hard work and risk they put into becoming capitalists?
#16 Are interest and profit not the reward for waiting or postponing consumption?
#17 Doesn’t the greatest talent of capitalists entitle them to profit? And aren’t their profits the result of innovation & entrepeneurial initiative?
#18 But doesn’t capitalism provide us with a free press?
#19 But without privatizing the commons, won’t it lead to ecological disaster, such as “the tragedy of the commons”?
20 But didn’t capitalism make it possible for you to make this video with ur computer, isn’t it hypocritical of you to criticize capitalism when you’re enjoying some of its benefits?
I’ve listened your opinions in that video and it is not difficult to prove you wrong on that issues. I’ve also seen your parody about capitalism, its funny, but I still don’t see any strong argument against anarcho-capitalism.
You start with a strawman. That does not bode well.
And another strawman…
I’m thinking you need to go back, work on grasping that creating a strawman means you’ve lost the debate, and get back to us when you’re not trolling.
If you can’t do that—I guess you won’t be allowed here. Capisce?
And one apparently not well received [8-)]
I did listen to your points of view. Even though it made me ill, I watched both videos, the first one twice.
I was going to do a point by point refutation, but I wasn’t sure if you would come back to read it and debate it, and also it’s very hard to argue with people who do not hold rational points of view. I can’t compete with emotive pleas. I’m not interested in fighting “the bosses”.
The bottom line is, labour always has choices. No one is obligated to employ you, or to not deploy their savings (capital) in the market. People join companies (in the west, usually) in a completely voluntary manner, and get paid for their labour at a rate they agree to, not at a rate that reflects the value of the product when it hits market. If it was organized that way, and you worked for a company with a bad product, then you could be expected to work for a loss, if the product does not sell and fails.
Anti-capitalists love to make the argument that the person deploying the capital goods is the bad guy, the bully, when in effect he’s just someone with a lower time preference, and possibly more business acumen, that is willing to give labour opportunities with goods that increase their productivity, and with those increases, usually an increase in their pay as well.
What you did with the videos, is take 20 strawmen, and then blow them down, sometimes unconvincingly.
It’s hard to take anyone pro-unionism seriously, because unionism is just the cartelization of labour, and if you oppose the cartelization of capital (corporations) then it follows that you must oppose the cartelization of labour, assuming your argument is principled.
“No, we just know a troll when we see one. And we the mods will thank you to not troll here, ok? Yeah, that’s a warning.”
Guilty before proven innocent ah? Your “troll” accusation presupposes that I am Invanfoofoo, the guy that posted a link to my videos earlier. That’s demonstrably false–though not a surprising claim given this institute’s contempt for facts and minimal notions of justice.
I don’t mind engaging him. Yes, his arguments are strawmen, but it’s better to have a refutation posted so his arguments don’t go unchallenged.
Ok, I was on your side there for a minute, and Knight does not represent the Mises Institute, so I’ll ask you to back up your claim about contempt for facts (provide some) and back off the ad homs (minimal notions of justice).
There are more straw men in your points than there are points.