[Closed] Capitalism, who agree's with the system or farce, who doesn't?

Junky - why don't you try arguing with the point I'm making rather than trying to go off in your own direction all the time? Why are the workers worse off when they have 6 nuts instead of 5, just because the boss has 100 nuts instead of 50?

[url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5061626.stm ]Source of 40% poverty rate[/url]

[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_percentage_of_population_living_in_poverty ]National rate[/url]

The differing rates are probably down to:

"roughly half of the area [shanty towns] falls within the City, while half classed as in the state of Mexico"

so some ignore the area outside 'the city'

Actually Elfin if you really want a serious answer

..I'll know not to ask you. It's ok, I knew that anyway. Interesting attempt to segway onto the subject of the Hindu Caste System though. Not that it's relevant in this discussion, but one for the future perhaps.

Labby is often very keen, I notice, to use statistics and figures to support his arguments, yet often ignores the reality. Stats and figures are subject to manipulation, and very often, those provided by political entities don't tell the whole story, or are cooked up in order to support political ends.

I prefer to look at real life. Like the situation here in Tower Hamlets, which has some of the greatest wealth and highest levels of social deprivation in the UK. Since the development of Canary Wharf, and the increasing desire to own cars, local traffic has multiplied. Billions of pounds have been spent on building and maintaining roads, while local services have often been neglected. Asthma rates in young children have increased alarmingly, linked directly to increased air pollution from road traffic and construction. Diseases such as Rickets, directly related to poverty, have made a comeback. Drug addiction has increased. Reliance on state benefits, especially Housing Benefits, has increased. Etc. Local adult further education has been all but destroyed. Many local libraries have been closed. A poverty of education now exists in a more extreme manner than it has in a long time.

Meanwhile, the average individual 'wealth' has increased. This does not mean more people are earning more, just that a small number are earning disproportionate amounts relative to most others, which skews the figures somewhat. As the cost of housing increases, the poorer residents are compelled to leave the area, for cheaper accommodation elsewhere. To places where there is less employment. So, social problems are simply moved elsewhere. So it's not that the poor enjoy the benefits of Capitalism, but quite the opposite; they are forced from their homes and communities by economic pressures, and the spaces left by them are taken up by others able to benefit from their departure. There is now a 'Poverty of Community'; a social vacuum where people do not mix, share and enjoy together.

That's the real story. The one which goldfish bowl dwellers like Labby can't see, so blinded are they, by the vision of Capitalist Utopia.

extreme poverty fell almost seven percentage points, [b]which can be explained by development in rural areas[/b], where extreme poverty fell from 42.4 per cent to 27.9 per cent. [b]The urban poverty rate, however, got stuck at 11.3 per cent[/b].”

See that - rural poverty rate of 2-4 times the urban poverty rates - point proved

Aracer

I am not going off on a tangent - why not do a percentage calulation of all the nuts and see what percentage they have and see how much better off they are relative to all nuts. They have more nuts [ I am happy to confirm for you that 6 is indeed more than 5 - I am less convinced this can only be achieved via capitalist means of production ] and a smaller percentage of all nuts- this is maths. Neither of us can wiggle here. I am not sure this is strictly speaking better off - total yes percentage no-and they are certainly not as large an improvement in wealth as the boss - whch is what we see in the real world re inequitous spread of wealth.
Why not reply to the points I made after quoting you rather than saying I am going off on a tangent?Are you still maintaining their is insufficient wealth or are you willing to accept that the issue is it's inequitous spread?

Friends, numpties and country peeps.

I have listened to a lot of arguments and a lot of individuals going on about this or that. About theories and systems and well a lot of different material has been put forward.

However no definitive argument has been proposed.

Here is mine, I don't care for an argument that says look at the good of capitalism, look at all the wealth it creates and all the benefits as a species we have due to this wealth.

THE WHOLE ****ING WESTERN WORLD IS IN DEPT, DEPT = -WEALTH, SO SHURRUP!!!

ARGUMENT SETTLED AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We have created an way of life or an environment where the very worst characteristics the human mind is capable of are being cultivated. Greed, lust for power, deception, heartlessness, all of these lead to a destabilization of our way of life.

We as a species require to create an environment where the best characteristics are rewarded, loyalty, adaptability, cooperation. We need to create an environment where we encourage people to fullfil their potential and increase their output.

Yes I know that I am simplifying things in your eyes, but to my way of seeing it, I am being direct.

Mutually beneficial arrangements are the corner stone of true trading, Capitalism is just organised global tyrrany.

If the fools in charge can't find a way to gather resources without destroying the planet, should they really be in charge ❓

A free market economy could be the way forward.

Its at least worth a try.