Collapse of capitalism in the USA?

[inthebrain]

Anyone think that we are at the same impasse the country faced in the 30's?

People loising their homes.

No jobs.

Inflated prices on food.

Media and political system completely ignoring those left behind from natural and economic disasters.

State and local governments facing Bankruptcy.

Lending institutions collapsing as a result of their own greed.

Unpredictable global markets.

Exploding prison population that ranks tops in the world. Surprising that it surpasses even China.

Millitary budget that's completely through the roof while our educational instutions decay.


Just out of curiousity. How many people feel the Dems have answers to these problems? How long with the poor populations go ignored before they start to rise up and kick back at the system thaqt left them behind?

Statistcly about 50 million Americans live below the poverty line. 1/4 of all children in this country live in poverty. In terms of rights of children in the industrialized world, our country ranks at the bottom with Great Britain.

What would you like to see change to address these issues? What ideas do you have to fix these problems?

[mdmc]

1. I don't know what will make the leap

In the fictional series Star Trek, everyone's basic needs are met. There is no need for money.

I don't know how to get there. I want to go there. I don't know if America is ready.

[Bucky]

99. Thank you for clarifying that you were referencing the *fictional* Star Trek

Since the galactic government in that series seems to be a benign military dictatorship, I think I'll find my utopias elsewhere.

[mdmc]

2. and to answer your question regarding the dems

I don't think we have the answer. We just have better answers then the neo-cons

[DangerDave921]

3. Way too pessimistic

While there are serious problems facing us, you overstate them. Very few people (out of the entire home-owning population) are actually losing their homes. No jobs? Unemployment is about 5.7%, which means 94.3% have jobs.

I tend to take a more optimistic view of life.

[democraticinsurgent]

8. you're probably right about the pessimism but...

don't take the unemployment rate as true. they have manipulated that statistic so ridiculously that it only shows those actively looking for work and reporting to the unemployment office. if your benefits are used up, or if you are working at mcdonald's instead of teaching at university, or not looking at all, you are NOT counted. Some economists believe the real unemployment rate is between 10-15% if not more.

[zbdent]

12. It was either Reagan or Bush41 who initiated including the military in the counts

so that the "unemployment" figures would be lower than true ...

[AZ Criminal JD]

41. Clinton made that change in 1994.

I was working at the Department of Labor at the time.

[Grey]

29. Question?

Does that mean that the high prison population is also counted as employed because they are not actively looking for work?
It seems to me the total of both the military and the prisons would skew the numbers, not even counting the under-employed?

[inthebrain]

37. Prison populations

even after released are not counted in the statistic.

Millitary counts as employed.

[FKA MNChimpH8R]

49. Correct

I'm not counted as unemployed because my benefits expired long ago. And I haven't had a job since the end of 2005. If the unemployment rate was calculated the way it was under Clinton it would be close to 10%

[inthebrain]

51. Someone above mentioned

That Clinton is responsible for the way the rate is tabulated today.

[Nederland]

94. Incorrect

It is a common misconception that unemployment rates are calculated by looking at the unemployment rolls--they are not. The unemployment rate is calculated via a large sampling of Americans done every money called the CPS. It has no connection to the unemployment rolls.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_Population_Survey

[DailyGrind51]

91. Exactly! Can you imagine all the "discouraged workers" who have

run out of unemployment benefits and are still unemployed with little possibility of finding employment?

[nebenaube]

11. sorry...

but that is exactly how one lies using statistics. Are you really that simple minded?

[DangerDave921]

14. well

My degrees would indicate I am educated. Care to explain more instead of just calling me simple?

[inthebrain]

16. I don't think your lying

I don't think you really understand how those numbers work. Mostly because you porobably never really delved into it.

The 5.7 unemployment rate is not reliable for accounting all the unemployed. People drop off the radar and are no longer counted. That rate only reflects the last six months or so.

The poverty line with the amount of people counted at 50 mill works the same way. That's how many people are still "on the radar". Realisticly when you count the underemployed and "realistic" living wage for each regio,, right now you are looking at anywhere from 1/3 to about half the population living in poverty right now.

[DangerDave921]

18. unemployment rate

Has that always been true, or just recently? Because all my life I've heard about the unemployment rate and never really questioned it.

[inthebrain]

21. Don't know if it's always been true

Never really looked into that.

Most economists, that are at least honest about it, will tell you to take the official number and double it.

[Nederland]

101. That's not remotely true

The numbers accurately reflect what the defined terms mean, and economists define the terms. Sure, if you believe that a person who is not working and not looking for work should be included in the unemployment rate, then the number is too low. However, that definition of unemployment has not been the accepted definition of unemployment since the times of FDR when the government first started publishing the numbers.

[Yavin4]

31. DangerDave921, The UE Rate Is A Political Statistic, Not An Economic One

Once a hard economic stat gets manipulated to show an alternate reality, then it becomes a political stat, not an economic one. The UE rate should be the number of people who want but cannot find full time employment.

Currently, it does not measure people who have become discouraged and give up looking, and it does not measure people who are working part time or temp positions.

[slick8790]

20. I think it's absolutely absurd to say that 1/3 to half of the population is living in poverty.

Simply not true.

[inthebrain]

22. Take a look at the povert line

What you have to make each year to be considered poor. Some placesd have it at about 25-30,000 a year. In many places, 40,000 a year will barely get you a roof over your head and a telephone line.

In MA, you need to make below 30,000 to qualify for MA health. If not you have to have private uinsurance. If not you get a fine on your taxes.

[DangerDave921]

24. definitions

I guess it's all about definitions. I can't see making $30k a year as poverty. Let alone $40k a year. Poverty to me means going without eating, having no coat in the winter, etc. There is a difference between being poor and being in poverty.

I thought the federal definition was more like $20k a year.

[inthebrain]

26. Relate it to the cost of living

you live in an area where you have to pay 900-1000 a month just for aq studio you are going to struggle, Now with food and gas going up a lot of people are going with out.

And people are losing their homes.

[Dr.Phool]

27. Check out the article in last months Harpers. "Why the economy is worse than you think".

It gives a time line of all the adjustments made in the cost of living, and unemployment statistics dating back to JFK.

Kevin Phillips is one of the most astute observers, and analysts I've ever read. He figures real inflation is over 12%, and real unemployment is between 9-13%.

And just some anecdotal evidence. Since X-mas, receipts in my restaurant are down almost 50%, prices for supplies, flour cheese, etc are through the roof, with flour alone up over 400% in the last year. Also people coming through the door every day looking for work.

[inthebrain]

34. I wwas just talking to two guys the other day

That have been out of work since November.

They've been pounding the pavement and handing out applications evey day and recently landed temp jobs. One has two kids and making 11 dollars and hour. His current assignment is up in about two months. The other is single and still has yet to land something.

He's moved back in with his parents and he's 32.

Things are really bad and I doubt we've scraped the surface of it.

[DangerDave921]

35. Very sad

But taking a larger view, one cannot extrapolate an entire nation's economic outlook based on isolated instances. I guarantee that even during the dot.com rise of the 1990's there were people out of work for long stretches. And I could tell you that my personal income has gone up about 2 1/2 times over the past 6 years. But that doesn't mean the economy's doing great either.

I wish there was some way to measure it that I could trust. But I know that economists and politicians can twist stats to suit themselves.

[inthebrain]

36. I agree

I'm just hearing more of these stories now than I have in my lifetime.

I live in Boston which usually does better than the national average. Things are very bad here. The Boston Housing Authority has had lines out the door of people applying for subsidies.

[Trajan]

73. I moved to SW Missouri from Southern California in 2004

Laid off from a good aerospace job where I averaged $60,000 per year (including modest OT) ...

When I arrived in the Missouri Ozarks, I sought work for months on end, placing over 90 applications and resumes over those months .... I received 4 hits : Two were minimum wage positions ($5.50 X 2080 hrs = $11,440 per year - DEFINITELY poverty wages) ... 1 hit was a temp job outside of my field @ $7.50 per hour (11 weeks), and another contract job @ $9.00 per hour - $18720 per year (This was in my field of expertise) ...

I was making over $25 per hour in CA when I was laid off ... I didn't expect that much in other states, but I expected at least $15 in the technical fields. My family could not survive at that low level of income.

I had to expand my job search OUTSIDE of Missouri, and leave my family behind while I went to CO and rented a room, finally finding a decent job at a decent wage ($18.00 per hour = 70% of my previous wage), but that was contract work WITHOUT medical and without an opportunity to become a direct employee: I could not move my family from Missouri to Colorado for a temp job. I finally found work in my field by again moving 1000 miles away, to Portland OR, where I was paid $20 per hour (78% of my previous wage). I moved my family to Oregon from Missouri shortly thereafter, because this job AT LEAST was direct and offered decent medical and dental coverage. After 3 years, I have averaged 2.75% in wage increases, which means I am slipping behind in real income as prices and expenses romp quickly past my ability to pay for them.

I have nearly 30 years of experience in my field, with excellent references and a superior work record.

Three salient points about this ordeal:

1) I am still making 84% of my wage of 5 years ago: I must work 12 hours of OT per week to make up the loss.

2) I again have begun a search for a new job, hoping to improve the lot of my family. My OT is being reduced to 7% of my hours (2.8 hours MAX per week)

3) I recognize just how bad things are in some regions of the country. To have a job that pays above minimum wage in the south is a dream come true for them. Yet, at $8 per hour or so, making about $16,000 per year, they exist at a bare subsistence level with little chance of lifting their children above their own economic existence. Many of those whom I met there and with whom I discussed economic issues did not recognize their futile position. Cars, energy, groceries, insurance, utilities, and other expenses were the same cost level as So CAL, so the regional differences in costs didn't add up to account for the low wages. Many of them were just happy to have SOME sort of income, even if it were not enough to 'rise up' .... There was little aspiration to move upward and forward: Just mere existence was enough ....

I cannot fathom that mindset, as I expect my own children to do BETTER than I did ... But I worry that will not be true, and wont be true for a long long time to come ...

[sakura]

77. Welcome to Portland.

Contracting is quite the scam, isn't it? You get to work (almost!) full time for absolutely no benefits. The company I work for has at least half of its employees on contract. If my husband didn't have a union job, with the benefits that go with that type of job, we'd be screwed.

[FKA MNChimpH8R]

55. Excellent cite

Kevin Phillips is perhaps the most honest and unaffiliated political observer on today's scene. He was a registered Repuke for years and a Nixon policy analyst. He walked away from the Repukes, registered as an independent, and has been systematically tearing them down brick by brick for the last 15 years. He hates the Bush crime family and Big Oil with an undying passion. Read his books and learn.

[nebenaube]

40. no

Your degrees indicate that you are trained. Not educated. A critical mind would not assume that everyone not unemployed is employed.

[DangerDave921]

42. You're very rude

When you don't even know me, to tell me that I am not educated. And that I don't have a critical mind.

[inthebrain]

43. I don't think education matters

Smart and educated people beleive false and weird things all the time.

We could go on for hours down the list of all the ridiculous and false things even the most brilliant believed. Education is just a measure of aquired knowledsge.

No matter how educated we are there are always things we do not know.

[GihrenZabi]

86. Education doesn't matter?

Clearly you don't think it does because you aren't...just cut to the chase and say so rather than attempting to cloak your opinion in "argument."

Epic fail.

[jwirr]

13. Job stats are seldom correct and especially in an election year as

*ss and co. are no doubt manipulating them. Even in ordinary years they do not show the real unemployment rates and seldom acknowledge underemployment. As to home stats they do not reflect those who are living in nuclear families, bumming off friends, etc.

[Mojorabbit]

28. I don't think this is true

In april according to this article
"
That meant one in every 538 households received a filing during the month."
http://www.wral.com/business/story/2734700/

I read somewhere that one in every hundred homes were in some process of foreclosure but I can't find the article.
There are a ton of homes that are due to reset next year so I don't think we have even begun to see the worst of it yet.

[whatchamacallit]

59. Optimism is good, but

It seems those who are the most optimistic about our broken systems, are usually the ones who have the most to gain from them just as they are.

[inthebrain]

60. There's optimism and then there is issue avoidance.

[fasttense]

69. Very few people losing their homes????

Not in this world apparently:

"In the month of February, 223,651 more Americans entered into foreclosure, according to RealtyTrac-- a company that collects real estate-related data. That amounts to 7,712 foreclosure filings per day in the month of February. If that foreclosure rate continues -- and all indications are that it is actually increasing -- almost 240,000 more Americans will have been foreclosed upon during the month of March. UBS reports that foreclosures of this magnitude are on par with the severity of foreclosures during the Great Depression.

These foreclosure rates are not simply high in relative terms. They are at record levels, according to the Mortgage Banker's Association (MBA). The Mortgage Bankers' data show that more than 1 in every 50 homes with a mortgage in the country is in foreclosure. Foreclosure rates have been growing at record levels for some time.

Foreclosures are increasing because people are continuing to struggle to make their payments. The data tells us that 1 in every 13 homes with a mortgage has fallen behind on their mortgage. Every day that goes by without action means more families are losing their homes."

http://banking.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?Fuseaction=Articles.Detail&Article_id=60902894-d6fa-4b3b-9b27-54fb3cd66f78

[Raineyb]

74. Actually considering how they calculate the unemployment rates I wouldn't be quite so optimistic

The government only counts people who are actively looking for jobs. If someone's been looking for over a year and gives up they don't count anymore. They are of course still unemployed. That doesn't take into account the changes they made in the survey methods. The government has been jiggering the unemployment numbers for years. It is higher than what they claim.

Regards

[krabigirl]

76. yep. I agree. But I swear, some people just love doom and gloom.

[inthebrain]

79. As much as they love to ignore it?

There's a fine line between optimism and being totally delusional. If your house is burning down and you deide to stay in bed because you think the fire will extiguish itself, that's just nuts.

I think the same can be said of folks that have lost their homes, pensions and jobs over the last 12 years. "Optimism" is just another word like "America hater" that's meant to derail any thought or duscussion. Also to keep folks playing in a game that totally stacked against them.

[Zynx]

4. While the financial market turmoil is greater than normal, the other symptoms you

describe are not different than the typical recession.

[Blue Meany]

7. The difference between now and the 1930s

is that then the government was in a position to ameliorate the collapse through deficit spending but now the government is already heavily in debt to foreign lenders. Also, we were not then dependent on foreign oil. For these reasons, I think we are facing more than a typical recession and it is going to be a long slog working our way out of it--with the right wing fighting rear-guard actions every step of the way. I'm guessing that we will have to raise taxes on the wealthy and allow the dollar to continue to deflate in order to have any hope of paying off the national debt, which would be a burden in the best of conditions.

[TooBigaTent]

5. We can only hope it collapses. Capitalism is a disaster because of the power exerted by

the rich to benefit only themselves at the expense of everyone else.

It has lasted this long only because the worker drones have not been bottomed out - yet.

Unfortunately, by the time enough people recognize that their only place at the table is serving feasts to their owners, they will have no power to effect any change.

Capitalism appeals to the worst in humans (what's in it for ME) - and there will always be enough assholes willing to sell out their fello-citizens for a slightly less-terrible condition.

[unpossibles]

6. I see the economic systems of the future being able to hopefully learn from our current phiosophies

and taking the good from a variety of sources. Capitalism does have some good elements, just as Socialism does, and both can be manipulated by greed. In fact, I'd say our biggest hurdle to any system being successful in practice is human nature.

[DangerDave921]

15. Then why

has this country risen to such a high standard of living in just a couple hundred years?

[inthebrain]

23. That due to hard fought battle by Labor itself

Not the natural forces of capitalism.

[SOS]

32. The rise of the middle class was from 1946-1973

It's been downhill for the average American ever since.

And before WW2 the average American was in much worse shape.
The school lunch program was introduced because men coming into the Army in WW2 were largely malnourished.

[bread_and_roses]

61. Well, genocide, slavery, exploitation, and oppression, destruction of environment had a lot to

do with it...people always write some variant of "capitalism is good" when citing our standard of living, but ignore how we acheived it, or that capitalism seems to have no problem at all with any of those tools.

[slick8790]

9. I sure hope not. Capitalism is the best we've got. n/t

[Dr.Phool]

30. Too bad we're at the fascism level now.

Mussolini said that the best definition was the wedding of the corporation and the state.

Look at all your tax dollars going to bail out millionaires and billionaires on Wall Street.

[SOS]

33. But wouldn't it be great

if we went in the direction of Scandinavian capitalism, rather than devolving into the Chinese version?

[FKA MNChimpH8R]

50. That is one of my fondest dreams

- that we would finally look to Scandinavia for an example of what social democracy is supposed to look like.

[depakid]

54. 7th Century Byzantium would actually be a good result

and a semi realistic, highly optimistic one, considering the likely consequnces of of peak oil and climate change on the American macroeconomy.

[jwirr]

10. Same place but I don't think many are thinking about socialism as

the answer - YET.

[Occam Bandage]

17. No. We aren't anywhere close to the "revolution" threshold. Call back when unemployment hits 20%.

[inthebrain]

19. Realisticly its about 11-12%

Revolution threshold?

I'm not claiming that. The economic system in this country has absolutely collapsed under it's own selfish weight.

[Occam Bandage]

44. A recession is hardly a "collapse." It will recover, as it usually does.

Bust cycles are an expected part of free markets.

[inthebrain]

46. That applies to wealthy people

Not working class folks.

They are constantly left behind during these so called recoveries. They rareytl benefit from prosperous periods as well. During the Clinton boon just as with the Reagan boon, most workers didn't benefit from it.

[Occam Bandage]

47. Right. The lot of the working class remains pretty consistent. As much as

kids might like to pretend they're modern-day Ches, the working class doesn't seem to feel like revolting. A recession is not going to change that, just like it didn't in any of the previous ones.

[inthebrain]

48. Depends

The elitests really don't like mullings about by large groups of poor people. That what a lot of the anti immigration sentiment really comes from in that respect.

Over the years they've also been veryh successful in turning that anger towards drug addicts, Welfare Moms, Non Violentg criminals etc. That's all just misplaced class anger in a lot of respects. They like to tool where you throw your frustration and even make the country paranoid of each other. I think the war on Terror has worked wonders in this regard.

It's not like revolt or larger social movements are not possible. We haven't has a serious poor peoples movement in quite some time. Last one was small but effective living wage movement in 99/00.

That got swept under the rug by 9/11.

But I don't think your looking at violent revolts. The socialist movements having looked at the disaters in Russia and evenour own American Revolution are opposed to that kind of revolt. THey are now of the belief that slow and gradual change works best as it keeps power hungry abusive assholes in check.

Rather than offering the opportunity to abuse people resulting from need in a state of emergency.

[cliffordu]

25. Revolution threshold == food riots, 10.00/gallon gas.

Bullets will always be cheap.

[AndyTiedye]

38. It's Not Capitalism Anymore After Robber Barons Buy the Government

There's another word for that form of government. It starts with an "F".

[killbotfactory]

39. Our government is intentionally bankrupting instelf

They will use it as an excuse to privatize everything they can get away with privatizing. They can get away with it because no matter how much they fuck it up, or how badly an executive mismanages a company, they know they will be taken care of. No matter how ruthless or corrupt our government is, our media will pretend it's no big deal or that they really aren't that bad and any mistakes in government policy are mere human folly. No matter how many disastrous, expensive, illegal wars they start, they will never hold themselves accountable for starting them.

The poorer we all are, the more powerful the elites can become.

The first thing we must realize is that we are all quite powerless politically and economically as individuals. That our current problems are systemic in nature, and not new or merely the result of idiots in our government. We have to realize that there are nearly no depths of depravity which our government will not descend to, and which the mainstream media will not act like apologists for. We must realize that the greed of corporations knows no limit, and no amount of profit is enough, that legally they are required to pursue profit above all other considerations, which means working people will inevitably get screwed. Then we have to figure out why our system acts this way, and try to determine what approaches we can take to remedy it. There is not a simple solution.

[barack the house]

45. Let's hope it motivates a more social democracy. Capitalism will last but must be tamed.

[inthebrain]

52. up

[inthebrain]

53. up

[inthebrain]

58. up

[davidpdx]

56. Here's a good article: The Future of American Power

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20080501facomment87303/fareed-zakaria/the-future-of-american-power.html

[WinkyDink]

57. Capitalism is WINNING. Poverty for the masses is part of its POINT.

[inthebrain]

62. In this country poverty is tolerated

only as long as the poor keep silent.

I would love for them to establish their own political movement. I think a lot folks would learn greatly from it. I think they are best positioned to offer up what it wrong with our society. They suffer the consequences every day.

[Arugula Latte]

64. Yep. Gotta have people to work in McDonalds ...

Do that by keeping them stupid by pushing religion, withholding quality education, and providing nonstop "patriotic" propaganda. That seems to be working for the corporations.

[POAS]

68. More to the point I think is

that Capitalism is being replaced by Corporatism.

A regulated capitalist system uses government control to tamp down the worst instincts of the capitalists.

Absent that regulation capitalism morphs, by attrition, into a few mega corporations controlling the mechanisms of government to their own advantage and profit.

As wealth concentrates into fewer and fewer hands poverty at the bottom naturally increases and those at the bottom having fewer resources have little to no chance of effecting change, short of violent means.

[uponit7771]

63. Dems are far from perfect but are better at thinking about working folk than reThugs IMHO

[The Onyx Key]

65. Um... no.

And a bunch of anecdotal "evidence" posts from alarmists won't affect the superior economic system firmly, thoroughly entrenched in out lives and consciousness.

Our "poverty" threshhold is so high in contrast to so much of the world that it would be laughable if it weren't so sad for those truly less fortunate. We take so much for granted in this country...

[depakid]

66. "the superior economic system firmly, thoroughly entrenched in out lives and consciousness. "

will inevitably contract as the era of cheap oil wanes and the consequences of climate change become ever more apparent.

[inthebrain]

105. It's more than cheap just oil.

Take the hiring priorities at any company. Particularly a temp agency.

For the most part Temp jobs were the domain of college students. just spare change for people in a transient period of their life and some people stuck economically. Now adays, the temp job is a primary means of support for many professionals across the economy.

So much for college students supporting themselves while they "chase the American Dream of a college education". Temp agency catched wind that you're a college student 9 out of ten will leave you to rot. Crap, even the Wal Marts and Home Depots no longer offer their positions to those people. They want lifers as well.

[old mark]

67. No. If you read about the real depression,

this isn't even a blip in comparison.

Then, there was aprox 25% unemployment across the country, now it's about 6%.

There were too many differences to list, but this is not even close.

mark

[inthebrain]

70. It's at about 12% right now

The official rate doesn't account for ALL the unemployed.

THere is also a reason why we refer to the great depression as the "great depression". Much of it because the underclasses rebeled and threatened to tip the apple cart.

Today the underclasses in this country have MASSIVLY increased. Folks are gettin laid off like crazy and losing their homes.

To add to that, we are at a point where the economic system doesn't benefit the majority of Americans. There is a huge wage slave class that's been created.

There are differences and there are a lot of simiarities as well.

[Common Sense Party]

90. Not even close to Great Depression times and conditions.

But some people like to wax hysterical. It makes them feel better to scream "the sky is falling."

The evidence is NOT there, but they like to pretend it is, in anecdotal form.

In 10 years we'll look back on this and think, "that kinda sucked, but we made it through okay."

The 'end of capitalism"??? :eyes:

[JustAnotherGen]

71. Changes and Fixes

At risk of sounding like an isolationist/nationalist jerk . . .

Pull out of Iraq.
Shut down at least half our bases overseas (time for Europe to put on its' big girl panties and deal with it) - or at least those where they don't pay us to stay there. Germany, S. Korea, and Japan give us money. France kicked us out a long time ago.
Fix the infrastructure


We need a New Deal. No - really - we do. I think people have forgotten about a big big bridge falling in America.

Electric - http://www.journal-news.net/page/content.detail/id/508583.html?nav=5006 This sparks alternative energy sources as well. Imagine the Bureau of Wind Mills.

Bridges - http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-07-24-bridges_N.htm - America's Bridge Corp? This site will make you bonkers if you let it :-) :http://nationalbridges.com/


And how about a total review of levees, dams, roads, TRAIN systems for the most populated states? You know? Drive through the Europe that Rome controlled. See those old fragments of aqueducts?(Sp) Seriously - we could build something better if we wanted to - and I do think we NEED to.

Finally great little piece from Talking Points Memo site: http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/06/an-american-renaissance-turnin.php

We need to pull our collective heads out of our asses and come up with some new and innovative ideas for the future.

I am proposing is that we stop being the world's police force and start promoting a multinational force that can respond to these emergencies. I think it is about time we stop footing the bill for solving the world's problems alone. By spreading the responsibility for our common global security equally, we can drastically cut our military budget in the short term and move to a much slimmer force in the future that perhaps has other things as its primary mission than kicking ass and taking names.

Wow - working with the rest of the world? Shifting our funds to those things which better ALL Americans lives while sparking well paying jobs, and dare I say - perhaps even providing Universal Health Care to all Americans.

Forgive me. I sometimes get a little crazy with myself when I think outside of the box. :-)

[IndianaGreen]

72. And we should care about the collapse of capitalism because...?

:eyes:

[bread_and_roses]

75. my take exactly (n/t)

[depakid]

78. I can think of several good reasons:

-----------


-----------



-----------

[bread_and_roses]

80. So, you think Socialism in the US caused the Great Depression?

I mean, seriously, I'm sure that's not what you mean, but it does seem odd to use pictures from the Great Depression as a justification for Capitalism. Especially since the Capitalist Oligarchs fought FDR on every program.

And why assume that the collapse of Capitalism would only mean wide-spread suffering? There are collapses and collapses - some more gradual than others. Right down the road from me (alas, too far though for me) there is a nice little example of socialism at work. A municipality owns a power plant and provides electricity to its residents at about 1/3 the cost of the local privite profiteers. Yet our citizens are so indoctrinated that many, if not most of the very people who benefit from this community ownership would no doubt rail against "liberals" much less "socialists."

[inthebrain]

81. I think he was answering the "Why should we care"

question.

[bread_and_roses]

83. Not caring about Capitalism does not =not caring about suffering(n/t)

[depakid]

84. The economic contraction will hit capatialists and social democrats alike

Some nations (and regions within nations) will fare better (or less worse) than others, of course- based on how well they've planned ahead for the eventualities.

[inthebrain]

88. I never saw Capitalism as a system that worries about "planning ahead"

It's more instant gratification. Show me profits now and do anything to achieve that goal.

[depakid]

89. What we have in the states- and to some extent in the world financial markets isn't capitalism

in the states, it's closer to corporatism, whereby the government practices socialism with respect to loses incurred by larger, more powerful entities (i.e. moral hazard) and costs externalized onto society (i.e. -the true costs of production of goods and services aren't reflected on the balance sheets).

Both of these promote short-sightedness and the dysfunctional focus on quarterly profits.

However, the bottom line on all of this is that no system can grow without increasing its energy inputs and/or drastically decreasing its energy usage (though, among other things- conservation and efficiency).

We're entering an era of energy declines- particularly cheap energy that's suitable for transportation and despite magical thinking on the part of the neoclassical economists who believe that the circular flow of the macroeconomy operates as some sort of perpetual motion machine, that means the next two decades (or more) will involve prolonged contraction(s).

In econ speak- that means recession(s) and/or depression(s)- along with re-localization.

The only question is how well various regions plan ahead and adapt.

[inthebrain]

102. THe working classes in this country are not going to tolerate that

[osaMABUSh]

82. WWIII on the horizon

http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/rants/ww3.htm

[DailyGrind51]

85. Did you see "Washington Week" on Friday, August 8?

David Wessel, "Wall Street Journal", said "The free market drove the economy over a cliff!"

We're not talking the "Daily Worker" here, mind you, we're talking the "Wall Street Journal"!

[GihrenZabi]

87. Capitalism doesn't work long-term

Not as a world economy. Any system that depends on winners and loser will ultimately fall apart in the grand scheme of things. The more we globalize, the more capitalism is going to fuck all of us.

I don't think America is anywhere near a collapse...as someone else said, our "poverty" still provides for too high a standard of living for it to piss off enough people to spur them to violence, which is about the only way you'll ever see radical change in American society.

We're just going to continue to become less and less relevant on the world stage. We don't produce enough. We're a service economy in a world where others can provide better, or at least equivalent, and cheaper service. Our corporations aren't "ours" anymore, they're independent entities who could give a rat's ass about the nation they're supposedly "based" in.

The idea of an "American" company is quickly becoming just plain silly.

[DailyGrind51]

93. Capitlaism, like cancer, depends on continued growth to survive.

[depakid]

95. Captialism isn't a zero sum game

Many trades are win/win -and smart economic policies promote positive development and gains in the human condition (as opposed to mindless growth and increases in the velocity of money reflected in the GDP).

[inthebrain]

104. You need a good long look at labor movements

and why you are where you are now. It's not at the mercey of capitialists that you are entitled to an education or forty work week and overtime pay.

[TheKentuckian]

96. People are so indoctrinated into the economy

that they are blinded to the fact that it's success and growth are divorced from the average citizen as far as benefits. We feel the hit when the market slumps but it can go through the roof and we still see our jobs exported and what money we do have worth less all the time.

Jobs will return when it's cheaper for them to be here. That means a drastic decline for about 96% of us. Very drastic.

These folks are pushing for third world wages, standard of living, ecological standards, and working conditions.

I don't want any of this kind of "freedom" that is being pitched. I can't believe anyone has failed to extrapolate this model over any period of time in a global market. Maybe with enough technological advancement and compassion/fear from our masters, we'll regain our current standard of living in 150-200 years. The genie is probably too far out of the bottle now but we have to mitigate the damage to the American people the best we can. Why should we support and empower an economic system that doesn't actually benefit us? With no people there is no need for such a construct as an economy. It's my thought that an economy that doesn't account for people is doomed to failure because it loses track of it's purpose.

[depakid]

97. I wouldn't too much over globalization- it's had it's brief time in the sun

As energy prices increase to $10+ dollars per gallon and higher- those 8,000 mile supply lines will exceed the savings of most cheap labor overseas.

[Nederland]

92. The Great Depression didn't kill Capitalism

...and this recession, which is a ripple in a pond in comparision, won't either.

[ieoeja]

98. I see two major differences between now and then. One good and one bad.

Good

The government will help. At the onset of the last economic depression (and all those preceeding it), it was an almost universally accepted assumption that government was not responsible for the economy. The opposite is now an almost universally accepted fact.


Bad

Then, we were still stealing jobs from Europe. Now, we are losing jobs to Asia. Then, the European elite were selling out their own people which had a side benefit for us. Now, the American elite are selling out us.

[Bucky]

100. Capitalism isn't collapsing, silly. Capitalism is human nature.

People have a natural inclination to truck and barter (to paraphrase Adam Smith). The economy is being badly managed right now, but that doesn't mean human nature is being rewired.

[inthebrain]

103. Adam Smith was not an expert in human nature

I'd probably look at Erickson, Freud, Piaget and Kohlberg.

Just about anyother person that's observed and sudued human behavior. Humans are social beings.