User Tag List

First 152324252627 Last

Results 241 to 250 of 303

  1. #241
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    I consider myself more rational, not more superior. I make decisions based on real world evidence and I learn from the lessons of history. I've urged you to produce counter examples to make your case but you have failed to do so.
    As you obviously value this rationality the most then those two things are pretty much synonymous within your realm of judgement.

    As for making decisions on real world judgement, half the point of the posts made contrary to your opinion could be summed up by saying that you should be more open minded and broader read in your information gathering (moreso the former). I realise you will counter by stating you are broad and open minded but I would counsel that you reconsider. Unless you believe that all who post contrary to your opinion are fools or misinformed then it is highly likely you need to re-evaluate your approach.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    Let me now list 5 more great capitalists: Walt Disney, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Ray Kroc, and Sam Walton. Your turn.
    Let me clarify, your parameters for "capitalist" is someone who is good at making money. You are asking for the names of people who are socialist and therefore care less about money bit whom have made an equal amount of money. Am I somewhere close? Based on this I believe we have found another unassailable quandary.

    A brief googling brings up names like Einstein but I'm sure you wouldn't value his contributions in this discussion about business. It's a bit like asking how many tee totalers have made a business selling alcohol.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    ICall me skeptical, but I'd love to see a study that backs up your bold claim.
    If I must Google everything for you then I shall but I'd rather you did your own finger work. I'm no feeder.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    IBecause bad managers result in a bad work force. If you manage a restaurant and you let the wait staff chew bubble gum or talk on the phone, that harms the business.
    Again we differ in our experience, a manager doesn't do the work, cannot motivate his staff and likely relies on outdated recruitment backed up by a desire to recruit people like him or herself. The fact of the matter is that the staff do the work and can do it without the manager. A poor manager doesn't mean a poor workforce. They can just sit back and shirk, letting more competent people do the jobs. Many people do this.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    IHow did Apple do after they fired Steve Jobs? He's making the argument that leadership doesn't matter and that's obviously a stupid perspective.
    Ah the wonderful Mr Jobs. A fan of child labour and a supporter of sucking the lifeblood from his customers. I can't say I appreciate his work. Perhaps I would be a poor judge of his performance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    INo one is asking you to be religious, but to ignore all the evidence because it runs counter to your belief system is a bit irrational. Again, where is the evidence that raising taxes on the rich helps the economy, that raising the minimum wage helps the economy, that raising the capital gains tax helps the economy? I'd love to see the evidence.
    Your insistence that I believe the opposite to yourself is startlingly incorrect. I believe in no ism or ist. I only believe in what is shown to work and no extreme has ever worked for long each empire falls and a new pretender rises.

    If you're talking politics then I believe that is one area severely under regulated, moreso than any bank.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    II'm very reasonable but you are still wrong. The signs that you are wrong are all over the place: you can't name a single great socialist; you can't provide any evidence that raising taxes help people; you can't provide evidence that big government helps the economy. My question to you would be: why hold such strong beliefs when there is no evidence to back them up? Why hold such strong beliefs when you can't defend them?

    Explain why Greece, Spain, France, and Italy are a mess. Explain why the US has created twice the number of jobs in a 25 year period than Europe despite having a smaller population. Explain why every time the capital gains tax rates have been cut, we've seen increases in capital gains tax revenue? I have the answers to all these questions.
    I rarely venture into politics because I prefer not to be reminded of the school yard by people on such high wages. That being said, I'm told that the UK had the highest growth of something or other recently and that everyone is pleased. Shame that half the experts are warning that half the measures they're using will lead to another crash.

    See I avoid arenas covered with people who claim that their opinion is unquestionably right and that everyone else is a fool. I've rarely found much wisdom there.

    Discuss hr and I may be of more service but km guessing you have no management experience and are postulating from your arm chair. If not then please do tell me how your free market will lead to a more productive workforce considering your espousing the kind of ideas that means their job security is lessened quite a lot.
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  2. #242
    deplorable basketcase Tellenbach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,953

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander
    As you obviously value this rationality the most then those two things are pretty much synonymous within your realm of judgement.
    We each have our gifts. I don't think the polar bear is superior to the black bear just because it's a better swimmer.

    Unless you believe that all who post contrary to your opinion are fools or misinformed then it is highly likely you need to re-evaluate your approach.
    Not fools, but suffering from cognitive dissonance and unable to overcome the false narrative drummed into them at a very early age.

    Again we differ in our experience, a manager doesn't do the work, cannot motivate his staff and likely relies on outdated recruitment backed up by a desire to recruit people like him or herself.
    Do you ever watch Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares? The success of a business rests in large measure on the ability of the managers.

    A poor manager doesn't mean a poor workforce. They can just sit back and shirk, letting more competent people do the jobs. Many people do this.
    Sure, this happens, but it's more likely that poor management results in a poor work force. If there is no one around to crack the whip, the staff will be lazy and goof off.

    A brief googling brings up names like Einstein but I'm sure you wouldn't value his contributions in this discussion about business. It's a bit like asking how many tee totalers have made a business selling alcohol.
    Einstein didnt achieve his greatness because of socialism; he would've been great in any capitalist nation. Bill Gates, Edison, Bezos all became great men because of capitalism; they would've been ordinary men in a socialist nation. That's the difference. You can't provide a single name of a person who achieved greatness because of socialism.

    If not then please do tell me how your free market will lead to a more productive workforce considering your espousing the kind of ideas that means their job security is lessened quite a lot.
    The free market demands that business that aren't efficient go out of business. If you aren't competitive, you won't last long (Yugo, the XFL, the Nook e-reader). Job security is only a concern in nations with little job opportunity. Yes, in socialist nations, this is the case because socialist policies kill jobs and drive out the job creators. When jobs are abundant, job security is no longer a concern. If a worker gets fired, he'll just find another job.
    Senator Rand Paul is alive because of modern medicine and because his attacker punches like a girl.

  3. #243
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    We each have our gifts. I don't think the polar bear is superior to the black bear just because it's a better swimmer.
    Considering your later ideas this is rubbish. You're postulating that all is swimming and so the polar bear is king. Anyone who argues for the value of anything else is obviously a fool because it is raining too hard.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    Not fools, but suffering from cognitive dissonance and unable to overcome the false narrative drummed into them at a very early age.
    Having worked fortunate we have you to point out where we're all going wrong.

    You ever look into what's happened before when one person claims to hold the truth against all opposition?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    Do you ever watch Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares? The success of a business rests in large measure on the ability of the managers.
    1 kitchens rely on productivity in a short timescale.
    2 chefs are renowned for their tempers
    3 you're taking management advice from a person who seems to think it's appropriate to throw a temper tantrum every five seconds
    4 the level of emotion engaged upon by that man I'd unsustainable for a long term project. Go ask around.

    You're quoting the wrong man if you're in about management. Also you're assuming that because he's successful that he's competent to the same degree. That is not a given.

    Do you see Mr Trump jumping around screaming? Oh he must just be some insane looser.

    What about Mr Branson? You'd do well to look at how he operates. I've heard he's a decent employer as well as a successful businessman. Certainly not a person paying low wages for high turnover and trying to sell mass produced quality for craftsman prices.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    Sure, this happens, but it's more likely that poor management results in a poor work force. If there is no one around to crack the whip, the staff will be lazy and goof off.
    Ah so you're a Talorite. Sorry but that doesn't hold water anymore.

    Companies rely on people going above and beyond their job description. Treat them as you suggest and they tend to "Work to rule". Perhaps that's why you want free market ideas and deregulation so you can fire people to cover your poor leadership skills?

    People work best when you free them up to do the job and make it possible for them to be motivated.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    Einstein didnt achieve his greatness because of socialism; he would've been great in any capitalist nation. Bill Gates, Edison, Bezos all became great men because of capitalism; they would've been ordinary men in a socialist nation. That's the difference. You can't provide a single name of a person who achieved greatness because of socialism.
    Best laugh I've had from your posts. I'd keep laughing if I didn't know you were serious.

    You asked for greatness, got it and so moved the goal posts. As "greatness" is a statement of opinion and not any kind of objective measure. Thank you for proving everything I've said up to this point. I don't need to quote statistics to show you're not thinking straight. I just need to quote you.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    The free market demands that business that aren't efficient go out of business. If you aren't competitive, you won't last long (Yugo, the XFL, the Nook e-reader). Job security is only a concern in nations with little job opportunity. Yes, in socialist nations, this is the case because socialist policies kill jobs and drive out the job creators. When jobs are abundant, job security is no longer a concern. If a worker gets fired, he'll just find another job.
    The free market demands nothing. What twaddle.

    An inefficient business only has to beat it's rivals. It doesn't have to do this with efficiency.

    Microsoft are well known to produce some absolute howlers and yet they have the largest market share. They pay people per line of code and then wonder why they end up with bloated operating systems. Bill Gates himself said he preferred Linux as an os. Why then is Microsoft still the most popular? Because of direct x. If a commission ever separated that from the main company it's very likely that Windows would suffer a significant drop in popularity. You only have to look at the long term efforts of wine and the charges they used to make. Obviously people were willing to pay large sums to get windows applications away from the windows os.

    Also where do you get this crap about jobs? When did you change jobs last? Do you even have a job?

    It took me 11 months to find a new job after one employer decided they were in a free market and could get rid of me on a whim. Now considering I was very cheap for my skill set and had someone who'd advised chief constables in their CVs backing me up, that's a lot of time. Fortunately my wife made enough to keep us afloat for that time. According to your thinking I could have moved across the country and bought a new house in that time. My wife could travel further to work so we could cover a larger radius with our cars.

    According to your deluded thinking, if the wage range of a low paid job got too low the people could take a similar pause in their income and move house to find new work in an area with better wages.

    I'd live to see how you'd manage the finances.
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  4. #244
    Super Ape Luke O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    954
    Posts
    1,742

    Default

    Free Market Capitalism works for you as long as Free Market Capitalism likes you.

    It's fine, if you're working and making your way up the rungs of the ladder, or running a successful business.

    If you're not doing any of those things, FMC will declare war on you, and will point the finger of blame at you for so many things. Why? If you're not earning money to pay it back into the system, FMC has no use for you. By paying back into the system, this is both spending all your money on shit you don't need, or saving that money in a bank account - you might never spend it, but your bank will to generate extra income from financial markets.

    People appear happier under FMC because of the focus on entertainment. Entertainment sells, because it becomes a created need - we're a mess of hormones, going from one addiction to another to keep those hormones stimulated. Progress these days is a bunch of commuters bent necked, staring at their phones playing Candy Crush or whatever, because in contrast, reality seems so dull.

    When you bomb out of the system, e.g. you get made redundant, you get ill etc, you see the world as it really is is, like being reborn, kicking and screaming like a heroin baby that just had it's supply cut.

    All you want is that good feeling of earning lots and spending lots, but don't worry, because something else came to the fore in the '80s, an even harder drug to kick - credit, lots of easy to get, hard to pay off credit.

    We could be colonising the galaxy, but humanity would rather burn up all its oil for entertainment and comfort instead. You can't say Free Market Capitalism works, even if it is the least shit of all the economic/political models we use.

  5. #245

  6. #246

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luke O View Post
    Free Market Capitalism works for you as long as Free Market Capitalism likes you.

    It's fine, if you're working and making your way up the rungs of the ladder, or running a successful business.

    If you're not doing any of those things, FMC will declare war on you, and will point the finger of blame at you for so many things. Why? If you're not earning money to pay it back into the system, FMC has no use for you. By paying back into the system, this is both spending all your money on shit you don't need, or saving that money in a bank account - you might never spend it, but your bank will to generate extra income from financial markets.

    People appear happier under FMC because of the focus on entertainment. Entertainment sells, because it becomes a created need - we're a mess of hormones, going from one addiction to another to keep those hormones stimulated. Progress these days is a bunch of commuters bent necked, staring at their phones playing Candy Crush or whatever, because in contrast, reality seems so dull.

    When you bomb out of the system, e.g. you get made redundant, you get ill etc, you see the world as it really is is, like being reborn, kicking and screaming like a heroin baby that just had it's supply cut.

    All you want is that good feeling of earning lots and spending lots, but don't worry, because something else came to the fore in the '80s, an even harder drug to kick - credit, lots of easy to get, hard to pay off credit.

    We could be colonising the galaxy, but humanity would rather burn up all its oil for entertainment and comfort instead. You can't say Free Market Capitalism works, even if it is the least shit of all the economic/political models we use.
    There's good material on the extent to which peoples experience of the world per se is driven by psychological fantasy, like Ethel Person's By Force of Fantasy, and that this is why entertainment proves to be so important for most people, plus from the sociological side of things there's all the stuff about leisure classes and conspicious consumption.

    I think if you consider those two things together you can get a good picture as to why the status quo exists and endures when it does not appear rational or reasonable.

    The reason that "capitalism" is so popular is the same reason that Vegas is popular or Lotteries are popular, people think or at least dream that they are going to be a winner rather than a loser, which is much more likely, and then seek to ensure that the system benefits winners and protects their winnings.
    Likes Luke O liked this post

  7. #247
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    There's good material on the extent to which peoples experience of the world per se is driven by psychological fantasy, like Ethel Person's By Force of Fantasy, and that this is why entertainment proves to be so important for most people, plus from the sociological side of things there's all the stuff about leisure classes and conspicious consumption.

    I think if you consider those two things together you can get a good picture as to why the status quo exists and endures when it does not appear rational or reasonable.

    The reason that "capitalism" is so popular is the same reason that Vegas is popular or Lotteries are popular, people think or at least dream that they are going to be a winner rather than a loser, which is much more likely, and then seek to ensure that the system benefits winners and protects their winnings.
    You have to respect the skill involved though. The patient has been sold on the idea that as excessive bleeding makes them feel light headed then it's the perfect remedy for a headache. This salesmanship could have solved the middle east years ago....unfortunately it doesn't pay that well.
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?
    Likes Luke O liked this post

  8. #248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    You have to respect the skill involved though. The patient has been sold on the idea that as excessive bleeding makes them feel light headed then it's the perfect remedy for a headache. This salesmanship could have solved the middle east years ago....unfortunately it doesn't pay that well.
    The contradictions of the message alone, let alone the actual data, is simply amazing.

    Forget the "literary criticism" of Marx and Engels, who probably were able to examine the short fall from the promises to the greatest extent, the glaring paradox of most of the contemporary champions of capital are something to behold.

    Its all going to perfectly fix everything on the one hand, massive carrots, but you ignore or dissent from orthodoxy on the other and its going to wreck havock and destroy you on the other, massive stick, I've no idea how anything can simultaneously be both carrot and stick at the same time.

    To be honest I think what threats orthodoxy the most is that China has almost, in a much shorter space of time, garnered more millionaires to itself than everywhere else, with the possible exception of the US which isnt creating any new money in the way China is, and the Chinese have done so by a pretty selective application of orthodoxy themselves. If they cant be won over to anglo-saxon style class struggles against poor people shortly they could be the economic hegemons and a real alternative capitalism to the western way of capitalism.

  9. #249
    deplorable basketcase Tellenbach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,953

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander
    You're postulating that all is swimming and so the polar bear is king. Anyone who argues for the value of anything else is obviously a fool because it is raining too hard.
    I don't think the polar bear is superior to the black bear
    Read more carefully. You're attributing thoughts that I never made.

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander
    You ever look into what's happened before when one person claims to hold the truth against all opposition?
    That's hyperbole. There are about 3 people who are posting in this thread. Mr. Laffer's ideas have been vindicated dozens of times, so it really doesn't matter if socialists disagree with them. They really can't dispute the success.

    You're quoting the wrong man if you're in about management. Also you're assuming that because he's successful that he's competent to the same degree.
    I've seen Gordon Ramsay's New York City restaurant kitchen on TV. It's immaculate; his staff cleans it everyday. That attention to detail is the result of good management.

    Companies rely on people going above and beyond their job description.
    Good managers do this.

    You asked for greatness, got it and so moved the goal posts. As "greatness" is a statement of opinion and not any kind of objective measure. Thank you for proving everything I've said up to this point. I don't need to quote statistics to show you're not thinking straight. I just need to quote you.
    I defined "greatness" in an earlier post. I asked for men who changed the trajectory of humanity for the better. You'll find great men who believe in socialism but you won't find any great men who are produced by socialism. Very simple logic here. One system produces many, many great men; the other produces none. No moving of any goal post; read my earlier posts.

    An inefficient business only has to beat it's rivals. It doesn't have to do this with efficiency.
    A competitive company is usually an efficient company, especially if we're talking small businesses. Restaurants fail by the thousands each year and those that do succeed do so because they are efficient.

    Microsoft are well known to produce some absolute howlers and yet they have the largest market share.
    Microsoft achieved that market share by being the first to put out a consumer friendly OS, Microsoft 95. Linux is not consumer friendly.

    Also where do you get this crap about jobs? When did you change jobs last? Do you even have a job?
    Have you considered that perhaps the high unemployment rates in Spain, Italy, France, and Greece might have something to do with their socialist, economic policies? These nations have unemployment rates twice and three times that of the US.

    It took me 11 months to find a new job after one employer decided they were in a free market and could get rid of me on a whim.
    A big nanny state government sucks out the capital from the productive sector and you wonder why you have such a hard time finding a job. It's because businesses can't afford to hire or expand or give wage increases when the taxes and regulations are so burdensome. Simple question: if taxes are high, are businesses more likely to hire people or less likely to hire people?

    According to your deluded thinking, if the wage range of a low paid job got too low the people could take a similar pause in their income and move house to find new work in an area with better wages.
    In a thriving economy, that is the case. In North Dakota, the unemployment rate is 3%. They have essentially full employment and the competition for labor is so great that even fast food workers are making $12/hour, well above the minimum wage. In the UK, you don't have a thriving economy because of socialist policies and that is why you had such difficulty finding a job.

    Quote Originally Posted by Luke O
    You can't say Free Market Capitalism works, even if it is the least shit of all the economic/political models we use.
    Free market capitalism is wildly successful compared to the first 10,000 years of human economic activity. For 700 years, economic growth was directly tied to population growth and it grew at a rate of 0.14%/year, but then we had the industrial revolution and free market capitalism and the economic growth rate was 7 times that in the 19th century. By the 20th century, the economic growth rate doubled. (From Donlan's "A World of Wealth")
    Senator Rand Paul is alive because of modern medicine and because his attacker punches like a girl.

  10. #250
    respect the brick C.J.Woolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    424

    Default

    Microsoft got its start when IBM selected its MS-DOS (initially called QDOS, for "Quick and Dirty Operating System") for its PC. MS-DOS was not the best product available for the job, but Bill Gates' mother was a friend of IBM's CEO.

    Bill Gates started as a crony capitalist.
    Likes Tellenbach liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. Slavery, child labor, organized religion and a free-market economy
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-22-2013, 11:21 PM
  2. Define capitalism, socialism, free market fundamentalism, communism, etc.
    By ygolo in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-14-2012, 06:34 PM
  3. Why your diet may not be working like you want...
    By sdalek in forum Health and Fitness
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-03-2007, 08:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO