Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: What's gone wrong with Capitalism?

Posted 7 years ago on Nov. 3, 2012, 11:25 a.m. EST by agkaiser (2452) from Fredericksburg, TX
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Today, more people than ever are asking: “What's gone wrong with Capitalism? Why can't it support the majority of the population?”

That's the wrong question. Capitalism is a makeover of the corpse of feudalism, evolved in order to preserve the power of ruling elite classes of plutocrats. More colorfully: Capitalism is just zombie feudalism! And the Tory traitors who are the lords of Wall St, supporters of the crown in the founding fathers' day, have already eaten your brain.

What you should be asking is how do you think an economic system motivated by the desire to have more than average could ever have worked for more than a few? Do you think that something that expresses the intent to concentrate wealth with ruling elites will cause wide spread prosperity? Do you think you think at all?



Read the Rules
[-] 9 points by beautifulworld (23285) 7 years ago

Capitalism needs many many checks and balances to ensure that it at least provides enough to the masses so that they can survive, and even more checks and balances to ensure that the masses prosper, and what you end up with then, is not capitalism, because capitalism simply doesn't work!

[-] 5 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

Say it say it say it again - can I get an Amen? Amen - Brother Amen - Sister.

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (23285) 7 years ago


[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

Hey Beautiful {:-])

[-] 1 points by gsw (3324) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 7 years ago

You might like this idea?


Change the tone, get more people involved in Ows, change the world.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 years ago

if everyone got a basic guaranteed income, entrepreneurs could compete for that money

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (23285) 7 years ago

Yes. It's simple, really.

[-] 7 points by agkaiser (2452) from Fredericksburg, TX 7 years ago

Wake up! Capitalism doesn't work for most of us. Until you renounce your denial of reality no solution is possible! Start on the path to true knowledge. Know the problem.

Read 'How Does That Work' at: https://www.createspace.com/3852916

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 7 years ago

Simple, succinct and so true. Thanx for your excellent forum-post. Also, re. all things 'Occupy' :

per aspera ad astra ...

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 years ago
[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

Fuck the Mega Monster Banksters - I am in a credit union - I do believe that they will do better when the stockmarket resumes it's down hill plunge.

Folks - if you have not already - if it is possible for you to do so - then by all means shred your credit cards and get your accounts over to your community credit union - do not take out new loans unless you have no choice due to some emergency.

Operate as strictly CASH & CARRY as you can.

[-] 2 points by sassure (7) from Salem, MA 7 years ago

Capitalism is certainly not a "leave no one behind" system.....you gain success by fleecing, swindling, outsmarting, being slick, and not looking down at those you've trampled into the mud or behind at those who are left in ruins. It's the law of the jungle, but we should be evolving. Besides, thanks to the law of the jungle, the real jungle has been all but eliminated from the face of the earth.

[-] 1 points by agkaiser (2452) from Fredericksburg, TX 7 years ago


[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 7 years ago

Jon Stewart Video reveals Conflict of Interest in US Congress in Helping Main Street.


[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 7 years ago

Nothing. The problem is that 90% of the population has let the other 10% deny them their fair wage. We once had a union membership of 35% that has shrunk down to just 12%. Workers fought hard in the 30's and 40's for the relative prosperity of the 50's and 60's. If we don't negotiate, if we don't use collective bargaining, if we don't fight for a higher wage, we can't blame anyone but ourselves.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 years ago

corporations negotiate with each other

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 7 years ago

First Make a List of the Influence of Money and the Conflict of Interest that it causes.

1) Congress relies on Money for Re-election, Wealthy Corporations are happy to provide this money and provide Legislation from their own Lawyers in order to deregulate and to Create a revolving Door between government and Industry, and create regulatory Capture where the government can only afford to charge a fee for violations of banking, finance, accounting, or corporate law.
2) Congress is partisan due to personal interest/conflict of interest.
3) Elections of Congress depend on a "RUSE" to keep most Voters in the Dark, they don't like freedom of information (FOI Act). And they employ con artist tricks to promote propaganda and short "emotional Messages" to get parts of their voters involved actively supporting them as the better party (either Dem or Rep). They only need a small percent of people passing on the message of support in an emotional way to influence 20 times the number of voters.
4) Gerrymandering Districts. recently I've heard that congress members actaully run un opposed. This is Self Serving, Conflict of Interest, and a betrayal of the voters. Where is the Honor and honest USA?
5) There would have been zero Financial Crisis and banking Crisis of conservative principles from the Great Depression where Law. Sure we would have crime and fraud, Regulations only discourage Fraud and Crime. This Deregulation Could not have Occurred without Congress being on the take for Gifts, Campaign Contributions, Soft Money (501(c)(4) organizations), PACs (527s), and Lobbying. But also it could not have taken place if regulators like Allan Green Span, Hank Paulson, Tim Geithner, Mary Schipiro, Robert Rubin, Larry Summers, all the Federal Bank Examiners, FDIC, and all of Financial regulators, CFTC, SEC, weren't all Caputured by Careerist within the Lawyer and Banker Cartel that Run Wall Street.

Corporate Strategies are predictable in hind sight. In 1970 OSHA was passed and workers had already gained worker Rights. So, corporate strategies had to be created to start off-shore production since the Banana Wars had proven the Strategy for Agriculture.

Why then wouldn't Corporations try to influence all US Policies (Wash DC) and infiltrate Univesities with Conservative Plants and Ideas. The Effect was apparently embraced around 1970 as NeoLiberal Economist from the Chicago School of Economics found firm footing in National Politics. Deregulate as under Milton Freidman and Allan Greenspan.

We are still feeling the effects of the Bubble which pulled US Dollars into High yield Financial Schemes on Wall Street... and we still have all the False Ideas floating in our Economy and Politics. Politics is about planting FALSE Ideas in Media. Clearly there is a Conflict of Interest with Corporations using money and influence in Our Politics - Their only Purpose is to "Increase Profits".

Small Business is the heart of the US Economy. And what is happening there? No small business Loans since like 2007. Dishonest Loans and Deals have driven Honest Deals Out of the Economy. This is Greshem's Dynamic. Maybe a Voter has to admit there was Crime and Fraud on Wall Street in order to proceed with any enlightened Discourse.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/businessdesk/2010/03/black-the-best-econ-books-ive.html (Gresham's Dynamic)

Yeah, Obama is not a genius on Economics. His programs probably helped the Economy and prevented all out Depression, But too many people out of work who could be building infrastructure like Bidges, Roads, Schools, etc.

I Blame the Hard Ball that the Republicans always play. Sure they often Win and Make the Democracts Blink first. But they are the party of No. Except they like to start wars and spend on Defense while not bringing in tax dollars to pay for these expenses. They spend $4.1 Trillion, and cut taxes at the same time. This is not the way to Run a Business (stupid two faced Republican NeoCons, Saying government is a business is tounge in cheek here. Republicans compare the federal budget to a home or business budget and it is really a non sequitur, the logic does not follow).

I suppose someone should start a Post about Republican Non Sequiturs on the basis that business and financial Logic is extremely important to the US Future. We can't afford a nation of dumbed down republicans that don't understand busines and finance due to Non Sequiturs - put out by Politicians.

Mary Schapiro (Chairman SEC) Charles Christopher Cox (Chairman SEC) William H. Donaldson (Chairman SEC) H. David Kotz (IG SEC) Erik R. Sirri (SEC, Professor Finance, Economist) Tim Geithner (Secretary of the Treasury) Ben Bernanke (Chairman of the Federal Reserve) Alan Greenspan (former Chairman of the Federal Reserve) Jon Corzine (Goldman Sach executive, MF Global CEO, Politician) President Barak Obama (willfully ignorant, passive executive) President George Bush (Responsibility goes to the Top) President William Clinton (Responsibility goes to the Top) President George H.W. Bush (Responsibility goes to the Top) Dick Chaney (did he ever serve the public good) Lawrence Summers (former Treasury Secretary) Henry Paulson (Treasury Secretary, Goldman Sachs) Steven Shafran (Treasury, Goldmans Sachs) Kendrick R. Wilson III (Treasury, Goldmans Sachs) Edward C. Forst (Treasury, Goldman Sachs) Robert K. Steel (Wachovia CEO, Goldman Sachs, US Treasury) Robert E. Rubin (Secretary Treasury, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup) David G. Nason (Treasury) Robert F. Hoyt (Treasury) Michele Davis (Treasury) Jennifer Zuccarelli (Treasury) Stephen Friedman (Federal Reserve NY, Goldman Sachs) William C. Dudley (Federal Reserve NY, Goldman Sachs) E. Gerald Corrigan (Federal Reserve NY, Goldman Sachs) Reuben Jeffrey (Treasury, Goldman Sachs) Neel T. Kashkari (Treasury, Goldmans Sachs) *Dan Jester (Treasury, Goldman Sachs) Phillip Swagel (Treasury Economic Policy) Michael Bloomberg (Mayor NY, Bloomberg LP) David K. Wilson (OCC Bank examiner, should have known) Tim Long (OCC Bank examiner, should have known) Douglas W. Roeder (OCC, should have known) John C. Dugan (Comptroller of the Currency) John D. Hawk (Comptroller of the Currency) Armando Falcon (OFHEO) James Lockhart (OFHEO) Darrel Dochow (West regional director OTS) John Reich (Director OTS) Clarence K. Lee (Director OTS) Shiela C. Blair (FDIC, Should have known) Martin J. Gruenberg (FDIC, should Have Known) Sandra Thompson (FDIC, should have known) Robert W. Mooney (FDIC, should Have Known) George French (FDIC, should have known) Mark Pearce (FDIC, should have known) Christopher J. Spoth (FDIC, should ahve known) Michael H. Krimminger (FDIC, should have known) Arthur J. Murton (FDIC, should have known) John H. Corston (FDIC, should have known) James R. Wigand (FDIC, Complex Financial Institutions) Jason C. Cave (FDIC, Complex Financial Institutions) William C. Dudley, (Federal Reserve NY) Richard Westerkamp (Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond) Donald Kohn (Vice Chairman Federal Reserve) Joseph Sommer (Counsel, NY Federal Reserve) Timmothy P. Clark (Federal Reserve) Roger T. Cole (Federal Reserve Board) Steve Manzari (Federal Reserve NY) Dianne Dobbeck (Federal Reserve NY) Hayley Boesky (Federal Reserve NY) Seth B. Carpenter (Federal Reserve Board) James A. Clouse (Federal Reserve Board) Charles Thomas (Federal Reserve Board) Sherry Edwards (Federal Reserve Board) Patrick M. Parkinson (Board of Govenors Federal Reserve) Edward J. DeMarco (Federal Housing Finance Agency) Gary Gensler (Commodity Futures Trading Commisson) Henry Cisneros (Secretary Housing and Urban Development) Daniel H. Mudd (CEO of Fannie Mae, charged with Fraud) Donald J. Bisenius (Freddie Mac) Richard F. Syron (Freddie Mac) Alan Cranston (Democrat of California, Keating Five) Dennis DeConcini (Democrat of Arizona, Keating Five) John Glenn (Democrat of Ohio, Keating Five) John McCain (Republican of Arizona, Keating Five) Donald W. Riegle, Jr. (Keating Five) Jim Wright (D-TX) (Congressman, Vernon Savings & Loan) Eric H. Holder, Jr. (US Justice Department) Lanny A. Breuer (US Justice Department)

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 7 years ago

I do not think you can create a system for this country that will work right now. Black Friday will be all the proof we need.

We havent left the last recession. Another one is on the way. Now might not be the best time to be spending our hard earned money on cheap material goods from China. SYM. Save Your Money.

[-] 2 points by agkaiser (2452) from Fredericksburg, TX 7 years ago

Better use your money to create a personal subsistance economy or in cooperation with a neighborly community.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 7 years ago


[-] 1 points by agkaiser (2452) from Fredericksburg, TX 7 years ago

Baa! I've edited the typo. Are you always so easily distracted?

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 7 years ago

Bahhhh... Are you a friendly neighbor?

[-] 1 points by agkaiser (2452) from Fredericksburg, TX 7 years ago

I am to friendly neighbors. Friendliness and petty criticism are mutually exclusive.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 7 years ago

I lived in Phoenix for a bit.

[-] 4 points by agkaiser (2452) from Fredericksburg, TX 7 years ago

my evil big sister retired to Ft Meyers a few years ago. PHX is big and ugly like LA. AZ is getting T Party crazier by the minute. I voted against all 8 legislature propositional constitutional amendments because they're tantamount to secession. This country has seen enough of states' rights and the "South will rise again" that motivates it. The cons are a threat to the Human Race and I want to see them eliminated from the Planet's gene pool. They're a greater threat than all the tyrants and terrorists since the beginning of civization. Repus are the enemy that threatens our existence!

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 7 years ago

Agree. That is true about NeoCons and Repubs. Repus think it is just a game. Some of them put out dangerous lies knowing they are Conning their fellow americans. It is like go ahead and cheat your neighbor, a friend, a patriot. Nice.

I'm guessing it is largely the same people that are War Mongers. They are always for War with Third World Countries thousands of mile from our border ...they don't ever have to see or hear about Land mines, Disease, Wounded, Refugees, Dead Bodies, wounded Allies, dead civilians.

But I guess you are not talking about the War Mongers. You are more Talking about the Neoliberals that cut all Regulations so they can strip the Country of all it's wealth and health. Nice. The neoliberals are not exactly the same as Libertarians (US Version not European Version). But neoliberals will gain support from Libertarians at election day.

[-] 1 points by Underdog (2971) from Clermont, FL 7 years ago

Roughly speaking, I have personally come to the conclusion that the overlay of Capitalism (which is a form of economic/financial dictatorship) against the social/political structure of Democracy (or apparent Democracy) creates a structural "schizophrenic" conflict that can never be resolved as it currently exists. It was setup originally in this country to favor the wealthy class, who wanted the social/political/religious freedom that they felt they did not have under British rule, but they (wealthy) wished to retain the Financial Aristocracy of Business Dictatorship (where the owner rules from the top-down and dictates business activities/policies from on high). 200+ years later, this peculiar dichotomy has resulted in a conflicted population who are taught from childhood that the country is the "land of the free", and that the individual can vote and determine the political and governmental direction of the country, but cannot "vote" under normal circumstances to determine the direction of a Corporation. In publicly-traded corporations shareholder votes are not equal, but based upon number of shares held, so even here there is no truly democratic process at work, but rather that wealth dictates voting power.

How could this dichotomy be resolved? By working to reduce the influence and operation of Corporatism either formally (rule of law) or informally (grass-roots efforts such as Move to Amend) and work to replace Corporatism with Co-operativism (Co-ops) whereby the democratic process is used to run the business and typically involves ALL employess in business decisions...not just CEOs and the Boards of Corporations. Once ALL Corporations have been replaced with Cooperatives, a unity of political/social/business/economic/financial can, in theory, be achieved...and this would unify the 99% in a way that would be historically unprecidented. To achieve true Democracy in all aspects is a worthy pursuit that should be constantly worked toward with a vision for a better tomorrow, and to always work to achieve the greatest good for the greatest number, and not the greatest good for the smallest number.

But the 1% Aristocracy will not peacefully surrender their dictatorships that they have enjoyed for so very, very long. My personal dream would be that all publicly-traded corporations would somehow allow shareholders to vote for conversion of the Corporate legal entity to a Cooperative one. This would be nothing short of miraculous if it occurred, but perhaps it would be a place to start. Another possibility would be similar to Move to Amend, but perhaps called "Move to Convert" (to Cooperatives). There are multiple avenues that could be chosen if people got serious about it, but you need enough people (millions) to get serious about it for there to be any hope at all.

But one can always dream.

[-] 1 points by agkaiser (2452) from Fredericksburg, TX 7 years ago

We will have to awaken a critical mass before the real work can begin.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 7 years ago

The problem isn't capitalism. From 1958 to 1968 the U.S had the best 10 years in recent memory. Everybody shared in the wealth under a capitalist system.


From 1968 to 2008 the wealth went almost entirely to the upper 10%.


It wasn't because of capitalism, but because a few who understand how rapid inflation confuses the real value of money, they took advantage of that knowledge and continue to today. Our money supply went off the gold standard in 1971 and rapid devaluation of the dollar has continued ever since.


The average person doesn't know if he's making a better wage now than he did ten years ago, or if the price he's paying for a loaf of bread is a fair deal. With the benchmark value for the dollar constantly changing, the opportunity for those who do understand the changing value of a dollar will continue to take advantage of those who do not. It's not a matter of capitalism versus socialism, it's a matter of economic understanding. The group that has the knowledge will always rule the group that does not.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 7 years ago

Do i think capitalism is bad no

[-] 0 points by WSmith (2698) from Cornelius, OR 7 years ago

Deregulation is the problem.

Reregulation is the answer.

The 1%-Cons are against that.

The 99%-Dems are for it.

Vote the 1%-Cons OUT!


[-] 0 points by WuWei (34) from New York, NY 7 years ago

I don't like the word Capitalism, I Prefer trader. Trading is an honourable profession. The guy selling hot dogs down your street is a trader not a capitalist. Why can't trading support the Majority of people? I didn't know know it couldn't. I thought it could and was. Marxism can't. Russia and China have never had it so good since they ditched Marxism and took up Liberatarianism and it is the only chance for other developing nations as well.

[-] 6 points by agkaiser (2452) from Fredericksburg, TX 7 years ago

You hear about the billionaires made when KGB gangsters bought up Russia's national industries and resources for pennies on the dollar but not about the decline in living standards for the majority. American entertainment news media propagandists don't report the whole truth.

When you get the facts, try to imagine a world in which everyone is a successful trader and no one works at production. That libertarian utopia is as unsustainable as Galt's island without a real economy to parasitize!

Ayn Rand was an idiot and Milton Friedman a cynical SOB. All the rest from Reagan/Greenspan to pseudo Asian crack pots are the dupes of fools.

[-] 1 points by WuWei (34) from New York, NY 7 years ago

If we were all self employed traders then we would all be part of the same hypocriscy wouldnt we? Marxism is rubbish, its the politics of envy. The reason for the break up of the Soviet Union was due to the utter inadequacy of Marxism to deal with the slightest problem. The Soviet union was already disintegrating when Gorbachov declared Peristroika but it was too little too late. What has Marxism ever achieved? Everybody who,had to live under it hated it. That was the reason for the Iron curtain. Russia was a prison. Thank God its gone, good riddance to and I hope we are now rid of it for ever.

[-] 2 points by agkaiser (2452) from Fredericksburg, TX 7 years ago

The failure of 20th some century "Marxist" experiments says nothing about the truth of Marx's predictions concerning capitalism. We're seeing the failure of parasitic abstract economy hundreds of years before Marx foresaw.

The most successful economies are Scandinavian socialist, with high taxes and social services that compensate for them. Even Cuba, where bourgeois professionals, plantation owners and other capitalists and their ministers suffered, the general population, at least 90%, are much better off than they were under the gangsters and banksters who preceded the revolution.

But you don't want the whole truth, do you? You want to cherrypick the facts to make your case for greed. And you won't even really admit that trade is dependent on real economy and can't exist without a repressed majority to exploit. I don't give a fuck about what's happened in Russia or China. I care about the evil that's still going on in America today.

Wake up! That tired old libertarian shit never has tasted good to any but the utter fools who gobble it 24/7!

[-] 1 points by WuWei (34) from New York, NY 7 years ago

I agree with you about Scandanavian Socialism which is in fact National Socialism without the racism. I regard the brief period of Socialism that Europe experienced after the war as an outstanding success but the European electorate turned their backs on it. The attraction to me of the Liberatarian philosophy is what it can do for Developing countries such as China. But to be fair if it hadn't been combined with the one child policy it would have done little to lift the chinese poor out of the dire poverty they were in. India has also had spectacular growth rates but every year the number of new Jobs created is less than the number of new mouths to feed. But part of the Liberatarian Philosophy is the legalisation of Marijuana. Just think how that could transform third world economies such as Mexico, Morocco and Jamacia. I have heard it said that Canadian exports of Marijuana to the USA are bringing more money to Canada than Wheat. The Liberatarians are not against the idea of Welfare, only that it should be limited to what can be afforded.Look at Thailand. They have unemployment benefit there, also old age pensions, disablement pensions and Student loans. Households that use less than a certain amount of water and electricity get both for free. They run free buses for the poor and third class travel on the railways are free. A few years ago they gave everybody earning the basic wage or less $30 to spend. They hand out cheap start up business loans. All this on a 10% income tax rate, 7.5% sales tax, and stiff import duties.

[-] -2 points by Shayneh (-482) 7 years ago

For those of you who think Capitalism is gone wrong - how many of you know how to earn a living using your own knowledge and labour without working for somoeone else?

Could you survive working on your own, not having to worry about someone making money off your labour but you making money off your own labour.

Could you do that? If you can't why not? What's your excuse?

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

I'm a builder. I sometimes employ others.

[-] 1 points by agkaiser (2452) from Fredericksburg, TX 7 years ago

You're asking if we can be like the evil masters and play their game. Wake up! Community based production will not be controlled by capitalists. They won't make the rules that make it improbable that we can succeed. We won't be playing their game. Why don't fools like you get it?

You can only say nay to everything that even criticizes the 'free market' fraud. You are as disgusting as Mitch McConnel or John Boner!

[-] -1 points by Shayneh (-482) 7 years ago

So tell everyone - you say working for yourself is being like the "evil masters" and play their gaim. So tell us - what is your option for being able to provide for yourself or your family without working for what you want?

[-] 5 points by pangloss2 (20) from Montclair, NJ 7 years ago

no! you say he says, 'working for yourself is being like the "evil masters" and play their gaim.'

He said: working for them instead of ourselves is playing their game. But I don't expect someone who can't spell game (or proofread their blather) to understand that.

[-] 0 points by Shayneh (-482) 7 years ago

Where in his comment that I replied to did he say "working for them instead of ourselves is playing their game?

And where in my comment did I say "you're asking if we can be like the evil masters and pley their game?

What I did say is basically - if you don't like working for someone go work for yourself. So tell me how is "working for yourself" the same as "working for someone" else?

[-] 1 points by pangloss2 (20) from Montclair, NJ 7 years ago

You don't recognise what you yourself have written. I'm not going to waste time trying to explain what I've inferred from what another has written. The education of fools is a thankless task!