Reply to: The unacceptable face of capitalism

[Old Greg]

Can you tell the difference between investment of capital for a return and the selling of a Big Mac for a profit?

I'm a contractor and I sell my labour. I also invest heavily to increase the future value of my labour. I'm a capitalist and I trade in human capital.

I'll take that as a no. Carry on as before.

[SpontaneousOrder]

It's not even a dichotomy you silly.

But... can you tell the difference between the investment of capital for a return and the selling of labour for a wage?

Can you tell the difference between investment of capital for a return and the selling of a Big Mac for a profit?

I'm a contractor and I sell my labour. I also invest heavily to increase the future value of my labour. I'm a capitalist and I trade in human capital.

[Zero Liability]

You have a remarkable propensity for stating the bleedin' obvious esp after I had already said it 3 times in the thread. The term you are looking for is 'avoidance'; if a tax saving is illegal, it's 'evasion'. I think you misunderstood my point about buying in bulk; the point that I was making is that being cash rich, you can take advantage of preferential terms by buying in bulk whereas the other 98% of whom you speak usually can't. Doesn't stop you taking advantage though? It's not about whether you shop at Lidl or take the leftovers out of the skip at the back of KFC.



Especially when since WW2, successive lying governments would have us believe contributions are ring fenced and targeted only at the NHS and pensions. The biggest lie of last and this century. I would have less of a beef about paying any tax if so much was not wasted or shared around money grubbing politicians and their friends.

I'd still have an issue with it but at least then there would be a modicum of transparency to it, rather than a blatant rip off, not to mention the government's ludicrous sanctimony over it.

[Old Greg]

If that's a valid argument, then it also invalidates the idea that the state must restrict the 'extremes' of capitalism. To what end? when different peopel have different views?

No it doesn't invalidate the argument. But you are right that there will be different views (and interests) to navigate. How to navigate this depends on your political philosophy.

[BrilloPad]

Do you know the difference between a capitalist and a worker?

I am sure Bernard Manning told that one - remind me of the punchline please.

[Old Greg]

It's a false dichotomy.

It's not even a dichotomy you silly.

But... can you tell the difference between the investment of capital for a return and the selling of labour for a wage?

[SpontaneousOrder]

You seem to be confusing free trade with capitalism. Look at the relationship in any society between labour and capital and then you will understand whether it is a slave society, a feudalist society, a capitalist society or something else.

I'm not - but free trade (of goods, services, labour, or anything else a man might voluntarily trade with another) is a prerequisite. When you restrict a man's freedom to trade, or not trade - then you kill capitalism. When a deal is a bad one, men must be free to not make that trade - the state prevents that in many cases.

QE wouldn't be a problem if we were free to not participate in the current fiat paradigm. But we're not, and as such we're robbed of wealth every time the state prints another pound.

[SpontaneousOrder]

Do you know the difference between a capitalist and a worker?

It's a false dichotomy.

[SpontaneousOrder]

But different people have a different view of what a desirable outcome is.

If that's a valid argument, then it also invalidates the idea that the state must restrict the 'extremes' of capitalism. To what end? when different peopel have different views?

[Old Greg]

Where is the contradiction?

Do you know the difference between a capitalist and a worker?

[SpontaneousOrder]

Nice try but fail.



capitalist: definition of capitalist in Oxford dictionary (British & World English)

IT contractors make their living by selling their labour, so are workers, even if they are privileged workers.

Where is the contradiction?

[Old Greg]

There's a tacit understanding here of what that desirable outcome is. The problem is that people who claim that capitalism doesn't work in certain markets tend not to understand capitalism or basic economics, and that ignorance causes them to empower people to commit fraud, and sabotages the market's potential to deliver optimal results.

But different people have a different view of what a desirable outcome is.

Optimal results for whom?

[Old Greg]

Human capital.

Nice try but fail.

capitalist
Line breaks: cap¦it¦al|ist
Pronunciation: /ˈkapɪt(ə)lɪst /
NOUN

A person who uses their wealth to invest in trade and industry for profit in accordance with the principles of capitalism:

capitalist: definition of capitalist in Oxford dictionary (British & World English)

IT contractors make their living by selling their labour, so are workers, even if they are privileged workers.

[SpontaneousOrder]

Everything 'works' in that it produces an outcome. Whether that outcome is desirable is a different matter. Feudalism 'worked'.

There's a tacit understanding here of what that desirable outcome is. The problem is that people who claim that capitalism doesn't work in certain markets tend not to understand capitalism or basic economics, and that ignorance causes them to empower people to commit fraud, and sabotages the market's potential to deliver optimal results.

[Old Greg]

Exactly. That's the opposite of capitalism, not the extreme of it. It's the state's interference in markets which facilitates this fraud.

You seem to be confusing free trade with capitalism. Look at the relationship in any society between labour and capital and then you will understand whether it is a slave society, a feudalist society, a capitalist society or something else.