For those that understand capitalism and a FREE society...

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

There are many different ideas or systems of how an economy should be run. The two most common are capitalism and socialism. They are very different in how they view who runs the economy. Most economies have ideas from both systems, but tend to be more of one than the other.

Capitalism is the economic system based on private or corporate ownership of, production and distribution of goods. It has always existed to some extent in all civilizations but was written about formally by Adam Smith in his book "The Wealth of Nations" in 1776. Capitalists favor a system of free enterprise which means the government should not interfere in the economy - that the laws of supply and demand will make sure that the ecnomy runs most efficiently in meeting people's needs. Capitalism is characterized by competition in which there is rivalry in supplying or getting an economic service or good. Sellers compete with other sellers, and buyers with other buyers. The buyers seek the best possible deal in purchasing goods and the sellers look to make the best possible sale allowing them the most profit.

Socialism is an economic theory or idea that states that the government or the state should be in charge of economic planning, production and distribution of goods. This contrasts with capitalism where free markets predonimate and property is privately owned. Socielism tends to favor cooperation whereas capitalism is characterized by competition.

The theories of socialism first arose in the late eighteenth century in response to the Industrial Revolution where factory owners were becoming wealthy and the workers impoverished. Thus, workers wanted a greater share in the wealth that factories were making. Later a form of socialism called communism sprang up based on the writings of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Communism advocates class struggle and revolution to establish a society of cooperation with strong government control. Communism predominated in the former Soviet Union and much of Eastern Europe at one time. Today it predominates in China and Cuba, but its influence has lessened.

From time to time in human history, there occur events of seismic significance, when one orthodoxy is overthrown and another takes its place. Today, the scale of the global financial crisis demands that we re-evaluate the economic policy and philosophy that brought us to this point.

George Soros has said that "the salient feature of the current financial crisis is that it was not caused by some external shock. ... The crisis was generated by the system itself." He is right. The current crisis is the culmination of a 30-year domination of economic policy by a free-market ideology that has been variously called neo-liberalism, economic liberalism or economic fundamentalism. The central thrust of this ideology has been that government activity should be constrained, and ultimately replaced, by market forces. In the past year, we have seen how unchecked market forces have brought capitalism to the precipice.

Instead of distributing risk throughout the world, the global financial system has intensified it. Neo-liberal orthodoxy held that global financial markets would ultimately self-correct - the invisible hand of unfettered market forces finding their own equilibrium. But as economist Joseph Stiglitz has caustically observed: "The reason that the invisible hand often seems invisible is that it is not there."

Just as it fell to Franklin Roosevelt to rebuild American capitalism after the Depression, and to the American Democrats, strongly influenced by John Maynard Keynes, to rebuild postwar domestic demand, to engineer the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe and to set in place the Bretton Woods system to govern international economic engagement, so it falls to a new generation to reflect on and rebuild our national and international economic systems.

If centrist governments are to save capitalism, they must face three challenges. First is to use the agency of the state to reconstitute properly regulated markets and to rebuild domestic and global demand. With the demise of neo-liberalism, the role of the state has once more been recognized as fundamental. The state has been the primary actor in responding to three clear areas of the current crisis: in rescuing the private financial system from collapse; in providing direct stimulus to the real economy because of the collapse in private demand; and in the design of a national and global regulatory regime in which government has ultimate responsibility to determine and enforce the rules of the system.

The second challenge for social democrats is not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. As the global financial crisis unfolds and the hard impact on jobs is felt by families across the world, the pressure will be great to retreat to some model of an all-providing state and to abandon altogether the cause of open, competitive markets both at home and abroad. Protectionism has already begun to make itself felt, albeit in softer and more subtle forms than the crudity of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930. Soft or hard, protectionism is a surefire way of turning recession into depression, as it exacerbates the collapse in global demand. Social democracy's continuing philosophical claim to political legitimacy is its capacity to balance the private and the public, profit and wages, the market and the state. That philosophy once again speaks with clarity and cogency to the challenges of our time.

A further challenge for governments in dealing with the current crisis is its almost unprecedented global dimensions. Governments must craft consistent global financial regulations to prevent a race to the bottom, where capital leaks out to the areas of the global economy with the weakest regulation. We must establish stronger global disclosure standards for systemically important financial institutions. We must also build stronger supervisory frameworks to provide incentives for more responsible corporate conduct, including executive remuneration.

The world has turned to co-ordinated governmental action through the Group of 20: to help provide immediate liquidity to the global financial system; to co-ordinate sufficient fiscal stimulus to respond to the growth gap arising from the global recession; to redesign global regulatory rules for the future; to reform the existing global public institutions - especially the International Monetary Fund - to provide them with the powers and resources necessary for the demands of the 21st century.

The IMF's governance arrangements must be reformed. It is only reasonable that, if we expect fast-growing developing economies such as that of China to make a greater contribution to multilateral institutions such as the IMF, they should also gain a stronger decision-making voice in these forums.

The longer-term challenge for governments is to address the imbalances that have helped to destabilize the global economy in the past decade: in particular, the imbalances between large surplus economies such as that of China, Japan and the oil-exporting nations, and large debtor nations such as America.

The magnitude of the crisis and its impact across the world means that minor tweakings of long-established orthodoxies will not do. Two unassailable truths have already been established: that financial markets are not always self-correcting or self-regulating, and that government can never abdicate responsibility for maintaining economic stability.

For governments, it is critical that we get it right - not just to save the system of open markets from self-destruction, but also to rebuild confidence in properly regulated markets, so as to prevent extreme reactions from the far left or the far right taking hold.

Governments must get it right because the stakes are so high: There are the economic and social costs of long-term unemployment; poverty once again expanding its grim reach across the developing world; and the impact on long-term power structures within the existing international political and strategic order. Success is not optional. Too much now rides on our ability to prevail.

people can take anything out of context and do with it what they want; it still doesn't make it a McCain/Palin issue.

foreign to you. Do you not understand that the purpose of marriage is to produce the next generation? Just how do queers do that? Queer adoption only propagates more perversion. It's the role model instilled, you know? Monkey see, monkey do.

Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by a Holy God because of blatant homosexuality. Is that what you want to participate in? The wrath of God?

Reptile breeders should feel pride in the progress they�ve helped achieve over the past several decades. We�ve unraveled many of the mysteries of inducing our animals to reproduce in captivity, and have made �Captive-Bred� ( = 'CB' ) a common adjective in the hobby and industry. CB applied to herps is now understood to reflect �quality� and �hardiness� as pets. The percentage of CB herps available today dwarfs what we had just ten years ago, and is already making up a significant proportion of herps sold in pet shops.

Just as it seems obvious to us close to the herp industry that this natural evolution is proceeding well, new threats to our freedom to keep herps looms in the form of three �new� enemies � the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), The Fund For Animals, and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). The PETA are presently under scrutiny by the F.B.I. as a terrorism network because of their admission of funding extremists who have destroyed several facilities by fire. These closely-aligned organizations have remained largely hidden from our notice until recently. They have now set their sights on the reptile hobby and trade, their ultimate goals being to stop it completely.

The HSUS is a familiar group to most people. Its name seems to imply it all � humane treatment for animals. In the past, the group took in abandoned cats and dogs, prosecuted farms that allowed livestock to starve, and went after people who mistreated animals in some way. It created animal shelters, promoted spay-neuter programs, and developed modern euthanasia protocols. We all applauded the old HSUS efforts and supported it with our donations. We believed in what it stood for and helped make it a huge and powerful organization.

The HSUS was wildly successful in its efforts. The public was educated and abuse cases dwindled. Nowadays, it�s headline news when a rare case of neglect or other atrocity against animals is uncovered and prosecuted. Anyone who may have allowed care of an animal in their custody to become substandard is now frightfully aware of the consequences of such unacceptable behavior.

Since 1954, the HSUS has grown into a huge bureaucratic organization with 200+ employees and well over $200,000,000 (by 2005) in their bank accounts. The money is stock-piled, and not one dollar of it is used to help the many �Humane Society� shelters in cities across

America

. The HSUS long ago separated itself from all the smaller regional societies around the country, sharing no funding at all with them now. You are doing nothing to help your local community animal shelter by donating money to the Humane Society of the

United States

The HSUS got fat and prosperous capitalizing on our concern for the plight of homeless animals by bombarding us with tear-jerking fundraising campaigns. Its assets naturally attracted humaniac extremist groups like PETA that wished to tap into the war chest of funds. Radical animal rights proponents thoroughly infiltrated the HSUS and instilled their idealistic views as representing the whole organization�s doctrine. Then a subtle �coup� occurred in 1973, warranted by the changing leadership because �the costs of running a local animal control operation [was] drawing off funds needed elsewhere�. (< That quote is from the HSUS� own website!) They literally declared that supporting the small Humane Society shelters across the U.S. was 'stealing' the money needed to pursue their own new humaniac agendas.

The HSUS split away completely, dropping financial support of all the smaller state �Humane Society� groups. But they did it quietly to leave everyone with the logical impression they were now just the national headquarters coordinating all �their local chapters�. They have purposely done nothing to erase that illusion of �umbrella organization� to insure receiving all the same donation monies you thought were still supporting your home town animal shelters. The HSUS�s coffers swelled because they didn�t have to share the wealth anymore. It was a pretty sneaky and wildly successful move on their part!

The HSUS grew into a rich monster that basked in the glory of its past accomplishments of conquering cruelty to animals. But with that war largely won, the �new� HSUS had a different agenda to set its sights on. Most importantly, it had to continue evoking sympathy donations from the public to keep the money flowing in. Creating a new, visible enemy became a necessity. They chose to refocus on non-traditional pets largely because the ranks of people in the bird, reptile and fish hobbies / industries were less unified, easier targets. This is why reptile-keeping has come under attack. We�re the new excuse � the new bad guys � to keep their paychecks coming in steadily.

In its distorted view (and the published rhetoric it distributes to back it), reptiles are totally unsuitable as pets. The HSUS preaches that nearly all reptiles suffer shortened life spans when kept in cages. It goes so far as to include all captive-bred herps in that appraisal, but not through sheer ignorance.

The HSUS�s clever strategy is to focus the public�s attention on isolated problems it can capture in pictures or on video to invoke sympathy, then imply that those disturbing images represent the norm in the entire industry. Recognizing the huge progress in herpetoculture over the past couple decades would not strengthen the gloomy ecological scenario it wants people to remember when filling out those donation checks. The HSUS purposely ignores captive breeding success and how it is rapidly replacing the need for some wild-caught herps. It's crucial the public stay duped into believing that stopping reptile-keeping is the only way to protect animals in nature. The HSUS needs this manufactured image to focus public condemnation and thus assure continued funding of their efforts.

Another HSUS approach is to scare us into believing that reptile-related Salmonella has reached plague proportions. Its well-paid advertising staff uses the craftiest psychology to twist facts and statistics and to publicize the �huge� health threat herps pose. It knows such tactics weigh heavily on parents� minds, hoping those frightened parents will prohibit their children from having herps at all.

Just how big a problem is Salmonella anyway? Bill and I do not know, or even know of, anyone who has ever contracted Salmonella from reptiles in their entire lives. We don�t even personally know of any Salmonella cases, period, and we know and meet lots of herp keepers! We don't doubt that it happens occasionally, but the HSUS is blowing public health fears all out of proportion to achieve their animal rights goals.

Unlike the old HSUS, the new PETAphile leaders have declared total war on all pet keepers, intending to end the practice of owning pets completely. They�ve stated that goal repeatedly, though they try to subtly disguise the true, hidden agenda so not to scare away contributions from cat and dog owners. On their website�s home page (http://www.hsus.org), they state �Promoting the protection of all animals�. What they mean is to protect ALL animals from any use by humans - as pets, as food, as leather, for medical research --- EVERYthing! Don�t let them fool you --- HSUS and PETA are essentially synonymous today.

The HSUS is presently trying to make virtually every act of pet keeping an offense by emphasizing every imperfection in our ability to draft new species into captivity / domestication. They subtly bombard schools with free 'animal information' that carries their propaganda, preaching their private agenda to children so their 'conservation message' is taken to heart early. When indoctrinated while young and impressionable, they hope those children will support the HSUS as future voters / donators. The HSUS is no longer composed of soldiers for a noble cause. They�re more like mercenaries who must create an enemy to assure their continued employment. The modern HSUS is an animal rights organization masquerading as an animal welfare organization. Supporting them is like supplying terrorists with money to hurt us.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Don�t abandon the local Humane Society animal shelters in your own community � they�re still doing their commendable work as always.

We have not suddenly become political activists. This expos� is just an honest response to the attack the HSUS initiated upon all herp keepers. We hope it may convince you to spread the word to friends and family. Avoid doing anything that benefits the Humane Society of the United States, the reptile hobby and industry's new sworn enemy.

self-righteous, superior, ignorant, totally irrelevant and insignificant DISDAIN.

* I don't know what *9/11 perps* you are talking about, but I don't think anyone has gone free.*

BAGHDAD, Iraq � About 24 top former officials in Saddam Hussein's regime, including a biological weapons expert known as Dr. Germ, have been released from jail, while a militant group released a video Monday of the purported killing of an American hostage.

The first results of Thursday's parliamentary election were released, with officials saying the Shiite religious bloc, the United Iraqi Alliance, got about 58 percent of the votes from 89 percent of ballot boxes counted in Baghdad province.

Across Iraq, meanwhile, demonstrations broke out to protest a government decision to raise the price of gasoline, heating and cooking fuel, and the oil minister threatened to resign over the development.

An Iraqi lawyer said the 24 or 25 officials from Saddam's government were released from jail without charges, and some have already left the country.

The release was an American-Iraqi decision and in line with an Iraqi government ruling made in December 2004, but hasn't been enforced until after the elections in an attempt to ease the political pressure in Iraq, said the lawyer, Badee Izzat Aref.

Among them were Rihab Taha, a British-educated biological weapons expert, who was known as Dr. Germ for her role in making bio-weapons in the 1980s, and Huda Salih Mahdi Ammash, known as Mrs. Anthrax, a former top Baath Party official and biotech researcher, Aref said.

Because of security reasons, some of them want to leave the country, he said. He declined to elaborate, but noted some have already left Iraq today.

Lt. Col. Barry Johnson, a U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad, would say only that eight individuals formerly designated as high-value detainees were released Saturday after a board process found they were no longer a security threat and no charges would be filed against them.

Neither the U.S. military or Iraqi officials would disclose any of the names, but a legal official in Baghdad said Taha and Ammash were among those released.

The official, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the issue, said those released also included Hossam Mohammed Amin, head of the weapons inspections directorate, and Aseel Tabra, an Iraqi Olympic Committee official under Odai Saddam Hussein, the former leader's son.

The video from the extremist group The Islamic Army of Iraq was posted on a Web site and showed a man purportedly being shot in the back of the head. Last week, the group had claimed it had killed civilian contractor Ronald Allen Schulz, a native of North Dakota.

The video did not show the victim's face, however, and it was impossible to identify him. The victim was kneeling with his back to the camera, with his hands tied behind his back and blindfolded with an Arab headdress when he was purportedly shot. The video also showed Schulz's identity card.

A separate video, shown on a split screen, showed images of Schulz alive. The group had aired that video when he was first taken hostage earlier this month.

Schulz has been identified by the extremist group as a security consultant for the Iraqi Housing Ministry, although family and neighbors from his current home in Alaska, say he is an industrial electrician who has worked on contracts around the world.

Schulz served in the Marine Corps from 1984 to 1991. He moved to Alaska six years ago, and friends and family say he is divorced.

The German government, meanwhile, said kidnappers had freed a German aid worker and archaeologist taken hostage with her driver in northern Iraq more than three weeks ago. Susanne Osthoff, 43, was reported in good condition at the German Embassy in Baghdad. It was unclear whether Osthoff's Iraqi driver had also been freed.

The military said a U.S. Marine was killed by small arms fire Sunday in the town of Ramadi, in central Iraq. The death brought to 2,156 the number of U.S. service members killed since the start of the war in 2003, according to an Associated Press count.

In other violence Monday, a suicide car bomb exploded outside a children's hospital in western Baghdad, killing at least two people and wounding 11, including seven police, officials said. Police believe the bomb had targeted a convoy carrying a police colonel, who was among the injured.

In western Baghdad, gunmen attacked the convoy of Deputy Baghdad Gov. Ziad Tariq, killing three civilians and wounding three of his bodyguards, police said. Tariq was not injured.

Iraqi soldiers on Monday began Operation Moonlight, which the U.S. military described as the first large-scale operation planned and executed by soldiers of the Iraqi 1st Brigade. The mission's aim is to disrupt insurgent activity along the Euphrates River near the border with Syria.

There are five Iraqi Army companies and one U.S. Marine company taking part in the operation, said Marine Capt. Jeffrey S. Pool.

With 89 percent of the ballot boxes counted in Baghdad province � Iraq's largest district � preliminary results showed the United Iraqi Alliance received 1,403,901 votes, or about 58 percent, while the Sunni Arab Iraqi Accordance party got 451,782 votes, and former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi's Iraqi National List with 327,174 votes, the electoral commission said.

The commission did not say how many people voted in Baghdad province or provide further details. Baghdad is Iraq's biggest electoral district with 2,161 candidates running for 59 of the 275 seats in Iraq's parliament.

Results from southern Basra province, also mixed but predominantly Shiite, saw the clergy-backed United Iraqi Alliance significantly ahead, winning 612,206 votes with 98 percent of ballot boxes counted. The list headed by Allawi, a secular Shiite, was in second with 87,134 votes, while the Sunni accordance party trailed with 36,997 votes.

In a speech Sunday, President Bush praised the vote and warned against a pullout of U.S. forces. He said the election would not end violence but means that America has an ally of growing strength in the fight against terror. He also warned that a U.S. troop pullout would signal to the world that America cannot be trusted to keep its word.

The fuel prices were raised Sunday � some as much as nine times � to curb a growing black market, Oil Ministry spokesman Assem Jihad said.

A gallon of imported and super gasoline in Iraq was raised to about 68 cents, but Iraqis were upset by the fivefold increase. The price of locally produced gas was raised to about 48 cents per gallon, a sevenfold increase.

In Amarah, 180 miles southeast of Baghdad, police fired into the air to disperse the hundreds of protesters who had gathered in front of the provincial government headquarters. The demonstrators, however, didn't leave, and scuffles broke out with police.

Drivers blocked roads and set tires on fire near fuel stations in the southern city of Basra, and hundreds demonstrated outside the governor's headquarters to protest the increases.

Oil Minister Ibrahim Bahr al-Uloum said when the Cabinet raised prices, it also decided that the extra money would be used to support more than 2 million low-income families. Some aid money was supposed to reach the families before the increases, but that didn't happen, he said.

Dr. Ibrahim will submit his resignation to the Iraqi government if the situation continues as is, he said, referring to himself. We should take in consideration the living conditions and the economic situation of the citizens.

Iraq's oil minister has previously said that cheap domestic fuel prices had encouraged smuggling to other countries. Iraq's government has continued Saddam's practice of heavily subsidizing fuel prices.

Do you really think the government will give us worse insurance than the for-profit insurers are doing now? Really???

I'm sick of paying something for nothing - after all the deductibles, out of pocket charges, copays and disallowed claims - that's pretty much what we get. I'd rather take the money I pay in premiums to a greedy corporation who will refuse to pay a cent when the time comes I need them - and pay it in taxes for a free healtchare plan. At least everybody would be in the same boat, with no nasty surprises.

healthcare for myself. I want free or more affordable cost healthcare for American children. My children are already covered. My husband has worked for the same company for over 12 years, and he has decent insurance. You are impossible to argue with because you refuse to admit that we can afford $333 MILLION PER DAY FOR A WAR IN IRAQ, AND WE CAN AFFORD $19 MILLION PER DAY FOR CHILDREN'S HEALTH CARE. How are your taxes going to be raised to 70% of your income for the health care? Have they been raised that high for the war? NO, so your argument is not valid.

I discovered this web site a couple weeks ago and have been finding it rather humerous. It's has a liberal slant, but seems to hang more on government watch. Enjoy!

For those that understand capitalism and a FREE society...

What government must do to save capitalism

Related Articles