BS: Capitalism: A Love Story

Subject: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Sep 09 - 09:10 PM

I think I'm looking forward to this one, too...

http://fora.tv/2009/09/17/Filmmaker_Michael_Moore_on_Capitalism_A_Love_Story#fullprogram

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Sep 09 - 10:26 PM

Me too. I've watched about half the video now, and it's excellent.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Sep 09 - 10:35 PM

Power to the people!


;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: number 6
Date: 24 Sep 09 - 11:33 PM

Michael Moore is reaping the benefits of captialism quite well .... he has a very healthy investment portfolio ... it even included included some Haliburton stock!

He denies it ... but, it's not the first time he's lied.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: pdq
Date: 24 Sep 09 - 11:42 PM

He made over $100 million just from his 2004 Bush-bash movie. How do you spell hypocrit?

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Sep 09 - 11:58 PM

So if anyone actually succeeds in doing anything substantial in a career sense in our present system, pdq, then I guess he cannot be considered a legitimate spokesman on behalf of the general public, the poor, and those in need?

That sounds like a very good method for ensuring that any progressive messages which would initiate radical social change in the USA will never reach the general public at all....because only a message that HAS a great deal of money behind it (which can only be done if it's highly profitable) CAN reach the general public at all in the present system of film distribution as it exists in North America.

There are a great many independent individuals of a progressive type who would like, I'm sure, to make a movie about the kind of things Michael Moore is addressing, and they would like it to reach an audience of millions. But....if they do not have a lot of money already and a lot of connections in the business already...that won't happen. Their movies will hardly be seen by anyone, won't be spoken of in the media, and won't play in the cineplexes across the nation. No one will know what they said.

You've got to already be a major player in this capitalist system to be able to afford and get major exposure. Moore is a major player.

I fear that the kind of personal moral nobility you seem to demand of people who represent views that worry you is based on your inner and unspoken desire for those people to simply not be in any position to make their views known. Then and only then will they meet your stringent requirements for moral purity...because then you'll get exactly what you want: they won't be heard.

What bothers you about Moore, I suspect, is his message, not his moral fibre.

Moore has not said he's against capitalism. He has said he's against greedy and unscrupulous and dishonest and antisocial business practices that damage 95% of society for the benefit of 5% of society. Rule by a tiny elite is what that is. It's not democracy.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 01:17 AM

Those kinds of criticisms look like nothing more than gossip to me, anyway. They certainly don't address the subject of the film itself.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 01:47 AM

For once, I'm slightly at odds with my fellow heretics, Little Hawk and Carol.
"Moore has not said he's against capitalism. He has said he's against greedy and unscrupulous and dishonest and antisocial business practices that damage 95% of society for the benefit of 5% of society.".....I'm afraid the practice of Capitalism always leads inevitably to the situation you describe Hawk, we should try to understand Capitalism for what it really is...a device to organise society in a certain way, to enslave society, to trade material posessions for real life.

It should be wiped from the face of the earth! No excuses!

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 01:49 AM

I haven't yet said what I think of Capitalism. I think I'll wait until I see the movie before I comment on that.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 02:57 AM

On this occasion, I agree with akenaton

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: Stu
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 05:42 AM

"How do you spell hypocrit?"

With an 'e' on the end.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 07:35 AM

Moor stated that he's been waiting for the day to be financially independent enough to make *this* film. As far as he is concerned, he see's the money he's created from his prior work, as providing him with independent financial resources to invest in future projects. As his projects are not fundamentally self-serving in their purpose, I see no problem in that.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 07:38 AM

Make that Moore with an e..

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: number 6
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 07:54 AM

I see Moore as the (U.S.) left's equivalent af Bill O'Rielly.

Both are right on to the point 55% of the time.

Both distort the facts and truth 45% of the time. This percentage which is nothing more than just plain propaganda is rather dangerous.

Both lose their composure when confronted by someone who has them cornered in the ropes.

Both reap sufficiently large amounts of $money$ out of their endeavors.

As to the movie ... well, like Carol I'm going to have to see it before any I can make any comments on it.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: number 6
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 08:04 AM

I should also add ...

Both Moore and O'rielly play up thier working class backgrounds ... and distrust of the ivy league corporate heads.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 09:34 AM

As regards capitalism itself, Akenaton....on what level?

What I mean is this. Capitalism on the LARGE level does always lead to massive corruption and waste, not to mention stark insanity. No doubt about it. On the other hand, socialism on the LARGE level has led to other forms of corruption and waste and stark insanity (when you look at socialism as practiced by Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc).

Now what about on a smaller level? I see nothing wrong with the fact that an artisan or a small business person or a farmer or an entertainer charges enough his or her product or service in order to generate a profit and thereby earn a living. That's capitalism on a small scale. A product or service that is honestly and well done and useful deserves to generate a profit, and indeed is unviable if it does not do so (in a money-based economy).

So when you say the word "capitalism", what are you talking about exactly?

I've visited a largely socialist society...Cuba...and I liked it a lot. I liked the complete lack of commercial advertising. I liked the fact that there were lots of little unique local businesses (stores, cafes, artisans, etc) who were all different from one another according to who ran then and how....instead of the soulless chains that we have in North America like McDonald's, Starbucks, etc.

And by the way, those little Cuban businesses and artisans were, in fact, engaging in a form of capitalist activity, because they were charging above cost for what they were selling in order to generate enough cash flow to make their activities profitable and worthwhile...despite the fact that they supposedly exist in a socialist society.

So what you really had there was a mix of capitalism (small scale) with socialism (large scale).

What we have in Canada is a mix of capitalism (large and small scale) with a mix of socialism (mostly large scale) although a series of conservatively influenced governments under orders from the corporates have been chipping away at the socialist institutions for about 3 decades now.

So how are you defining "capitalism" when you dismiss it as entirely evil?

As long as we have money at all, then I think we have to have a good deal of small-scale capitalism. We should find ways of severely regulating the activities of large scale capitalism so as to prevent its abuses.

I would love to see a society with no money at all, where things are done because they are good for people, not because they generate a profit, but I don't see any likelihood of that happening in the near term. (See the many episodes of Star Trek Next Generation for a demonstration of exactly how such a society would work...and YES, it is possible! It only requires the vision and the will to set it up, educate people to understand it, and then do it. If done, it would establish a genuine democracy and a genuinely fair and sane social system on this planet by freeing people from the tyrranny of the once useful tool they invented long ago...money...which in time became a devouring monster.)

*****

Moore is right to distrust social elites. Their primary purpose (in general, not right down to every individual in the elite) is to maintain and enlarge their already dominant position in a society and they do it on the backs of the ordinary public. Sometimes real reformers do come forth FROM the elite. They are notable exceptions to their class, and are probably viewed as traitors and subversives by the rest, I would think. Fidel Castro, for instance, was the son of a wealthy family. One thing about wealth...it gives you time to think about social theory, if you're so inclined to. An idealistic son or daughter of the wealthy can well become a revolutionary, but in so doing he or she must directly challenge the very power structure he was born in. Only a few do.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: meself
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 09:49 AM

Capitalism is good at some things; socialism is good at others. Capitalism does a superb job of getting food onto the shelves of the grocery store. Socialism provides quality health care. Etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: pdq
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 10:31 AM

America's Capitalist Economy

        From U.S. Department of State, for About.com

In every economic system, entrepreneurs and managers bring together natural resources, labor, and technology to produce and distribute goods and services. But the way these different elements are organized and used also reflects a nation's political ideals and its culture.

The United States is often described as a "capitalist" economy, a term coined by 19th-century German economist and social theorist Karl Marx to describe a system in which a small group of people who control large amounts of money, or capital, make the most important economic decisions. Marx contrasted capitalist economies to "socialist" ones, which vest more power in the political system. Marx and his followers believed that capitalist economies concentrate power in the hands of wealthy business people, who aim mainly to maximize profits; socialist economies, on the other hand, would be more likely to feature greater control by government, which tends to put political aims -- a more equal distribution of society's resources, for instance -- ahead of profits.

Does Pure Capitalism Exist in the United States?
While those categories, though oversimplified, have elements of truth to them, they are far less relevant today. If the pure capitalism described by Marx ever existed, it has long since disappeared, as governments in the United States and many other countries have intervened in their economies to limit concentrations of power and address many of the social problems associated with unchecked private commercial interests. As a result, the American economy is perhaps better described as a "mixed" economy, with government playing an important role along with private enterprise.

Although Americans often disagree about exactly where to draw the line between their beliefs in both free enterprise and government management, the mixed economy they have developed has been remarkably successful.

©2009 About.com, a part of The New York Times Company.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 11:43 AM

Where do those figures of 55% right and 45% distortion come from? Has someone done a fact checking study on all of his work and come up with a legitimate percentage, or is someone just tossing off numbers from the top of their head?

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: pdq
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 11:55 AM

...here is Michael Moore in his own words. Some of you will see nothing wrong with his statement:

Goodbye, GM ...by Michael Moore

Monday, June 1st, 2009

I write this on the morning of the end of the once-mighty General Motors. By high noon, the President of the United States will have made it official: General Motors, as we know it, has been totaled.

As I sit here in GM's birthplace, Flint, Michigan, I am surrounded by friends and family who are filled with anxiety about what will happen to them and to the town. Forty percent of the homes and businesses in the city have been abandoned. Imagine what it would be like if you lived in a city where almost every other house is empty. What would be your state of mind?

It is with sad irony that the company which invented "planned obsolescence" -- the decision to build cars that would fall apart after a few years so that the customer would then have to buy a new one -- has now made itself obsolete. It refused to build automobiles that the public wanted, cars that got great gas mileage, were as safe as they could be, and were exceedingly comfortable to drive. Oh -- and that wouldn't start falling apart after two years. GM stubbornly fought environmental and safety regulations. Its executives arrogantly ignored the "inferior" Japanese and German cars, cars which would become the gold standard for automobile buyers. And it was hell-bent on punishing its unionized workforce, lopping off thousands of workers for no good reason other than to "improve" the short-term bottom line of the corporation. Beginning in the 1980s, when GM was posting record profits, it moved countless jobs to Mexico and elsewhere, thus destroying the lives of tens of thousands of hard-working Americans. The glaring stupidity of this policy was that, when they eliminated the income of so many middle class families, who did they think was going to be able to afford to buy their cars? History will record this blunder in the same way it now writes about the French building the Maginot Line or how the Romans cluelessly poisoned their own water system with lethal lead in its pipes.

So here we are at the deathbed of General Motors. The company's body not yet cold, and I find myself filled with -- dare I say it -- joy. It is not the joy of revenge against a corporation that ruined my hometown and brought misery, divorce, alcoholism, homelessness, physical and mental debilitation, and drug addiction to the people I grew up with. Nor do I, obviously, claim any joy in knowing that 21,000 more GM workers will be told that they, too, are without a job.

But you and I and the rest of America now own a car company! I know, I know -- who on earth wants to run a car company? Who among us wants $50 billion of our tax dollars thrown down the rat hole of still trying to save GM? Let's be clear about this: The only way to save GM is to kill GM. Saving our precious industrial infrastructure, though, is another matter and must be a top priority. If we allow the shutting down and tearing down of our auto plants, we will sorely wish we still had them when we realize that those factories could have built the alternative energy systems we now desperately need. And when we realize that the best way to transport ourselves is on light rail and bullet trains and cleaner buses, how will we do this if we've allowed our industrial capacity and its skilled workforce to disappear?

Thus, as GM is "reorganized" by the federal government and the bankruptcy court, here is the plan I am asking President Obama to implement for the good of the workers, the GM communities, and the nation as a whole. Twenty years ago when I made "Roger & Me," I tried to warn people about what was ahead for General Motors. Had the power structure and the punditocracy listened, maybe much of this could have been avoided. Based on my track record, I request an honest and sincere consideration of the following suggestions:

1. Just as President Roosevelt did after the attack on Pearl Harbor, the President must tell the nation that we are at war and we must immediately convert our auto factories to factories that build mass transit vehicles and alternative energy devices. Within months in Flint in 1942, GM halted all car production and immediately used the assembly lines to build planes, tanks and machine guns. The conversion took no time at all. Everyone pitched in. The fascists were defeated.

We are now in a different kind of war -- a war that we have conducted against the ecosystem and has been conducted by our very own corporate leaders. This current war has two fronts. One is headquartered in Detroit. The products built in the factories of GM, Ford and Chrysler are some of the greatest weapons of mass destruction responsible for global warming and the melting of our polar icecaps. The things we call "cars" may have been fun to drive, but they are like a million daggers into the heart of Mother Nature. To continue to build them would only lead to the ruin of our species and much of the planet.

The other front in this war is being waged by the oil companies against you and me. They are committed to fleecing us whenever they can, and they have been reckless stewards of the finite amount of oil that is located under the surface of the earth. They know they are sucking it bone dry. And like the lumber tycoons of the early 20th century who didn't give a damn about future generations as they tore down every forest they could get their hands on, these oil barons are not telling the public what they know to be true -- that there are only a few more decades of useable oil on this planet. And as the end days of oil approach us, get ready for some very desperate people willing to kill and be killed just to get their hands on a gallon can of gasoline.

President Obama, now that he has taken control of GM, needs to convert the factories to new and needed uses immediately.

2. Don't put another $30 billion into the coffers of GM to build cars. Instead, use that money to keep the current workforce -- and most of those who have been laid off -- employed so that they can build the new modes of 21st century transportation. Let them start the conversion work now.

3. Announce that we will have bullet trains criss-crossing this country in the next five years. Japan is celebrating the 45th anniversary of its first bullet train this year. Now they have dozens of them. Average speed: 165 mph. Average time a train is late: under 30 seconds. They have had these high speed trains for nearly five decades -- and we don't even have one! The fact that the technology already exists for us to go from New York to L.A. in 17 hours by train, and that we haven't used it, is criminal. Let's hire the unemployed to build the new high speed lines all over the country. Chicago to Detroit in less than two hours. Miami to DC in under 7 hours. Denver to Dallas in five and a half. This can be done and done now.

4. Initiate a program to put light rail mass transit lines in all our large and medium-sized cities. Build those trains in the GM factories. And hire local people everywhere to install and run this system.

5. For people in rural areas not served by the train lines, have the GM plants produce energy efficient clean buses.

6. For the time being, have some factories build hybrid or all-electric cars (and batteries). It will take a few years for people to get used to the new ways to transport ourselves, so if we're going to have automobiles, let's have kinder, gentler ones. We can be building these next month (do not believe anyone who tells you it will take years to retool the factories -- that simply isn't true).

7. Transform some of the empty GM factories to facilities that build windmills, solar panels and other means of alternate forms of energy. We need tens of millions of solar panels right now. And there is an eager and skilled workforce who can build them.

8. Provide tax incentives for those who travel by hybrid car or bus or train. Also, credits for those who convert their home to alternative energy.

9. To help pay for this, impose a two-dollar tax on every gallon of gasoline. This will get people to switch to more energy saving cars or to use the new rail lines and rail cars the former autoworkers have built for them.

Well, that's a start. Please, please, please don't save GM so that a smaller version of it will simply do nothing more than build Chevys or Cadillacs. This is not a long-term solution. Don't throw bad money into a company whose tailpipe is malfunctioning, causing a strange odor to fill the car.

100 years ago this year, the founders of General Motors convinced the world to give up their horses and saddles and buggy whips to try a new form of transportation. Now it is time for us to say goodbye to the internal combustion engine. It seemed to serve us well for so long. We enjoyed the car hops at the A&W. We made out in the front -- and the back -- seat. We watched movies on large outdoor screens, went to the races at NASCAR tracks across the country, and saw the Pacific Ocean for the first time through the window down Hwy. 1. And now it's over. It's a new day and a new century. The President -- and the UAW -- must seize this moment and create a big batch of lemonade from this very sour and sad lemon.

Yesterday, the last surviving person from the Titanic disaster passed away. She escaped certain death that night and went on to live another 97 years.

So can we survive our own Titanic in all the Flint Michigans of this country. 60% of GM is ours. I think we can do a better job.

Yours,
Michael Moore
[e-mail]
MichaelMoore.com

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: number 6
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 12:16 PM

Those figures are mine .... I've been working on a scientific algorithm for determining statistics regarding distortion of factual truth ... though not complete in it's development I'd say the results are close, give or take 10% either way.

Then again Fox news would arrive at 100% right on for Bill in regards to the factual truth and 100% complete distortion of the factual truth for Mike

Mike Moore's team would arrive at a complete reversal to Fox's results.

As to anyone else ... well only you can determine what is factual and what is distortion.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 12:23 PM

I would be interested in seeing how the figures of 55% and 45% were arrived at, then. And I would also like to see the method used of verifying the accuracy (or lack of it) of the things O'Reilly and Moore say. I say this because, if those figures are not accurate, the person stating them as fact is guilty of the very same thing they are accusing Moore of.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: number 6
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 12:33 PM

Well .... it should be said "guilty of the very same thing they are accusing Moore and O'Rielly of".

If Moore and O'Rielly can state their agenda's in Books, movies, websites, without backing up (completely) what they say, then I can arrive at what I stated based on my statistical factual Truth software program ... which is btw cloned from the spin cycle chip from our LG front end loading washing machine ... now, if I can can only get it to blow hot air I've completed my task.


biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 12:34 PM

number 6

On The Oberman show last night he said that he would gladly retire if there was no need to expose a corrupt and unfair corporate system.

If both Keith and Michael were so successful that corporations would no longer pay them for their criticism based shows they would both be out of their current work. They shook hands and hoped that day might come.

People who watch movies and shows allow for more to be made. If there was no longer a need or interest in such educational entertainment, Michael would be out of the movie business.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 12:39 PM

But that is assuming that what Moore says is not accurate. Since no evidence has been provided that what he says is not accurate, then the above syllogism doesn't work.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 12:39 PM

Oops. The syllogism in the post right after my last one.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 12:41 PM

Capitalism concentrates wealth to the exclusion of many.

Super Capitalism concentrates such gigantic wealth to the exclusion of virtually everyone, that it can destroy entire nations as well as world economies.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: number 6
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 12:41 PM

"If there was no longer a need or interest in such educational entertainment, Michael would be out of the movie business."

the same can be said for Bill Orielly ... but that doesn't state that all their showbiz should be taken for the factual truth.

Both these guys beleive that they have an agenda to expose the wrongs in our society ... kudos to them (I sincerely mean that) but how the expose it is rather stretched, distorted and exagerrated ... all this to capture the audience's attention.

As I stated, I (personally) take about 1/2 of what they each say as the factual truth.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 12:45 PM

Nobody has so far produced any evidence that the way Moore exposes things is stretched, distorted, and exaggerated. So far, all they have done is express an opinion that it is those things. So I don't see why anyone should take these accusations as the factual truth.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 01:05 PM

Moore is not a reformer. He has no bills before Congress.
He is a man who can go to a theatre for 2 hours in the dark with 200 people and laugh your ass off and even cry.
There are two expose's in this film which will be new to most people.

Otherwise everyone is free to feel any way in which they wish.
If 6 wishes to disbelieve without any reason he is entitled to his feelings. How one feels about facts is often a feeling of denial.
"I wish it weren't true... so it isn't true" is just a feeling.
Other people feel that the more they know, the more they want to know.


As for our system it is a pyramid scheme.

Pyramid schemes are legal for the richest and make countless people miserable.

There is no Democracy when it comes to the economy.
You have no say in the economy.
Financial Corporatons do and gamble however ever they want.
Scams? Swindles? Of course, thats how they make money.
Its not like they are building a car. They are accumulating money that is not yet theirs.
There has not been a single rule change or regualtions of Wall St. since the collapse.

not 1

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 01:07 PM

edit
"He is a man that can cause you to go to the theatre..."

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 01:10 PM

People are certainly entitled to their feelings and opinions. But we don't have to accept those things as facts.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: number 6
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 01:29 PM

"But we don't have to accept those things as facts."

Exactly ... I was a big fan of Moore but i started to have my doubts about him after I saw Bowling for Columbine ... specifically the scene where he said Canadians don't lock their doors .... even in Toronto ... and then the scene where he just walks up to a front door of a house and knocks ... lady opens the door and states ... no we never lock our doors here .... well, we lived in Toronto right by where that was filmed ... guess what ... we always locked our doors, have for years. Everyone does, out of fear. In fact just about the time that was filmed we were broken into ... so was everyone else on our street ... locked doors and all .. the thieves kicked in windows ... police said they were powerless to control the B&E's ... the volume exceed the manpower to stop it.

So Mike lied to impress the U.S. audiences that things were cosy and safe north of the border ... that his system system was wrong and ours isn't. I always wonder how much he paid that woman that he talked to on the front porch?

After that I looked more closely into his facts and cinematic (3 ring circus) techniques ... manipulated for his own agenda. But, I guess if he did show things the way it really is (blemishes and all) and used less grandstanding, exagerrated facts, used a more flat editing style he would have a difficult time attracting an $audience$.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 01:35 PM

"...a "capitalist" economy, a term coined by 19th-century German economist and social theorist Karl Marx... "

The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary give the first use of the word as 1792, in France. That's 26 years before Karl Marx was born 1n 1818.

Evidetly the U.S. Department of State needs a fact checker. I'm not too surprised at that...

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: number 6
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 01:42 PM

Hmmmm .... maybe they could use my Statistical Factual Truth Software program .... I'll probably have to apply some modifications in it for their use.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 01:44 PM

I'll give you an example of Michael Moore lieing.

In this new movie Moore dubs words into the mouth of Jesus Christ.
He has him preaching the Capitalist Bible.

Of course this is a lie and Christ did not preach the Capitalist Bible,nor did he appear pn camera.

However it does show the difference between the actual "WORD" and the recent Evangelical Word who claim our Christian Capitalist Founders of America wanted you to give your money to the church and Reeublican Party as preached by the TV prosperity preachers and money changers in local worshiping establishments.

Even if I am a minority of one I consider myself a humorist at times.
It is my experience that there are about 20% of people in this world who do not get satire.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: Stringsinger
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 01:48 PM

It's so easy to call people liars. That's what they're doing to President Obama via Joe Wilson.

The Halliburton stock thing? Prove it. It sounds like a rightwing gossip column to me
and they are liars.

number 6, you have been demoted to number 2. :)

People in America who do anything worthwhile are subject to the system as it stands which needs to be changed to reflect true democracy.

The US could use a healthy dose of socialism in it's government in the managing of health care and the environment in the way other European countries are doing it.

I don't think that I want the government to make shirts. We still need private companies.

Anyone who thinks the American system of government is perfect now or would be better off with private corporations running it exclusively is off their rocker and anti-democratic.

Micheal Moore did his thing without the intent of making a million dollars. He was making these kind of films even in his early T.V. days.

The only reason he is getting this right-wing flack now is that he is able to reach the public with some hard reality.

He is actually a practicing Catholic although he disagrees with some of their institutional decisions.

Bill O'Reilly has not particulaly engendered any confidence by reasonable American people. He is a right-wing pundit who has the "noise machine" on his side.

Moore actually is a self-made entrepreneur who should have the Libertarians admiration.
He is making his money the "old fashioned" way.....honestly.

There are many self-satisfied Americans who don't want to have this discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 01:49 PM

A lot of Canadians I know say they never lock their doors. Even some in Toronto. I've definitely heard that one mentioned by Canadians as a cultural difference between the US and Canada. JtS would never lock the door, either, if I didn't have strong feelings about keeping the doors locked. So maybe he wasn't wrong about that one as much as just not running into the right Canadians.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: number 6
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 01:51 PM

"It is my experience that there are about 20% of people in this world who do not get satire. "

I'm beginning to see a real need for my Statistical Factual Truth Software program ... I think I'm gonna make a lot of $bucks$ out of it. Buy a lotta stock from the money I make .... maybe I'll have take up residency in the Cayman Islands.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: pdq
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 01:52 PM

" Not that all of these individuals used the term capitalism, for as [Thomas L.] DiLorenzo points out, "The word capitalism was coined by none other than Karl Marx, who hoped that it would help in his crusade to denigrate the system of private property and free enterprise and promote socialism" (p. 1).

Although this is a book about capitalism, it is not a book on economics. As an economist, DiLorenzo is naturally quite at home when he discusses concepts like consumer sovereignty, supply and demand, scarcity, the division of labor, comparative advantage, inflation, price floors, price ceilings, monopoly, the free-rider problem, eminent domain, protectionism, mercantilism, rent seeking, embargoes, predatory pricing, and equilibrium prices. But because these concepts are all explained in layman's terms, and are only introduced when necessary, no prior knowledge of economics is required. In fact, because of the pervasive misunderstanding of capitalism, it might be better if the reader didn't know anything about economics because he would have less to "unlearn."

The title of the book may initially seem to be an exercise in hyperbole, but such is not the case. How Capitalism Saved America is indeed the untold history of our country. After a brief introduction and two very crucial introductory chapters on the nature of capitalism and the perpetrators of anticapitalism, DiLorenzo takes us through nine chapters of American history – from the Pilgrims to the recent California energy "crisis" – and shows "how, from the very beginning, capitalism has been vital to America's growth, and how excessive government interference in the economy has only exacerbated economic problems and stifled growth" (p. 4). Although the book is written chronologically, any of these nine chapters can be read independently. However, only one of them is necessary to see that the book's title is not an overstatement.

Because it was Marx himself who coined the term, it is no surprise that capitalism has been falsely thought to benefit only capitalists and the rich while exploiting workers and the poor. DiLorenzo dismisses as Marxist propaganda the idea that capitalism is "a zero-sum game in which 'somebody wins, somebody loses'" (p. 13). Instead, "Capitalism succeeds precisely because free exchange is mutually advantageous" (p. 11). And not only does it succeed, it is "the source of civilizations and human progress" (p. 1). Capitalism has "brought to the masses products and services that were once considered luxuries available only to the rich" (p. 12). Capitalism is not only "the best-known source of upward economic mobility" (p. 26), it "actually reduces income inequalities within a nation" (p. 26). In short, capitalism alleviates poverty, raises living standards, expands economic opportunity, and enables scores of millions to live longer, healthier, and more peaceful lives."

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: number 6
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 02:01 PM

Well Carol .... I've lived here all my life ... Toronto, small town Ontario, and now here in the Maritimes ... I have never known anyone who intentially leaves the door of their house unlocked .... well, I do know someone who lives in Bell Isle N.B. who did, up until a couple of years ago ... until thier house was broken into. Maybe in rural Nfld they don't ... but things are changing.

Jeeezuz ... here in the little backwater port town of Saint John you house would be ramsacked in no time .... whew, the thought of it scares the bejeezes out of me.

biLL (now shamefully called Number 2)

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 02:04 PM

Communist China has found a warm spot for Capitalism to thrive.

When a Chinese capitalist corporation knowing sells poison baby milk, their post facto regulation is swift execution of the boss.

Capitalism needs a strong foundation of regulation. It needs a strong cage. It needs containment.

...for it can be a fierce toxic and lethal tool for destruction as well as construction.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 02:06 PM

Like I said, maybe he wasn't so much wrong as just running into the wrong Canadians, because obviously there are a lot of Canadians who don't lock their doors, even if not all Canadians know about them.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 02:08 PM

And by the way, JtS has lived in Ottawa, as well as the suburbs of Toronto, and he used to never lock his doors (and as I said, still wouldn't even here in the US, if I didn't have strong feelings about it).

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: number 6
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 02:10 PM

HuH .... well .... probably a bunch of Americans (the U.S. ones) out in the backwoods of Minnesota, Alaska, Maine who don't lock their doors either.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 02:41 PM

It all depends on your local community (UK village - near a crumby town). I regularly leave my doors unlocked, it's my fella who's the door locker. My Mother always left the back door unlocked, so does my Uncle, and so did my Grandmother. Members of my Mothers London Irish family leave the front door unlocked, I think it harks back to traditional social habits from the Motherland.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 02:43 PM

When I say 'unlocked', I don't just mean 'unlocked'.

I mean, the door is open for any unexpected guest to just *walk in* unannounced without asking, if they happen to turn up.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: sing4peace
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 03:07 PM

Here's Malvina Reynolds' take on the subject...

THE MONEY CROP -

Oh, money has its' own way
And money has to grow
It grows on human blood and bone
As any child would know
It's iron stuff and paper stuff
With no life of its' own
And so it gets its' growing sap
From human blood and bone.

Many a child is hungering
Because the wage is low
And men will die on battlefields (I sing "many will die")
To help the money grow
And those who take the money crop
They're at it without end
They plant it in the tenements
To make it grow again...

The little that they leave for us
We cannot make a seed
We spend it on our shoddy clothes
And every daily need
We spend it in a minute
In an hour it is gone
To find its' way to grow again
On human blood and bone
Blood and bone....

(c. Schroder Music Co. 1966)
------
Joyce
(sure I'm a Marxist...Harpo was always my favorite)

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 03:39 PM

The thing is, "capitalism" is not the same thing as "free enterprise" - in some ways it is the opposite.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story
From: number 6
Date: 25 Sep 09 - 03:41 PM

Hey look kids .... the bottom line is don't blindly follow leaders albeit they are politicans or showbiz types .... it's a money driven capitialist world out there and these types certainly will take their cut of the action.

You can be slightly skeptical of Bill O'Rielly and criticize him and still be a right winger and a patriot.

You can be slightly skeptical of Michael Moore and criticize him and still be a left winger and a socialist.

Personally I lean pretty far to the left on socialist issues and my anxiety level goes up a few meters whenever I hear about the sleaze, and greed of the corporate capitalists. I prefer to admire the people that walk the walk ... the doctors and nurses that work in the fields of 3rd world have not nations, the mother theresas out there, the people out there that work in the food handout centres, the legal aid lawyers, the people out tere on the front lines helping the homeless, those that work with the street kids, the addicts ... you get the drift. Watch, listen and understand these people, they speak the factual truth.

I just don't think Bill and Mike really walk their talk 100% .. looking at Mike do you think he really walks at all .... ok, cheap shot ... my apologies Mike ... anyway, I'm outta here.

biLL