Korean meat processor wins bid to buy U.S. chicken company

[theVOID]

Capitalism is about maximizing profit for the organisation and wiping out the competitor if possible.

And the entity is made up of people cooperating out of mutual self-interest, producing to trade with others out of mutual self-interest. In a free market the only conceivable way you could "wipe out the competitor" is if you offered your good/services to a consumer at a price lower than what the competition can offer it or hire the employees of the other company or bought out the competitors. While it would be possible for someone to buy out all their competitors (although in a global economy this is near impossible), the higher they raise their prices once gaining market dominance the more opportunity there is for someone else to take market share and profit.

I can guarantee you that the restrictive licenses, regulations, tax breaks, subsidies and exclusive contracts given by the government does far more to hurt market competition than anything a business could do via trade alone, the most harmful being the allocation of available capital investment towards the industries that are backed by a government.

Co-operation may exist in a cartel situation, where greedy capitalist exploiters decide it best to work together in their own common selfish interest.

It's impossible to do that without committing fraud in my view, if the public are sold an illusion of competition the perpetrators have committed a crime, this gives the police/prosecutors a real moral authority to intervene.

That is mutual interest among the exploiting class. Mutual interest doesn't stretch to the working and under classes, who simply have to get a living by either selling their labour or accepting whatever handout exists under the capitalist system.

EVERYONE has to sell their labour/resources, not just the middle class. The amount you receive in exchange for it depends on how desirable the skills of the person are to others. Desire and pleasure are the source of value, the more desired someone/something is the more valuable they are, since money is quantized value operating as an exchange for the fulfilment of desires/pleasures, the more desires a person can fulfil the more they are valued in dollars.

While you may dislike the notion that some people are genuinely more valuable given how desired their skills/resources are it's a simple fact. Telling someone how much they can be worth, based on your own values and despite their desirability is nonsense, if a pop-star has millions of fans and is desired globally their value denominated in dollars is going to be much higher than someone selling antiques at a local level.

In the job scenario, the worker wants as much for his labour as he can get. The employer wants to hire as cheaply as he can so as to maximise his own and any shareholders' profit.

In many cases sure. However you can't ignore that this exchange is cooperation. Someone who has highly desirable skills might well hire someone in a job that is in it's self not so desirable, they should expect to make less money.

It is a competition loaded in favour of the employer 99% of the time, the exception coming very rarely when labour is hard to come by.....rare as rocking-horse shit nowadays.

It depends not only on the quantity of labour but also the desirability of their skills.

And what is worse is that the workers are in competition against fellow workers for the work available!

Of course they are, someone who is unemployed for instance is quite understandably going to make themselves stand out against others who are seeking work. Why do you get to decide who gets a job and who gets to stay on the dole? Shouldn't the people looking for the finite number of available jobs be able to put their best forward in effort to seem more desirable than the other people after the same finite number of jobs?

Work can take many forms, some being quite attractive, most being just a necessity and some being very unpleasant indeed.

And these people get paid a lot more because the less attractive a job is the lower the supply of workers who are willing to do it. I've got a friend in "Sanitation" working for a company who clear the premises of various factories, especially meat processors, it's a disgusting job and not many people would be willing to do it, making labour more scarce and thus more desired - He gets paid a lot more than me, a web designer, I've got a cushy job that many people would be happy to do, there is more competition so I can't expect to be as valuable to others as my friend.

Whatever it is the man hires when he needs workers and the man fires when he no longer has the need for them. Capitalism is not worker-friendly.

This ties back to that UN report which showed that more capitalism created more jobs, lowered the level of poverty and lead to a general increase in the standard of living. Not only that report but there are countless other detailed studies showing economic freedom and standards of living being highly correlated.

https://www.terry.uga.edu/economics/docs...reedom.pdf
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2170613/Economic-Freedom
http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2011/06/28/...y-of-life/
http://capitalist-shrugged.blogspot.com/...ndard.html

Gangter/crony capitalism, call it what you like, any description that has the c word in it indicates the thirst for profit. That thirst inevitably leads to unfairness, exploitation, greed, dodgy dealings, corruption at the highest levels of business and government, obscene wealth in the hands of the few....and the third world.
I won't have capitalism, even diluted capitalism put forward as the best option for the human race.

And yet it is strongly correlated with rising standards of living... Hmh...

Tell me, what example of a system without so much as "diluted capitalism" can you name that has comparable standards of living to the likes of Singapore, New Zealand, Australia, Canada etc?

Of course I would legislate a maximum wage, just as a minimum wage has been. That minimum wage in the UK is derisory and yet the so-called left-wing government that brought it in considers it a great achievement! I don't have a figure in mind, but it would be set so as to drastically reduce the massive difference in the pay packets of the ordinary workers and the M.D , Chief Execs etc.etc. A business isn't a business without the worker.

And what gets done with the money that would otherwise be paid to high-earners? Bet you it gets paid out to shareholders as dividends. Are you going to also cap the amount of money that someone can receive as a return on the money they took the risk to invest?

I'll tell you Void, one thing we can agree on.....god doesn't exist, in all probability!!

Sure.