My view of capitalism is a different representation, I'll grant you that. It isn't a misrepresentation though. There is a difference.
Capitalism these days is implemented with a mixture of socialism, a bad move for sure. They put heavy taxes on everything, especially business, and expect businesses to provide jobs. If businesses paid no tax, and there was an active encouragement for new business to start up, you'd have far more jobs being created.
Of course, the government is the real greedy party in modern politics. They want as much money as they can get their hands on, and they'll make taxes for everything in order to get it. They have so-called "progressive" taxation which means the wealthier people pay a larger percentage of their earnings, despite the fact that these are the same people who are meant to be providing jobs. What is the incentive to create more jobs for people if by doing so you end up losing money because you are suddenly in a higher income bracket? A flat rate tax system is fair to everyone, since everyone pays the same proportion of their earnings. The rich can afford to create more jobs, and by doing so have an incentive (since they actually make a profit). The workers save more money since they get higher wages, and pay less tax on food, etc.
The only people who lose are those who refuse to work, but if you don't contribute to society, why should society contribute to you? Oh, and before you misinterpret my position *again*, I am not advocating for people who have conditions that mean they cannot work. There is a difference between "refusing" to work and not being able to. The people who refuse to work can get supported by private charity, if some lunatic wants to set up a private charity dedicated to slackers. It isn't the business of the state though.
Capitalism these days is implemented with a mixture of socialism, a bad move for sure. They put heavy taxes on everything, especially business, and expect businesses to provide jobs. If businesses paid no tax, and there was an active encouragement for new business to start up, you'd have far more jobs being created.
Of course, the government is the real greedy party in modern politics. They want as much money as they can get their hands on, and they'll make taxes for everything in order to get it. They have so-called "progressive" taxation which means the wealthier people pay a larger percentage of their earnings, despite the fact that these are the same people who are meant to be providing jobs. What is the incentive to create more jobs for people if by doing so you end up losing money because you are suddenly in a higher income bracket? A flat rate tax system is fair to everyone, since everyone pays the same proportion of their earnings. The rich can afford to create more jobs, and by doing so have an incentive (since they actually make a profit). The workers save more money since they get higher wages, and pay less tax on food, etc.
The only people who lose are those who refuse to work, but if you don't contribute to society, why should society contribute to you? Oh, and before you misinterpret my position *again*, I am not advocating for people who have conditions that mean they cannot work. There is a difference between "refusing" to work and not being able to. The people who refuse to work can get supported by private charity, if some lunatic wants to set up a private charity dedicated to slackers. It isn't the business of the state though.
