Trump versus Clinton?

[paulpablo]

Capitalism in a free market is made up of voluntary exchange, wage labour, private ownership of the means of production, so on and so on (snip).

And, do your really think, this applies to todays capitalism?

I always make a distinction between a free market and capitalism. The same way as I make a distinction between social democracy and socialism - or communism in it's worst case. Note the ism in all these words. In most cases it points to a system running unchecked. And that's never a good thing, since any given system isn't in the business of correcting itself.

There are different forms of capitalism, but it doesn't really affect the question I asked.  I'm just asking how does any form of capitalism make a difference to decisions made by private companies on who to hire?

[abaris]

There are different forms of capitalism, but it doesn't really affect the question I asked.  I'm just asking how does any form of capitalism make a difference to decisions made by private companies on who to hire?

In the absence of legislation, it makes a hell of a difference. It's the main reason why so many companies are outsourcing to low wages, low regulations countries. However, agreeing to them paying a pitance, won't keep anyone afloat in countries where living costs are high. And that's not even taking into account that paying a pitance isn't a temporary phase today. If they can get away with it, they keep the pay low.

It's a vicious circle, actually, since they all want to sell their products to western consumers. But the more they outsource and the less they pay, the less consumers are actually able to afford their products.

[Sterben]

       If there was an abundant number of experienced applicants then I can understand that company's would not want to risk hiring a recently collage graduate. In a lot of these fields though there is not a abundant pool of choices. How is a person suppose to get the experience needed if no one will hire them? We had a system in place before company's would hire at a entry level wage, they would get experience and be able to progress further in a career. That's how it's the fault of capitalism. One I know for sure about, networking. You pass all your classes and no one wants to hire you cause you have no field experience. Again I ask you how do you get it when no one will hire you?

1) Isn't there still a system in place now where companies can hire people at an entry level wage and enable them to get experience to be able to progress further if companies choose that option?                                                                                                                                
2) I don't see how that system goes against any of the values of capitalism. Capitalism in a free market is made up of voluntary exchange, wage labour, private ownership of the means of production, so on and so on, but there's nothing there that contradicts anything to do with entry level wages, people gaining experience and progressing further in a business.

      There is, but so few company's use that system and a lot of people can't get in on such programs. They promise a average income on entry level positions and provide so few openings. I know it's all competitive and a lot of is the students fault for choosing a over crowded career field. The market has only has so many networking, programming, and other tech jobs available. Those type of careers though can get you into other countries though which is a great option if your lucky enough to be able to get the proper professional experience. Has an added bonus as well, those who do for google and others like that will have the option to be able to escape the U.S if Adolf Trump Hitler is elected.

https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/spg/show_pi...e8a8030177

If that day comes, if your Jewish hide it, if you have Jewish blood lines burn the records, and if your Muslim or Brown your fucked either way.

[Brian37]

The times when only good looking people could hope for being a successful actor/actress are over for a few decades by now. It has more to do with chance and coincidence. If only good looking people made it, Steve Buschemi wouldn't be a star and half the cast of Game of Thrones wouldn't keep their contracts.

There was never a time when only good looking people could hope to be a successful in acting.  Again that wasn't the point I'm making anyway. I was saying that people are born with attributes that subtract or add to their value all the time, Bill Gates isn't exceptional in that way.  The reason why these people have value is because of the freedom of choice other people have, being good looking is often an advantage when it comes to getting on TV, yes that's not the only way to get on TV, people can invest time in learning acting or be naturally gifted in acting or in being funny, whatever it is, it boils down to, it's people choosing what they want to see on TV what they want is what adds or subtracts value in the acting market place.  Putting everyone on an even level of value, as Kitan was suggesting, is taking away the freedom of people to choose what they think is more or less valuble.     It's either that or your going to allow people choose and distribute the money to what they put value in and then you steal off the people who have more and give it to those who have less.

No it isn't more or less valuable just different. It still remains that the bulk of any society are the workers, not those with the money or the power. It is really no different than sperm trying to get at an egg, the majority don't get to it. It isn't advocating everyone be poor or that people don't value different things, just that nobody is more important than anyone else. We are still in this together.

And bullshit, voting is not theft. If we only do what the rich say all the time then there is no point in having voting at all, just only have the rich vote. When we only allow rich power over an economy that is called a plutocracy.

In our current climate the rich are stealing from the rest of us. Corporate welfare are the taxes they dodge and the rest of us have to make up for. 

You have bought into old cold war bullshit.

[KUSA]

nobody is more important than anyone else. We are still in this together.

That's bullshit. Some people are more important than others.

And bullshit, voting is not theft.

But you can vote for someone that will steal for you.

[abaris]

That's bullshit. Some people are more important than others.

Their profession maybe. The people are replaceable.

[KUSA]

That's bullshit. Some people are more important than others.

Their profession maybe. The people are replaceable.

Everybody is replaceable. That wasn't the argument. Some people are more important than others. It not their profession, it's the person.

[Mermaid]

Their profession maybe. The people are replaceable.

Everybody is replaceable. That wasn't the argument. Some people are more important than others. It not their profession, it's the person.

Well, that is disgusting and frightening if you are saying what I think you are saying.

[Brian37]

nobody is more important than anyone else. We are still in this together.

That's bullshit. Some people are more important than others.

And bullshit, voting is not theft.

But you can vote for someone that will steal for you.

You accept evolution? If you do you'd know what a stupid statement that is. The ride ends for friend and foe alike, for rich and poor alike. It is more of a crap shoot than most people like to think. 

Now do I value different things than others, certainly. But nobody is the center of this planet or the universe.

Vote for someone who'd steal for you? That is what Corporate welfare is, the art of paying lawyers and lobbyists to write laws to protect your tax breaks the rest of us have to pay for. 

NO voting is NOT theft. That is as stupid as if a man told his stay at home wife she has no say because she doesn't pay the bills. I may not be rich but that most certainly DOES NOT  give the rich the right to dictate OUR laws. The difference between you and me is that I am not telling the rich to go away, you are still stuck on the bullshit notion that liberals want to end the private sector. NO we do have a say and we will vote. The rich are only one part of the economy but that does not mean they have dominion over all the laws WE live under.

But if you want to call voting theft, between an unemployed or poor person or middle class voter, and a billionaire, who can afford lawyers and lobbyists the most? Money equals power, and as long as humans seek power there has to be a check on that power, and voting extends to all classes, not just the rich.

[KUSA]

Everybody is replaceable. That wasn't the argument. Some people are more important than others. It not their profession, it's the person.

Well, that is disgusting and frightening if you are saying what I think you are saying.

I don't think I'm as important as Einstein was.