• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do the wealthy have too much power in the United States?

Do the wealthy have too much power in the United States?


  • Total voters
    56
no, it's not failing.... and you don't have a very good idea of what it is or what it does.

Capitalism is, essentially, a system where the trade and industry are controlled/by private owners for their profit. This can encompass many things like wage labor, competitive markets, etc... Am I wrong?
 
I honestly think you don't know why you disagree with it. Tell me, would you hire the more expensive contractor even if the quality of his work is not any better than his cheaper competitor?

I disagree with it because it thrives on exploitation, along with many other reasons.
 
Workers have " NEVER owned the means of production " in a Socialist or Communist society.

Thats may have been the promise, the propaganda handed out to the naive and ignorant masses to revolt and instill some dictator who then gives the means of production to the State.

After that " the Workers " get to deal with the corruption and inefficiencies of Central planners.

When Chavez in Venezuela Nationalized their wealth producing industries he did it under the pretense of handing the means of production over to the workers.

Now Venezuela is a basket case and just another example of how destructive the Socialist ideology is.

I know they haven't, which sucks, I don't actually think any of those states were "democracies" either though.
 
I disagree with it because it thrives on exploitation, along with many other reasons.

Why is it exploitation to hire cheap labor?
 
I disagree with it because it thrives on exploitation, along with many other reasons.

you call competition exploitation while you want servitude imposed by a government of the failures

capitalism appeals to the best and the brightest and encourages people to be better and brighter. Your system appeals to failures and and encourages people to let others do the heavy lifting
 
Why is it exploitation to hire cheap labor?

I'll give you a dumbed down example: A sweatshop worker makes $100 in clothing per hour, the capitalist realizes this worker doesn't have minimum wage protection, etc.. and only pays the worker 25 cents an hour, which is way more then what sweatshop workers actually make on average (Mexico is 3.00 per day on average I think?), but none the less, you can see how I oppose it, you may not follow the labor theory of value, but I do, so we will always disagree.
 
Last edited:
you call competition exploitation while you want servitude imposed by a government of the failures

capitalism appeals to the best and the brightest and encourages people to be better and brighter. Your system appeals to failures and and encourages people to let others do the heavy lifting

If competition involves purposefully going to countries without regulations, a minimum wage, etc.. and finding the cheapest laborers and barely paying them enough to live, then yes, competition sounds wonderful. That is the real "competition" between capitalists. Capitalism appeals to the best and brightest? Encourages people? 80% of the world makes less then $10 a day, are they just not trying hard enough, or is it the system that is broken? My system, appeals to failures? Capitalism appeals to those who love the idea that food can be sold for a profit, that the world produces enough food to feed 10 billion, yet, we somehow can't distribute that, (exchange value is used over use value..) Let others do the heavy lifting? YOU MEAN THE FREAKING WORKERS working in the factories who may want to collectively own the factory for the benefit of everyone, not just the capitalist? LOL.
 
I'll give you a dumbed down example: A sweatshop worker makes $100 in clothing per hour, the capitalist realizes this worker doesn't have minimum wage protection, etc.. and only pays the worker 25 cents an hour, which is way more, but none the less, you can see how I oppose it, you may not follow the labor theory of value, but I do, so we will always disagree.

so how much should the worker in your scenario receive in wages?
 
I'll give you a dumbed down example: A sweatshop worker makes $100 in clothing per hour, the capitalist realizes this worker doesn't have minimum wage protection, etc.. and only pays the worker 25 cents an hour, which is way more, but none the less, you can see how I oppose it, you may not follow the labor theory of value, but I do, so we will always disagree.

Yes, you oppose captialists because they buy the cheapest product. Your position is no better than someone that doesn't like people that shop at wal-mart because in their opinion everyone should pay more at mom and pop shops.
 
If competition involves purposefully going to countries without regulations, a minimum wage, etc.. and finding the cheapest laborers and barely paying them enough to live, then yes, competition sounds wonderful. That is the real "competition" between capitalists. Capitalism appeals to the best and brightest? Encourages people? 80% of the world makes less then $10 a day, are they just not trying hard enough, or is it the system that is broken? My system, appeals to failures? Capitalism appeals to those who love the idea that food can be sold for a profit, that the world produces enough food to feed 10 billion, yet, we somehow can't distribute that, (exchange value is used over use value..) Let others do the heavy lifting? YOU MEAN THE FREAKING WORKERS working in the factories who may want to collectively own the factory for the benefit of everyone, not just the capitalist? LOL.

hey if a bunch of people get together and say-lets start a business and they all contribute and agree to run and own the business equally-so be it. your system involves the government taking the factory from those who built it and giving it to those who work there. Sorry I oppose that kind of crap
 
so how much should the worker in your scenario receive in wages?

That's the very problem, congratulations on finding it. The capitalist will always need to make a profit, the laborer will never receive the value of their labor, this can be helped in heavily regulated countries, but theres a reason it's like this.... Just think about it :shock:
 
If competition involves purposefully going to countries without regulations, a minimum wage, etc.. and finding the cheapest laborers and barely paying them enough to live, then yes, competition sounds wonderful. That is the real "competition" between capitalists. Capitalism appeals to the best and brightest? Encourages people? 80% of the world makes less then $10 a day, are they just not trying hard enough, or is it the system that is broken? My system, appeals to failures? Capitalism appeals to those who love the idea that food can be sold for a profit, that the world produces enough food to feed 10 billion, yet, we somehow can't distribute that, (exchange value is used over use value..) Let others do the heavy lifting? YOU MEAN THE FREAKING WORKERS working in the factories who may want to collectively own the factory for the benefit of everyone, not just the capitalist? LOL.

do you know what you call workers who collectively own the factory?


capitalists. :)
 
That's the very problem, congratulations on finding it. The capitalist will always need to make a profit, the laborer will never receive the value of their labor, this can be helped in heavily regulated countries, but theres a reason it's like this.... Just think about it :shock:

you didn't answer the question...
 
hey if a bunch of people get together and say-lets start a business and they all contribute and agree to run and own the business equally-so be it. your system involves the government taking the factory from those who built it and giving it to those who work there. Sorry I oppose that kind of crap

LOL? Built the factory? You mean the "owner" who sat back while laborers built it. Jesus.
 
do you know what you call workers who collectively own the factory?


capitalists. :)

Nope, as they wouldn't be owning it to create a profit in terms of wealth.
 
Yes, you oppose captialists because they buy the cheapest product. Your position is no better than someone that doesn't like people that shop at wal-mart because in their opinion everyone should pay more at mom and pop shops.

That's my problem, human beings are somehow products that must be sought after so you can get them cheap, ah, the mind of a capitalist..
 
hey if a bunch of people get together and say-lets start a business and they all contribute and agree to run and own the business equally-so be it. your system involves the government taking the factory from those who built it and giving it to those who work there. Sorry I oppose that kind of crap

that's another great thing about capitalism... it allows for the collective ownership of the means of production :)
 
That's my problem, human beings are somehow products that must be sought after so you can get them cheap, ah, the mind of a capitalist..

The laborers are selling their labor. What makes you think for one moment businesses shouldn't look for the lowest price?
 
The laborers are selling their labor. What makes you think for one moment businesses shouldn't look for the lowest price?

The laborers don't really have a choice as to what they get for their labor, it will always be less then what it is worth, you think their are competitive job opportunity's for those in poverty in India? China? People HAVE to work, and when presented with the option of working for a capitalist to acquire money, which is used to buy food from other capitalists, in order to survive, meh.. Not even worth it, you're turning humans into products, and that is why I fundamentally disagree with the ideas stemming from capitalism.
 
that's another great thing about capitalism... it allows for the collective ownership of the means of production :)

No, it does not, where the hell did you get that idea? Seriously, you may be delusional.
 
are you trying to say the worker should receive $100 in wages per hour?

I believe the laborer should receive what their labor is worth, but this cannot happen under a system like capitalism, that's all I'll say, I understand being paid $100 doesn't work under capitalism, no profit for the owner, which is why I disagree with the system, one of many reasons. I hope you understand my POV.
 
Throughout recorded history the wealthy and the elite have always held the power. This is true even in so called communist states like the USSR, Cuba and North Korea. This is the one constant and it will never change. Equality is a myth perpetrated by naive idealists like socialists and it will never happen- thats why every instance that socialism has been attempted ultimately failed.
 
Of course the wealthy are too powerful, because wealth is power. I am very open to the idea of a maximum wealth/wage cap. That Koch and Soros and a handful of others have so much political power undermines the intent of our (representational) democracy. Concentration of ownership of mass media outlets is another big part of the problem.
 
Back
Top Bottom