Why shouldn't capitalism be better regulated?

Bullseye said:

Yeah, more taxes is the answer to every question. The fact the rich are already paying a huge share of taxes already doesn't matter. Worker protections? Are you kidding - the work place is awash in regulations and restrictions.

Click to expand...

The rich pay no more than their share of national income.

gdgyva said:

as far as corporations, they have shareholders they are beholden to....not their employees

the employees dont have to work there....they can work elsewhere....no one is forcing a gun to the persons head making them accept their wage

it is a decision that the employee makes....and if you think you can run a business better, by all means get in the game....get your friends together and start competing

you will see it isnt as easy as you think it is.....

Click to expand...

That’s always been the argument for those who want to exploit workers

MTAtech said:

That’s always been the argument for those who want to exploit workers

Click to expand...

I think we're conflating business, generally, with capitalism. There are important distinctions. Some policies, like minimum wages, affect all businesses, but most do not. As noted earlier, taxes don't regulate businesses, they are simply part of the environment in which the business operates - like roads, power, labor market, supply sources and competition. Minimum wages are like that, too. Not all regulation is "of capitalism". Is it "commerce" that is being regulated, or merely the environment in which the commerce is operating that is being regulated?

(Strictly speaking, mom-and-pop businesses and self-employed entrepreneurs are not "capitalists". Capitalism implies a corporate form, where labor and ownership are segregated. In some respects, once a business is large enough to hire labor, it becomes "capitalistic", because that labor is no longer connected to the capital of the business. But, I think it is important to define terms, rather than splitting hairs.)

When government regulates an activity, say oil drilling, it creates rules that are specific to that activity. The more that activity has external impacts unrelated to the actual activity (extracting oil), the more regulation, indeed need for regulation, exists. There are very few regulations that apply to normal business transactions (I sell you a widget for x dollars, price negotiable). There may, however, be a lot of regulations that apply to other business activities.

More, later, I have life activities to attend to.

Checkerboard Strangler said:

We have FIRE regulations for a reason, yes?
Fire can be a useful tool, because it can warm your home, forge your steel and iron, cook your food, etc.
It can also burn down entire towns if left unchecked.

Capitalism is a lot like FIRE. Left unregulated and unchecked, it can become predatory and very damaging, and it can unearth some pretty awful unintended consequences. And yet when properly harnessed, capitalism can lift entire generations out of poverty, stimulate innovation and launch entirely new industries. Capitalism has demonstrated the capability to serve as a useful and rewarding tool to serve the middle class if it operates under the right kind of regulation.

So this thread is an effort to explore suggestions and ideas on how to properly regulate capitalism to do just that.

Click to expand...

By regulated you mean increasing the many regulations that already exist, right ?

So what new regulations are you proposing ? I don't think anyone one supports returning to the unchecked and unregulated Capitalism of the 19th century that led to the forced break-up of Standard Oil.

nekrodev said:

This is a good point, and I don't know if any of us said it, but it should also just be so obvious that it doesn't need to be said.

The biggest problem we have in the US is that we're way far behind most European countries in terms of very basic stuff - like healthcare, labor rights, education, etc....

Taxation is obviously going to be the main method of getting money to fund the social programs, unless we were to nationalize an industry - and that, I think, might be taking it a bit too far, especially seeing as one of the main things that is usually good for that is oil, and we're trying to stop using that, so nationalizing it probably isn't a great idea. Conservatives, especially, really like to talk about how people abuse our social programs, but statistically, we have almost a negligible amount of fraud in our systems. Our biggest problem is we went from taxing the rich and large corporations at rates of 50-90% to taxing them lower than normal people making 50k a year - not to mention all the other tax credits and subsidies and **** we provide to the "job creators".

Click to expand...

It's not the 1950's, so it's absurd to promote a a 70-90% top marginal rate

The " Rich " ( investors, wealthy and Corporations ) will not pay the confiscatory rates being proposed by people like Warren, Sanders and AOC

There are multiple examples of how confiscatory tax rates affect revenue and GDP and how they drive off capital investment.

For example, France implemented a 75% wealth tax back in 2012. In 2014, after two years of falling revenues and stagnant GDP, they were forced to abandon their wealth tax.

Hollande's 75% 'Supertax' Failure A Blow To Piketty's Economics
Hollande's 75% 'Supertax' Failure A Blow To Piketty's Economics

The Left doesn't just want us to ignore common sense, they want us to ignore failed examples of their policies, to implement them blindly.

The effectiveness of confiscatory tax rates is predicted on the off chance the Rich will simply play along. They will not, capital will always move away from confiscatory tax rates

Checkerboard Strangler said:

We have FIRE regulations for a reason, yes?
Fire can be a useful tool, because it can warm your home, forge your steel and iron, cook your food, etc.
It can also burn down entire towns if left unchecked.

Capitalism is a lot like FIRE. Left unregulated and unchecked, it can become predatory and very damaging, and it can unearth some pretty awful unintended consequences. And yet when properly harnessed, capitalism can lift entire generations out of poverty, stimulate innovation and launch entirely new industries. Capitalism has demonstrated the capability to serve as a useful and rewarding tool to serve the middle class if it operates under the right kind of regulation.

So this thread is an effort to explore suggestions and ideas on how to properly regulate capitalism to do just that.

Click to expand...

Give examples of the above in the last 29 months; unregulated, unchecked, predatory, and very damaging.

Try to talk about any policing of socialism - ie social programs - and instantly the Democratic Party will start ranting and sobbing "racism! You are trying to kill people!"

WHY NOT BETTER REGULATE SOCIALISM IN THIS COUNTRY?

The Democrats absolutely oppose regulating capitalism. In fact, on this forum they rant against it.

Trump tries to do something about the super rich capitalists using foreign child labor sweatshops to replace American goods - and the Democratic Party is hysterical.

Make any hint that the government should regulate the richest corporations and people on earth - who also pay $0 taxes, like Jeff Bezos, Amazon, Google, Facebook, Twitter - and the Democrats on the forum start screaming about the absolute rights of capitalists that absolutely must NOT be regulated.

Never, ever believe ANYTHING the Democratic Party says they care about. In fact, the Democratic Party only cares about the super rich and how via the super rich they can still have slaves working for them cheap. That and getting rich off of graft, usually thru relatives like Biden and Pelosi.

trixare4kids said:

Give examples of the above in the last 29 months; unregulated, unchecked, predatory, and very damaging.

Click to expand...

I can. The banning of conservatives and free political speech from social media - which the Democratic Party 100% supports and furious defends. There is NOTHING Jeff Bezos and the super rich want that the Democratic Party would not do anything to deliver.

gdgyva said:

nope...i dont

you work for me....you come ask for a raise

we discuss your production....are you average? above average? what have you learned in the last year to help me become more profitable? what have you taken on to increase your responsibilities? we talk....and hopefully, we can agree on whether or not you DESERVE a raise

if you feel someone out there is willing to pay you more for the same job, by all means you are welcome to go get it. dont ask me for a handout....i am in business to make money, and you having a job, and providing for YOUR family, that is a GREAT side benefit and helps the entire economy.

I give opportunities for growth, but if employees refuse those chances....when reviews come up and they dont like the results, they have no one to blame but themselves

Click to expand...

Supply and demand applies to you, too, cowboy.

If you pay peanuts, your workers are all going to desert you. Starting with the ones that make you most profitable.

~ I think what some are concerned with is the greed & selfishness we see in big corporations - Walmart & Amazon comes to mind. Also monopoly businesses with no competition such as Google/ YouTube. These are difficult issues to deal with fairly, and our illustrious idiots called politicians certainly are not going to come up with any intelligent solutions other than more
tax 〰

DifferentDrummr said:

Supply and demand applies to you, too, cowboy.

If you pay peanuts, your workers are all going to desert you. Starting with the ones that make you most profitable.

Click to expand...

of course it does

never said it doesnt

i have lost very few employees over my 35 year career....

there is something employees value....honesty

i dont sugarcoat stuff....it makes having honest conversations easier

everyone knows where they stand.....no surprises.....

can you say the same thing?

MTAtech said:

The rich pay no more than their share of national income.

Click to expand...

Sorry, no. The pay a far higher portion of the tax than their income is to total income.

Checkerboard Strangler said:

So this thread is an effort to explore suggestions and ideas on how to properly regulate capitalism to do just that.

Click to expand...

The trouble with capitalism is that it is rapacious, and untethered from morality. There is no upper limit, no extreme too far in its quest for profit.

All positive benefits to society from Capitalism are inefficiencies to be targeted. Even labor "victories" or government policies that produce better pay or benefits are minor setbacks, as Capitalism thinks in the long term, and never forgets an unnecessary cost.

It's self-feeding, in that those profits largely exist to produce more profits, and to eliminate inefficiencies. These are the armies of lobbyists (legal or otherwise) that have functionally unlimited resources to insure that politicians either tow the line (as defined by whatever industry) or are removed.

And it sadly dovetails with human nature, being short-sighted and selfish. Doubtless many of the donor class see themselves as working towards the greater good, even as they aggressively work to prevent any point of view but their own from being heard. The battle cry of Capitalism is "**** you, I got mine" which might as well be the national motto for the U.S. today.

To try to return to the actual topic, I'm not sure what you can do with all that. You can try to insert inefficiencies, or just skim right off the top to pay for the thing capitalists aren't concerned with (anything unprofitable) but this is also subject to corruption.

One wonder why the donor class permits any of it, frankly. You can sometimes see them perverting things, though. Look at California, where government projects are very much for-profit endeavors, whatever they were pitched as to get the votes needed (one of those inefficiencies they'll have to dispose of one day.)

I'll spare you my rant about CA's high-speed rail boondoggle, which is a beautiful example of modern Capitalism in action.

Fenton said:

By regulated you mean increasing the many regulations that already exist, right ?

So what new regulations are you proposing ? I don't think anyone one supports returning to the unchecked and unregulated Capitalism of the 19th century that led to the forced break-up of Standard Oil.

Click to expand...

I think, in that, you are absolutely wrong. The tax cuts that allowed a dozen of the most profitable businesses in the United States to be untaxed is a good example of the opposite. The entire agenda of the Trump administration has been aimed at the same thing - destroying regulatory programs simply because they worked (e.g, Title IX, CFPB, EPA). How else can you describe that?

By the way, I don't think this was intended to be a tax forum, so I am not going to address the many errors in the tax posts.

Checkerboard Strangler said:

We have FIRE regulations for a reason, yes?
Fire can be a useful tool, because it can warm your home, forge your steel and iron, cook your food, etc.
It can also burn down entire towns if left unchecked.

Capitalism is a lot like FIRE. Left unregulated and unchecked, it can become predatory and very damaging, and it can unearth some pretty awful unintended consequences. And yet when properly harnessed, capitalism can lift entire generations out of poverty, stimulate innovation and launch entirely new industries. Capitalism has demonstrated the capability to serve as a useful and rewarding tool to serve the middle class if it operates under the right kind of regulation.

So this thread is an effort to explore suggestions and ideas on how to properly regulate capitalism to do just that.

Click to expand...

You said BETTER regulated, not just regulated. I dont see anyone arguing for economics being left unregulated and unchecked. Youll have to better define the terms youre using. Why do you think capitalism needs to be regulated differently than it is now (properly)?

NWRatCon said:

I think, in that, you are absolutely wrong. The tax cuts that allowed a dozen of the most profitable businesses in the United States to be untaxed is a good example of the opposite. The entire agenda of the Trump administration has been aimed at the same thing - destroying regulatory programs simply because they worked (e.g, Title IX, CFPB, EPA). How else can you describe that?

By the way, I don't think this was intended to be a tax forum, so I am not going to address the many errors in the tax posts.

Click to expand...

Govts have been using taxation to regulate the behavior of their citizens for thousands of years

What do you think the carbon tax is ? It's a regulatory tool meant to alter behavior. Regulations can also have the unintended consequences of imposing a regressive tax on lower income individuals.

Like the carbon tax.

Increasing corporate taxes is a regressive tax. Corporations do not pay those tax increases, consumers do.
The cost of Obama's regulations were passed down to Americans, and had SCOTUS ruled in the Obama Administrations favor on how Clean Power plan, the massive cost of his plan would have been passed onto consumers via increased energy prices.

So that's another example of regressive taxes coming from draconian regulations

gdgyva said:

of course it does

never said it doesnt

i have lost very few employees over my 35 year career....

there is something employees value....honesty

i dont sugarcoat stuff....it makes having honest conversations easier

everyone knows where they stand.....no surprises.....

can you say the same thing?

Click to expand...

Good for you. And yes, I always aim to deal honestly with people who work for me. (I might not be perfect, but that's my goal.)

gdgyva said:

details, we need details

regulate HOW

by WHOM

controlled by WHAT

i own a business....ie i am a capitalist at heart....government going to tell me how to run my business? what to pay my vendors? my employees? how much to charge my customers?

if so, then i am no longer a businessman....just another in a long line of government managers....been there, done that...and already have my tee shirt

thanks but no thanks

i dont mind following a few rules as far as safety....and getting licenses....and dealing with the county on zoning bull****

you can keep the rest of the crap

Click to expand...

We need to look the past to find what works. Our ancestors who survived the Great Depression had a plan that worked so well that it created the greatest middle class in history and made us the envy of the world. No need to reinvent the wheel. Their plan included confiscatory income tax rates for top earners, support for unions, breaking up of monopolies and other methods that support wage growth for the masses. I would also add tax breaks for small business with under 50 employees. Small business is not the problem so you should rest easy.

iguanaman said:

We need to look the past to find what works. Our ancestors who survived the Great Depression had a plan that worked so well that it created the greatest middle class in history and made us the envy of the world. No need to reinvent the wheel. Their plan included confiscatory income tax rates for top earners, support for unions, breaking up of monopolies and other methods that support wage growth for the masses. I would also add tax breaks for small business with under 50 employees. Small business is not the problem so you should rest easy.

Click to expand...

The major problem now is the wealthy 1% own those that do the regulating.

WillyPete said:

I'll spare you my rant about CA's high-speed rail boondoggle, which is a beautiful example of modern Capitalism in action.

Click to expand...

About that, now that it's axed, plans are underway to expand Interstate 5 with two more special lanes for each side on sections outside the major cities, where there will be no speed limit. A "California Autobahn" so to speak.

So one way or another, travel time between SD, LA, BFLD, SF and the other cities, is going to get a lot shorter.

gdgyva said:

details, we need details

regulate HOW

by WHOM

controlled by WHAT

i own a business....ie i am a capitalist at heart....government going to tell me how to run my business? what to pay my vendors? my employees? how much to charge my customers?

if so, then i am no longer a businessman....just another in a long line of government managers....been there, done that...and already have my tee shirt

thanks but no thanks

i dont mind following a few rules as far as safety....and getting licenses....and dealing with the county on zoning bull****

you can keep the rest of the crap

Click to expand...

This is like saying having traffic lights and speed limits on the roads turns you into a driver for the government.

Makes no sense.

trixare4kids said:

Give examples of the above in the last 29 months; unregulated, unchecked, predatory, and very damaging.

Click to expand...

Give examples where I mentioned Trump.
This isn't a Trump thread, so please explain why the last 29 months bears any special significance. Are you trying to make this a Trump thread?

Checkerboard Strangler said:

About that, now that it's axed, plans are underway to expand Interstate 5 with two more special lanes for each side on sections outside the major cities, where there will be no speed limit. A "California Autobahn" so to speak.

So one way or another, travel time between SD, LA, BFLD, SF and the other cities, is going to get a lot shorter.

Click to expand...

^^^ I found the optimist, y'all! ^^^

Great ROI for 100B in debt. And I'll believe it when I see it.

We voted this spending in based on intentional lies, so obviously now that it's collapsed, they just get to spend whatever money they haven't squandered yet however they feel like.

That'll show'em!

Rogue Valley said:

The major problem now is the wealthy 1% own those that do the regulating.

Click to expand...

That's why a lot of regulations - at least in the near future - would need to be made by people who aren't elected.

Those people can start cleaning up the corruption in the campaign process.