Why shouldn't capitalism be better regulated?

[jaeger19]

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.

Nah.. it really didn't.

Their plan did not have confiscatory tax. In fact..the effective tax rate was lower on many of the wealthy than it is today.. and their were actually higher taxes on the poor and middle class than they are today. Todays tax system is more progressive than back then.

Breaking up of monopolies was before the great depression. and actually after the great depression...monopolies began to develop.

As far as wage growth.. they government actually controlled wage growth during the war years..and thus led to benefits as an unintended consequence of wage CONTROLS.

What really created the middle class growth was a post world war boom in demand for goods and services after world war II. The GI bill. The influx of government money into research like nuclear power, military weapons (how the computer was developed), and the space program.

That's what really led to the middle class. It was not engineered through taxes or regulation.. It came about because of a post war boom.. and support for education, and research and development that would sustain it.

 

[jaeger19]

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

Most regulations come about because of the lobbying of the 1%. That's what most people don't realize. A lot of my regulations.. probably the vast majority.. come from my competitors... either alternative industries, or even within the industry itself. Its one of the ways that corporations can get a competitive edge over their competitors.

 

[nekrodev]

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

First of all, you don't give them a damn choice. Protectionist policies first, then taxes.

Secondly, the supertax is WAY harsher than anything proposed by people here. They were doing 75% after €1 million. AOC's was 70% after $10 million. And that was just spitshooting, not even an actual proposal.

Thirdly, just because the rich and corporations have gotten ****ing SPOILED and ENTITLED doesn't mean we can't, or shouldn't fix it.

 

[nekrodev]

Most Americans don't make enough money to live on and save for any major issues that may come up in their life.

why?

are they skilled?

did they educate themselves when they had the opportunity?

what have they done to increase their skillset? have they taken on additional responsibilities at work?

you think "everyone" deserves a decent wage....i say everyone is entitled to WORK FOR a decent wage

that is our difference in philosophy

i wont GIVE AWAY anything except for checks to charities i deem responsible

as for employees, i make them EARN everything....

None of that matters, because conservatives won't take into account anything that may have prevented them from doing those things.

If someone is working 40 hours a week at a job, and they're doing well enough that they're not getting fired, then they are EARNING their money, and that money should be enough that they can live on. Period.

 

[iguanaman]

Nah.. it really didn't.

Their plan did not have confiscatory tax. In fact..the effective tax rate was lower on many of the wealthy than it is today.. and their were actually higher taxes on the poor and middle class than they are today. Todays tax system is more progressive than back then.

Breaking up of monopolies was before the great depression. and actually after the great depression...monopolies began to develop.

As far as wage growth.. they government actually controlled wage growth during the war years..and thus led to benefits as an unintended consequence of wage CONTROLS.

What really created the middle class growth was a post world war boom in demand for goods and services after world war II. The GI bill. The influx of government money into research like nuclear power, military weapons (how the computer was developed), and the space program.

That's what really led to the middle class. It was not engineered through taxes or regulation.. It came about because of a post war boom.. and support for education, and research and development that would sustain it.

How do you figure the top rate of 90% was not confiscatory? Because most did not pay it? That was the point of those high rates, to stop the wealthy from drawing huge salaries and sucking up all the increased profits for themselves. Instead they gave their workers raises. We need those high rates back again so execs can make 20 times their workers instead of 250 times or more like they do now. Wages stop going up with profits as soon as those rates came down. It's human nature to try and take as much for yourself as you can but that is why Govt. needs to control that impulse by taxing those "windfall profits" high enough so that they get shared more equally.

Rising wages for workers and those govt. programs like the GI bill is what caused the postwar boom. Demand means nothing if the money to spend is not there.

i

 

[iguanaman]

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

The major problem is that greed is encouraged and rewarded since Reagan deified the "job creators", forgetting that without the wages of workers there would be no jobs.

 

[CommunityStanda]

What makes you think capitalism is NOT regulated? There are huge volumes of laws and regulations on the books governing the operation of our businesses. Probably far more than necessary. The reason corporate misbehavior makes news is because it's rare. There are tens of thousands of corporations and businesses out there doing business lawfully, and honorably.

That's right. The M$M never does stories about those types.

 

[SmartCat]

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

The government has the responsibility to make sure that the goods and services you sell are safe for the consumers. It has the responsibility to make sure that you do not pollute the environment. The government has the responsibility to make sure that you allow your employees to join labor unions. The government has the responsibility to make sure that you obey minimum wage laws.

 

[SmartCat]

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.

Since the Reagan administration the rich have paid lower taxes on more money. The rest of the country has not benefited. The national debt has risen.

There is plenty of money in this economy. All we need to do is to vote for politicians who will make the rich pay, and pay, and pay. Fortunately, most of the voters want that to happen.

 

[SmartCat]

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.

During the Great Depression we taxed and spent our way to prosperity.

 

[Bullseye]

Since the Reagan administration the rich have paid lower taxes on more money. The rest of the country has not benefited. The national debt has risen.

Total nonsense - since the Reagan administrator the rich have been paying a higher percentage of the total tax bill. The national debt rises because politicians are spending addicts.

pay[/SIZE], and pay. Fortunately, most of the voters want that to happen.

They are paying.

 

[Noodlegawd]

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.

Better regulated than what? What actual problem are suggesting needs to be solved?

 

[ajn678]

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.

Complains about government corruption meanwhile blaming Capitalism for it.

Is this some kind of joke?

 

[ajn678]

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.

This is perhaps one of the worst understandings of history I have seen on this forum.

 

[nekrodev]

This is perhaps one of the worst understandings of history I have seen on this forum.

I mean, I'd argue with his usage of the word "ancestors", but it seems pretty accurate to me. it wasn't until the 70s and 80s that all of those things he listed started getting undone.

 

[AmNat]

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.

The fundamental problem is that the leaders no longer care about the people. We were sold out decades ago, and no good idea will ever be implemented by rulers who aren't of good will.

 

[AmNat]

The fundamental problem is that the leaders no longer care about the people. We were sold out decades ago, and no good idea will ever be implemented by rulers who aren't of good will.

With that said, I'll support ideas I think are good regardless of the source. But it's a waste to devote energy to advocacy of economic programs separate from a robust nationalism. No systematic reform of the economy is possible as long as the government belongs to the highest bidder.

 

[nekrodev]

The fundamental problem is that the leaders no longer care about the people. We were sold out decades ago, and no good idea will ever be implemented by rulers who aren't of good will.

With that said, I'll support ideas I think are good regardless of the source. But it's a waste to devote energy to advocacy of economic programs separate from a robust nationalism. No systematic reform of the economy is possible as long as the government belongs to the highest bidder.

and yet, you're a "conservative", which in our political system means you're literally NOT for the people, and are for corruption, for destruction, for war, for denial of rights, for denial of science, for denial of reality....

 

[AmNat]

and yet, you're a "conservative", which in our political system means you're literally NOT for the people, and are for corruption, for destruction, for war, for denial of rights, for denial of science, for denial of reality....

Thank you for telling me what my views are. I really wasn't sure until you came along.

 

[nekrodev]

Thank you for telling me what my views are. I really wasn't sure until you came along.

that's clear

 

[WillyPete]

Complains about government corruption meanwhile blaming Capitalism for it.

Is this some kind of joke?

Not sure I understand your point.

Capitalists are perfectly happy to profit from the government, and will corrupt the process as much as possible to maximize profits.

 

[gdgyva]

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.

the rest of the world was in turmoil after a war....rebuilding

there was no competition...of course we cleaned their clock

it was easier then....there is no such advantage now

you start taxing high earners at high rates and they leave....be it individuals or companies

they take their money or their business and they go elsewhere...and we have seen over the last few decades

i have zero issue with them doing this....but i have heard nothing but yelling on WHY the unions are losings jobs left and right

same for people with money....look at some of the blue states with high tax rates....lots of people leaving

why pay those rates when you DONT HAVE TO

 

[jaeger19]

H

ow do you figure the top rate of 90% was not confiscatory? Because most did not pay it? That was the point of those high rates, to stop the wealthy from drawing huge salaries and sucking up all the increased profits for themselves

Yeah.. first... they did not pay it because they did not make their money in wages. Just like today. Most of the 1% is not made in wages.. so this.. "well now they will have to stop sucking up the profits for themselves and pay wages.. is pure bs on your part. Seriously man.. just think about what you are saying.

So.. I as a corporate owner.. are going to decide.. "gee.. I could take 300,000 more in profit.. and pay effective tax of 90% (which is not true at all. Effective rates were never ever ever.. that high)… so now I get 30,000 dollars more.

OR.. I could decide to pay my workers more. Why? Why... would I pay my workers more? What if the next year.. I make less profit.. and now have to reduce their salaries? Why would I simply pay them more? Just to be nice? Sorry.. it didn't work that way back then. A company pays more.. because they need to attract workers... or retain workers.. they do not do it simply to be nice.

Wages stop going up with profits as soon as those rates came down

A correlation that has nothing to do with causation. Wages went down because of things like outsourcing, more workers (women) going into industry, the decline in unions, illegal immigration... changes in legal immigration (visas for foreign workers).. and automation.

Rising wages for workers and those govt. programs like the GI bill is what caused the postwar boom. Demand means nothing if the money to spend is not there.

Yep… and the wages don't rise just because you tax me more. Wages rose because demand increased because initially their was a lot of pent up demand from rationing during the war. People had money to buy things..but lots of production had been diverted to war items. Investments in infrastructure, investments in technology development and education is what drove the boom, pent up demand.. and a world war that left the US as one of the least touched industrial nations.

It was not taxes.

 

[SmartCat]

Total nonsense - since the Reagan administrator the rich have been paying a higher percentage of the total tax bill. The national debt rises because politicians are spending addicts.
They are paying.

Sorry, Reagan reduced the top tax rate from 70% to 28%. No, I do not think he made up for the decline by plugging up the tax loop holes.

"Politicians are spending addicts," because most Americans want the government to help them get through life. Because that is the way things are the government should hammer the rich with high taxes.

If they do not like it, they can move to a third world country with low taxes. That country will also have dirt roads, dangerous drinking water, high crime rates, and corrupt criminal justice systems. I will help them pack. They should only be allowed to take with them two suit cases with toilet articles and two changes of clothing. Everything else they own should be sold. The money should go to the U.S. Treasury to pay off the national debt that has grown since the inauguration of Reagan.

 

[jaeger19]

Sorry, Reagan reduced the top tax rate from 70% to 28%. No, I do not think he made up for the decline by plugging up the tax loop holes.

"

Actually go take a look at what the US effective tax rate as a percentage of gdp has been sinc e. Which is basically this is the country's effective tax rate. You will find that it tends to average about 18%. That's despite huge fluctuations in marginal rates. In fact.. if you were to look at Reagans period.. there are some of the highest US effective tax rates. In 1982 the effective tax rate as a percentage of gdp.. (what we collected vs the nations income).. was about 18.4% of gdp.

In 1950.that rate was about 14% of gdp.


Yet in the 1950's.. the highest marginal tax rate was 70% or higher.

While by 1982.. the highest tax rate had fell to 50%.


Yet... more money as a percentage of gdp was being collected in 1982.