Tweet
Given that the United States debt is denominated in US dollars and our government can technically print as many US dollars as it needs, we should never default on our debt. The only way we could truly default would be if Congress, in an incredible act of stupidity, decided to vote to default and overrode a Presidential veto.
Traditionally that seemed so obviously idiotic that markets had no fear it would happen. But that all changed last year when Republicans decided to hold the vote to raise the debt ceiling hostage to their budget reduction demands.
By threatening they would do something so stupid, the Republicans made Treasury bonds unnecessarily riskier than they should have been. This risk premium increased our borrowing costs, and according to the Government Accountability Office, that cost the government at least $1.3 billion in one year and likely more in the years to come. From the GAO:
A decrease in the yield spread indicates that the market perceives the risk of Treasury securities to be closer to that of private securities, increasing the cost to Treasury. Conversely, an increase in the yield spread indicates that the market perceives the risk of Treasury securities to have decreased relative to that of private securities, making the securities less costly to Treasury. We found that the 2011 debt limit event led to a premium on Treasury securities with maturities of 2 years or more while Treasury securities with shorter maturities either experienced no change or became slightly less costly relative to private securities. Applying the relevant increase or decrease in the yield spread shown in figure 2 to all Treasury bills, notes, bonds, CM bills, and TIPS issued during the 2011 debt limit event period, we estimated that borrowing costs increased by about $1.3 billion in fiscal year 2011. Many of the Treasury securities issued during the 2011 debt limit event period will remain outstanding for years to come. Accordingly, the multiyear increase in borrowing costs arising from the event is greater than the additional borrowing costs during fiscal year 2011 alone
I like to think of this as basically a stupidity tax we are all paying because of how incredibly dysfunctional our government is. Given that top Republicans are now claiming they plan to hold the debt ceiling hostage again in the future, it is likely we will continue to see similar unnecessary borrowing cost increases going forward. Over the long term the mere existence of the totally unnecessary debt ceiling will likely add billions to the deficit.
There is absolutely no reason we shouldn’t simply eliminate the debt ceiling altogether by removing the limit. We are one of the only countries with its own currency to have this idiotic concept, and it serves no useful function. It can only cause harm by allowing a minority to threaten to hurt the whole economy. Now that it has hurt the economy, it is time for it to go before Congress does even more damage.
133 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
You said it: stupidity. Same thing applies to deficits unless we are at full employment and all resources are at capacity. When has that last happened?
I think, given the mess we are in, there must be inherent flaws in the Constitution we just haven’t discovered yet.
How exactly did we get so many stupid people elected to congress?? Gotta be a fly in the ointment, a monkey in the wrench.
“Given that the United States debt is denominated in US dollars and our government can technically print as many US dollars as it needs…”
I think the problem here is that the US government and the Fed could print/borrow quadrillions of these fiat currency units in the near future and they won’t buy a loaf of bread. So this oft-repeated idea seems kind of specious to me.
The US has about 5% of the world’s population, and yet uses about 25%-33% of the world’s energy, depending on your yardstick, and imports most of it from abroad. Given that fact, it seems to me that messing around with devaluing the currency unit here is an incredibly stupid idea. But maybe that’s just me overthinking things.
In any event this is system is on the verge of collapse anyway. Soon Americans will envy the living standards of Mexico, and I don’t think there is any politician or any policy that can change that fact.
Hmmm.
The US can no longer supply what it NEEDS.
The US can no longer provide its people, especially young people, with sufficient meaningful endeavor to employ all those who wish to work.
Does anyone see a connection between those two things?
Does anyone perceive the “outcome” if these two things are allows to persist?
There is … stupid and then there is …. STUPID.
The question MUST be asked.
Who, specifically, is stupid?
And who, specifically, again, seeks to inculcate that “stupidity” and then takes advantage of it?
Presumably, “stupid” can go on until the human species is no more?
When do we change the name we have proudly given ourselves, “homo sapiens”, which means “intelligent man”, to homo stupidis?
Or are we, collectively, too stupid to grasp the irony of our “situation”?
Forgive them, for they know not, but … stupid.
Thank you, Jon, for trying …
DW
The comedian Ron White said, “You can’t fix stupid.”
Let’s hope he was wrong or, that it will die out over time.
As you say, it pervades our socienty and seems to rule the land. Didn’t used to be like that.
Yeah, I gotta go with jgordon on this one. If we “printed” the debt out of existence, we would just be transferring the debt into the costs of every single item that can be bought or sold. AKA, causing inflation. That would be a BFM (Big F@cking Mess).
On the other hand, I think we ought not to be trying to pay it down now, given that the world economy is in the shitter.
I wonder if the dollar amount of potential energy squandered out the tailpipes of America’s trucking fleet, cars and airplanes since say, 1941 matches the amount of money we have borrowed to stabilize the unsustainable which has forced Americans into the most regressive tax of all. The .80 cents of every American dollar spent on potential energy fueling all transport costs, which has been wasted? So how much did we spend on war to protect access to cheaply harvested oil????
What seems kind of specious to me is the argument that printing money is going to be so darn detrimental.
I’m pretty sure we printed a couple of trillion for wars or to bail out the banks and my bread doesn’t cost $500 a loaf right now.
It’s only when the money might be utilized to pay for social programs like health care or ensuring we keep our commitment to the elderly that all of a sudden printing is so problematic and the arguments that we’ll end up paying $500 for a loaf of bread comes out.
If we hadn’t caused global warming, someone else would’ve. It was a public service!
You can’t redistribute the benefits of bubble economics.
Yeah, you are over thinking this thing.
Homo Stupidis? They were the Neanderthals of The Great Harvest.
Funny how that works isn’t it?
How does one pay anything down when you wasted trillions of dollars out your tailpipe for 70 years and trillions of dollars on war to protect the waste of trillions of dollars?
It’s a “extinction event” we are witnessing. Not a fucking thing in life can waste 80% of it stored potential energy and expect to sustain itself. We are retarded!
A true service to the public… :)
It’s less along the lines of can’t and more along the lines of won’t.
This makes it more idiotic since the economy itself is one big feedback loop.
If people are unemployed or underemployed than they spend less because they have less income. They supply less to the government in terms of revenue. If this happens you have a decrease in demand which leads to more layoffs. You have an increase in deficits (do to an increased need in social programs and decreased tax revenue)Lather, rinse and repeat. Absent government intervention to goose demand by putting people back to work it can and does go on ad nauseaum.
No, it’s an extermination event. We are deluded.
Why would you want to pay anything down? Has the bill collector demanded payment or something?
Sounds kinda shitty.
Correction applauded………
Not according to the Masters. And they set reality.
And yes, a capitalist psychosis sets in Depression, but the preparations indicate this is premeditated.
Your story is deadly simple.
So, what you are saying is the Republicans strategically played a ploy that made even more money for their buddies, and themselves, no doubt. well played, traitors!
All an economy is is redistribution.
It always amuses me when the right side of the aisle argues about government redistribution as if Walmart and Kroger and have some giant vault that they keep every dollar spent by consumers at their stores in and hoard. Kroger, commies that they are, redistributes the revenue from purchases to employees and vendors. Walmart does the same. However, I’m supposed to believe if a government does it then it’s EVIL. Meh.
All kidding aside the government could employ everyone who wants a job. We dont out of ignorance, a good substitute for stoopid.
You need to be retrained comrade.
Shhh! Must keep the masses ignorant and servile!
Modern Money Theory folks!
Reeducated. Yes he do.
Them guys are commies I’m sure of it. They want to spend money and put people to work.
I’m pretty sure that most people have caught on to the fact that the MOTU are self important imbeciles that are too stupid to see past their greed.
We’re going to have to work around them. Right now everyone is dragging their feet because it will be hard. It’s much easier to give in to inertia or try and find a shortcut(remaking the Democratic party.)
It’ll take awhile but I believe it is still possible to work around them. Time will tell I guess.
Crypto-commies? Beware!
I think you are referring to “quantitative easing”, which we were discussing last week in another thread. I did not see a good explanation of why it has not affected inflation more.
Here is a definition of QE, from Wikipedia: “A central bank buys financial assets to inject a pre-determined quantity of money into the economy.”
My understanding was that the Fed did this using new electronic money that was created on the spot. i.e. not reserves. I would think this would cause inflation, but I note that this did not cause noticeable inflation. I have to suspect that the new money is simply not in public circulation.
And if you doubt they are imbeciles just tune into CNBC any day and listen to them talk their misinformed nonsense.
I’m one of those silly women who don’t understand math or money. (shrugs shoulders)
Not quite. The fed buys treasuries and the bank gets reserves. It is only an exchange of one asset for another. No new money is created.
Comrade, comrade, comrade. I leave out the snark. The MOTU are not all “too stupid”. They take care of their idiots which are sometimes very useful.
They want you to work around them. “Good luck,” they say.
Me thinks you know a good deal more tha you let on.
Uh, by dicking around with money, which is what I was writing about.
O. Sorry.
Thank you.
We’ve been to some extent fighting deflation. A decrease in demand lowers the prices of houses, TVs ,oil etc, etc
Now, mind you I’m not saying the basket has completely gone down. We’ve seen localities increase fees and taxes to make up for shortfalls in their budgets(since most don”t have the luxury of printing their own money that a federal government has and 49 of the states require a balanced budget.) We’ve seen decreases in value as businesses try to wring every ounce of profit while they can out of consumers. However, as a whole inflation has not been a really large issue with demand such a problem.
The rule of “life” is the ultimate bill collector. We can’t evade the laws of physics yet, no matter how delusional the commercials we see, are. But you know, things at least seemed better when there was a budget surplus and jobs in America along with the Glass-Steagall Act, aka 1933 Banking Act. After its removal we have been eaten alive. In 1933 fascism was already running the world amok. Look what happened when;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Act
Just about killed US and the extermination event continues orchestrated by corporate money in politics, till we are all the “walking dead,” in hawk up to our gonads…..
Yes, and inflation in things like food and energy are typically supply shocks. Hard to get around higher food prices after a drought or a Saudi prince increasing the price of oil.
Not the average joe? BTW put the full context of my comment in quotes next time……..
I fully agree that repeal of glass steagall was one of the worst actions we ever undertook but the elites wanted it. On surpluses though they typically cause recessions . We should always go for deficits so long as the current account with the rest of the worls is in deficit. Ie more imports than exports.
Makes sense.
Just so I understand, Jon is asking for more printing to enable hyperinflation to kick in sooner than later? You want to save the banks at the expense of each one of us. They have received billions now from our government printing office at the fed in bailouts. You are asking for the value of your existing money to go down, and to do so rapidly. You want to protect the bank using your money to gamble in a zero % return environment. You get zero % return on your money, but that isn’t good enough, you want less. You want the folks that caused the misery to get more from us by devaluation so they can take the remaining wealth from an ever weaker populace that will soon become destitute from money printing. Weimar is a fine example of truth and consequences of money printing with no econmic growth. Our congress won’t complain, it is how they make their living, running for office and taking bribes.
You use words to denegrate others that think differently than you do by describing their actions as stupidity. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Common mistake so no worries.
My husband is also a c waltz(although he uses psuedonyms on the web). It’s actually kind of funny because some of the folks he worked with thought my postings were his thoughts and called him “hardcore.” I’m not sure if that’s a compliment or not.
Any reader can click on “JamesJoyce @ 14” and get the context. In the meantime, I’m staying focused on the monetary shenanigans.
The only thing that is certain here is collapse. Whether that means hyperinflation or deflation depends entirely on the Fed.
The world is running out of fresh water, fish, petroleum, phosphorous, uranium, rare earth elements, and literally just about every other resource that industrial civilization relies on. Neoclassical economists with their fancy non-reality based ideological models making predictions about what printing money via QE or tweaking the interest rate or whatever will ultimately have no impact on the fact that we have already passed the Limit to Growth.
That is why the world has been mired in a seemingly insoluble financial crisis for the past five years, and that is also why the market economy will continue going downhill from here on. As Dimitry Orlov suggests, every spare scrap of income you get ought to be going into reducing and eliminating your reliance on the market economy, because it won’t be there soon–if you like survival.
I don’t think Jon wants to print more money. He just thinks the debt limit is kinda stupid.
Ha! You need another pseudonym.
Pretty dire prediction there comrade. Where did it come from?
We printed trillions of dollars to save the banks. We printed trillions of dollars to pay for wars. Bread is not $500 a loaf. As a matter of fact despite printing housing prices continue to decline as do many other goods. So clearly printing is not the be all or end all in determining price structure.
The OMG hyperinfaltion brigade always seems to leave these little details out though.
Lets not forget
Suez Canal Crisis
Mid East Wars
Oil Embargoes
Price Manipulations
Commodity Monopolies
Libor Rigging
$147.50 Oil
Futures Trades
MBS/CDO’s rated AAA worth the value of dog shit?
Never mind a Prince or a drought……
Fossil fuel capitalism is a Ponzi scheme.
Yes, there are many things can cause inflation or deflation, not the least of which is fraud like the libor scandal.
So to was, slavery.
Sometime around the Reagan era we got privatized Keynesianism: private credit to stimulate the economy and profiteer, but with the unknowing backing of the taxpayer. Now, we have immense paper assets held privately that, unleashed simultaneously, could devastate the 99%.
What do you think you are unknowingly backing this time, comrade?
Incomparable, comrade.
The housing bubble was driven by massive fraud. We are still living with it. Ever notice how capitalism is unstable, one recession or depression after another, comrade?
I’m not by any means saying our system does not have problems. Wall Street has become one of the world’s largest gambling casinos and we should totally fix that. Private business entities clearly need better regulatory capture and the government should do a better job policing. That being said I’m not certain that throwing out capitalism or the proverbial baby in the bathwater is the direction I’d go in as far as an economic model goes.
The “massive fraud” was driven by a “minute fraud”, one Greedspan acquitted himself of over lunch (poetic license).
“Capitalism” is reckless. But it’s the best of all worlds, don’tcha know.
Ha ha ha ha ha …
The best of all worlds, eh, comrade?
Ha ha ha ha ha …
But, back to the question. If you could see that pattern of privatized Keynesianism, what do you think the next scam crisis would be?
For the best of this world, non?
Some people are arguing for amore mixed economy these days, with cooperatives owning some business.
Rules and accountability are only for little folks, not the MOTU.
We clearly don’t understand how difficult it is to screw things up on a large scale.
As atrios like to say cue the hippie punching.
No “comrade” here. I just don’t trust government or corporations that buys government and laws at the expense of the governed and the republic.
Oh student debt is totally going to blow up next.
They’ll be a “who could have imagined” choir and lectures about responsibility and accountability(nevermind that for years they told people to go to school to get an education and that those that didn’t DESERVED poverty.) Our government is pretty predictable as a model.
Aren’t we in this together, comrade?
Personally I would like the government much more involved in providing for the public purpose. For example, the Feds should be directly involved In ensuring full employment. That should not be a choice by any political party. People’s lives should not be gambled with in that way.
Yes.
Only some of us are in this together, comrade.
I think employee owned models are probably going to be a mixed bag. There always seems to be at least one greedy person that figures out how to game the system
A lot of good things start out with the best of intentions (see BCBS) and evolve over time. That’s why I find regulation such an important component. It minimizes the risk of the self interest of one or two outweighing the good of the rest of us when it works right.
Of course, we still have to get rid of this whole “better to beg for forgiveness then ask for permission “model the private business world(and to a lesser extent our government) has going on.
Agreed
Capitalism = Insatiable greed + limited resources + myopic worldview = catastrophic failure
Well, capitalism in its pure form is supposed to be an exchange that is win win for both the labor and resource market.
Just like communism though what actually exists is convoluted. I’m pretty sure that the fact that we have mutations in the definitions as a practice have to do with the human component of the equation.
Sadly many are myopic and don’t realize that greed ultimately destroys everything it touches.
The ultimate goal in capitalism is to create a profit for the capitalist. The need for profit is what drives down the cost of production which would have humans working as slaves where it still legal and necessary. Slavery is a natural occurrence of capitalism, today we are all wage slaves. Capitalism is closer to a “positive feedback loop” than an exchange system. The more narcissistic the capitalist can be the more he/she will profit.
Capitalism is closer to a “positive feedback loop” than an exchange system. The more narcissistic the capitalist can be the more he/she will profit.
== WIN!
Profit in and of itself isn’t evil or selfish though. You can use the money from profitability to give raises to employees or increase benefits. You can donate it to help communities or create scholarships. Profit isn’t the problem. Greed is. It’s when profit becomes concentrated and isn’t shared that you have problems and when public entities fail to do their due diligence to curtail greed corrupting the system.
Ultimately if and when capitalism fails it will be due to the greed of myopic capitalists that failed to recognize it doesn’t fit the definition of capitalism when you destroy the exchange of goods and services and win-win component in it.
Timeless wisdom, yup, with no information content. This collapse has more obscure roots. One problem is not a lack of understanding but the capitalist’s advantage in your not understanding.
My definition is based on what I learned in microeconomics(shrugs).
Economic theory, of course, rarely plays out exactly as they portray it in textbooks(one of the many reasons I wish there was less sneering from the Ivy leaguers when it comes to the practical knowledge that working class people often possess in “debates” on policy.)
You don’t seem to realize that under capitalism, the human spirit is not free.
“Advocates of capitalism are very apt to appeal to the sacred principles of liberty, which are embodied in one maxim: The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate.”
-Bertrand Russell
“Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” -John Maynard Keynes
“Fascism is capitalism plus murder.”-Upton Sinclair
The masses have been propagandized to believe in TINA, so that any discussion to an alternative to this destructive system is immediately met with closed minds.
Oh? So you are prepared? In this crisis, deception precedes tyranny.
So where are you on the predictability of the eCONomists?
Sadly, I understand just enough. I haven’t completely been able to apply the logic to come up with a surefire solution to our bought and paid for political problem(even with a third party you risk corruption once they obtain power and you still have to deal with the uniparty in Congress for 18 years before you could have a complete turnover so I’m not naive enough to think my third party vote will fix everything.)
I took macro and micro in college as well, do you think it is coincidence that the emergence of modern economic theory coincides with the social Darwinist movement at the time?
Is there an economic system out there that promises complete freedom? In practice not theory?
Generally speaking I think living in a society means that you give up some level of “freedom.” Even in systems like communism you give up some to promote the interests of the community.
Capitalism IS a beg for forgiveness system, comrade. See Confessions of a Microfinance Heretic for an explication of the depths of it’s cruelty: under the guise of aid, it rabidly morphs into outrageous profit-taking even though the debtors are explicitly disadvantaged and being “serviced”.
Timeless, boilerplate excuse, comrade. Under capitalism, every greedy person is supposed to game the system. Isn’t that exactly what the winners have been propagandizing you with for three decades?
Capitalism is irresponsible and so are it’s believers.
I’m as prepared as I can be.
Which economists? I agree with some more than others on solutions to economic malaise. I’m definitely not in the austerity, now ,now, now camp.
You miss the point.
Capitalism is fraud.
Social Darwinists have been around awhile I don’t know that I’d ascribe to them the movement itself. I tend to think of them as opportunists always looking to exploit a situation for their own gain. I suspect they’ll be tussling with “us pie in the sky dfh idealists” for as long as there is a human race.
Yeah! Their diversity is a means to hide the truth but here’s the nugget: in their collective, they did not warn you that they are not working in your interest.
That’s fraud, comrade.
I’m not missing the point. I’m saying that the problem with any economic system is going to be the human element. Self interest is going to play a part in any economic system.
I would prefer a democratic socialist system. Whether this system “will work” or not is unknown because it has never been tried in the history of humanity on a large scale. One must keep in mind when studying Marxism that Karl Marx wasn’t talking about changing society overnight, but by changing the way society operates and the eventual elimination of greed as a motivating factor for humans, then humans will change to a more communal way of being. Communism is not a means but an eventual end for humanity to work towards. This all begins with universal education and universal health care which free the human mind of these simple burdens.
You believe greed is inherent in humanity and it is not. It has been taught down the eons. It has been taught that by taking your neighbor’s resources and exploiting his labor is normal.
You’re missing the point again, comrade. The capitalist system installs an ideology in it’s subjects which hinders them from “fixing” it.
This is neither a necessity for a “human system”, nor is it the result of human frailty, nor “mutations due to the human component”.
The corruption is in the system.
Yes you are, no that’s not “the problem”, and, of course.
Do you really believe this ideological nonsense?
Free yourself.
Interesting discussion.
I agree, people mess up everything. Wow, solving that problem is gonna be a tough row to hoe. I do think that unbridled greed has become more pervasive than ever before. And, perhaps, more lucrative.
I believe self interest is inherent in humans and the result often is greed for a portion of our population.
Self interest/self preservation is natural, greed is taught.
We are told that more is better, greed is good, in order to be number 1 everyone else needs to be beaten or eliminated.
I’m on board and a proponent of a universal health care system(I’d prefer a hybrid of a single payer system rather than a nationalized one due to my experience as a health care worker in the military) and free education(it’s positively ridiculous to not maximize the brain trust of your citizenry and instead make it a for profit paradigm that prices out people that are smart but not affluent.)
I’m not missing the point. I’m disagreeing. ;)
If you think any of this can be done within a capitalist framework than you are just deluding yourself. Instead of moving in that direction for humanity we are moving in the exact opposite under capitalism. Our politics works within that pyramid scheme we call capitalism thus our puppet leaders undying defense of that scheme.
Ok, you’re evading my points. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.
Wars have been always sold to the poor masses who fight them under the guise of self preservation of their “unique way of life” but in fact are just resource wars for imperialism all along.
I tend to believe greed is self interest taken to an extreme.
I actually tend to feel sorry for greedy people. It seems to me that they spend an inordinate amount of time focused on self and on material things. The holes they must have in themselves to need several houses, brigades of cars and planes to fill them.
That’s your opinion and I’d never argue that you weren’t entitled to it. We have has strides in society despite the profitability of practices. We created child labor laws despite the fact that it was considered profitable to exploit children at one time. We created safety rules despite the fact it was often in the interest of capitalists to ignore them.
Believe what you want but it doesn’t make it true. We have been programmed to believe that greed is natural because we see it all around us. Abundant material wealth is a human concept created after we left our hunter/gatherer societies. There was the concept of personal possessions then but not to the point where economic systems can be created to dominate one person over another just because they “owned” this or that.
Our capitalistic notion of our society/economy denies the truth of cooperation and propagandize the myth of competition as the best form of allocating scarce resources. This myth is ingrained in us sometime after childhood. We are taught to share as children but before we are adults we learn to horde for ourselves and think in terms of self interest only. We as a society will continue to believe this myth, even as our environment deteriorates to the point where it won’t be surprising that you will see people walking around with small tanks of oxygen to breath clean air as we do today to buy a bottle of clean water to drink today at a convenience store.
*shrugs*
You made a statement that the system is the problem and that it instills an ideology (this seems flawed because we are a nation filled with people who have a myriad of opinions on what constitutes success or what is right and wrong which suggest there isn’t necessarily one ideology. ) I disagreed.
I’m still waiting for someone to show me the utopian economic model in practice and a whole entire country full of people completely content with that particular system. It’s in human nature to not be content. Even those of us less focused on materialism and more focused on idealism or less tangible wants will always be striving to make things “better(and I don’t think there is anything wrong with always striving for better.)
Ludwig:
cwaltz:
QED.
I just gave you 2 examples of times where compassion trumped profitability despite a capitalist system. What wasn’t true?
People are complex. It makes sense that anything involved with them, including economies are going to be equally complex. I don’t think there is anything that either you or Ludwig is going to say to convince me the problem is the system of capitalism rather than the players within the system.
We’ll probably just have to agree to disagree.
An interesting note of American history is that whenever the American PTB give concessions to the greater population such as granting the the right to vote to women and minorities, it usually done to suppress a much larger move against them such as the larger communist and socialist movements in the 20′s and 30′s and the peace movements of the 60′s. With these concessions the PTB are quick to find a new “common” enemy to continue the American myth. Americans went from fighting the ‘savages’ to fighting the ‘terrorist’ in an uninterrupted continuum.
The people in the system have changed, generation after generation, but the system remains with the same problems, why do want to continue on the same path?
Ideology: singular.
Are you really telling me that you, I and eveyone impacted by our capitalist system have the same ideology even as you are typing here and arguing with me about ideology?
Individuals make their own determinations on values and ideology. Yes, systems have an impact but they aren’t the only thing that matters when people make determinations.
The values and ideology of the Koch brothers are different than the values and ideology of myself despite the fact that we both may embrace capitalism.
Am watching “The Man Who Studies Murder” about Elliott Leyton’s study of variations in violence across societies. He demonstrates the role of culture in the variations.
Of the conception that all human systems’ “failures” are due to the humans in them, would you say that is an authoritarian belief?
Comrade, you are in denial.
The problems are due to human nature and society itself, not the system.
Look at communism in theory, it’s not a horrible position to have classless ownership society. However, look at it’s practice, has it ever looked anything like theory? Or take socialism, why does socialism in France look different than socialism in Venezuela?
Culture has an impact. That being said, you are arguing the system creates the culture. I’m arguing it is the other way around.
Haven’t seen it.
Of the conception that all human systems’ “failures” are due to the humans in them, would you say that is an authoritarian belief?
I would say that that is a simplistic viewpoint that authoritarians accept eagerly. It presumes that humans are naturally at fault and doesn’t question the system itself. Democracy is messy but it doesn’t have to be cruel nor greedy.
Actual democratic socialism has never been implemented in any large scale human society. You are using these words because the American propaganda system told you that socialism and communism is being practice in these parts of the world.
I was in Venezuela a year ago and what Chavez is doing there is no way even close to real democratic socialism.
That is my point though.
Are the problems in Venezuela a result of the system or they the result of the PEOPLE implementing the system like Chavez?
No I’m not.
That’s clearly an authoritarian viewpoint.
I think I have reached an adequate diagnosis.
“You’re missing the point again, comrade. The capitalist system installs an ideology in it’s subjects which hinders them from “fixing” it.”
So this statement wasn’t meant to imply that the system capitalism is the problem?
cwaltz:
Ludwig:
I’m just about out of patience with this run-around, comrade.
I’m going to ask this again, if the problem isn’t human nature then you should have no problem pointing me towards the presently operational utopian economic system. Where is it? Point me to the place on the map please and prove me wrong. You’ll also have no problem explaining why cultures that practice a similar economic system can look absolutely different in practice.
I’ve been called way, way worse then authoritarian.
I’ve got TONS of patience and you appear to be avoiding the question.
This was your statement.
“The capitalist system installs an ideology in it’s subjects which hinders them from “fixing” it.”
Does this statement or does it not imply that capitalism is responsible for the culture? Suggesting the system creates an ideology that it imparts to citizens certainly seems to suggest that you believe that the system is the problem and it creates culture’s perception.
O. Sorry to hear that.
False assertion, comrade. You are reiterating the tired, run down ideological arguments for capitalism, with some illuminating variety. In the process, you are caricaturing my arguments to make yours appropriate. For example:
Besides not giving an example of this discrepancy and your already having an explanation for this, you imply again that I say “the system creates the culture”.
Have I demonstrated to you how you are giving me the run-around?
I’m sorry, I don’t have so much patience. Your generalizations are causing too much confusion. You ask if “The capitalist system installs …” implies that “capitalism is responsible for the culture?” No, it does not.
I’m sure we can agree that capitalism influences the culture. Can it be said that capitalism is the sole influence in culture? That’s obviously ludicrous. So, in this meaning of responsible, “capitalism is responsible for the culture” is also false. Now if you allow that use of “responsible” for an arrangement that is a component/influence on culture, then yes, it is. Likewise, capitalism is a major component/influence on cultural perception.
What is your explanation that “The capitalist system installs an ideology in it’s subjects which hinders them from ‘fixing’ it” frustrates your understanding?
Chavez is not a socialist and he is not implementing a socialist model in that nation. It is the same old authoritarian crap under a different name. Stalin and Lenin where just the same. American capitalism is the same old authoritarian crap under a different name. How do you suppose we humans are going to progress if we keep allowing this same old authoritarian crap to rule our lives? The illusion of democracy is what keeps the capitalist dream alive.
The American public is so propagandized that the vast majority still believe that they have a voice and choice in elections and rapacious capitalism is the only viable economic model despite all the evidence of the harmful effects on humans and the environment.
World governments are being controlled by corporations. Governments lie to their citizens and promote outdated ideas of nationalism and patriotism to foster war and discord so that the privileged few may profit off of human misery. Corporations are not persons and have no loyalty to anything other than to make a profit.
The myth of free markets is just that a myth. Capitalism moves toward monopoly and oligarchy. Competition is the antithesis of compassion, the very thing that makes human beings human. When the people of a nation cheer for the murder of any human life, one begins to wonder where is the humanity of those people. Vengeance is not justice no matter what our governments say. Yet,like the people of Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia, we will be told of our new enemy and the blood lust will begin anew.
Not only does capitalism coerce one to do things one would rather not, it threatens one not to admit it, and, finally, it persuades some that this is preferable. The very denial of a consensus on it’s oppression should immediately alert one to it’s evil.