Kieswetter is sitting with a massive problem

[lexity]

can you show me where I had to back up what I had to say?

I engaged you cogently wrt your conflation of capitalists with crony capitalists.

Your ultimate response....

you type alot but you don't say much

once I see a premise thats faulty I stop reading

This is just a plain old dodge, masquerading as intolerance for a time-waster. Otherwise you'd point out the alleged fault.

 

[saturnz]

I engaged you cogently wrt your conflation of capitalists with crony capitalists.

and I responded with how capitalism will lead to crony capitalism

try again...

 

[lexity]

and I responded with how capitalism will lead to crony capitalism

try again...

Why try again when you said you didn't read my reply the first time.

Around and around we go....

I'm getting that circular argument vibe again. The one that pigs - that are only interested in maintaining an appearance of being willing to engage in a productive back-n-forth - tend to put out.

 

[saturnz]

Why try again when you said you didn't read my reply the first time.

I read your reply, I quoted it in my response

you said I conflated crony capitalism with capitalism, this is false because I literally provided an explanation as to how capitalism morphs into crony capitalism

 

[lexity]

I read your reply, I quoted it in my response

you said I conflated crony capitalism with capitalism, this is false because I literally provided an explanation as to how capitalism morphs into crony capitalism

No, I wasn't talking about that reply.

I was talking about the next one.

The one you said you didn't read.

 

[saturnz]

No, I wasn't talking about that reply.

I was talking about the next one.

The one you said you didn't read.

you just said I conflated two concepts while ignoring the fact I explained myself

you made a false claim...

 

[lexity]

you just said I conflated two concepts while ignoring the fact I explained myself

you made a false claim...

You also demonstrated you don't know the difference between a label and an explanation.

How can I take you seriously?

p.s. Post 78.... you didn't read it, you just labelled it as faulty.

No explanation.... no quoting a specific point, nothing. Just... I'm not reading that because it's faulty.

 

[saturnz]

You also demonstrated you don't know the difference between a label and an explanation.

How can I take you seriously?

p.s. Post 78.... you didn't read it, you just labelled it as faulty.

No explanation.... no quoting a specific point, nothing. Just... I'm not reading that because it's faulty.

yes because morals has absolutely nothing to do with anything here

 

[lexity]

yes because morals has absolutely nothing to do with anything here

If you can't see that morals is the foundation of civlization... well, I guess we don't deserve each others attention.

 

[saturnz]

If you can't see that morals is the foundation of civlization... well, I guess we don't deserve each others attention.

the issue is not civilization, it is capitalism

keep shifting those posts

and I'm still waiting for the part where I can't back up what I said...

 

[lexity]

the issue is not civilization, it is capitalism

The only reason civilization emerges, in any half-way sustainable form, is the strong legal protection of privacy of person and property, and individuals acceptance of the responsibility for shunning Collectivists.

All the effects that flow from this e.g. the abolition of slavery, and the incentive to produce, do not simply fall like rain i.e. to be taken for granted. Freedom is something you do, not something you have.

But that is precisely what happens if you think freedom is free as in beer i.e. you sow the seeds of Communism... that paradise where everyone is equally poor and equally miserable.... including eventually your hero kleptocrats that promised you a life of perpetual childhood, where you don't have to take decision-making responsibility for putting the most competent first.

keep shifting those posts

and I'm still waiting for the part where I can't back up what I said...

Back up your claim that morals are irrelevant to sustainable civilizations.

Capitalism doesn't fail when you stop implementing it.

That's you.... you failed. Don't blame capitalism.

 

[saturnz]

Back up your claim that morals are irrelevant to sustainable civilizations.

LOL, I didn't make this claim

 

[lexity]

Back up your claim that morals are irrelevant to sustainable civilizations.

LOL, I didn't make this claim

saturnz: 'morals has absolutely nothing to do with anything here'

Just to remind yourself.... read the thread title.

 

[saturnz]

saturnz: 'morals has absolutely nothing to do with anything here'

Just to remind yourself.... read the thread title.

I was not talking about civilisation, I was talking about capitalism

you moved the goal posts, I made no comments on civilisation

 

[lexity]

I was not talking about civilisation, I was talking about capitalism

you moved the goal posts, I made no comments on civilisation

Capitalism emerges when you remove authoritarian economic controls.

It's not installed by a new regime. It is the preferred choice when you take the State and bind it, or better yet abolish it. Because it works to incentive producers, and Statism does the opposite.

You are still conflating crony-capitalism, an oxymoron, with capitalism. Hence you can speak of civilization without 'capitalism'.

Capitalism is a moral choice i.e. to prosecute violators of the concept of self-ownership, and all the rights that flow from it.

 

[saturnz]

It is the preferred choice when you offer it, because it works better.

LOL, and I must accept that because you say so

You are still conflating crony-capitalism, an oxymoron, with capitalism. Hence you can speak of civilization without 'capitalism'.

I didn't speak of civilisation without capitalism, I spoke about how capitalism easily morphs into croney capitalism

and you still are under the impression I conflate the two even when I explained myself

 

[lexity]

LOL, and I must accept that because you say so

No. You don't have to accept anything I say. If you think you have to go on what I say alone, without referring to history, that is exactly why your and my values are completely incompatible.

You deserve your own jurisdiction where you can demonstrate your Socialist paradise and win us over through demonstration that this time it will be different.

I didn't speak of civilisation without capitalism, I spoke about how capitalism easily morphs into croney capitalism

and you still are under the impression I conflate the two even when I explained myself

You didn't acknowledge that capitalism is something one does.

If a bank is bailed out when it makes bad business decisions, instead of being allowed to fail.... that is not capitalism. You have then stopped being capitalist. That is not capitalism failing... that is you failing to carry on the formula for economic flourishing.

So saying capitalism easily morphs into crony-capitalism totally discards human agency. You have made it clear you think it is an inevitable process. That, right there, is you shunning human agency.

That's individual primacy in law. You take individual responsibility for mitigating risk. You don't leave it up to some politician, who has promised you you don't ever have to worry about passing over losers.

 

[saturnz]

No. You don't have to accept anything I say. If you think you have to go on what I say alone, without referring to history, that is exactly why your and my values are completely incompatible.

You deserve your own jurisdiction where you can demonstrate your Socialist paradise and win us over through demonstration that this time it will be different.


You didn't acknowledge that capitalism is something one does.

If a bank is bailed out when it makes bad business decisions, instead of being allowed to fail.... that is not capitalism. You have then stopped being capitalist. That is not capitalism failing... that is you failing to carry on the formula for economic flourishing.

So saying capitalism easily morphs into crony-capitalism totally discards human agency. You have made it clear you think it is an inevitable process. That, right there, is you shunning human agency.

That's individual primacy in law. You take individual responsibility for mitigating risk. You don't leave it up to some politician, who has promised you you don't ever have to worry about passing over losers.

Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit

if that is the underlying premise of capitalism, then nothing stops private ownership of everything

 

[lexity]

if that is the underlying premise of capitalism, then nothing stops private ownership of everything

My God, man, you're starting to get it.

 

[saturnz]

My God, man, you're starting to get it.

private ownership of government, private ownership of the markets itself

in othewords, nothing stops capitalism from morphing into monopolistic behaviour

ggwp