Very easy.
How can you invest and trade if in case of conflict and/or cheating you don’t get an effective recourse.
How can you invest and trade if, at any time the state can deprive you of your goods ?
I did not spoke of democracy. Yes, capitalism does not need it directly.
How does Ukraine living as a sovereign democracy “dominate Russia”?
What does that supposed to mean? What does that matter to the bigger question? Do you know what foreign nation invading your homeland feels like? Who’s made any threat against Russian homeland?
What’s Macathyism look like here in this forum, pray tell?
Not sure how any of that justified or explains anything about why Russia is blasting the living heart out of neighbor?
I don’t really mind people going off topic, that happens all the time, but when those are intended as distractions, red herrings, it’s annoying. As with any moderator decision, it’s a matter of patterns. We delete a few users a week before they even get past their first post, those are easy, but when they make long posts about history, show some knowledge of something, it gets complicated.
Take this case, first the distraction, then the ad hominem nature of it (based on it not being logical, not connected to the definition of McCarthyism), and it’s repetitive without responding to questions and requests for clarifications so not engaging with the discussion. It adds up.
I think it was Jefferson who reflected on the creation of the Constitution, saying it won’t work if there is not an underlying basis of morality in the people whom it governs. Capitalism can exist in that, but can also exploit it. We all want freedom and choices, and would prefer an open world, but we have to watch for aggressors, so we need to build defenses and have the ability to take away freedoms from people who would take fundamental rights from others, like taking someone’s life.
I saw an example of someone drowning, and negotiating a large portion of their wealth to get help. That would be a square deal in capitalist terms, but extortion in any moral sense. The example is extreme, but it happens every day when millions of people choose a crappy job because they need food, housing and medicine.
Capitalism doesn’t care about you as long as you don’t disrupt commerce. It is designed to find the lowest value you can put on your time and efforts. A moral system would look for the highest value you can contribute and work to nurture that in as many people as possible.
Capitalism needs you as an added value producer, and as a consumer.
And it wants to integrate you in the market.
Yeah, part of “not disrupt” to me means continuing to pass through your value back into the system. For anyone under the poverty level, like over half the world, that means not being able to save, not being able to spend resources on improving yourself, not even having time to just reflect on what you should do next.
It’s kind of the paradox of capitalism, because once you get beyond living hand to mouth, and past that to being able to have real choices, a moral system would reinvest the extra capital. But capitalism is an economic system, it doesn’t enforce morality, so many choose to hoard, take huge risks, use their money to make more money, and don’t think about who it harms.
And when companies “own” the gov’t …
A 5-4 Supreme Court reinstated a Trump-era rule Wednesday that restricts the authority of states to reject federal permits under the Clean Water Act
I forget if this is the same rule that allows mining companies to dump toxic waste into sources for drinking water.
The last words of Justice Kagan’s dissent.
… By nonetheless granting relief, the Court goes astray.
It provides a stay pending appeal, and thus signals its view of the merits, even though the applicants have failed to make the irreparable harm showing we have traditionally required.
That renders the Court’s emergency docket not for emergencies at all. The docket becomes only another place for merits determinations—except made without full briefing and argument. I respectfully dissent.
JUSTICE KAGAN
Here’s something interesting I ran into and got slightly sidetracked, as I was looking into your link and other places that lead me.
Who are these justices making these decisions?
Yes, Orban is not really liberal, but that does not make him an ally of Putin. More to the point, I suspect liberal values do not translate well into the cultures east of Vienna and south of the Alps. Those nations seem to have become a burden on the EU.
Eazy pezy. The rules are made by the boss class for the boss class and the State which includes the judiciary is there to ensure these are enforced and protected in particular- property rights. Nothing independent and impartial about that arrangement
Then it wouldn’t be a “free” market would it? That was my point. It seems, according to you, there are no just systems, political or economic. What do you suggest we do?
More complex.
Yes the judiciary system is a tool of domination of the bourgeoisie
But it needs to be credible.
For instance, in France, we have courts who judge the cases between workers and firms. Workers win often.
And, beyond, 2 things:
-second, the law needs to be applied fairly, for the system itself.
Ask the yellow vests. Winning peanuts
This is what I’m talking about when I talk about patterns. This is not a serious answer to the question. That would be fine, no rule against being silly, but when you pepper comments with insults to the members on the forum, including how the forum is moderated, when you make posts that are just links, when you demand your questions are answered but don’t answer questions to you, and more. It adds up.
Sorry to see you go, but it’s time.
High time. He seems to think MIGHT makes right. It is time he got a taste of that philosophy.
We don’t have a jury system here, and appeals are made to the moderators. Some people have found an email to the CFI staff above me, the ones who fund this and have more tools than I do, but they are pretty much hands off. I suspect they would like a more orderly forum, but are aware