leaving you this...

[callmeslick]

...to ponder and debate whilst I'm in the mountains. From John Maynard Keynes:
"Capitalism is the extraordinary belief that the nastiest of men, for the nastiest of motives, will somehow work to benefit us all."

[vision]

Before responding, first read about the quote. There is no evidence pinning this directly to Keynes, but definitely appears to be a view held by him and his peers.

[Isaac]

@ OP,

That's why accounting standards and internal controls are important.

[Tunnelcat]

I found a better quote the best describes the rot in BOTH our government and our corporate systems.

We design corporations and governmental structures so that "responsibility" and "accountability" are spread across a lateral plane so that there is no definitive trail of accountability. It nurtures and stimulates the "book of excuses" and selfish greed.

[Will Robinson]

I reject the premise of the statement.
There is nothing about capitalism that is designed to benefit anyone other than the participant. No one should attribute an altruistic character to its intended implementation. There usually are many benefits to those in its path and wake but that is coincidental to its purpose.

It is a system designed to allow the individual to work toward his own goals with as little hindrance from others as possible, at least in as much as the society/culture will allow without stepping in to punish him or tax him.

So, while many people might find that quote poignant they are simply ignorant.

[Spidey]

Sounds something like trickle down economics to me.

[Tunnelcat]

I reject the premise of the statement.
There is nothing about capitalism that is designed to benefit anyone other than the participant. No one should attribute an altruistic character to its intended implementation. There usually are many benefits to those in its path and wake but that is coincidental to its purpose.

It is a system designed to allow the individual to work toward his own goals with as little hindrance from others as possible, at least in as much as the society/culture will allow without stepping in to punish him or tax him.

So, while many people might find that quote poignant they are simply ignorant.

Capitalism is system, and it creates bureaucracies and hierarchies in the form of large companies and corporations. The power structures between a government and a corporation are pretty much the same, although the government tends to get rigid and entrenched over time, which I agree is THE main problem in any government. But at least, we have a chance to vote out those we don't like and perhaps change the system. With a corporation, you're stuck with whatever they want to do, or sell. They can pollute our water, either by accident or neglect, yet nothing gets solved. They can poison our food, and they go away, but they'll get reborn as another entity.

You seem to forget that humans run both the free market and the government, and humans will invariably do the same thing running both systems, because that's just what they tend to do. They can just as easily manipulate and abuse both endeavors for their own power, greed and gain, and many do. There is no magic behavior change when people run a company, or a government. Those with no scruples or morals will always take advantage, IN ANY SYSTEM, and most systems contain those types of people because power and greed draws them in.

Now, you tell me how this corporate leader, who royally messed up at his job and oversaw one of the biggest security breaches in any company, DESERVES the exorbitant payment he got just to leave his job. This is NOT an isolated practice either in corporate America either. In fact, it's commonplace, to reward even failure. If I, personally, happened to screw up in most of the jobs I've held throughout life, I had to either pay for it, or make it right on my dime because I took the responsibility. If I was fired, which I was once from a fast food joint as a teenager, all because I had to study for school that night instead of man the counter like the manager wanted me to, I got no back pay and only a good riddance in return.

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2014/05/ ... parachute/

[Will Robinson]

TC you are applying all sorts of meaning and content to my post that isn't there...
And we are not "stuck" with corporations. We vote with our money. We are much more stuck with entrenched politicians than we are with any corporation and in the instances where it seems true is usually because some politicians have enabled the corporate concern to sneak past the law or intent of the law.

But on a whole your comments seems to want to characterize my post as suggesting corps=good....government=bad. That is not what I'm saying. Stop trying to fit my comment through your handy dandy left vs. right talking points template and just take my words at face value. That is all the intent that is behind them. Find your partisan approved sparring partner elsewhere...

[callmeslick]

We are much more such with entrenched politicians than we are with any corporation .

hate to be this harsh, but you are either disingenuous, or completely delusional.

[Will Robinson]

We are much more such with entrenched politicians than we are with any corporation .

hate to be this harsh, but you are either disingenuous, or completely delusional.

What corporate entity do we not want but have to buy from?

[Top Gun]

Walmart, for one. There are a lot of people out there who probably don't like it very much but can only afford to shop there.

[vision]

What corporate entity do we not want but have to buy from?

Internet service providers, cable, telephone, utilities, and basically any industry where regional monopolies and/or price-fixing is in place. Happens in retail all the time. I ran my friend's music business for a couple years and most of the vendors were deadly strict about the prices of their products. If they caught you selling under the "industry accepted" price they pulled the plug on your account. Hurray capitalism! I would love to vote with my dollar, but in some cases that means having to do without, and doing without can put you at a competitive disadvantage for your career. Is this freedom?

We are much more such with entrenched politicians than we are with any corporation.

Here is a list of corporations older than every living politician. Perhaps you recognize a few?

[Tunnelcat]

TC you are applying all sorts of meaning and content to my post that isn't there...
And we are not "stuck" with corporations. We vote with our money. We are much more stuck with entrenched politicians than we are with any corporation and in the instances where it seems true is usually because some politicians have enabled the corporate concern to sneak past the law or intent of the law.

But on a whole your comments seems to want to characterize my post as suggesting corps=good....government=bad. That is not what I'm saying. Stop trying to fit my comment through your handy dandy left vs. right talking points template and just take my words at face value. That is all the intent that is behind them. Find your partisan approved sparring partner elsewhere...

You sure come off that way. Corporations can do no wrong, government does everything wrong. My point is, they both have problems. If we didn't have government regulations and oversight, we would be totally owned by corporations, if we aren't already. The problem now is that corporations have bought too much influence in our government and can now dictate things on their terms, not the people's. We don't need socialism, but we need to take back our government from the capitalists.

Case in point:

http://gizmodo.com/fcc-incest-meet-the- ... 1579963216

[Will Robinson]

Monopolies are protected donors for the most part as I alluded to in my original comment.

WalMart? Really? You don't have to buy their stuff yet the number of customers that choose to shop there tells me that example is a failed attempt.

And none of them can force you to buy their product....well Obamacare providers notwithstanding...

Try not paying taxes. Try making politicians stop selling exemptions to big donors. Try running a campaign against the D or R machines that create the fiefdoms like so many Senators hold. And when one finally gets retired the R and D machine installs another just like the old one.

Just because a corporation is old doesn't mean the majority of citizens don't want them to exist.

And to the core point, corporations, private capitalistic ventures etc. are supposed to be as profitable as law and culture will allow!
By their very nature that is what they are supposed to do AND NOTHING ELSE...the silly notion that they are supposed to serve the greater good of the population is absurd.

The notion that government is supposed to do so however is precisely correct.
Therefore comparing the two using a 'benevolence factor' as the criteria is foolishness.

It's like comparing fire to firemen.

Fire is good if you control it but it owes you nothing...it can't show you respect or rescue your kittens from a tree.
A fireman who is good will do those things.
A fireman who will let some people's house burn because they aren't his kind of people is...well...like a politician.

[flip]

Since were finding quotes:

“Let me give you an example, the kind of money we’ve poured in,” he said. “So the most dangerous — sorry, the safest city in America is El Paso, Texas. It happens to be across the border from the most dangerous city in the Americas, which is Juarez. Right?”

“And two of the safest cities in America, two of them are on the border with Mexico,” Garcia continued. “And of course, the reason is we’ve proved that Communism works. If you give everybody a good government job, there’s no crime.” -Democratic Florida Rep. Joe Garcia

So, the democratic plan for the future is to be either a government stooge or a hamburger flipper! Also, how exactly do you "give everyone a government job" unless you plan on completely destroying the free market?

[woodchip]

where will the taxes come if everyone works for the govt.?

[Will Robinson]

where will the taxes come if everyone works for the govt.?

You want to know what is really scary? There are a LOT of people who will blurt out in answer to that question: "It's the government! They can print all the money they need!"
It is so easy to manipulate voters like that. As we have been witness to.

[Tunnelcat]

Monopolies are protected donors for the most part as I alluded to in my original comment.

WalMart? Really? You don't have to buy their stuff yet the number of customers that choose to shop there tells me that example is a failed attempt.

And none of them can force you to buy their product....well Obamacare providers notwithstanding...

Try not paying taxes. Try making politicians stop selling exemptions to big donors. Try running a campaign against the D or R machines that create the fiefdoms like so many Senators hold. And when one finally gets retired the R and D machine installs another just like the old one.

Just because a corporation is old doesn't mean the majority of citizens don't want them to exist.

And to the core point, corporations, private capitalistic ventures etc. are supposed to be as profitable as law and culture will allow!
By their very nature that is what they are supposed to do AND NOTHING ELSE...the silly notion that they are supposed to serve the greater good of the population is absurd.

The notion that government is supposed to do so however is precisely correct.
Therefore comparing the two using a 'benevolence factor' as the criteria is foolishness.

It's like comparing fire to firemen.

Fire is good if you control it but it owes you nothing...it can't show you respect or rescue your kittens from a tree.
A fireman who is good will do those things.
A fireman who will let some people's house burn because they aren't his kind of people is...well...like a politician.

You never explained how a corporate CEO, who screws up doing his job, deserves a multimillion golden parachute. That's not business, that's rewarding greed and failure. Most workers who do that get canned and docked back pay. This is endemic in the very top leadership of our system and is directly a result of the greed and lack of personal responsibility and accountability in our corporate structures. And yes, our government as well.

As for Walmart, granted there are other "choices" and I readily avail myself of them locally. Since we are a more liberal city, it gladdens my heart to see Walmart's mostly empty lot because there are other, better stores close by and people here really loathe Walmart. But most stores sell the same crappy processed foods anyway because of Walmart, so here's not really any choice, is there? Walmart has pressured food manufacturers to cheapify and lower the quality of their processed foods all in their constant effort to force down prices. I don't see that as a good thing either. Most processed food now is pretty much garbage, all because of Walmart.

In my area, if I want a better internet service, I'm stuck with one of 2 monopolies that BOTH have poor service, unreliable connections, high prices and slow speeds. I have no choice there at all. I take umbrage that these companies make a profit off of me and other customers without any care or thought as to the quality of their service. THEY DON'T GIVE A SH*T! I guess I could take my money and run..... but then I'd have no access to the internet and commerce.

And your firefighter analogy has a slight flaw. When something is privatized, if you don't happen to pay, or forget to pay, they don't spray. They'll stand there and watch your house burn down. By paying regular taxes, I can be assured of adequate fire responses and protection because everyone in the city pays taxes to keep things running reliably. There are some things that work more efficiently as part of the commons.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/39516346/ns/u ... home-burn/

Take roads for example. How do you think this country would have fared with ALL privatized roads and highways? Do you think we would have had the tremendous economic growth and rise of commerce we've had since WWII? I'm guessing not.

[Will Robinson]

...

You never explained how a corporate CEO, who screws up doing his job, deserves a multimillion golden parachute. That's not business, that's rewarding greed and failure.

What point did you think this makes?

...
And your firefighter analogy has a slight flaw.

The only flaw is you failing to grasp its meaning! I'm guessing because the distinction it points out is not what you want to discuss....so you just respond as if I had said something else.
But then you did that with most of what I said. You want the discussion to be about government=good capitalism=bad as if they are the same thing and people have to be ideologically in one camp or the other exclusively.

So just go for it, you don't need anyone to distract you from you talking only about what you want to rant about. Think of this thread as twitter with no text character limits...knock yourself out.

[woodchip]

TC, you never explained how a top level bureaucrat who screws up gets to keep his high paying job and his pension.

[Tunnelcat]

...

You never explained how a corporate CEO, who screws up doing his job, deserves a multimillion golden parachute. That's not business, that's rewarding greed and failure.

What point did you think this makes?

It shows me that Marcinko's observational quote is just as correct concerning corporations as it is with government bureaucracies. The fact that golden parachutes even exist at all shows me that personal responsibility is pretty much non-existent in the upper echelons of corporate America and rewarding greed has become a de rigueur part of the culture in our present free market system.

...
And your firefighter analogy has a slight flaw.

The only flaw is you failing to grasp its meaning! I'm guessing because the distinction it points out is not what you want to discuss....so you just respond as if I had said something else.
But then you did that with most of what I said. You want the discussion to be about government=good capitalism=bad as if they are the same thing and people have to be ideologically in one camp or the other exclusively.

So just go for it, you don't need anyone to distract you from you talking only about what you want to rant about. Think of this thread as twitter with no text character limits...knock yourself out.

First of all, I never said government, in it's present incarnation, is good. It needs a good cleansing to make it work for the people again. We only differ in how much should government be involved our lives, when it's not infested with greed and corruption. Right now, it's clearly rotten to the core.

But you seem to hold the deluded belief that corporations and the free market are inherently good and will not succumb to the same evils that now corrupts our government. I believe that corruption and greed knows no bounds, or system, and that all human created systems, be it capitalism, socialism, or any flavor in between, will invariably gravitate towards rot and corruption unless people are constantly vigilant and willing to police things and work together.

TC, you never explained how a top level bureaucrat who screws up gets to keep his high paying job and his pension.

I didn't. I don't happen to support that practice either. There's no personal responsibility or accountability when there are no consequences. It should be the same while working for the government, or for corporate America.

[Will Robinson]

...

...

But you seem to hold the deluded belief that corporations and the free market are inherently good and will not succumb to the same evils that now corrupts our government. ...

No. You assign that false premise to my comments so your arguments might be valid. Feel free to try and quote where I said what you imply...

I have pointed out the stark difference in the designed purpose of government versus a capitalist organization designed to create profit. More than once. But you ignore that distinction and the problems it creates for your analogies, comparisons and conclusions.

Greed is a natural motivator and a useful tool in one.....and a corrupting cancer in the other.
Government corruption or inept execution allows corporate greed to harm innocents. It isn't greed that harms people it is the politician neglecting his duty to keep it contained so he can profit.
Thus the 'fire' and 'fireman' analogy that you didn't grasp.

[Tunnelcat]

...Greed is a natural motivator and a useful tool in one.....and a corrupting cancer in the other.
Government corruption or inept execution allows corporate greed to harm innocents. It isn't greed that harms people it is the politician neglecting his duty to keep it contained so he can profit.
Thus the 'fire' and 'fireman' analogy that you didn't grasp.

That's where you're wrong. Desire to make good money and a good living is the motivator. If you come up with a better idea or product than the next guy and make far more money than you ever expected, you get a greater reward. Greed corrupts that the original idea of making money for a living by turning into taking money by any means possible because there can NEVER be enough money to satisfy that greed. Greed makes people careless and uncaring towards whatever business they're running. Greed also fuels doing things illegally to make more money. Greed makes money a drug.