@Desi9 I think that is the reason we seek trade with other nations. We used to get spices from India and South America. We seek to profit from all innovation across the world. We still seek trade of all goods. This is why we have monetary exchange rates. :)
@catbuffalo ...their money from capitalistic ventures. Both Corporatism and Capitalism have the goal of profit. Corporatists seek near-immediate multiple short-term gains while Capitalists seek long-term growth and investment.
@catbuffalo Profit alone is not capitalistic. Capitalism is a system using capital earned from a business to invest in a business in order to earn further profits. Lobbying falls under the Corporatist/Miltary-Industrialist/Mixed Economy category. You use the example of a defense contractor with lobbying. Government Contractors can't enter into Capitalism by their very nature because they are at least in part directly involved with Government acquisition of taxpayer money. They can't make all of
I am in favor of Capitalism but strongly oppose corporatism. The difference is that corporatism is backed by the government. Corporatism makes money through government assistance and war. Capitalism is a fair exchange of capital and goods/services between people. Corporatism has been in exsistance since the Spanish American War if not earlier. Corporatism is what I compare to a reverse Robin Hood mentality...rob from the poor and give to the rich.
Greed is why we're in this global mess/recession, greed is why 25000 people die every day in this world from preventable diseases, greed is why there are over 50 wars happening right now most of which could have been avoided if money wasn't a major factor...in short, Milton Friedman was a cock and so are all his followers. I believe in Capatilism, but despise corporatism because nothing good ever comes from corporations ever since their motto is greed always leading to more suffering worldwide.
My 2 cents is that we should really be a Corpratist govenment because it lets everyone get their say, it reduces class warfare and eliminates the need for greed.
The point is really simple. No one manages your money than you, so why buy stocks in a corporation and let other people have control of it? In addition, if they mismanage it and lose it, the risk is entirely your's. This is how foolish people are.
Do you know what a corporation is? They are suppose to use the shareholders money to make investments in the corporation; however, these CEOs are stealing the money and miss managing the money. Since they are not putting in any of their money, they don't care what happens to other peoples money. In addition to that, they print more stock and sell it to shareholders, and manipulate the value of those stocks. Making it go up, down, side ways, making money any direction it moves.
@canefan17 no, it stems from how government can be controlled. thats the difference... when you allow coporations to have unlimited lobbying power... its not the government that has the power.. its the corporations... but they can use the government to exhibit that power...
@canefan17 the problem that you have is, you are looking at the symptons (government has too much power) not the problem... (corporations are lobbying, buying, the government to do what they want.) In the US government doesnt have the power, the people do... however the issue is what gets the government to do what the people want.. is it votes, or is it money/lobbying power.
I find the exact opposite to be true. The problem is the rule makers have too much power and thus there is plenty of lobbying to be done. Corporations will forever lobby politicians to the best of their ability - but if you limit the power and size of government you limit corruption.
Much of this power needs to be done away with and/or given to our state and local governments (who the people can influence much easier)
@canefan17 the US government is designed in nature to be as big or as small as the people want it to be... hence my point. Its the people who decide.... whether with votes or with money. if you limit the size of government, you just expand the corruption to the private sector... you have to nip where the power inbalance happens... and thats the ability to use money to get away with whatever you want.
@canefan17 not suggesting big government, and our govenrment could use without the fed, or department homeland security, no child left behind.. and save billions,... hell trillions with the fed alone.
just saying dont do the extreme here... small government is just as scary as big government.
True capitalism for me is like...You have an idea, you create a private enterprise and start to sell your product, which in turn starts the capitalistic process of letting consumers control the flow of money.
But wall street does not have a physical product. They play casino games with loans, debts, mortgages and derivatives and THEY, not the consumers, control the market.How can anyone claim thats capitalist? lol
Wall Street provides the capital for private enterprise.
And our government owns Wall Street.
When you figure this out you'll have it.
The government controls the money supply and interest rates. THAT is all that matters in a monetary system and our government owns that.
Wall Street just plays the hand you deal them. (E.g Fannie and Freddie back loans that never would have been issued, in a true free market, to high risk borrowers). Gubby says "everyone should own a home." lol
I won't disagree with your frustration, but to blame it on the Republicans is idiotic. You diminish your argument. Democrats are every bit as guilty of participating in "corpratism"
@fiddlinmike "The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy." Carroll Quigley (the left, right two party scam)
@shadowgeyser , exactly right, we have been doubling down on Reaganomics and the capitalist have greatly increased their wealth. However that wealth has done little for the vast majority, tax breaks should be given after the jobs are created not in hope they will. The wealthy do what is best for them not the economy. Our Democracy is being perverted by special interest and we are far to invested in the financial sector, money is being pooled in the hands of the few.
@zaurakdigis Im sorry but tax breaks and job growth are functions of eachother. Without investment and incentives to invest the economy will always be worst off. The second we depend on higher taxes is the second the economy shrinks due to less investing resulting in more unemployment. Furthermore our standard of living will be affected. The super rich are not the major players in the investment game. It is the risk takers in the upper middle and lower upper classes. Do not take away incentive.
@trickdaddyaz03 what you're describing does not apply everywhere. here in Canada we pay higher taxes, yet our unemployment rate is 2 percent lower than the US.
Of course you have to ask why corporatism exists, I would imagine that it is because the elites who triggered the revolutions wanted to keep the money for themselves and fool everyone else with talk about sucess and capital. James Madison said for example, that the role of the American system was to protect the few against the many. Of course religious lingo is good too, the market is all wise, the market will reward the good, the market works in cycles etc Bottom line the market does not exist.
THANK YOU! For God's sake, Thank you! I'm so sick of people blaming Capitalism for corporate monoliths. Being in bed with the government has nothing to do with Capitalism.
Actually it does. If it benefitted you as a defense contractor fianancially to lobby the government to go into iraq, that falls into the category of the profit motive. Unless you think capitalism has nothing to do with profit making.
with the way things are. i wouldnt be surprised if either A, the corporations control obama because they know its to obvious and were pissed. or B. another "terrorist" attack will occur before the election. scare people towards someone like bush to protect us
@shadowgeyser and if you are saying that there is less regulation now then there was 30-40 years ago...you are not reading your politics correctly. You are listening to only one side and not researching on your own and looking at all sides. keynesian economics vs austrian economics. Keynesianism is what we have had for a long time before REAGAN AND BUSH , and they have all done the same thing. Spent money that they do not have and hope it comes back. Baaaaad Economics
@DadoPennsylvania , there was less regulation than 30-40 years ago? What have you been smoking?
Wall Street regulations put in place post 1929 Crash was reversed, regulation enforcement has been outsourced to the corporations. No enforcement equals no regulation. Research funding has sharply decreased and corporations fund research that is falsified for profit. The Drug Industry is a perfect example. Mining inspections is also a good example, inspectors look the other way or get fired.
@shadowgeyser to look at the US and say oh this capitalism is just like corporatism. The truth is that there is almost no Capitalism in the US any more. This is clearly corporatism. Again I know you'll say its the same...but please research capitalism and corporatism and compare them on your own. Do not listen to Republicans and Democrats....because they want you to believe that capitalism is corporatism. Capitalism, Corporatism,Socialism those are three very very very different things
@shadowgeyser please do not take me the wrong way. I am not one of those people who come on here to tell people what they should think especially tell them in a bad way....but I just had to say something about your comment that capitalism and corporatism are the same. I am sorry, but you could not be more wrong. Just because Obama comes out and says this is a Democratic,Capitalistic,free-market free trade country does not mean that it is. It is a common mistake of many people today ....
Monoply doesn't exist under capitalism. It's illigal to monopolize goods and servicesin the US . Monopoly exists under Fascist and Communistic economy.
@SlavicFront88 AHAHAHAHAHA! Communists favored who ever bribed them the most! They had complete control over everything every-were that's the biggest monopoly of all!
Excuse me Mr. Turk, but corporatism is actually the fusion of the state and private enterprise where the government chooses the winners and losers and the "corporations" plan accordingly with the state with which ever agenda they have in mind. It's a dual relationship. Look up Facism and Peronism for examples.
Those shareholders are actually simply living up to contracts. a contract is legal and if people spend it wrongly, someone else will replace them in the future
Wrong Wrong...your wrong......did I say your wrong...its so your I can only say its STOOPID! Do your research putz. Look at Mussolini (Corporate Pawn) and he unregulated everything for Big Business at the time. Same for Hitler!
I believe in a government like the REAL republicans do. Small, with few interventions into the market. With no central bank, and currency with a standard. not one that inflates. However i do believe there should be social security support for education, and technology. but in the american context, this should be regional not national. Although national or international "collaborations" in these area's are ok. My 2 cents. basicly 1 system can never have all the answers so i might be wrong.
@Lollitard unfortunately you can not have both....no government except in some places. you ether have it or you dont. if you go both ways , then you get corporatism which we are in today and the US has been for a long time
@Lollitard thank you. as a real republican, dont you feel as if your parties been high jacked? Its not even following legitimate ideals all i hear are things that will support this corporate take over we had happen under bush, and support abolishing social security and government programs so the rich will have an excuse not to pay taxes, or things that are completely trivial. Like arguements over gay marriage. How about the violation of freedom of the press in reporting on Iraq? Middle class?
Yeah... that sort of thinking got us all the banking crisis. And you basically have no idea what you're talking about anyway. But since most people don't this sort of stuff sounds good to ignorant people.
Fact is your system would be an even BIGGER corporatocracy because you'd weaken the one thing that can possibly keep it in check, and that you get to have a vote in; The government.
If you where actually smart you'd want to restructure the government, not castrate it.
Seriously... libertarians... I wouldn't say they mean well, there's to much of a streak of social darwinism amongst libertarians if you ask me. Sure there's a few nice ones, but like consies, they're generally not nice people. But that's not even what their fault is.
Their fault is that they, in spite of their supposed quest for freedom are essentially for making freedom purely dependent on wealth. Either out of being misguided, gullible or a misplaced superiority complex.
@TheSkunkCat What you dont understand is the libertarians understand that capitalism has developed out of facts 1) the world has limited resouces and 2) that socially some are a able to produce and utilize resources more than others. Yes liberty is another aspect of the position, yet a different more complex argument. However the end belief is that humanity is better off in capitalism than any other system. Is it pretty? no. Does is work for everyone? no. But is the best system.
@Desi9 Well take for example the life of the average poor American and the poor life of the average person in a second or third world country. The standard of living between the two is significantly different because of technology yet both standards are elevated by technology. Where would 2nd and 3rd world labor markets be without the outsourcing of jobs for technological industries? They would be worse off. Capitalism allows those with money freedom to invest in companies which provides jobs.
You can see the evidence in the fact that capitalist America's poor has today by far a higher standard of living compared to those of second and third world countries. Our poor have very comfortable lives in terms of the costs of living.
@trickdaddyaz03 well it's stretch to say they have comfortable lives, esp considering an increasing number of them are unemployed and losing their homes. and it really isn't much to say the poor in US have a "far" higher standard of living than low-income countries considering the conditions of grinding poverty in those countries. even so, there's one study, I forget which one, that reveals living conditions in the poorest places in US are little different than those in low income countries.
"Freedom dependent on wealth"? please explain that genius. Are you telling me that a poor person in this country cannot decide for himself to go to school and get a profession? As opposed to the tracking system in the UK where if you dont produce intellectually at a certian level at a certain age the decision is made for you? That is not freedom my friend. Our worst economic recessions (excluding the great depression) have never been as bad as the UK.
@TheSkunkCat lol way to generalise hundreds of millions of people, what does that say about you?
Libertarianism isn't about wealth, it's about the freedom to pursue it, or anything else without the gov't parasite stealing from us for things we would never choose to purchase, like illegal wars, BP Oil contracts etc
Gov't producers nothing, it's a cancer controlled by the elites
War, dollar devalue, SS, medicare (100 trill unfunded liab) How many more failed ponzi schemes do you need?
@GtheMVP Explain how social security is a "failed ponzi scheme"
50% of seniors lived in poverty untill SS came into place. Now only 10% live in poverty...I dunno about you but a program that decreases poverty by 40% seems like it works okay..
@coopmuch56 45 million Americans are living in poverty, these numbers have been rising for decades. Social security and other gov't run programs are working at whose expense?
Let's see, two trillion dollar deficit, near/over 100 trillion in unfunded liabilites, sorry, your big gov;t doesn't work -- Bureaucracies cost the US nearly 2 trillion a year
And SS is far worse than a ponzi scheme, at least entrance into a ponzi scheme is voluntary, not our fault people are easily duped
@coopmuch56 Social Security is available for now, but what will happen when people aren't working and there is no one to pay into the Social Security System to pay back all of the people, like myself at age 29, who will want to collect all of the money they paid into the system? The money that I pay into SS right now, goes right to the Government and into someones pocket. It's not being saved, it's being passed around... It's a Ponzi Scheme.
@coopmuch56 I really don't know how to answer your question, but if you haven't noticed, jobs are leaving this country and they aren't coming back. The US Government has 100 Trillion Dollars of Debt lined up to be spent on just two programs, not including SS, 80 Trillion Dollars on Medicare and 20 Trillion on Prescription Drugs... If the jobs aren't as plentiful as they were when the money was allocated, there will be no way to collect the money to put into the system to pay to the recipients.
@coopmuch56 I really don't know how to answer your question, but if you haven't noticed, jobs are leaving this country and they aren't coming back. The US Government has 100 Trillion Dollars of Debt lined up to be spent on just two programs, not including SS, 80 Trillion Dollars on Medicare and 20 Trillion on Prescription Drugs... If the jobs aren't as plentiful as they were when the money was allocated, there will be no way to collect the money to put into the system to pay to the recipients.
@Lollitard Be very careful of who you all vote in the U.S.A cause what you'll vote will determine the future of our global economy. Power to the People not the corporations/governments or any other irrelevant nonsense I don't give a submarining fuck about. This thing is GLOBAL.
@Lollitard Like your Comment, so how do you feel about Ron Paul then, because from what you said, it sounds like you'd agree with a lot of his viewpoints after some deeper than surface level examination.
you think they really regulate the banks? the government creates situations so that the banks dont have to be accountable. remember the bailouts that republicans and democrats voted for?
Growing government in a socialist way is not going to fix these things. You can't grow the government and expect them to work differently. The government is giving these corporations the power to influence. In a true free market society with a small government it will decrease the influence of corporations.
Why would you all trust a coercive violent government to take care of you and make rules for the economy?
@DavidValley , Yes, Capitalists are always willing to take care of people and the environment. I am sure, that your heavenly free market society will bring prosperity to all. Indeed I am sure, that all those elderly who fall sick will have plenty of private health insurance companies providing them affordable health care. And I am sure, that without the minimum wage, millions of workers will earn much more than before and enjoy a good standard of living. Please take your bullshit elsewhere
@easye2233 Technically speaking, the idea of capitalism does not contradict in any way welfare and healthcare. "Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are privately owned and operated for a private profit; decisions regarding supply, demand, price, distribution, and investments are made by private actors in the free market; profit is distributed to owners who choose to invest in businesses, and wages are paid to workers employed by businesses and companies."[Wikipedia]
@ahmedeox, please, FREE market, means no welfare, for welfare requires taxes on the system. Those hardcore neoliberal free market capitalists want to do away with the welfare state. The welfare state was created as response to pressure from workers not sympathy from capitalists.
@easye2233 In the definition given to capitalism, even though there is no exact definition, is there any mention of free market? No. My point was that there is no contradiction between capitalism and welfare. There is one between free market, which eliminates government interventionism, and welfare, but that was not the issue. Capitalism and communism are opposites because they are different views on ownership of the means of production. This is separate from the problem of the free market.
Capitalism in its pure form is not based on welfare and any sense of fairness or equality, but exploitation and accumulation of profit. Where do you think profit comes from? It comes from the ability to command workers and pay them less than they produce.
@easye2233 Profits comes from selling people something they want at a price they are willing to pay. You can't command workers in a free enterprise system because under that system the worker competes freely for jobs and business competes freely for workers.. Wages are determined by how much one desires that a job be done combined with how scarce the supply of laborers willing and able to do that job.
@easye2233 My bad, but not a big one. Posted that one a while back, forgot the details. I will argue differently then. Is free market necessary for capitalism?I wouldn't think so, since there are many countries which do distribute wealth, yet still support private ownership of the means of production (France, Sweden, UK, etc.) Calling them socialist countries would mean that they support the public ownership of these means, which they do not. Moreover, how do you define free market?
@ahmedeox A free market is a market - free - from any form of intervention. i.e. no taxes, no price controls, no subsidies, no minimum wages, no export taxes, no import tariffs, no emissions taxes, no regulation.
@easye2233 How about taxes for maintaining an army, police force, fire departments, governmental agencies that ensure competition on the free market is fair? If free market excludes these too, then there is no free market anywhere in the world, and if you construe free market as NECESSARY for capitalism, then it follows that there are no truly capitalist economies in the world.
@easye2233 But I never claimed that you can, and I'm sure there are many capitalists who think that government intervention is required at least to ensure that the market is free and all the players are fair, precisely because you cannot rely on the market alone. The root of the issue is how you define free market, because you will need taxes, like those that I mentioned before, but one must argue why a certain tax is necessary.
@easye2233 I could argue that tax for public education is OK and beneficial for the economy, because it allows for the training of the best individuals, not of the best AND who can afford it individuals, thus maximizing the probability of finding outstanding people that would benefit the economy. The market is still free and the idea of maximizing profit is still applied, yet it is a welfare distribution tax.
@ahmedeox; you are admitting that the free market does not work and government intervention in areas such as education is required. There are many areas in which the market fails, not only education.
@easye2233 I am not admitting that free market does not work. All I'm saying is that you can define free market in such a way so it can be compatible both with capitalism and welfare. I did not say that the market fails when it comes to education, I said that given the fact that free market does not exclude some taxes, one can justify other taxes, welfare taxes, while being consistent with the main principles of capitalism: private ownership and profit maximization.
@ahmedeox, It is blatently obvious you haven't done any reading of economics. Please pick up an economics book and read on market failure, education is one area, but there are countless others.
@easye2233 Please pick up a manual of logic, an English dictionary and a manual on manners, because it is clear that you do not understand what I'm saying, nor understand subtle distinctions, nor realize that an ad hominem argument is not an argument at all, nor have a minimum of decency and respect for me taking the time and expressing and arguing for my opinions on the matter without making any claims about your competence on the matter.
@easye2233 Not admitting that the free market does not work, does not mean that I accept that it works. Giving education as an EXAMPLE does not mean that one cannot give others. Saying that a term must have a clear definition does not mean that I accept or reject a particular view. All this is an exercise of critical thinking. the main argument is that the failure of capitalism leads to people losing jobs, while the failure of socialism, i.e. communism, leads to totalitarianism.
@easye2233 I live in an ex-communist country,and it annoys the hell out of me to see people that lived pampered lives in the cozy bosom of capitalist societies preaching an outdated,empirically proven false system that cost my country 50 years of freedom and countless lives.I'm not an American neocon,I believe the best way is the middle way and deciding where the middle is can be done only by rational argument,not by calling your opponent names.
@ahmedeox, You are the typical example of somebody who enshrines capitalism on the basis of the USSR experience. You want to be in the middle? Then go and read Keynes.
@easye2233 Can't you read? I do not enshrine capitalism. And I'm basing my objection on Hayek, von Mises, Friedman and Popper. Sorry for using Wiki, but I tend not to do extensive academic research when posting on youtube, especially when I think that I'm replying to a dogmatic and rude prick with his head so far up his arse that he can see his tonsils. Thx for proving me right.
@ahmedeox LOL @ U, basing objections on Friedman? and you call yourself middle? You are more dumb than I thought. What can I say, it must be hard being the retard that you are.
@easye2233 I think I mentioned 3 others. Also, it would be nice of you to give some reasons why you reject his view. I did say that I don't agree with all he says, not even all his objections to socialism.
@easye2233 Oh, I forgot to add something insulting...apparently it is a custom in your country to say bad things about the people you talk to. Let's see....oh yea, I got it: fuck off you knuckle-dragging shit-for-brains cave-dwelling inbred dick.
And how many of those millions were in the form of stock options, which when exercised, are considered capital gains, and are taxed at 15%, which is a LOWER rate than the average working schmuck pays? The rich in many instances pay A LOWER RATE THAN THE MIDDLE CLASS, and THEY"RE STILL FUCKING BITCHING ABOUT IT! AND THEY WONDER WHY I HATE THEM SO FUCKING MUCH!!!
The 1930s was an absolute failure of capitalism, these people compalining about bailouts as if without it we would all be better off. The fact of the matter is, in the 1930s there was no bailout, unemployment skyrocketed and everyone - especially the workers ended up worse off. The problem is not merely corporatism, the problem is capitalism itself.
@greenghost2008 oh really? So 1929 economic crash was entirely due to government involvement into the economy? Uneducated man read some economic history.
Capitalism is celebrated in this country until it needs to bail out. Don't get me wrong capitalism is good, but socialism is also good, if you only have one you are destined to fail as seen now. Obama hasn't changed anything either, he is not progressive in the least bit when it comes to his actions. He may have ideologies but he wont force them upon the congress.I fucking hated Bush but at least he figured out that he has the same constitutional powers as 535 people in the legislative branch
Capitalism is celebrated in this country until it needs to bail out. Don't get me wrong capitalism is good, but socialism is also good, if you only have one you are destined to fail as seen now. Obama hasn't changed anything either, he is not progressive in the least bit when it comes to his actions. He may have ideologies but he wont force them upon the congress.I fucking hated Bush but at least he figured out that he has the same constitutional powers as 535 people in the legislative branch
Im not a republican, but..The republicans cenk? Come on guy, Obama has spent more money on energy BS and to banks eliminating competition than ANYONE in HISTORY!
This guy is rarely correct about most things. In this clip he is correct that it is Corporatism, but he is completely wrong that the Dems aren't just as responsible as the Repubs. In the Republican party, about half are corrupt and half are not. With the Dems, corruption is across the board
Corporatism is a system which involves corporations running the state, which is what we have. Mussolini defined it as fascism, which he defined in two words, "corporate government." The theft of money drawn through CEO salaries and bonuses is kleptocracy enabled by corporations writing legislation that enables them to steal. In effect, the US is part of a network of global kleptocrats who buy politicians to write laws in favor of them, their banks, and their corporations.
why do people want to change the name of fascism to corporatism? Why bother? Fascism is a good word with a history. Corporatism is very clumsy and has no meaning for most people.
@filmbeau Think of this way my friend, you know how tea pottyheads and the modern GOP like to use the spin term socialism? It's basically the less threatening word for fascism and it means that they can still keep their campaign contributions from BIG OIL and the banks while they fuck the system up by deregulating
@filmbeau Don't listen to him, he doesn't really know the system. Corporatism can be both Fascist and Communist. Corporatism is based on Consuming and Taking over others (slaves). We are already in the Corporatism. Until the Money system is dead we will be stuck in it forever. Only way to defeat Corporatism(far too many follow Jobs).
Corporatism is not more like... "Process by a State to license and regulate to incorporate social, religious, economic or popular in one collective body. So you can use the term "corporatism" when these states co-opt the corporate leadership or circumscribe the ability to challenge state authority by establishing organizations such as the source of its legitimacy to rule the state or by corporations."
You all think I'm talking about a third world country, about Cuba, Argentina, Honduras, Venezuela. The reality is, this is happening inside the US, as my nation, Puerto Rico, is a territory of the US and all of us Puertoricans are citizens of the US. Corporatism is the reason why so many of us emigrate towards the US mainland. If this happens here, it could spread to the states, so I urge all of you to take care and protect your nation against the evil of corporatism its despotism.
@metalspector Thank you for sharing your story. The world you describe seems dystopian and terrifying, but the signs are all around, even in the states. Corporatism, Capitalism, whatever you want to call it, is degrading to the human condition. Here we are treated with a veneer of dignity as Consumers™, but when our credit runs out we will face the same as you. It doesn't have to go this way, but it is where we are headed. What are we to do?
And want to know what happens when people protest? There's something called the DOT (Tactical Operation Division). They send those agents armed with batons, tasers, and gas grenade launchers and start attacking protesters. A 16 year old girl lost her ability to hear because she was attacked in the face with batons. Many end up in hospitals. They wreck cars, and in one occassion they hurt 4 tourists in a protest in front of the Senate because the tourists were recording, and their cams confiscate
Our own government destroys the country's ability to become self-sustainable, and then asks the US for money to run things. What happens with those federal funds we get? Just like our local funds. Usually federal investigations surge, over 20 high ranking government officials here get jailed for 1-3 years, but they made a few millions so they get out of jail rich. Also, its common for people's homes to be expropiated, just to build some walmart, sears, ect.
Then the government raise workers taxes in order to lower the taxes corporations pay, which is significantly lower than the US (maximun 7%, usually less and some even are exempt) while worker's pay from 20-40% their salary. We don't have a good public education like the US or other countries, and most of the money the government takes from workers go to pay for corporate subsidies and on construction. Politics hand out contracts to their rich corporate friends.
If you wanna learn what corporatism is, I urge you to live in Puerto Rico. The government fires employees and then hire companies to do the same work at higher cost. The government uses worker's taxes to give them to multi-nationals (walmart, ect.) to cover their establishment, utilities, and other expenses to "create jobs" (they end up destroying jobs because the small business can compete when the government helps the multi-national economically).
Is this supposed to be a burn on capitalism? It's just more proof that government regulation doesn't work. Here we have a situation where government regulation actually DECREASED competition. The government's only business in the free market is to ensure the safety of workers and consumers, which are basically the same rights of the individual. We must have PURE free market capitalism.
@NeedlesTheSpace Yah, unregulated capitalism will take us right back to the "prince and the pauper" via wealth consolidation by the few. GREAT IDEA, LOL.
"Too big to fail" is such bullshit... but at the same time, understandable cause imagine all those poor workers in corporations getting laid off cause their bosses sucked. :\ so tricky.
Rules in capitalism? True capitalism is free enterprise and laissez faire where companies can do whatever they want with their money. if they want to give themselves more money and hurt their company then let them do that, that is how capitalism works.
@jmrogers23 Exactly, no rules in true capitalism. If you own a company and want to secretly dump your waste in any abandoned hole you find, I say you should be allowed to. Fuck communities.
It is crony capitalism or, rather, socialism for the corporations--bilk the ordinary taxpayer of their money and then the government doles it out to rescue failing banks. Sweet deal.
typical lefty jealous that someone is sucessful in life. TYT are pro socialism and this is evident from all thier videos. Its not anyones fault that TYT were such failures at journalism that they have to fake being a news station by going down to lowes and fabricating a back board. I bet he's broadcasting from his living room. What a bunch of losers with radical lefty agendas. They need to be deported, even if they have green cards (which I doubt) lol.
Usually TYT is pretty much spot on, but I'm calling BS here. Corporatism is the natural progression from capitalism, as communism is theorized to be from socialism. In any field, whether it be politics, economics, or otherwise, power is constantly consolidated into fewer and fewer hands unless deterred by some outside force. Kings didn't give up power in the interest of the people in mind. They were forced. Imperial powers didn't give up their empires until they became too costly. (cont.)
(Cont.) And large corporations will NEVER lif a finger for the common good unless forced by an outside party; and even then ONLY if their bottom line is threatened and ONLY if the 3rd party can't be bought off. Large corporations are simply tyrannical viruses destroying their democratic hosts from within. But given that unchecked power can only grow, what else could have happened?
The problem is systemic, and no amount of dancing around the issue will ever change that.
@suckittrebek619 NO ONE ever lifts a finger for the common good unless forced to by an outside party. So to call them viruses is a little ridiculous. Humans are only out for what's good for them.
@suckittrebek619 No corporatism is the natural progression from a highly regulated and taxed mixed economy. Do you have a clue about how much sway big companies have over the political actions in France or Sweden?
The 48 of the top 50 companies in Sweden were created during the period of free markets. Did people take a break from building up firms? Or did the government moronically set up rules that only big companies who can afford an army of accountants and Lawyers can navigate around
@suckittrebek619 you are an idiot, corporatism didn't start happening until the federal i.e. central government started getting a lot bigger in the early 20th century (mainly wilson's fault). any system can change to any system but that isn't the fault of the prior system. feudalism after hundreds of years gave way to capitalism but that doesn't mean capitalism was the natural progression of feudalism. if that was the case, then how come russia went from feudalism to communism?
@bonfirejovi If you really believe that corporatism began in the 20th century I suggest first pulling your head out of your ass, then looking up the Dutch East India Company (the best of literally hundreds of examples).
As for Russia, there was this tiny little thing called the Bolshevik Revolution that changed their entire economic structure. Come on, you can't possibly be that dumb. Then again, you just tried to imply that larger government = corporatism, so maybe...
You have completely misrepresented the flow of events. You start the story in the middle and therefore miss the cause. How did the major corporation get big in the first place? It surely isn't the product of capitalism, as American history provides sufficient evidence to show that under free market conditions cartels and monopolies never lasted long. When they saw their market shares dropping they went to the government to regulate the markets.
See corpratism can only exist in a capitalist society if you play your cards right, then it will eventually lose any way because some one will break the monoploy as long as force is not used to attack the small guys witch is not alowed in capitalism. But companys now get bailouts from DEMOCRATS so they stay on top, greed is not sucsessful in capitalsm
Actually the bailouts started under Bush. Remember the 700 Billion dollar Emergency Economic Stabilization Act in October of 2008, or did you conveniently for get that one?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@666bushisnazi666 America is done with sniveling cunts like you. Come November the adults are back in charge. Then you can look back on 2 full years of complete control of all 3 branches of government and ask yourself what the democrats did with such an opportunity. Squawking little bitches unable to do anything but blame others, just like yourself.
@666bushisnazi666 Yup...the one that McCain said was so important that he would stop campaigning entirely until it passed. But why would the rightwingers let something as trivial as factual information deter them from ranting about how Obama is evil incarnate.
@666bushisnazi666 Bailouts are nothing new and didn't start under Bush, but bailouts have been going on since the 50's in order to expand the US empire after WII (1948). We haven't lived under true capitalism for a long time (1814-1915).
Bush was a socialist, Obama is more of a corporatist. Ron Paul and other liberty-minded conservatives are the only true people supporting free market capitalism. I imagine since you hate Bush you must hate Obama (considering they are almost exactly the same)
@greenghost2008 But America is the greatest democracy on earth! Where you can pick 1 of 2 parties. OR be blamed for the results when you vote for a 3rd party GODFORBID
@666bushisnazi666 oh you mean that one 700 Billion Dollar package that the democratic house and democratic senate created and then voted for and then President Elect Obama stated "we need to sign this into law as soon as possible to help hurting Americans"...you mean that bill, that huge mess that was created by the Democrats and then signed by Bush...that's the one your talking about right...
@Desi9 I think that is the reason we seek trade with other nations. We used to get spices from India and South America. We seek to profit from all innovation across the world. We still seek trade of all goods. This is why we have monetary exchange rates. :)
teeterharris 6 days ago
@catbuffalo ...their money from capitalistic ventures. Both Corporatism and Capitalism have the goal of profit. Corporatists seek near-immediate multiple short-term gains while Capitalists seek long-term growth and investment.
teeterharris 6 days ago
@catbuffalo Profit alone is not capitalistic. Capitalism is a system using capital earned from a business to invest in a business in order to earn further profits. Lobbying falls under the Corporatist/Miltary-Industrialist/Mixed Economy category. You use the example of a defense contractor with lobbying. Government Contractors can't enter into Capitalism by their very nature because they are at least in part directly involved with Government acquisition of taxpayer money. They can't make all of
teeterharris 6 days ago
I am in favor of Capitalism but strongly oppose corporatism. The difference is that corporatism is backed by the government. Corporatism makes money through government assistance and war. Capitalism is a fair exchange of capital and goods/services between people. Corporatism has been in exsistance since the Spanish American War if not earlier. Corporatism is what I compare to a reverse Robin Hood mentality...rob from the poor and give to the rich.
gatesofhell1981 1 week ago
Greed is why we're in this global mess/recession, greed is why 25000 people die every day in this world from preventable diseases, greed is why there are over 50 wars happening right now most of which could have been avoided if money wasn't a major factor...in short, Milton Friedman was a cock and so are all his followers. I believe in Capatilism, but despise corporatism because nothing good ever comes from corporations ever since their motto is greed always leading to more suffering worldwide.
frogprincereader 2 months ago
@frogprincereader greed is part of human nature son, you can't ever eliminate it
poopguypenis2 1 month ago
My 2 cents is that we should really be a Corpratist govenment because it lets everyone get their say, it reduces class warfare and eliminates the need for greed.
johnthesencond 2 months ago
The point is really simple. No one manages your money than you, so why buy stocks in a corporation and let other people have control of it? In addition, if they mismanage it and lose it, the risk is entirely your's. This is how foolish people are.
He101A 2 months ago
Do you know what a corporation is? They are suppose to use the shareholders money to make investments in the corporation; however, these CEOs are stealing the money and miss managing the money. Since they are not putting in any of their money, they don't care what happens to other peoples money. In addition to that, they print more stock and sell it to shareholders, and manipulate the value of those stocks. Making it go up, down, side ways, making money any direction it moves.
He101A 2 months ago
Corporatism, crony capitalism, statism, socialism.
What do they all have in common? They all stem from government control. When you guys figure that out you'll have it.
canefan17 3 months ago
@canefan17 no, it stems from how government can be controlled. thats the difference... when you allow coporations to have unlimited lobbying power... its not the government that has the power.. its the corporations... but they can use the government to exhibit that power...
In the US, money is worth more than votes.
eddieisfiction 1 month ago
@canefan17 the problem that you have is, you are looking at the symptons (government has too much power) not the problem... (corporations are lobbying, buying, the government to do what they want.) In the US government doesnt have the power, the people do... however the issue is what gets the government to do what the people want.. is it votes, or is it money/lobbying power.
eddieisfiction 1 month ago
@eddieisfiction
I find the exact opposite to be true. The problem is the rule makers have too much power and thus there is plenty of lobbying to be done. Corporations will forever lobby politicians to the best of their ability - but if you limit the power and size of government you limit corruption.
Much of this power needs to be done away with and/or given to our state and local governments (who the people can influence much easier)
canefan17 1 month ago
@canefan17 the US government is designed in nature to be as big or as small as the people want it to be... hence my point. Its the people who decide.... whether with votes or with money. if you limit the size of government, you just expand the corruption to the private sector... you have to nip where the power inbalance happens... and thats the ability to use money to get away with whatever you want.
eddieisfiction 1 month ago
@eddieisfiction
But bribery will forever reign, no?
And I'm not quite convinced the people in this country wanted big government.
Thanks mostly to The Fed and it's invincibility it was inevitable.
What's your opinion of a Gold Standard?
canefan17 1 month ago
@canefan17 not suggesting big government, and our govenrment could use without the fed, or department homeland security, no child left behind.. and save billions,... hell trillions with the fed alone.
just saying dont do the extreme here... small government is just as scary as big government.
eddieisfiction 1 month ago
@eddieisfiction
Actually it's not up to the people it's up to the representatives and they have a poor track record of being honest.
catbuffalo 1 week ago
@catbuffalo thats kind of the understood you there bud.
eddieisfiction 6 days ago
In a true free market the State doesn't control the money supply and interest rates.
We don't have true capitalism or a free market today.
canefan17 3 months ago
True capitalism for me is like...You have an idea, you create a private enterprise and start to sell your product, which in turn starts the capitalistic process of letting consumers control the flow of money.
But wall street does not have a physical product. They play casino games with loans, debts, mortgages and derivatives and THEY, not the consumers, control the market.How can anyone claim thats capitalist? lol
syntaxed2 3 months ago
@syntaxed2
Wall Street provides the capital for private enterprise.
And our government owns Wall Street.
When you figure this out you'll have it.
The government controls the money supply and interest rates. THAT is all that matters in a monetary system and our government owns that.
Wall Street just plays the hand you deal them. (E.g Fannie and Freddie back loans that never would have been issued, in a true free market, to high risk borrowers). Gubby says "everyone should own a home." lol
canefan17 3 months ago
I won't disagree with your frustration, but to blame it on the Republicans is idiotic. You diminish your argument. Democrats are every bit as guilty of participating in "corpratism"
fiddlinmike 4 months ago 15
@fiddlinmike Technology is having affect on globalization and capitalism is allowed to things it couldnt before, what do u think about this?
Desi9 3 months ago
@fiddlinmike
This is exactly right, though in Cenk's defense he is about the furthest thing from an Obama yes man among left leaning American commentators.
trilobright 2 months ago
@fiddlinmike "The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy." Carroll Quigley (the left, right two party scam)
1poorsod 1 month ago
@shadowgeyser , exactly right, we have been doubling down on Reaganomics and the capitalist have greatly increased their wealth. However that wealth has done little for the vast majority, tax breaks should be given after the jobs are created not in hope they will. The wealthy do what is best for them not the economy. Our Democracy is being perverted by special interest and we are far to invested in the financial sector, money is being pooled in the hands of the few.
zaurakdigis 5 months ago
@zaurakdigis Im sorry but tax breaks and job growth are functions of eachother. Without investment and incentives to invest the economy will always be worst off. The second we depend on higher taxes is the second the economy shrinks due to less investing resulting in more unemployment. Furthermore our standard of living will be affected. The super rich are not the major players in the investment game. It is the risk takers in the upper middle and lower upper classes. Do not take away incentive.
trickdaddyaz03 5 months ago
@trickdaddyaz03 what you're describing does not apply everywhere. here in Canada we pay higher taxes, yet our unemployment rate is 2 percent lower than the US.
unfortunatebeam 4 months ago
the subtitles in this video are terribly inaccurate... lol
SevenFootPelican 6 months ago
Of course you have to ask why corporatism exists, I would imagine that it is because the elites who triggered the revolutions wanted to keep the money for themselves and fool everyone else with talk about sucess and capital. James Madison said for example, that the role of the American system was to protect the few against the many. Of course religious lingo is good too, the market is all wise, the market will reward the good, the market works in cycles etc Bottom line the market does not exist.
2787mh 6 months ago
This is the one time Cenk Uygur has ever made any sense, but I can safely say that his idea of FAIR RULES are fucked up to all hell.
TheManiacalSatanist6 6 months ago
THANK YOU! For God's sake, Thank you! I'm so sick of people blaming Capitalism for corporate monoliths. Being in bed with the government has nothing to do with Capitalism.
teeterharris 6 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
@teeterharris Technology is having affect on globalization and capitalism is allowed to things it couldnt before, what do u think about this?
Desi9 3 months ago
@teeterharris
Actually it does. If it benefitted you as a defense contractor fianancially to lobby the government to go into iraq, that falls into the category of the profit motive. Unless you think capitalism has nothing to do with profit making.
catbuffalo 1 week ago
This place is a depressing high school dance.
Clownspike77 7 months ago
with the way things are. i wouldnt be surprised if either A, the corporations control obama because they know its to obvious and were pissed. or B. another "terrorist" attack will occur before the election. scare people towards someone like bush to protect us
doonymacc 7 months ago
@shadowgeyser and if you are saying that there is less regulation now then there was 30-40 years ago...you are not reading your politics correctly. You are listening to only one side and not researching on your own and looking at all sides. keynesian economics vs austrian economics. Keynesianism is what we have had for a long time before REAGAN AND BUSH , and they have all done the same thing. Spent money that they do not have and hope it comes back. Baaaaad Economics
DadoPennsylvania 7 months ago
@DadoPennsylvania , there was less regulation than 30-40 years ago? What have you been smoking?
Wall Street regulations put in place post 1929 Crash was reversed, regulation enforcement has been outsourced to the corporations. No enforcement equals no regulation. Research funding has sharply decreased and corporations fund research that is falsified for profit. The Drug Industry is a perfect example. Mining inspections is also a good example, inspectors look the other way or get fired.
zaurakdigis 5 months ago
@zaurakdigis there are so many new regulations added every year, go check the stats.
"True News: Borrow More, or Cut Spending? False Dichotomy Planet! "
v=PWDrS6_VFq4&feature=player_embedded
Some crucial ones were removed, which helped this crisis, but the 08 meltdown is just a symptom of the out of control parasitic gov't.
Regulations cost almost 2 trillion to tax payers two years ago, the beuraucracy is a destructive leviathon, with far more regulations than ever
GtheMVP 5 months ago
@shadowgeyser to look at the US and say oh this capitalism is just like corporatism. The truth is that there is almost no Capitalism in the US any more. This is clearly corporatism. Again I know you'll say its the same...but please research capitalism and corporatism and compare them on your own. Do not listen to Republicans and Democrats....because they want you to believe that capitalism is corporatism. Capitalism, Corporatism,Socialism those are three very very very different things
DadoPennsylvania 7 months ago
@shadowgeyser please do not take me the wrong way. I am not one of those people who come on here to tell people what they should think especially tell them in a bad way....but I just had to say something about your comment that capitalism and corporatism are the same. I am sorry, but you could not be more wrong. Just because Obama comes out and says this is a Democratic,Capitalistic,free-market free trade country does not mean that it is. It is a common mistake of many people today ....
DadoPennsylvania 7 months ago
@shadowgeyser
America is a bueracracy...
Salvysahagun 7 months ago
Buy Silver - Earn Silver
Fast Delivery
htt p(colon)//silversnowball(dot)com/3897
frankiegmh 8 months ago
Corporatism is just socialism for the rich.
surfer53 8 months ago 2
O'really? From what I see today is coorporate monopolies which pretty much only exist in capitalist countries.
SlavicFront88 9 months ago
@SlavicFront88
Monoply doesn't exist under capitalism. It's illigal to monopolize goods and servicesin the US . Monopoly exists under Fascist and Communistic economy.
kaminoneh 8 months ago
@kaminoneh
Really? The Federal Reserve seems to have a monopoly. They are a private company, and they press all the money, so that would make them a monopoly.
How about Monsanto with it's semi-monopoly on seed? Pretty fucking capitalistic company, wouldn't you agree?
Deutsche Telecom, last time I checked, Germany was a capitalistic country.
How about SAQ, De Lijn, Veolia, etc. All state-run monopolies in capitalistic countries.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 8 months ago
@SlavicFront88 AHAHAHAHAHA! Communists favored who ever bribed them the most! They had complete control over everything every-were that's the biggest monopoly of all!
wtfjaftw 8 months ago
Excuse me Mr. Turk, but corporatism is actually the fusion of the state and private enterprise where the government chooses the winners and losers and the "corporations" plan accordingly with the state with which ever agenda they have in mind. It's a dual relationship. Look up Facism and Peronism for examples.
Those shareholders are actually simply living up to contracts. a contract is legal and if people spend it wrongly, someone else will replace them in the future
MrJuanzup 9 months ago
Wrong Wrong...your wrong......did I say your wrong...its so your I can only say its STOOPID! Do your research putz. Look at Mussolini (Corporate Pawn) and he unregulated everything for Big Business at the time. Same for Hitler!
STKpc 10 months ago
Corporatism is Capitalism unregulated.
STKpc 10 months ago
@STKpc Corporatism is capitalism over regulated if anything
ToughGuyHarrison 10 months ago
@STKpc
No Corporatism is Capitalism regulated.
RyanR3volution 9 months ago
Here's the difference between Marxism and anarchism:
Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice. Socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality. -Mikhail Bakunin
bjarczyk 11 months ago
proof that even morons like cenk can be overpaid in amerika
TripleSpeak 1 year ago
I'm glad that Cenk actually can tell the difference between Capitalism & Corporatism at least a little bit... lol
YoungIvyScholar 1 year ago
I believe in a government like the REAL republicans do. Small, with few interventions into the market. With no central bank, and currency with a standard. not one that inflates. However i do believe there should be social security support for education, and technology. but in the american context, this should be regional not national. Although national or international "collaborations" in these area's are ok. My 2 cents. basicly 1 system can never have all the answers so i might be wrong.
Lollitard 1 year ago 34
@Lollitard unfortunately you can not have both....no government except in some places. you ether have it or you dont. if you go both ways , then you get corporatism which we are in today and the US has been for a long time
DadoPennsylvania 7 months ago
@Lollitard thank you. as a real republican, dont you feel as if your parties been high jacked? Its not even following legitimate ideals all i hear are things that will support this corporate take over we had happen under bush, and support abolishing social security and government programs so the rich will have an excuse not to pay taxes, or things that are completely trivial. Like arguements over gay marriage. How about the violation of freedom of the press in reporting on Iraq? Middle class?
doonymacc 7 months ago
@Lollitard
Yeah... that sort of thinking got us all the banking crisis. And you basically have no idea what you're talking about anyway. But since most people don't this sort of stuff sounds good to ignorant people.
Fact is your system would be an even BIGGER corporatocracy because you'd weaken the one thing that can possibly keep it in check, and that you get to have a vote in; The government.
If you where actually smart you'd want to restructure the government, not castrate it.
TheSkunkCat 6 months ago
@TheSkunkCat
Seriously... libertarians... I wouldn't say they mean well, there's to much of a streak of social darwinism amongst libertarians if you ask me. Sure there's a few nice ones, but like consies, they're generally not nice people. But that's not even what their fault is.
Their fault is that they, in spite of their supposed quest for freedom are essentially for making freedom purely dependent on wealth. Either out of being misguided, gullible or a misplaced superiority complex.
TheSkunkCat 6 months ago
@TheSkunkCat What you dont understand is the libertarians understand that capitalism has developed out of facts 1) the world has limited resouces and 2) that socially some are a able to produce and utilize resources more than others. Yes liberty is another aspect of the position, yet a different more complex argument. However the end belief is that humanity is better off in capitalism than any other system. Is it pretty? no. Does is work for everyone? no. But is the best system.
trickdaddyaz03 5 months ago
@trickdaddyaz03 how do u think that technology affected capitalism and globalisation?
Desi9 3 months ago
@Desi9 Well take for example the life of the average poor American and the poor life of the average person in a second or third world country. The standard of living between the two is significantly different because of technology yet both standards are elevated by technology. Where would 2nd and 3rd world labor markets be without the outsourcing of jobs for technological industries? They would be worse off. Capitalism allows those with money freedom to invest in companies which provides jobs.
trickdaddyaz03 3 months ago
You can see the evidence in the fact that capitalist America's poor has today by far a higher standard of living compared to those of second and third world countries. Our poor have very comfortable lives in terms of the costs of living.
trickdaddyaz03 5 months ago
@trickdaddyaz03 well it's stretch to say they have comfortable lives, esp considering an increasing number of them are unemployed and losing their homes. and it really isn't much to say the poor in US have a "far" higher standard of living than low-income countries considering the conditions of grinding poverty in those countries. even so, there's one study, I forget which one, that reveals living conditions in the poorest places in US are little different than those in low income countries.
unfortunatebeam 4 months ago
"Freedom dependent on wealth"? please explain that genius. Are you telling me that a poor person in this country cannot decide for himself to go to school and get a profession? As opposed to the tracking system in the UK where if you dont produce intellectually at a certian level at a certain age the decision is made for you? That is not freedom my friend. Our worst economic recessions (excluding the great depression) have never been as bad as the UK.
trickdaddyaz03 5 months ago
@TheSkunkCat lol way to generalise hundreds of millions of people, what does that say about you?
Libertarianism isn't about wealth, it's about the freedom to pursue it, or anything else without the gov't parasite stealing from us for things we would never choose to purchase, like illegal wars, BP Oil contracts etc
Gov't producers nothing, it's a cancer controlled by the elites
War, dollar devalue, SS, medicare (100 trill unfunded liab) How many more failed ponzi schemes do you need?
GtheMVP 5 months ago
@GtheMVP Explain how social security is a "failed ponzi scheme"
50% of seniors lived in poverty untill SS came into place. Now only 10% live in poverty...I dunno about you but a program that decreases poverty by 40% seems like it works okay..
coopmuch56 4 months ago
@coopmuch56 45 million Americans are living in poverty, these numbers have been rising for decades. Social security and other gov't run programs are working at whose expense?
Let's see, two trillion dollar deficit, near/over 100 trillion in unfunded liabilites, sorry, your big gov;t doesn't work -- Bureaucracies cost the US nearly 2 trillion a year
And SS is far worse than a ponzi scheme, at least entrance into a ponzi scheme is voluntary, not our fault people are easily duped
GtheMVP 4 months ago 3
@coopmuch56 Social Security is available for now, but what will happen when people aren't working and there is no one to pay into the Social Security System to pay back all of the people, like myself at age 29, who will want to collect all of the money they paid into the system? The money that I pay into SS right now, goes right to the Government and into someones pocket. It's not being saved, it's being passed around... It's a Ponzi Scheme.
TwiztedAnimator 4 months ago
@TwiztedAnimator why will people not be working?
coopmuch56 4 months ago
@coopmuch56 I really don't know how to answer your question, but if you haven't noticed, jobs are leaving this country and they aren't coming back. The US Government has 100 Trillion Dollars of Debt lined up to be spent on just two programs, not including SS, 80 Trillion Dollars on Medicare and 20 Trillion on Prescription Drugs... If the jobs aren't as plentiful as they were when the money was allocated, there will be no way to collect the money to put into the system to pay to the recipients.
TwiztedAnimator 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@coopmuch56 I really don't know how to answer your question, but if you haven't noticed, jobs are leaving this country and they aren't coming back. The US Government has 100 Trillion Dollars of Debt lined up to be spent on just two programs, not including SS, 80 Trillion Dollars on Medicare and 20 Trillion on Prescription Drugs... If the jobs aren't as plentiful as they were when the money was allocated, there will be no way to collect the money to put into the system to pay to the recipients.
TwiztedAnimator 4 months ago
@Lollitard Be very careful of who you all vote in the U.S.A cause what you'll vote will determine the future of our global economy. Power to the People not the corporations/governments or any other irrelevant nonsense I don't give a submarining fuck about. This thing is GLOBAL.
Nitrozzy7 3 months ago
@Lollitard Like your Comment, so how do you feel about Ron Paul then, because from what you said, it sounds like you'd agree with a lot of his viewpoints after some deeper than surface level examination.
PaulMeixnerFilms 1 month ago
you think they really regulate the banks? the government creates situations so that the banks dont have to be accountable. remember the bailouts that republicans and democrats voted for?
DaveRandal 1 year ago
Growing government in a socialist way is not going to fix these things. You can't grow the government and expect them to work differently. The government is giving these corporations the power to influence. In a true free market society with a small government it will decrease the influence of corporations.
Why would you all trust a coercive violent government to take care of you and make rules for the economy?
DavidValley 1 year ago
@DavidValley , Yes, Capitalists are always willing to take care of people and the environment. I am sure, that your heavenly free market society will bring prosperity to all. Indeed I am sure, that all those elderly who fall sick will have plenty of private health insurance companies providing them affordable health care. And I am sure, that without the minimum wage, millions of workers will earn much more than before and enjoy a good standard of living. Please take your bullshit elsewhere
easye2233 1 year ago
@easye2233 Technically speaking, the idea of capitalism does not contradict in any way welfare and healthcare. "Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are privately owned and operated for a private profit; decisions regarding supply, demand, price, distribution, and investments are made by private actors in the free market; profit is distributed to owners who choose to invest in businesses, and wages are paid to workers employed by businesses and companies."[Wikipedia]
ahmedeox 1 year ago
@ahmedeox, please, FREE market, means no welfare, for welfare requires taxes on the system. Those hardcore neoliberal free market capitalists want to do away with the welfare state. The welfare state was created as response to pressure from workers not sympathy from capitalists.
easye2233 1 year ago
@easye2233 In the definition given to capitalism, even though there is no exact definition, is there any mention of free market? No. My point was that there is no contradiction between capitalism and welfare. There is one between free market, which eliminates government interventionism, and welfare, but that was not the issue. Capitalism and communism are opposites because they are different views on ownership of the means of production. This is separate from the problem of the free market.
ahmedeox 1 year ago
@ahmedeox Yes there is a mention of free market according YOUR OWN quote. Please read what you cut and paste and dont make a fool of yourself.
easye2233 1 year ago
Capitalism in its pure form is not based on welfare and any sense of fairness or equality, but exploitation and accumulation of profit. Where do you think profit comes from? It comes from the ability to command workers and pay them less than they produce.
easye2233 1 year ago
@easye2233 Profits comes from selling people something they want at a price they are willing to pay. You can't command workers in a free enterprise system because under that system the worker competes freely for jobs and business competes freely for workers.. Wages are determined by how much one desires that a job be done combined with how scarce the supply of laborers willing and able to do that job.
sleedolfine15 7 months ago
@easye2233 My bad, but not a big one. Posted that one a while back, forgot the details. I will argue differently then. Is free market necessary for capitalism?I wouldn't think so, since there are many countries which do distribute wealth, yet still support private ownership of the means of production (France, Sweden, UK, etc.) Calling them socialist countries would mean that they support the public ownership of these means, which they do not. Moreover, how do you define free market?
ahmedeox 1 year ago
@ahmedeox A free market is a market - free - from any form of intervention. i.e. no taxes, no price controls, no subsidies, no minimum wages, no export taxes, no import tariffs, no emissions taxes, no regulation.
easye2233 1 year ago
@easye2233 How about taxes for maintaining an army, police force, fire departments, governmental agencies that ensure competition on the free market is fair? If free market excludes these too, then there is no free market anywhere in the world, and if you construe free market as NECESSARY for capitalism, then it follows that there are no truly capitalist economies in the world.
ahmedeox 1 year ago
@ahmedeox, The root of the issue, is that you cannot rely on the market alone can you.
easye2233 1 year ago
@easye2233 But I never claimed that you can, and I'm sure there are many capitalists who think that government intervention is required at least to ensure that the market is free and all the players are fair, precisely because you cannot rely on the market alone. The root of the issue is how you define free market, because you will need taxes, like those that I mentioned before, but one must argue why a certain tax is necessary.
ahmedeox 1 year ago
@easye2233 I could argue that tax for public education is OK and beneficial for the economy, because it allows for the training of the best individuals, not of the best AND who can afford it individuals, thus maximizing the probability of finding outstanding people that would benefit the economy. The market is still free and the idea of maximizing profit is still applied, yet it is a welfare distribution tax.
ahmedeox 1 year ago
@ahmedeox; you are admitting that the free market does not work and government intervention in areas such as education is required. There are many areas in which the market fails, not only education.
easye2233 1 year ago
@easye2233 I am not admitting that free market does not work. All I'm saying is that you can define free market in such a way so it can be compatible both with capitalism and welfare. I did not say that the market fails when it comes to education, I said that given the fact that free market does not exclude some taxes, one can justify other taxes, welfare taxes, while being consistent with the main principles of capitalism: private ownership and profit maximization.
ahmedeox 1 year ago
@ahmedeox, It is blatently obvious you haven't done any reading of economics. Please pick up an economics book and read on market failure, education is one area, but there are countless others.
easye2233 1 year ago
@easye2233 Please pick up a manual of logic, an English dictionary and a manual on manners, because it is clear that you do not understand what I'm saying, nor understand subtle distinctions, nor realize that an ad hominem argument is not an argument at all, nor have a minimum of decency and respect for me taking the time and expressing and arguing for my opinions on the matter without making any claims about your competence on the matter.
ahmedeox 1 year ago
@ahmedeox blah blah blah, you are talking nonsense mate. Get educated, wikipedia alone won't get you very far.
easye2233 1 year ago
@easye2233 Not admitting that the free market does not work, does not mean that I accept that it works. Giving education as an EXAMPLE does not mean that one cannot give others. Saying that a term must have a clear definition does not mean that I accept or reject a particular view. All this is an exercise of critical thinking. the main argument is that the failure of capitalism leads to people losing jobs, while the failure of socialism, i.e. communism, leads to totalitarianism.
ahmedeox 1 year ago
@easye2233 I live in an ex-communist country,and it annoys the hell out of me to see people that lived pampered lives in the cozy bosom of capitalist societies preaching an outdated,empirically proven false system that cost my country 50 years of freedom and countless lives.I'm not an American neocon,I believe the best way is the middle way and deciding where the middle is can be done only by rational argument,not by calling your opponent names.
ahmedeox 1 year ago
@ahmedeox, You are the typical example of somebody who enshrines capitalism on the basis of the USSR experience. You want to be in the middle? Then go and read Keynes.
easye2233 1 year ago
@easye2233 Can't you read? I do not enshrine capitalism. And I'm basing my objection on Hayek, von Mises, Friedman and Popper. Sorry for using Wiki, but I tend not to do extensive academic research when posting on youtube, especially when I think that I'm replying to a dogmatic and rude prick with his head so far up his arse that he can see his tonsils. Thx for proving me right.
ahmedeox 1 year ago
@ahmedeox LOL @ U, basing objections on Friedman? and you call yourself middle? You are more dumb than I thought. What can I say, it must be hard being the retard that you are.
easye2233 1 year ago
@easye2233 I think I mentioned 3 others. Also, it would be nice of you to give some reasons why you reject his view. I did say that I don't agree with all he says, not even all his objections to socialism.
ahmedeox 1 year ago
@ahmedeox I am not your tutor, go waste some one else's time retard.
easye2233 1 year ago
@easye2233 Oh, I forgot to add something insulting...apparently it is a custom in your country to say bad things about the people you talk to. Let's see....oh yea, I got it: fuck off you knuckle-dragging shit-for-brains cave-dwelling inbred dick.
ahmedeox 1 year ago
@ahmedeox you dirty son of a whore. your nothing but a disease.
easye2233 1 year ago
Comment removed
easye2233 1 year ago
And how many of those millions were in the form of stock options, which when exercised, are considered capital gains, and are taxed at 15%, which is a LOWER rate than the average working schmuck pays? The rich in many instances pay A LOWER RATE THAN THE MIDDLE CLASS, and THEY"RE STILL FUCKING BITCHING ABOUT IT! AND THEY WONDER WHY I HATE THEM SO FUCKING MUCH!!!
xcellken1 1 year ago
A corporation is when profits are privatised and risks are socialised. I do like it when TYT gets all pro-freemarket!! ;)
Adlasyn 1 year ago
The 1930s was an absolute failure of capitalism, these people compalining about bailouts as if without it we would all be better off. The fact of the matter is, in the 1930s there was no bailout, unemployment skyrocketed and everyone - especially the workers ended up worse off. The problem is not merely corporatism, the problem is capitalism itself.
easye2233 1 year ago
@easye2233 over way round. was government.
greenghost2008 1 year ago
@greenghost2008 oh really? So 1929 economic crash was entirely due to government involvement into the economy? Uneducated man read some economic history.
easye2233 1 year ago
@easye2233 Actually it was due to the centralized banking system which was set up by the government in 1913. So in a way yes.
DavidValley 1 year ago
@DavidValley Oh yes, capitalism will work perfectly with unregulated banks lol, what a joke.
easye2233 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Capitalism is celebrated in this country until it needs to bail out. Don't get me wrong capitalism is good, but socialism is also good, if you only have one you are destined to fail as seen now. Obama hasn't changed anything either, he is not progressive in the least bit when it comes to his actions. He may have ideologies but he wont force them upon the congress.I fucking hated Bush but at least he figured out that he has the same constitutional powers as 535 people in the legislative branch
assviolations 1 year ago
Capitalism is celebrated in this country until it needs to bail out. Don't get me wrong capitalism is good, but socialism is also good, if you only have one you are destined to fail as seen now. Obama hasn't changed anything either, he is not progressive in the least bit when it comes to his actions. He may have ideologies but he wont force them upon the congress.I fucking hated Bush but at least he figured out that he has the same constitutional powers as 535 people in the legislative branch
assviolations 1 year ago
Im not a republican, but..The republicans cenk? Come on guy, Obama has spent more money on energy BS and to banks eliminating competition than ANYONE in HISTORY!
AroundSun 1 year ago
This guy is rarely correct about most things. In this clip he is correct that it is Corporatism, but he is completely wrong that the Dems aren't just as responsible as the Repubs. In the Republican party, about half are corrupt and half are not. With the Dems, corruption is across the board
funk7000 1 year ago
really hate this guy
stump229 1 year ago
Corporatism is a system which involves corporations running the state, which is what we have. Mussolini defined it as fascism, which he defined in two words, "corporate government." The theft of money drawn through CEO salaries and bonuses is kleptocracy enabled by corporations writing legislation that enables them to steal. In effect, the US is part of a network of global kleptocrats who buy politicians to write laws in favor of them, their banks, and their corporations.
duganrushes 1 year ago
@duganrushes Very nice explanation..
stablejelly 1 year ago
I was expecting a video on the difference between capitalism and corporatism to be much, much, shorter...say maybe half a second.
netando 1 year ago
why do people want to change the name of fascism to corporatism? Why bother? Fascism is a good word with a history. Corporatism is very clumsy and has no meaning for most people.
filmbeau 1 year ago
@filmbeau Think of this way my friend, you know how tea pottyheads and the modern GOP like to use the spin term socialism? It's basically the less threatening word for fascism and it means that they can still keep their campaign contributions from BIG OIL and the banks while they fuck the system up by deregulating
viletree 1 year ago
@filmbeau Don't listen to him, he doesn't really know the system. Corporatism can be both Fascist and Communist. Corporatism is based on Consuming and Taking over others (slaves). We are already in the Corporatism. Until the Money system is dead we will be stuck in it forever. Only way to defeat Corporatism(far too many follow Jobs).
makemap 1 year ago
@SIGN666 All are paid equally? why bother working then?
Sorry, but socialism only looks nice on paper; factoring in human nature, it fails miserably.
javvieh 1 year ago
I understand what he was trying to say. He is just using the wrong words to describe the madness on wallstreet. Stay angry TYT, but keep studying.
piperadio 1 year ago
i love the somomomo bitch. does he say that deliberately? or has he learned id like that some years ago and cant get it right now?
shmoopy papooopy.
tyt rocks!!!
gatskillz 1 year ago
Corporatism is not more like... "Process by a State to license and regulate to incorporate social, religious, economic or popular in one collective body. So you can use the term "corporatism" when these states co-opt the corporate leadership or circumscribe the ability to challenge state authority by establishing organizations such as the source of its legitimacy to rule the state or by corporations."
Corporatism+Capitalism= Libertarian & Republican BULLSHIT!!
Mariet31 1 year ago
Comment removed
Mariet31 1 year ago
You all think I'm talking about a third world country, about Cuba, Argentina, Honduras, Venezuela. The reality is, this is happening inside the US, as my nation, Puerto Rico, is a territory of the US and all of us Puertoricans are citizens of the US. Corporatism is the reason why so many of us emigrate towards the US mainland. If this happens here, it could spread to the states, so I urge all of you to take care and protect your nation against the evil of corporatism its despotism.
metalspector 1 year ago
@metalspector Thank you for sharing your story. The world you describe seems dystopian and terrifying, but the signs are all around, even in the states. Corporatism, Capitalism, whatever you want to call it, is degrading to the human condition. Here we are treated with a veneer of dignity as Consumers™, but when our credit runs out we will face the same as you. It doesn't have to go this way, but it is where we are headed. What are we to do?
No one is taking care.
krull7 1 year ago
And want to know what happens when people protest? There's something called the DOT (Tactical Operation Division). They send those agents armed with batons, tasers, and gas grenade launchers and start attacking protesters. A 16 year old girl lost her ability to hear because she was attacked in the face with batons. Many end up in hospitals. They wreck cars, and in one occassion they hurt 4 tourists in a protest in front of the Senate because the tourists were recording, and their cams confiscate
metalspector 1 year ago
Our own government destroys the country's ability to become self-sustainable, and then asks the US for money to run things. What happens with those federal funds we get? Just like our local funds. Usually federal investigations surge, over 20 high ranking government officials here get jailed for 1-3 years, but they made a few millions so they get out of jail rich. Also, its common for people's homes to be expropiated, just to build some walmart, sears, ect.
metalspector 1 year ago
Then the government raise workers taxes in order to lower the taxes corporations pay, which is significantly lower than the US (maximun 7%, usually less and some even are exempt) while worker's pay from 20-40% their salary. We don't have a good public education like the US or other countries, and most of the money the government takes from workers go to pay for corporate subsidies and on construction. Politics hand out contracts to their rich corporate friends.
metalspector 1 year ago
If you wanna learn what corporatism is, I urge you to live in Puerto Rico. The government fires employees and then hire companies to do the same work at higher cost. The government uses worker's taxes to give them to multi-nationals (walmart, ect.) to cover their establishment, utilities, and other expenses to "create jobs" (they end up destroying jobs because the small business can compete when the government helps the multi-national economically).
metalspector 1 year ago
Well done Cenk, spoken like a true economic illiterate.
bonfirejovi 1 year ago
Is this supposed to be a burn on capitalism? It's just more proof that government regulation doesn't work. Here we have a situation where government regulation actually DECREASED competition. The government's only business in the free market is to ensure the safety of workers and consumers, which are basically the same rights of the individual. We must have PURE free market capitalism.
NeedlesTheSpace 1 year ago
@NeedlesTheSpace Yah, unregulated capitalism will take us right back to the "prince and the pauper" via wealth consolidation by the few. GREAT IDEA, LOL.
Someideasandstuff 1 year ago
"Too big to fail" is such bullshit... but at the same time, understandable cause imagine all those poor workers in corporations getting laid off cause their bosses sucked. :\ so tricky.
Vicioussama 1 year ago
Rules in capitalism? True capitalism is free enterprise and laissez faire where companies can do whatever they want with their money. if they want to give themselves more money and hurt their company then let them do that, that is how capitalism works.
jmrogers23 1 year ago
@jmrogers23 Exactly, no rules in true capitalism. If you own a company and want to secretly dump your waste in any abandoned hole you find, I say you should be allowed to. Fuck communities.
Someideasandstuff 1 year ago
It is crony capitalism or, rather, socialism for the corporations--bilk the ordinary taxpayer of their money and then the government doles it out to rescue failing banks. Sweet deal.
shulastinks2 1 year ago
Wow this cenk guy is shockingly stupid. How the fuck did he make it as an attorney.
bonfirejovi 1 year ago
typical lefty jealous that someone is sucessful in life. TYT are pro socialism and this is evident from all thier videos. Its not anyones fault that TYT were such failures at journalism that they have to fake being a news station by going down to lowes and fabricating a back board. I bet he's broadcasting from his living room. What a bunch of losers with radical lefty agendas. They need to be deported, even if they have green cards (which I doubt) lol.
WDTripps 1 year ago
This guy is an idiot. Every single topic he takes up is taken from a far left point of view, which in my opinion is unrealistic.
trickdaddyaz03 1 year ago
@trickdaddyaz03 So that makes him an idiot? Is that the extent of vocabulary of righties in the US?
IcedPhoenix666 1 year ago
@IcedPhoenix666 lol no, "idiot" just happens to be the most applicable word. Every arguement he makes is flawed and enticing only to the uninformed.
trickdaddyaz03 5 months ago
No kidding. Look what happened to Steris. Corporate Bastards.
Fundemons 1 year ago
Usually TYT is pretty much spot on, but I'm calling BS here. Corporatism is the natural progression from capitalism, as communism is theorized to be from socialism. In any field, whether it be politics, economics, or otherwise, power is constantly consolidated into fewer and fewer hands unless deterred by some outside force. Kings didn't give up power in the interest of the people in mind. They were forced. Imperial powers didn't give up their empires until they became too costly. (cont.)
suckittrebek619 1 year ago
(Cont.) And large corporations will NEVER lif a finger for the common good unless forced by an outside party; and even then ONLY if their bottom line is threatened and ONLY if the 3rd party can't be bought off. Large corporations are simply tyrannical viruses destroying their democratic hosts from within. But given that unchecked power can only grow, what else could have happened?
The problem is systemic, and no amount of dancing around the issue will ever change that.
suckittrebek619 1 year ago 5
@suckittrebek619 NO ONE ever lifts a finger for the common good unless forced to by an outside party. So to call them viruses is a little ridiculous. Humans are only out for what's good for them.
ErikBarmon 1 year ago
@suckittrebek619 No corporatism is the natural progression from a highly regulated and taxed mixed economy. Do you have a clue about how much sway big companies have over the political actions in France or Sweden?
The 48 of the top 50 companies in Sweden were created during the period of free markets. Did people take a break from building up firms? Or did the government moronically set up rules that only big companies who can afford an army of accountants and Lawyers can navigate around
EasyEs 1 year ago
@suckittrebek619 you are an idiot, corporatism didn't start happening until the federal i.e. central government started getting a lot bigger in the early 20th century (mainly wilson's fault). any system can change to any system but that isn't the fault of the prior system. feudalism after hundreds of years gave way to capitalism but that doesn't mean capitalism was the natural progression of feudalism. if that was the case, then how come russia went from feudalism to communism?
bonfirejovi 1 year ago
@bonfirejovi If you really believe that corporatism began in the 20th century I suggest first pulling your head out of your ass, then looking up the Dutch East India Company (the best of literally hundreds of examples).
As for Russia, there was this tiny little thing called the Bolshevik Revolution that changed their entire economic structure. Come on, you can't possibly be that dumb. Then again, you just tried to imply that larger government = corporatism, so maybe...
suckittrebek619 1 year ago
@suckittrebek619
You have completely misrepresented the flow of events. You start the story in the middle and therefore miss the cause. How did the major corporation get big in the first place? It surely isn't the product of capitalism, as American history provides sufficient evidence to show that under free market conditions cartels and monopolies never lasted long. When they saw their market shares dropping they went to the government to regulate the markets.
Hapafull 1 year ago
Check out Venus Project and a resource based economy.
no more federal reserve and no more corporate banks and stock markets,
does anyone pay attention? from thinking about Corporatism i came across some solutions.
skeight976 1 year ago
See corpratism can only exist in a capitalist society if you play your cards right, then it will eventually lose any way because some one will break the monoploy as long as force is not used to attack the small guys witch is not alowed in capitalism. But companys now get bailouts from DEMOCRATS so they stay on top, greed is not sucsessful in capitalsm
VhDVE 1 year ago
@VhDVE
Actually the bailouts started under Bush. Remember the 700 Billion dollar Emergency Economic Stabilization Act in October of 2008, or did you conveniently for get that one?
666bushisnazi666 1 year ago 23
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@666bushisnazi666 America is done with sniveling cunts like you. Come November the adults are back in charge. Then you can look back on 2 full years of complete control of all 3 branches of government and ask yourself what the democrats did with such an opportunity. Squawking little bitches unable to do anything but blame others, just like yourself.
NCAJAX 1 year ago
@666bushisnazi666 Yup...the one that McCain said was so important that he would stop campaigning entirely until it passed. But why would the rightwingers let something as trivial as factual information deter them from ranting about how Obama is evil incarnate.
suckittrebek619 1 year ago
@666bushisnazi666 Bailouts are nothing new and didn't start under Bush, but bailouts have been going on since the 50's in order to expand the US empire after WII (1948). We haven't lived under true capitalism for a long time (1814-1915).
Kiyaki777 1 year ago
Bush was a socialist, Obama is more of a corporatist. Ron Paul and other liberty-minded conservatives are the only true people supporting free market capitalism. I imagine since you hate Bush you must hate Obama (considering they are almost exactly the same)
Willredd94 1 year ago
@666bushisnazi666 everybody did
thor123422 1 year ago
@666bushisnazi666
700 billion under president Bush? Are you sure?
newbalance336 1 year ago
@666bushisnazi666 Democracts and Republicans, some fucking choice. : /
greenghost2008 1 year ago 44
@greenghost2008 Huey long said it best: "one skins you from the neck down while one skins you from the ankles up."
tdr124 11 months ago
@greenghost2008 But America is the greatest democracy on earth! Where you can pick 1 of 2 parties. OR be blamed for the results when you vote for a 3rd party GODFORBID
keys1320001 7 months ago
@666bushisnazi666 oh you mean that one 700 Billion Dollar package that the democratic house and democratic senate created and then voted for and then President Elect Obama stated "we need to sign this into law as soon as possible to help hurting Americans"...you mean that bill, that huge mess that was created by the Democrats and then signed by Bush...that's the one your talking about right...
cchanderson 1 year ago
Watch this video to see what corporatism, or "crony capitalism" truly is... watch?v=3lN2AFvvI3g
This guy is a mouthpiece. It isn't Republicans or Democrats to blame, it is BOTH! Wake Up!
seanone23 1 year ago