Parties, politicians and PACs that want "less regulation" are, or represent, bullies that want to bully everybody and take everything away from everybody less powerful than them. Throughout time immemorial, this is the story of human nature and human civilization. The disappearing "middle class" of America was made possible by tediously beating back the tentacles of business greed, through organized labor movements and wildly successful socialist policies that created the prosperity bubble of the 1950s that everyone fetishizes so much, without (apparently) questioning how it was made possible, and HOW TO PROTECT IT from the wolves that are ALWAYS at the door.

Made readable especially if that last run-on sentence were broken down into a sentence for each concept or point. It reads too much like a lawyer's brief. I could not figure out who was the party of the first part. And never did find the relevant verb in that first sentence.

Example: "Parties, politicians and PACs that want "less regulation" are, or represent, bullies. Those bullies want to bully everybody and want to take everything from the less powerful." Is that what you were trying to say?

"Parties, politicians and PACs that want "less regulation" are, or represent, bullies that want to bully everybody and take everything away from everybody less powerful than them."

Of course. This is what happens when *State Capitalists are in charge.

You wouldn't have that kinda shit with Free Enterprise.

#

"If the government "big brother" orders you not to avoid hiring someone strictly based upon them being gay" (or black or female or disordered or disabled or...) be clever and don't hire 'em for a 'legit' reason.

Really, the only reason anyone runs a'foul of EO is cuz they were too stupid to put one over on 'civil servants'.







*the more masculine version of tw's beloved State Socialists.

From the era of free enterprise-

Whoa, see how easy it is to get carried away and move from regulations to entirely throwing away markets? The thing that raised billions out of abject poverty, and continues to do so in China and India faster than anyone thought possible? Using an example of abject poverty during a time when it still existed, which was over a century ago in this country?

"From the era of free enterprise"
 

Go, educate yourself on what Free Enterprise is, what State Capitalism is.

That picture, for example, shows the result of the latter, not the former.

Any 'system' offers opportunity for abuse, but sweat shops, onerous child labor, etc. are strictly the result of protected 'capital', not risky 'enterprise'.

By definition: Capitalism is only about 'capital', so it's natural for the Capitalist to see himself protected by the Big Stick, hence he works to see regs minimized on himself and maximized on his competition. The Capitalist always has an eye open for bringing every penny into 'his' coffers (not his competitor's and sure as shit not his customer's or employee's). Capitalism is a Keynesian exercise that promotes intrusive, irresponsible, playin' favorites, muckin' with culture, government (rule by the powerful).

By definition: Free Enterprse is only about the trading individual as he transacts with other trading individuals. The Big Stick is excluded ('cept as final arbiter of dispute) so it's natural for the Free Enterpriser to be cautious and moderate (he has no safety net to catch him or teat to nourish in bad times). 'Too big to fail' is alien to the Free Enterpriser cuz the reality of failure looms (the wolf is always at the door). Free Enterprise is an Austrian exercise. Free Enterprise promotes less intrusive, responsible, largely silent, neutral, government (proxy-hood).

Thank you for explaining this--it's actually really helpful to see how you've broken down what you view as the causes and effects of different systems, and to understand what you mean when using different terms.

This makes it easier to see that our views are based on similar concerns. And, of course, unless either one of us is omnipotent, or has a PhD in several different fields, much of this is interpretation of information and analysis we've received from outside sources.

That's an interesting cleaving of free enterprise and capitalism. I've all ways understood them to be interchangeable.
Evidently I'm not alone...

From
From
free enterprise
noun - an economy that relies chiefly on market forces to allocate goods and resources and to determine prices

Synonyms:
laissez-faire economy, market economy, private enterprise
Antonyms:
non-market economy
an economy that is not a market economy
Types:
capitalism, capitalist economy
an economic system based on private ownership of capital
venture capitalism
capitalism that invests in innovative enterprises (especially high technology) where the potential profits are large
Type of:
economic system, economy
the system of production and distribution and consumption

Flint,

"much of this is interpretation of information and analysis we've received from outside sources."

In my case: while defintions and whatnot come from dictionaries and whatnot, my experience of the difference between Free Enterprise and Capitalism is first hand.

As I say: I self-employ, and I do so in a gray area sphere (information). I find it, convey it, wash my hands of it. What I do is largely unregulated ('cept by 'legit' private investigators who are always lookin' to call down the fire on someone they think is takin' their business). Mine is truly a 'free' enterprise. I have no formal regulators to oversee me, no safety net, no teat. If I don't work, or if I work but fail, there's no line for me to stand in to get a check. If I'm screwed over by a client, the current iteration of the courts is of little use to me.

Having worked 9 to 5, with all the benefits and all the strictures, serving multiple overseers, ain't no way in Heaven or Hell I'd ever give up the autonomy I have now for the 'security' I had then.

As I reckon things: Free Enterprise, with all it's dangers and neck-breakin', life-wreckin' possibilities, is superior to State Capitalism with it's abattoir-like confinements and 'regulations'. Only thing State Capitalism is better than is State Socialism (and not by much).

#

Bruce,

Investopedia (I think) has three small articles (one on Free Enterprise, one on Capitalism, one comparing/contrasting the two). Also: run a general search using '*free enterprise vs capitalism'. You should get hits for links to formal analysis of the differences as well as essays doin' the same.

I'd do the work for you (cuz I'm a 'fuck you, I told ya so' kinda guy), but this old Ipad I'm workin' from ain't none too swift. Besides: you're a big boy. If you really wanna know, you'll climb over the garden wall yourself.









*Free enterprise, for the record, is synonomous with 'free (open, unregulated) market' (something Capitalists discourage [which makes them different from commies how?]).

But you see my point, we're comparing fruit over the phone when I'm holding an apple and you an orange. Gets real muddled if we're not using names the same way.

Well, I nipped that in the bud, yeah?
 

.

Yeah, now I know exactly what you're wrong about. :lol2:

http://cellar.org/2015/imsorry.gif I couldn't resist, the Devil made me do it. :blush:

^This^, on WORLD KINDNESS DAY? :eyebrow:

Oh, the humanity! ... :p:

I've been insulted (I guess) but I don't know how, so I guess it doesn't matter...
 

...but. in case it does...

Go fuck yourself, Bruce.

So again the characteristic of a wacko extremists is evident. Explains why he approves of Nazis, White Supremacists, and KKK - just like Trump.

Profanity makes more sense (justifies all conclusions) when one is an extremist.

Actually he is being kind. Otherwise he would resort to what is most often implemented by extremists - assault weapons.