Is it Capitalization or Exploitation
By Anthony J. Mountjoy
Maybe I should look more closely at colonialism. If my leftist friends are so supportive of it, (and my right wing friends so triggered by it) maybe there is value there I'm missing? Where there's interest there should be customers. I've always opposed corporatism which is obviously colonialism with a brand strategy, now I'm thinking fight fire with fire. Turn about is fair play...right? Can the Verboten brand benefit from this social fallacy to gain exposure while maximizing capitalistic production? Can an individual out smart a group? Just watch me.
When someone takes your money by force (taxes) because they think they have better use of it and the right to decide for you, that is exploitation because after the transaction there is LESS value on the whole. Either through lack of production or inflation. That is the classic social over-reach usually invoked through government that robs value generated through capitalist production. "Freemarket Capitalism" is the only peer to peer system so far discovered that reliably encourages production where Socialism requires the centralized power of the master/slave relationship and the ignorance of its participants.
Capitalization uses knowledge, through detailed measurement, and the law of compensation to create accessible value where none existed before. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it can only change form. "Freemarket Capitalism" is a framework built around the knowledge that a capital exchange is NOT a zero sum gain. There is value created by the transaction itself. This is the most beautiful thing ever conceived. Math has saved more lives and elevated more creativity than anything in human history. Period. I dare you to argue otherwise. The facts will destroy your claims faster than a coward can run.
This is the mistake in understanding many who oppose "Freemarket Capitalism" make. They think for one person to make money another has to lose it. The opposite is true. When one party pays another for a legitimate service (that is not fraud) production occurs. This production is a measurable INCREASE in value on the whole between those involved in the transaction and thus increased value in the economy. This is why fraud is a crime and a form of stealing from everyone involved directly or not.
Devaluation occurs when their is social theft driving prices down or operating costs up, exploiting the production of others apparently to solve "big problems" not being addressed adequately by private interests. In truth, many on the egalitarian side of the social spectrum think it is immoral to make money from certain things like rent for example. They choose to ignore the production value, the improvements in design and implementation that drive costs down. In part sale price, but more importantly production cost. "Freemarket Capitalism" demands progress to remain competitive and produce more value.
The idea of making a profit on people's basic living needs is offensive to the social mind. Taken to its extreme, selling anything becomes offensive, because the entitled always eventually conflate needs with wants. And when productivity is outlawed so the less effective, less educated, less ambitious workers can have a so called "living wage" the economy inevitably collapses. It runs out of capital because production can't keep up. eg. Greece, Ireland, Germany, France, Russia, etc. Must I go on?
I wonder, do the anti-capitalists really want to solve poverty or do they just want to prove their ideological approach can solve poverty so they can get on with abolishing personal freedom entirely.
What irony that they fight the only system that has ever measurably increased life expectancies and reduced infant mortality rates. Is the first colour blind system, the first complete system to not care about religion at all. In short "Freemarket Capitalism" is to Commerce what Science is to Knowledge.
Without it we are no better than tribesman leaching value from membership alone and never from production or our own contribution. To make our tribe ascendant we must destroy the other tribes. Where's the collaboration? The creation? I think its pretty clear which side benefits from prejudice and division. "Freemarket Capitalism" brings people together in mutual self interest, the alternative is to be an ant in the colony and I always thought colonialism was a bad thing? Now, I'm not so sure.
If you want us to know you stopped by, visit our featured content and we get a little bit of ad revenue.Verboten Feature
These are posts distributed for broader viewership; could be anything from our catalogue past or present. Will open in a new tab.
|Indians Are Only Visible Minority In Canada|
The average Indian in Canada makes much less than our national average a year. Metis had the highest median income at nearly $28,000, followed by the Inuit with just less than $25,000 and First Nations people with a median income of approximately $19,000 in 2005.