Originally Posted by SirReveller
What we're driving at, IMO, is that lefties generally think the capital stock is infinite, has no creators, exists in the abstract, and requires good-hearted bureaucrats, to dole out on basis of need.
I'm believe capital is created by productive individuals who took business risks, and incurred serious opportunity cost, is finite, and, if these owners are going to have a slice of it seized for "the greater good", I pray the bureaucrat in charge doesn't tout stuff like "morality comes before economics", and hopefully at least took
macro before dismissing concepts like deadweight loss as "irrelevant."
Of course, the people best trained to run large budgets are clearly those who, before politics, were "community organizers", so what do I know...
Some liberals believe this and some believe that. What I believe is that a lot of money is 'real'--i.e. been generated through business--and a lot of money isn't 'real'--i.e. been printed by banks, etc., as electronic debt. It's a very complicated system, and you've basically just described the two ways in which all money exists. So, to answer your question: You're both wrong and you're right, but it has nothing to do with conservatives and liberals; many conservatives believe what you consider to be a liberal thought process.
Also, this conservative ideology that all CEOs, etc., work really hard, and shouldn't have money taken off them, is completely dumb. Society depends on taking from businesses (and citizens). Corporation tax used to be over 90%, but most conservatives would freak the fuck out, if taxes went anywhere near that level nowadays (for reasons they can never seem to verbalise). The thing they don't understand is: Life gets worse for the majority, when taxes are lowered (corporations get away with tax havens, etc., as it is). Taxes are what keep society maintained and progressing. Conservatives and liberals tend to disagree over who should see the benefits of taxes. Conservatives generally believe the rich should see the benefits, and liberals care more about maintaining society--which, funnily enough, has the roundabout effect of improving the economy.
I'll explain one of the problems we currently face under capitalism. The economy depends on the workers of a society. The government are elected based on what those workers feel the government should be doing for them. Boards of directors and their CEOs, CTOs, etc., first of all, take a hugely disproportionate take of their workers hard work in large salaries and bonuses (CEOs don't do the majority of the work), and, secondly, they fight against having to pay higher taxes which will (hopefully) be used in the best interests of the workers (it's admittedly up to the workers, to vote for someone they believe will do what's best for them [hello, Bernie Sanders]). CEOs, etc., are fucking their workers (i.e. the majority of society) over on two counts. You can't do both at the same time, as eventually people will fight, to break out of that system, which is what we are seeing with the resurgence of the debate over socialism across the globe. We have a tendency as a race, to enslave one portion of people, to create things for another. I think it's about time we had an intelligent debate over how to stop that from continuing.
I hope your last point was sarcasm, as people who used to be bankers, etc., (dumbasses like Mitt Romney) are the worst people to run an economic system.
I seriously wish conservatives would just come right out and say it. They don't want to live in a society. They think they are too good existing alongside other people. Build your own rocket and fly to Mars, then.
Edited by JapanAlex01 - 9/2/15 at 3:24am