Gingrich is a hero for arguing for “ethical capitalism”

Hotair ^ | 12-13-12 | KRISEN POWERS

[babygene]

“From what they were saying at FNC today the ‘King of Bain’ had some very gross errors in it.”

So errors are lies?

[kabar]

Why not just call Mitt an unethical businessman rather than linking it to an economic system?

[fabian]

yes indeed, and not all practices in capitolism are sacrosanct for heaven sakes!

[VinL]

A concept that can exist without participants can drive something, because we have chosen to use it as our drive.

***************
Precisely. And who is the “we”-— people. So, we have a conceptual car, and people get into it for the purpose of driving it. Now, since you concede that people drive the concept, the next question for you is are all people ethical? Are they perfect?

[chris37]

Then why did he use the phrase “ethical capitalism” if capitalism isn’t the issue?

Couldn’t he have just said that Romney is unethical?

You realize you have just agreed with my premise, don’t you?

Newt has just undermined our economic system by qualifying it with an invalid qualifier, and apparently very few people can see that.

[Antoninus]

The point is that capitalism is not per se or inherently ethical or unethical.

I never said it was. What I said was that you can't divorce the system from the participants. When the participants are immoral scoundrels, capitalism breeds only misery because those corrupt individuals will do everything in their power to rig the system in their favor (sound familiar?). Indeed, I will posit that a truly free-market system can not exist in a state when a large percentage of the citizens are corrupt. The trust necessary for the system to function is destroyed.

And this all gets back to Rick Santorum's premise during this election. Unless this nation can somehow get back to its moral foundations, the system won't matter. We'll be cooked regardless.

[chris37]

I have already stated that the nature of man is corruption and greed. In your example, the car and its purpose do not matter, only the choices of its users matter.

If Newt wants to say the drivers of the car are unethical, then he should say that.

But I expect he would say that the people are driving an unethical car, and that makes about as sense as “ethical capitalism”.

[sickoflibs]

SOL ”From what they were saying at FNC today the ‘King of Bain’ had some very gross errors in it.”.....
BG :So errors are lies?”

Please read my comment that you re-posted and your response to it both re-posted above closely and you will hopefully see why your question to ME makes little sense.

then, Do you have a real question?

[Antoninus]

Who decides what is a "fair" price? The government or the marketplace? This is the kind of reasoning that gets us rent controls, the minimum wage, price controls, etc.

Nonsense. The cure's inventor would set the price, who, being a good and moral man, would set it to cover his costs, pay his workers, and provide a nice existence for himself. And, when need be, he would act in a charitable way, seeking out hard cases who couldn't even pay the fair price he asks for his cure and giving it to them gratis thereby earning the praise of his fellow men, good publicity for his business, and a treasure in heaven.

Notice, this is how a Christian business owner would be expected to act. How is this hard?

[babygene]

So chris37, It’s just capitolism, so why do we have usury laws in almost every state? The answer is that capitalism ISN’T always ethical... No more than any other system is.

It’s OK that unethical behavior is not always illegal, but we sure as hell don’t want that in our president. It’s perfectly reasonable for voters to make up their minds on this and vote accordingly.

[chris37]

You’re right, Antonius, and that is why, in a free society. God is needed for the purpose of morality, otherwise it will descend into chaos, and that is exactly where we are headed.

If a man has morality, then he can govern himself. But as that belief system is taken from, then those who wish to control step in, and make no mistake, they are Evil. Rick is also right, but not enough people can see that, they don’t even want to try and see it, and as a result, we are in deep, deep trouble.

[Antoninus]

That’s right, the life is on his head. I think that’s how God would see it, but so what?

So what? LOL.

In a free society, a man is free to make choices, including the wrong choice.

Indeed. And the rest of us are free to tell him to go to hell when he subsequently asks for our vote for elective office.

[kabar]

What I said was that you can't divorce the system from the participants. When the participants are immoral scoundrels, capitalism breeds only misery because those corrupt individuals will do everything in their power to rig the system in their favor (sound familiar?).

Capitalism doesn't breed anything. It is an economic system, not a moral code. Someone can be an immoral scoundrel in any economic system. The economic system didn't make them corrupt. You sound like an OWS Marxist ascribing capitalism in and of itself as sinister.

"Capitalist production, therefore, develops technology, and the combining together of various processes into a social whole, only by sapping the original sources of all wealth - the soil and the labourer."

Karl Marx

Predatory capitalism created a complex industrial system and an advanced technology; it permitted a considerable extension of democratic practice and fostered certain liberal values, but within limits that are now being pressed and must be overcome. It is not a fit system for the mid-twentieth century.

NOAM CHOMSKY, Language and Freedom

[babygene]

“Why not just call Mitt an unethical businessman rather than linking it to an economic system?”

Because that’s exactly what Newt is doing...

[Antoninus]

If a man has morality, then he can govern himself. But as that belief system is taken from, then those who wish to control step in, and make no mistake, they are Evil. Rick is also right, but not enough people can see that, they don’t even want to try and see it, and as a result, we are in deep, deep trouble.

You and I agree completely, then.

[chris37]

The answer is that people AREN’T always ethical...

Fixed.

It’s OK that unethical behavior is not always illegal, but we sure as hell don’t want that in our president. It’s perfectly reasonable for voters to make up their minds on this and vote accordingly.

I never said we do want that in our president, and I never said it was unreasonablefor voters to make up their minds and vote accordingly. Are you confusing me with someone else?

What I have said is that Newt misframed his argument and in so doing is attacking the nature of our economic system, and I have also stated that Newt is smart enough to realize the distinction, and thus I think he is unethical for making this argument in the manner that he did.

[VinL]

The failing of your argument is that both the car and capitalism presupoose users-it’s endemic to the concept. If you don’t think so, pleased define conceptual capitalism without reference to markets. And then, define markets without reference to goods, and the manufacturers of the same, and the end users.

[babygene]

“What I have said is that Newt misframed his argument and in so doing is attacking the nature of our economic system”

Newt misframed nothing. He didn’t attack our system, he went after a bad actor in our system. And rightfully so...

[sickoflibs]

RE :“Why not just call Mitt an unethical businessman rather than linking it to an economic system?”
.....
Because that’s exactly what Newt is doing...”’

Is there some rational reason why you keep responding to others comments except pinging me to make it look like I made comments I never did with text I never posted? Did you make King of Bain?

[kabar]

Nonsense. The cure's inventor would set the price, who, being a good and moral man, would set it to cover his costs, pay his workers, and provide a nice existence for himself. And, when need be, he would act in a charitable way, seeking out hard cases who couldn't even pay the fair price he asks for his cure and giving it to them gratis thereby earning the praise of his fellow men, good publicity for his business, and a treasure in heaven.

You don't understand capitalism or human nature. And what exactly is a "nice existence?" Does Bill Gates charge too much for his products given his immense fortune? Should the oil companies reduce their profit margins? Are billionaires good and moral people because they have much more than they need for a "nice existence?"

America's abundance was created not by public sacrifices to the common good, but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes. They did not starve the people to pay for America's industrialization. They gave the people better jobs, higher wages, and cheaper goods with every new machine they invented, with every scientific discovery or technological advance -- and thus the whole country was moving forward and profiting, not suffering, every step of the way.

AYN RAND, Capitalism: The Unknown Deal

Capitalism is based on self-interest and self-esteem; it holds integrity and trustworthiness as cardinal virtues and makes them pay off in the marketplace, thus demanding that men survive by means of virtue, not vices. It is this superlatively moral system that the welfare statists propose to improve upon by means of preventative law, snooping bureaucrats, and the chronic goad of fear.

ALAN GREENSPAN, The Assault on Integrity