[Wolves] Anyone a citizen of loverly?

[Bobby Singh]

Hello,

OK you have read my post note that i don't blindly
beleive in the system.  I beleive gov't should
intervene in capitist counties. OK sorry about the
spellings.  Countries that go from poor to richness
embrace free-markets.  A fully free-market countries
system will benefit poor countries.  As if african
countries could export food products to EU market it
will be better for them.  But some african countries
have loans from world institions in exchange to
privatise there utilities. This has made there prices
unstable and made the poor suffer. 
These words like 'capitism' and 'free markets' are
relative terms.  Like right wing in this country my be
centre in the USA. But hey if you suggest some system
that is good and proven in countries i will accept it.
 Also if i say a lot of incorrect stuff just correct
me.  

Cheers

Bobby

PS; i wrie this is a minute so spelling mistakes and
grammer mistake are every where.
PPS; To bring balance to the post what is your distro.

--- "Kelly, Martin" <Martinkelly at wlv.ac.uk> wrote:

> Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 12:31:43 +0100
> From: Stuart Langridge <sil at kryogenix.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wolves] Anyone a citizen of loverly?
> To: Wolverhampton Linux User Group
> <wolves at mailman.lug.org.uk>
> Message-ID:
> <4c91566f05091004316d4415f4 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> > > Look, no system is perfect, capitism is the best
> of
> > > the worse.
> 
> (Hmm, probably get a hammering,but here goes).
> Seeing that you mispelt capitalism also reminds me
> that entrepreneurs like to leave out the li.  The
> big problem of course is that a lot of the poorer
> countries DO practise capitalism as an economic
> system, they're just not very good at it.  
> this is because capitalism isn't about a free market
> (so in an earlier post when you mention capitalism
> and free market in the same sentence, it somewhat
> made me titter). 
>  If they practised some kind of import controls they
> would do better, if they regulated their markets
> they would do better, if their officials weren't so
> easily bought by big companies they would do better,
> if they had access to the sofisticated tools of mass
> production they would do better, but they don't. 
> After centuries of robbing poorer countries of their
> raw materials to make goods here, capitalists are
> now getting the idea that they can make more profits
> by moving their factories there ( wherever there
> happens to be).
>  with the further movement of jobs abroad the rising
> price of energy and transportation, it may be that
> capitalism may soon not be in our interests for very
> much longer. 
> The other opinion voiced of self regulation, no
> leaders, also has, I'm afraid to say, the problems
> that poorer countries face, that is that, there is
> no protection from bully boys with big armies. I
> must say I would prefer anarchy, in it's ideal form,
> to capitalism, as a true free market would flourish
> under such a system, but there would always be
> elements out to destroy it.  
> Is this not equivalent to the open source ethos?
> where we offer help and software with no thought of,
> ( or maybe just a little occasionally) personal
> gain. with monolithic corporations trying to close
> down such philanthropic enterprise it seems obvious
> that the better system is not capitalism i.e the
> accumulation of capital, but one which protects
> communities and acknowledges human beings true
> worth.
> Any one fancy a pint?
> Mart.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Wolves LUG mailing list
> Homepage: http://www.wolveslug.org.uk/
> Mailing list: Wolves at mailman.lug.org.uk
> Mailing list home:
> http://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/wolves
> 



		
___________________________________________________________ 
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com