Lansky was a small-time player who didn’t seek to conquer the world. The “legitimate” financiers that I mentioned, along with the executives of most of the Fortune 1000 corporations are true “large C” Capitalists who do seek to extract as much wealth as possible out of the world, regardless of the longterm consequences.
They have corrupted the concept of capitalism — too complex for a comprehensive explanation in this forum. The short explanation is that capitalist corporations (or “combinations) were originally conceived to raise capital for short term projects, with the expectation that any corporation would be dissolved after there completion of the project and distribution of profits to the shareholders.
Instead, corporations have become immortal entities that live on even after their original investors are deceased. The profits go to rentiers — another term that needs explanation— most of whom know little or nothing about the companies they own and for which they have never worked.
The Capitalism is based upon the unspoken notion of infinitely available resources on an infinitely large planet — a notion mathematically doomed to fail.
Calling Lansky a "small-time player" kinda goes against the fact that his "company" (The National Crime Syndicate) had a net worth multiples of US Steel. Lansky founded Las Vegas to launder the drug money the syndicate was collecting.
The "legitimate" financiers you refer to hired Lansky all the time. (Actually "hired" is the wrong term, they appealed to him to help them out for "a taste")
Capitalism was corrupt from its inception. It was nothing more than a protection racket.
I find it interesting that you can accuse corporations of crime yet think they have nothing in common with Lansky and his crime syndicate. Want to know about Lansky's relationship with AIPAC?
The "infinitely available resources" narrative goes no where for me. China has developed a Thorium reactor that can provide power for the next 65,000 years.
There's so much that is true and not true at the same time. It all depend on how you look at it.
“Small” compared to Wall Street or the London Stock Exchange.
Even Trump is a small time thug compared to his sponsors who prefer to avoid the limelight.
The resources that feed Capitalism are vast, but limited. Thorium reactors cannot produce an unlimited amount of food, clothing, shelter, potable water and clean air for an infinitely large human population.
The Earth cannot sustain a population of 9-billion humans, indefinitely. Some scientists estimate that the Earth cannot sustain a sustain no more than 2 or 3-billion. Capitalism expects an infinite number of future customers.
By the year 1910 or so, all of the old-growth forests of Michigan had been clear-cut to produce lumber to build housing and furniture for the East Coast and Mid-West, and to produce coke for steel mills. Those forests will require another 300-400 years to be able to produce trees comparable to what were “harvested”.
The natural cod fisheries seemed unlimited but are now near extinction. Ditto for lobsters wild-caught tuna and salmon.
Capitalism has become a corrupt con game, based upon the notion that all participants have equal access to all information and equal bargaining power to all transactions. Capitalism and Capitalists have had the freedom to ignore all “externalities” of their operations. Such externalities include pollution, environmental destruction, societal disruption and destruction, wars, poverty, homelessness and more.
Capitalists are free to lie, cheat and steal as long as they do so surreptitiously and have a supply of willing labor and affluent customers. Capitalists seek to eliminate the expenses of labor, and continue pursue a diminishing number of consumers who will tolerate price increases.
OK, I see your scale to define "small-time". It isn't helpful to debate that point.
Concerning how many humans the planet earth can or cannot support, I don't dispute any of what you say -except- for how you blame it on Capitalism. This is kind of sad, because it probably sounds like I'm defending Capitalism (I'm not).
The world is (probably) over-populated. But that isn't because of Capitalism.
I have not said that Capitalism is causing overpopulation. Perhaps it has or has not caused overpopulation. The European development of North and South America was financed via Capitalism, but North and South America constitute a relatively small fraction of the global human population.
What I say is the Western concept or practice of large “C” Capitalism presumes the availability of unlimited resources along with the existence of unlimited customers to buy goods and services in order to generate ever-increasing profits for the Capitalists.
The simplistic concepts of Economics as taught in both undergraduate and graduate schools discuss supply and demand that may be applicable to small villages or towns of residents who all know each other. Increased demand inspires increased supply or “substitution”.
In order to increase profits, Capitalists must increase their production of goods and/or services for sales to more customers, or they must increase their prices and/or reduce their operational costs.
Technology and automation can reduce or eliminate labor costs along with sales to unemployed workers. Seizing resources from inhabitants of “weak” countries can reduce material costs while keeping those inhabitants in poverty. Eventually, the Capitalists will run out of customers and resources.
The flaw is in the belief that Capitalism demands ever-increasing profits at any and all costs, with most of the profits going to billionaires and mega-millionaires who don’t earn them or need them, and who don’t spend their profits to support the society that generates them.
Capitalism can be useful in establishing temporary companies for the construction of essential infrastructure. It can be useful in supporting innovations and explorations. Corporations become toxic, like cancer, when they outlive their original missions but continue to slowly drain their hosts.
China is not a capitalist economy. It has no problem keeping money creation out of the hands of private individuals. It does not allow privatization of natural monopolies which would generate unjustified "economic rent". China financed its own infrastructure the same way Lincoln did when he built the transcontinental railroad with IOUs called "Greenbacks"
At the same time China allows private investments in industry. Some might say this is capitalism.
Hudson does not. He is very insistent that China did not allow financialization of its economy which is Capitalism.
My mention of Lansky was to highlight the nature of end-state capitalism.
If the list are capitalists, then they are directly the result that leads to the end of the American Empire.
Lansky was a small-time player who didn’t seek to conquer the world. The “legitimate” financiers that I mentioned, along with the executives of most of the Fortune 1000 corporations are true “large C” Capitalists who do seek to extract as much wealth as possible out of the world, regardless of the longterm consequences.
They have corrupted the concept of capitalism — too complex for a comprehensive explanation in this forum. The short explanation is that capitalist corporations (or “combinations) were originally conceived to raise capital for short term projects, with the expectation that any corporation would be dissolved after there completion of the project and distribution of profits to the shareholders.
Instead, corporations have become immortal entities that live on even after their original investors are deceased. The profits go to rentiers — another term that needs explanation— most of whom know little or nothing about the companies they own and for which they have never worked.
The Capitalism is based upon the unspoken notion of infinitely available resources on an infinitely large planet — a notion mathematically doomed to fail.
Calling Lansky a "small-time player" kinda goes against the fact that his "company" (The National Crime Syndicate) had a net worth multiples of US Steel. Lansky founded Las Vegas to launder the drug money the syndicate was collecting.
The "legitimate" financiers you refer to hired Lansky all the time. (Actually "hired" is the wrong term, they appealed to him to help them out for "a taste")
Capitalism was corrupt from its inception. It was nothing more than a protection racket.
I find it interesting that you can accuse corporations of crime yet think they have nothing in common with Lansky and his crime syndicate. Want to know about Lansky's relationship with AIPAC?
The "infinitely available resources" narrative goes no where for me. China has developed a Thorium reactor that can provide power for the next 65,000 years.
There's so much that is true and not true at the same time. It all depend on how you look at it.
“Small” compared to Wall Street or the London Stock Exchange.
Even Trump is a small time thug compared to his sponsors who prefer to avoid the limelight.
The resources that feed Capitalism are vast, but limited. Thorium reactors cannot produce an unlimited amount of food, clothing, shelter, potable water and clean air for an infinitely large human population.
The Earth cannot sustain a population of 9-billion humans, indefinitely. Some scientists estimate that the Earth cannot sustain a sustain no more than 2 or 3-billion. Capitalism expects an infinite number of future customers.
By the year 1910 or so, all of the old-growth forests of Michigan had been clear-cut to produce lumber to build housing and furniture for the East Coast and Mid-West, and to produce coke for steel mills. Those forests will require another 300-400 years to be able to produce trees comparable to what were “harvested”.
The natural cod fisheries seemed unlimited but are now near extinction. Ditto for lobsters wild-caught tuna and salmon.
Capitalism has become a corrupt con game, based upon the notion that all participants have equal access to all information and equal bargaining power to all transactions. Capitalism and Capitalists have had the freedom to ignore all “externalities” of their operations. Such externalities include pollution, environmental destruction, societal disruption and destruction, wars, poverty, homelessness and more.
Capitalists are free to lie, cheat and steal as long as they do so surreptitiously and have a supply of willing labor and affluent customers. Capitalists seek to eliminate the expenses of labor, and continue pursue a diminishing number of consumers who will tolerate price increases.
OK, I see your scale to define "small-time". It isn't helpful to debate that point.
Concerning how many humans the planet earth can or cannot support, I don't dispute any of what you say -except- for how you blame it on Capitalism. This is kind of sad, because it probably sounds like I'm defending Capitalism (I'm not).
The world is (probably) over-populated. But that isn't because of Capitalism.
I have not said that Capitalism is causing overpopulation. Perhaps it has or has not caused overpopulation. The European development of North and South America was financed via Capitalism, but North and South America constitute a relatively small fraction of the global human population.
What I say is the Western concept or practice of large “C” Capitalism presumes the availability of unlimited resources along with the existence of unlimited customers to buy goods and services in order to generate ever-increasing profits for the Capitalists.
The simplistic concepts of Economics as taught in both undergraduate and graduate schools discuss supply and demand that may be applicable to small villages or towns of residents who all know each other. Increased demand inspires increased supply or “substitution”.
In order to increase profits, Capitalists must increase their production of goods and/or services for sales to more customers, or they must increase their prices and/or reduce their operational costs.
Technology and automation can reduce or eliminate labor costs along with sales to unemployed workers. Seizing resources from inhabitants of “weak” countries can reduce material costs while keeping those inhabitants in poverty. Eventually, the Capitalists will run out of customers and resources.
The flaw is in the belief that Capitalism demands ever-increasing profits at any and all costs, with most of the profits going to billionaires and mega-millionaires who don’t earn them or need them, and who don’t spend their profits to support the society that generates them.
Capitalism can be useful in establishing temporary companies for the construction of essential infrastructure. It can be useful in supporting innovations and explorations. Corporations become toxic, like cancer, when they outlive their original missions but continue to slowly drain their hosts.
China is not a capitalist economy. It has no problem keeping money creation out of the hands of private individuals. It does not allow privatization of natural monopolies which would generate unjustified "economic rent". China financed its own infrastructure the same way Lincoln did when he built the transcontinental railroad with IOUs called "Greenbacks"
At the same time China allows private investments in industry. Some might say this is capitalism.
Hudson does not. He is very insistent that China did not allow financialization of its economy which is Capitalism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okw0ZW2yFps