Clarence Thomas and the Billionaire

[Stacyhs]

and the problem IS capitalism, as is implies a causal link between being Rich and being Good: the superrich would not be superrich if they weren't guided by the divine invisible hand of the market.
Their success proves that what is good for them is good for society as a whole.

Therefore, a judge in a capitalist society might feel the obligation to treat a rich person very differently than a poor one, not because they commit fewer crimes, but because their crimes, by definition, must be for the good of society, or they would not be so rich.

That is very much the philosophy of Calvinism only you've substituted "the divine invisible hand of the market for "the divine invisible hand of God.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

That is very much the philosophy of Calvinism only you've substituted "the divine invisible hand of the market for "the divine invisible hand of God.

Distinction without a difference

 

[Stacyhs]

Distinction without a difference

The market isn't driven by divine anything. It's driven by supply, demand, and prices which are driven by international and domestic events.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

The market isn't driven by divine anything. It's driven by supply, demand, and prices which are driven by international and domestic events.

May I remind you of a little thing called Manifest Destiny ?

 

[Stacyhs]

May I remind you of a little thing called Manifest Destiny ?

May I remind you that the claim was capitalism is "guided by the divine invisible hand of the market"? Manifest Destiny was the belief that Americans had a divine right to claim and occupy land across the North American continent to the Pacific Ocean. It was about land acquisition, not the markets.

 

[quadraginta]

The market isn't driven by divine anything. It's driven by supply, demand, and prices which are driven by international and domestic events.

Sure, if you want to be pedantic about it.

Just don't tell the plebs.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

May I remind you that the claim was capitalism is "guided by the divine invisible hand of the market"? Manifest Destiny was the belief that Americans had a divine right to claim and occupy land across the North American continent to the Pacific Ocean. It was about land acquisition, not the markets.

That was not MY claim, but the claim of those who think Capitalism is the only legitimate economic, nay politial, system.
It's a religious belief, as the facts are obvious that, on it's own, the Invisible Hand of Market would push the economy right off the nearest cliff.

 

[Susheel]

That was not MY claim, but the claim of those who think Capitalism is the only legitimate economic, nay politial, system.
It's a religious belief, as the facts are obvious that, on it's own, the Invisible Hand of Market would push the economy right off the nearest cliff.

Well Christian thought also allows for divinely ordained mass purges to ensure the privileged are favoured.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Well Christian thought also allows for divinely ordained mass purges to ensure the privileged are favoured.

God provides those who purge Jews and people of wrong denomination with the stuff those people owned.
How much more evidence of God's generosity do you need?

 

[Susheel]

God provides those who purge Jews and people of wrong denomination with the stuff those people owned.
How much more evidence of God's generosity do you need?

Flows well into the American rightwing's love for a non-fettered free market (labour exempted) and absolute fear of social welfare programs. The dying poor will mean more for the rich...

 

[Darat]

and the problem IS capitalism, as is implies a causal link between being Rich and being Good: the superrich would not be superrich if they weren't guided by the divine invisible hand of the market.
Their success proves that what is good for them is good for society as a whole.

Therefore, a judge in a capitalist society might feel the obligation to treat a rich person very differently than a poor one, not because they commit fewer crimes, but because their crimes, by definition, must be for the good of society, or they would not be so rich.

Look at the "Prosperity Theology" movement across the world. They explicitly link wealth and material success to being a "good" Christian.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Alito's wife doing business with company profiting from SC ruling

https://www.businessinsider.com/ali...ma-fossil-fuels-epa-environment-scotus-2023-6

Calling Chief Justice! Do something for the legitimacy of the Court!

 

[Lurch]

Look at the "Prosperity Theology" movement across the world. They explicitly link wealth and material success to being a "good" Christian.

Beat me to it. The prosperity gospel nonsense tying lucre to godliness is an obscene leap in the noxious evolution of toxic capitalism. And don't forget Citizens United, effectively equating money to speech.

 

[Stacyhs]

The system is functioning as intended: the rich get to buy as much or as little justice as they want.

and the problem IS capitalism, as is implies a causal link between being Rich and being Good: the superrich would not be superrich if they weren't guided by the divine invisible hand of the market.
Their success proves that what is good for them is good for society as a whole.

Therefore, a judge in a capitalist society might feel the obligation to treat a rich person very differently than a poor one, not because they commit fewer crimes, but because their crimes, by definition, must be for the good of society, or they would not be so rich.

That is very much the philosophy of Calvinism only you've substituted "the divine invisible hand of the market for "the divine invisible hand of God.

Please note that my comment was merely pointing out the similarity of Calvinist philosophy with your statement. I made no criticism of your statement.

Distinction without a difference

You saw my comment as a challenge to the validity of your statement, which it wasn't, so defended it with claiming there was no difference. I pointed out that there is a distinction with a difference: markets are driven by real world factors not divine guidance:

The market isn't driven by divine anything. It's driven by supply, demand, and prices which are driven by international and domestic events.

You then offered Manifest Destiny in support of your statement:

May I remind you of a little thing called Manifest Destiny ?

I did not see Manifest Destiny as being relevant as it was not about the markets, but land acquisition:

May I remind you that the claim was capitalism is "guided by the divine invisible hand of the market"? Manifest Destiny was the belief that Americans had a divine right to claim and occupy land across the North American continent to the Pacific Ocean. It was about land acquisition, not the markets.

Please note that I did not say it was YOUR claim, but that it was "the claim".

That was not MY claim, but the claim of those who think Capitalism is the only legitimate economic, nay politial, system.
It's a religious belief, as the facts are obvious that, on it's own, the Invisible Hand of Market would push the economy right off the nearest cliff.

Again, what does Manifest Destiny have to do with the financial philosophy of capitalism? I would agree that the belief the US had the right to all the land west to the Pacific was justified by claiming it was a "God given right" but that justification is used for countless other claims, too, including some socialists. For example, the Diggers, who believed "God had created the world for people to share, not to divide and exploit for private profit," and today's "Christians on the Left" which endorses left-wing politics and socialist economics on the basis of the Bible and the teachings of Jesus. Popular in the UK, members include Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

"It's a religious belief, as the facts are obvious that, on it's own, the Invisible Hand of Market would push the economy right off the nearest cliff."

Or...it's a justification in the guise of a religious belief as so many things are.

We could go round and round about this but that would just derail the thread so I'll bow out of this exchange now.

 

[quadraginta]

Beat me to it. The prosperity gospel nonsense tying lucre to godliness is an obscene leap in the noxious evolution of toxic capitalism. And don't forget Citizens United, effectively equating money to speech.

There's nothing new about it. Organized religion has been all about and only about money since its inception.

They're just saying it out loud now.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

It's an empirical fact that Capitalism will always seek to undo a Market Economy.

Because capitalists don't want competition.

 

[ZiprHead]

How Harlan Crow Slashed his Tax Bill by Taking Clarence Thomas on Superyacht Cruises

For months, Harlan Crow and members of Congress have been engaged in a fight over whether the billionaire needs to divulge details about his gifts to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, including globe-trotting trips aboard his 162-foot yacht, the Michaela Rose.

Crow’s lawyer argues that Congress has no authority to probe the GOP donor’s generosity and that doing so violates a constitutional separation of powers between Congress and the Supreme Court.

Get Our Top Investigations
Subscribe to the Big Story newsletter.

Email address:
Enter your email
Members of Congress say there are federal tax laws underlying their interest and a known propensity by the ultrarich to use their yachts to skirt those laws.

Tax data obtained by ProPublica provides a glimpse of what congressional investigators would find if Crow were to open his books to them. Crow’s voyages with Thomas, the data shows, contributed to a nice side benefit: They helped reduce Crow’s tax bill.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

How Harlan Crow Slashed his Tax Bill by Taking Clarence Thomas on Superyacht Cruises

In other words, for Crow, Clarence Thomas is a Business Expense, not the "good friend" he thinks himself to be

 

[The Don]

In other words, for Crow, Clarence Thomas is a Business Expense, not the "good friend" he thinks himself to be

And Crow is Thomas' sugar daddy - one hand washing the other in a typically (for today's GOP) transactional way.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

And Crow is Thomas' sugar daddy - one hand washing the other in a typically (for today's GOP) transactional way.

if only that - that would imply some degree equality

But Thomas is clearly just his Pet.