[QUOTE=davar55;405364]Capitalism is our friend.[/QUOTE]
Our friend eats too much meat, won't eat his veggies and likes to drink and party too much.

[QUOTE=davar55;405364]Capitalism is our friend.[/QUOTE]

Hardly drink at all. But I don't advocate nanny socialism.

I'm not sure explicitly what "crony" capitalism really is, but
if it's a malvariant form of economic practice, it should take
the blame, not capitalism our friend. How about calling it
cronepotism instead? After all, <repeat after me>
capitalism is our friend. (Has a nice, friendly ring to it.)

[QUOTE=davar55;405385]After all, <repeat after me>
capitalism is our friend. (Has a nice, friendly ring to it.)[/QUOTE]
[url]http://thebandwagon.net/faqs/[/url]
[QUOTE]Q: How much does it cost to rent a BandWagon?
A: It depends upon the rental timeline. Rates are posted here on the site.

Q: What if we pull our own trailer?
A: That is well within your rights, pending our approval after sending along your trailer’s specs.

Q: How much is the satellite television?
A: Provided free of charge.

Q: Is internet provided?
A: Internet does not come standard, but is an option at a cost of $30 per day. It’s much cheaper to go to your favorite wireless provider and get your own. We use the Verizon network; it’s not some magical high-speed network. It’s the same network that you can sign up for at the rate of $59 – $79 per month if you piggyback it onto a voice plan and broadcast the signal using your mac.

Q: How many people can fit comfortably in a BandWagon?
A: Up to nine people.

Q: What about all of the maintenance costs that the other coach companies charge (i.e. main engine service, transmission service, generator service, etc?).
A: We don’t charge them.

Q: What other costs are there?
A: $2,500 fully-refundable damage deposit, Indiana state sales tax (since this is a rental and not a lease), and a one-time end-of-tour-cleaning fee.

Q: Who can drive a BandWagon?
A: Anyone over the age of 25 years with a valid driver’s license from their country of origin.

Q: Is it hard to drive?
A: Nope. It’s fully automatic with an air ride suspension, and is the same size as a box truck. The size is its only similarity. This is NOT a glorified box truck, but rather an RV that has been specifically designed and outfitted to our specs specifically for touring bands. It’s comfortable like a bus, but logistically just as easy to drive as a box truck.

Q: What kind of MPG do these things get?
A: It depends upon the routing, as the driver and the terrain are the two most important factors in determining fuel economy, but the BandWagon will average 7.5 – 9.0 MPG with the generator running 24/7. Please send us your routing and we’ll be more than happy to provide you with a fuel estimate for your tour.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=davar55;405364]Capitalism is our friend.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=davar55;405385]Hardly drink at all. But I don't advocate nanny socialism.

I'm not sure explicitly what "crony" capitalism really is, but
if it's a malvariant form of economic practice, it should take
the blame, not capitalism our friend. How about calling it
cronepotism instead? After all, <repeat after me>
capitalism is our friend. (Has a nice, friendly ring to it.)[/QUOTE]
And bandwagons aside, I note that you keep using the word "our" as a qualification to the word "friend. Who precisely do you include within that pronoun?

[QUOTE=Brian-E;405391]And bandwagons aside, I note that you keep using the word "our" as a qualification to the word "friend. Who precisely do you include within that pronoun?[/QUOTE]

Anyone who has the freedom to improve their lot,
which is generally a possibility only within a
capitalism framework.

[QUOTE=davar55;405402]Anyone who has the freedom to improve their lot,
which is generally a possibility only within a
capitalism framework.[/QUOTE]
Yes. In other words, those who benefit from capitalism are the people who have been given a good start in life (education), don't start so far down the poverty ladder that they are able to broaden their horizons beyond the basic necessities of food and shelter, have not become ill or disabled to an extent that they are unable to work, and are not burdened with full time caring for others who are unable to fend for themselves. Those are the people who have the freedom to improve their lot. You will acknowledge, I hope, that not everyone has this freedom?

[QUOTE=Brian-E;405415]Yes. In other words, those who benefit from capitalism are the people who have been given a good start in life (education), don't start so far down the poverty ladder that they are able to broaden their horizons beyond the basic necessities of food and shelter, have not become ill or disabled to an extent that they are unable to work, and are not burdened with full time caring for others who are unable to fend for themselves. Those are the people who have the freedom to improve their lot. You will acknowledge, I hope, that not everyone has this freedom?[/QUOTE]

Poor education, poverty, illness, disability, and family burdens can be difficult problems to overcome,
probably impossible outside a free capitalism economy. Only when those who do get educated, or
do rise from poverty, or do get well, or do manage their disability, or do handle or transcend family
burdens, are economically free to have the possibility of economic success, which is not possible
under any other economic system, can others be helped to escape those same troubles.

[QUOTE=davar55;405422]Poor education, poverty, illness, disability, and family burdens can be difficult problems to overcome,
probably impossible outside a free capitalism economy. Only when those who do get educated, or
do rise from poverty, or do get well, or do manage their disability, or do handle or transcend family
burdens, are economically free to have the possibility of economic success, which is not possible
under any other economic system, can others be helped to escape those same troubles.[/QUOTE]
I agree. And isn't "helping others to escape those same troubles " synonymous with socialism which a few posts ago you professed not to advocate? (Or did you mean something else when you referred to "nanny socialism"?)

[QUOTE=Brian-E;405425]I agree. And isn't "helping others to escape those same troubles " synonymous with socialism which a few posts ago you professed not to advocate? )[/QUOTE]


No, it is NOT the same.

Neither of you seems to know the definition of socialism. You seem to think that wealth redistribution
is socialism.

It is not.

Socialism is an economic system in which the capital and the means of production
are owned by the government. Period.

Go consult any economics textbook.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;405427]Socialism is an economic system in which the capital and the means of production are owned by the government. Period.

Go consult any economics textbook.[/QUOTE]Perhaps one should let the definition of socialism to those who invented the concept and promoted it. The definition is then "Socialism is an economic system in which the means of production are not privately owned". For a large part of the early socialists (even if Marx succeeded to oust them from the first international by devious means) there was no question of government.

Never forget that the so called communist regimes in the soviet union and its followers were (and still are for those still in place) in reality state capitalistic regimes. Lenin said several times that he and his party wanted to change capitalism to state capitalism in other words capitalism controlled by the government. This is very different from abolishing capitalism.

Jacob.

Okay, I'll rephrase the question (to davar55 or to anyone). Aren't significant state-owned resources a necessary prerequisite to ensuring that everyone is able to enjoy economic freedom regardless of their circumstances?