: : That may be so, however, but the point is that the companies own the land or the forests or the lakes that they are extracting resources from. Mr. Loudon Head was arguing that when companies own the land and the resources they take better care of it. Yes, there will be some exceptions, such as companies that are fly by night operations hoping to capitalize quickly. However, those companies that are in it for the long run will make sure that they always plant more trees than they cut down so that there will be more next year. Similarly, fisheries will not dredge their fishing areas, completely wiping out the fish populations.
: -The state housing the world over isnt always respected by it's inhabitants, why? Because they have no stake in it's ownership, now explain to me why when the whole world and every little thing in it belongs to Bill Gates et al why there is any logical reason the people wont disrespect it also?
I don't quite understand what you are saying. It does not matter if they disrespect it so long as they have no power to affect it. For instance, if I own a logging company and I own the land which I use for logging, I can pursue any policy that I so choose, regardless of whether the people condone it or not. As the sole proprieter of that land, I can do with it as I please within the constraints of the law.
: -The 'fly by night' out fits that you describe that are interested in turning a short term profit are the ones that prosper the most under capitalism, it's about competition and you dont win competitions by planning longterm and taking heavy immediate losses.
Not necessarily. Here is an example: Amazon.Com went public more than a year ago (maybe longer) and the chairman immediately made the statement that shareholders would see some of the heaviest losses ever. The price of the shares still sky rocketed because investors were valuing it by its potential, not by how much its bottom line was. And, a few weeks ago, Amazon.Com actually turned a profit for the first time. As a result of its purposely taking losses in order to stay competitive with the larger chains like Barnes and Noble and Borders, it is now worth something on the order of twice their combined net worth.
: -You believe that companies have some interest in perserving the environment, they dont, it is all resources, the logic of capitalism is that:
PLease do not confuse capitalists with capitalist companies. Many capitalists are all for not polluting and keeping the environment clean, however capitalist companies are beholden to their stock holders to turn a profit and are run by a board of directors who may or may not look after the environment.
: 1. The capitalist knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
And Socialists are a bunch of greasy self-impoverished whiners who constantly clammor for more government freebies.
Now that we have the misinformed rhetoric out of the way, lets continue.
: 2. Capitalism thinks it is possible to infinitely grow the economy on exhaustable finite resources.
I heard an excellent description of the worlds resources. Yes they are finite, just like one inch is a finite distance. However, the amount of points you can put in an inch is infinite, similarly, the amount of uses that you can use your resources for knows no bounds. When fossil fuels become horribly depleted, we will find something else. Who knows, perhaps we will be manufacturing synthetic fossil fuels.
: McSpotlight: [sic] - Latin for 'thus' - it means 'I'm quoting this from a text word-for-word exactly as it appears'
Yeah, it is used by editors when copying something that they are not sure is used correctly or spelled correctly.