[logiclion]

Sure, hate the rich, it doesn't prove you have compassion for the poor. What you are stating as a threat is really the 'protection' of private property. Something that a poor person has access to as well, and in fact the utilization of such could allow them to come out of poverty.

As far as your remarks on power, I hope you also understand it isn't a replacement for a hierarchy built on competence. Something that the Capitalist system seems to reward as well...interesting...

[mschuster91]

> Something that a poor person has access to as well

I doubt this. When the other side has orders of magnitude more money than you, you don't have access to protection by the legal system - this is the very reason why and how, for example, patent trolls stay in business.

> and in fact the utilization of such could allow them to come out of poverty

You're talking about trickle-down effect, I guess? That's been proven false. When all the employers pay only the least they have to, you won't ever get out of poverty. What could help is strikes, but union busting has taken care of that "problem" for the employers.

> it isn't a replacement for a hierarchy built on competence

Competence does not seem to be rewarded as much as it was in ye olde times. Look at who is in government right now: certainly not the experts that the US needs, and in Europe the situation doesn't look much better...

(for the record, given your question above: I have not downvoted you)

[logiclion]

Sorry, when I said access to private property I was referring to the right of having private property in general. A poor person can still have private property, I'm not going to play the game of rich vs poor.

Again for the utilization of private property, a person is still able to use their own property without the interference of ANYONE else. I'm not speaking about rich vs poor, I'm speaking as an individual.

Essentially what my entire post has been is about the dynamic of power and victimization when it comes to the criticism of Capitalism. I'm sorry but I really can't subscribe to the idea that it's inherently violent because poor people are oppressed and then the police are used as the henchmen of the rich when the poor act out. Which is why I raised the concept of competency to begin with. A poor person has the right and if they have the ability, they can try to leverage their own way of acquiring value. It becomes violent when resources are scarce and the 'poor' are victimized into believing that the rich are the oppressors aka Maoist China & Stalinist Russia. As long as opportunities exist to move up and down the class/social ladder I don't again think its concise to say that more 'power' is needed and I'd again say that understanding that hierarchy can be achieved of competency is important to remove the idea of victimization.

Lastly to explain my point simply, you might be for those that throw bricks as a display of 'power', but those bricks can be used not only for the skyscrapers of the 'oppressors', but they can be used for the bricks of small businesses and other uses to enable poor people to make a living and in turn create value for others in a capitalist society. How is this related to President Trump and how he became president/what this means for America? I literally have no idea how American capitalism is to blame?

It seems like you just don't like Trump, that's fine me neither. But I'm not going to start raving about anti-capitalistic ideology while I type all of this on a MacBook am I...