Very interesting. You say that you were told not to use "that phrase". Is this written down anywhere? Or just word of mouth?

God did not invent money, geometry, people, or a single speck of dust. He doesn't exist. If he did, and you followed his judeo Christian iteration as I suppose you do from your other comments, then you would only be able to come to the conclusion that selfishness and capitalism are anti-God. As has been discussed many times, Christianity is incompatible with capitalism because it advocates altruism as its moral ideal, not rational selfishness, which is the philosophical basis for capitalism.

But that is not the main point I wanted to make, not why I wanted to comment on this thread to begin with.

What do you mean by equating homosexuality with sin? By what rational thought process did you come to this conclusion?
Was your comment "which previously dared not speak its name" a lament for a time when gay men and women feared to come out of the closet?

I agree that the two terms generate more interesting discussions, but they are less effective tools of persuasion than the alternatives.

God invented money, the same way that He invented geometry: it is the fabric of the universe.

I understand the point: pursuing money for its own sake is not balanced or healthy; it's an obsession. That said, it is important to step back and consider that we all have toolboxes. I have four: one for the car; one with just mostly screwdrivers; one with just mostly wrenches; and one for electronics and small work. Nothing like a good tool...

So, too, with money. It comes in many forms and each one serves a purpose.

Following the advice of my co-workers, I bought a Benchmade knife. I learned a lot about knives. Long, long ago, the Whole Earth Catalog ("Access to Tools") taught that in an earlier day, a mechanic was hired on the basis of the tools he made for himself.

Have you ever made your own money? I have. Several times.

(Interesting topic... I think this bears discussion...)

I agree that many other labels carry the same meaning (generally) and also bring forward a "nicer" nuance. "Personal enterprise" is easy to propose and hard to oppose. I don't like "free market" (though I do use "free enterprise") because "free"
can mean "no cost" which is confusing in the "market" sense. I prefer "open market.

The thing with baggage though - capitalism and selfishness in particular - is that it certainly opens the door to discussion as you and your interlocutors "take out" and "inspect" each "item" in the baggage.

The phrase "free market" carries much less baggage than the word "capitalism", which has been degraded by its avowed enemies and alleged friends alike. I never use the word "capitalism" as an ideological term when discussing economics or politics.

Years ago as I was passing by a panhandler, he asked, "Do you worship God or money?" I replied "neither" and walked on. Looking back, I wonder if that was his standard opening line and what kind of responses he typically received from those passing by.

I wonder if it's because -ism and -ist sometimes mean abuse of the thing: e.g. Islamism, racism, alcoholism.

I could see how it could sound like capital is the means of production and capitalism is abusing the means of production by having them privately owned. I obviously don't advocate changing the language in favor of euphony as in 1984, but I personally like the sound of "free enterprise" better than "capitalism".

My favorite PCism along this vein is calling privatization "personalization", which sounds much cozier.

To some it is a goal. They want more and more but have no plan to use it for anything,. Not a tool , just something to be held and worshiped.

Money is a tool, not a goal.

We have an equal and opposite problem with "capitalism." Ayn Rand called it "the unknown ideal" but many libertarians stretch for phrases such as "personal enterprise" or "open market" rather than the love of money that dares not speak its own name.