Capitalism Doesn't Work... So What Would?

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Mathew's long video link is basically warmed over and rework communistic idealism, but has some good history of the CIA's + United Fruit's role in the suppression of democracy in many South American nations and also some valid criticisms of the Flaws in fractional banking, but is very naive faith in technology to end all scarcity and thus abolish money, rule by the rich and powerful, the need for laws, religion, etc. (About only "ultimate soviet man" idea they forgot was Lenin's comment that someday the main use of gold would be to make the brick floors of public bathrooms.)

They do not address at all who or how desirable things, inherently limited in supply, (like a house on a bluff overlooking the ocean) will be allocated. As Malthus noted long ago, sex is popular and especially in a society where everyone's material desires are free so are children to comfort you when you are old. Thus, soon in such an idealistic "everything free" by technology producing the good society, there will be a standing room only.

They are also is very confused by not recognizing that independent of money there are real costs to everything. In economic terms, even in a "no-money, resource society" there is still the "opportunity cost." For example, if some oil is used to make plastic A it cannot be used to make plastic B.

Their answer to need for energy is "solar + geothermal" but there are real cost to all of these. (Geothermal especially when it is hot sulfur and arsenic rich brine water that the heat is in.) Solar energy IS more expensive than coal fired electricity already. If the coal were free as they say all resources should be do you think that would make the decision makers abandon coal? They are simple minded ideologs beyond belief, who think the problems are all caused by money. I.e. they do not understand that there is "low hanging fruit" and fruit more difficult to take. All will want the more easily obtained fruit - conflict will not disappear nor will laws if money did. Money, or some means of allocating resources to their highest use is essential. I sure do not want these fuzzy thinking idealists to allocate the global resources. IMHO they would screw the world up more than regulated democratic capitalism has.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I actually agree with you. I think the video went too far with the everything being free idea, but I think they are on the right track as far as there basic ideals are concerned, as well as their insight into what's wrong with America today.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

If that is true (ie, that all economic systems have the same flaws), then why endorse one over the other?

 

Work for whom?

 

If you had as much acquaintance with history as you pretend to have, you would know without being told that history is nothing if not a narrative of supposed impossibilities coming to pass.

Your second paragraph does not advance your reputation as a thinker either, to put it mildly. Slave societies 'stood the test of time' for thousands of years before giving way (or, to be more accurate, being driven underground; considering our trade deficits with modern slave societies, it would not be a stretch to say that our civilisation and lifestyles are still propped up by slavery and serfdom). Even were this not the case, you have advanced a truly jaw-dropping contortion of logic in your assertion that since other economic forms have failed after centuries in existence, that capitalism is therefore the only correct system, since, having existed for less time, it has not failed yet.

If you are registered to vote, please unregister.

 

Wal*Mart arguably has the most successful rags-to-riches tale of all, and yet they have only become more vicious, misanthropic, and destructive as they have increased efficiency over the years. This highlights the basically rapacious and antisocial nature of top-tier capitalism.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by your second statement. What sort of competition do you mean?

 

Sorry about the confusion. Poor use of an analogy on my part.

All I was really trying to say is that the American system is inefficient and unfair, and the government as a whole seems to have no incentive to fix this problem.

 

Sorry, but you make it painfully clear that you don't understand nearly as much as you are pretending you do. For one thing, it does not require "centuries" to prove that capitalism is superior to all of the other economic models that have been tried in just the last century alone.

You would appear much wiser if you put a little more thought into your rash statements before making them.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I have noticed a problem here. What is meant when people say capitalism? Is it pure capitalism, regulated capitalism, socialistic capitalism, or capitalism in all it forms? It seems to me people are throwing the word around but everyone is interperting it as it being used according to how they themselves are using it.

 

That's quite true, but it's not really a problem at all.

Why? Because there isn't any such thing as "pure" capitalism. It will always contain some the elements you mentioned.

In fact, it's quite obvious that it's in different forms in every country. Compare the U.S. with England, Sweden, Russia, China and any other country you'd care to list. You'll fine more regualtion in some, more socialism in some and on and on...

 

Right. Not only no incentive, but counter-incentive to repairing the vile corruption.

 

I correctly shined the light on your logical absurdities. Now, justly rebuked, you are advancing an entirely different line of reasoning, with different premisses. If you want to attempt proving that capitalism is superior to all other economic models this century, no one is stopping you. But you must also define what you mean by capitalism and superior.

 

Matthew 809, please PM me.

 

You did no such thing. And it's neither my purpose or intent to prove anything here. I'll let history speak for itself in terms of failed systems.

 

When I started this thread I made the mistake of grouping everything wrong with the American system under the label of "capitalism". Sorry about that moment of stupidity(must be the fluoride in the water). In the title, I also made the mistake of stating that this system "doesn't work", which is another inaccuracy. It actually does work- just not very efficiently or fairly, and also not the way that the general population believes it does. So, here's the new official thread title:

"The American System is a Disgrace...We Must Redesign it"

 

And we are - constantly. It's a naturally evolving process.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

good point...

"The American System is a Disgrace...We Must Redesign it" - another bad thread title. Let me try again:

"The American System is Not Getting Any Better...In Fact it's Getting Much Worse...So Instead of Letting the System Naturally Evolve, Maybe We Should Utilize our Brains and Redesign the System to Make it Better"

 

That "getting much worse" is just a subjective opinion - probably based on recent events.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

If you look at it objectivly, we ARE using our brains and making it better. Compare today with the 1950s. Compare that time period with the 1940s. Then check that against the 1920s - especially the end of that decade. And continue the process just as far back as you'd like to go. You'll find tons of improvement - quite a bit at every single step of the way.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

And we aren't through yet. The next round of banking regualtions should go a long way toward preventing the mess we have today. And beyond that, we'll still keep improving...

 

More and more regulations are not the answer. You can only patch a boat so many times before it sinks. I think all these regulations are part of the problem. For example, it's estimated to cost American businesses around 500 billion dollars a year just to comply with our increasingly complicated tax codes. All that money is just lost into our economy. Or.... more specifically, all that cost of tax code compliance gets transferred down to the consumer, stockholders, and employees. They are the ones who really pay the price.

Don't get me started on the tax system...