What comes after capitalism ?

scorpius said:
Click to expand...

Near death experiencer Dannion Brinkley was shown that the next step was something he referred to as Spiritual Capitalism... or Spiritualistic Capitalism.

I think that near death experiencer Howard Storm was shown more about what that would look like.

https://www.near-death.com/religion/christianity/howard-storm.html#a04

The image of the future that they gave me then, and it was their image, not one that I created, surprised me. My image had previously been sort of like Star Wars, where everything was space age, plastics, and technology.



The future that they showed me was almost no technology at all. What everybody, absolutely everybody, in this euphoric future spent most of their time doing was raising children. The chief concern of people was children, and everybody considered children to be the most precious commodity in the world.



And when a person became an adult, there was no sense of anxiety, nor hatred, nor competition.



There was this enormous sense of trust and mutual respect. If a person, in this view of the future, became disturbed, then the community of people all cared about the disturbed person falling away from the harmony of the group. Spiritually, through prayer and love, the others would elevate the afflicted person.



What people did with the rest of their time was that they gardened, with almost no physical effort. They showed me that plants, with prayer, would produce huge fruits and vegetables.



People, in unison, could control the climate of the planet through prayer. Everybody would work with mutual trust and the people would call the rain, when needed, and the sun to shine.



Animals lived with people, in harmony.



People, in this best of all worlds, weren't interested in knowledge; they were interested in wisdom. This was because they were in a position where anything they needed to know, in the knowledge category, they could receive simply through prayer. Everything, to them, was solvable. They could do anything they wanted to do.
Click to expand...
 
No other system will replace capitalism. The idea of big corporations giving 10% or more or less to help poverty in other countries is not happening and won't happen. Right now still the system where 67 cents a day will provide food and medicines to the needed.

Capitalism was born since day one when societies became to be. It has survived rough eras and still is the system leader in the world.

Perhaps a worldwide disaster changes it into cooperativeness, but always someone will try to make profit over the work made by the others.
 
Our future will see systems that blend capitalism, authoritarianism, pure democracy, barter economies, socialism - most -isms. Just as we have now. The emphasis will change but the mix will stay about the same.
 
billvon said:
Our future will see systems that blend capitalism, authoritarianism, pure democracy, barter economies, socialism - most -isms. Just as we have now. The emphasis will change but the mix will stay about the same.
Click to expand...

How would a system like I was there about
  • a person would only be able to OWN 1 company
  • totally responsible for everything going on in said company
  • I MEAN EVERYTHING
  • ALL people employed by owner have shares in company
  • NO-ONE CAN HOLD SHARES UNLESS EMPLOYED BY COMPANY
Few more regs but those are the few top ones

Build on those. Other rules I am thinking about might answer any objections

:)
 
Michael 345 said:
  • a person would only be able to OWN 1 company
  • totally responsible for everything going on in said company
  • I MEAN EVERYTHING
  • ALL people employed by owner have shares in company
  • NO-ONE CAN HOLD SHARES UNLESS EMPLOYED BY COMPANY
Click to expand...
Your first, second and fourth points are in direct conflict with each other. If one person owns a company, and is totally responsible for it, then no one else can own part of it.
 
billvon said:
Your first, second and fourth points are in direct conflict with each other. If one person owns a company, and is totally responsible for it, then no one else can own part of it.
Click to expand...

They don't own part of the company. They are paid a wage from the profits

Yes shares not the best term to use

In Australia at the moment Health Care Funds are looking to cut back paying for certain operations as well as increasing payments

While the Government does to a certain extent keep increases in payments down they are still have been more than the rate of inflation

Each of the 4 main have made profits, just not as much as shareholders are used to

Answer from the funds - cut some services we have paid for in the past. One service being mentioned, hip replacement

Don't know what, what I call fringe benefits, the situation is with those. Things like gym membership and acupuncture for crying out loud

:)
 
Michael 345 said:
They don't own part of the company. They are paid a wage from the profits

Yes shares not the best term to use

In Australia at the moment Health Care Funds are looking to cut back paying for certain operations as well as increasing payments

While the Government does to a certain extent keep increases in payments down they are still have been more than the rate of inflation

Each of the 4 main have made profits, just not as much as shareholders are used to

Answer from the funds - cut some services we have paid for in the past. One service being mentioned, hip replacement

Don't know what, what I call fringe benefits, the situation is with those. Things like gym membership and acupuncture for crying out loud

:)
Click to expand...
Maybe you meant profit sharing rather than owning shares?
 
billvon said:
OK. So if there are a few years where there are no profits, they don't get paid? That's fair, but is going to be hard for many workers.
Click to expand...
As it is currently when businesses go bankrupt or there is a loss of business due to another company built a better widget

:)
 
Michael 345 said:
As it is currently when businesses go bankrupt or there is a loss of business due to another company built a better widget
Click to expand...
Right. But that will still happen on occasion. But under your system, the employee could be going to work every day, doing a great job, working hard - and still not get paid because the company isn't making a profit yet.

Tesla, for example, went something like eight years before it made a profit. Can most people afford to work for eight years with no pay, even if the eventual payoff is very large?
 
O
billvon said:
Right. But that will still happen on occasion. But under your system, the employee could be going to work every day, doing a great job, working hard - and still not get paid because the company isn't making a profit yet.

Tesla, for example, went something like eight years before it made a profit. Can most people afford to work for eight years with no pay, even if the eventual payoff is very large?
Click to expand...

Will think about but first idea comes to mind is savings

:)
 
Seattle said:
Do the ultra poor have jobs? How do your suggestions do that? Why do that? How about just improve the lives of the poor?
Click to expand...
So many questions, so wait until I flesh it out a bit

Do the ultra poor have jobs?

In Bali there are people who go around collecting plastic bottles they take to recycling
England is it a job collecting safety net

How do your suggestions do that?

Since the system would have grown on a planet far far away question non applicable

Could we transition to such a new system???? a better question

How about just improve the lives of the poor?

How about we don't have ultra poor whose lives do not require massive improvement but if capable they improve to their capacity

:)
 
I don't really know where you are going with this? It's not hard to make it into a middle class life if that's what you want to do.

It's got nothing to do with those wealthier than you. You don't need to change the current system.

Jeff Bezos doesn't take money away from his employees with a ridiculous salary. His wealth comes from starting a business and then holding the stock. Investors buy the stock, that's where his money comes from, not from taking it from his employees.

If people like him don't start businesses that grow that fast and large then the economy is a smaller place. That doesn't help the poor either.

Government can regulate and tax. How does any of that make the economy better? It doesn't. Bernie Sanders (for example) has picked a fight with Bezos for not paying his workers enough. The starting wage at Amazon for the lowest paid worker is $15/hr. In Sander's state of Vermont it's $11/hr.

Amazon workers start with full benefits. Sanders has also picked fights with Elon Musk. Look at how many companies Elon has started and at how many people he employs. Who is doing more for the economy Sanders or Musk? It's not even close.

Are you trying to envision a world where someone can collect plastic bottles and support a family of 4?
 
Seattle said:
Government can regulate and tax. How does any of that make the economy better?
Click to expand...
Taxation allows roads to be built. Roads allow people to get to jobs that are not within walking distance of their homes.
Regulation allows radio stations, mobile phone companies and satellite providers to provide services to people.

To use two simple examples.
 
billvon said:
Taxation allows roads to be built. Roads allow people to get to jobs that are not within walking distance of their homes.
Regulation allows radio stations, mobile phone companies and satellite providers to provide services to people.

To use two simple examples.
Click to expand...
Yes, I get it but Bernie lecturing Musk makes no sense, wouldn't you agree?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top