Capitalism...What's so good about it?

[Gillipig]

Why is capitalism so good again?

[warmonger1981]

Fractional reserve banking. Its a great scam.

[daddy1gringo]

It's not. Socialism and communism are morally superior to capitalism. The problem is that we as a human race are not morally superior. That's the only advantage of capitalism: if you are trying to solve our economic problems, you have to base your solutions on its principles, because it is the truth about what real people do with their real money in the real world. It's the ugly truth, but the truth nonetheless.

[Dukasaur]

Why is capitalism so good again?

Capitalism brought about the Industrial Revolution, which allowed for the exponential increase in material wealth that we have seen since then.

Maybe that's not a good thing. Maybe today's society with its grotesque materialistic excess is not the best of all possible worlds, but I personally believe that as decadent and wasteful as our modern society is, it is still preferable to the life of constant crushing, grinding poverty that was most people's fate in pre-industrial times.

[mrswdk]

Socialism and communism are morally superior to capitalism.

lolk

I guess you live by a moral code that is tolerant of widespread starvation occurring as the result of an under-performing agricultural sector.

Hey, sometimes you have to break 30 million eggs to make an omelette!

[chang50]

Socialism and communism are morally superior to capitalism.

lolk

I guess you live by a moral code that is tolerant of widespread starvation occurring as the result of an under-performing agricultural sector.

Hey, sometimes you have to break 30 million eggs to make an omelette!

Wow,don't you think he was referring to the theory of socialism and communism as opposed to the practice which everyone knows has been an unmitigated disaster???

[Gillipig]

Socialism and communism are morally superior to capitalism.

lolk

I guess you live by a moral code that is tolerant of widespread starvation occurring as the result of an under-performing agricultural sector.

Hey, sometimes you have to break 30 million eggs to make an omelette!

Wow,don't you think he was referring to the theory of socialism and communism as opposed to the practice which everyone knows has been an unmitigated disaster???

Socialism hasn't been a disaster, Sweden is largely socialst and it's functioning a lot better than the USA.

[mrswdk]

Socialism and communism are morally superior to capitalism.

lolk

I guess you live by a moral code that is tolerant of widespread starvation occurring as the result of an under-performing agricultural sector.

Hey, sometimes you have to break 30 million eggs to make an omelette!

Wow,don't you think he was referring to the theory of socialism and communism as opposed to the practice which everyone knows has been an unmitigated disaster???

So it's morally superior to advocate a system that cannot be put into effect without decimating whichever economy adopts it?

[mrswdk]

I mean, sure, a utopia in which smiling farmers and factory workers all give an honest day's labor and then divide their produce evenly amongst themselves is the 'nicest' scenario, but it's totally unattainable and this fantasy is therefore a moot point.

The reality is that communism is a total oasis. It is a destructive system justified by the promise of something that will never be achieved, and I don't see what is 'moral' about advocating that.

[daddy1gringo]

Socialism and communism are morally superior to capitalism.

lolk

I guess you live by a moral code that is tolerant of widespread starvation occurring as the result of an under-performing agricultural sector.

Hey, sometimes you have to break 30 million eggs to make an omelette!

Wow,don't you think he was referring to the theory of socialism and communism as opposed to the practice which everyone knows has been an unmitigated disaster???

So it's morally superior to advocate a system that cannot be put into effect without decimating whichever economy adopts it?

I agree with you. Chang was right about where I was coming from: theoretically they are morally superior, the problem is that they don't work out in the real world, as I said. You and I agree. Trust me; I don't advocate communism or socialism.

I mean, sure, a utopia in which smiling farmers and factory workers all give an honest day's labor and then divide their produce evenly amongst themselves is the 'nicest' scenario, but it's totally unattainable and this fantasy is therefore a moot point.

The reality is that communism is a total oasis. It is a destructive system justified by the promise of something that will never be achieved, and I don't see what is 'moral' about advocating that.

My point exactly. Btw, you should edit "oasis" to "mirage". A mirage is an optical illusion of water that isn't really there. An oasis is a good thing: a small place with water and vegetation in the middle of a desert. It sounds like you are advocating communism.

[patches70]

Why capitalism is good is also why it's also bad, to certain people. It all depends on the individual.

With capitalism, it doesn't matter under what circumstances one was born, what social group they belong, what minority they belong, if an individual has some talent or skill they can use that talent and skill to better their lives. That is their labors and their natural gifts are their own.

If we think back on the old days of serfdom, if one was a serf it didn't matter if that serf had better ideas, invented something or has some talent, their labors would be stolen if even bothered with at all by those in the higher classes.

Communism all of one's skills and talents are owned by The State, and thus the individual is effectively robbed. The guy who invented the AK47, in recognition of his invention of the most widely used weapon in the history of the world, he got a nice little cabin, small plot of land and a monthly stipend. He wasn't poor (compared to the rest of his countrymen) and he certainly wasn't rich.

Had he invented the AK47 under a capitalist system he'd have found himself fabulously rich, maybe.


Just because one has certain talents, ideas or whatever, doesn't instantly translate into success. It all depends on the individual. Some individuals squander the gifts they have. Some just don't have the right mindset to get wealth from their ideas. An example of the latter is Tesla, arguably one of the smartest human beings to have ever graced this green Earth. He invented some incredible things, not the least of which is the electric motor which is still used to this very day in virtually every power tool built and used. Imagine just receiving a single penny in royalty for each and every electric motor used in all types of inventions that couldn't be without that electric motor.
But Tesla died penniless and destitute. He just didn't care about getting rich, but others certainly got rich off his inventions.

Capitalism, as well as any other system one can name, can't eliminate fraud, cheating and other things that lead to the exploitation of individuals gifts, labor and sweat. But capitalism is a good basis to motivate individuals to come up with new ideas, new products, new entertainment and everything else. The promise of wealth, in line with the contributions one makes.

Capitalism isn't perfect, that's certainly true enough, but more people have been brought out of poverty under capitalism than any other system. What is the point of coming up with a new idea that changes everything if one isn't even going to be compensated fairly for that idea?
In communism one's labors are stolen by The State. That's not to say the same thing can't or doesn't happen in capitalism, such thefts have happened all the time (just look at Tesla). But communism is the idea that one's labors, ideas, intellectual property, are not owned by one's self, that such things are owned by The State. That's bullshit!

Now if you are an individual that happens to be born with virtually no talents, or are too lazy, irresponsible or otherwise impaired to be unable/unwilling to learn skills, then capitalism will be very harsh with that individual.

In a nation of at best mediocre people, capitalism won't be a good mistress. Communism on the other hand might be the right recipe for such people.

Capitalism cannot eliminate fraud, or theft. Communism is systemic fraud and theft. Capitalism, despite it's flaws, is typically a better alternative than communism, but capitalism is not the end all of how things should be.

After all, if men were angels we wouldn't need capitalism, communism or even government. But men aren't angels, so a system that rewards hard work, good ideas and valuable skills and punishes idleness, poor ideas (and investments!**) and eliminates unneeded skills is better than any system that insists that all of one's labors and pursuits belongs to the society at large by default.

Your ideas are your own. Your labors are your own. And we should live within a system that allows people to use those skills and talents they possess to better their own life and the lives of their families. In that way it benefits everyone, the society at large as well. Being born a serf and being forced to remain a serf despite one's talents is immoral, and frankly evil (by today's standards).

Back in the old days a knight or royalty would just cut your throat if you stepped out of line, even if the line you are taking is wiser and better than your betters. One can be the wisest serf ever, but the wisest serf ever will still just be a serf and who's lot in life will never substantially improve, no matter how good that wise serf's ideas and talents are. Because such endeavors will always be confiscated and otherwise stolen because those efforts don't belong to the wise serf, they belong to his rulers.


Capitalism rejects that idea. Hell, you don't even have to be smart to improve your life under capitalism, just look at Miley Cyrus to see that's true! But things like nepotism, theft and fraud still exist even under capitalism or any other ism one wishes to use.

Which is a shame. But I suppose that's the human condition. All any of us can do, really, no matter what "ism" they may live under, is to muddle through life the best we can. But I for one say that your labors belong to you, to use as you see fit to improve your lot in life. Or not if that's your wish, so long as you don't interfere in my or other's pursuits, squander away if one wises. Just don't come taking my stuff because you think you don't have enough or that life hasn't been fair to you. I struggle under the same conditions.



**The bailout back in 2008-2009 was a travesty of justice. Bush wasn't kidding when he said "I had to abandon free market ideas to save the free market". That wasn't capitalism, that was the opposite and it was pure theft. Those institutions that made bad investment decisions should have paid the price for their bad decisions. Instead those bad investments and decisions were rewarded. The elites would not admit that it was merely the markets correcting for bad investments that should never have been made in the first place!
That's what markets do, punish bad decisions and reward good decisions. By bailing out the failures Bush wasn't saving the free market, he was destroying it.
All to protect people who have been using forms of theft to steal the labors of people for years. It was a sickening episode and shows just how far we have strayed from the ideals of capitalism and free markets.

[AndyDufresne]

Someone make the following topic: "Jism...What's so good about it?"


--Andy

[Army of GOD]

wait, daddygringo supports communism over capitalism?


I thought he was a conservative all this time...

[mrswdk]

Ah, touché.

MIRAGE is the word I was looking for

[kuthoer]

Communism all of one's skills and talents are owned by The State, and thus the individual is effectively robbed. The guy who invented the AK47, in recognition of his invention of the most widely used weapon in the history of the world, he got a nice little cabin, small plot of land and a monthly stipend. He wasn't poor (compared to the rest of his countrymen) and he certainly wasn't rich.

Had he invented the AK47 under a capitalist system he'd have found himself fabulously rich, maybe.

....maybe, unless he invented the weapon as an employee of a gun manufacturer. So, instead of the state getting the profits, the company does. Capitalism and Communism has it's structural flaws for the little people.

Socialism at least tries to balance the playing field for ordinary people.

[daddy1gringo]

wait, daddygringo supports communism over capitalism?


I thought he was a conservative all this time...

Gaaaa! Read the exchange between me and mrswdk, or shoot, just read more of my original post than just the first sentence. Yes, you were right "all this time", and no, I don't support communism.

[notyou2]

Communism would be good in an ideal world, but the problem is humans. We need to live in a communist world run by machines not people.

[kuthoer]

Communism would be good in an ideal world, but the problem is humans. We need to live in a communist world run by machines not people.

Eventually humans will become machines and they'll be no need for Capitalism or religion.

[macbone]

Oh, there's a lot of stuff capitalism's good for.



How else is some duck going to be able to acquire three cubic acres of cash?

[Phatscotty]

Oh, there's a lot of stuff capitalism's good for.



How else is some duck going to be able to acquire three cubic acres of cash?

and

[Gillipig]

Oh, there's a lot of stuff capitalism's good for.



How else is some duck going to be able to acquire three cubic acres of cash?

and

Very important stuff, how could we live without the newest gadgets? You my good sir have successfully convinced me! I am now crazy about capitalism!!

[Gillipig]

Why is capitalism so good again?

Capitalism brought about the Industrial Revolution, which allowed for the exponential increase in material wealth that we have seen since then.

Maybe that's not a good thing. Maybe today's society with its grotesque materialistic excess is not the best of all possible worlds, but I personally believe that as decadent and wasteful as our modern society is, it is still preferable to the life of constant crushing, grinding poverty that was most people's fate in pre-industrial times.

Scientists brought about the inventions that made the industrial revolution possible, they did the important part, the part that no other group could do. Then private companies took advantage of these inventions in some countries and in others the government built the railroads etc. Capitalism was not neccesary for the industrial revolution, it arguably sped up the process but there's no reason why a none capitalistic society couldn't make use of scientific inventions that benefit it's citizens in various ways.

[mrswdk]

Capitalism was not neccesary for the industrial revolution, it arguably sped up the process but there's no reason why a none capitalistic society couldn't make use of scientific inventions that benefit it's citizens in various ways.

[Gillipig]

Capitalism was not neccesary for the industrial revolution, it arguably sped up the process but there's no reason why a none capitalistic society couldn't make use of scientific inventions that benefit it's citizens in various ways.

Excellent argument! Very graphic!

[tzor]

Why is capitalism so good again?

Well in "capitalism" you have this thing called "capital" and that's a "capital idea!"

Capitalism is owning and using "capital." Everything else is propaganda and fluff. People often confuse "free market" with "capitalism." Can't say I blame them; some people find math hard. Some people find logic hard. Some people find reason hard. Some people are progressives. But I have been repeating myself; they are the same people.