Opinion Do you think Capitalism is good or bad? What would you replace it with?

[Starman]

Oh! I see you don't want answers, just validation of your opinions. Goodbye.

No. I want real, actual answers. Not just links you never read. Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Nancy.

 

[Gandhi]

Honestly, the fact that this single chart doesn't end this entire discussion is a testament to the true power of cognitive dissonance and just how much these sorts of debate are about scoring political points and how little they are about actually being concerned for the well-being of others.

Or one could at least address the chart.

Devils advocate counter is to say this is less about markets than it is about China stealing IP and productive capacity through a highly regulated economy to impoverish the west. Or about India stealing well paying tech jobs.

I don’t agree with those arguments, but at least they step up to the plate. Instead we can get ill defined fantasies about command economies and rants about locusts.

 

[eternaldarkness]

Time to get off the net and start your hunter gatherer existence.

Already doing it.

 

[eternaldarkness]

I guess I'm not as smart as you, I can tell you are by the way you got emotional and called me a cunt for having a different opinion.

Whaaaaa! Dey pickin' on me...

 

[eternaldarkness]

It's funny he can get away with it because it's directed at people who aren't in lockstep with our left-wing moderators' viewpoints.

I've been yellow-carded for far less.

Notice the lovely yellows. Also I couldn't care about left or right. I'm all for the eradication of the human race.

 

[eternaldarkness]

Reported, due to criminal ignorance.

 

[Ultra O’Dia]

i think Capitalism is a wonderful model for towns, where there is face to face accountability.

It doesnt work over a huge country, and it sure doesnt work globally.

The smaller the market the more it is about earned reputation. The bigger the market it becomes about who can pay for advertisements - whether that is buying off a doctor, a study, or paying for a Superbowl timeslot.

 

[Senzo Tanaka]

There's no perfect system. I favor a highly regulated form of capitalism.

- Individual/private transactions are private
- Banks would be split into individual banking and corporate banking. This would end speculation and people losing their entire savings thanks to Wall Street.
- Every Wall Street transaction would be taxed and used for UBI
- Anti-outsourcing law. If you operate a business in the U.S., you must hire local workers. If you outsource, you get fined every dollar you would have saved by hiring locally, lose all federal grants, funding and tax breaks. (This is a major loophole to the minimum wage in the sake of extreme corporate profits).

That's it in a nutshell. I think capitalism is the best system we've come up with but without regulation, it runs amok and we end up with a society where the top 1% own everything and will do anything for increased profit.

 

[Starman]

Notice the lovely yellows. Also I couldn't care about left or right. I'm all for the eradication of the human race.

Start with yourself.

 

[eternaldarkness]

Start with yourself.

I notice you couldn't refute the post about expansionism. What company do you work for, I'm willing to bet they profit from the destruction of other cultures...

 

[Gandhi]

Already doing it.

Or it’s being done for you

 

[Starman]

I notice you couldn't refute the post about expansionism. What company do you work for, I'm willing to bet they profit from the destruction of other cultures...

There’s nothing to refute. You’re ignorant and uneducated, deep in your feelings, lashing out at people because you hate your father and blame the world for your own failings.

 

[jeremyemilio]

You dumb cunt. Not everything is about the economy, that is the entire point of this thread...

Wait... but... wasn't it Marx who said that everything is about the economy?

And isn't "the entire point of this thread" to propose a world in which all that government does is micro-manage the economy?

 

[bowened]

I'm just wondering what other posters here think of Capitalism. I believe in hundreds of years, that Capitalism will be looked at as the most destructive system ever devised.

Capitalism leads to competition in a free market, which leads to corporations finding ways to give us cheaper products. They often use cheap and toxic materials to maximize profit, which jeopardizes our health. It also leads to massive incentive for growth, which in turn leads to massive expansion of business. Ergo, businesses will find ways to cut corners with no regard for the destruction of the environment. We've already seen the amount of devastation large corporations have caused this planet via oil spills, unsafe materials, toxic byproducts and pollutants, etc.

Food quality will inevitably will go down. We can barely find food that hasn't been poisoned by contaminants and pesticides, and the water is not safe to drink in many areas, mainly because of competition in the agricultural sector, forcing farmers to use poisonous chemicals to yield more crops in order to be able to compete with other businesses.

Capitalism is a designed to keep those at the top in power while creating massive wealth inequality. Any system that revolves around money will inevitably lead to corruption and destruction.

It will never be the best solution because it will always cater to the more intelligent and capable. This is something I don't agree with. I don't feel that a man with a 90iq should have to slave his existence away for no other reason than he may not be smart enough to do better.

A better system

In my view the best society would be something like a socialist meritocracy. People would have their skills recognized and career opportunities would offered based off your individual skill set. The most intelligent would be groomed for engineering, medical practices, scientific fields etc. Those with lesser intellectual abilities would be offered lesser positions, yet, everyone would still be considered equals and share similar lifestyles. Those in more advanced fields would be treated and compensated the same as those in minor positions such as a janitor, for intelligence should not dictate your quality of life in a society. As long as you contribute, that's what should be important. You contribute to the best of your abilities.

Nobody would be forced to work in a field they don't want to work in, and flexibility in terms of career changes should be possible. You should be able to work any position you want as long as there are openings in the field and you are intellectually capable.

We should have free healthcare and education, as well as the elimination of currency. Food should be produced to the highest quality and distributed through massive food distribution centers which could be more easily monitored with less waste. We should grow food indoors to eliminate the need for pesticides as there would be no reason to use it in a secure environment.

This system encapsulates the ideology of the best man for the job, while still giving the best possible life to those who are less capable. It also gives freedom of choice for a career, better educational opportunities, and the highest quality food to keep us healthy.

My wife and I are busting our asses so we can make some extra money this year and buy a nice truck and take our family on a killer ski vacation.

In your setting, we don’t have to put in extra work; we just have to put in a “reasonability” request with the Czar who ultimately decides if we can do that or not? Is that how it works?

 

[jeremyemilio]

I know it's not a small thing. He wasn't exactly pointing out glaring problems, he was rambling on with long winded sentences about cow tongues and fillet mignon, am I supposed to take that seriously?

I'm not writing people off when they say it's not possible, I just don't agree with it. I'm ok with having a difference of opinion. Why must I have the answer to every problem? Implementing a system like that would not be something I or any one person could do alone, it would take a collective effort from many very smart people with innovate new ideas. Those ideas would have to be refined and improved over time in order to solve all the unforeseen problems that could arise. I'm not saying it's a perfect system either, it's just my vision of a better world, whether you believe in it or not. I don't believe there is such thing as a perfect system, and perfect is a subjective term defined by the individual, as different people have different notions of what a perfect world would look like.

Honestly? That's what you got from that? That I was "rambling on" about cow tongues and fillet mignon?

I was isolating a single, relatively simple production and consumption issue, as an extremely basic case study to test your system and see how it dealt with limited supply of highly desired products and oversupply of much less desirable products.

The actual product doesn't matter. What matters is how your proposed system deals with the most fundamental reality of how the world works:

Some things are scarce. Others are abundant.
Some things are more in demand. Others are less in demand.

Capitalism deals with this reality through pricing. How does your system deal with this reality?

"Who gets the fillet mignon and who gets the cow tongue?" is just one of a trillion similar questions.

"Who gets the new Ferrari and who gets the second hand Corolla?" works just as well.

Or do people all get the same car every number of years, with no second hand car market?

Capitalism has an answer for this question, too.

Why doesn't your system have an answer for any of these trillions of very basic questions? Are you going to create a committee of meat distribution and a committee of car distribution and a committee of cell phone distribution and on and on? Seems like it would collapse in on itself.

 

[JoeyJoeJoeJr]

My wife and I are busting our asses so we can make some extra money this year and buy a nice truck and take our family on a killer ski vacation.

In your setting, we don’t have to put in extra work; we just have to put in a “reasonability” request with the Czar who ultimately decides if we can do that or not? Is that how it works?

I would say that unless you're planning on taxing the system in some way, there would be no request, have at it. If the vacation requires travel by plane or boat, we would probably have to set reasonable limitations. You cant be flying by plane across the world on ski trips all the time, it would be too taxing on the system. However, if you wanted to drive up to the mountains and ski, I would say you could do that any time you want in your free time. Why not? Ultimately a ski trip is just gliding down some mountains, its not exactly a huge burden on anything.

 

[Koro_11]

Notice the lovely yellows. Also I couldn't care about left or right. I'm all for the eradication of the human race.

I have a simple solution for dummies who think like you, just off yourself and the problem is solved.

I never get the types who talk about there being too many people or us being some type of disease to the planet. It’s like, motherfucker if that’s how you feel then lead by example and just check out.

 

[JoeyJoeJoeJr]

Honestly? That's what you got from that? That I was "rambling on" about cow tongues and fillet mignon?

I was isolating a single, relatively simple production and consumption issue, as an extremely basic case study to test your system and see how it dealt with limited supply of highly desired products and oversupply of much less desirable products.

The actual product doesn't matter. What matters is how your proposed system deals with the most fundamental reality of how the world works:

Some things are scarce. Others are abundant.
Some things are more in demand. Others are less in demand.

Capitalism deals with this reality through pricing. How does your system deal with this reality?

"Who gets the fillet mignon and who gets the cow tongue?" is just one of a trillion similar questions.

"Who gets the new Ferrari and who gets the second hand Corolla?" works just as well.

Or do people all get the same car every number of years, with no second hand car market?

Capitalism has an answer for this question, too.

Why doesn't your system have an answer for any of these trillions of very basic questions? Are you going to create a committee of meat distribution and a committee of car distribution and a committee of cell phone distribution and on and on? Seems like it would collapse in on itself.

I've already given my explanation on how it would work, if you won't accept it, I cant help you. You're acting as if introducing some kind of universal system for food is impossible, could never be done, would never work, I really don't understand it. I think you really need to get an imagination.
Also, you want me to answer every one of your questions with off the cuff suggestions so you can pick it apart and say, "Uh Huh!!, See, It would all collapse!". I already said It would take tremendous planning and everything would have to be worked out and improved over time.
I don't see the issues as impossibilities the way you do. I just see them as obstacles that we could overcome if we really wanted to change the way we live. The system would have answers to all of these questions, I just don't have them all because nobody can create such a complex system on their own.

Now you can write me another long winded paragraph about how I'm wrong, something about cow tongues, and who gets the fillet mignon. Take care.

 

[jeremyemilio]

I've already given my explanation on how it would work, if you won't accept it, I cant help you. You're acting as if introducing some kind of universal system for food is impossible, could never be done, would never work, I really don't understand it. I think you really need to get an imagination.
Also, you want me to answer every one of your questions with off the cuff suggestions so you can pick it apart and say, "Uh Huh!!, See, It would all collapse!". I already said It would take tremendous planning and everything would have to be worked out and improved over time.
I don't see the issues as impossibilities the way you do. I just see them as obstacles that we could overcome if we really wanted to change the way we live. The system would have answers to all of these questions, I just don't have them all because nobody can create such a complex system on their own.

Now you can write me another long winded paragraph about how I'm wrong, something about cow tongues, and who gets the fillet mignon. Take care.

You've explained nothing. So here's your chance to finally do so.

Nothing long winded.

You butcher a cow. How do you decide who gets the fillet mignon and who gets the cow tongue?

Simple. Basic.

If your proposed system doesn't even have an answer for that, I would suggest you don't have a system.

 

[terrapin]

We have just got to realize that the entire setup is just a game and although some people do better at the game than others and always will be need to set it up so that its fun for everyone.