Capitalism Sucks

[Revoltingest]

I have to agree capitalism's time is quickly coming to an end. Capitalism, Communism, socialism, everything we currently understand and practice through models of industry is being rendered obsolete by technology.
Truly we need something new to meet the needs and demands of a new world with vastly new technology.

Already living in the Star Trek age, eh.
That too is a hypothetical construct.
One big solar flare, & this technology will grind to a halt.
Then you'll need antique engines to run factories.
That makes manual labor valuable, with the return of
19th century capitalism.

 

[Laika]

I have to agree capitalism's time is quickly coming to an end. Capitalism, Communism, socialism, everything we currently understand and practice through models of industry is being rendered obsolete by technology.
Truly we need something new to meet the needs and demands of a new world with vastly new technology.

People felt capitalism's collapse was imminent during the great depression and though it took a world war to defeat fascism as one of the worst manifestations of capitalism, it did stabilise. It was followed by a golden age of consumerism in the post-war boom. There is a chance capitalism could adapt itself again. e.g. a Green New Deal would only save Capitalism in the same way as FDR's original New Deal.

Equally, technologies don't make capitalism obsolete either; it takes human beings to abolish it and replace it with a new system. The absence of alternative models to capitalism beyond "feel good" left-wing populism that would, yes, make people's lives better, but not actually replace it, is the most telling indication of the limited scope of the left.

I agree with the intention and the principle, but I'm concerned by the limited practical development and implementation of a new system. Though it's now the bandwagon loads of people are jumping on because these are hard times, it's ringing alarm bells because we don't have the answers we need to make such a system work better than previous attempts like European Social Democracy or Soviet style Socialism.

 

[Revoltingest]

People felt capitalism's collapse was imminent during the great depression and though it took a world war to defeat fascism as one of the worst manifestations of capitalism, it did stabilise. It was followed by a golden age of consumerism in the post-war boom. There is a chance capitalism could adapt itself again.

Equally, technologies don't make capitalism obsolete either; it takes human beings to abolish it and replace it with a new system. The absence of alternative models to capitalism beyond "feel good" left-wing populism that would, yes, make people's lives better, but not actually replace it, is the most telling indication of the limited scope of the left.

I agree with the intention and the principle, but I'm concerned by the limited practical development and implementation of a new system. Though it's now the bandwagon loads of people are jumping on because these are hard times, it's ringing alarm bells because we don't have the answers we need to make such a system work better than previous attempts like European Social Democracy or Soviet style Socialism.

To fans of socialism, I recommend pursuing their larger
social goals in the framework of capitalism. UBI, universal
health care, environmental protection....those things aren't
inherent to any economic system....but they can be well
financed under capitalism.

 

[Laika]

To fans of socialism, I recommend pursuing their larger
social goals in the framework of capitalism. UBI, universal
health care, environmental protection....those things aren't
inherent to any economic system....but they can be well
financed under capitalism.

Agreed. But the problem is Capitalism will produce a new economic crisis in the future to build further resentment and will also produce right-wing champions who would dismantle any progress that might have been achieved. That's why a systematic change might happen and might be unavoidable in the long term. And then it gets really complicated...

 

[SomeRandom]

To fans of socialism, I recommend pursuing their larger
social goals in the framework of capitalism. UBI, universal
health care, environmental protection....those things aren't
inherent to any economic system....but they can be well
financed under capitalism.

Whilst I agree. Looking at the US (since it is a superpower and arguably one of the more aggressive capitalist countries out there) such policies don’t seem to have had much luck so far.

 

[Revoltingest]

Agreed. But the problem is Capitalism will produce a new economic crisis in the future to build further resentment and will also produce right-wing champions who would dismantle any progress that might have been achieved. That's why a systematic change might happen and might be unavoidable in the long term. And then it gets really complicated...

All economic systems have inherent instabilities. Capitalism's
instabilities differ from command economies. In the former,
there are feedback loops in supply & demand leading to
ups & downs without even external events. In socialism, the
instabilities are more due to external factors, eg, a bad
harvest isn't efficiently responded to by centralized agriculture.
Old saying....
What are the 4 problems of Soviet agriculture?
Spring, summer, fall, & winter.

Capitalist instabilities can be addressed easily thru regulation.
Alas, government doesn't take my advice to....
- Stop high LTV (loan to value) lending. Requiring more
equity makes the borrower less susceptible to economic
swings.
- Eliminate high taxes on real estate transfer. Let people
who must move for job reasons do so without high cost.
- Stop heavy subsidies of home ownership, which incentivizes
treating it like an investment, encouraging over-buying.
- Stop institutionalized inflation (ie, currency devaluation),
which drives asset speculation.

Regulation can be useful, & without interfering with
free markets in a deleterious way. Not totally "free",
but free enuf in the way that matters. In fact, some
of my proposals would free things up.


Edit:
There must be an economic equivalent of the Reynolds
number (from fluid mechanics). It's a dimensionless number
that correlates with turbulence...the higher the number,
the greater the instability. We need a theoretical economist
on board. Hey, @Polymath257....you could easily switch
fields to do this. Mathematicians often become economists
in the private sector.

 

[PureX]

You keep repeating this but it doesn't square with the reality of my experience.
Maybe I just have a greater control over my needs than most.

I can't help what you see and don't see. But no matter who you are, or where on the planet you live, now, you are going to HAVE TO BUY stuff that other people produce, to live. You are no longer able, or in most instances even allowed to procure or produce them for yourself, anymore. And the markets through which you do so are NOT FREE MARKETS. They are captive markets because the buyers have no option but to buy what the sellers are selling. Most people in the U.S., for example, buying a car, a home, food, clothing, heat and electricity, a computer/phone and internet access are not optional if you want a job. And you will literally not be able to survive for long, here, without one. So that NONE of these markets are free markets, anymore. They are all captive markets because the people buying these products cannot 'opt out'.

What part of this are you having so much trouble 'seeing'?

And given the fact that the buyers have to buy, to live, the sellers can then charge whatever the buyers can afford to pay, as opposed to what their products are actually worth to them (cost + a reasonable profit). And no seller will deviate from that goal because none of them are in business to make LESS money than what is possible to be made.

Same goes for labor. Once the employers all know that everyone has to work somewhere, to live, they no longer have to worry about their employees 'opting out' of the labor force. And they can then all pay as little as possible for labor as they can get away with, and they all will, because NONE of them wants to pay a penny more than they have to.

What part of this aren't you 'seeing'?

This fantasy about how competition magically reigns in the greed of those who have all the production/consumption control is just that: a fantasy. Worse, it's a flat out lie. Because all these captive markets just give the capital investors that control production the ability to abuse and exploit everyone else involved the commercial enterprises that they control. And that's exactly what they do. Because they can. Because we all have to bow to their control, and accept their low wages, and pay their high prices, to get the things we need to survive in a modern, highly inter-dependent society.

Capitalism was OK when we could 'opt out' if we wanted or needed to. But those days are long gone. There is no more opting out, now. We are captives of our production/consumption economies. And under those conditions, giving all that power to the capital investor is just a recipe for exploitation and abuse. And it's exactly what has resulted from it. If you can't see this, I cannot help you to. Just open you eyes and it's all around you.

 

[Laika]

All economic systems have inherent instabilities. Capitalism's
instabilities differ from command economies. In the former,
there are feedback loops in supply & demand leading to
ups & downs without even external events. In socialism, the
instabilities are more due to external factors, eg, a bad
harvest isn't efficiently responded to by centralized agriculture.
Old saying....
What are the 4 problems of Soviet agriculture?
Spring, summer, fall, & winter.

Capitalist instabilities can be addressed easily thru regulation.
Alas, government doesn't take my advice to....
- Stop high LTV (loan to value) lending. Requiring more
equity makes the borrower less susceptible to economic
swings.
- Eliminate high taxes on real estate transfer. Let people
who must move for job reasons do so without high cost.
- Stop heavy subsidies of home ownership, which incentivizes
treating it like an investment, encouraging over-buying.
- Stop institutionalized inflation (ie, currency devaluation),
which drives asset speculation.

Regulation can be useful, & without interfering with
free markets in a deleterious way.

You may be right as both capitalism and socialism have their share of limitations. Unfortunately, we are both prisoners of our respective countries two-party systems which ensure "third parties", whether libertarian or socialist/communist, have a very low probability of taking power. We are stuck voting between the varying degrees of excrement of the corporate elites who have been "selected" for us to ensure they do as little as possible to disturb the status quo. And they call it "democracy" because we choose our executioner.

 

[Revoltingest]

Whilst I agree. Looking at the US (since it is a superpower and arguably one of the more aggressive capitalist countries out there) such policies don’t seem to have had much luck so far.

We have hand much luck, ie, progress.
But we still have more work to do.
Still better to live here than in any socialist country.

 

[Revoltingest]

You may be right as both capitalism and socialism have their share of limitations. Unfortunately, we are both prisoners of our respective countries two-party systems which ensure "third parties", whether libertarian or socialist/communist, have a very low probability of taking power. We are stuck voting between the varying degrees of excrement of the corporate elites who have been "selected" for us to ensure they do as little as possible to disturb the status quo. And they call it "democracy" because we choose our executioner.

I don't see any country being perfect.
We just pursue the change we want, & hope for progress.
Things are already much better than when I was a kid.

As for the corporate elites "selecting" leaders &/or policies,
I don't buy it. Look at how people vote in primaries. They
have wide choice, but always go with the status quo....
....with rare exceptions.

 

[Laika]

I don't see any country being perfect.
We just pursue the change we want, & hope for progress.
Things are already much better than when I was a kid.

Neither Socialism or Communism will produce perfect societies, and they will have their own share of flaws. The debate should be less over creating "perfect" societies, but which is better. Capitalism's record for much of the past century has certainly better if you happen to be in Western Europe or North America, but we are definitely in a rough patch and people are hurting.

As for the corporate elites "selecting" leaders &/or policies,
I don't buy it. Look at how people vote in primaries. They
have wide choice, but always go with the status quo....
....with rare exceptions.

True. It's still hateful however you look at it.

 

[Revoltingest]

True. It's still hateful however you look at it.

The problem is that a great many people want
the leaders & results we have. But everyone
gets something to hate, & so they complain
about some boogeyman.....the patriarchy, the
oligarchy, Marxist plots, creeping socialism, evil
capitalism, Big Oil, Big Pharma, deep state, etc.

 

[PureX]

People felt capitalism's collapse was imminent during the great depression and though it took a world war to defeat fascism as one of the worst manifestations of capitalism, it did stabilise. It was followed by a golden age of consumerism in the post-war boom. There is a chance capitalism could adapt itself again. e.g. a Green New Deal would only save Capitalism in the same way as FDR's original New Deal.

Equally, technologies don't make capitalism obsolete either; it takes human beings to abolish it and replace it with a new system. The absence of alternative models to capitalism beyond "feel good" left-wing populism that would, yes, make people's lives better, but not actually replace it, is the most telling indication of the limited scope of the left.

I agree with the intention and the principle, but I'm concerned by the limited practical development and implementation of a new system. Though it's now the bandwagon loads of people are jumping on because these are hard times, it's ringing alarm bells because we don't have the answers we need to make such a system work better than previous attempts like European Social Democracy or Soviet style Socialism.

The capitalists that now have massive control over government and media will and do use it to fight ANY advancement in terms of economic or social equity tooth and nail. Which is why you aren't seeing any great advancement in that direction. And yet you choose to blame this on the "leftists" instead of on the on capitalists using their huge accumulation of wealth and power to stymie any significant positive change. Why?

 

[SomeRandom]

We have hand much luck, ie, progress.
But we still have more work to do.
Still better to live here than in any socialist country.

I don’t know. Isn’t the biggest reason for bankruptcy in the US due to medical bills? Something unheard of in pretty much every other civilised nation.
Also don’t so called “socialist countries” always outpace the US in terms of happiness, quality of life ect?
Granted what qualifies as a “socialist country” in American terms seems to differ person to person. I assume that’s because of the Red Scare?

 

[Revoltingest]

I
Granted what qualifies as a “socialist country” in American terms seems to differ person to person. I assume that’s because of the Red Scare?

I use the dictionary....not red scare hype.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Already living in the Star Trek age, eh.
That too is a hypothetical construct.
One big solar flare, & this technology will grind to a halt.
Then you'll need antique engines to run factories.
That makes manual labor valuable, with the return of
19th century capitalism.

We're not there to Stat Trek yet, but especially with 3d printing and increasing automation we are going to have to rethink things.
Better to be ready than late with this one.

 

[Nakosis]

I can't help what you see and don't see. But no matter who you are, or where on the planet you live, now, you are going to HAVE TO BUY stuff that other people produce, to live. You are no longer able, or in most instances even allowed to procure or produce them for yourself, anymore. And the markets through which you do so are NOT FREE MARKETS. They are captive markets because the buyers have no option but to buy what the sellers are selling. Most people in the U.S., for example, buying a car, a home, food, clothing, heat and electricity, a computer/phone and internet access are not optional if you want a job. And you will literally not be able to survive for long, here, without one. So that NONE of these markets are free markets, anymore. They are all captive markets because the people buying these products cannot 'opt out'.

What part of this are you having so much trouble 'seeing'?

I have a friend/co-worker that is surviving fine without a car. He is also building a solar farm to provide the electricity needed to start bitcoin mining. Housing, I'm having a house built in an area that I chose which has less government interference which saved me a lot of money vs the area I currently live in which has heavy government interference getting the same house at almost 1/3rd of the cost. A government which also support the largest homeless population in the country.

And given the fact that the buyers have to buy, to live, the sellers can then charge whatever the buyers can afford to pay, as opposed to what their products are actually worth to them (cost + a reasonable profit). And no seller will deviate from that goal because none of them are in business to make LESS money than what is possible to be made.

That's true, I don't see a problem with that except where the government has interfered forcing me to not stay local.

Same goes for labor. Once the employers all know that everyone has to work somewhere, to live, they no longer have to worry about their employees 'opting out' of the labor force. And they can then all pay as little as possible for labor as they can get away with, and they all will, because NONE of them wants to pay a penny more than they have to.

Actually they do have to worry about the labor force opting out. It is actually quite a big problem. Everywhere is hurting for labor. There is a big opportunity for those who want to work. There is a big problem with ghosting as skilled labor goes to the highest bidder with no repercussions for not giving notice.

What part of this aren't you 'seeing'?

Umm... yeah, none of it.

This fantasy about how competition magically reigns in the greed of those who have all the production/consumption control is just that: a fantasy. Worse, it's a flat out lie. Because all these captive markets just give the capital investors that control production the ability to abuse and exploit everyone else involved the commercial enterprises that they control. And that's exactly what they do. Because they can. Because we all have to bow to their control, and accept their low wages, and pay their high prices, to get the things we need to survive in a modern, highly inter-dependent society.

That's not the "fantasy". I have to begrudgingly admit for the need of government to deal with greed. The government could certainly do better at it if it could manage to set aside its own greed. The "fantasy" is that self-interest and profit provide the optimum control over pricing. Greed is just the word used by socialists/Marxists to slander capitalism.

Capitalism was OK when we could 'opt out' if we wanted or needed to. But those days are long gone. There is no more opting out, now. We are captives of our production/consumption economies. And under those conditions, giving all that power to the capital investor is just a recipe for exploitation and abuse. And it's exactly what has resulted from it. If you can't see this, I cannot help you to. Just open you eyes and it's all around you.

Except this is a big part of what I do. I know how it works and see it every day. I'm not trying to sell anyone on capitalism. I don't have academic training, maybe it's better that I don't. I'm certainly not the not the brightest pebble on the beach. Fortunately with capitalism, one doesn't have to be to do well. I'm forced to deal with the reality of it every day. Sure, capitalism is a system one has to learn to survive in, but anyone can learn how. Though one has to start by looking past their prejudices.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The capitalists that now have massive control over government and media will and do use it to fight ANY advancement in terms of economic or social equity tooth and nail.

So did Kings. But we flipped them the bird and now they're way less powerful and numerous.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I don’t know. Isn’t the biggest reason for bankruptcy in the US due to medical bills? Something unheard of in pretty much every other civilised nation.
Also don’t so called “socialist countries” always outpace the US in terms of happiness, quality of life ect?
Granted what qualifies as a “socialist country” in American terms seems to differ person to person. I assume that’s because of the Red Scare?

Yup to all.

 

[Nakosis]

True. It's still hateful however you look at it.

Regarding people voting the same stooges in, yeah, someone pointed out to me it is brand familiarity. People will stick with the brand they are familiar with, even though there are better products out there. Leaves the politician free to sell out their vote to the highest bidder.