One Problem with Capitalism?

[Alceste]

Legit capitalism has never been fully enforced.

It also makes no sense why capitalism is always associated with pollution, as if capitalism is simply a corporate/rich-centered economical philosophy. It really isn't, that comes from years of misinterpretation mutating into ignorant propaganda.

I asked people before (not sure if it was on this forum or another) what they pictured in their head when they heard the term capitalism. A lot of them said things related to huge corporation buildings, companies owning companies, and rich men in suits.

When I hear the term capitalism, I think of cities being similar to a large flea market, and outside of it would be farmlands/small businesses spread out on a country-side. This is because, what I interpret freemarket to be like, businesses would be privately owned and thus smaller, less expensive, and more jobs (since either you'd make a business yourself with your own feats, help a friend or relative with their business, etc)

IMO, you need to stop picturing pretty things and look at the world.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

IMO, you need to stop picturing pretty things and look at the world.

The same can be said to anybody.

 

[Willamena]

How is it bad to be competitive, acquisitive, or opportunist?

As with anything, it's not intrinsically bad, it's only "bad" at the expense of others. Thing is, Capitalism cannot help but be at the expense of others.

I don't see how it would give the ruthless or conniving the flip side, given that it is a societal-based economy, and that most consumers would prefer not to buy from a ruthless or conniving producer.

You might check out a video called "The Century of the Self." The bottom line is that 'public relations' is a euphemism for precisely that--societal based "voting" giving the ruthless and conniving the up side, and making the whole process a consumer preference.

It doesn't give punishment to any of those things. Honesty? Not really, in fact I can't help but see it more honest. Compassion? It's still there, it's one major necessity for Capitalism. Fair play? It's very fair. In the ideal capitalist society, everyone is given equal opportunities, but not equal results. That's the only way to combine the two virtues of fairness and freedom. The last three, still don't see how he comes up with that stuff...

So in a nutshell - Nope, he's probably thinking of Corporatism like most people do...

Corporatism is a result of P.R. and Capitalism.

Fair play, okay, it's there, but how do you see compassion in Capitalism?

Idealism is just that--a dream.

 

[Alceste]

The same can be said to anybody.

Can't be said to people who look at the world.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Can't be said to people who look at the world.

So you assume I'm completely unaware of the imperfection of our world for defending a utopian idea of capitalism and separating it from the common misview?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

So you assume I'm completely unaware of the imperfection of our world for defending a utopian idea of capitalism and separating it from the common misview?

Since when is capitalism a utopian concept? It's not and never has been. It can't be because someone is always going to be "losing" while someone else is "winning".

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Since when is capitalism a utopian concept? It's not and never has been. It can't be because someone is always going to be "losing" while someone else is "winning".

It suggests a free market, not a competitive, rich business one. I can definitely see it working out as a utopia. Unlike communism, where doctors make just as much as store clerks.

 

[Revoltingest]

Since when is capitalism a utopian concept? It's not and never has been. It can't be because someone is always going to be "losing" while someone else is "winning".

I find that both parties to a capitalistic arrangement can win.
When I hire a contractor to do a tenant build-out, he, the tenant,
& I all benefit.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

It suggests a free market, not a competitive, rich business one. I can definitely see it working out as a utopia. Unlike communism, where doctors make just as much as store clerks.

A free market is all about competition and business. Have you hit your head or something? :areyoucra

Nobody makes any money in communism since money wouldn't exist. Besides, how does someone making lower wages than someone else and being poor or lesser off have anything to do with utopianism?

I find that both parties to a capitalistic arrangement can win.
When I hire a contractor to do a tenant build-out, he, the tenant,
& I all benefit.

You know that's not what I mean.

 

[Alceste]

So you assume I'm completely unaware of the imperfection of our world for defending a utopian idea of capitalism and separating it from the common misview?

Yep. .

 

[Bunyip]

Since when is capitalism a utopian concept? It's not and never has been. It can't be because someone is always going to be "losing" while someone else is "winning".

I think that is the key point here. Capitalism depends upon one group exploiting another, and that is why it will reach it's natural limits.

Ultimately globalisation will mean that there is no 'them' to exploit, only 'us'.

 

[Revoltingest]

You know that's not what I mean.

Going by your post....

.... someone is always going to be "losing" while someone else is "winning".

....I genuinely inferred a claim that someone always loses.
So I explained that my experience is otherwise, ie, there can be mutual benefit.
You meant something else?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Going by your post....

....I genuinely inferred a claim that someone always loses. You meant something else?

I meant in the wider social scale of capitalism, not within specific business transactions.

 

[Alceste]

I think that is the key point here. Capitalism depends upon one group exploiting another, and that is why it will reach it's natural limits.

Ultimately globalisation will mean that there is no 'them' to exploit, only 'us'.

Pfft. Fantasy. Try comprehending the world you actually live in.

 

[Revoltingest]

I meant in the wider social scale of capitalism, not within specific business transactions.

Aha....but what system (something which could actually exist
long term in an entire country) doesn't have winners & losers?

 

[Bunyip]

Pfft. Fantasy. Try comprehending the world you actually live in.

I studied economics, it was one of my minors. Please make an argument rather than just insulting me.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Aha....but what system (something which could actually exist
long term in an entire country) doesn't have winners & losers?

Communism.

 

[Alceste]

I studied economics, it was one of my minors. Please make an argument rather than just insulting me.

. I studied folk music. Try backing your suppositions with evidence rather than fantasizing about your ideal world.

 

[Revoltingest]

Communism.

Yeah....that's worked out so well where it's been tried.
I think of those I know who fled such places.

 

[Bunyip]

Reaganomics taught that looking after the rich helped the poor, because of the 'trickle down effect'. It was a key philosophy within 20th century capitalism.

The problem is that it did not work, the money doesn't trickle down - the rich keep it, and then use it to get richer.

In the decades since the 'trickle down effect' was promoted, the gap between rich and poor has grown and the concentration of wealth in the hands of a tiny few has reached greater extremes.