One Problem with Capitalism?

[Bunyip]

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

But China is about to become the largest economy on earth - it is by far the most sucessful economy of the 21st century.

Expatriate Chinese are returning home in their millions.

The most rapidly growing state on earth is communist, it is 'working out' spectacularly well.

 

[Bunyip]

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

Again I ask you to try to present an argument, rather than just flinging insults.

I studied economics as part of a degree in politics and international relations. You ask me to back my suppositions, and yet all you have offered is insult.

As to the evidence that Capitalism is reaching it's natural limits, go to your nearest tent city. Or drive through the suburbs of Detroit.

 

[Revoltingest]

But China is about to become the largest economy on earth - it is by far the most sucessful economy of the 21st century.
Expatriate Chinese are returning home in their millions.
The most rapidly growing state on earth is communist, it is 'working out' spectacularly well.

The ones I know left early on in the revolution.
No capitalism back then, which is the China they fled.
Same thing for the USSR, which doesn't even exist now.

 

[Bunyip]

The ones I know left early on in the revolution.
No capitalism back then, which is the China they fled.
Same thing for the USSR, which doesn't even exist now.

Sure, the revolution though was the beginning of the communist regime. China has grown every year for the last 30 years at an astronomical rate - you could not label it a failure.

There are also more socially equitable forms of economic governance such as we find in Scandinavia, many countries place much greater emphasis on the common good and social welfare than does the US. Bhutan includes a measure of the general happiness of its people into it's economic calculations.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

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

The USSR, China, North Korea, Cuba, etc. are not and were never communist.

 

[Revoltingest]

The USSR, China, North Korea, Cuba, etc. are not and were never communist.

We'll just have to disagree about that. (Imperfect communism is still communism.)
But as I mentioned before, they fled the old USSR & China, not Russia & capitalist China.
(I don't know anyone from Cuba or N Korea.)
Well, one guy did flee Russia too, but he did so for religious reasons.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

We'll just have to disagree about that. (Imperfect communism is still communism.)
But as I mentioned before, they fled the old USSR & China, not Russia & capitalist China.
Well, one guy did flee Russia too, but he did so for religious reasons.

It's either communist or it isn't. This is communism:

Communism (from Latin communis – common, universal) is a socioeconomic system structured upon common ownership of the means of production and characterised by the absence of classes, money,[1][2] and the state; as well as a social, political and economic ideology and movement that aims to establish this social order.[3]

You could argue that they were aiming for such a thing at the beginning of their revolutions, but they obviously dropped that goal for all intents and purposes.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's either communist or it isn't. This is communism:

Communism (from Latin communis – common, universal) is a socioeconomic system structured upon common ownership of the means of production and characterised by the absence of classes, money,[1][2] and the state; as well as a social, political and economic ideology and movement that aims to establish this social order.[3]

You could argue that they were aiming for such a thing at the beginning of their revolutions, but they obviously dropped that goal for all intents and purposes.

There are technical definitions & there are common ones. Some argue that the "commies" were really socialists. And some don't admit that communist or socialist countries have ever existed. This makes it problematic to advocate for such a structure when there's no example of it ever working. What's even worse? One could argue that there are no capitalist countries either.

 

[Bunyip]

It's either communist or it isn't. This is communism:

Communism (from Latin communis – common, universal) is a socioeconomic system structured upon common ownership of the means of production and characterised by the absence of classes, money,[1][2] and the state; as well as a social, political and economic ideology and movement that aims to establish this social order.[3]

You could argue that they were aiming for such a thing at the beginning of their revolutions, but they obviously dropped that goal for all intents and purposes.

I understand what you are saying, but if you go by strict definitions like that then there are no democracies and no capitalist states either.

Personally I think that democracy is a lovely idea, and hope that one day somebody tries it.

 

[Revoltingest]

Personally I think that democracy is a lovely idea, and hope that one day somebody tries it.

I'll stand back at a distance & watch.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

There are technical definitions & there are common ones. Some argue that the "commies" were really socialists. And some don't admit that communist or socialist countries have ever existed. This makes it problematic to advocate for such a structure when there's no example of it ever working. What's even worse? One could argue that there are no capitalist countries either.

Many, if not most people, have no idea what communism or socialism actually is, seeing as Westerners have been bombarded with 60+ years of anti-"Red" propaganda. People who have actually bothered to do more than superficial research into the actual theories have a clearer view.

By the way, "communist country" is an oxymoron, seeing as there would be no state under communism. Communism is a very old idea and has been practiced under various circumstances throughout history.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I understand what you are saying, but if you go by strict definitions like that then there are no democracies and no capitalist states either.

You could make a good argument for there being no democratic states but I fail to see how you could do the same for capitalism.

Personally I think that democracy is a lovely idea, and hope that one day somebody tries it.

Same.

 

[Revoltingest]

Many, if not most people, have no idea what communism or socialism actually is, seeing as Westerners have been bombarded with 60+ years of anti-"Red" propaganda. People who have actually bothered to do more than superficial research into the actual theories have a clearer view.

By the way, "communist country" is an oxymoron, seeing as there would be no state under communism. Communism is a very old idea and has been practiced under various circumstances throughout history.

I've looked up the definitions of socialism & communism in multiple sources,
& found that there is just no agreement in a freewheeling place like this.
Oh, getting tired....hard to....must go to.....having trouble.....uhhhh.....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I've looked up the definitions of socialism & communism in multiple sources,
& found that there is just no agreement in a freewheeling place like this.

I've heard of different definitions of socialism (which is part of the reason why I stopped calling myself a socialist, because it tends to be somewhat vague) but not of communism (well, outside of less knowledgeable sources).

 

[work in progress]

"The problem with capitalism is that it best rewards the worst part of us: the ruthless, competitive, conniving, opportunistic, acquisitive drives, giving little reward and often much punishment--or at least much handicap--to honesty, compassion, fair play, many forms of hard work, love of justice, and a concern for those in need."


-- Michael Parenti


Is Parenti substantially correct? Why or why not?

I think Michael Parenti is exactly right! Today, we have an economic system that rewards the accumulators of capital (especially those starting through inheritance) at the expense of those of us who earn our incomes from actual work!

But, not only do we have an economic system that gives unjustified rewards to those who already control most of the money -- the capitalist system fuels a ruthless materialism and competition all the way down the economic ladder, even to the very bottom. The competition fuels unnecessary demands for many products with questionable real value...other than status symbols in a competitive economic hierarchy. The net result psychologically, is that people become increasingly unhappy and unsatisfied as inequality continues to grow...as is evidenced by an array of survey data showing that self-reported happiness and wellbeing was at its peak in the 1950's, and has been in decline ever since! Despite rising GDP's and new products to play with, etc..

Since we're on Religious Forums, someone should note the irony of how the American conservative Christian establishment in the last half century or so, has turned Christian and Jewish social gospel on its head, as they have made amassing wealth the prime virtue and sign of divine blessings/while poverty is the now the sign of moral failing and being out of favor with God!

Since I personally have come to see the destruction of the environment as the greatest existential threat to our survival, my no. one problem with capitalism is it's reliance on creating new money through new loans or debt obligations, which demand ever-increasing economic growth to pay off.

The most recent IPCC Report had to acknowledge economic growth as the fundamental driver behind rising carbon levels in the atmosphere. So, building windmills and solar panels will slow down, but NOT solve the problem of rising emissions, as long as our world has a global economic system demanding constant growth and harvesting of the planet to fuel that economic growth.

 

[dawny0826]

So a system that relies on social stratification to exist isn't the root of poverty in our times?

I know better. The root causes or influences of poverty can vary from one American locality to the next. Mindset and culture absolutely have a significant impact on poverty as well.

When working with individuals impacted by a significant event in my community - those that lived on or below the poverty level shared common characteristics (and mind you, I'm not presenting this with a negate tone): elderly with limited social security and/or retirement income and disabled with limited income.

The majority of the elderly had not worked much during their working years. So, their social security income and retirements were miniscule.

In the East End of my city, where you have the highest concentration of impoverished - there's a lot of drug addiction, alcoholism, abuse and there's a need for educational efforts.

The kids that are raised in this part of my city have the same opportunities as my kids do. They go to the same school system and in fact, have additional opportunities extended to them. This is where culture comes into play as well. If Mom is single and raising you alone and can't keep her head above water (and couldn't keep her head above water before she had children) - these kids unfortunately, don't have the support systems at home to encourage their development.

I'm not blanket labeling as the family dynamics and support within this community varies as well. This type of family is common. Drug abuse, neglect, elective poverty - in the sense that people are having large families without the financial means to support them and without the education and stability to produce healthy, motivated citizens.

It at the very least is maintaining it by producing a society of "winners" and "losers", where the "winners" and their families are privileged over everyone else.

To an extent. But. there's little seeming privilege in the middle class - which is where I'm at and my family is at. I can't relate to the mindset of the "rich", because I don't know anyone in this category.

My Dad who makes a very good salary - worked his way up from the bottom of the totem pole at the shipbuilding. He started without an education - making a very piddly amount. Over the course of 30+ years, he's become a master shipbuilder, makes great money and was able to obtain a college degree over the years.

We weren't raised privileged. We were raised to understand the concept of work ethic, which many Americans lack.

Americans have no power over the economy. Are you serious? We don't even have power over our own government!

Are you serious? We DO have power over our government. We elect our freaking government. We've allowed it to grow into the monster that it is through our own greed, apathy and stupidity.

I must admit that I find it a delicious irony that I, as a Satanist, am anti-capitalist but you, as a Christian, are defending capitalism as being somehow moral and ethical

I must admit that I find it deliciously ironic that as a Satanist, you're not a Libertarian. Perhaps you need to spot check your own morals an ethics. What types of politicians are you putting in office?

 

[Revoltingest]

Since I personally have come to see the destruction of the environment as the greatest existential threat to our survival, my no. one problem with capitalism is it's reliance on creating new money through new loans or debt obligations, which demand ever-increasing economic growth to pay off.

I argue that your problem should be with gov policy rather than capitalism itself.
Consider:
- Only government creates new money. And they do so at a rate which devalues the currency.
- Continually devalued currency spurs speculation & hurts savings.
- Only government can forcibly curb population growth.
- Environmental destruction is directly caused by an expanding population, not by capitalism. Even socialists & communists require land to grow food, so if we have more of them, then we will have less wild space on the planet.

I don't have a solution to the problems you see, but it's important to complain about the correct causes.

 

[Father Heathen]

"The problem with capitalism is that it best rewards the worst part of us: the ruthless, competitive, conniving, opportunistic, acquisitive drives, giving little reward and often much punishment--or at least much handicap--to honesty, compassion, fair play, many forms of hard work, love of justice, and a concern for those in need."


-- Michael Parenti


Is Parenti substantially correct? Why or why not?

It's people, not capitalism, who are to blame for dishonesty and exploitation. In fact, people can be and have been just as ruthless, competitive, conniving, opportunistic, and acquisitive on the opposite end of the spectrum; Mao, Stalin, etc. The issue is human nature, not economic models.
That said, I don't see ambition and work ethic as bad things.

 

[Father Heathen]

But China is about to become the largest economy on earth - it is by far the most sucessful economy of the 21st century.

Expatriate Chinese are returning home in their millions.

The most rapidly growing state on earth is communist, it is 'working out' spectacularly well.

Their growing economy is due to relaxing hardline policies and embracing capitalistic measures.

 

[Father Heathen]

I must admit that I find it a delicious irony that I, as a Satanist, am anti-capitalist but you, as a Christian, are defending capitalism as being somehow moral and ethical.

How is that any more ironic than you claiming to be LHP while embracing ideals that conflict with it?