The Morality of Capitalism

[Audie]

IMO, capitalism is neither moral nor immoral, as what I believe is most important along that line is peoples' behavior. What I do believe is immoral, however, is dog-eat-dog capitalism that provides no safety net and/or only favors the wealthy.

That is found in countries like myanmar, run
by crony kleptocrats

 

[Audie]

Life in the USSR...
"They pretend to pay us, & we pretend to work."

Try that here

 

[Stevicus]

Life in the USSR...
"They pretend to pay us, & we pretend to work."

Yeah, I've heard that one before.

I've been there. It was never as bad as people in the West thought it was.

 

[Revoltingest]

Try that here

Wouldn't work here either....unless one works for government.
Mrs Revolt's father was an editor at Voice Of America.
He had workers under him who did no work. One ran
a real estate business from VOA. But he was under
direct orders to give everyone a positive review.

 

[Audie]

Wouldn't work here either....unless one works for government.
Mrs Revolt's father was an editor at Voice Of America.
He had workers under him who did no work. One ran
a real estate business from VOC. But he was under
direct orders to give everyone a positive review.

Versions of that here.

We dont even have a word for nepotism

 

[Father Heathen]

"<capitalism> respects individuals, their rights, and their pursuit of happiness"

Because companies would never try to mislead, cheat, or take advantage of consumers.

 

[Stevicus]

First, capitalism is moral because — unlike socialism — it respects individuals, their rights, and their pursuit of happiness. In fact, capitalism requires this respect for individuals and rights. This is why capitalism often is defined as a social system, not an economic system, which protects individual rights.

Second, capitalism is moral because it is pro-consumer. When anti-capitalists hear the term "competition," they think it is a cruel process that hurts those who don’t have the resources or ability to survive. This isn’t cruel, though. Only through competition do we provide the numerous benefits to consumers.

Third, capitalism is moral because it generates wealth. This wealth generates jobs, improved quality of life, a cleaner environment, and much more. When businesses are able to make profits, they can create jobs and reinvest the profits into goods and services that could have valuable societal benefits.
Capitalism and Morality.

To which I say poppycock.

A system which champions individual rights, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness would be a liberal society, not necessarily a capitalistic society. That would be a function of the political system, not the social system (although one could argue that the political system is a part of the social system).

This article seems to carry the standard litany of pro-capitalist arguments I've been exposed to over the course of my life.

I sometimes wonder if people would talk this way about capitalism and the US political/economic system overall if not for the Cold War and all the rhetoric associated with that era.

Also, I would suggest that, in order to evaluate the morality of capitalism, one would have to do so on a more global scale than just looking at the United States or other "first world" countries. There's a reason why there are "first world" and "third world" countries, and there's a cause-and-effect relationship between the fact that the "first world" does so well, while the "third world" is considered so bad - even though both are capitalist.

In the U.S., we kind of lucked into things (which fed into the whole idea of America's success being God's will and our "Manifest Destiny"). No need to go over the whole history, but a large part of it wasn't exactly "moral" by anyone's standard.

I think humankind's struggle with capitalism was partly related to trying to adjust to the massive changes brought about through the industrial revolution. That's another long section of history. Industry has brought both the good and the bad, the moral and immoral.

 

[Father Heathen]

I'll take capitalism over communism any day of the week. Even if it irritates the hell out of me.

Morality is subjective anyways.

Would you rather fire departments be privatized/for profit as well? What could go wrong? What about the public "communist" roads you drive upon?

 

[Stevicus]

 

[Father Heathen]

Too bad you cannot try living inna world that never developed capitalism

Personally, I don't see capitalism as either moral or immoral. It's people who are either moral or immoral. I'm not against capitalism, but I am against it being practiced in unethical ways, as it often is. Having everything socialized would be horrible, but so too would it be if everything were privatized.

 

[Revoltingest]

Would you rather fire departments be privatized/for profit as well? What could go wrong? What about the public "communist" roads you drive upon?

Would you rather have government grow & supply food to you?

 

[Father Heathen]

Would you rather have government grow & supply food to you?

Not sure how you inferred that from my post, but no? (remember we're talking about "communism" within the context he used it; i.e. anything socialized, like public schools.) That said, I can't help but find the notion that some families are starving while others are spending $200 on designer handbags - all within the same city - to be a disturbing one.

 

[Nakosis]

A system which champions individual rights, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness would be a liberal society, not necessarily a capitalistic society. That would be a function of the political system, not the social system (although one could argue that the political system is a part of the social system).

This article seems to carry the standard litany of pro-capitalist arguments I've been exposed to over the course of my life.

I sometimes wonder if people would talk this way about capitalism and the US political/economic system overall if not for the Cold War and all the rhetoric associated with that era.

Also, I would suggest that, in order to evaluate the morality of capitalism, one would have to do so on a more global scale than just looking at the United States or other "first world" countries. There's a reason why there are "first world" and "third world" countries, and there's a cause-and-effect relationship between the fact that the "first world" does so well, while the "third world" is considered so bad - even though both are capitalist.

In the U.S., we kind of lucked into things (which fed into the whole idea of America's success being God's will and our "Manifest Destiny"). No need to go over the whole history, but a large part of it wasn't exactly "moral" by anyone's standard.

I think humankind's struggle with capitalism was partly related to trying to adjust to the massive changes brought about through the industrial revolution. That's another long section of history. Industry has brought both the good and the bad, the moral and immoral.

Myself I agree with a few other folks here. Capitalism is amoral. Capitalism is an economic system, not a moral guide. Trying to explain it as such just makes you look silly, IMO.

 

[Stevicus]

Myself I agree with a few other folks here. Capitalism is amoral. Capitalism is an economic system, not a moral guide. Trying to explain it as such just make you look silly, IMO.

It may look silly in your eyes, but others might have a different perspective.

At least, give me something substantial I can respond to. Don't just drop off a cheap shot and leave me hanging. Have a heart.

 

[Revoltingest]

Not sure how you inferred that from my post, but no?

I just flipped your oft made claim that public roads
are either "socialist" or "communist". If you really
want those, government would be providing things
you now get from greedy farmers & businesses.

 

[Father Heathen]

I just flipped your oft made claim that public roads
are either "socialist" or "communist". If you really
want those, government would be providing things
you now get from greedy farmers & businesses.

Again, that's not my claim; but rather it's that of those who abuse those terms and erroneously apply them to public sector spending. You're talking wild swings through the air thinking you gotta gotcha.

 

[Revoltingest]

Again, that's not my claim; but rather it's that of those who abuse those terms and erroneously apply them to public sector spending. You're talking wild swings through the air thinking you gotta gotcha.

I've seen you claim it more often than anyone.

I'm reminded of something Kurt Vonnegut said....
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be.”

 

[Father Heathen]

I've seen you claim it more often than anyone.

I'm reminded of something Kurt Vonnegut said....
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be.”

I know those things aren't socialist/communist, but when conservatives screech and squeal about "socialism/communism", it's often in reference to things such as universal healthcare, social programs, etc. rather than actual socialism/communism. Thus I point out examples of things that are "socialism/communism" by their standards with which they have no qualms with.

Please read post #50.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Would you rather fire departments be privatized/for profit as well? What could go wrong? What about the public "communist" roads you drive upon?

Back with the stupid roads are a political philosophy analogy I see.

Added in fire departments too as well. Novel.

I happen to like volunteer and local departments personally. The raffles and chicken dinner fundraisers can be a lot of fun.

 

[Revoltingest]

I know those things aren't socialist/communist, but when conservatives screech and squeal about "socialism/communism", it's often in reference to things such as universal healthcare, social programs, etc. rather than actual socialism/communism. Thus I point out examples of things that are "socialism/communism" by their standards with which they have no qualms with.

Please read post #50.

Are you fine when liberals "screech" that those things are "socialism"?