Unbridled Capitalism is self-destructive

[Yerda]

One can always cite terrible things happening under
any economic system. One can argue that theoretically,
one system is bad, & another is good. But these
approaches are ultimately made irrelevant by empiricism.

We can compare different real world economic systems
with a simple test anyone can take.
List 5 countries you'd like to live in.
You can even pick historical ones, eg, USSR.
What economic systems do they have?
The results tell us about the potential for success.

That was a quick swerve, sir.

The point that I would make is that capitalism will always lead to starvation, homelessness, exploitation, preventable diease etc and to end those things we'll have to end capitalism. To the extent that we can reduce those things, we have to reduce the power of capital to shape our societies and economies. I'm quite happy to accept that markets are a requirement but I don't think this precludes common ownership of resources and worker control of workplaces. Maybe that wouldn't be really socialism but I'm not too fussed on what it is that ends capitalism.

Anyway, just for fun:

1. Spain between the brief period of the republic before the fascists ruined it.
2. Finland now.
3. Vietnam now.
4. America post war.
5. Future Scottish Socialist Republic.

 

[Revoltingest]

That was a quick swerve, sir.

it was very direct.

The point that I would make is that capitalism will always lead to starvation, homelessness, exploitation, preventable diease etc and to end those things we'll have to end capitalism.

What is the alternative with less starvation, disease, war, etc, etc?
Certainly not socialism.

To the extent that we can reduce those things, we have to reduce the power of capital to shape our societies and economies. I'm quite happy to accept that markets are a requirement but I don't think this precludes common ownership of resources and worker control of workplaces. Maybe that wouldn't be really socialism but I'm not too fussed on what it is that ends capitalism.

Workers can buy stock in companies employing them.
Workers can form their own companies. I know many
who've done so because they disliked either the company
or union, & saw the opportunity to strike out on their own.
That liberty is the beauty of capitalism.

Anyway, just for fun:

1. Spain between the brief period of the republic before the fascists ruined it.
2. Finland now.
3. Vietnam now.
4. America post war.
5. Future Scottish Socialist Republic.

Of the existing systems you've
named, I see that all are capitalist.

I don't argue that capitalism is perfect.
Only that it offers better potential for liberty
& prosperity than any real world alternative.
It's like science & democracy....both of which
have their share of failures & shortcomings,
but no one offers anything better.

 

[Audie]

That was a quick swerve, sir.

The point that I would make is that capitalism will always lead to starvation, homelessness, exploitation, preventable diease etc and to end those things we'll have to end capitalism. To the extent that we can reduce those things, we have to reduce the power of capital to shape our societies and economies. I'm quite happy to accept that markets are a requirement but I don't think this precludes common ownership of resources and worker control of workplaces. Maybe that wouldn't be really socialism but I'm not too fussed on what it is that ends capitalism.

Anyway, just for fun:

1. Spain between the brief period of the republic before the fascists ruined it.
2. Finland now.
3. Vietnam now.
4. America post war.
5. Future Scottish Socialist Republic.

Which socio economic govt religious system does not have those ills attending?

 

[Revoltingest]

Which socio economic govt religious system does not have those ills attending?

Too many people never ask themselves that hard question.
Often it's....
1) Capitalism is bad.
2) Therefore must have something else.
3) Thinking all done now.

 

[Yerda]

What is the alternative with less starvation, disease, war, etc, etc?
Certainly not socialism.

Maybe not. Personally I think the critical step is taking ownership out of the hands of a small group of people. Starting with public goods, then moving towards all of the means of production insofar as it increases the common wealth.

Workers can buy stock in companies employing them.
Workers can form their own companies. I know many
who've done so because they disliked either the company
or union, & saw the opportunity to strike out on their own.
That liberty is the beauty of capitalism.

Sure. Capitalism isn't without it's beauty.

Of the existing systems you've
named, I see that all are capitalist.


I don't argue that capitalism is perfect.
Only that it offers better potential for liberty
& prosperity than any real world alternative.
It's like science & democracy....both of which
have their share of failures & shortcomings,
but no one offers anything better.

I don't argue capitalism is all bad. Just that the inherent flaws can't be overcome.

 

[Audie]

Too many people never ask themselves that hard question.
Often it's....
1) Capitalism is bad.
2) Therefore must have something else.
3) Thinking all done now.

Anti capitalists are
Communists
Morally weak
And/or
Simply insane.

 

[Revoltingest]

Maybe not. Personally I think the critical step is taking ownership out of the hands of a small group of people. Starting with public goods, then moving towards all of the means of production insofar as it increases the common wealth.

IOW, taking the means of production
away from private parties?

I don't argue capitalism is all bad. Just that the inherent flaws can't be overcome.

All economic & political systems will have inherent
flaws that cannot be eliminated. Democracy is that
way....we don't eliminate it because it's imperfect.
There's no good alternative. Instead, we should
address what results as various countries optimize
their political & economic systems.

 

[Yerda]

IOW, taking the means of production
away from private parties?

For the most part, yes. Definitely removing all private ownership of land, natural resources, transport, infrastructure, health and education for starters.

All economic & political systems will have inherent
flaws that cannot be eliminated. Democracy is that
way....we don't eliminate it because it's imperfect.
There's no good alternative. Instead, we should
address what results as various countries optimize
their political & economic systems.

I agree. I just happen to think that the ownership is the feature that makes capitalism what it is - and inevitably causes the problems we see with it. We could do better and have more manageable problems.

 

[Stevicus]

Too many people never ask themselves that hard question.
Often it's....
1) Capitalism is bad.
2) Therefore must have something else.
3) Thinking all done now.

What actually happens is that capitalists too often refuse to listen to reason until the revolution happens, and then it's too late. There are things they could do right now to improve the current situation, but they refuse because they're greedy. For example, I could end the homeless problem nationwide overnight, if only we implemented nationwide rent controls. Very simple solution, yet the capitalists and their puppets in government refuse to do that. Price controls would end inflation overnight. Socialized medicine would solve all our healthcare deficiencies.

These are very simple and effective solutions that could be done right now, but are not done solely because of capitalist greed.

 

[Audie]

For the most part, yes. Definitely removing all private ownership of land, natural resources, transport, infrastructure, health and education for starters.


I agree. I just happen to think that the ownership is the feature that makes capitalism what it is - and inevitably causes the problems we see with it. We could do better and have more manageable problems.

You believe.

In experimental social engineering.
You do understand that idealist leaders in Europe and Asia
we're responsible for tens of millions of deaths in the last. century?

I was not kidding about moral weakness and / or insanity.

 

[Revoltingest]

For the most part, yes.

You're advocating for socialism then.

I agree. I just happen to think that the ownership is the feature that makes capitalism what it is - and inevitably causes the problems we see with it. We could do better and have more manageable problems.

Do you think there are any problems
with your alternative of socialism?
If so, it would be worth comparing
results of socialist countries with
capitalist countries, comparing the
best of each.

 

[Revoltingest]

What actually happens is that capitalists too often refuse to listen....

That's a vapid unsupported & irrelevant claim.
The issues aren't about some un-named people
who don't listen to what you might call "reason".

 

[Stevicus]

That's a vapid unsupported & irrelevant claim.
The issues aren't about some un-named people
who don't listen to what you might call "reason".

It's about policies that could improve the economy and the reasons why they're not implemented. Since we know that public policy is not the result of some supernatural force, then it stands to reason that these policies are caused by people, whether named or not. Do you disagree?

 

[Revoltingest]

It's about policies that could improve the economy and the reasons why they're not implemented.

Tis better to discuss the policies, problems, & solutions
than to criticize some imagined people who don't listen.

 

[Stevicus]

Tis better to discuss the policies, problems, & solutions
than to criticize some imagined people who don't listen.

They're not imagined.

But okay let's talk problems and solutions: The problem is that the prices are too high and wages too low for everyone to be able to afford the necessities and other things that can enhance life. The reason the prices are too high is solely because of greed, and the solution is price controls. Those who would oppose controls do so out of a malignant desire to make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

 

[Audie]

What actually happens is that capitalists too often refuse to listen to reason until the revolution happens, and then it's too late. There are things they could do right now to improve the current situation, but they refuse because they're greedy. For example, I could end the homeless problem nationwide overnight, if only we implemented nationwide rent controls. Very simple solution, yet the capitalists and their puppets in government refuse to do that. Price controls would end inflation overnight. Socialized medicine would solve all our healthcare deficiencies.

These are very simple and effective solutions that could be done right now, but are not done solely because of capitalist greed.

Envy is where the greed actually is.

That's not a comfy thought for non
achievers.

Hence the projection, that it's successful
people who are greedy.

And of course, justification for raiding
what they have. Noble Robin Hoods! Take the
ranches farms and factories. The businesses
large and small.
When they're all destroyed you will find out where their money us hidden!

As if.

 

[Revoltingest]

They're not imagined.

But okay let's talk problems and solutions: The problem is that the prices are too high and wages too low for everyone to be able to afford the necessities and other things that can enhance life. The reason the prices are too high is solely because of greed, and the solution is price controls. Those who would oppose controls do so out of a malignant desire to make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

See post #116.

I'll add that high prices & low wages beat
the bare shelves that socialism endures.

 

[Audie]

That's a vapid unsupported & irrelevant claim.
The issues aren't about some un-named people
who don't listen to what you might call "reason".

Our " socialist" friends should have had the
chance to experience Mao's time in China.

 

[Revoltingest]

Our " socialist" friends should have had the
chance to experience Mao's time in China.

 

[Stevicus]

Envy is where the greed actually is.

That's your opinion.

That's not a comfy thought for non
achievers.

Hence the projection, that it's successful
people who are greedy.

And of course, justification for raiding
what they have. Noble Robin Hoods! Take the
ranches farms and factories. The businesses
large and small.
When they're all destroyed you will find out where their money us hidden!

As if.

If you don't understand the subject you're discussing, then your best bet is to bow out and not make bizarre, nonsensical statements. I find most of your posts to be incoherent.

It has nothing to do with envy at all. It has to do with people on the streets without homes, and people without enough money for food. The reason they don't have enough money is not because of envy or being a non-achiever or any other social Darwinist BS you can come up with. That's a load of crap, and you know it.

Every business is in business to make money. Do you deny this? If so, then prove to me that businesses are in business for strictly charitable purposes. If not, then my point is proven and my argument is valid.

And that's it.