Depends how you define it. Free Markets without government control or support----Good. Capitalism is a term first coined by Karl Marx, and is loaded with Marxist thinking. When I think of how most people view "capitalism", it is a market based system with government playing big-daddy. So, I don't support Capitalism, I do support laissez-faire free markets. In fact, if you really support freedom and liberty, you can't support authoritarianism when it comes to the economic sphere of human action.
Bignate603
Lifer
- Sep 5, 2000
- 13,897
- 1
- 0
Carbonyl, the problem with true socialism is that human nature does notwork under that system. It sounds great in theory, but in practice it wouldn't work. Why would I yearn to be a success when I can simply work at a simple job and then live as well as the guy who got educated and became an engineer or a doctor? If socialism truely is a classless system, then that would have to happen. If doctors or engineers were paid more or received better benefits than Joe Six-pack working at the local mall, then you have a capitalistic class. If not, you'll have a society of people with no job skills all hoping to live off the other guy. Sure, there's going to be the few people who still strive for success not for the perks but simply to be educated and be a success, but those people are few. Besides, how do you plan on divying up the resources under socialism? The economy can only make so many private jets, and everyone wants one. Under capitalism, they are expensive so only the few can afford them, but in classless socialism, if anyone can get one, everyone should get one. It's only fair. Obviously, since resources are scarce, everyone cannot get one. So, what would happen? Would the government take control of the private jet industry and share it with everyone? Would they use that as a ruse to be able to use it for their own selfish means? Let's face it, people always are trying to get the upper hand on each other. Moonbeam thinks that before capitalism, we all lived in peace and harmony. What about all the wars in the past, the rise of the Roman empire, the wars between the Greek city states, the Crusades, the wars between European nations during the middle ages? Capitalism wasn't in vogue, yet people were still competing for resources, competing for land, competing for power. Face it, competition is part of the human psyche.
This is what makes capitalism the best alternative out there. Instead of fighting against human nature, it tries to use it to further its goals. Competition in a capitalistic society is great. It brings new products to market and brings down costs. It forces people to do something if they want to succeed in life. Sure, there is a small segment of the population that lives of their inheritence, but those people will never go away. For the rest of us, capitalism forces us to compete to try and make something of our selves. Greed is a natural part of the human psyche, and capitalism gives you a worthwhile outlet for that greed. Remember, for every Enron out there, there are a thousand small businesses starting up, all of which have the potential to strike it big and unleash some new product or idea onto the world. Apple computers was started by two guys in a garage. Microsoft was created by a college drop out. Now, they are huge companies bringing new things to us each and every day. You decry capitalism, but it brought you the computer you are using today. Why would Bill Gates have written DOS if he would get the same return on that investment as the guy working an eight hour shift down at the factory? It's not perfect, but nothing is. For what we have right now, it's far and away the best.
This is what makes capitalism the best alternative out there. Instead of fighting against human nature, it tries to use it to further its goals. Competition in a capitalistic society is great. It brings new products to market and brings down costs. It forces people to do something if they want to succeed in life. Sure, there is a small segment of the population that lives of their inheritence, but those people will never go away. For the rest of us, capitalism forces us to compete to try and make something of our selves. Greed is a natural part of the human psyche, and capitalism gives you a worthwhile outlet for that greed. Remember, for every Enron out there, there are a thousand small businesses starting up, all of which have the potential to strike it big and unleash some new product or idea onto the world. Apple computers was started by two guys in a garage. Microsoft was created by a college drop out. Now, they are huge companies bringing new things to us each and every day. You decry capitalism, but it brought you the computer you are using today. Why would Bill Gates have written DOS if he would get the same return on that investment as the guy working an eight hour shift down at the factory? It's not perfect, but nothing is. For what we have right now, it's far and away the best.
In a free market system corporations are not seen as having the legitimate use of force, governments are. Perhaps you should provide some specific examples so I have a better idea of what your asking?
flavio
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 1999
- 6,823
- 1
- 76
Here's an example of one of the pitfalls of capitalism.
A large corporation actually suing survivors of a toxic chemical spill instead of cleaning up their mess. This is greed over the good of society.
A large corporation actually suing survivors of a toxic chemical spill instead of cleaning up their mess. This is greed over the good of society.
Did you read what I wrote? I am in favour of laissz-faire free markets, that means no government control over business and no business control over government. That would require a "government" much different than what we have today, one who's sole purpose is the defend the Lockean rights of Life, Liberty and Property.
Buddy, you didn't read what I said at all...I don't support Capitalism. I support lassez-faire free markets.
Where much of the benefit goes to Starbucks, Inc in some far off land and we all simply work for Starbucks.
I would prefer to see more localized delivery of goods and services, just as you would. Why? Because locally owned business tend to promote and support the community and there is no dangerous concentration of wealth in large corporations. My feeling is that too much of a concentration of power/wealth in a single entity be it a corporation, government, religion...anything will always eventually be detrimental to individuals.
This can't be denied but keep in mind large corporations tend to have huge advertising campaigns and other means to gain market share over the little guy.
If the coffee experience at Starbucks is equivalent to the coffee experience at Mom and Pops, most chose the former due to heavy marketing and other reasons.
I'm not saying this is wrong. Small businesses growth is still taking place. I'm just saying someday we may have no choice left but to drink our coffee from Starbucks, Inc.
- Mar 20, 2000
- 102,402
- 8,572
- 126
wouldn't work because most actors have no clue what other actors are doing with the economy, so they can't acurately judge what maximizes their benefit. what you're describing would work best in world of perfect knowledge and an infinite-horizon for the timeline. which we don't have.
Like what I tell my wife when there are dishes in the sink "the free market will take care of it!"
sandorski
No Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 70,782
- 6,339
- 126
The closest Canada comes to "Socialism" is the healthcare system, other than that Canada has a long way to go if it wants to be a "Socialist state". In some ways Canada is even more Capitalist than the US, take Agricultural sibsidies for example, they are near non-existant in Canada.
You're missing that this is the reason why nothing can work as well as the free marketplace. The free market provides spontaneous order amongst millions of players without a single one overseeing or directing the process. The "market" is: the exchange of ideas, goods or services between and among individuals are groups of individuals. As your statement acknowleges that fact that we are not capable as individuals of assessing the trillions of little individual acts, then how can we direct such actions? We can't, either individually or collectively. Command economies try, but they fail. Have a look at Hayek's The Counter-Revolution of Science especially the first bit of the book, or his "Road to Serfdom" is pretty good to at explaning this.
I think we're a fair bit more socialistic than the US, however, we are far less impiralistic. If I had to choose between these evils, I'd choose socialism.
Which bring me back to one of my original thoughts... Do most of you care where the products you use are made in? Do you support a company who employ American workers to get the products made and create jobs or do you prefer to spend less on products made in third world countries? *cough*Nike*Cough*
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter