Does capitalism work?

[lixluke]

Americans have promised equal freedom of opportunity, not promised equal opportunity of result.

The loser is you. Nobody said anything about equal opportunity of result. America is not about equal freedom of opportunity. It is a bout might makes right. The rich plutocracy are the dictators. There is no democracy.
Sure you can fight try to speak out and fight against it in politics. Just like you can do in any other dictatorship. Not saying it is easy to win.

 

[lixluke]

The only problem with capitalism is that it tries to maintain cohesion by disallowing too much power changes.
This allows for the offspring of the gifted to hold onto power they have not earned and do not always deserve.
Money has tilted the balances and made strength and power into an abstraction which can be inherited and passed on.

Capitalism is basically the means of production in private hands. This imposes society to have an economic dependence on private hands. Supposedly, it drives prices down. After many many decades, we clearly see this is a load of bull.
The best thing to do is simply use the flaws in the system to your advantage just like the rich do. Capitalism is a flaw, so it should not be too difficult as long as you are aware of this.

 

[spuriousmonkey]

Does nature…”work”?
Does not nature produce inequality, and conflict and poverty and wealth?
Does not nature produce imbalances which result in temporary huge environmental upheavals?
Is not man, and all his works, a part of nature?

It is Christianity, and its political counterpart, communism, that attempt to go against human nature, by reshaping the human animal.
This too is a part of the process.


The only problem with capitalism is that it tries to maintain cohesion by disallowing too much power changes.
This allows for the offspring of the gifted to hold onto power they have not earned and do not always deserve.
Money has tilted the balances and made strength and power into an abstraction which can be inherited and passed on.

No, nature does not work. Nature does what it can to make things feel right. And then it changes them again to make them feel right.

 

[Baron Max]

No, nature does not work. Nature does what it can to make things feel right. And then it changes them again to make them feel right.

Hmm, I believe, Spurious, that that would be called "working", don't you?

Baron Max

 

[wesmorris]

Capitalism is basically the means of production in private hands. This imposes society to have an economic dependence on private hands.

And this objection is valid because governments know what's best eh? What motivation does a government have to efficiently produce? Governments are bueurocracies whose only motivation is maintenance of power. Efficient production (lack of waste of resources) is NOT government's forte`. Where is the motivation for improvement or innovation?

Supposedly, it drives prices down. After many many decades, we clearly see this is a load of bull.

What an argument. Here's a counterargument just as well supported.

So long as there is competition, not only does it drive prices down but it provides a motivation to do so! We clearly see this is an unquestionable truth. Further, it provides motivation for innovation and giving people what they actually want rather than what some schmuck decides they should have. The truth of this is in choice. People can spend as they like, not as that schmuck thinks they should.

The best thing to do is simply use the flaws in the system to your advantage just like the rich do. Capitalism is a flaw, so it should not be too difficult as long as you are aware of this.

Yeah, it's really easy to get rich. That's why everybody's doing it. What a carefree life the rich live.

Capitalism is not a flaw, but there are always flawed elements of any system. HUGE corporations are generally a flawed component, as their only motivation is generating cash. Capitalism flourishes in the condition of a fair exchange of goods and services. HUGE corporations (pardon the generalization) generally have to lose sight of that in lieu of gratifying their investors.

Perhaps it's just "public companies" that are ultimately the flaw, as private ownership doesn't necessarily suffer the same shortcoming.

 

[Satyr]

Capitalism is basically the means of production in private hands. This imposes society to have an economic dependence on private hands. Supposedly, it drives prices down. After many many decades, we clearly see this is a load of bull.
The best thing to do is simply use the flaws in the system to your advantage just like the rich do. Capitalism is a flaw, so it should not be too difficult as long as you are aware of this.

Capitalism is the law of nature abstracted.

Money represents the abstraction of value.
Once value can be inherited and saved, then everything has a price.
Morality, dignity, freedom are all given a monetary value that can be bought and sold.

The rich become deplorable when they have not proven their quality but have simply inherited it through money or bought it using money.

The problem with Communism is that it is a Christian idealization of what man should be like, rather than how he is.
It rests on the assumption that such a man can be manufactured through social manipulations, producing an ant-like psychology through the loss of identity.

 

[wesmorris]

And what Satyr said, perfectly.

 

[spuriousmonkey]

Hmm, I believe, Spurious, that that would be called "working", don't you?

Baron Max

Aren't you one of those parasitic retired people?

 

[spuriousmonkey]

Capitalism is the law of nature abstracted.

Money represents the abstraction of value.

There are no values in nature.

 

[wesmorris]

There are no values in nature.

All life values the things it percieves it needs to perform its function, no?

If the lion doesn't value its prey, it does not pursue it, etc. No?

 

[lixluke]

The government in a capitalist economy is not meant to regulate anything. It creates and enforces laws, and adjudicates disputes and violations.

The people pretty much elect representatives, to do all this.
Laws are created to protect the people, and the environment.
The government can be considered an organization owned by the public. The government purchases goods and services from private companies to be used for government purposes.

For example:
Hire a company to build a court house.
Purchase all the materials needed to supply the courthouse.
Hire workers.
Etc.

The government keeps the peace to enforce all this.

Innovation is not a natural human motivation, but motivated through competition. Without competition, humans have no motivation for innovation. Innovation is more important that having no competition. This means that some have a higher standard while others have a lower standard of living. Having no competition means no innovation, and everybody has a lower standard of living.

Premise: Nobody has any motivation for improvement of life and society without competition. It is impossible for somebody that is not in competition to want to improve their own lives and society as a whole. True or false?

TRUE: Innovation equals a better standard of living.


We now have an economy in which goods and services are produced in private hands. In order for the individual to accomplish personal care and care of his family, he must depend on these companies for a living. The individual must pay for everything. This gives the individual motivation to work. The individual works for a business, or starts his own business to compete with other business. A portion of the individual’s income goes to the government.

A person works hard building his businesses, making sacrifices, and managing opportunities to get rich. Not everybody has food. Not everybody has shelter. Not everybody has clothes. They are left to die because it is not the public’s responsibility to provide for them. This is functional as long as there is innovation. There is no such thing as oppression. People are free to do what they want. So they cannot possibly be oppressed. If they do not like how they are being treated, they can find a way to make money by actively taking advantage of opportunities.

As a result of businesses in competition, prices go. People purchase from those with lower prices. The problem is not capitalism, but the ability for businesses to go public as corporations.

 

[spuriousmonkey]

All life values the things it percieves it needs to perform its function, no?

If the lion doesn't value its prey, it does not pursue it, etc. No?

The lion is a black box with input and output. The lion doesn't put value to the prey. The outcome of a complex set of interactions elicits a certain behavioural pattern. It might pursue the prey. Or it might take a dump. The nutritional value of the prey remains the same. The nutritional value of a lion turd also. There is no goal for the lion to pursue as humans gather wealth. A lion is merely being a lion.

Gathering wealth is cultural programming. Nobody needs 1 billion or 1 million to exhibit natural behaviour. In fact, having 1 billion might inhibit natural behavioural patterns. You see this effect with people pursuing a career. They put so much effort into it that there is no time for anything else, such as socializing, fucking around, making babies, farting, taking a slow dump, etc. They are at work networking.

This is of course based on a natural drive, the urge to compete and to be good at something, but cultural and social influence has taken the idea so far that normal behavioural patterns are inhibited to a large degree and seen as abnormal. For example 'doing nothing'.

There is a natural 'value' to do nothing. In capitalism it is frowned upon. Lions do nothing most of the day. It's interesting you mentioned them as an example. They 'value' as you say to 'do nothing'. More than chasing prey.

 

[lixluke]

There is nothing wrong with the laws of nature that are very real.
What is wrong is an imposition on characteristics of human nature that society imposes. As long as society imposes fallacies of human nature, our city designs will take the backseat to nurture what is not human nature, but psychological disorder instead of nurture psychological health.
Yes. Real life motivation through competition and desperation is a psychological disorder. It is not selfmotivation. It is not real motivation. It is imposed motivation. Most of all, it is not human nature.

 

[Roman]

The lion is a black box with input and output. The lion doesn't put value to the prey. The outcome of a complex set of interactions elicits a certain behavioural pattern. It might pursue the prey. Or it might take a dump. The nutritional value of the prey remains the same. The nutritional value of a lion turd also. There is no goal for the lion to pursue as humans gather wealth. A lion is merely being a lion.

Gathering wealth is cultural programming. Nobody needs 1 billion or 1 million to exhibit natural behaviour. In fact, having 1 billion might inhibit natural behavioural patterns. You see this effect with people pursuing a career. They put so much effort into it that there is no time for anything else, such as socializing, fucking around, making babies, farting, taking a slow dump, etc. They are at work networking.

This is of course based on a natural drive, the urge to compete and to be good at something, but cultural and social influence has taken the idea so far that normal behavioural patterns are inhibited to a large degree and seen as abnormal. For example 'doing nothing'.

There is a natural 'value' to do nothing. In capitalism it is frowned upon. Lions do nothing most of the day. It's interesting you mentioned them as an example. They 'value' as you say to 'do nothing'. More than chasing prey.

So a lion places value on doing nothing.

 

[wesmorris]

The lion is a black box with input and output.

No, no it isn't. You just frame it that way because you're a science nerd, which I appreciate - but you seem to have forgotten the difference between science and reality?

The lion doesn't put value to the prey.

I presume you asked the lion about this? I say look in its eyes and you'll see it does indeed love the sport... in a very simplistic way, but still. It feels. It desires to perform its function of either taking a dump or chasing down and dominating its prey.

There is no goal for the lion to pursue as humans gather wealth. A lion is merely being a lion.

Oh but people aren't merely being people? I cannot disagree more.

Gathering wealth is cultural programming. Nobody needs 1 billion or 1 million to exhibit natural behaviour. In fact, having 1 billion might inhibit natural behavioural patterns. You see this effect with people pursuing a career. They put so much effort into it that there is no time for anything else, such as socializing, fucking around, making babies, farting, taking a slow dump, etc. They are at work networking.

Dude, please try to consider the following:

You are sort of right, but it is damned similar to the lion being the lion for the following reason: People pursue their survival as they come to understand what that means given what they percieve to be their circumstance. Same thing the lion is doing, just a lot more complicated via much more sophisticated abstractions.

Or not. *shrug*

This is of course based on a natural drive, the urge to compete and to be good at something, but cultural and social influence has taken the idea so far that normal behavioural patterns are inhibited to a large degree and seen as abnormal. For example 'doing nothing'.

You can do nothing if you want. You have choice for chrisake. Of course if you're not financially independent, you might get sort of hungry. If you can find the energy to haul your sorry do nothing ass to the YMCA or some charity, they'll prolly feed ya and someone will give you clothes probably. *shrug* Stuff generally doesn't just magically appear. Was there ever a time when one could "do nothing" and live? Isn't "going nothing" kind of the antithesis of living anyway? Maybe I misunderstood you.

There is a natural 'value' to do nothing. In capitalism it is frowned upon.

I'd say that's totally wrong. In capitalism, getting the most for the least amount of "doing" would be the most efficient way of garnering resources. Doing nothing is great if you can swing resources your way by having done so.

Lions do nothing most of the day. It's interesting you mentioned them as an example. They 'value' as you say to 'do nothing'. More than chasing prey.

Well apparently they're quite efficient at gathering the resources they require eh? You're not so efficient? I'm not either I guess, but I'm getting better!

And you have it screwy a bit, what they value changes with their circumstance, like I said above. When they get hungry, their value becomes prey, and wait you just said they don't value shit? Anyway, I think you've framed this shit to support your premise. Maybe I've done the same thing but can't see it. Fuck if I know.

 

[wesmorris]

I just wanted to dissect this a smidge:

Gathering wealth is cultural programming.

That's one way to see it, but people don't have to follow it. Regardless of how you frame it, people will seek what they value. If they value pure monetary wealth, they'll pursue it to the extent of the will/motivation they can muster towards it (really a reflection of how much the notion is really valued), limited by their circumstance, including how lucky they were in doing do, and how effective their plan to gain what they value is (intelligence, dillegence, luck, realism, motivation, etc).

If you say "it's cultural programming" then you have relegated your own argument to nothing more than the same, no? If you are capable of operating outside this programming, aren't other people as well then?

Nobody needs 1 billion or 1 million to exhibit natural behaviour.

First, you do not define the needs of others. They define it themselves based upon their experience and how they percieve their circumstance in every moment. For whatever reason, it could be that they feel that indeed they do NEED to accumulate massive wealth. That you feel differently does nothing to establish what they think they need. It only establishes what you think you need, which is to do nothing apparently. Hell man more power to you. If you can figure out a way to eat and do nothing, why are you typing this shit? You value it apparnetly, but it's not quite nothing is it? Anyway, you'll notice that even the lion gets up off his ass to hunt down a gazelle from time to time. It's about gathering the resources you think you need. Considering the abstraction of value as noted by sartyr, you might consider it's an easy conclusion to reach that more money = satisfaction of need. Of course I personally find this short sighted, as with more money comes more shit you have to take care of or defend, I cannot say it's invalid reasoning for someone else's situation. Apparently you think you can. Of course you can say what you want, but I think it's as short sighted as the person who only lives for money.

In fact, having 1 billion might inhibit natural behavioural patterns.

Apparently, I think what you consider to be "natural" is unnecessarily narrow. People are part of nature, and attempting to describe their acts as anything but perfectly natural must yeild a skewed variant of what is actually natural. Unless perhaps you've decided to become a theist or something. *shrug* I'd say it's perfectly natural to seek material resources that aid in your "survival" as you come to think survival is. That's the most interesting part to me, is that survival is, with the advent of humanity and a life where you don't necessarily have to kill your own food... strewn across the abstract to the point where someone's existence can, in their own mind, be dependent on the exact shade of their hair color, and rightfully so! Fucking fascinating to me.

You see this effect with people pursuing a career. They put so much effort into it that there is no time for anything else, such as socializing, fucking around, making babies, farting, taking a slow dump, etc. They are at work networking.

Hopefull you can understand where I'm coming from, which I think perfectly explains why some might do what you're saying above.

 

[spuriousmonkey]

Well, I can never see capitalism as natural due to my biological background. Neither is any other political/economical system. There are some systems in which natural 'state' is easier to reach. I doubt we have seen the perfect system so far.

Capitalism does work very well in certain aspects. Since it is build on competition it can outcompete systems easily that are not build on competition. This does not equal being 'better' of course. Just different.

In our modern society capitalism was a necessity to bring a higher standard of living to more people. Unfortunately at the same time there has been a movement going on that deprives more and more people from a good standard of living to maintain the excellent standard of living for a part of the human population. And there is a very very small part that has living standards that are completely wacko jacko regarding the earlier topic of what is natural.

American capitalism saved Europe from a third worldwar. There is no question about that. The old systems of protectionism just had to fall.

That said I think the social welfare states of Europe are dealing with a more humane and possible natural kind of capitalism than the USA.

But this view of mine, my friends, is no secret to anyone.

 

[wesmorris]

There is nothing wrong with the laws of nature that are very real.
What is wrong is an imposition on characteristics of human nature that society imposes. As long as society imposes fallacies of human nature, our city designs will take the backseat to nurture what is not human nature, but psychological disorder instead of nurture psychological health.
Yes. Real life motivation through competition and desperation is a psychological disorder. It is not selfmotivation. It is not real motivation. It is imposed motivation. Most of all, it is not human nature.

why do you even speak when all that comes from your head is shit? what a waste of bandwidth you represent.

let me offer the solution to your apparent lack of comprehesive ability:

If you cannot motivate yourself, or think for yourself - someone else will do it for you. Society has to some degree evolved to have that shit built in. It keeps retards like you from causing more trouble than they already do. That's a simple law of nature, dumbass.

 

[lixluke]

Actually, without self motivation, somebody will do it for you.
This is not the argument.
Not everybody is self motivated. Their lack of self motivation is an example of a personality disfunction.
This is not a functional individual.

 

[baumgarten]

Actually, without self motivation, somebody will do it for you.
This is not the argument.
Not everybody is self motivated. Their lack of self motivation is an example of a personality disfunction.
This is not a functional individual.

"Ninety-five percent of the people in the world need to be told what to do and how to behave." -- Arnold Schwarzenegger