Do we like capitalism based on the fantasy of it?

cawacko said:
To be clear, and to state the obvious, capitalism is not a perfect economic system. I would argue of all the economic systems conceived so far capitalism has been the best. I would site the argument that no other economic system has brought more people out of poverty than capitalism.

This is an excellent topic for discussion though as the OP and 3D referenced there are different ways capitalism can go within a country. For instance when we allow the moral hazard of letting firms be too big to fail with the knowledge they will be bailed out is that a good thing? When government increases it's role in regulating the economy and determining winners and losers is that a good thing? (Before someone goes Desh on me this isn't suggesting complete laissez faire with zero regulations.)

And if capitalism is deemed not to be working I'd ask two questions. Is there something out there that's currently working better? Or what would be an idea for a completely new system? If it's the former I know a lot of people like to point to Europe. I'd say Europe is having some serious economic challenges however. They have an aging society and not enough young workers to maintain the benefits level expected by the older generation. European countries have also relied heavily on America for its defense. Could the European countries continue their liberal social benefits if they had to increase their share of defense spending and rely less on us?

Secondly we could look at China. They've obviously had a rapid rise with their state run capitalism. Is that the future though? There are a lot of economists who think China is facing some major headwinds economically. I think more time needs to be given to see how their situation plays out before saying we've seen the light.

IMO, nothing we are currently seeing is going to replace capitalism in the near future.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by "Europe is an aging society with not enough young workers, etc.?"
 
Teflon Don said:
How does one define success when it comes to an economic system? Unless you do that the debate is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say it's irrelevant, or that it's hard to get a general definition. Would the majority of people agree that the current system is working for the majority?

I think the honest answer to that would be no. But a lot of people - myself included - still believe in capitalism, largely because they like the fantasy of it & the idea that they could still become wealthy, even though the odds are completely stacked against that.

It's a strange thing. We're told from an early age that competition is healthy and good in the economy, and that it brings out the best in people. Do we really see that in practice? It brings out the best in some, and some (a small few) certainly benefit greatly from it. But the evidence is clear: for the vast majority in 2016, it means stagnating wages, mountains of debt and an inability to keep up with the cost of living.
 
Seahawk said:
This is an excellent point.

Maybe we should go back to the system we had in the 50's and 60's. I wonder though if it is not possible because we have many, many more people now. Also, I wonder if poverty simply was not highlighted back then, especially among black people and Hispanics.
Click to expand...

I think whatever we were doing in the '50's and '60's was working for the most part - though you're correct on minorities. It was really white America that reaped the benefits back then.

But it was a time when wages were good & growing, there was no "too big to fail," no real schemes and complex financial dealings that exploited the masses for the gain of a small few. I don't think corporate or monied interests had nearly the influence in DC that they do now.
 
Thing1 said:
I wouldn't say it's irrelevant, or that it's hard to get a general definition. Would the majority of people agree that the current system is working for the majority?

I think the honest answer to that would be no. But a lot of people - myself included - still believe in capitalism, largely because they like the fantasy of it & the idea that they could still become wealthy, even though the odds are completely stacked against that.

It's a strange thing. We're told from an early age that competition is healthy and good in the economy, and that it brings out the best in people. Do we really see that in practice? It brings out the best in some, and some (a small few) certainly benefit greatly from it. But the evidence is clear: for the vast majority in 2016, it means stagnating wages, mountains of debt and an inability to keep up with the cost of living.
Click to expand...

If you want to speak in generalities that is fine. But you say things like "it is not working for most". Well what does that mean? How do you define success? What would be working to you? Is it your expectation that everyone be millionaires? If that is how you define success then I guess it would be easy to conclude it isn't working.

You keep saying you are enamored with the "fantasy" of capitalism. What is this fantasy?
 
Teflon Don said:
If you want to speak in generalities that is fine. But you say things like "it is not working for most". Well what does that mean? How do you define success? What would be working to you? Is it your expectation that everyone be millionaires? If that is how you define success then I guess it would be easy to conclude it isn't working.

You keep saying you are enamored with the "fantasy" of capitalism. What is this fantasy?
Click to expand...

The fantasy is that you become one of the 'haves.' We'd rather have a system that doesn't work for most, on the off chance that we become one of the few who benefits.

And defining success isn't the expectation of being a millionaire. I don't think people's dissatisfaction stems from unrealistic expectations. I think most people would say that they simply can't get ahead at all in the current system, and that therefore, it isn't working for them. As I've said, they see their wages stagnating while the 1% get more & more wealthy and acquire more power. They see themselves working more hours and in some cases multiple jobs & still not keep up with the cost of living. They see their debt increasing with little chance of paying it off.

I think most dream of wealth, but also have a much simpler definition of "success" in their lives. Work hard, be able to afford a modest home, take care of their children & send them to college & be able to do that without creating crushing debt. It just isn't happening for most.
 
Thing1 said:
The fantasy is that you become one of the 'haves.' We'd rather have a system that doesn't work for most, on the off chance that we become one of the few who benefits.

And defining success isn't the expectation of being a millionaire. I don't think people's dissatisfaction stems from unrealistic expectations. I think most people would say that they simply can't get ahead at all in the current system, and that therefore, it isn't working for them. As I've said, they see their wages stagnating while the 1% get more & more wealthy and acquire more power. They see themselves working more hours and in some cases multiple jobs & still not keep up with the cost of living. They see their debt increasing with little chance of paying it off.

I think most dream of wealth, but also have a much simpler definition of "success" in their lives. Work hard, be able to afford a modest home, take care of their children & send them to college & be able to do that without creating crushing debt. It just isn't happening for most.
Click to expand...

So your issue is that the cost of living (inflation) keeps going up.

Is that really a problem with capitalism? Could it be that the federal reserve system with its low interest policy could be to blame?

Define what a "have" is and compared to what?

By every measure those that are considered "poor" today are better off than those who were considered rich even 50 years ago.

Time was that working multiple jobs to provide for a family was considered a virtue by society because you "did what you had to do". Now you see it as a burden.

While I think our "system" has been manipulated by immoral people I don't think that it has anything to do with capitalism or any other "ism".

I find these conversations to be shallow and lacking any originality. You can just want to synthesize it down to a "capitalism bad or good" conversation. The truth is that it is much more complicated than that but I understand that some people aren't deep enough thinkers to process that.
 
Teflon Don said:
So your issue is that the cost of living (inflation) keeps going up.

Is that really a problem with capitalism? Could it be that the federal reserve system with its low interest policy could be to blame?

Define what a "have" is and compared to what?

By every measure those that are considered "poor" today are better off than those who were considered rich even 50 years ago.

Time was that working multiple jobs to provide for a family was considered a virtue by society because you "did what you had to do". Now you see it as a burden.

While I think our "system" has been manipulated by immoral people I don't think that it has anything to do with capitalism or any other "ism".

I find these conversations to be shallow and lacking any originality. You can just want to synthesize it down to a "capitalism bad or good" conversation. The truth is that it is much more complicated than that but I understand that some people aren't deep enough thinkers to process that.
Click to expand...

M'eh - that last comment just shows that you haven't paid much attention to a lot of what's been said on this thread. I'm very conflicted about it, and see it as a very complex issue. I certainly am not distilling it down to "capitalism bad."

There are undeniable facts, however. Like I said, I think the system worked better for most 50-60 years ago. We now have a system that a small few are basically gaming - making huge amounts of money for themselves, and usually in a way that has little or no benefit for the masses, and even in ways that hurt the average working American. I don't think this is a shallow comment or unoriginal - it's just a fact. I mean, we have insurance companies who have quotas for denial of coverage, because profit is the motive. There are examples like that in almost every industry.

Is that what a nation of 300 million really wants? Because that's what it comes down to. Everything we choose to do is a social contract among all of us - what do we want for ourselves? Do we really want a system that is set up to greatly benefit a very small % of us, so that the rest of us struggle & usually fail to truly get ahead?
 
Thing1 said:
The fantasy is that you become one of the 'haves.' We'd rather have a system that doesn't work for most, on the off chance that we become one of the few who benefits.

And defining success isn't the expectation of being a millionaire. I don't think people's dissatisfaction stems from unrealistic expectations. I think most people would say that they simply can't get ahead at all in the current system, and that therefore, it isn't working for them. As I've said, they see their wages stagnating while the 1% get more & more wealthy and acquire more power. They see themselves working more hours and in some cases multiple jobs & still not keep up with the cost of living. They see their debt increasing with little chance of paying it off.

I think most dream of wealth, but also have a much simpler definition of "success" in their lives. Work hard, be able to afford a modest home, take care of their children & send them to college & be able to do that without creating crushing debt. It just isn't happening for most.
Click to expand...

Its not a fantasy that you become one of the haves....its a goal....and somewhere along the line one must realize that they've gone as far as their talents will take them
Somewhere in their lives they must realize, there is no more getting ahead and be satisfied with what they have.

What goal is there in any other system?....to just exist in the same realm as everyone else? be just another spoke in the wheel ?

That what makes capitalism work, you are in control of your own fate..... people's dissatisfaction DOES stems from unrealistic expectations. We all can't be rock and roll
idols, or famous doctors, or wealthy movies stars, and you see all this wealth and high living on tv and some are shallow enough to go nuts wanting it all and obcessing
about it.....
We live in a country that even MOST of so called 'have nots' walk around with cell phones, watch TVs in their air conditioned rooms and aren't starving....
Like I said, there is no heaven on earth and no utopia.....the mentally ill will always exist along with some homeless and those that are despairingly ill and an so will the
exceptionally inept that simply can't find their place in society........perfection just does not exist....

If your not a mover and shaker....well, thats life.....if your not a genius, just be thankful you're not a stupid as legion troll and enjoy what nature has given you.
 
Last edited:
Thing1 said:
I'm hoping for some serious discussion on this, so if you need to get the "commie liberal" comments off your chest, try to limit them to a post or 2.

I'm actually a pure capitalist. I love capitalism - I love determining my own income. More than anything, I love the idea that I can be wealthy someday if I really apply myself to it. And I think that's why many like capitalism - we all think we can be rich.

But how realistic is that? The percentages do not lie. A very small few of us actually get rich, and the vast majority of the population - a # that continues to grow - continues to wallow in the lower-to-mid classes, and see their buying power erode as wages stagnate and they accrue more & more debt to try to pay for a modest lifestyle that is still above their means.

Beyond that, that small few is calling more & more of the shots. Spending millions in Washington, helping to get politicians elected, and helping to write laws.

I feel like we're all being pretty gullible, and doing exactly what those who really pull the strings want us to do. It might be time to consider the possibility that capitalism just isn't working.
Click to expand...

Capitalism is just like any other system. It can be abused.

Such as what is going on now - with global capitalists preying on disenfranchised workers around the world to increase their profits. It's basically the equivalent of new-age slavery and we need to put a stop to it. Because race to the bottom economics is not good for anyone (except for the few at the very top). Americans aren't (nor should they) going to be able to compete with workers making pennies an hour in Bangledesh.
 
Last edited:
cawacko said:
Dale said:
Capitalism is just like any other system. It can be abused.

Such as what is going on now



Bringing jobs to poor people is now considered preying on them and slavery? Where do you come up with this?
Click to expand...

Wal Mart blocked having to pay their workers in Bangledesh even 35 cents an hour. Even that was too much for them. So you have your work cut out for you if you are going to try and make me believe their motives are altruistic.

But let's put that aside. Is more poor people around the world with a job worth the disintegration of our country's Middle Class to you?
Click to expand...
 
Dale said:
cawacko said:
Wal Mart blocked having to pay their workers in Bangledesh even 35 cents an hour. Even that was too much for them. So you have your work cut out for you if you are going to try and make me believe their motives are altruistic.

But let's put that aside. Is more poor people around the world with a job worth the disintegration of our country's Middle Class to you?
Click to expand...

Please name an economic system that has brought more people out of poverty than capitalism.

And yes trade increases economic growth.
Click to expand...
 
cawacko said:
Dale said:
Please name an economic system that has brought more people out of poverty than capitalism.

And yes trade increases economic growth.
Click to expand...

No these trade policies have not increased economic growth. At least not here in America. That's why we are approaching twenty trillion dollars in debt with barely any economic growth at all. Wages have stagnated or declined, poverty has increased, our infrastructure is falling apart.

This is not free or fair trade. This is simply the relocation of our manufacturing sector abroad to take advantage of near-slave labor. That's not trade. That's relocating.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Dale said:
cawacko said:
No these trade policies have not increased economic growth. At least not here in America. That's why we are approaching twenty trillion dollars in debt with barely any economic growth at all. Wages have stagnated or declined, poverty has increased, our infrastructure is falling apart.

This is not free or fair trade. This is simply the relocation of our manufacturing sector abroad to take advantage of near-slave labor. That's not trade. That's relocating.
Click to expand...

Trade is what's caused our national debt and infrastructure issues? On what basis do you make that correlation?
Click to expand...
 
cawacko said:
Dale said:
Trade is what's caused our national debt and infrastructure issues? On what basis do you make that correlation?
Click to expand...

Moving our manufacturing sector abroad is what has caused it. That's not trade. That is relocating like I said.

Manufacturing is the engine that grows any economy. So naturally it stands to reason that if you move our manufacturing sector to a different country it is going to negatively affect our economic growth. And it has. The stats prove it. Did you see what our economic growth was last quarter?
Click to expand...
 
Dale said:
cawacko said:
Moving our manufacturing sector abroad is what has caused it. That's not trade. That is relocating.

Manufacturing is the engine that grows any economy. So naturally it stands to reason that if you move our manufacturing sector to a different country it is going to negatively affect our economic growth. And it has. The stats prove it. Did you see what our economic growth was last quarter?
Click to expand...

What does one quarter of GDP have to do with anything? Is that to suggest we never had slow or negative growth when we were a manufacturing based economy compared to today's information based economy? Technology is a game changer. We're not going back to a time when someone made $25/hr plus benefits for making a pair of Nike shoes (for instance).

And despite his rhetoric Trump isn't bringing manufacturing jobs back.
Click to expand...
 
cawacko said:
Dale said:
What does one quarter of GDP have to do with anything? Is that to suggest we never had slow or negative growth when we were a manufacturing based economy compared to today's information based economy? Technology is a game changer. We're not going back to a time when someone made $25/hr plus benefits for making a pair of Nike shoes (for instance).

And despite his rhetoric Trump isn't bringing manufacturing jobs back.
Click to expand...

Its not just one quarter. Our economic growth has been pathetic for years, which would not be the case if these trade policies truly were such a boon to our economic growth.

And no: technology did not do away with these jobs. There are still manufacturing jobs and we still make things. We just build them in other countries now instead of here because businesses can get away with paying the workers there crap wages there because they live in corrupt piss holes with governments that don't give two shits about their people.

For example: Apple (about as technological as it gets) has a vast manufacturing sector. They just manufacture in China instead of America. So it's not technology that's the problem. It's greed.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top