Hi all,
I’m seeing a lot of hate for capitalism here, and I’m wondering why that is and what the rationale behind it is. I’m pretty pro-capitalism myself, so I want to see the logic on the other side of the fence.
If this isn’t the right forum for a political/economic discussion-- I’m happy to take this somewhere else.
Cheers!
Most people who hate capitalism are focusing in on its evil brother, “unfettered capitalism”. UC is a shit show which has created many of the problems we see today and is the unholy unity created when big business and the government combine. When done right, capitalism pushes to lower costs and improve services for consumers. Companies competing is a good thing. Unfortunately the greed of corporations knows no bounds which is when UC enters the picture and fucks everything up.
But where capitalism is fettered there is tremendous incentive for any successful capitalist to… defetterate, that is to intervene politically to undo the restraints holding them back from making more money, and conversely to seek regulatory frameworks which restrain potential competitors. It’s possible to have markets and competition, arguably the only features of capitalism that are even a little good, under other systems.
I agree… there is always the incentive and that is there we need politicians who aren’t so morally bankrupt that they bendover backwards and sell the people out and give these companies these sweetheart deals. And nothing keeps politicians more honest than an engaged public and a news media that is willing to report on these issues. That’s kind of where all this starts to fall apart.
And nothing keeps politicians dishonest like giant piles of money under the control of just a tiny handful of individuals, nothing keeps the media in line like those same piles of money and allowing journalists to schmooze a bit with the upper class, nothing keeps the public disengaged like a media landscape under the influence of capital.
Has it ever been done right though? A capitalist entity’s mandate is to grow itself and extract maximum profit. It is obliged to become as unfettered as possible to achieve that. This is inheritly unsustainable and in conflict with the interests of society and the environment at large.
Which is where laws and regulations step in. People act like capitalism is some kind of lawless world. The CEOs might want that, but no one is saying we have to give it to them.
Because in practice it is, daily you see news of corporations caught violating the law and as a result being slapped in the hand with a day’s worth of income, which for anyone with half a forehead means a profitable investment.
Again, like almost anything, it’s great if you don’t count the bad part.
There are well over a million companies in the US with 10 employees or more, but yes, by all means focus on the tiny percentage that violate the law to suite your talking-points. Anywhere else, that would be called cherry-picking, but I guess when you are trying to fit your narrative that CaPiTaLiSm BaD then let’s pretend that everyone is a crook.
Let’s say we were talking about Facebook alone, their crimes affect more people than the company has, more people than there are in your country, and even more people than they have active users, do you mean to tell me that’s meaningless because there are thousands of people who registered their t-shirt printing businesses that together will never collect enough money to match what Zuckerberg makes in an hour?
That’s an outlandish way of seeing it, the fact that are people like you who are satisfied with such arguments is part of why these monstrous companies can do whatever the hell they want.
SO GO AFTER FACEBOOK. Holy shit. How is that sooooo difficult to understand?! Someone named Fred murdered someone last week. Does that mean that all people named Fred are murderers?? That’s the kind of ridiculous logic you are trying to apply.
Nah, it means you can’t read because that comparison makes no sense unless you read something different.
You say unfettered capitalism but then say that big businesses and government have combined. Those seem contradictory, do you think it was better when the government wasn’t involved?
The government should be on the side of consumers/workers/the nation at large. Government is the only entity large enough to tame these larger corporations. You don’t want them dictating the color and trim packages of Ford F150 that are produced, but you need government telling them that “hey, maybe dumping unfiltered burnt leaded gsoline into the air ain’t such a good idea”.
Unfettered Capitalism is, in part, when the government is on the side of big business to the determent of everyone else. In that case, the government is actively giving blank checks to these mega corporations - look at the Military Industrial Complex for examples. Or when sweetheart deals are made which blindly favor one company because the CEO is cousins with some lawmaker.
I feel like saying that capitalism is not bad but the current implementations are the problem is is like saying the same for communism, they both are great in theory but reality doesn’t vibe with imaginary ideals.
Except that Capitalism has proven to be a world-changing entity. We aren’t talking about fancy ideas in someone’s head or in a closely controlled laboratory experiment. Real life. The rise of the post-war American middleclass was one of the biggest growth of wealth spread out to the largest group of people in human history. The 50s and 60s were an economic miracle where companies competed which led to some amazing innovations and upward mobility for works. Of course then came the doldrums of the 70s and then the disaster of the Reagan Administration and everything went to shit. Enter stage unfettered capitalism.
This guy thinks unfettered capitalism only began in the 70s lol did u learn about the gilded age or miners strikes (wars) in history class? Hate to burst your bubble but corruption, capitalism and government has worked together hand in hand since the founding of the union.
deleted by creator
Companies cooperating always lead to better results. That’s why they do it. If they would cooperate with society also, everyone would win.
Capitalism is cancer. It pushes everyone to fight society for itself.
Define “better”.
Better for whom exactly? Shareholders? Workers? Consumers? CEOs? Companies cooperating is good when you are talking about USB and ANSI and ISO standards and such. Where having one cohesive set of rules makes sense.
For most other things, companies competing with each other is far better for everyone involved. Competition breeds innovation.
That’s plainly wrong, any kind of capitalism has to end up with the rich eventually owning everything.