-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Are you ready to consider that capitalism is the real problem?
- Thread starter Lime
- Start date
Muppet of a Man
Member
This cannot be said enough. Crony capitalism is a huge problem with the US's implementation of capitalism. Regulated capitalism tempered by social democracy, as seen by a number of countries around the world, most notably the nordic countries, is the way to go.
I am personally think the idea of capitalism is great, that competition is the driving force of innovation. However you can't ignore the growing wealth gap, lack of wage increase & poverty levels in the UK. More funding is needed for our public services, and education really needs to be better. State schools in England have massive class sizes and underpaid teachers which is not a great combination.
Scandinavia have seemed to nail it for the most part, a good balance of capitalism with dashes of socialism. I am not agasint rasinig of taxes to meet there levels, it's just I don't think they will be distributed well. The NHS is amazing, and I wild fight for it tooth and nail but that computer system that cost the tax payer £11bn and didn't even work. What a fucking waste, that could of been used to boost wages, improve machines anything.
I am worried about the next surge of automation. It is going wreak havoc on many industries, and mostly low paid workers. Most innovation in history has created more jobs than it has displaced, this however, I don't see it. I just hope there's a plans in place to deal with the mass unemployment because our current welfare system isn't going to help.
Scandinavia have seemed to nail it for the most part, a good balance of capitalism with dashes of socialism. I am not agasint rasinig of taxes to meet there levels, it's just I don't think they will be distributed well. The NHS is amazing, and I wild fight for it tooth and nail but that computer system that cost the tax payer £11bn and didn't even work. What a fucking waste, that could of been used to boost wages, improve machines anything.
I am worried about the next surge of automation. It is going wreak havoc on many industries, and mostly low paid workers. Most innovation in history has created more jobs than it has displaced, this however, I don't see it. I just hope there's a plans in place to deal with the mass unemployment because our current welfare system isn't going to help.
Hello? This is Hailun!
Member
> that competition is the driving force of innovation.
Need is the driving force of innovation.
Need is the driving force of innovation.
Acerac
Banned
Seriously, this world would be so much better off if we killed off socialism. I say we start with socialized road services, I'm sick of paying for roads I'll never use and potholes I didn't create.
Bl@de
Member
It's interesting how people will argue that socialism and communism can't actually work in their true form, yet will defend the ideal of some true form of capitalism that seems to have never existed.
HellforLeather
Member
This is not an uncommon sentiment echoed by modern Progressives.
ZoltanXerxes
Member
Let me add to this comment. I don't think you need government to put that much regulation on capitalism. Where does the real regulation come from? You. The customer. You are the reason why they offer their product or service and the competition (other companies) is the reason why they need to offer you a good deal (or the best value for your money), and attract you to their business.
Remember this phrase: "The one in the relationship (Business transaction) that has the power is the one who needs the other the least".
You have many options in the free market to get a specific service or product, so you have the power to choose. If the company knows this, they will need to provide you with a good deal or more service to prevent you to go somewhere else for a better deal.
Hello? This is Hailun!
Member
Capitalism is Capitalism son. You don't think it be like it is, but it do.
"Offer you a good deal" like having a decent product at a lower price? So how do they get that lower price? Slave labor in the third world? Depressed wages? Why is you getting a good price on something suddenly absolving the horrors of Capitalism?
Do you not care about the people who work for pennies on the dollar or is it an out of sight out of mind thing?
Acerac
Banned
Mind elaborating?
Can someone explain how a simple thing like watching TV would work without capitalism? I'd have to interract with:
-People who mine the ressources (oil/plastic, minerals, etc.)
-People who build the television set
-People who create the content
-People who build and exploit the network to bring me the content
-People who generate and transport the electricity
That's like hundreds/thousands of people. Am I supposed to trade potatoes from my field or poetry with all of them? Or maybe hope that they do it for the love of television?
Seems like buying the television set with money earned from performing some tasks and paying for a monthly subscription really simplify things a lot.
-People who mine the ressources (oil/plastic, minerals, etc.)
-People who build the television set
-People who create the content
-People who build and exploit the network to bring me the content
-People who generate and transport the electricity
That's like hundreds/thousands of people. Am I supposed to trade potatoes from my field or poetry with all of them? Or maybe hope that they do it for the love of television?
Seems like buying the television set with money earned from performing some tasks and paying for a monthly subscription really simplify things a lot.
cpp_is_king
Member
Equally interesting is how people will argue that capitalism is horrible despite the only common factor amongst the most prosperous civilizations, while arguing the socialism in its true form is the only thing that can work despite nobody ever having been successful in implementing it, and all societies that have tried failing miserably
BreezyLimbo
Banned
Das Kapitalismus is the best. Sorry communism, you suck.
Hello? This is Hailun!
Member
HellforLeather
Member
What about monopolies? I am not an anti-capitalist but there definitely needs to be some level of regulation. If left to their own devices there will always be a market force that produces a net negative to society.
Am I entitled to a fridge? (not according to Fox News but whatever...)
Most of the most successful civilizations in history have been slave owning, imperialist nations. If the drug lord is far more prosperous than the burger chef, should we all aspire to be drug lords?
Hello? This is Hailun!
Member
The fact that you think that the insignificant minority of people who live well under Capitalism makes it worth it is sad. You're the "temporarily embarrassed millionaire" stereotype.
For every Kim Kardashian there's tens of thousands who live on starvation wages.
Hello? This is Hailun!
Member
I would say that having access to food storage takes a healthy precedence over making sure you can watch your stories.
MotionBlue
Member
Capitalism is bad!
Posted from my IPhone.
In the safest, healthiest era of human development ever.
Capitalism is fine when regulated. The USA has problems with plutocracy, cronyism and corruption, Not capitalism.
Posted from my IPhone.
In the safest, healthiest era of human development ever.
Capitalism is fine when regulated. The USA has problems with plutocracy, cronyism and corruption, Not capitalism.
HellforLeather
Member
Hello? This is Hailun!
Member
The most heavily regulated nations on the planet right now, as far as capitalist development is concerned, is China and North Korea.
Glad that's what you aspire to.
hahaha got 'em *burp*
Zen_Arcade
Banned
Need is not the driving force of innovation. There are countless examples of innovation to things society doesn't really need.
So I guess I walk to the closest communal food storage place then? And please, I only watch science documentaries.
What's with the anti-capitalists acting so high-and-mighty?
HellforLeather
Member
What he means is in the "I need this to make this task easier/faster/more convenient!" type of need; not the hunter-gatherer survival sense of the word.
TyphoonStruggle
Member
The most heavily regulated nations on the planet right now, as far as capitalist development is concerned, is China and North Korea.
Glad that's what you aspire to.
I'm not quite sure what you meant by posting that image. But it looks like you're mocking the poster using a strawman argument in an image.
I agree! Need does not drive innovation. Did we NEED to go into space? Nope. Competition drives innovation.
cpp_is_king
Member
The majority live "ok". It's a minority that live in extreme poverty
PumpkinSpice
Banned
It's almost like there's some sort of healthy balance between a totally restricted market and a completely unregulated one.
I'm not particularly invested in either side of this argument and am trying to keep an open mind. With that said, can you define "ok" in relation to "extreme poverty?" I am asking this in good faith for the record.
Hello? This is Hailun!
Member
Maybe? I dunno.
Calm down. You're literally getting upset that liberation of subsistence almost slave labor would interrupt your TV time.
Forced obsolescence isn't innovation. You don't need a thinner cell phone and it's renovation was designed to get you to throw away your old one, not to get you to need a new one.
The strawman is the argument that you can't participate in something and also criticize it.
TheWorthyEdge
Member
Yeah, this isn't true.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Just to be clear, do you mean "without Capitalism" or do you mean "without money"?
Come on, man; that's the tritest, most banal observation possible.
Bl@de
Member
Don't act stupid.
Why should I? You can read up on it. You have access to the internet. A tool which lets you download whole books on the topic. For free and within seconds.
Hello? This is Hailun!
Member
Please son, don't "not true capitalism!11!!" and then call someone else stupid.
Why don't you want to talk about Capitalism in a thread about talking about Capitalism?
ZoltanXerxes
Member
Monopolies are negative when large companies get governments and law makers to enact regulations where their product or service can be copyrighted to extreme levels thus making their product or service impossible to compete against.
Copyright laws are there to protect a product or service from being copied, but to levels which other companies can still compete with them. For example, if Apple said "you cannot make touchscreen phones, only we can make touchscreen phones", that would be very negative to the market, thus, the law makers know how this affects the market so they create laws that will instill competition.
Monopolies can be ended anytime in the free market by a new competitor, or consumers seeking alternatives (mostly from price since monopolies can charge a large sum for their business).
If things do get out of hand, then governments have to step in and breakup a monopoly, but most of the time, governments are the cause of monopolies. If there was nothing but the free market, and the laws were firm but not too strict regarding copyright, monopolies would be a rarity.
HellforLeather
Member
I think we are actually on the same side of this issue in that be both seem to agree that the government needs to maintain some level of oversight? I might have assumed your position in the last post, my mistake.
In terms of gdp, China is now second and has leaped over several developed "capitalist" countries the past two decades. In regards to economic progress they've accomplished plenty despite, or probably because, state intervention.
Edit: I didn't realize you're joking. I'm still leaving my post up to add that state intervention can be good if done right.
Hello? This is Hailun!
Member
One of the governments biggest reasons for existing is the protection of private property, meaning copyright.
Literally? Reread my post and you'll see that I'm in no way upset. I used TV as an example and then you told me I'm not entitled to watch TV so I asked the same question with a fridge instead, since it's widely considered to be an essential appliance.
Well, I guess it's more "without money" because many in this thread opposing capitalism seem to equal those two. Without knowing what should replace capitalism, it's hard to envision how it would work. But yeah, watching TV and using a fridge would obviously be possible under communism or socialism. I guess there would be less models and/or content though.
MotionBlue
Member
Hoho. You sure got me comrade. Any other riveting internet memes you want to post. Maybe some more strawmen for r/LateStageCapitalism?
Hello? This is Hailun!
Member
And all they had to do to get there was create a violent totalitarian dictatorship.
China's success is 100% because of state intervention and its authoritarianism.
Hello? This is Hailun!
Member
/LSC is a bunch of 12 year olds who think China is some how Socialism.
You're praising heavily regulated Capitalism, which is what China is. I don't understand the snark here.
During the Cold War, we absolutely needed to go into space for national security purposes.
You could argue that reaching the moon was a goal driven by arbitrary competition, but the technological advancements required for, and thus gained by going into space were paramount to the US and USSR defending themselves from one another.
Hello? This is Hailun!
Member
And in hind sight the USSR wasn't a grave threat to the US and we should have spent that money on real need, like human welfare.
HellforLeather
Member
A hostile superpower with a stockpile of nuclear weapons wasnt a grave threat?
What you have to back up is the following:
"Capitalism crashes every 10 years or so" (because there was a crisis 10 years, but the last global crisis before that was 1929 which is a wee bit more than 10 years before that)
and
"Capitalism has no qualms with using the political tool of Fascism to discipline a working class and liquidate a bourgeoisie class if their political will doesn't line up with Capital's end goal." (the fascism was actually born from quite similar ideas as socialism in Italy at the beginning of 20th century - so why are you stating that fascism is a tool of the capitalism?)
Those are very different statements from what you are saying now. I asked your two very easy questions that you somehow are unable to answer.
And your arrogant tone doesn't cover for the fact that you use hyperbole and exaggerations in order to make a point for yourself. Honestly, your undeserved arrogance doesn't do anything else than accentuate your lack of arguments. It's also ironic when socialists prove to be elitists.
Acerac
Banned
You should because you offered the basis of an idea with nothing to support it. Perhaps you are not familiar with how discussions work?
Every opinion on this forum is represented elsewhere. Why are you even here?
Similar threads
- Locked