[Closed] Capitalism

But absolute poverty is reduced through economic growth.

Absolute poverty isn't the whole story though.

A healthy, happy society is one that has a relatively small gap between rich and poor - this is clearly shown to be better for the rich in those society's as well as the poor.

The gap between rich and poor is increasing in most societies, including ours.

In some countries cyclists have no choice, they have to buy Saracen.

Elfinsafety wishes it was more like that here.

😛

social democratic mixed economies seem to produce the happiest peoples. Think Germany or Norway or even the UK.

Pure capitalism is nasty - think Victorian mills

"The Cuban model doesn't even work for us anymore."

Fidel Castro, September 2010

Pure capitalism is nasty - think Victorian mills

Which kind of brings me to the point I was trying to get to originally but no one seems to have noticed - should the role of government be to prevent crime or to manipulate free market economics? Or both? Or neither? Personally I think that the behaviour of victorian mills were a crime, as they effectively employed slave labour and had little if any regard to the welbeing of their workers.

I have a bit of a love hate relationship with STW, we are happy to banter for hours about conveyor belts, the nuances of the abuses of the catholic church or whether we are allowed to enjoy the sound of a warplane but when challenged about the whining lefty anti capitalist theme that pervuades this forum all we get is hollow arguments and misinformation, if anything.

Anyway, carry on...

whining lefty anti capitalist theme that pervuades this forum

It all depends on your point of view - I find STW a haven for swivel-eyed right wing ranters. A right wing sod you too thatcherite concensus seems to be the norm with a few folk noisily kicking against this.

but when challenged about the whining lefty anti capitalist theme that pervuades this forum all we get is hollow arguments and misinformation, if anything.

Whereas you have provided what exactly?

Whereas you have provided what exactly?

Hopefully a reasonably cogent and rational discussion of why I do not believe capitalism to the root of all of the world ills.

Nope, just some irrelevant bollocks about tribes, berries and drugs as far as I can see.

I'm not sure that anyone on here has ever argued capitalism to be the root of all evil btw.

sorry, i'm an idiot.
nothing to see here, move along, i shall carry on enjoying this thread and ignoring my grouting.

[b]"The Cuban model doesn't even work for us anymore."[/b]
Fidel Castro, September 2010

Oh, you're using Cuba as an example of how 'Communism has failed'. How surprising...

For your next mission, I'd like you to examine how the US trade blockade of Cuba has affected the latter's economy so severely. You could look at how even vital medical supplies are prevented from getting through by the Land of The Free, even though America has supposed to have relaxed it's rules on allowing Humanitarian products through.

[url= http://uspoverty.change.org/blog/view/us_poverty_rate_hits_143_44_million_are_poor ]Ah, America, where of course, Freedom, Democracy and Capitalism have worked so well...[/url]

"The Cuban model doesn't even work for us anymore."

Fidel Castro, September 2010

Communism as the sole idealogy for a country will always fail, Castro admits this and the Chinese have changed their game. Capitalism as a sole idealogy has also failed many times except that those who run that particular game won't admit to it and can call on the Governments of this world to do the socialist thing and bail them out.

social democratic mixed economies seem to produce the happiest peoples. Think Germany or Norway or even the UK.

Pure capitalism is nasty - think Victorian mills

The deaths caused by the Irish potato famine could greatly have been reduced if it were not for capitalist dogma. Exploitation of the workforce during the Victorian period gave rise to Socialism and Unions. I can only partially agree with Stoner that Capitalism has lifted people out of poverty, its also because of the social protections we have today mixed in with capitalism that have achieved this...in the west.

We are now doing an industrial revolution style of exploitation on developing countries.

Nope, just some irrelevant bollocks about tribes, berries and drugs as far as I can see.

If you disagree with me, explain why, I was hoping I had made some relevent points.

I'm not sure that anyone on here has ever argued capitalism to be the root of all evil btw.

This thread was started in response to the statement 'I hate capitalism'. This also seems to be a common theme in society at large, rolling out the bankers as the supreme evil every time the C word is mentioned. I happen to think that goverment manipulation of free markets is more at fault and that bankers are just playing the game.

Drugs were cited as an example of capitalism gone bad and I was just trying to make a case as to why that is not the case.

Berries was a simplistic argument for what I see as the core of capitalist behaviour.

If you disagree I would be very happy to argue the night away, it is why I come here. Otherwise.. erm.. well, bye!

Elfinsafety wishes it was more like that here.

[url= http://bikesforafrica.org/about.html ]I'd quite like more people everywhere to have bicycles actually.[/url]

[b]Elfinism[/b] would ensure that every man, woman and child on Earth would have a bicycle if they so wished.

I think it was Thomas Hardy who suggested that his faith in humankind is restored every time he sees a man on a bicycle.

Pure capitalism is nasty - think Victorian mills

lol the Victorian era wasn't "pure capitalism". The was [i][b]massive[/b][/i] state intervention during Victorian times : water sewerage and gas was supplied by local authorities, roads were built by the state, the mail service was nationalised as was the telegraph service, the railways were state regulated, state schools were created and museums built, local authorities built council houses for people on low income, and so it goes on.

There is no such thing as "pure capitalism", and there never will be - despite Milton Friedman's best attempts to achieve it. In every advanced country in the world there is massive state intervention, with the Finance Minister invariably the second most important person in any government.

No country allows the market to operate unregulated, indeed the single greatest preoccupation all governments have is how to make the economy "work" ........ and they never manage to get it right.

Capitalism only works in [i]theory[/i] ........well at least if you believe in the theory - it doesn't work in reality. Hence the need to abandon whole swathes of the economy from the "invisible hand of the market".

The Victorian laid the foundations for State Monopoly Capitalism not because they wanted to, but because of necessity.

OK, to use your silly berries analogy - the core of capitalist behaviour is just as much: the strongest member of the tribe taking all the baskets and all the berries for themselves, letting half of the tribe starve, then maybe doling out a few berries to his mates.

And characterising the state as 'taking away the berries and giving them to someone else' is bollocks too - in return for your 'berries' you get lots of public services etc back

A right wing sod you too thatcherite concensus seems to be the norm with a few folk noisily kicking against this.

You may be right, but TJ, I have no doubt you are the man to put them (us!?) in their (our!?) place. 😉

letting half of the tribe starve, then maybe doling out a few berries to his mates.

Sadly that seems to be the way that things are but at the moment and it seems to be our governments who aquire the neccesary weapons and resources to protect themselves and to ensure that the other berry thieves are not bought to justice. It could be argued that the political systems we have are the result of many years lobbying and manipulation by the berry theft specialists.

And characterising the state as 'taking away the berries and giving them to someone else' is bollocks too - in return for your 'berries' you get lots of public services etc back

Well excuse me if I do not feel I get great value for money, half (if not more) of my worldy productivity is a lot to pay for the very few services I have ever had to call on.

half (if not more) of my worldy productivity is a lot to pay for the very few services I have ever had to call on.

What a shame.

so you don't use the roads? You don't benefit from defence, you had no state education? You have no healthcare in your life. They are the main costs I believe

Well excuse me if I do not feel I get great value for money, half (if not more) of my worldy productivity is a lot to pay for the very few services I have ever had to call on.

You pay more than 50% tax? Wow you must earn a lot.

Never used a school or a road then?

It also sounds like you would probably be happier in life if you weren't always thinking about what you deserve and what you can get out of it, and be grateful that you are comfortably off in one of the richest countries in the world.

[img] [/img]

Torminalis, taking a break from shouting at pigeons...

You don't benefit from defence

I don't really think anyone in this country has benefited from 'defence' for a very long time. We have gone on the offensive a few times and I have actively protested against those occasions. Because they do not represent my interests, they seem to represent the interests of people who supporess alternative technologies to the ones whose interests we are seeking to defend.

You pay more than 50% tax?

We all do, we pay at least 25-30% on our basic income (and yeah, 40% in my case), then another 17.5% on most of the stuff we buy (against an income which has already been taxed), then there's council tax, inheritance tax, alcohol, gambling, petrol, land, capital gains, national insurance (and yes it is a tax, I never expect to get a state pension) and all of the other myriad of taxes that we have to fork out.

Never used a school

Yeah, I used a school and they were some of the most depressing years of my life. My education has no bearing whatsoever on my success in life, if anything I believe they slowed me down. My brother who is dyslexic was failed so badly by the schools that my parents put him into a specialist school where he thrived and had his former headmistress sacked for gross neglilgence bordering on abuse.

Healthcare

I have private healthcare and I am very lucky not to have ever had to use it.

Roads

Yeah, I like them and would be happy to pay as a part of road pricing scheme.

It also sounds like you would probably be happier in life if you weren't always thinking about what you deserve and what you can get out of it

As it happens I am a very happy individual and I have a great quality of life. I do however happen to object to our government waging illegal wars, subsidising and protecting the mega wealthy, distorting democracy, pouring cash into the coffers of corrupt foreign dictators, cultivating a culture of dependency though the benefits system and all of the other things that the self appointed, barely elected, career politicians choose to do in my name, with my hard earned cash.

crikey - have we met?

stoner
did actually like the article but whilst well written it is polemic from outset
it does state that the real wages increase [ if this occured] was caused by lower food prices. This was a result of the agrarian revolution/imports producing more food [supply] and thereby reducing price. It hardly proofs that capitalism per se improved anything it appears technology and production changes did this rather than benign employers/capitalists/landowners/lords etc
It was full of tenous rubbish like

it is fair to say that the majority of modern economic historians who study the industrial revolution believe that at least a slight increase in the material standard of living occurred. Since the introduction of reliable statistical evidence in Sir John Clapham’s An Economic History of Modern Britain in 1926, it has become increasingly obvious that real wages rose. The evidence is now so conclusive that one historian has confidently declared that “unless new errors are discovered, the debate over real wages in the early nineteenth century is over:

This monetary instability, coupled with severe harvest failures, led to rapidly increasing food prices throughout the Napoleonic Wars (Redford, pp. 89-93).

You pay more than 50% tax?

We all do,

Wrong. Tax take in this country is around 40%

I have private healthcare and I am very lucky not to have ever had to use it.

Which uses staff trained with taxpayers money and is no use to you if you have an accident or chronic disease

Roads
Yeah, I like them and would be happy to pay as a part of road pricing scheme.

Which would cost you a lot more if it was totally funded from road pricing 'cos at the moment all taxpayers pay for roads but many don't drive cars on them. If only the drivers paid for all the roads you would be paying around £1000 a year more

The most obnoxious piece of capitalism I know of is the USA selling guns and bombs to both sides in wars

self appointed, barely elected, career politicians

What's "barely elected" ?

And what would "fully elected" be ?

And how can you be self appointed and elected ?

.

my hard earned cash.

Your "hard earned cash" is provided to you by society.......without society you would have NOTHING.
So cough up, pay your taxes, and stop whingeing.

'Capitalism will destroy itself' - well I think that the US will tumble one day as we see the wealth gap widen to the point that the nation can't hold itself together. Whether the more moderate capitalist societies will be OK is a different matter but socialism has little of appeal for me.

okay, fair play but do you not think that 40% of ones total output (on average) in life is a bit steep?

Healthcare should be free at the point of delivery and I don't mind paying for that but not in the extremes that we have today, with a massive medical lobby medicalising what would once earn you a pat on the head and pull yourself together. I need someone to fix me up when I break myself on my bike. Anyway, we digress,

I didn't start this thread to peer into my own personal circumstances but more to have an ideological discussion on the nature of capitalism. I am very fortunate, others aren't and I accept that one of the hallmarks of a civilised society is the ability to care for the weakest and most vulnerable.

So TJ, what do you make of paying for illegal wars and removing moral hazard from our house-of-cards financial system? Do you not even slightlyly resent paying to push a government agenda which seems to represent the interests of only the very wealthy. Would they be so wealthy if they did not have a government to push their interests?

Is this anticapitalist backlash because you tried to live in a tent and it was a bit cold?

I have no problem with the rather naive, trading beads and shells version of capitalism that you describe, but the fact is we live in a society which seems to spend an awful lot of time and resources serving the needs of artificially created legal personalities. That strikes me as a bit wrong.

Me

I would make the MOD really about defence not the dept of War. So the cost of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are clearly wrong IMO.

I very much resent the government of the rich for the rich. I would prefer a stronger social democratic consensus like in Scandinavia or the Netherlands.

My own take is a strong green slant on social democracy

strong green slant

Always knew you were a bit Irish TeeJ 🙂

What's "barely elected" ?

The last labour govt represented 18% of the actual voters.

As for fully elected, don't think it can be done so lets not pretend that the current system has a legitimacy that it doesn't. Proper proprtional representation would be the best compromise available to us but that is highly unlikely to ever happen.

Self appointed because you start as a researcher patting backs and not causing too mch trouble, get parachuted into a safe seat and then elected by a minority in the absence of a sensible voting system. Or that is certainly how it seems, I cannot remember the last time I heard a politician speak that got me excited.

Your "hard earned cash" is provided to you by society.......without society you would have NOTHING.

And your point is? I am not against society. I would just like it to be a bit fairer and less distorted by government intervention.

So cough up, pay your taxes, and stop whingeing.

Because everything is perfect, our money does not pay for the death and suppression of millions across the globe and we should all be grateful.

Balls.

do you not think that 40% of ones total output (on average) in life is a bit steep?

Look at it as "cost".........you get to keep 60% as "profit", whilst you pay 40% to society as cost. Doesn't seem like a bad deal to me. Specially as the alternative is you op out of society and have nothing. Well apart from maybe a shelter made of branches and a few berries to eat.

Torminalis - you seem to be very confused.

anticapitalist backlash

erm, dude, I think you got the wrong end of the stick here, I am arguing in favour of capitalism and less government intervention into the free markets unless there is actual criminal behaviour.

rather naive, trading beads and shells version of capitalism that you describe

It was meant to be simplistic to prove a point. I am aware of some of the the complexities beyond the berry trading, though do not presume that I am not at the very least slightly naive.

tried to live in a tent and it was a bit cold

Bit cold?!? Not half...

less government intervention into the free markets unless there is actual criminal behaviour.

And how do you define what is criminal behaviour?

Torminalis - you seem to be very confused.

It's all pretty clear from where I am sat.

Capitalism gets blamed for a whole lot of the worlds ills. I am trying to argue that government intervention is as bad, if not a whole lot worse for society and the wellbeing of individuals. I have used war, protectionism, the criminalisation of the innocent and the unreasonable tax burden to try and make my case. You may not agree, but to suggest I am confiused is both patronising and wrong. I have my opinions and I am happy to subject them to scrutiny, which I hope you agree is a vital part in refining ones beliefs and passing them on where appropriate.

So cough up, pay your taxes, and stop whingeing.

[b]"Because everything is perfect, our money does not pay for the death and suppression of millions across the globe and we should all be grateful."[/b]

You very definitely didn't give the impression that were perfectly happy paying your taxes and that your only objection was how it was being spent.

unreasonable tax burden? That is a construct not an absolute.

I think our tax burden is too low. I would prefer higher taxers to provide better services.

Heres one for you. Without benefits paid for by taxes crime would increase ( as people stole to get a bite to eat) So paying benefits makes your cosy little middleclass life safer

erm, dude, I think you got the wrong end of the stick here

Don't think he did - I assume he was referring to your backlash against anticapitalists.

What you seem to be failing to grasp is that just because capitalism works well [i]for you[/i] doesn't mean it works well for everyone - in order for you to do well it means lots of people round the world are getting screwed instead.

You also seem to be forgetting that capitalism drives protectionism, war etc. Criminalising people, well yes I agree I suppose. And as for the unreasonable tax burden, well boo hoo. Again, the vast majority of the world's population would kill to swap places with you.

I am arguing in favour of capitalism and less government intervention into the free markets unless there is actual criminal behaviour.

But on the other hand you're saying that governments let business interests (be it weapons manufacturers, alcohol, etc) ride rough-shod over the proles. Which is it? Would the arms manufacturers stop selling weapons to countries that perpetrate atrocities if they were less heavily regulated? Looking back through history, have the people with the money always acted responsibly? (Clue: the answer's no.)

This is just a limp anti-New Labour rant a decade too late.

You very definitely didn't give the impression that were perfectly happy paying your taxes and that your only objection was how it was being spent.

I do accept that as a civilised society we have to provide safety nets for the weakest and most vulnerable as I have stated all along.I also believe we would have to pay a lot less if we didn't have to sponsor the various governments' misadventures and attempts to manipulate the free market to the advantage of their most vested interests.