Why capitalism?

Can anybody tell us why capitalism is such a good idea?

 

It is a good short-term government system for very high production.

Not really any good for sustaining long term prosperity and technological advance, cannot comprehend finite resources correctly, only availability of that resource at that instance.

Look at the Human species with a sense of perspective and it becomes quite visible.

I guess you would have to say it has done us well so far but it has been failing us in the last half a century as its not able to react to situations that don't involve continued capitalism as the system.

So I guess, good for productivity and science, easy to start with, but dificult to change out of.

 

If that's your opinion, why do you describe yourself as ultra liberal?

 

1. It encourages high productivity

2. It provides incentives for technological innovation, which drives humanity forward

3. It allows the people to be free to spend or save their money as they please

4. It allows the people to be free to earn their money as they please, provided their method of income doesn't wrong anyone else

5. It offers a relatively high standard of living to the vast majority of the people, even among the lower- and middle-class

6. It allows social mobility more than most other systems, meaning you can become rich even if you were born poor

7. It has been a great success in nearly every nation that has tried it

 

I'd say we've done pretty good with capitalism in the last fifty years. The stock market has increased nearly 40-fold, we've made more technological progress in the last fifty years than in all the rest of human history combined, and capitalist nations continue to be the best educated, best fed, and best treated medically.

 

Marx advocated capitalism, because it rapidly increases the means of production neccessary for the ultimate success of socialism.

Marx, however, was unaware of the repressed psycho-sexual impulses that are at the root of capitalism's unconscious motivations.

 

Why don't you ask the people in Mexico, Brazil or Russia how they feel about capitalism? Most people in this world are living in poverty. Over one billion people live on under one dollar a day.

South Africa, Eastern Europe, Africa, Asia... Hasn't done much good there, has it?

Actually, the Cuban population is the best in the world regarding their mother language and mathematics.


Do you think the people in Sudan is well educated, fed and best treated medically?

 

Communism isn't going to change that. If a nation has 10 million people earning an average of $300 per year, it only has $3 billion to work with even if it has a 100% tax rate (hardcore socialism). No matter how it slices the pie, it won't change the fact that there just is not enough to go around. What it will do is destroy the incentive to work. Why should I work for my $300 per year when the government will give it to me anyway?

Capitalism increases productivity, allowing higher GNPs per capita.

What are you talking about? Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia are among the crowning achievements of capitalism. It's not a coincidence that the Eastern European countries that quickly threw off the communist shackles following the collapse of the Soviet Union (Poland, Czech Republic) have the highest GDP in the region, while those that have regressed to Soviet-style communism or kleptocracy (Belarus, Ukraine, Romania) are still third-world countries.

Just because the government of Cuba says so doesn't make it true.

Compared to how they would be educated, fed, and medically treated if communism was the predominant system there? Absolutely. This argument is fallacious because it singles out a specific country, with no comparison to the system you are advocating. Since there's no comparable country to the Sudan that has a communist system, there aren't really any conclusions to be drawn. Let's compare countries that are culturally and historically similar, but economically diverse: North and South Korea. (The former) East Germany and West Germany. Belarus and Poland. Vietnam and Thailand. Capitalism beats communism every single time.

You remind me of the people who say "The DJIA was down today, so obviously the economy is terrible" or "The NASDAQ was up today, so the economy must be booming."

 

This is not a discussion about communism.

100 percent tax rate, hardcore socialism? You must be kidding.






There is more then enough to go around. It's just that the West exploits the poor countries, and are waisting like hell.

Is that why Putin is throwing WW2 veterans on the street so they can freeze to death because they can't pay the rent? There are over 1 million homeless people in Russia. Have you seen the conditions there?

Are you aware of that the Russian military had to, in 2000, to take control of power plants by military force because they couldn't pay the bill?


Ask the poor working class people how they feel about this new system. Seriously, just do it.

It is a generally known truth that Cuba has an excellent education system. I've never quoted the Cuban government, so why do you take such assume such a thing?

This is not a discussion about communism.

Can you justify the suffering all around the world? Can you justify that capitalism has created such an economic gap between people?






Let me give you a hint:


POVERTY, INEQUALITY &
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Poverty

Although poverty has been dramatically reduced in many parts of the world, a quarter of the world's people remain in severe poverty. In a global economy of $25 trillion, this is a scandal - reflecting shameful inequalities and inexcusable failures of national and international policy.

UNDP Human Development Report 1997

Half the world's people live on less than $2 a day.

World Bank, "Global Poverty Measures 1987-1998 and Projections for the Future," 1999.

1.2 billion people live on less than $1 per day.

World Bank, "Global Poverty Measures 1987-1998 and Projections for the Future," 1999.

Together, South Asia, East Asia and South-East Asia and the Pacific have more than 950 million of the 1.3 billion people who are income-poor.
UNDP Human Development Report 1997



Women and Poverty

Millions of women in developing countries live in poverty. The feminization of poverty is a growing phenomenon. Women are still the poorest of the world's poor, representing 70 percent of the 1.3 billion people who live in absolute poverty. When nearly 900 million women have incomes of less than $1 a day, the association between gender inequality and poverty remains a harrowing reality.

UNIFEM, Strengthening Women's Economic Capacity

Women work two-thirds of the world's working hours, produce half of the world's food, and yet earn only 10% of the world's income and own less than 1% of the world's property.

World Development Indicators, 1997, Womankind Worldwide



Education

Today, there are still 125 million children who never attend school. Another 150 million children of primary age start school, but drop out before they can read or write. Sixteen countries in sub-Saharan Africa (with almost half of Africa’s 6-11 year-olds) have suffered a decline in enrolment rates. Today, sub-Saharan Africa accounts for one-third of the total out-of-school population. On current trends, it will account for three-quarters of the total in 2015.
One in four adults in the developing world – 872 million people – is illiterate, and the numbers are growing.

Global inequalities in the provision of education are enormous. Today, a child in Mozambique can expect to go to school for two to three years, with luck. A five-year-old European or North American child can expect to spend 17 years in formal education.

Girls account for two-thirds of the children not in school. Despite government commitments to close the gender gap, it is widening in many countries. For example, Ethiopia has one of the lowest rates of enrolment in the world, and one of the largest gender gaps. Fewer than one-third of 6-11 year old boys and one-tenth of girls are in school. In many schools in the developing world, the treatment of girls is tantamount to a system of apartheid.

 

Debt Crisis

The debt burden is the biggest single barrier to development in the Third World, the most powerful tool that western nations use to keep whole countries in bondage.

It is estimated that the Third World pays the developed North nine times more in debt repayments than they receive in aid. Africa alone spends four times more on repaying its debts than it spends on health care.

DebtChannel.org - OneWorld.net - Beginner's guide to debt

Structural Adjustment Programs, or SAPs, have particularly affected the countries of sub-Saharan Africa, whose economies are already the poorest in the world.

SAPs consist of measures designed to help a country repay its debts by earning more hard currency - increasing exports and decreasing imports. In a few countries SAPs appear to have had some good effect; in most they have worsened the economic situation. In all countries applying SAPs, the poor have been hit the hardest.

Jubilee USA Network - A Beginner's Guide to the Debt Crisis

In 1997 the foreign debts of ‘developing’ countries were more than two trillion (million million) US dollars and still growing. The result is a debt of $400 for every man, woman and child in the developing world – where average income in the very poorest countries is less than a dollar a day.

New Internationalist - Issue 312 "Debt"



Inequality

“The assets of the 200 richest people in 1998 were more than the total annual income of 41% of the world’s people.

UNDP Human Development Report 1999

Three families – Bill Gates, the Sultan of Brunei and the Walton family – have a combined wealth of some $135 billion. Their value equal the annual income of 600 million people living in the world’s poorest countries.

World Development Movement. WDM in Action, Winter 1999, Rebecca McQullan (article)


Global Inequality - Inequality between countries

The richest 20% of the world population now receives 150 times the income of the poorest 20%.

UNDP Human Development Report 1992

The richest one-fifth of the world:
• Consume 45% of all meat and fish, the poorest fifth 5%.
• Consume 58% of total energy, the poorest fifth less than 4%.
• Have 74% of all telephone lines, the poorest fifth 1.5%.
• Consume 84% of all paper, the poorest fifth 1.1%.
• Own 87% of the world’s vehicle fleet, the poorest fifth less than 1%.

UNDP Human Development Report 1998

The richest 20% of the population now receives 150 times the income of the poorest 20%.
UNDP Human Development Report 1992

The bottom line for poverty and incomes: The share of the poorest 20% of the world's people in global income now stands at a miserable 1.1%, down from 1.4% in 1991 and 2.3% in 1960. It continues to shrink. And the ratio of the income of the top 20% to that of the poorest 20% rose from 30 to 1 in 1960, to 61 to 1 in 1991 - and to a startling new high of 78 to 1 in 1994.
UNDP Human Development Report 1997

The income gap between the richest fifth of the world's people and the poorest fifth, measured by average national income per head, increased from 30 to one in 1960, to 74 to one in 1997.
Human Development Report, United Nations Development Program, 1999.


Inequality within countries

Within nations, the income gap has been growing as well. Russia now has the world's greatest inequality, with the richest 20% having 11 times the income of the bottom 20%. Income inequalities have also grown dramatically in China, Indonesia, Thailand, other East and South-East Asian countries, and in the industrialized countries, especially Sweden, Britain, and the United States.

"The State of the World," Stephen R. Shalom

The richest 1 percent of Americans earned as much after taxes as the poorest 100 million; in 1977 the top 1 percent only (!) had as much as the bottom 49 million. The poorest 20 percent are making less today in real terms (adjusting for inflation) than they were in 1977.

"The State of the World," Stephen R. Shalom, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities



Food & Hunger

826 million people remained undernourished in 1996-98

UN Food and Agriculture Organization - State of Food Insecurity in the World 2000

Hunger continues to plague an estimated 793 million people around the world, including 31 million in the U.S. Hunger kills. Every day, 24,000 people die from hunger and other preventable causes. Nearly 160 million children are malnourished worldwide.
Oxfam America - Hunger Fact Sheet

Almost 800 million people—about one-sixth of the population of the world's developing nations—are malnourished. 200 million of them are children.

Bread for the World (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations)







Health

880 million people lack access to basic healthcare, and 1.3 billion lack access to safe drinking water. 17 million people die each year from curable diseases, including diarrhea, malaria and tuberculosis. 5 million of these people die due to water contamination.
Oxfam America - Fact Sheet

Each day in the developing world, 30,500 children die from preventable diseases such as diarrhea, acute respiratory infections or malaria. Malnutrition is associated with over half of those deaths.

Bread for the World (UNICEF, World Health Organization)



http://www.worldrevolution.org/Projects/GlobalIssuesOverview/Development.htm

 

Give us a definition of communism, please.

 

Here's a breakdown on why capitalism hasn't worked well in some African countries.

[Open market economists point out that freer economies tend to have more prosperous populations as opposed to less free ones where the majority of the people are poor. Kenya is among the least free economies of the world.]


[From the East African perspective, Uganda performed better in the legal structure and security of property rights, then Tanzania and Kenya came last. Uganda led on access to sound money and Tanzania came last. But Kenya leads in all the other elements.]


[Instead of politicians grabbing all the energies of Kenyans, it would be better to focus on issues that can make Kenyans productive. Free the economy of Kenya to achieve growth. Economists understand that individuals engage in trade because both sides benefit: the buyer wants what he buys more than the money he gives up to obtain it, while the seller values the money he gets more than the commodity he is selling. This is true for people in the streets and no less true for people on different sides of international borders. Give Kenyans an environment that will enable them trade amongst themselves, with neighboring countries and internationally.]


[People will be productive if they are sure that they will enjoy the fruits of their labor. The rule of law not politics play a major role in preventing aggressors who may seek to use violence, coercion and fraud to seize things that do not belong to them.]

[When a country relies less on individual choice and the market and invests heavily in the political process to allocate resources, goods and services the prospects of economic growth are dwindled. Tribal jostling to control the national cake does not augur well for a country that is seeking to fight poverty and underdevelopment.]

http://irenkenya.org/page.php?instructions=page&page_id=56&nav_id=19

 

Because it works.

 

Free market capitalism has to be allowed to work. You actually have to free the economy along with laws for property rights etc.

Here's an example of people wanting to interfer with free markets in Mexico. president Fox wants to free Mexico's economy more,but some of his opponents want Mexico to go back to the government controls over the economy of Mexico's past.

MEXICO CITY, Mexico (AP) -- Mexico's most free-market president faces growing demands to return to old state-run economic policies as he prepares for his fourth state-of-the-nation address amid protests against two decades of economic reforms.

[But the opposition is demanding broader, large-scale industrialization and works programs the country saw in the 1970s, when the government was involved in almost every sector of the economy.

It may be largely nostalgia, based on current high oil prices that remind people of the oil-driven boom years of three decades ago. Some may have forgotten the economic crisis of the early 1980s that was caused by growing debt, backward industries and a fall in oil prices.]


http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/americas/08/31/mexico.fox.ap/

 

Norway, Sweden, and Denmark have restrictions on the market, and these are some of the wealthiest nations in the world.






I don't understand how you can claim to stand for equality when you support a system that takes from the poor and give to the rich.

 

the thing that sounds nice about communism is how the gap between rich and poor is narrowed. it would be neice if we could all be equal. communism would be an ideal society, but because of the qualities that fault mankkind (greed, jealousy, hate, a feeling of superiority), a communistic system scarcely works because of the corruption of those in power (stalin). the problem with stalin was that he was too desperate for power, even killing trotsky so that he could take power. communism would be a perfect world, but nothing in this world can ever be perfect.

 

Can we focus on capitalism, please?


Stalin has nothing to do with communism. USSR was, officially socialist. USSR has nothing to do with communism. None of the so-called "communist countries" has ever claimed to be communist. That is because communism is something very different from socialism (ie the system that exists in Cuba, for example)

As I see it, it is narrow minded to think that capitalism is the only system that is possible. Wouldn't it be better to have a society based on equality?

If everything was free, there would be no greed.

Hate is natural, but in most cases it's because of reasons. Are you saying these things constitute the basis of humanity?

 

I have to admit I didn't read the whole discussion, because I saw Kandahar joined in, and he's brainwashed and ignorant about both capitalism and communism (What can you expect from a conformist who also has the misfortune of living in America?:H ).
You can read some of capitalism's records at www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45319 .

m6m made a good point (both concerning development and sexual repression - are you a Reichian?). Concerning Marx's position on the positive traits of capitalism (primarily the development of the forces of production, which is the precondition for a higher social order) see the first part of the Communist Manifesto (the second part, in which he advocates nationalisation as a first step, is quite obsolete, since he himself later, i.e. with the experience of the Paris Commune - www.dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/pariscommune/Pariscommunearchive.html , realized the need to immediately "smash the machinery of the state" and replace it by self-management/direct democracy/communism).

Love,
Dan

P.S. - don't you sometimes feel like you're happily in love (not that I would really know about that) when you think about a Revolution!?!

 

I'am not too familiar with Norway and Denmark,but I've read where Sweden had problems in the past with keeping some of it's businesses from relocating because of it's high taxes used to finance it's welfare system. It's been recently that things have turned around because Sweden has lowered it's taxes on businesses,but have raised them on private income to make up for what they need to finance their welfare system. It'll be interesting to see what the long term effects of that will be on workers?

How does capitalism "take" from the poor and give to the rich?

I don't think capitalism is a system that guarantees equality. Because with capitalism people have options and choices and not everyone is going to make "equal" choices and make "equal" decisions. This won't happen because people are influenced by their interest, and not everyone is going to have "equal" interest under capitalism or any system for that matter.

 

The capitalists are getting reach beacause they hire labor from the workers. The workers are not given the real worth of their labor.

Well, socialism doesn't have anyting to do with doing "equal" choices, or "equal" decisions. It is about distributing wealth. Capitalism allows freedom for a few people, while the majority has to struggle just to survive.


Look at Pinochet, there wasn't much freedom there, was it? Capitalism does not neccesarily equal freedom. As I see it, it's quite the opposite.


I've always been in favor of reading something from a different perspective. I think this link could be a good one:



http://pubs.socialistreviewindex.org.uk/isj88/harman.htm





C