31–40 of 52 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Charity makes sense in a capitalistic world, because some people get the "choice" of being poor in it.
in contrast to government-owns-the-means-of-production socialist systems, where nobody gets the choice to not be poor.
The premise is a really strange one to set up. I think he tries to motivate it somewhat later on in the article: > You can see it in stark, comic terms. What are Bezos and Musk doing? Trying to flee to Mars. What’s Gates doing? Recommending you books to read, and trying to save the world with charity. LOL — how ironic. These are different forms of freedom from capitalism I would argue, that especially in case of Musk…
> Something a government might never bother with. Maybe because colonizing Mars is a massive waste of resources that could be better spent fixing the planet we already live on? Or do you think the solution to scarcity is to have billionaires play with their space toys?
Right, you are making my point though, because you don't agree with how the money is spent. We have finite resources and infinite and different wishes. Capitalism tries to optimize between these.
Your view of how the government 'should' spend money is perhaps not mine, or my neighbours. Capitalism seems fairer and safer to me, than putting it all on government bureacracy.
The premise is a really strange one to set up. I think he tries to motivate it somewhat later on in the article: > You can see it in stark, comic terms. What are Bezos and Musk doing? Trying to flee to Mars. What’s Gates doing? Recommending you books to read, and trying to save the world with charity. LOL — how ironic. These are different forms of freedom from capitalism I would argue, that especially in case of Musk…
> Something a government might never bother with. Maybe because colonizing Mars is a massive waste of resources that could be better spent fixing the planet we already live on? Or do you think the solution to scarcity is to have billionaires play with their space toys?
In my opinion colonizing Mars will begin to create a revolution in humanity in terms of resources, freedom, growth, and potential. I could get into why, but now isn't the place. The great thing is that capitalism enables people to decide for themselves what is likely to produce the greatest benefit and pursue that. Bill Gates seems to believe that solving malaria in Africa is going to be something that might help revolutionize society. And the great thing is that all of these actions are happening simultaneously, rather than mutually exclusively. And so indeed we'll get to see which efforts, if any, end up as tin cup telephones - and which end up as the next internet.
Capitalism is not a system of ideas, nor is it a system that anyone chooses. It is not designed, voted on, decreed, or managed. It has no governing authority, no standards organization. It has no dogma, creed, commandments, or constitution. Capitalism is the natural order of things within human societies above a certain size and complexity level. It's more like a force of nature than anything else. To establish any s…
0. some agreement to not use violence to take value
1. some way to Exchange Value
2. ways to Store Value
3. ways to Lend Value
Nearly all countries today embrace it.
I think it important to not conflate it with the issues it can encourage if uncontrolled: greed, inequality, the abuse of labor, natural resources and the environment, unsafe products and working conditions, and the unavailability of essential services and goods where unprofitable.
The premise is a really strange one to set up. I think he tries to motivate it somewhat later on in the article: > You can see it in stark, comic terms. What are Bezos and Musk doing? Trying to flee to Mars. What’s Gates doing? Recommending you books to read, and trying to save the world with charity. LOL — how ironic. These are different forms of freedom from capitalism I would argue, that especially in case of Musk…
> Something a government might never bother with. Maybe because colonizing Mars is a massive waste of resources that could be better spent fixing the planet we already live on? Or do you think the solution to scarcity is to have billionaires play with their space toys?
The author gleefully mixes things together that have no connection and asserts that capitalism is a social system, when it's merely an economic and more importantly resource management system. Capitalism can't fix things that are outside of it's scope, and this is where most leftist intellectuals fail in their critique, capitalism can't fix abortion rights or same-sex marriage, because they are not economic or resource problems, they are social ones that will have to be addressed with a social system not an economic one. Capitalism might tell you how much resources it takes to do these things, but it can't take a stand on any of these things, because it has no connection to the issue.
Managing resources will always be handled by the system that is most optimized and efficient in a natural world, capitalism, as opposed to feudalism is more efficient in allocating resources, feudalism also had a social component where it differed from capitalism since it has no social dimension. What comes to tribalism, that is just purely a social system with nothing to do with economy and resource management.
Good luck to the author on his quest to mix things up and try to figure a solution to something that doesn't match reality.
Capitalism is not a system of ideas, nor is it a system that anyone chooses. It is not designed, voted on, decreed, or managed. It has no governing authority, no standards organization. It has no dogma, creed, commandments, or constitution. Capitalism is the natural order of things within human societies above a certain size and complexity level. It's more like a force of nature than anything else. To establish any s…
This got me to thinking about the minimum things need for capitalism. 0. some agreement to not use violence to take value 1. some way to Exchange Value 2. ways to Store Value 3. ways to Lend Value