81–90 of 135 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can tell you that if you asked the poorest in America if they believed private ownership of property should be illegal in the US they would disagree. Socialism to most Americans is free healthcare and college. Capitalism is lobbying and the abuse of government sponsored monopolies.
Which is unfortunate, because government involvement in business is a socialist idea, not a capitalist one.
The cold war branding of anything communism/socialism as evil is being seen through as rhetoric, and more people are seeing merit of using blends of governance than pure free market. People 50 years ago had to support one system of face real consequences. We can now debate the merit of concepts like "privatise luxury, socialise necessity" without being a 'commie bastard'. With the irony being socialist policy was far…
"The cold war branding of anything communism/socialism as evil is being seen through as rhetoric" I can hardly believe that anyone who was alive during the 'cold war' would ever say that. I grew up in an immigrant community in Canada, and most of my friends fled those disastrous, oppressive and totalitarian 'communist paradises' all over E. Europe, China, Vietnam, Cuba - and also - Sweden, by the way. Nordic countrie…
My point is ANYTHING communism/socialism became a negative point. Kinda how you jumped on my comment without as though I was being a communist/socialist avocate when I was saying elements of have potential. Healthcare in USA is a good real world example. Most developed nations do universal healthcare and its the preferred way for the majority in these countries with clearly better outcomes for the mass. Many Americans still seem emotionally charged against 'socialising healthcare', argueing this is not a viable alternative despite significant empirical examples proving this works well. And also allows for integration with private alternatives for those that want service options.
I just feel the world is getting more ration in its discussion on this point. Plenty if irrationality remaining elsewhere :)
Contract law. "Capitalism" here usually means private voluntary agreements are very sacred or absolutely sacred.
Property law. "Capitalism" here usually means a rule of first possession.
Tax law. "Capitalism" here usually means a presumption against taxation, especially if redistributive in purpose.
Limited liability. "Capitalism" here usually means possibility of absentee investors.
Fiduciary duties. "Capitalism" here usually means duty to maximize shareholders' economic value.
Antitrust law. "Capitalism" here, as term is used by self-perceived opponents, usually refers to corporate bigness.
Etc.
Was Thomas Jefferson capitalist? He hated bigness in all forms.
Was Thomas Paine capitalist? He thought rule of first possession was useful because easy to administer but proposed something akin to universal basic income.
Important to be clear, as many others have noted in the comments.
― G.K. Chesterton
Earlier quoted context omitted.
alright. I'll bite. I have made almost no money in the past year, and my bank account is nearly zero. I had a relatively middle class upbringing (but for reasons I'd rather not go into) my family is currently bankrupt. Capitalism (in the free markets sense) is great. The problem is that gobs of money are stolen from poor people like me by the government through various processes, the biggest of which is inflation. Th…
> the biggest of which is inflation Inflation is a mechanism to prevent the rich from hoarding cash. The flipside is that people who aren't putting their money to use lose value. Without inflation, the rich would hoard with impunity.
As "mechanism to prevent hoarding" by the rich it's pretty shitty. The rich know how to protect their net worth from devaluating currency (e.g. real estate), and can more easily partake in leveraged investment vehicles which would not be possible with higher interest rates and non-inflationary base currency. You don't see the guy on the tenderloin buying leveraged etfs. For that matter neither does the middle class, who mostly are locked into managed find situations which provide low yield (if you look through to trough, the real value of the stock market has been static for 25 years)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
alright. I'll bite. I have made almost no money in the past year, and my bank account is nearly zero. I had a relatively middle class upbringing (but for reasons I'd rather not go into) my family is currently bankrupt. Capitalism (in the free markets sense) is great. The problem is that gobs of money are stolen from poor people like me by the government through various processes, the biggest of which is inflation. Th…
> Capitalism (in the free markets sense) is great. The problem is that gobs of money are stolen from poor people like me by the government How much can the government be stealing from you if you have no money? The government is in a position to help you, by providing you with social services, with financial benefits, by providing police to protect you, not to mention debt forgiveness (you mentioned your family is in…
http://www.academia.edu/6681088/Washing_Away_the_Sins_of_Deb...
In my experience, people who criticize this article are probably benefiting from "capitalism" (the majority of people on here, I reckon, do), meanwhile those struggling from inequality, not being here, will fail to have their voice heard. And so the echo chamber ensues. That being said, capitalism and having things like free healthcare and education are hardly mutually exclusive. So I think the article's conclusion,…
> meanwhile those struggling from inequality, not being here, will fail to have their voice heard. And so the echo chamber ensues. Those struggling from from inequality are struggling from relative deprivation, not absolute deprivation, while the latter is the only thing that rationally matters. I don't give a damn that Bill Gates is a ridiculous amount richer than me, in fact I admire him and want to be rich too som…
Being content and happy in life has a LOT to do with expectations and we've done a great job of promoting huge expectations for Americans ala "The American Dream!" Poor people don't care that Bill Gates and Elon Musk have near unfathomable wealth. They care that a lifetime of hard work doesn't guarantee a decent home, access to affordable healthcare, or the security to live without constant threat of basic necessities being out of reach.
Further, the poor should demand more! All we hear from the upper class/business owners is more, more, more! Get leaner, cheaper, and make more money! The poor are only following the examples set by the "titans of industry." And if they didn't constantly ask for more, they would be in even worse shape than they are now.
And finally, if you ever want to convince others of your viewpoint, comparing America to third world countries is not the way to go. You've got to put on your oxygen mask before you help those around you. Otherwise you all end up screwed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
96% of hourly workers already earn more than minimum wage, so it shouldn't be the first place to look at improving wage stickiness. Start with the cost of employment, primarily health care, which has sucked up a lot of money that should have gone to wage increases. https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2015/home.htm
Minimum wage sets a floor which affects wages close to it, too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the biggest of which is inflation Inflation is a mechanism to prevent the rich from hoarding cash. The flipside is that people who aren't putting their money to use lose value. Without inflation, the rich would hoard with impunity.
That doesn't make any sense. If the rich hoard money the velocity of money goes down, and that causes the value to go down too. As "mechanism to prevent hoarding" by the rich it's pretty shitty. The rich know how to protect their net worth from devaluating currency (e.g. real estate), and can more easily partake in leveraged investment vehicles which would not be possible with higher interest rates and non-inflationa…
> That doesn't make any sense. If the rich hoard money the velocity of money goes down, and that causes the value to go down too.
'Velocity' of money is a shitty concept, but regardless what it means is that with higher velocity, goods and services are in higher demand relative to cash (more transactions over time). This increases price levels but reduces the value of cash.
So velocity going down decreases demand for and the value of goods and services (price levels), increasing the relative value of cash.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that the prices of everything rise every year.
Everything? True, some prices have risen. But, if I may, here are some fun equations to ponder. 1996 (Florida) Minimum wage $4.25 Gallon of milk $2.73 Gallon of gas $1.26 Dozen eggs $1.31 2017 Minimum wage $8.10 Gallon of milk $3.31 Gallon of gas $2.41(was almost $4.00, if I remember correctly a few years ago?) Dozen eggs $1.59 1996 Electronics (to do work, using one's natural talents, for example) Expensive. 2017 El…