Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The end of capitalism has begun

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–88 of 88 posts

Re: The end of capitalism has begun

#81

Post by brucefancher »

tstactplsignore wrote: post #69
MCRed wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Telecom-- a government granted tri-opoly. The FCC limits the number of organizations who can license spectrum in a given metro area. Airlines-- government regulated, airports are local government monopolies and they limit competition. Microsoft- Not a monopoly in any line of business I have been waiting for a long time for someone to come up with an example of an actual natural monopoly that exercises monopoly pricin…

Your requirements are absurd - Every business will be subject to some sort of government regulation that could limit barrier to entry. That's why your conclusions are outlandish- Microsoft was literally deemed to violate antitrust law in federal court; there are plenty of obvious historical examples (United Fruit, Standard Oil, US Steel); Pharmaceutical companies consistently exhibit price gouging in medical monopoli…

Translation: Capitalism is whatever you say it is, not what it actually is. OK, got it.

Re: The end of capitalism has begun

#82

Post by wycx »

shkkmo wrote: post #49
vegancap wrote: post #17

The author assumes we have 'capitalism' to begin with. Even talks about big banks etc. Secondly, he's citing 'information technology' as being the death of 'capitalism'. An industry, arguably the most aggressively capitalistic. Then he talks about corporate monopolies (anyone who's read economics 101 would tell you corporate monopolies are rarely result of unadulterated capitalism, but rather state corporatism). He m…

> Most of the fluffy scenarios he describes, whereby private individuals make voluntary, mutually beneficial agreements with each other, is almost the very definition of capitalism! No, that is the definition of a free market. Capitalism is a framework of ownership that operates in markets of varying degrees of freedom. A barter economy is a free market, but not usually a capitalistic one. The author is pointing out…

Indeed. Ultimately, I think most private enterprises would rather not be competitve contestants of a free and open market but would rather be monopolists, monopsonists and above all, rent seekers (ideally a monopolist rent seeker earning rents from a entity spending other peoples money).

It is often much easier to compete by sabotaging competitors and potential competitors than by competing on the merits of the product/service that you provide.

Neoliberals have been very effective at promoting confusion between free and open markets (which most definitely require some form of regulation to remain free and open) and captialist/private ownership framework, largely to further deregulation and the rent seeking opportunities it affords.

Re: The end of capitalism has begun

#83

Post by omnibrain »

sebastianz wrote: post #75
vegancap wrote: post #17

The author assumes we have 'capitalism' to begin with. Even talks about big banks etc. Secondly, he's citing 'information technology' as being the death of 'capitalism'. An industry, arguably the most aggressively capitalistic. Then he talks about corporate monopolies (anyone who's read economics 101 would tell you corporate monopolies are rarely result of unadulterated capitalism, but rather state corporatism). He m…

> anyone who's read economics 101 would tell you Sorry for veering slightly off topic but since you mentioned this, may I ask if you have a recommendation of a few important books that would make a core of a "economics 101"?

Samuelson Nordhaus - Economics, though nowadays some prefer Mankiw - Principles of Economics. There is - obviously - a lot of criticism from several sides against both.

In the end there are several schools of economics. So it depends what Economics 101 text someone read. ;)

Re: The end of capitalism has begun

#84

Post by Turing_Machine »

tstactplsignore wrote: post #77
Turing_Machine wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're using United Fruit as a counter-example to state corporatism? United Fruit got its monopolies by subverting Central American governments, then maintained them by using the power of the United States government, up to and including actual raw military force. If there's a better historical example of state corporatism, I can't think of what it could possibly be.

That is a large part of my point- natural monopolies, or more generally, any concentration of wealth in a capitalist society, rapidly progresses towards what you call "state corporatism" (but what I would just call "capitalism"). You seem to miss my main point - it was claimed that "corporate monopolies are rarely [the] result of unadulterated capitalism, but rather state corporatism"- my point is that state corporat…

"my point is that state corporatism is the be-all and end-all unadulterated capitalism; the latter becomes the former, one is not a perversion of the other."

Sorry, that is simply not correct.

These are things that occur when the government has too much power. It doesn't matter what it calls itself. For instance, the Soviet Union engaged in plenty of imperialism (far worse than anything United Fruit ever did), despite being Marxist.

Re: The end of capitalism has begun

#85

Post by pron »

MCRed wrote: post #59
tstactplsignore wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Then he talks about corporate monopolies (anyone who's read economics 101 would tell you corporate monopolies are rarely result of unadulterated capitalism, but rather state corporatism). Let's talk about this point as a whole. Firstly, I don't think it is well substantiated, and there are numerous examples to the contrary- Microsoft, Standard Oil, United Fruit, telecoms, airlines, railroads- almost anything which r…

Telecom-- a government granted tri-opoly. The FCC limits the number of organizations who can license spectrum in a given metro area. Airlines-- government regulated, airports are local government monopolies and they limit competition. Microsoft- Not a monopoly in any line of business I have been waiting for a long time for someone to come up with an example of an actual natural monopoly that exercises monopoly pricin…

Do you know why regulations in the US exist? Because of the robber barons of the gilded age.

Re: The end of capitalism has begun

#86

Post by tstactplsignore »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #84
tstactplsignore wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a large part of my point- natural monopolies, or more generally, any concentration of wealth in a capitalist society, rapidly progresses towards what you call "state corporatism" (but what I would just call "capitalism"). You seem to miss my main point - it was claimed that "corporate monopolies are rarely [the] result of unadulterated capitalism, but rather state corporatism"- my point is that state corporat…

"my point is that state corporatism is the be-all and end-all unadulterated capitalism; the latter becomes the former, one is not a perversion of the other." Sorry, that is simply not correct. These are things that occur when the government has too much power. It doesn't matter what it calls itself. For instance, the Soviet Union engaged in plenty of imperialism (far worse than anything United Fruit ever did), despit…

I'm sure we don't disagree on the atrocities committed by the Soviets.

>"Sorry, that is simply not correct."

We may be at an impasse, because to me and many others, it is not only logically apparent that capitalism leads to state corporatism, but verified by empirical evidence throughout quite a bit of history. Can you explain why you disagree - I'm genuinely curious and open minded. Do you think it is not to the advantage of a capitalist entity to lobby for and obtain a government granted monopoly? Do you think that it is not to the advantage of capitalist entities to influence the political process in their favor as much as possible? If there was no state presence at all, do you think it wouldn't be to the advantage of a capitalist entity to effectively create and exhibit control over one? Or, do you think these things have not, or do not, happen in reality?

Capitalism is inherently a system which encourages the consolidation of power. I think the key issue is that while you've presented "government" as something inherently different than private market forces, often the two go hand-in-hand. If all government power in a capitalist state was removed, it would be only a matter of time before a "privatized" replica of the worst aspects of government is created, only this time without even any pretenses of not being controlled by a capitalist elite. You say "It doesn't matter what it calls itself", and I think that's something that can be restated. Power is abused by many who don't call themselves a government. There is little to no difference between capitalists who seek to control a government and a people, and the authoritarians you have called out.

Re: The end of capitalism has begun

#87

Post by lotsofcows »

dpweb wrote: post #2

It's interesting the Greece and 2008 global crises are usually brought up, but important to note that with capitalism comes a need for responsibility - especially regarding debt, and those failures were a result of irresponsiblity on the part of the governments and actors involved - not a defect of the capitalist system itself. In both cases, taking on massive debt and quite simply, living beyond one's or a state's m…

There's a defect in the EU, the Greek government, the Greek people and all the states / people who have made business arrangement with the above?

That's an awful lot of people. Are you sure the problem's not in the system?

Post reply on HN