I know it wasn't mentioned in this one but... Can we please have a different lens to criticize capitalism with other than Marxism? I mean sure capitalism is worth criticizing, but Marxism is objectively a failure by comparison.
@Secale, yeah, I see a lot of criticisms of capitalism but I never see them suggest a better system. Except for lunatics like Bernie Sanders who’s like to implement a system that has failed time and time again
@Secale, socialized capitalism. It'd be difficult to implement, sure, but the ultimate goal for humanity should be "nobody has to work to survive", and it seems like we're starting to drift further from that in recent years, not closer.
@Rtas Vadum, I think I under stand what you're saying here. By the time that we get to the point that "socialized capitalism", as you put it here, is feasible. We'd've already solved world hunger. I don't see the definition "nobody has to work to survive" coming from anywhere but delusion, or socialism, but saying that is me being redundant.
@That one lurker, The point isn't so much that it'll be feasible to get there any time soon, it's that we should be trying to move in that direction as much as is feasible. Lately though, upper class wages have skyrocketed while lower class wages have stagnated, wages haven't kept up with inflation, and wages also haven't matched the increases in productivity. All of those things are steps backwards, not forwards.
@Rtas Vadum, why are you using socialist rhetoric to try to push for a Utopia scenario? I agree it's feasible under capitalism to remove hunger from the equation, that's self evident. But you slip into discussing about high and lower class as if the problem stems from the disparity. The problem rest firmly at everone's feet, the rich in at least this country give overwhelmingly charity as well as pay the majority in our taxes. Where as the lower class is lead like sheep by the promise of Utopia from Marxist who lie about their Eternal reward. I can only speak from my home state of Ar on this, in the 2018 election the people voted for a increase of the minimum wage around 42 to 56. Should I blame the upper class for the inflation that's going to come from this? If I do it'll start this all over again, and the Utopia are you're talkin about will never come.
A proposal for Mutual ground. In schools instead of teaching high-end math, how about replace it with an economics course? Win-win.
@That one lurker, the issue is that an economy booms properly from supporting the foundation. The trickle down economics pushed lately has only led to the ultra rich getting richer by using the cuts they got to inflate their company worth with stock purchase.
The trickle down system says as the cup up top fills the overflow will reach the lower cups. What really happens is the top cup just gets bigger until the ones below it can’t support it anymore
@Cloverleaf, "booms properly". Why are you asserting opinion here? We're having a proper boom in the economy. Back in late 2016 economist couldn't imagine how good the economy would be. They, along with Obama, declared it to be impossible, and yet here we are with a laundry list of boons. You don't have to like orange man to understand that his confidence, trade deals, and tax cuts, have lead to this boom.
@That one lurker, thing is, we saw something similar to how it is now back in 2007. There’s a bubble forming, and it’s liable to pop. Then it’s back downhill.
@Cloverleaf, either you're young or don't understand what you're talking about. Not to be rude with that. 2007 had extraordinary differences expand all the way back to the clintons repealing glass-steagall. It prohibited commercial banks from participating in the investment banking business and vice versa. This incestuous pool ment that subprime loans could be sold like credit. Essentially a debt-laden I owe you that inflated the housing market. When the debtors couldn't pay, the banks couldn't keep things afloat. So the bubble burst, the response from the government was to throw money at it.
@That one lurker, glass steagall’s repeal is debatable on its impact, and most of the cause can be further tied more to a general lack of regulations that allowed companies to get greedy and take far too many risks.
@Cloverleaf, so, the lack of regulations is the problem. But glass steagall, a litch pen piece of regulation, may not have any impact. The piece of regulation that protected people from the predatory lending.
@That one lurker, and when I look over the wiki regarding the financial crisis then that act isn’t mentioned. Now if you have something you could point me to specifically showing referential data that shows it had a significant impact I’ll look at it. But when I read on that, the repeal allowed banks to multipurpose in investment and savings. I can see how it would, but if it hadn’t been, do you think the separate entities would not have made similar mistakes?
@That one lurker, https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/050515/did-repeal-glasssteagall-act-contribute-2008-financial-crisis.asp
Linked from your source.
@Cloverleaf, you spent three minutes, and posted a hyper link from the phrase "debunk this theory. Where they admit that it played a role. My whole point was that even the minutiae of the 2007 crash is far more complicated then just buzz terms like trickle down economics.
@That one lurker, you’re arguing that it definitely played a major role. I’m arguing that it wasn’t a major factor. That’s a debunk on the major factor statement, directly linked to by your given source, and on the same website. And this current argument has already strayed from the trickle down economics.
@Cloverleaf, so wait. You ask me a question over a statement I made and ask for additional proof. I give both over a theoretical field. But because there is some people who dissent, all of my points on this side adventure are invalid.
I never said it was the major role. If you got that through implications because no one remembers a law that wasn't being enforced. Then that's your falt.
@That one lurker, I am not saying your statement it had an impact is wrong. But you definitely implied it was a major factor. And I’ve been counter arguing that factor. We’re definitely seeing debt rise now, and cuts to taxes on the rich, deregulation that is occurring, and the actions of a definite idiot are spiraling into another bubble.
@Cloverleaf, the reason why you think that is because it was the first thing that popped into my head. I cant mention every little thing in the text constraint. So I chose one off hand. We could argue about the organization that bullied bush into forcing banks to lend for house to fight racism. But I can't remember it that well. I could possibly name another half dozen. But I think I make my point.
@That one lurker, that it was a factor? That wasn’t ever a question. What I’m saying now is we’re seeing a bubble form again, not necessarily in the same area, and we’re likely looking at a similar economic downturn in the near future.
This link was found in your link.
Tldr; this government organization forced Banks to not say no to any high risk house loans. I.e. gettos.
To my point there will need to be something drastic to cause not only another bubble to form, but to have it pop as well. We've been seeing pressure get release periodically, meaning we're in a healthy economy. Our current problems is that some of the worst now I'm turns we've seen have been artificial. False reports from the main stream media makes the economy fluctuate hard. This actual narrative your repeating came from them, in the hopes of causing a scare, and tanking the economy before the 2018 election.
And yes, I am saying that these people are malicious actors. That are willing to put the country through another recession just to get some power.
At least capitalism prevents us from having to pay $300 for a loaf of bread like a certain south American country
@Elmato, fvcking China.
@Cjko27, most famous South American country. Fvck their artisan bread! Why is it so expensive!?
Still the best economic system thus far.
@M0RT0S, it’s shjt, but the best shjt
@Siska the Khajiit, I'd say it's shî
t mostly due to foreign markets and a lack of care for quality craftsmanship or services on both the shoulders of buyers and sellers.
@M0RT0S, that and big business having no moral compass for the rights of the workers.
@Reluctantkitty , show me what you've got then, I'm always willing to chat.
@Siska the Khajiit, This assumes that what have is capitalism. We have some capitalism, but not mostly capitalism. Most call what we have is corporatism.
@M0RT0S, exactly, it's not perfect but holy crap capitalism makes peoples lives fantastic! Is there room to improve and grow? Yeah. Does that mean torch the whole thing from the ground up? Of course not! These people that denounce how bad capitalism is can't look atbthe world around them without filtering out only all the bad that they wanna see.
There's strength in numbers, unions can be your friend in this case and your enemy in others
@Medic135, like the mafia.
Capitalism is inheriently flawed as it inevitablly creates an unstainable top down society.
Once again kinda fustrating that I have to say this. Just because I or someone else critises capatalism doesnt mean i believe in communism or anarchism or something...
I believe in hybrid systems that combine the best of all systems.
@bonja, I don't think it inevitably creates a top down society. It's susceptible to people using force to rise and remain at the top, but it is not a feature of a capitalist system to create a top down society.
@bonja, anything with a governing body will have elites. And the only way to control wealth is either not to or make everybody poor which is by far worse. Capitalism isn't perfect, but its built to anticipate flaws in human behavior and work to keep these things in check. Hybrid systems fo that poorly by making larger government which = more powerful political elites and 1%ers.
@PoliticalOtters, its not an intentional feature but it makes it so large corporations have an unequel standing. As forming monopolies becomes far easier.
Its why economic disparity has been ever increasing in the west (not mentioning other regions not because economic disparity isnt a thing just that its caused by their own problems with the systems they have)
No one system is perfect and its healthy to critique them and look at other ways as well. That doesnt mean throw out everything we know
@bonja, That's my point. Capitalism doesn't make corporations have unequal standing. It is susceptible to socialist/interventionist governments influencing the market and creating monopolies. In this day and age there are no market monopolies that weren't created by government intervention into the free market (a completely anti-capitalist action).
The income disparity we see now is due to socialist government policies intervening in what would otherwise be a free market.