Why do people say that Capitalism is good?

[martin's a madman]

And this is why we have a GOVERNMENT to prevent the Capitalist system from becoming completely laissez faire. Were there no regulations at all, people would probably manipulate the stock market to make as much money as possible, tank the country, then escape to some island they bought for themselves. And I am going to reiterate this point. NO SYSTEM IS PERFECT. Yes, there are flaws with Capitalism. And every system is good in theory, but in practice, Capitalism works best. It does for the most part tend to create better products for lower prices, and as long as government regulation prevents any monopolies from forming, it will work.

No monopoly has ever formed without Government support.
Not that I'm bashing your political opinion, I'm just stating that.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

Capitalism is good when its regulated and creates a even playing field the most creative and inventive business types can play and build in. When you allow monopolies to thrive in it you start decay and degradation.

Capitalism is good because it uses the public to raise society through individual genius the trouble is when its poorly regulated it becomes a nightmarish bureaucracy the same can be said for socialism and communism and they require(communism mostly) even more rules to curve greed and corruption than capitalism dose.

 

[Freeze_L]

who said it was the governments job to do more then enforce the laws? the government is not their to provide healthcare or money for the disabled, other than those who were in government employment ie. veterans. There is plenty of profit in insurance and if given the opportunity to work across state lines there will be insurance available cheaply, that will provide healthcare and disability coverage. The poor do indeed need help, the homeless need shelter, but it is NOT the goverment that is responsible, it is the pepole of the community, it is their job and moral duty to help those in need however possible, and non-profit organizations help them, and they are more effective, than the governments help.

 

[countrysteaksauce]

Capitalism doesn't mean that the law doesn't exist.

Yes, complete free market capitalism works. Nothing in its pure form works, but Capitalism is the best economic policy that gives people the most freedom.

I'm glad there is someone else upholding the system in the face of rabid socialists.

Is it too much to ask that we not live on the fucking edge all our lives? Isn't the purpose of society in general to remove the burdens of survival through community?

I see your dire condition, living on the edge of your life as you type out a post on a computer with an internet connection.

Capitalist society removes the burdens of survival. After all, you can't do everything yourself. That's why you don't find yourself farming your own crops, pumping your own water, building your own house. Capitalism provides for specialization that allows you to live a comfortable life within the system while simultaneously doing whatever you can best do.
As Adam Smith said: "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest."
As both you and the baker look after your own self interests, everyone is better off.
Though, of course, you could simply kill off any incentive to make bread cheaper, faster, and better by forcing the baker to provide everyone in the community with bread while he receives only the minimum he needs to survive.

 

[ender214]

I prefer laissez faire capitalism because in laissez faire capitalism, each man's survival and success is based on their ability to work. Those who possess skills and work ethic would rise to the top, whilst the unskilled and lazy will fall to the bottom, perhaps to die from their inability to produce resources. Even a thief would have to be skilled at their craft in order to become a successful thief. While the socioeconomic situation that a person is born into will create disparities in their ability to take advantage of this system, it will not make it impossible for a lower class man to survive or even rise to the top, it would merely make it more difficult.

I take issue with social programs because, in my mind, the government is taking my money and giving it to people who have know right to it. If the government was taking my money and using it for infrastructure, I would derive benefit from the improved infrastructure. If the government takes my money and gives it to poor family to sustain their survival, I derive no benefit. In fact, I am hurt by the fact that the poor family continues to be draining resources while the government freebies would discourage greater effort to become more productive, as they now know they have a fallback and their survival no longer depends on their work. If I were worried for their survival out of human feelings of compassion, I would freely of my own will give them my money. The fact that the government gives them my money with no say of my own is what angers me.

In my mind, socialism and social programs defend the weak at the expense of the strong, therefore slowing progress as a great weight slows a shackled man.

 

[Downfall89]

Capitalism doesn't mean that the law doesn't exist.

Yes, complete free market capitalism works. Nothing in its pure form works, but Capitalism is the best economic policy that gives people the most freedom.

Indeed. Outright/pure capitalism doesn't work *cough America* but a more moderate capitalism certainly does.

 

[FaceFaceFace]

When was the last time you heard anyone advocate "hardcore Capitalism"? For me, it was Bioshock. Pure capitalism is a terrible thing, kinda like pure communism. As is true in almost everything, the balanced middle ground is the best choice.

 

[Manji187]

Capitalism doesn't mean that the law doesn't exist.

The existence of the law does not reduce the value of ill-gotten money.

Yes, but it makes it less likely for people to do things we're they achieve ill-gotten cash.

If someone can gain ill-gotten money with no chance of getting in trouble, it doesn't matter what type of economic system you live in, 9/10 times people will do it.

Well, one approach to stopping theft is to punish the thief. Another is not to give him anything to steal.

If you can have everything you want or need for free, and don't feel compelled to acquire money for money's sake, you're not going to steal money.

...could it be? Have you watched Peter Joseph's "Zeitgeist"?

EDIT: Wow people...you truly believe we already live in the best of possible worlds? Or in the least bad one? So this is the End of History and we are the Last Men? Nothing to do anymore? No grand visions? We've played out the "game" that is Life?

How silly. What is capitalism in the grand scale of things anyway? Nothing more than a fad, a speck that will be forgotten in time.

 

[Apocalypse Tank]

one strong argument is that capitalism most efficiently converts what limited resources we have into products desired by the masses (and it almost always recovers market equilibrium, where optimal employment is occurring in the economy).

Personally, though, I believe a visionary government planned economy can be more beneficial to mankind, even if some efficiency is lost.

 

[alrekr]

Capitalism is system we deserve as it best suits the selfish nature of humans. Marx's idea of pure communism(basicly everyone lives as equals working how ever they can to support the community e.g. through labour, or interlect so bascily you could farm, write books or whatever so long as you try to help everyone else in some way, there is no goverment as everyone has been socialised to be ultra nice and never want to do anything bad, also everyone has an equal right to things but lets say you don't want that grey shirt then you can have the blue shirt,just becasue everyone is entitled to the same rights dosen't mean they have to be the same and this also applies to luxeries so basicly even though there is no money to gain luxeries you need to contribute to the community so just because people are equal dosen't mean people won't work or that your entitled to evrything) would never work as humans are just to darn selfish but it's a nice ideal to aspire to,
*EDIT* BTW there are actualy societies abeit small ones, which are "pure communist" so can work at least on a small scale e.g. not so large tribe

 

[capnpupster]

The whole concept of a "self-regulating free market" is a fallacy anyway. a self regulating market assumes that people will, in general, be logical and reasonable with their money, but they are far more emotional than the economic model predicts. The point is that people are too stupid to be in charge of their own financial market.

I actually like communism best in theory. It takes a massive, easy to corrupt bureaucracy to run it on a large scale though, which ends up making it the worst in practice. Socialism seems to be working, Americans have a problem with it because Nazi Germany was socialist and we supposedly fought them on some idealogical level, which simply isn't true. Capitalism is actually based on the majority of the population being screwed over and stuck in poverty, with the promise that some of them (supposedly the best of them) can rise above it, but the people born into poverty never really have the same chance as those who are born into money. American(I'm one btw) have this idea that we'd rather be more likely to lose, but have a small chance to win really big, so we favor capitalism. It doesn't really make any damn sense but there you have it. It's actually another example of people being emotional with their money instead of rational.

The weird thing is that all these people screaming about healthcare being a socialist plot are also complaining about their social security benefits being cut, or restricted, or the retirement age being increased. If you try to take away a socialist program that's already in place they will ***** and moan about it, but heaven forbid we add more socialism similar to what they already enjoy. In short, baby boomers are assholes, and America will be better off when they dead.

 

[RN7]

Because it suits the greedy nature really well. And it will continue to do so, until WW3. Then the proletariat shall bourgeoisie masters! Or so says my partial insane friend who wants to take over the United States and impose a communist regime during a time of weakness. I personally prefer capitalism because it's stable, at the very least. Imposing a new system would be too chaotic right now, even if would benefit people in the long run. The whole equality thing just never really appealed to me anyway, although I do see many faults in both systems.

 

[Kailat777]

I've read several pages of this and noticed one thing: you seem to be arguing against the established form of capitalism based on the assumption that people are perfect.

Before you argue against that, let me explain: it all lies in this quote from you:

My idea is an integrated system of Capitalism and Communism where needs are provided by the state and entrepreneurial and entertainment industries are controlled by the market. It's not as flashy or lucrative as Capitalism, but its more stable and still supports progress.

Now, the problem here is that if your needs are provided by the state, nobody has any real reason to work harder than anyone else. Thus, everybody works to the minimum of their abilities, which actually deters progress. We're looking at an entrepreneurial and entertainment industry where the people are liable, so the obvious course of action is to get a menial government job so you won't be held liable for the costs of your actions. Nobody wants to be a brain surgeon if their living arrangements are the same as the trash collector. How are you going to get people into the medical professions?

Also, it takes money to, say, start up a new business. Given that your system is 'not as lucrative', when someone manages to get together the money for his new entrepreneurship, why is he going to try to start his business?

If your response to either question is "to get more money for what he wants", then your system is extremely close to the current form of capitalism, to the point where you may seem to be arguing against yourself. If your response is "for progress" or "for the betterment of mankind", then you are an idealist and don't understand how much people consider 'risk v. reward' before making a choice.

 

[peduncle]

i don't like capitalism.
if i could have it, i would make the entire world a communistic society.

 

[tehannihalator]

but we aren't in a true capitalist society because it would be hell we are in a consumerist society

 

[Iron Lightning]

This is in response to the thread "Why do people say that Capitalism is 'good in theory'?" The fact that Capitalism, and its beloved nephew the Free Market, are held up as the greatest socioeconomic system by so many people confuses me to no end.

Okay, so first of all, let's talk about money.

Money is something you get for working to better society. It is a representation of how much you have contributed. This is the crux of Capitalism: the harder you work, the more money you get. And then you get to take that 'work' and translate it into goods - food, housing, a new car. So, with money as an incentive, it's believed that people will compete to be the best in their field, so they receive the most money.

So my first gripe is, money represents work. But it isn't work itself. You can acquire money without working. You can rob someone, for instance. In fact, if you can get away with it, it's much easier to rob someone than it is to make the same amount of money through your own labors. See investment loan scandals. Because money is an end in itself, there's no incentive not to steal it - in fact, there's an incentive to do so. It's the path of least resistance.
The idea behind the free market is "If the market has no regulation, then people will only buy the best products, and therefore people will be incentivized to make better and better products." But it's so much easier to convince people of the superiority of your product than it is to make a genuinely superior one.

Secondly, in hardcore Capitalism, you need to pay for everything. This includes food, water, shelter, healthcare. Let's think about this for a moment. Without these things, we literally will die. So if you don't have money, you can't stay alive. Money = lifeforce. So if you're unable to work, or lose all your money in an unforseeable calamity - say, you've been robbed - you're fucked. Is it too much to ask that we not live on the fucking edge all our lives? Isn't the purpose of society in general to remove the burdens of survival through community?

Capitalism incentivizes the stealing of people's lifeforce.

And that's really the root of the issue here.

So, you have any better ideas? Go on, write it out, I'll wait.

Before you do, I'd like to remind you that even the most hardcore Anarchic-Capitalists propose (highly ineffective) measures to discourage theft. It's hardly fair to blame theft on capitalism, if we didn't have money thieves would satisfy themselves with pies, cars, and horses (as they still do today.)

 

[capnpupster]

If I were to set up a system it would be best to cover all basic needs for your people, food, housing, water, that stuff. You have to realize that you have to do some things that sound like they would lose efficiency in order to produce a net gain in efficiency. Sure some people are going to cheat workers comp and other social programs, but if you hire too many people to try and hunt these people down, you end up spending more money than you save by catching these people. Here's a better example: let's say you instate a half-assed healthcare program that covers life-threatening conditions, but doesn't allow for regular check ups. That's a stupid program that will end up costing more money than it saves, not to mention lives.

If you're an idealist and believe that if peoples needs are met they will work to better themselves and society than obviously you should provide for them. If you're a pessimist it might still be a good idea, all you have to believe is that people are more greedy than they are lazy to make it worth it.

 

[dashiz94]

And this is why we have a GOVERNMENT to prevent the Capitalist system from becoming completely laissez faire. Were there no regulations at all, people would probably manipulate the stock market to make as much money as possible, tank the country, then escape to some island they bought for themselves. And I am going to reiterate this point. NO SYSTEM IS PERFECT. Yes, there are flaws with Capitalism. And every system is good in theory, but in practice, Capitalism works best. It does for the most part tend to create better products for lower prices, and as long as government regulation prevents any monopolies from forming, it will work.

No monopoly has ever formed without Government support.
Not that I'm bashing your political opinion, I'm just stating that.

Read up on the post Civil War railroad monopolies. Those formed completely out of a lack of government regulation.

 

[Lancer723]

 

[Grant Sturman]

I've read several pages of this and noticed one thing: you seem to be arguing against the established form of capitalism based on the assumption that people are perfect.

Before you argue against that, let me explain: it all lies in this quote from you:

My idea is an integrated system of Capitalism and Communism where needs are provided by the state and entrepreneurial and entertainment industries are controlled by the market. It's not as flashy or lucrative as Capitalism, but its more stable and still supports progress.

Now, the problem here is that if your needs are provided by the state, nobody has any real reason to work harder than anyone else. Thus, everybody works to the minimum of their abilities, which actually deters progress. We're looking at an entrepreneurial and entertainment industry where the people are liable, so the obvious course of action is to get a menial government job so you won't be held liable for the costs of your actions. Nobody wants to be a brain surgeon if their living arrangements are the same as the trash collector. How are you going to get people into the medical professions?

Also, it takes money to, say, start up a new business. Given that your system is 'not as lucrative', when someone manages to get together the money for his new entrepreneurship, why is he going to try to start his business?

If your response to either question is "to get more money for what he wants", then your system is extremely close to the current form of capitalism, to the point where you may seem to be arguing against yourself. If your response is "for progress" or "for the betterment of mankind", then you are an idealist and don't understand how much people consider 'risk v. reward' before making a choice.

Thank you for saying this! Thats my idea as well.
The best example of the Capitalism vs Communism is the Cold war. At the end of the war in the early 90's most industry in Russia and former USSR country were smoke stack industrys, which means they were low tech and took many people to produce a small amount of product. At he end of the war there were only 330,000 computers in all of Russia. In the U.S there were about 50,000,000 computers, not only that but the industry was much more advanced in the U.S ( and its allies ). The GDP per person, was much higher in the U.S than in Russia as well.

So what does this have to do with Capitalism? Almost everything. The biggest thing you get from capitalism is innovation. The U.S is one ( at least once was ) of the most Capitalistic nations in the world! They produce more patents per person than any other nation. If everything was given out for free, then no one would try to change it.

As for water, food, and "healthcare", if you wont work for it, then maybe you shouldnt have a "life force", if you cant work turn to the church. Trust me if you can move you can work, there is a man down my street that as only one arm and no legs, he is a carpenter, and it is amazing to watch him work. He is a veteran, but he never takes money from the VA. So if your 20-something and your back "hurts", and your unwilling to work, put a bullet in your brain and do us all a favor.