Capitalism- Good or Bad?

Sep 15, 2002
6,416
462
✟16,530.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
I am very pro-capitalism. It provides the greatest growth and most upward mobility. However, capitalism only works when it's players are ethical. As we saw in Enron and Tyco we can't rely upon business leaders to be ethical. There is nothing capitalistic about cooking the books in order to deceive stock holders. For this reason I am a proponent of regulated capitalism. I am strong proponent of SOX compliance which is a federal standard all publicly traded companies must meet.
Said it better than I could have.
 
Upvote 0

Blackguard_

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
Feb 9, 2004
9,468
374
41
Tucson
✟18,992.00
Faith
Lutheran
I should clarify.. I did say if I had it my way. It's far too idealistic a society though - people are, for the most part, extremely greedy. Even if they don't admit to it, the silent goal many people have is to have is to amass alot of money.
I agree, but I prefer to be idealistic in the other direction. i.e. a non-cut-throat free market.
Something I found interesting is that in an English history class I took it was mentioned that a member of the lower classes was better off in in the 17th century than the Industrial 19th do to things like Noblise Oblige as aopposed to being an expendable "plenty more where that came from" worker.

And for the second bit - that's the thing in my system. As I said.. from a time when services and good were worth something. Being in a trade would make them valuable, as well as assist the society around them.
That's still the case, goods and services are still valubale even if the paper money isn't.

In your system, would all people have equal propety? because why should someone bother earning a trade if they can be a bum and get the same amount? I realize people will do things from enjoyment/some sense of duty, but do you think enough would, especially if getting into the trade is expensive? Hospital eqipment and contractor's tools don;t grow on trees.

At very least.. I don't think things like cancer research in modern society should need to be paid for at all - simply done for the greater good.
I don't think cancer researchers are making money hand over fist. I think the cost of research has to do with the equipment used. One of my friends works at the UofA Cancer Center, I'll ask him next time what some of the more expensive equipment costs.

You see the problem is labor specialization, the researchers and people who build their equipment can't do that and farm and build a house etc. at the same time they do that so they need money to buy food and the like.
and the home builder can;t get all the materials himself, unless you are talking a very simple house.

It's a very idealistic system, and would never work for one simple reason - humans enjoy amassing things and being better than the next man
I disagree that's the one reason it won't work.

I think another reason is limited resoucres. In the free-market, resources are given to things people find valuable. I'm sure you've heard the expression "voting with your dollar"?

The tendency to amass things is how we get the resources to do things. The problem is when you go about it un ethically.

.
Socialism and Communism are great systems in theory - but in practice terrible because of human nature.
I don't liek them in thoery either. People aren;t equal(identical), they shouldn't all have the same property and responsibilty.

And every political theory works in theory.

Human nature also is all that keeps rule by enlightened philosopher-kings from working.

The intelligence comment was mostly because I'm finding more and more that we, as a western society (US, Canada, Britain etc) are not putting so much value on individual intelligence but rather simply as working sheep. And people are unfortunately content with this.
And that's a big problem with communism/socialism, it sees people as a collective and not as individuals.
Money has lost it's value - it stemmed from originally a beadmaker would trade beads for goods, a farmer would trade in food. Nations traded exclusively in what they needed.. spices, lumber etc. They created the original system of coinage/ gold as a standard of worth so that each trade would become exactly fair, things would have a set worth.
That, and it was something everyone could accept. i.e. what if I don't nead any beads? Plus, for merchants coinage saved a lot of space and weight.

Then inflation occurred - people decided that things should cost more, more money was created out of nowhere. And so it's worth was fractioned.
No, it was when they debased the currency, such as mixing in some tin or clipping corners.

What has happened over all this time is, as you said.. money is worthless now - it's become an invisible number hanging over all of our heads.
I wouldn't go as far as to say it's worthless today, but that it has no worth apart from the State that made it. Gold is gold no materr what potenate's head is stamped on it, but fiat money is worthless when the State behind it falls. (well, except as a collectors item like Confederate money or something)

We work jobs for an allowance, we are slaves to our wages.
I disagree. Many people in our society are slaves, but to various credit institutions, not wages.
I thin the necessity to have a wage/income has more to do with property tax then the state of currency.
As you may see - I'm a huge idealist. I believe that if humanity puts aside it's differences and obsession with above mentioned number we can work towards a golden age where we can find truth, beauty, equality and work legitimately for it.
The problem is you can do this with any social/economic system.

I think we should go back to Feudalism. If everyone is Feudalism was just there would be no problem. The peasants and serfs would be well treated, the nobles would enact just laws and enforce them fairly, etc. and the kings and nobles would establish education and research and patronize Universites and the like. Furthermore, decentralized societies have an advantage over centralized ones like yours when dealing with invaders (they don't fall with the stroke of a sword, the death of the rulers won't end the country)
Your mention of this only working on a small island is perfect here - say a group of people were shipwrecked on an island. They would work each day for survival, and they would all need to work together to ensure that they had everything they needed, selfishness in any member would be the fall of the group.
Ah, Lifeboat Ethics. . I don;t think it;s a good idea to have your ideal society be one with a sword of Damocles hanging over it. ;)

Besides you just vinidicated Objectivist ethics; it would be in the interest of the selfish person to cooperate to insure his survival. :p

really though, it's not incompatiable with Capitalism, i,e, the guy whose good at catching fish trades with guy whosw good at building shelters.

As in my ideal world - their greatest reward is that they benefited their group, and worked towards a more stable, happy mini-society.
So much for individualism.
Seriously though, In my ideal world it would be that people's greatest reward was acting ethically.
Actually, could I ask you a question back, you seem like a very intelligent person - What is America in debt to? I hear of this great 'national debt' all of the time.. but a debt to whom exactly?
Here.


And.. how can they keep paying for anything at all if they are in such an amazingly high debt
.
Because our creditors aren't stupid. Like credit card companies preying on financially iresponsible college students, they know the more we spend the more we are enslaved to them.

Doesn't the fact that the country is continually paying for things they cant actually afford proof of the non-existence or worthlessness of money?
No. It just shows they are very stupid with money. it's like many people with credit cards; as long as they can pay the interest on the debt/keep the creditors from collecting, they don't care how much money they don't have they are spending.
 
Upvote 0

TheReasoner

Former christian, current teapot agnostic.
Mar 14, 2005
10,292
684
Norway
✟29,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I am strongly opposed to capitalism and the so-called "free" market.
It benefits the strong and crushes the weak.
Some here say that it is the best system we have, and I beg to differ.
If you grew up in the USA I can understand such a viewpoint. But the internet is "free for all" and you can look up statistics and international information which I believe contradicts this. There is the fact that statistically you are much better off in a socialistic democracy than in a capitalistic one.

Fair trade, not "free". Equal worth and rights to ALL people, regardless of personal wealth.
 
Upvote 0
B

Bun-Bun

Guest
If it were up to me, money would be abolished and we would live in a society with systems based slightly on socialism - everyone would be entitled to the same food, health care and services, and the value of a trained, intelligent human being would return.

We've tried the whole "no money" thing before. It's called a barter economy. They aren't generally the most productive of societies.

There was a time before money, and it was a good time, trading goods and services for goods and services rather than imaginary numbers written on paper.

Not really. Barter economies really aren't that efficient. If you want to live in a backwards jungle tribe somewhere, go for it.

If money is the root of all evil, capitalism is it's evil man eating venus flytrap.

Money has no free will. Ergo, one cannot apply the concept of evil to money.

I should clarify.. I did say if I had it my way. It's far too idealistic a society though - people are, for the most part, extremely greedy.

No. It just doesn't really work on anything above a hunter-gatherer scale.

And for the second bit - that's the thing in my system. As I said.. from a time when services and good were worth something.

They still are worth something.

Being in a trade would make them valuable, as well as assist the society around them.

That already happens. Think plumber.

I don't think things like cancer research in modern society should need to be paid for at all - simply done for the greater good.

That sounds remarkably like slavery.

Socialism and Communism are great systems in theory - but in practice terrible because of human nature.

They're not that great, even in theory. They kind of ignore human nature.

The intelligence comment was mostly because I'm finding more and more that we, as a western society (US, Canada, Britain etc) are not putting so much value on individual intelligence but rather simply as working sheep. And people are unfortunately content with this.

And they're trending more and more toward statist economies. Dolists here we come?

Money has lost it's value - it stemmed from originally a beadmaker would trade beads for goods, a farmer would trade in food.

So how does the farmer get something from someone that has an ample supply of food?

They created the original system of coinage/ gold as a standard of worth so that each trade would become exactly fair, things would have a set worth.

How does something have a "set worth'? Is value an absolute?

Then inflation occurred - people decided that things should cost more, more money was created out of nowhere. And so it's worth was fractioned.

Money isn't just "created out of nowhere." People have to accept it in exchange for their goods.

What has happened over all this time is, as you said.. money is worthless now - it's become an invisible number hanging over all of our heads. We work jobs for an allowance, we are slaves to our wages.

It's not worthless. It just has no intrinsic value.

They would work each day for survival, and they would all need to work together to ensure that they had everything they needed, selfishness in any member would be the fall of the group.

That sounds remarkably like a subsistence level economy. What happens when someone develops a labor-saving device that permits him to only work one day a week for survival? Let's assume for a minute that they develop enough devices that everyone only has to work one day a week for survival? Then what do they do with the surplus labor?

As in my ideal world - their greatest reward is that they benefited their group, and worked towards a more stable, happy mini-society.

Everyone is enslaved to the group, for the common good. Nice future.

Doesn't the fact that the country is continually paying for things they cant actually afford proof of the non-existence or worthlessness of money?

If the government, prints more money to pay its debts, then the money will decline in value. However, it not worthless. It is less valuable, but still useful.
 
Upvote 0

Bulldog

Don't Tread on Me
Jan 19, 2004
7,122
176
22 Acacia Avenue
✟8,212.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
US-Libertarian
I am strongly opposed to capitalism and the so-called "free" market.
It benefits the strong and crushes the weak.

Can you brig up a specefic example of this?


Fair trade, not "free". Equal worth and rights to ALL people, regardless of personal wealth.

Free trade is equal rights, "fair trade" imposes coersion and violates rights.
 
Upvote 0

Maxwell511

Contributor
Jun 12, 2005
6,073
260
40
Utah County
✟16,130.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Free trade is equal rights, "fair trade" imposes coersion and violates rights.

Care to explain?

Btw to me equal rights require equal opportunities to exercise them, or else the concept is simply emotional empty rhetoric. Capitalist systems are highly dependent on initial conditions which restricts access and therefore the equality of opportunites. The words "free" and "rights" in the political sense should not be confused with what they mean in an economic sense. A free market is one that everyone with enough resources has the right to enter.
 
Upvote 0

bgrass1234

Regular Member
Sep 14, 2006
441
22
✟15,689.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Care to explain?

Btw to me equal rights require equal opportunities to exercise them, or else the concept is simply emotional empty rhetoric. Capitalist systems are highly dependent on initial conditions which restricts access and therefore the equality of opportunites. The words "free" and "rights" in the political sense should not be confused with what they mean in an economic sense. A free market is one that everyone with enough resources has the right to enter.
Guy A can sell his hot dogs for $1 and still manage a survivable profit. This is because he happend to get a good corner where he can move enough product to maintain that low price.

Guy B has to sell his for $2 because he has an inferior location and doesn't move as much product if he wanted to work the same hours as Guy A. But noone will pay $2 for a hot dog. So Guy B has sell his hot dogs for $1, work weekends and has to drive a used car and live in a smaller apartment.

Free trade is these two are free to do business as they like. If Guy B doesn't like his situation, its up to him figure out how to change it. If Guy A voluntarily decides to help out Guy B, then he's free to do that also. Its called freedom and liberty to own yourself and your property.

Fair trade is Guy B and this majority of friends decides this is unfair. They pass a law so they get to tax Guy A to subsidise Guy B so its then fair. If Guy A refuses, Guy B's friends will come with guns to haul Guy A off to jail and destroy Guy A's business. This is called slavery. Thats why Guy A needs to keep a 12 gauge in his cart and to be free to educate all the other hot dog sales men and hot dog consumers to whats going on.
 
Upvote 0

Job_s_First_Son

Regular Member
Feb 17, 2006
307
17
✟15,638.00
Faith
Atheist
We don't live under capitalism but rather a mixed economy. Minimum wage, welfare, progressive tax structures, income distribution methods, the myriad of regulatory bodies, etc. all seek to correct free market failures. Just pointing it out.

There are a lot of problems with capitalism, but I think it addresses the need for incentive and supports growth and advancement better than othes.
 
Upvote 0

Bulldog

Don't Tread on Me
Jan 19, 2004
7,122
176
22 Acacia Avenue
✟8,212.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
US-Libertarian
Care to explain?

Fair trade is fine and probably even a good thing until it imposes limits on free exchange.

Btw to me equal rights require equal opportunities to exercise them, or else the concept is simply emotional empty rhetoric. Capitalist systems are highly dependent on initial conditions which restricts access and therefore the equality of opportunites. The words "free" and "rights" in the political sense should not be confused with what they mean in an economic sense. A free market is one that everyone with enough resources has the right to enter.

To me "equal rights" means rights that everyone has -equally. Just because one is in a more disadvantaged situation than another, does not mean that they have any less of a right than anyone else. The problem is when we start getting into so called "rights" which impose force upon other people. Real rights and personal and individual.

A free market is simply a market without restrictions, much like free speech is speech without restrictions.
 
Upvote 0

Maxwell511

Contributor
Jun 12, 2005
6,073
260
40
Utah County
✟16,130.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Guy A can sell his hot dogs for $1 and still manage a survivable profit. This is because he happend to get a good corner where he can move enough product to maintain that low price.

Guy B has to sell his for $2 because he has an inferior location and doesn't move as much product if he wanted to work the same hours as Guy A. But noone will pay $2 for a hot dog. So Guy B has sell his hot dogs for $1, work weekends and has to drive a used car and live in a smaller apartment.

Free trade is these two are free to do business as they like. If Guy B doesn't like his situation, its up to him figure out how to change it. If Guy A voluntarily decides to help out Guy B, then he's free to do that also. Its called freedom and liberty to own yourself and your property.

Fair trade is Guy B and this majority of friends decides this is unfair. They pass a law so they get to tax Guy A to subsidise Guy B so its then fair. If Guy A refuses, Guy B's friends will come with guns to haul Guy A off to jail and destroy Guy A's business. This is called slavery. Thats why Guy A needs to keep a 12 gauge in his cart and to be free to educate all the other hot dog sales men and hot dog consumers to whats going on.

Fair trade is fine and probably even a good thing until it imposes limits on free exchange.

Fair Trade is a consumer driven movement that uses existing markets to sell its products which are a) the commidity itself and b) the sense of satisfaction the a consumer gets from buying the product. If this is restricting any business it is because of consumer demand, I am not aware of any legislation that actively restricts non-Fair Trade products in favour of Fair Trade products.

A free market is simply a market without restrictions.

Such markets cannot exist.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

HouseApe

Senior Veteran
Sep 30, 2004
2,426
188
Florida
✟3,485.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
A free market is simply a market without restrictions, much like free speech is speech without restrictions.

Free markets don't actually exist anywhere because in those places they have existed, they've proved so disastrous that folks quickly changed them.
 
Upvote 0

Bulldog

Don't Tread on Me
Jan 19, 2004
7,122
176
22 Acacia Avenue
✟8,212.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
US-Libertarian
Free markets don't actually exist anywhere because in those places they have existed

Most western socities have some mix of free enterprise and socialism.

they've proved so disastrous that folks quickly changed them.

Such as...?
 
Upvote 0

Bulldog

Don't Tread on Me
Jan 19, 2004
7,122
176
22 Acacia Avenue
✟8,212.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
US-Libertarian
Fair Trade is a consumer driven movement that uses existing markets to sell its products which are a) the commidity itself and b) the sense of satisfaction the a consumer gets from buying the product. If this is restricting any business it is because of consumer demand, I am not aware of any legislation that actively restricts non-Fair Trade products in favour of Fair Trade products.

This is fine.

Such markets cannot exist.

Why not?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Lifesaver

Fides et Ratio
Jan 8, 2004
6,855
288
38
São Paulo, Brazil
✟16,097.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Unscrupulous greed indeed destroys whatever freedom a market has.
A greedy politician, seeing the gains to be made by favouring one member of the market (and himself, of course) at the expense of others, will want to create as many restrictions to free enterprise and free trade as he can.
 
Upvote 0

Bulldog

Don't Tread on Me
Jan 19, 2004
7,122
176
22 Acacia Avenue
✟8,212.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
US-Libertarian
Unscrupulous greed indeed destroys whatever freedom a market has.
A greedy politician, seeing the gains to be made by favouring one member of the market (and himself, of course) at the expense of others, will want to create as many restrictions to free enterprise and free trade as he can.

This is a good point. "Monopoly," for example, originally referred to a grant from the king which restricted trade in a certain area to whoever he was being bribed by.
 
Upvote 0

HorstWessel

Member
Feb 5, 2007
22
3
116
✟155.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
I suggest you learn about the Robber Barrons. Their unscrupulous greed destroyed competition. Free trade leads to monopoly which is the antithesis of free trade.

You mean the 18th century railroad monopolies that were given by the government?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

kermit

Legend
Nov 13, 2003
15,477
807
49
Visit site
✟27,358.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Upvote 0