You make the bold claim that the poor can not benefit from the system of capitalism, and that only the rich can benefit from such a sytem. I beleive this to be absolutely untrue. In fact, everybody benefits from any true system of capitalism- just in different ways. While the rich may enjoy luxuries, so do the poor. In all of the countries I can think of that have at least had some extended period of capitalism (and still have some capitalism left) the poor are afforded great luxuries that the rich of previous years might not even have had. Microwaves, TV's, VCRs, vehicles. The poor are no longer living on the farm worrying about them dying next winter, or understanding that their child will more than likely not live into adulthood, they are in apartments, living quite well than they ever had before.
You could say that just because the poor do not live in mansions, their lives are not valued. In fact, it's a very emotional argument rather than a logical one- which reminds me of a lot of what Marxian rhetoric is- appeals to emotion rather than reason. The poor do have the ability to better themselves and an ideal form of capitalist healthcare allows the poor to provide for their own care if they need to.
The change you speak of comes not through change of a system but through a combination of exchange through trade, and scientific innovation.
You could say that just because the poor do not live in mansions, their lives are not valued. In fact, it's a very emotional argument rather than a logical one- which reminds me of a lot of what Marxian rhetoric is- appeals to emotion rather than reason. The poor do have the ability to better themselves and an ideal form of capitalist healthcare allows the poor to provide for their own care if they need to.
The change you speak of comes not through change of a system but through a combination of exchange through trade, and scientific innovation.
))<>((
My poor friend you don't have a clue about what I'm trying to show you, this is gonna be tricky. You basically say Capitalism is good because it's here, so it shouldn't change.
Of course we have benefited some years of capitalism, before that we have benefited some years of monarchy as well etc... In every past systems the men have "benefited" some improvements and discoveries. But this suffer 2 huge "gaps" in logic : nothing proves we wouldn't have improved if we had a different system at that time, we might have done even better ; and secondly nothing proves that the economical system has something to do with our discoveries and technological advances.
Technological and Scientific innovations happen because we're trying to resolve issues and answer questions, not because someone wants to make profit.
(dumb) Exemple : We didn't went to space because someone told himself "I want to make profit, I'll invent something to go to space and sell it to governments", but some people, deeply interested and curious about space searched and discovered ways to explore... Then capitalism enter the game and some people manage to get profit out of it.
You need to inform yourself about the world. A huge part of the human population still starve to death, or don't have access to drinkable water. A huge part of the population can't educate themselves because they have no mean to do so. A huge part of the population is in constant civil war because "First world countries" establishe dictatorship and putschs in poor countries to keep control over their ressources, so their children fights with guns and die before adulthood.
You're speaking about a fictionnal carebear capitalism that have STRICTLY NOTHING to do with the actual system, you're talking about schoolbook theory and capitalist propaganda.
What the fuck are you talking about. You've just sent away centuries of humanitarism thoughts, the golden rule, and the principle of "social specie" all at once, because according to you "it appeals to emotion rather than reason".
At least I'm glad it wakes some emotions inside of your "rational capitalist heart", it means you're not totally hopeless I guess.
Capitalism being slavery is not a tale communists were telling each others late at night around campfires, it's a fact. In Europe the number of people being unemployed gets higher every day because big companies send their factory in India or somewhere else in Asia because they can make the people work longer for almost nothing compared to the minimum wage in EU, means more profit. Heads of companies don't give a shit about people losing their jobs or making some children work 12 hours a day for nothing.
Of course we have benefited some years of capitalism, before that we have benefited some years of monarchy as well etc... In every past systems the men have "benefited" some improvements and discoveries. But this suffer 2 huge "gaps" in logic : nothing proves we wouldn't have improved if we had a different system at that time, we might have done even better ; and secondly nothing proves that the economical system has something to do with our discoveries and technological advances.
Technological and Scientific innovations happen because we're trying to resolve issues and answer questions, not because someone wants to make profit.
(dumb) Exemple : We didn't went to space because someone told himself "I want to make profit, I'll invent something to go to space and sell it to governments", but some people, deeply interested and curious about space searched and discovered ways to explore... Then capitalism enter the game and some people manage to get profit out of it.
The poor are no longer living on the farm worrying about them dying next winter, or understanding that their child will more than likely not live into adulthood, they are in apartments, living quite well than they ever had before.
You need to inform yourself about the world. A huge part of the human population still starve to death, or don't have access to drinkable water. A huge part of the population can't educate themselves because they have no mean to do so. A huge part of the population is in constant civil war because "First world countries" establishe dictatorship and putschs in poor countries to keep control over their ressources, so their children fights with guns and die before adulthood.
You're speaking about a fictionnal carebear capitalism that have STRICTLY NOTHING to do with the actual system, you're talking about schoolbook theory and capitalist propaganda.
You could say that just because the poor do not live in mansions, their lives are not valued. In fact, it's a very emotional argument rather than a logical one- which reminds me of a lot of what Marxian rhetoric is- appeals to emotion rather than reason.
What the fuck are you talking about. You've just sent away centuries of humanitarism thoughts, the golden rule, and the principle of "social specie" all at once, because according to you "it appeals to emotion rather than reason".
At least I'm glad it wakes some emotions inside of your "rational capitalist heart", it means you're not totally hopeless I guess.
Capitalism being slavery is not a tale communists were telling each others late at night around campfires, it's a fact. In Europe the number of people being unemployed gets higher every day because big companies send their factory in India or somewhere else in Asia because they can make the people work longer for almost nothing compared to the minimum wage in EU, means more profit. Heads of companies don't give a shit about people losing their jobs or making some children work 12 hours a day for nothing.
Last edited by deprav; Jun 14, 2013 at 11:40 AM.
No, I am challenging your belief that we need to get rid of capitalism.
I also feel the need to point out that you are unable to provide an alternative to capitalism so this whole debate is rather useless because all you do is point out flaws and provide no comparison with a “better” system.
Anyway, to respond to some of your points:
People working for less money surely is a great act of enslavement. >_>
That's actually an insult to people who are forced to work for nothing through means of violence.
Capitalism doesn't create slavery, a poorly regulated free market system does. If you look at well regulated countries in Europe and America you'll find good working conditions.
If you look at poorly regulated countries like India or Kongo you'll find bad working conditions. You cannot blame capitalism for lack of regulations.
Empirical evidence has shown that societies that have implemented capitalism have successful grown their economies. A few economic miracles have occurred: The economic miracle of Hong Kong and Singapore are two great examples. These nations were originally poor nation but have become industrialized due to implementing capitalism policies. If one looks at a graph comparing highly capitalistic nation, those nations that rank the best under the “economic freedom index” have higher gross domestic production then nations with low economic freedom and property rights.
Evidence of the social-calculation problem occurring also has empirical evidence. Massive famines and starvation has occurred in North Korea, China , and the Soviet Union . People waited in long lines just to get bread .While China remains more capitalistic, it still has communist elements to it. One result that has occurred is that China contains ghost cities which nobody inhabits .
Gross domestic production is a net benefit to society because it causes a lot of positive results that benefit society. People that live in wealthier nations tend to be happier . Life expectancy increase as gdp increases, since people have access to healthcare and nutrition . Higher gdp also correlates with a decrease in murders.
You may think that alternatives need to be implemented. You cannot even provide an alternative, let alone any empirical evidence that said alternatives can work. Speculation is likely to be wrong since it is difficult to predict how human motives will interact with one another in a complex world and there are more ways to be right then to be wrong. In order for his system to work, all assumptions and predictions would have to work out, which is unlikely to be the case. Now we know that the system of capitalism has improved the lives of billions. Therefore, a priori we should accept capitalism as the better alternative to utopic ideas. The system we live in today is the result past suffering and experimentation throughout thousands of years of social engineering.
I also feel the need to point out that you are unable to provide an alternative to capitalism so this whole debate is rather useless because all you do is point out flaws and provide no comparison with a “better” system.
Anyway, to respond to some of your points:
People working for less money surely is a great act of enslavement. >_>
That's actually an insult to people who are forced to work for nothing through means of violence.
Capitalism doesn't create slavery, a poorly regulated free market system does. If you look at well regulated countries in Europe and America you'll find good working conditions.
If you look at poorly regulated countries like India or Kongo you'll find bad working conditions. You cannot blame capitalism for lack of regulations.
Empirical evidence has shown that societies that have implemented capitalism have successful grown their economies. A few economic miracles have occurred: The economic miracle of Hong Kong and Singapore are two great examples. These nations were originally poor nation but have become industrialized due to implementing capitalism policies. If one looks at a graph comparing highly capitalistic nation, those nations that rank the best under the “economic freedom index” have higher gross domestic production then nations with low economic freedom and property rights.
Evidence of the social-calculation problem occurring also has empirical evidence. Massive famines and starvation has occurred in North Korea, China , and the Soviet Union . People waited in long lines just to get bread .While China remains more capitalistic, it still has communist elements to it. One result that has occurred is that China contains ghost cities which nobody inhabits .
Gross domestic production is a net benefit to society because it causes a lot of positive results that benefit society. People that live in wealthier nations tend to be happier . Life expectancy increase as gdp increases, since people have access to healthcare and nutrition . Higher gdp also correlates with a decrease in murders.
You may think that alternatives need to be implemented. You cannot even provide an alternative, let alone any empirical evidence that said alternatives can work. Speculation is likely to be wrong since it is difficult to predict how human motives will interact with one another in a complex world and there are more ways to be right then to be wrong. In order for his system to work, all assumptions and predictions would have to work out, which is unlikely to be the case. Now we know that the system of capitalism has improved the lives of billions. Therefore, a priori we should accept capitalism as the better alternative to utopic ideas. The system we live in today is the result past suffering and experimentation throughout thousands of years of social engineering.
Last edited by saahsaap; Jun 14, 2013 at 11:50 AM.
))<>((
dude, you're so deep into it you can't get your thoughts out of it, that's insane. You don't get half of what I'm saying. It's getting late I'll try to make it short but I fear I won't be able to D:
I'm not unable to provide alternative solutions, I just don't feel writting pages at this stage of the discussion, it's not useful yet if you can't get your eyes off of capitalism. Plus, you could just google around if you wanted, you'll have plenty models to think about (not communism, not socialism, new models taking into account actual technology and knowledge)
Erh... how to explain this... It's not just about working for less money. It's about how capitalism stops democracy, about how much time we spend working jobs we do not particulary like during our whole short life, about how we became "slaves" of a system we created as a tool instead of controlling it.
The world wide capitalist system (because politic is now worldwide, we can't just manage country in autarky now, those are old obsolete ideas) is VERY POORLY regulated. speculation on primary ressources and needs, dubious stock exchange, "offshoring" in poor countries to exploit their poor regulation etc... Talk about good working conditions to german peeps, they have no minimum wage, it's one of the most "competitive" country of EU but still it's the country in which "the poor people are the poorest" (in EU), way to go Capitalism ! Tell this to Greek peeps as well, they're fucked to the bones.
And poorly regulated countries like India or Kongo will stay poorly regulated because that's what give them jobs, companies from richer countries offshoring to theirs because the labour is cheaper and they will work for almost nothing to subsist.
Kudos, people starve under dictatorship ! Fackin revelation of the night. And you'll have to point what are the communist elements still left in china because appart from the name I really can't see any. It actually never have been, like ex-URSS and north korea, those were just self-cult "communist" dictatorship applied on a world wide capitalist system. It's non sense.
Thank you.
Of course they tend to be happier than people starving to death and eating some earth galette to fill their stomach. But please explain why approximatively 25% of the people living in developped countries are using anti-depressant (25% of the whole population, so like 50% of the active working people).
I have to say I'm almost speach-less because your conception of "happiness" and life are miles away from mine. Your explainations sound absurd to me, you have your head in a box and you're scared of changes because you actually live a comfortable life and you don't give a damn shit about the rest.
And I'm not the only one thinking alternatives need to be implemented... It becomes pretty obvious for a large part of people since our planet and our organisms won't be able to take it for much longer, we live longer but sick and depressed. hurray.
"Speculation is likely to be wrong since it is difficult to predict how human motives will interact with one another in a complex world"
This was right before any system change, before capitalism too, and here we are. If this was a valid point we would still have emperors.
Systems -in economics, politics, physics, biology or anything you want- are never right from the start. People try, modify, fail, learn and apply. That's how life works.
You sound like we have reached The Peak of our civilization, but you're just stuck in a morbid paralysis.
This system sure is the result of past suffering and experimentation, everything is. That doesn't legitimate the fact that we shouldn't change it. All the future systems will be the result of past suffering and experimention. The next system will be the result of present suffering and experimentations. This is evolution, we adapt.
Tho your graphics made me laugh, thank you.
- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Edit : I'll copy-paste this here because it was an edit on another post and you may have missed it
"a little exemple of the relation between evolution of our mind and our (political) environment, that I like to use in those kind of discussions :
A tribe of south-america called the Zo'e; they never had the need to make a currency or put mercantile values on their surrounding. Sharing is natural to them, to the point they don't have any word or expression in their language to say "Thank you", because giving to the rest of the group is just logic, like WE find logic the fact to work shitty jobs to earn paper to buy food and useless crap. And they're pretty, probably more than the average worker of the "developped" world. No income, no GPD, max happiness, where would that go in your graphics ;o
Do you understand the point ? There's no "one truth" or "one way of living", there's only adaptation and extrapolation of our past choices and crucial events through time."
I also feel the need to point out that you are unable to provide an alternative to capitalism so this whole debate is rather useless because all you do is point out flaws and provide no comparison with a “better” system.
I'm not unable to provide alternative solutions, I just don't feel writting pages at this stage of the discussion, it's not useful yet if you can't get your eyes off of capitalism. Plus, you could just google around if you wanted, you'll have plenty models to think about (not communism, not socialism, new models taking into account actual technology and knowledge)
People working for less money surely is a great act of enslavement. >_>
That's actually an insult to people who are forced to work for nothing through means of violence.
Erh... how to explain this... It's not just about working for less money. It's about how capitalism stops democracy, about how much time we spend working jobs we do not particulary like during our whole short life, about how we became "slaves" of a system we created as a tool instead of controlling it.
Capitalism doesn't create slavery, a poorly regulated free market system does. If you look at well regulated countries in Europe and America you'll find good working conditions.
If you look at poorly regulated countries like India or Kongo you'll find bad working conditions. You cannot blame capitalism for lack of regulations.
The world wide capitalist system (because politic is now worldwide, we can't just manage country in autarky now, those are old obsolete ideas) is VERY POORLY regulated. speculation on primary ressources and needs, dubious stock exchange, "offshoring" in poor countries to exploit their poor regulation etc... Talk about good working conditions to german peeps, they have no minimum wage, it's one of the most "competitive" country of EU but still it's the country in which "the poor people are the poorest" (in EU), way to go Capitalism ! Tell this to Greek peeps as well, they're fucked to the bones.
And poorly regulated countries like India or Kongo will stay poorly regulated because that's what give them jobs, companies from richer countries offshoring to theirs because the labour is cheaper and they will work for almost nothing to subsist.
Evidence of the social-calculation problem occurring also has empirical evidence. Massive famines and starvation has occurred in North Korea, China , and the Soviet Union . People waited in long lines just to get bread .While China remains more capitalistic, it still has communist elements to it.
Kudos, people starve under dictatorship ! Fackin revelation of the night. And you'll have to point what are the communist elements still left in china because appart from the name I really can't see any. It actually never have been, like ex-URSS and north korea, those were just self-cult "communist" dictatorship applied on a world wide capitalist system. It's non sense.
Gross domestic production is a net benefit to society because it causes a lot of positive results that benefit society.
Thank you.
People that live in wealthier nations tend to be happier . Life expectancy increase as gdp increases, since people have access to healthcare and nutrition . Higher gdp also correlates with a decrease in murders.
Of course they tend to be happier than people starving to death and eating some earth galette to fill their stomach. But please explain why approximatively 25% of the people living in developped countries are using anti-depressant (25% of the whole population, so like 50% of the active working people).
You may think that alternatives need to be implemented. You cannot even provide an alternative, let alone any empirical evidence that said alternatives can work. Speculation is likely to be wrong since it is difficult to predict how human motives will interact with one another in a complex world and there are more ways to be right then to be wrong. In order for his system to work, all assumptions and predictions would have to work out, which is unlikely to be the case. Now we know that the system of capitalism has improved the lives of billions. Therefore, a priori we should accept capitalism as the better alternative to utopic ideas.
I have to say I'm almost speach-less because your conception of "happiness" and life are miles away from mine. Your explainations sound absurd to me, you have your head in a box and you're scared of changes because you actually live a comfortable life and you don't give a damn shit about the rest.
And I'm not the only one thinking alternatives need to be implemented... It becomes pretty obvious for a large part of people since our planet and our organisms won't be able to take it for much longer, we live longer but sick and depressed. hurray.
"Speculation is likely to be wrong since it is difficult to predict how human motives will interact with one another in a complex world"
This was right before any system change, before capitalism too, and here we are. If this was a valid point we would still have emperors.
The system we live in today is the result past suffering and experimentation throughout thousands of years of social engineering.
Systems -in economics, politics, physics, biology or anything you want- are never right from the start. People try, modify, fail, learn and apply. That's how life works.
You sound like we have reached The Peak of our civilization, but you're just stuck in a morbid paralysis.
This system sure is the result of past suffering and experimentation, everything is. That doesn't legitimate the fact that we shouldn't change it. All the future systems will be the result of past suffering and experimention. The next system will be the result of present suffering and experimentations. This is evolution, we adapt.
Tho your graphics made me laugh, thank you.
- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Edit : I'll copy-paste this here because it was an edit on another post and you may have missed it
"a little exemple of the relation between evolution of our mind and our (political) environment, that I like to use in those kind of discussions :
A tribe of south-america called the Zo'e; they never had the need to make a currency or put mercantile values on their surrounding. Sharing is natural to them, to the point they don't have any word or expression in their language to say "Thank you", because giving to the rest of the group is just logic, like WE find logic the fact to work shitty jobs to earn paper to buy food and useless crap. And they're pretty, probably more than the average worker of the "developped" world. No income, no GPD, max happiness, where would that go in your graphics ;o
Do you understand the point ? There's no "one truth" or "one way of living", there's only adaptation and extrapolation of our past choices and crucial events through time."
Last edited by deprav; Jun 14, 2013 at 01:47 PM.
Originally Posted by deprav
Lel, you were arguing the exact opposite on the CISPA thread, something along the line of "governments don't lie" and their laws and bills about the internet are only to protect the citizens against cyber-threats... you wanted a proof ;o
Not much we can do about it if we ain't doing anything that's for sure.
lolno. I was arguing that not every bill regarding the internet is malicious, and that the particular bill in question had none of the language or clauses that could make it so.
As proven by that thread, no one who was against it had even read the bill!
If people can't find information and think for themselves, that's a huge problem. Some of them seriously made up their minds after seeing the forum banner!
Originally Posted by deprav
I have none, I'm pretty sceptical about half he said (aliens being presently held prisonner and working with US gov 'n shit), the important point is how plausible it sounds for a human brain (not likely, but plausible), because if the human race had any contact with ET life with a superior technology, it would more likely be held secret for economical reasons (& religious reasons)
Plus if you want proof, we are a living proof ;p We went to space and, in the absolute, we aren't particullary smart : 80% of the people watch dumbshit on TV to rest their brain from an exhausting shitty job. If only a few of us can make us go to space, I guess some more evolved specie somewhere in the overwhelmingly huge universe might have stopped over our planet. I've never seen any, but that surely doesn't sound impossible.
+ I don't think that's something we can provide proofs for : witnesses are called nutjob, pics and vidz makes people sceptical because we can photoshop anything, or give some other rational explanations. If someone ever meet an actual alien, shakes his hand in front of a camera, people would call it special FX and stay in denial xD
So yeah, the only proof we could ever provide is ourselves, coupled with logic and probability applied on the scale of the universe.
If someone actually had proof, it would be very easy to expose and spread it.
Originally Posted by deprav
We already had this (pretty long) discussion once. Any economic system will have influence on our social behaviour, our relation with "possession" and our political ideas in general.
The actual one is just enlarging the gap (between rich & poor) and becomes unbearable for the largest part of the population, ecologically dangerous, and starts to look like a totalitarian drift. Because people holding the money see the average joe is now able to educate himself, they're scared.
As we said in our long discussion about economics, it's no longer a science aiming to study human's exchange of good(needs) and currency, it's a tool which aims to exploit the weakness of the actual "closed system" for the profit of a few.
I don't think that's true at all. If the average joe becomes educated, that is good for everyone. Exactly who is scared?
I think most people profit from the economy. Hell, my parents have a nice house and food on the table. Are they "the few"?
Some people make more money than others, people do different work, people work differently, people have different situations.
Even in USA the mean income is still way above mean rent+consumables.
Originally Posted by deprav
Yep, it SHOULD be a natural and logical rule. But not in a world wide system preaching self-enrichment at the expense of others. Our whole system is based on individualism over general well-being, therefore people growing in this environment will think according to it. I'm pretty sure most of us never considered the golden rule, they probably heard it when they were kidz, and forgot about it...
I don't think such system exists.
