"Muh Federal Reserve!"

Post Reply New Topic

Ron Paul was similar to Donald Trump ... except that he was honest about his anti-globalist stance, rather than being a pretender.

Of course, nobody like Ron Paul is ever going to get elected ... so we can forget about that.

Bollocks. We've already established that technological growth can come out of socialist societies as well.
That technological advancement was likely a product of the liberal enlightenment, which led to rapid scientific progress.

The liberal enlightenment led to science and technological growth, which allowed merchants to become more powerful than landlords. The enlightenment also caused people to challenge the divine right of kings, creating democracy. This was supposed to be a good system, but then the wealthy capitalists corrupted it.

Technological advancement can come out of any economic system but capitalism has proven to be the system that has the most advancement in technology.

You constantly point to the soviets getting a man into space but how did that improve life for the people of that country? With Capitalism technological advancement is driven by creating more wealth when you do this by making better things and making them cheaper thus improving the lives of the average person.

Rubbish.

During the Middle Ages, there was a merchant class for a long time. They never had a chance to seize power until democracy was implemented by liberal reformers.

This was an unintended consequence of liberal democracy. It was supposed to be truly democratic, but then the merchants learned how to game the system.



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

The word "wage slavery" was created around this time for a reason. Many peasants became industrial workers due to changing times, but they didn't become wealthier or more free. They had to deal with low wages, horrible working conditions, and smog.

Socialism and environmentalism came about as a response to these horrible social conditions.



Some people just have a personal passion for technology. This passion usually starts during childhood, before a child knows anything about money.

The Dilbert Animated Series actually managed to sum it up pretty well.
VVV

If workers were not more free how where they able to form unions?
The Merchants were largely descended from Aristocrats the younger sons who did not inherit but had the political connections to become wealthy.

Wage slavery is an idiotic term.

Some people do have a passion for engineering and some people just love money. How come all the societies that advance technology the most are capitalist?

You should listen to the arguments from people like Richard Wolff. He believes that it's essentially too late. I would tend to agree.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba9H1E65rQA

The time for anti-globalism was in the 80s and 90s. We aren't going to bring back McMansions for factory workers. We need to focus on taking care of the most vulnerable first.

The problem is capitalism is no longer producing useful technological advancement. The big booms of the 19th and early 20th century were due to major breakthroughs in labor saving technology (mass production, steam and internal combustion engine, electricity, etc...). This is what raised the living standard for the masses.

Today tech companies have turned to data mining their customers in order to sell more junk they don't need. All advertisers are essentially competing for a limited supply of people's disposable time and income. It's a form of arms race. Capitalism has become less efficient in the sense that more and more time and energy is spent on marketing... i.e. attempting to manipulate demand in a competitive manner. Marketing of prescription drugs in the US is a particularly egregious example of capitalist waste. This is an aspect of capitalism that free market cheerleaders like to ignore. A lot of energy and resources are spent on garbage like advertising when infrastructure crumbles and foreclosed McMansions rot.

If we were actually making progress in terms of exploring space or developing useful AI, I might say capitalism will have one last gasp. It seems this stuff is coming along extremely slowly now due to lack of government funded research. Even Elon Musk has to beg governments for money. Right now I just don't see much happening to be honest. The billionaires are focused mostly on short term gains. They used the irresponsible Republican tax cuts to buy back their own stocks in order jack up the share prices. They've just fueled a new asset bubble and new there's evidence they're feeling jittery about it.

Capitalists societies still produce more new technology than other countries. Intellectual property rights should be strengthened to increase incentives to invent. Right now IP law only really helps big business and the independent inventor is exploited. Many countries don't even enforce IP law. Even in western nations infringing a patent is a civil issue not a criminal one, whereas if you steal a song then its criminal. If an inventor creates something their patent only lasts 20 years from the date of filing and it can take years to be granted. If an author writes a book that is their property for life plus 70 years after death.

You cannot create wealth indefinitely simply by making things cheaper. Macroeconomics doesn't work like a video game. Spent money doesn't simply disappear. Money must circulate to keep the economy running.

If capitalism always created progress by constantly making things cheaper, why has the cost of renting or buying a home risen so much, even though the cost of building a home hasn't risen? You see, the exchange value of a product doesn't always represent the cost of production. Even if you could build a house equally cheap in the city as in the country, you can sell it for far more in the city.

Last edited by NoClearMind53 on 11 Apr 2018, 8:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

It's pretty hard to gauge the success of capitalism by looking at the modern world, given that nearly all countries are capitalist in one way or another.

That being said, innovative tech companies exist in Scandinavia. This means that regulating big business doesn't stifle technological advancement in the slightest.



From what I've seen, people are still inventing.

I don't think that creating an "incentive to invent" is necessary. I think that most inventors just want to follow their passion.



To be honest, I'm not fond of intellectual property laws in general.



Yep.

I also hate it when YouTube poopers get copyright strikes for creating their fine art.

The thing is the wealth of the developed world is no longer limited by technology. Technological innovation cannot provide an exponential increase in the standard of living forever. Eventually the curve will start to level off. Right now the biggest problem is all the gains of capitalism are being funneled to the top 10-20% at the expense of the rest. This is only sustainable when the advance of technology is marching ahead at an exponential pace, such that even those at the bottom experience some gain. That simply isn't happening anymore. More and more of the economy has migrated towards marketing and finance instead of development. More and more jobs are created just for the sake of pushing money around without actually doing anything productive. The derivatives market is a complete joke. None of the problems that caused the 2008 crash have been solved. The next crash is coming.

If things are getting cheaper then yes that is wealth being created because the lowering of the price is because an increase in supply. Money is simply a tool its not wealth in of itself.

You can sell a house for more in the city because more people want to live there and it increases the value of land. House prices have risen in different countries for different reasons. However capitalism cannot create significantly more land. In my country the quality of housing has certainly increased and a lot more people own homes.

All countries are mixed economies. Scandinavia is absolutely capitalist and less regulated than the US it ranks higher with economic freedom.

Many potential inventors may not be motivated by money but many will why not have both groups working to advance society?

Yeah. This is one aspect of capitalism that "libertarians" like to ignore.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surplus_value

Let's say you buy a chair for 100 dollars. Chances are, the employee who built the chair got 10 dollars for making it. The employer got 90 dollars.

No system can create wealth forever that is true but we are a long way off from that point. The poor are becoming richer this is an indisputable fact and that is because of capitalism.

You have to pay attention to where the "cheapness" is coming from. In some cases it's simply a case of production being shipped to places where people can be paid far less. You can't just ignore the fact that people have to be paid for an economy to function.


I agree. It's the capitalist cheer-leaders who constantly assert that money is wealth. Just because a stock price rises doesn't mean wealth has been created.