Page 4 of 7 [ 99 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Subotai
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,036
Location: 日本

24 Feb 2012, 10:28 pm

marshall wrote:
artrat wrote:
Not only is capitalism inefficient but it is also morally wrong.

I see it as a necessary evil though. At least small 'c' capitalism which is simply a system of contracting and trading.

I think there should be more to human social relations than work and monetary exchanges though. I don't think all human beings are evolved for the superficiality and impersonality of modern society at large. Only a certain type of people really thrive in such an environment. Namely extroverts and people with a hardened individualistic mindset. I've come to the conclusion that it only works because in the first world we have the luxery and technology to find physical comfort without much effort. Yet emotionally sensitive people are harmed in the cold neglectful ego-centric society we have.


It all boils down to survival of the fittest.
Those of us born at the top of the ladder factor into this as well, because our ancestors struggled to get themselves and/or their future family generations to that point--this is the root of unconditional love for one's own children. So the wealthy consolidating their power is just an expression of the nature of life and evolutionary drive.
Philosophically it is wrong, but we are base creatures at the core.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

24 Feb 2012, 11:00 pm

Subotai wrote:
Philosophically it is wrong, but we are base creatures at the core.


We are not base. We are as we evolved to be. Do you expect human beings to be god-like?

ruveyn



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

24 Feb 2012, 11:24 pm

Subotai wrote:
marshall wrote:
artrat wrote:
Not only is capitalism inefficient but it is also morally wrong.

I see it as a necessary evil though. At least small 'c' capitalism which is simply a system of contracting and trading.

I think there should be more to human social relations than work and monetary exchanges though. I don't think all human beings are evolved for the superficiality and impersonality of modern society at large. Only a certain type of people really thrive in such an environment. Namely extroverts and people with a hardened individualistic mindset. I've come to the conclusion that it only works because in the first world we have the luxery and technology to find physical comfort without much effort. Yet emotionally sensitive people are harmed in the cold neglectful ego-centric society we have.


It all boils down to survival of the fittest.
Those of us born at the top of the ladder factor into this as well, because our ancestors struggled to get themselves and/or their future family generations to that point--this is the root of unconditional love for one's own children. So the wealthy consolidating their power is just an expression of the nature of life and evolutionary drive.
Philosophically it is wrong, but we are base creatures at the core.

I guess I'm not part of this "we" you're talking about as I have no such drive and find the entire notion rather dull and depressing. The interesting people of the world are the scientists and artists. Business people in suits who chase after wealth are boring.



Subotai
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,036
Location: 日本

24 Feb 2012, 11:27 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Subotai wrote:
Philosophically it is wrong, but we are base creatures at the core.


We are not base. We are as we evolved to be. Do you expect human beings to be god-like?

ruveyn


No, I don't expect that. Just acknowledging the roots of our motivations. I don't expect humans to be god-like but I do think philosophy is born from an evolutionary drive for us to become god-like. Not that we'll make it.



Subotai
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,036
Location: 日本

24 Feb 2012, 11:31 pm

marshall wrote:
Subotai wrote:
marshall wrote:
artrat wrote:
Not only is capitalism inefficient but it is also morally wrong.

I see it as a necessary evil though. At least small 'c' capitalism which is simply a system of contracting and trading.

I think there should be more to human social relations than work and monetary exchanges though. I don't think all human beings are evolved for the superficiality and impersonality of modern society at large. Only a certain type of people really thrive in such an environment. Namely extroverts and people with a hardened individualistic mindset. I've come to the conclusion that it only works because in the first world we have the luxery and technology to find physical comfort without much effort. Yet emotionally sensitive people are harmed in the cold neglectful ego-centric society we have.


It all boils down to survival of the fittest.
Those of us born at the top of the ladder factor into this as well, because our ancestors struggled to get themselves and/or their future family generations to that point--this is the root of unconditional love for one's own children. So the wealthy consolidating their power is just an expression of the nature of life and evolutionary drive.
Philosophically it is wrong, but we are base creatures at the core.

I guess I'm not part of this "we" you're talking about as I have no such drive and find the entire notion rather dull and depressing. The interesting people of the world are the scientists and artists. Business people in suits who chase after wealth are boring.


It's just my theory, probably off base on many points. Humans are capable of abstract thinking and self reflection, but at our primal level we are organisms driven by survival instinct.



AstroGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,582

24 Feb 2012, 11:38 pm

Even if capitalism is all that can ever work (I'm not convinced, but let's just say) I still find it rather vulgar. I don't like the fact that everything has to be done with profit in mind.



Declension
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,807

24 Feb 2012, 11:44 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Let me get this straight. Making something that someone else can use and is willing to pay for is immoral?


The usual anticapitalist line is that there is nothing wrong with such a thing, in itself. It's just the sort of thing that humans do, after all.

The problem comes when you reify the simple human action of "making and selling" into some sort of abstract absolute, and make it seem like it's the bedrock of society, even more important than democracy itself. Humans naturally make and sell things, yes. But humans also naturally agree on rules to govern everyone's behaviour, and humans also naturally decide that certain things and concepts are sacred and not for sale, and humans also naturally judge certain behaviours as antisocial.

Anticapitalists usually protest things that are as far removed from simple "making and selling" as you could possibly imagine. Banks use people's money irresponsibly and then demand to be bailed out by the taxpayer. Huge faceless corporations use economy of scale to undercut local business. No regard is given to third-party damages that imperil us all. How is this "making and selling"?



cw10
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 May 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 973

25 Feb 2012, 1:07 am

Declension wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Let me get this straight. Making something that someone else can use and is willing to pay for is immoral?


The usual anticapitalist line is that there is nothing wrong with such a thing, in itself. It's just the sort of thing that humans do, after all.

The problem comes when you reify the simple human action of "making and selling" into some sort of abstract absolute, and make it seem like it's the bedrock of society, even more important than democracy itself. Humans naturally make and sell things, yes. But humans also naturally agree on rules to govern everyone's behaviour, and humans also naturally decide that certain things and concepts are sacred and not for sale, and humans also naturally judge certain behaviours as antisocial.

Anticapitalists usually protest things that are as far removed from simple "making and selling" as you could possibly imagine. Banks use people's money irresponsibly and then demand to be bailed out by the taxpayer. Huge faceless corporations use economy of scale to undercut local business. No regard is given to third-party damages that imperil us all. How is this "making and selling"?


America doesn't have a capitalist society. We have a capitalist oligarchy. If you want to see free trade in action visit a market street in mexico, or visit a flea market (read: free market). They are the last bastions of true capitalism.



Subotai
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,036
Location: 日本

25 Feb 2012, 1:25 am

cw10 wrote:
Declension wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Let me get this straight. Making something that someone else can use and is willing to pay for is immoral?


The usual anticapitalist line is that there is nothing wrong with such a thing, in itself. It's just the sort of thing that humans do, after all.

The problem comes when you reify the simple human action of "making and selling" into some sort of abstract absolute, and make it seem like it's the bedrock of society, even more important than democracy itself. Humans naturally make and sell things, yes. But humans also naturally agree on rules to govern everyone's behaviour, and humans also naturally decide that certain things and concepts are sacred and not for sale, and humans also naturally judge certain behaviours as antisocial.

Anticapitalists usually protest things that are as far removed from simple "making and selling" as you could possibly imagine. Banks use people's money irresponsibly and then demand to be bailed out by the taxpayer. Huge faceless corporations use economy of scale to undercut local business. No regard is given to third-party damages that imperil us all. How is this "making and selling"?


America doesn't have a capitalist society. We have a capitalist oligarchy. If you want to see free trade in action visit a market street in mexico, or visit a flea market (read: free market). They are the last bastions of true capitalism.


We need to keep the oligarchs in check. Unfortunately they are the ones who control the resources, and they invest massively in lobbying and public relations in order to keep it that way.
Propaganda and public relations etc. is becoming more and more sophisticated, these people know history repeats itself and are working to prevent that (revolution wise).

I'm in a decent position though so I'm happy enough with the current situation. Times are relatively peaceful compared to most other points in history and we have a massive infrastructure in place to ease our lives.



Last edited by Subotai on 25 Feb 2012, 1:29 am, edited 1 time in total.

heavenlyabyss
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Sep 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,393

25 Feb 2012, 1:29 am

Alright, sorry for my previous response. I was out of line, this issue just makes me a little emotional. I get annoyed when people turn a blind eye to the fact that the system is unfair. To deny that the system is unfair is intellectually dishonest.

I haven't read any of the follow-up responses here but I see capitalism as being cold-hearted. I'm all for competition and working one's butt off, and being rewarded for it but I do not see a lot of that around me. The problem is that I see so many people who work their butt off and make $10 an hour, while CEO's are payed a million dollars a year to be heartless bastards who don't give a damn about anyone but themselves. It is a fact that the CEOs who lay off the most people make the most money. They are rewarded for their greed and it is sickening.

The same holds true for this Apple scandal lately. Hiring cheap labor in foreign countries is nothing short of pure evil. I don't give a damn if they make good products, it is evil, and it is wrong. These workers should be paid just as much as they would be paid in America. They are being taken advantage of.

Again, I'm all for education, I just have a problem with looking down on people who are not educated. I also have a problem when people assume that education implies competence in the workfield. I am a college graduate, and there is about zero correlation between being a good student and doing well in the work place. Doing well in the work field is about social skills and being cutthroat.

If a person can admit that then I am fine. If a person can not admit that, that is when I have a problem.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,135
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

25 Feb 2012, 2:00 am

marshall wrote:
To make the US healthcare system truly free-market you'd have to go the barbaric route and start refusing emergency treatment for those people who can't afford it. As the system works now the people that have insurance are effectively subsidizing those that don't whenever they go to the ER. Then additional money gets wasted when hospitals pay collection agencies to harass their debtors. It seems to me that we already effectively subsidize health coverage. We just do it in an extremely ridiculous and inefficient way. Instead of having a smooth sliding scale that's based on ability to pay we have a huge jump discontinuity between the insured and the uninsured with the latter group subsidizing the former. Then it's the people who are very close to the discontinuity who end up in a sticky situation where buying insurance is unaffordable due mainly to the fact that by buying insurance they suddenly have the burden of subsidizing all those that don't have insurance and can't afford to pay out after landing in the ER. This isn't even counting all the waste due to lack of preventive care.

I'd be much more for instituting something like what you're suggesting than making the defacto insurance carrier for all involved be government.


_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin


DC
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Aug 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,477

25 Feb 2012, 2:46 am

AstroGeek wrote:
Even if capitalism is all that can ever work (I'm not convinced, but let's just say)


Plenty of systems 'work'.

For example you may have certain misgivings about the unpleasant bits of Stalinism North Korea, but it still exists as a state, by definition it 'works'.

If you remove the massive food aid subsidies sure a few million might starve to death but the system wouldn't fall. Pretty damn resilient.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,135
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

25 Feb 2012, 3:31 am

That's the headache - making a system that a) works and b) meets the demands of its citizenry. People's demands can take their toll on the pool of possibilities quickly


_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

25 Feb 2012, 5:24 am

Subotai wrote:

No, I don't expect that. Just acknowledging the roots of our motivations. I don't expect humans to be god-like but I do think philosophy is born from an evolutionary drive for us to become god-like. Not that we'll make it.


Speak for yourself. I have no such drive.

Any urge to become god-like is doomed to disappointment.

We are the smartest, baddest Apes in the Monkey House.

ruveyn



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

25 Feb 2012, 12:11 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
marshall wrote:
To make the US healthcare system truly free-market you'd have to go the barbaric route and start refusing emergency treatment for those people who can't afford it. As the system works now the people that have insurance are effectively subsidizing those that don't whenever they go to the ER. Then additional money gets wasted when hospitals pay collection agencies to harass their debtors. It seems to me that we already effectively subsidize health coverage. We just do it in an extremely ridiculous and inefficient way. Instead of having a smooth sliding scale that's based on ability to pay we have a huge jump discontinuity between the insured and the uninsured with the latter group subsidizing the former. Then it's the people who are very close to the discontinuity who end up in a sticky situation where buying insurance is unaffordable due mainly to the fact that by buying insurance they suddenly have the burden of subsidizing all those that don't have insurance and can't afford to pay out after landing in the ER. This isn't even counting all the waste due to lack of preventive care.

I'd be much more for instituting something like what you're suggesting than making the defacto insurance carrier for all involved be government.


It would be great if private insurance companies could come up with a method to make insurance affordable to all. Unfortunately it doesn't look like private insurance companies are interested in universal affordability as a goal in and of itself. I'm not sure it's even possible for them to have that goal due to the Nash Equilibrium problem.



TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

25 Feb 2012, 1:08 pm

The biggest challenge with capitalism is that it tends to want to use capital in the most efficient way and unfortunately a bi-product of that is the capital wanting to be in the hands of as few people as possible.