3 ms·

"... which retain in outline the property structure of capitalism, but import many aspects of socialism to deal better with exactly those problems than capitali

"... which retain in outline the property structure of capitalism, but import many aspects of socialism to deal better with exactly those problems than capitalism ever did." That's a contradiction. You can't have both the property structure of capitalism, and state socialism. You have to violate the former to achieve the latter. I'd argue that current systems claim to keep the structure of the former, but violate it at will. In terms of dealing better with the provision of healthcare than capitalism ... have you seen the state of the American healthcare system recently?

dragonwriter 11y ago
Yes, US healthcare sucks, but is still-- despite being less universal and less efficient than that of any other modern advanced economy (all of which are also mixed economies) -- better than anything that existed anywhere when capitalism was the dominant model, and not just due to (non-social) technical advances. Of course, the US has adopted, in many areas and healthcare particularly, less elements of socialism than other advanced mixed economies. So maybe there's a reason US healthcare sucks so hard, and its not insufficient devotion to capitalism.
- duncan_bayne 11y ago
  "So maybe there's a reason US healthcare sucks so hard, and its not insufficient devotion to capitalism." The list of problems that the previous poster provided were almost all (especially cronyism and cartels) characteristics of systems other than capitalism. Is it possible we're using different definitions of capitalism, here? I think you might mean crony-capitalism, a.k.a. fascism.
  - kefka 11y ago
    I think the problem here is that capitalism when played out in a longer term, trends towards crony capitalism, fascism, plutocracy, and/or nepotism.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    I mean the real economic system that was dominant in the developed world from the late 19th to early 20th Century, which certain of its socialist critics created the word "capitalism" to refer to, since criticising it without a name was problematic, and it was an economic system by which property arrangements, policy, etc., were organized around the interests of the capitalist class. Cronyism and cartels were certainly not infrequent features of that system. Fascism is something different and newer.
    - duncan_bayne 11y ago
      ... which was also the system that produced this: http://crfblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/2007112238img1.gif http://crfblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/2007112238img1... Sure, there were problems. Abuses of power, cronyism, etc. But capitalism quite literally rescued the world from poverty, and continues to do so: http://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/wordpoverty2-600x387.jpg http://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/wordpovert...

dragonwriter 11y ago

Yes, US healthcare sucks, but is still-- despite being less universal and less efficient than that of any other modern advanced economy (all of which are also mixed economies) -- better than anything that existed anywhere when capitalism was the dominant model, and not just due to (non-social) technical advances. Of course, the US has adopted, in many areas and healthcare particularly, less elements of socialism than other advanced mixed economies. So maybe there's a reason US healthcare sucks so hard, and its not insufficient devotion to capitalism.

duncan_bayne 11y ago
"So maybe there's a reason US healthcare sucks so hard, and its not insufficient devotion to capitalism." The list of problems that the previous poster provided were almost all (especially cronyism and cartels) characteristics of systems other than capitalism. Is it possible we're using different definitions of capitalism, here? I think you might mean crony-capitalism, a.k.a. fascism.
- kefka 11y ago
  I think the problem here is that capitalism when played out in a longer term, trends towards crony capitalism, fascism, plutocracy, and/or nepotism.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  I mean the real economic system that was dominant in the developed world from the late 19th to early 20th Century, which certain of its socialist critics created the word "capitalism" to refer to, since criticising it without a name was problematic, and it was an economic system by which property arrangements, policy, etc., were organized around the interests of the capitalist class. Cronyism and cartels were certainly not infrequent features of that system. Fascism is something different and newer.
  - duncan_bayne 11y ago
    ... which was also the system that produced this: http://crfblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/2007112238img1.gif http://crfblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/2007112238img1... Sure, there were problems. Abuses of power, cronyism, etc. But capitalism quite literally rescued the world from poverty, and continues to do so: http://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/wordpoverty2-600x387.jpg http://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/wordpovert...