3 ms·

The article is echoing a pretty well trodden train of thought on the ultimate conclusion of capitalism. Which no one has seriously been able to refute. Wasted

by 1stop 11y ago

The article is echoing a pretty well trodden train of thought on the ultimate conclusion of capitalism. Which no one has seriously been able to refute. Wasted time is a bit harsh. Catchy one liners "Wealth creation through creativity" might help you sleep at night, but seriously, our creative endeavours have never produced anywhere near the amount of capital the resource sector has... What happens when we either get so efficient at resources that they cost nothing, or we run out of the resource?

adventured 11y ago
It's trivially easy to refute the conclusion in fact. Fortunately history has already provided the refutation, dozens of times, and history will continue to prove that Capitalism is the only system that works long-term. All other systems rot and collapse, requiring constant reform back towards Capitalism (see eg: Sweden since the 1980s, UK since 1970s). There isn't a single example in world history of Socialism, Fascism, or Communism working. Every example of heavy welfare state systems has resulted in eventual stagnation and decline. There is no ultimate conclusion to Capitalism, the system continues to create more prosperity, and capital continues to seek higher forms of productivity and profit, which perpetually raises the standard of living for any nation that deploys Capitalism with its well understood requirements (which include a strong judicial system, property rights, et al). New innovations and breakthroughs perpetually lead to new industry and expansion, creating perpetually greater numbers of jobs (which is why America doesn't only have 500,000 jobs available today; and America isn't even a properly functioning Capitalist nation, it's a poorly functioning highly regulated mixed economy).
- jedharris 11y ago
  So Sweden, Denmark and Norway have stagnated and declined? Can you be more specific? More generally, Malthus had much more historical support for his thesis (that population would quickly grow to consume all the food available). But the rules changed.
Turing_Machine 11y ago
"our creative endeavours have never produced anywhere near the amount of capital the resource sector has..." http://www.forbes.com/global2000/ http://www.forbes.com/global2000/ Only four of the top 20 could reasonably be described as "resource" companies (oil companies, in every case).
- 1stop 11y ago
  Are you suggesting banks are creative endeavours? I like the connotation.
  - Turing_Machine 11y ago
    Certainly. A bank is just a collection of ideas. It's a bunch of magnetic domains on hard disks that get reconfigured based on a set of rules. It certainly isn't a natural resource like oil or iron ore. What would you call it?
    - ectoplasm 11y ago
      Your mind (the rational part) is just a collection of ideas. One of them is called oil.

by 1stop 11y ago

adventured 11y ago

It's trivially easy to refute the conclusion in fact. Fortunately history has already provided the refutation, dozens of times, and history will continue to prove that Capitalism is the only system that works long-term. All other systems rot and collapse, requiring constant reform back towards Capitalism (see eg: Sweden since the 1980s, UK since 1970s). There isn't a single example in world history of Socialism, Fascism, or Communism working. Every example of heavy welfare state systems has resulted in eventual stagnation and decline. There is no ultimate conclusion to Capitalism, the system continues to create more prosperity, and capital continues to seek higher forms of productivity and profit, which perpetually raises the standard of living for any nation that deploys Capitalism with its well understood requirements (which include a strong judicial system, property rights, et al). New innovations and breakthroughs perpetually lead to new industry and expansion, creating perpetually greater numbers of jobs (which is why America doesn't only have 500,000 jobs available today; and America isn't even a properly functioning Capitalist nation, it's a poorly functioning highly regulated mixed economy).

jedharris 11y ago
So Sweden, Denmark and Norway have stagnated and declined? Can you be more specific? More generally, Malthus had much more historical support for his thesis (that population would quickly grow to consume all the food available). But the rules changed.

Turing_Machine 11y ago

"our creative endeavours have never produced anywhere near the amount of capital the resource sector has..." http://www.forbes.com/global2000/ http://www.forbes.com/global2000/ Only four of the top 20 could reasonably be described as "resource" companies (oil companies, in every case).

1stop 11y ago
Are you suggesting banks are creative endeavours? I like the connotation.
- Turing_Machine 11y ago
  Certainly. A bank is just a collection of ideas. It's a bunch of magnetic domains on hard disks that get reconfigured based on a set of rules. It certainly isn't a natural resource like oil or iron ore. What would you call it?
  - ectoplasm 11y ago
    Your mind (the rational part) is just a collection of ideas. One of them is called oil.