4 ms·
there is no alternative, not a better one at least, not now. look at other possibilities - ie central planning is a major fail over longer time (I lived in one
by saiya-jin 11y ago
there is no alternative, not a better one at least, not now. look at other possibilities - ie central planning is a major fail over longer time (I lived in one of those systems, no thank you).
IMHO what fails in all other systems is to take into account human nature, and not some ideal working guy that never actually lived. people are lazy, care more about themselves rather than company good, some are plain evil etc. very few work on themselves unless they see the carrot at the end of the stick (bonus?).
in capitalism it's cash, which can get you quite far in life, so most are chasing it (even you probably are - if your employer stopped paying you today, would you come in tomorrow?). this chase can easily ruin your life, makes people do regretful decisions but overall, it pushes mankind far beyond (and much faster) that it would achieve without this perpetual force.
I'll claim one thing, feel free to disagree - capitalism ain't often the best system for a single person, but (if all internal mechanisms work) it's probably best for the advancement of mankind. and these days, we need to advance to not destroy ourselves (for that, we already have capability)
- convivialdingo 11y agoI'd agree with this. (I also briefly lived in a socialist paradise myself.) I'm not a fan of capitalism, but everything else has historically been worse. The only pre-capitalist system that may have worked well was distributism, but that was under an aristocratic rule. I think the modern fair market issues we have in all 1st world nations isn't a feature of capitalism - it's the failure to reign in plutocratic tendencies. Democratic nations have a tendency to ignore oligarchs as they initially grow industry and produce lots of growth. Long term though, they tend to become parasites on the budget and political vampires.