4 ms·

> At what point did I 'protect' capitalism? You didn't make a sign or wave a $ symbol flag. When you say you "haven't heard a better argument", I read "won't h

by tomlin 16y ago

> At what point did I 'protect' capitalism? You didn't make a sign or wave a $ symbol flag. When you say you "haven't heard a better argument", I read "won't hear a better argument". Perhaps you don't mean it that way, in which case, apologies first. Perhaps your studies and intellectual investment would be of less worth if someone were to dare point out any alternative possibilities. When there is talk about a resource-based economy or singularity government, would-be opposers jump in quickly to shoot an idea down rather than see value. > The problem is that I don't think you've actually studied capitalism as a moral/economic philosophy (but I could be wrong) so saying "we need to find something more mature and stable" doesn't really have any significance. You are right. I have not studied Capitalism or any other type of economic framework. But would it matter? If you've committed to the idea of our "finest form" of economy, than like any religious person, your opinions are hopeless to evolve. We see millions suffer across the world as our "best" economical structure fuels its fire on the backs of the uncountable. If everyone were to embrace Capitalism as most modern nations have, Capitalism would have no "grease bin", so to speak. I am sure the people of developing countries share a different opinion than you. Are they wrong?

tkahn6 16y ago
I read "won't hear a better argument" You are right. I have not studied Capitalism or any other type of economic framework. But would it matter? If you've committed to the idea of our "finest form" of economy, than like any religious person, your opinions are hopeless to evolve. I clearly said I haven't heard a better argument; not that I won't accept any. I used to think a mixed economy was the best economic system (the best of socialism and capitalism). Then I read Wealth of Nations and a bunch of essays from Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. As I said, since reading those I haven't heard a better argument. Maybe I should point out that at this point, I think your an asshole. But I digress... I am sure the people of developing countries share a different opinion than you. Are they wrong? Again, you have failed to do any research. Just Google "free market africa" This is the first hit: http://www.unu.edu/africa/papers/development/Stambuli3.pdf http://www.unu.edu/africa/papers/development/Stambuli3.pdf You should read it. I fail to see how you can bring yourself to argue an opinion that is not grounded in any research. Even if you argued Marxism after reading Das Kapital, at least you would be informed.
- tomlin 16y ago
  > Maybe I should point out that at this point, I think your an asshole. But I digress... Sigh. You've come here to fight me, yet there is a well-authored video which highlights the points I am making. They aren't mine, but I understand the logic and outcomes in which the author is illustrating. It is with this my eyes open a little more, I learn a bit more and offer my open-mind to ideas not yet in bloom. The results you want me to find on Google reinforce your point, finds the best practice, but not any alternative. I will take your advice about the quality publications you have recommended; Wealth of Nations, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, etc. Yet, still, I will be an asshole simply because I wish to see your research as only that.
  - tkahn6 16y ago
    You've come here to fight me Man, what are you talking about? Are you just trolling? I can't tell if you're being serious. Yet there is a well-authored video which highlights the points I am making. You're not making any points as far as I can tell. Please explain to me what points you are making. I will take your advice about the quality publications you have recommended; Wealth of Nations, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, etc. Are you serious? Wealth of Nations is by Adam Smith. Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal contains essays by Alan Greenspan. I would appreciate it if you would let me know if we are indeed having a serious discussion.
    - tomlin 16y ago
      You're looking for me to bring a wealth of academia and research to the table to match your high knowledge of economics. That isn't going to happen. I've never insisted that I know more or less than the average person. I continue to explain that I am encouraged to see those who wish to seek out more evolved ways of thinking are doing just that -- thinking. Likewise, I do not know a lot about the human body. Yet, I would be extremely happy to hear about a process that would eventually conquer cancer. It seems you want clarification to my personal conclusion that "Capitalism is beneath us as a society.". I say this because in the framework of Capitalism, there must always be an element of misfortune; which isn't just a byproduct, but a prerequisite to it's success.
kiba 16y ago
Most ideas won't make it past the "economic calculation" litmus test. If a system cannot do economic calculation, than it's impossible to implement or only get by imitating the price structure of existing free market systems. You could dismiss capitalism by merely saying it's an ideology. Yet, capitalism's strength is not so much that its supporter exists, but that it works and exists. It's a natural and a spontaneous formation in society. In North Korea, people make by with black markets. The problem there is that the government wiped out people saving by inflating the currency in an effort to revive their failing state factories. All the other system I ever heard of requires central planning, and some kind of authority. It doesn't relies on some kind of spontaneous cooperation that happen in western society. It relies on iron fists and lot of policing. What are you merely doing is blaming distinct structures of society together as "capitalism", as if western nations adopt a pure version. It is not. It is a cacophonous mixture of all kind. Street gangs, the institution of statism, regulatory frameworks, and the system of laws and rules all works to create an emergent society. All of these system and institution are all moving parts, each creating its own disincentives and incentives, some perverse, and some positive. Organizations itself doesn't stay the same, it grows, and dies, based on the incentive system placed within that organizations. For example, gangs become more violent to increase its power and earn more money. The public got tired and told the police to curb it or lose their jobs. The gangs eventually become more discreet dues to its leadership and memberships getting decimated. The police evolve special gangs unit to catch them now that it is expected of them to stop gangsters. Some are feudal-like, some are socialist, some are anarchist/voluntary, and some are statist/coercive. So some part of western society have some capitalism. It doesn't tell us that capitalism itself is a failure just because of recent economic crisis that pervades western nations. You didn't consider the democratic system of government, the nature of our regulatory system, and the kind of incentive structure it imparts on human actors.

by tomlin 16y ago

tkahn6 16y ago

I read "won't hear a better argument" You are right. I have not studied Capitalism or any other type of economic framework. But would it matter? If you've committed to the idea of our "finest form" of economy, than like any religious person, your opinions are hopeless to evolve. I clearly said I haven't heard a better argument; not that I won't accept any. I used to think a mixed economy was the best economic system (the best of socialism and capitalism). Then I read Wealth of Nations and a bunch of essays from Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. As I said, since reading those I haven't heard a better argument. Maybe I should point out that at this point, I think your an asshole. But I digress... I am sure the people of developing countries share a different opinion than you. Are they wrong? Again, you have failed to do any research. Just Google "free market africa" This is the first hit: http://www.unu.edu/africa/papers/development/Stambuli3.pdf http://www.unu.edu/africa/papers/development/Stambuli3.pdf You should read it. I fail to see how you can bring yourself to argue an opinion that is not grounded in any research. Even if you argued Marxism after reading Das Kapital, at least you would be informed.

tomlin 16y ago
> Maybe I should point out that at this point, I think your an asshole. But I digress... Sigh. You've come here to fight me, yet there is a well-authored video which highlights the points I am making. They aren't mine, but I understand the logic and outcomes in which the author is illustrating. It is with this my eyes open a little more, I learn a bit more and offer my open-mind to ideas not yet in bloom. The results you want me to find on Google reinforce your point, finds the best practice, but not any alternative. I will take your advice about the quality publications you have recommended; Wealth of Nations, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, etc. Yet, still, I will be an asshole simply because I wish to see your research as only that.
- tkahn6 16y ago
  You've come here to fight me Man, what are you talking about? Are you just trolling? I can't tell if you're being serious. Yet there is a well-authored video which highlights the points I am making. You're not making any points as far as I can tell. Please explain to me what points you are making. I will take your advice about the quality publications you have recommended; Wealth of Nations, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, etc. Are you serious? Wealth of Nations is by Adam Smith. Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal contains essays by Alan Greenspan. I would appreciate it if you would let me know if we are indeed having a serious discussion.
  - tomlin 16y ago
    You're looking for me to bring a wealth of academia and research to the table to match your high knowledge of economics. That isn't going to happen. I've never insisted that I know more or less than the average person. I continue to explain that I am encouraged to see those who wish to seek out more evolved ways of thinking are doing just that -- thinking. Likewise, I do not know a lot about the human body. Yet, I would be extremely happy to hear about a process that would eventually conquer cancer. It seems you want clarification to my personal conclusion that "Capitalism is beneath us as a society.". I say this because in the framework of Capitalism, there must always be an element of misfortune; which isn't just a byproduct, but a prerequisite to it's success.

kiba 16y ago

Most ideas won't make it past the "economic calculation" litmus test. If a system cannot do economic calculation, than it's impossible to implement or only get by imitating the price structure of existing free market systems. You could dismiss capitalism by merely saying it's an ideology. Yet, capitalism's strength is not so much that its supporter exists, but that it works and exists. It's a natural and a spontaneous formation in society. In North Korea, people make by with black markets. The problem there is that the government wiped out people saving by inflating the currency in an effort to revive their failing state factories. All the other system I ever heard of requires central planning, and some kind of authority. It doesn't relies on some kind of spontaneous cooperation that happen in western society. It relies on iron fists and lot of policing. What are you merely doing is blaming distinct structures of society together as "capitalism", as if western nations adopt a pure version. It is not. It is a cacophonous mixture of all kind. Street gangs, the institution of statism, regulatory frameworks, and the system of laws and rules all works to create an emergent society. All of these system and institution are all moving parts, each creating its own disincentives and incentives, some perverse, and some positive. Organizations itself doesn't stay the same, it grows, and dies, based on the incentive system placed within that organizations. For example, gangs become more violent to increase its power and earn more money. The public got tired and told the police to curb it or lose their jobs. The gangs eventually become more discreet dues to its leadership and memberships getting decimated. The police evolve special gangs unit to catch them now that it is expected of them to stop gangsters. Some are feudal-like, some are socialist, some are anarchist/voluntary, and some are statist/coercive. So some part of western society have some capitalism. It doesn't tell us that capitalism itself is a failure just because of recent economic crisis that pervades western nations. You didn't consider the democratic system of government, the nature of our regulatory system, and the kind of incentive structure it imparts on human actors.