5 ms·

I am not saying capitalism as such is terrible, or that we should abolish it etc. What I do think we need is to have a more healthy mix of properly regulated ca

I am not saying capitalism as such is terrible, or that we should abolish it etc. What I do think we need is to have a more healthy mix of properly regulated capitalism, higher taxation of top earners, closing loopholes and corporations storing cash overseas and healthy social programs, infrastructure development etc. As for " it's better to be impoverished today than to be middle class 50 years ago", there was certainly less access to all kinds of goods, but there was much more job security as well, (you could work for a single company all your career), there was also more opportunity to own a house at a younger age and move higher up the ladder with lower education and less debt. What you also need to look at is things like student debt, 50 years ago, higher education was free at the point of use. Now, it puts you into dept at an enormously young age, before you even fully realize what it all means.

darkerside 8y ago
Well, if I understand correctly, you are arguing against the phrase, "Capitalism is an elegant system for resource allocation". But I still haven't parsed what your argument actually is, beyond, some people have gotten left behind, which is certainly true. I also don't understand the mindset that it's somehow somebody else's fault when a person accumulates student debt. Like, I'm sorry you made a poor choice, but nobody physically twisted your arm and made you take this loan. Protecting people from their own bad decisions is not, in my mind, proper regulation of capitalism. It's the infantilization of grown adult citizens. Butt I'm open to having my mind changed.
- AsyncAwait 8y ago
  > some people have gotten left behind, which is certainly true. Yeah, which probably shouldn't happen in an 'elegant' system, you know? > I also don't understand the mindset that it's somehow somebody else's fault when a person accumulates student debt. Like, I'm sorry you made a poor choice, but nobody physically twisted your arm and made you take this loan. That's a grossly simplistic view of the matter. I am saying that if your parents did not have to take out a loan to get higher education, why should you? If capitalism is so elegant why? It should elegantly allocate resources so that it's not necessary. As for nobody twisting your arm, you're of course right in the literal sense, but many higher paying jobs require candidates to have a higher education, so if you want to get on that economic ladder at all, in many cases you're forced into it by societal expectations. But even if it weren't so, what 'elegant' system makes progress by allowing the next generation to grow within it to obtain less free education than their parents? That doesn't seem like progress to me. Moreover, student debt is a problem for the broader society as well, because if young people cannot participate in the economy to the same degree as their parents, be ready for some stagnation.
  - darkerside 8y ago
    Elegant: (of a scientific theory or solution to a problem) pleasingly ingenious and simple. I'm not implying any of the characteristics you think I am. Capitalism is simple and effective, and IMO beautiful in the way it works at a systemic level. That doesn't mean nobody gets left behind, not by a long shot. You know what else has been an elegant an unmatched algorithm/system for making life better? Evolution. In all of its brutal beauty, it leaves behind many in its path with premature mortality or failure to reproduce. And yet it's culminated in the human race. It wasn't mysteriously directed by some higher force, it just worked.
    - AsyncAwait 8y ago
      Hmm, I see what you're saying, but many would argue that evolution is not particularly elegant, in fact rather crude. However let's go with your assumption anyway. I still don't think present-day capitalism works elegantly, the quite regular boom-bust cyclest are a testament of that. It "works" because it has to, when it doesn't we do bailouts and then it "works" again etc. in other words anything works if a society is organized in such a way that it doesn't know or contemplate anything else. If you only know one style of music, that music "works" for you, because it sort of has to. My point is, capitalism as it is today is one that even The Wealth of Nations doesn't agree with. Now that doesn't mean every aspect of capitalism is bad etc. No, in fact when it works as intended it can indeed be quite elegant. the problem is it often doesn't work as it was envisioned. We therefore need to look at other systems, pull some positive aspects from them, tweak the current capitalist system so that it works more like it was supposed to, that's all am saying.
      - darkerside 8y ago
        Some would say it works in spite of our interjections, not because of them. If we didn't bail out bad actors, they'd likely go bankrupt and the system would work around them. I'm not saying there's no pain involved. In fact, there can be quite a bit for individuals. But at the system level, there's a reason capitalism had beaten out any other competing economic system, from the industrial to the information age.

darkerside 8y ago

Well, if I understand correctly, you are arguing against the phrase, "Capitalism is an elegant system for resource allocation". But I still haven't parsed what your argument actually is, beyond, some people have gotten left behind, which is certainly true. I also don't understand the mindset that it's somehow somebody else's fault when a person accumulates student debt. Like, I'm sorry you made a poor choice, but nobody physically twisted your arm and made you take this loan. Protecting people from their own bad decisions is not, in my mind, proper regulation of capitalism. It's the infantilization of grown adult citizens. Butt I'm open to having my mind changed.

AsyncAwait 8y ago
> some people have gotten left behind, which is certainly true. Yeah, which probably shouldn't happen in an 'elegant' system, you know? > I also don't understand the mindset that it's somehow somebody else's fault when a person accumulates student debt. Like, I'm sorry you made a poor choice, but nobody physically twisted your arm and made you take this loan. That's a grossly simplistic view of the matter. I am saying that if your parents did not have to take out a loan to get higher education, why should you? If capitalism is so elegant why? It should elegantly allocate resources so that it's not necessary. As for nobody twisting your arm, you're of course right in the literal sense, but many higher paying jobs require candidates to have a higher education, so if you want to get on that economic ladder at all, in many cases you're forced into it by societal expectations. But even if it weren't so, what 'elegant' system makes progress by allowing the next generation to grow within it to obtain less free education than their parents? That doesn't seem like progress to me. Moreover, student debt is a problem for the broader society as well, because if young people cannot participate in the economy to the same degree as their parents, be ready for some stagnation.
- darkerside 8y ago
  Elegant: (of a scientific theory or solution to a problem) pleasingly ingenious and simple. I'm not implying any of the characteristics you think I am. Capitalism is simple and effective, and IMO beautiful in the way it works at a systemic level. That doesn't mean nobody gets left behind, not by a long shot. You know what else has been an elegant an unmatched algorithm/system for making life better? Evolution. In all of its brutal beauty, it leaves behind many in its path with premature mortality or failure to reproduce. And yet it's culminated in the human race. It wasn't mysteriously directed by some higher force, it just worked.
  - AsyncAwait 8y ago
    Hmm, I see what you're saying, but many would argue that evolution is not particularly elegant, in fact rather crude. However let's go with your assumption anyway. I still don't think present-day capitalism works elegantly, the quite regular boom-bust cyclest are a testament of that. It "works" because it has to, when it doesn't we do bailouts and then it "works" again etc. in other words anything works if a society is organized in such a way that it doesn't know or contemplate anything else. If you only know one style of music, that music "works" for you, because it sort of has to. My point is, capitalism as it is today is one that even The Wealth of Nations doesn't agree with. Now that doesn't mean every aspect of capitalism is bad etc. No, in fact when it works as intended it can indeed be quite elegant. the problem is it often doesn't work as it was envisioned. We therefore need to look at other systems, pull some positive aspects from them, tweak the current capitalist system so that it works more like it was supposed to, that's all am saying.
    - darkerside 8y ago
      Some would say it works in spite of our interjections, not because of them. If we didn't bail out bad actors, they'd likely go bankrupt and the system would work around them. I'm not saying there's no pain involved. In fact, there can be quite a bit for individuals. But at the system level, there's a reason capitalism had beaten out any other competing economic system, from the industrial to the information age.