3 ms·

They are both problems. Just stated in response to the arguments for capitalism. I say capitalism creates a world where ownership accumulates to too few people

They are both problems. Just stated in response to the arguments for capitalism. I say capitalism creates a world where ownership accumulates to too few people. We see that in the wealth gap. 6 people own as much as 50% of the all people in the world. Yes you can say those 50% also have better lives, however those better lives came without any controls on consumption. Capitalism has promoted green house gas emissions and lots of other bad things too. So while on the surface it seems good that we have more, it's not. It's worse. If we all had less right now, we'd be fine. If we don't have more tomorrow, we'll be fine. If we start having less, we might be better off. We don't even know well need the things we will think in 10 years are critical to own. See where I'm going? Capitalism needs limits. If you as 1 person own as much as 1% of all people, isn't that enough? Is time to divest some assets. likely assets you didn't earn.

andrenth 7y ago
> So while on the surface it seems good that we have more, it's not. It's worse. We are objectively not worse though. We have more life expectancy, quality of life, basically no more hunger, etc. This was given to us by capitalism. I'm not saying it's perfect, but it's responsible for these extraordinary advances. Consumption in itself is not necessarily a bad thing. It just means people have the means of acquiring whatever they believe will make their lives better. To blame environmental problems on capitalism is misguided, I think. To give an example, before the invention of the car, streets were full of horse manure and associated diseases. So you could argue that fossil fuels have made our cities cleaner. Yes, industrialization has led to air pollution. Technology advancements are taking care of that, again thanks to the incentives of capitalism. If you allow me some snark, I must say that the Soviet Union wasn't exactly an environmentalist paradise, so is it really capitalism that is the problem?

andrenth 7y ago

> So while on the surface it seems good that we have more, it's not. It's worse. We are objectively not worse though. We have more life expectancy, quality of life, basically no more hunger, etc. This was given to us by capitalism. I'm not saying it's perfect, but it's responsible for these extraordinary advances. Consumption in itself is not necessarily a bad thing. It just means people have the means of acquiring whatever they believe will make their lives better. To blame environmental problems on capitalism is misguided, I think. To give an example, before the invention of the car, streets were full of horse manure and associated diseases. So you could argue that fossil fuels have made our cities cleaner. Yes, industrialization has led to air pollution. Technology advancements are taking care of that, again thanks to the incentives of capitalism. If you allow me some snark, I must say that the Soviet Union wasn't exactly an environmentalist paradise, so is it really capitalism that is the problem?