4 ms·

Isn't the black market that occurs a form of naked capitalism? Here in Stockholm a lot of the public good properties have been sold out which have left preciou

Isn't the black market that occurs a form of naked capitalism? Here in Stockholm a lot of the public good properties have been sold out which have left precious little for too many to contend. Prices of labour and land are so expensive that, allegedly, profit margins are not good enough. The "know somebody" bit goes for plain hard capitalism as well, but is less in effect in a society that actually focus on the social side of things. IMO.

luckylion 7y ago
I don't know, I've always liked the "if you have money, you can buy it" part of capitalism. You can make money, but you can't change the fundamentals. In a racist white society, having money will not help you if you're black. In a politicized society, having money will not help you if you don't have the right worldview, or were born into the wrong family. In my home town, having money will not help you get into a (private) housing cooperative if you don't match the social criteria. What you describe in Stockholm has happened around here too. Still, I prefer it: this way I do have a chance to get a (nice) apartment, even though I was born to a family where nobody was a member of the local ruling party. Sure, I may not get the great flat at the greatest location for a third the market price, but at least I can get one, even if it's more expensive. I'm happy to pay a higher price to be able to actually buy something.
- jordanbeiber 7y ago
  I’m just saying that with capitalism comes politics. Always have, always will. To believe otherwise is a bit naive. Politics can be used to even things out as was done over here from the turn of the century up until, I’d say, 70-80s. The last few decades have been way to market/neoliberal policy wise, and in many ways we’re seeing the effect today. I just think you’re a bit binary here. I come from a struggling family but have managed to buy a place for my own family in a really attractive location. The problem is that thanks to virtually no regulations on the banks for lending the whole market is inflated, both for property and land. It’s simply not a question about supply and demand - it’s “how much money can I borrow”. A study showed that roughly 25% of people owning housing i Stockholm cannot manage a lowish “normal” interest rate. Banks love printing money for free! Capitalism only works when properly regulated by sane policy.
  - luckylion 7y ago
    > I’m just saying that with capitalism comes politics. I don't see that. I'm not with the mainstream politics at all in my country, yet I face very little inconveniences precisely because money determines whether I can buy a phone, not politics. We might talk about different kind of politics. You want regulation (for example on predatory lending), and I'm fine with that. I don't want "social criteria" (as in "what gender are you?", "what's your political world view?", "are you married?", "did you go to university?" etc) to determine whether I can rent an apartment. I prefer the worst neoliberal unregulated free market system to that, simply because in that terrible market I still have a chance if I'm not part of the "more equal" group. In the other I don't, no matter how hard I work. It's like a feudal society where your class if fixed at birth. I prefer pure capitalism over that. That's not to say that I prefer pure capitalism over everything, I just believe that even in its shittiest form, it's still more fair than a thoroughly politicized system. Fortunately, we still have a lot of market economy, so we're not anywhere near a place where only politics matter, but whenever somebody asks for "social factors" to play a role in deciding who will get a flat (or a job, or a car, or food), I can't help but see the writing on the wall.
    - hwio 7y ago
      I just don't think that makes much sense. Social criteria like where you went to school is one of the most important things in very capitalist countries. It didn't used to be very important in Sweden 20 years ago. There were also essentially no social housing, university dorms, private kindergartens, minimum wage or employer provided health care. Social criteria are a big thing in capitalist countries where inequality is accepted. Countries like Sweden have less social criteria as most people getting the same deal, so there is less of a need to treat people differently. At the same time the Nordic countries have had the best social mobility in the developed world (at least in terms of income). > It's like a feudal society where your class if fixed at birth. I prefer pure capitalism over that. What? Edit: Nothing in my comment is inaccurate. Just because you hide arguments doesn't make yours any better, in fact it makes them worse. And if you don't revaluate your own opinion when the mob tries to censor those they feel are wrong you can't expect to be smart.
- anoncake 7y ago
  > I don't know, I've always liked the "if you have money, you can buy it" part of capitalism. I, too, like it when a group a part of gets privileges.
  - luckylion 7y ago
    The point is: you can become part of that group. You can't become part of the privileged group if it's some arbitrary criteria like heritage, race, gender, political opinion etc.
    - anoncake 7y ago
      Although discriminating against people without talents the market values or with disabilities that reduce their earning power is more useful than racist etc. discrimination, not everyone can become part of the privileged group.

luckylion 7y ago

I don't know, I've always liked the "if you have money, you can buy it" part of capitalism. You can make money, but you can't change the fundamentals. In a racist white society, having money will not help you if you're black. In a politicized society, having money will not help you if you don't have the right worldview, or were born into the wrong family. In my home town, having money will not help you get into a (private) housing cooperative if you don't match the social criteria. What you describe in Stockholm has happened around here too. Still, I prefer it: this way I do have a chance to get a (nice) apartment, even though I was born to a family where nobody was a member of the local ruling party. Sure, I may not get the great flat at the greatest location for a third the market price, but at least I can get one, even if it's more expensive. I'm happy to pay a higher price to be able to actually buy something.

jordanbeiber 7y ago
I’m just saying that with capitalism comes politics. Always have, always will. To believe otherwise is a bit naive. Politics can be used to even things out as was done over here from the turn of the century up until, I’d say, 70-80s. The last few decades have been way to market/neoliberal policy wise, and in many ways we’re seeing the effect today. I just think you’re a bit binary here. I come from a struggling family but have managed to buy a place for my own family in a really attractive location. The problem is that thanks to virtually no regulations on the banks for lending the whole market is inflated, both for property and land. It’s simply not a question about supply and demand - it’s “how much money can I borrow”. A study showed that roughly 25% of people owning housing i Stockholm cannot manage a lowish “normal” interest rate. Banks love printing money for free! Capitalism only works when properly regulated by sane policy.
- luckylion 7y ago
  > I’m just saying that with capitalism comes politics. I don't see that. I'm not with the mainstream politics at all in my country, yet I face very little inconveniences precisely because money determines whether I can buy a phone, not politics. We might talk about different kind of politics. You want regulation (for example on predatory lending), and I'm fine with that. I don't want "social criteria" (as in "what gender are you?", "what's your political world view?", "are you married?", "did you go to university?" etc) to determine whether I can rent an apartment. I prefer the worst neoliberal unregulated free market system to that, simply because in that terrible market I still have a chance if I'm not part of the "more equal" group. In the other I don't, no matter how hard I work. It's like a feudal society where your class if fixed at birth. I prefer pure capitalism over that. That's not to say that I prefer pure capitalism over everything, I just believe that even in its shittiest form, it's still more fair than a thoroughly politicized system. Fortunately, we still have a lot of market economy, so we're not anywhere near a place where only politics matter, but whenever somebody asks for "social factors" to play a role in deciding who will get a flat (or a job, or a car, or food), I can't help but see the writing on the wall.
  - hwio 7y ago
    I just don't think that makes much sense. Social criteria like where you went to school is one of the most important things in very capitalist countries. It didn't used to be very important in Sweden 20 years ago. There were also essentially no social housing, university dorms, private kindergartens, minimum wage or employer provided health care. Social criteria are a big thing in capitalist countries where inequality is accepted. Countries like Sweden have less social criteria as most people getting the same deal, so there is less of a need to treat people differently. At the same time the Nordic countries have had the best social mobility in the developed world (at least in terms of income). > It's like a feudal society where your class if fixed at birth. I prefer pure capitalism over that. What? Edit: Nothing in my comment is inaccurate. Just because you hide arguments doesn't make yours any better, in fact it makes them worse. And if you don't revaluate your own opinion when the mob tries to censor those they feel are wrong you can't expect to be smart.
anoncake 7y ago
> I don't know, I've always liked the "if you have money, you can buy it" part of capitalism. I, too, like it when a group a part of gets privileges.
- luckylion 7y ago
  The point is: you can become part of that group. You can't become part of the privileged group if it's some arbitrary criteria like heritage, race, gender, political opinion etc.
  - anoncake 7y ago
    Although discriminating against people without talents the market values or with disabilities that reduce their earning power is more useful than racist etc. discrimination, not everyone can become part of the privileged group.