3 ms·
That's not a bad article. A lot of people seem to confuse capitalism with competitive markets. Competitive markets gave us most progress and innovation whereas
by Ididntdothis 7y ago
That's not a bad article. A lot of people seem to confuse capitalism with competitive markets. Competitive markets gave us most progress and innovation whereas pure capitalism gives monopolies and stagnation.
- cameronbrown 7y agoDisagree. A competitive market cannot really exist without profit motive. We can have capitalism without monopolies and global corporatism, it just requires a little regulation. I'm not saying profit motive is the only thing that drives corporations, but it's like breathing is to living creatures.
- Ididntdothis 7y agoI think we are saying the same thing. The profit motive is fine but it's not sufficient. Competition is needed.
- cameronbrown 7y agoWhat I'm saying is capitalism and competition go hand in hand. If they don't then that's a flaw with regulations (see: American health care).
- jpkiser 7y agoMany "pure capitalists" would argue that you only achieve competitive capitalism through "pure capitalism." The idea applies a cynical view to human nature but is interesting none the less. The idea can be boiled down to one simple point; everything can be bought for the right price. If there is a governing body that has the power to regulate any and every business then it only follows that the biggest of those businesses have every resource and incentive to guide regulation to enforce their monopolies. We may think about these as backroom deals between senators and lobbyists but I'd argue that you actively participate in such deals by just sitting in front of your TV or surfing the web. In America the biggest governing body is voters.
- whatshisface 7y agoPure capitalism would have no institutions in place to stop society from switching to another government type in the aftermath of a successful campaign.