4 ms·

Devils advocate here, is it safe to say that capitalism is a type of credit system that allows upward mobility except for it is based on greed and not being "tr

Devils advocate here, is it safe to say that capitalism is a type of credit system that allows upward mobility except for it is based on greed and not being "trust worthy"? I dunno there is a part of me that wishes the propaganda was true. It would be nice to live in a world where everyone is nice and respectful of each other. No lying, no cheating, etc. I'm sure that it's not implemented well at all in China, and resembles more of a Police State hellscape than anything but there is a part of me wishes that bad landlord I had or that person who ripped me off etc weren't able to get away with it so easily.

syrrim 7y ago
"it's based on greed" All systems reward greed. The more detached they are from how people naturally behave, the more they reward people who chase the system at the expense of thise who what comes naturally. Capitalism rewards people for fulfilling other's revealed preferences. A democratically-decided social credit system would reward people for doing what the majority says they should do. Both systems would occasionally reward people for anti-social behaviour, and require legislative correction. Of the two, I would prefer the one oriented towards the needs and desires of the individual, not of the collective. We would like a world where people are more kind. Why not pay people to be kind to you? - an induced kindness it not desirable, we want a natural kindness - it's subjective: what one person thinks is kind, another doesn't; how would we write that contract? - there's a tradeoff: while we value kindness, in many cases others value not being kind more than we value kindness; you would likely have to pay more than you are willing to pay - transaction costs: while the subjectivity problem might be solved, it would be at great expense, this would probably push the price over the edge where it wasn't already All these reasons apply equally to inducing kindness with a social credit system. I think the tradeoff problem would likely be ignored. That is, people would be forced to be kind against their wish (being punished for not doing it rather than rewarded for doing it). Suppose I believe that the burden of being constantly forced to be kind would outweigh the advantage of living in a world where everyone is kind all the time. A capitalist system tests this claim, a democratic social credit system ignores it in favour if the will of the majority.
jkingsbery 7y ago
Arguably, when people think of capitalism, they think of Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations," and all it entails about trade, specialization, profit, etc. For much of its history though, capitalism depended on a lot of what Smith wrote about in "On the Theory of Moral Sentiments," i.e., societies work because people "naturally [desire], not only to be loved, but to be lovely." In the West, we're trying to figure out the right allocation of goods through the market economy, and the right way "to be lovely" through freedom of speech, freedom of association, etc.
diydsp 7y ago
sort of. but at least in capitalism, individuals are free to choose which behaviors deserve dollars. obviously billionaires have outsized influence, but many small voice still matter. in PRC, some govt committee decides which behaviors get credit.
- JohnFen 7y ago
  > individuals are free to choose which behaviors deserve dollars That's more a function of a free market than capitalism.

syrrim 7y ago

"it's based on greed" All systems reward greed. The more detached they are from how people naturally behave, the more they reward people who chase the system at the expense of thise who what comes naturally. Capitalism rewards people for fulfilling other's revealed preferences. A democratically-decided social credit system would reward people for doing what the majority says they should do. Both systems would occasionally reward people for anti-social behaviour, and require legislative correction. Of the two, I would prefer the one oriented towards the needs and desires of the individual, not of the collective. We would like a world where people are more kind. Why not pay people to be kind to you? - an induced kindness it not desirable, we want a natural kindness - it's subjective: what one person thinks is kind, another doesn't; how would we write that contract? - there's a tradeoff: while we value kindness, in many cases others value not being kind more than we value kindness; you would likely have to pay more than you are willing to pay - transaction costs: while the subjectivity problem might be solved, it would be at great expense, this would probably push the price over the edge where it wasn't already All these reasons apply equally to inducing kindness with a social credit system. I think the tradeoff problem would likely be ignored. That is, people would be forced to be kind against their wish (being punished for not doing it rather than rewarded for doing it). Suppose I believe that the burden of being constantly forced to be kind would outweigh the advantage of living in a world where everyone is kind all the time. A capitalist system tests this claim, a democratic social credit system ignores it in favour if the will of the majority.

jkingsbery 7y ago

Arguably, when people think of capitalism, they think of Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations," and all it entails about trade, specialization, profit, etc. For much of its history though, capitalism depended on a lot of what Smith wrote about in "On the Theory of Moral Sentiments," i.e., societies work because people "naturally [desire], not only to be loved, but to be lovely." In the West, we're trying to figure out the right allocation of goods through the market economy, and the right way "to be lovely" through freedom of speech, freedom of association, etc.

diydsp 7y ago

sort of. but at least in capitalism, individuals are free to choose which behaviors deserve dollars. obviously billionaires have outsized influence, but many small voice still matter. in PRC, some govt committee decides which behaviors get credit.

JohnFen 7y ago
> individuals are free to choose which behaviors deserve dollars That's more a function of a free market than capitalism.