4 ms·
Why do people always have to shoehorn capitalism in any argument? Removing inconvenient truths has been done and will be done under any system. Be it tribal, r
by gherkinnn 7y ago
Why do people always have to shoehorn capitalism in any argument?
Removing inconvenient truths has been done and will be done under any system. Be it tribal, religious, monarchist, communist, capitalist, or a loose band of tree huggers. It really does not matter.
- jacquesm 7y agoTribes, religion, monarchy and communism all failed to greater or lesser extent before they could take the planet down with them. Their built-in faults were such that they did not need to be reined in before they self destructed. But capitalism is so successful by the one metric that matters to it - money - that it has the potential to destroy everything else whilst still maximizing for that one metric. The concentrating effects of wealth make this even more likely. After all, people will rarely bite the hand that feeds them, guaranteeing docility whilst marching them right into the abyss.
- randiantech 7y agoCapitalism is not only successful on economic matters. Poverty, for example, got reduced significantly during the last decades.
- jacquesm 7y agoPoverty is an economic matter if there ever was one.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- modwest 7y agoThe fact that poverty exists at all when there is unfathomable amounts of wealth[1] is a glaring sign of capitalist failure. Pointing to a reduction in the rates of poverty is not proving capitalism’s success. It’s pointing out capitalism’s most damaging and least ameliorable problem: poverty! Poverty does not have to exist. Having “only” 750million people living beneath the poverty line globally (and a similar proportion in the U.S., about 11%) is not success!!! It is a mitigation of failure! [1] - One commenter on this site last week or so in the VC community commented there are “trillions sloshing around.”