5 ms·

Free markets are NOT a zero sum game. If I buy an iPhone from Apple for $1000, you'd think they "accumulated resources at my expense", but I got something -- a

by oDot 7y ago

Free markets are NOT a zero sum game. If I buy an iPhone from Apple for $1000, you'd think they "accumulated resources at my expense", but I got something -- an iPhone. That iPhone is worth for me more than $1000, otherwise I'd keep the $1000. For Apple, it's worth less, otherwise it would raise the price or go bankrupt. Both parties are better off. What people call "late stage Capitalism" is not Capitalism at all -- it is Cronyism. It is the private sector buying favors from the government. Capitalism prevents that by definition. True capitalism may as well make people very rich, and although I've not verified it, I am willing to concede that it widens the wealth gap. However, poor people in capitalist countries are far richer than they would have been without it. Why would you care about the gap? Care about how you are doing.

yogthos 7y ago
Of course markets are a zero sum game. The reality is that capital owners accumulate majority of the resources in the country. Then they use these resources to manipulate laws, fund political campaigns, and news organizations for their own benefit. Average American cannot afford an unexpected $400 expense [1], while 3 richest people own more wealth than the bottom 50% of the country [2]. Thinking that this isn't a zero sum game takes a lot of naivete. Under capitalism the government is nothing more than a management committee for the rich because the rich have millions of times more political influence than a regular citizen. Here's what a long term Cambridge study [3] found about the effects of capitalism in America: >What do our findings say about democracy in America? They certainly constitute troubling news for advocates of “populistic” democracy, who want governments to respond primarily or exclusively to the policy preferences of their citizens. In the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not rule—at least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S. political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it. This mythical true capitalism you speak of has never been observed in practice because it's at odds with basic human nature. Capitalism favors psychopathic behavior because those who are willing to be ruthless, to step over others, cheat, lie, and steal will out-compete those who do not. Likewise, the idea that poor people in capitalist countries are far richer than they would be without it is a complete and utter fantasy. [4] [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/20/heres-why-so-many-americans-cant-handle-a-400-unexpected-expense.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/20/heres-why-so-many-americans-... [2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/noahkirsch/2017/11/09/the-3-richest-americans-hold-more-wealth-than-bottom-50-of-country-study-finds/#1a9eb78a3cf8 https://www.forbes.com/sites/noahkirsch/2017/11/09/the-3-ric... [3] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B/core-reader https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-poli... [4] https://sci-hub.tw//https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.2190/AD12-7RYT-XVAR-3R2U https://sci-hub.tw//https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10....
- oDot 7y ago
  I have demonstrated precisely how it is not zero sum, using the iPhone example. > Under capitalism the government is nothing more than a management committee for the rich... You are mixing definitions here. Capitalism means private ownership, and what you've described there is government control. The US has Cronyism, not Capitalism. Your argument for it being mythic also mises the mark. Cheating, lying and stealing are illegal under Capitalism. The 4th citation is completely false, as it considers non-capitalist countries capitalist. In that list, half the countries are "Mostly Unfree" or "Repressed" according to the Index of Economic Freedom[0]. If you actually look at capitalist countries, that paper supports that so-called "fantasy", as the countries mentioned as "High-income" are "Free" or "Mostly free". Irony at its best. [0] https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking
  - yogthos 7y ago
    >I have demonstrated precisely how it is not zero sum, using the iPhone example. My claim is that capitalism accumulates wealth with a small percentage of the population who then end up running the country as an oligarchy. Your iPhone example does not in any way contradict that. >You are mixing definitions here. Capitalism means private ownership, and what you've described there is government control. No, I've described how capitalists subvert the government to the interests of the rich oligarchy produced via the system of capitalism. >Your argument for it being mythic also mises the mark. Cheating, lying and stealing are illegal under Capitalism. That's the whole point, cheating, lying, and stealing are all effective means of being competitive under capitalism. Since making profit is the sole metric for success, these behaviors are inherently encouraged by the system. >The 4th citation is completely false, as it considers non-capitalist countries capitalist. False, the study clearly explains its methodology and the definition for capitalist countries. >In that list, half the countries are "Mostly Unfree" or "Repressed" according to the Index of Economic Freedom[0]. The discussion is whether capitalism improves quality of life, and the study clearly shows that it's false across the board. Meanwhile, I fundamentally disagree with your definition of freedom. A system that forces people to sell vast majority of their lives simply in order to survive is a form of slavery. It takes an incredibly dim mind to primarily conceive of freedom in terms of consumerism.

by oDot 7y ago

yogthos 7y ago

Of course markets are a zero sum game. The reality is that capital owners accumulate majority of the resources in the country. Then they use these resources to manipulate laws, fund political campaigns, and news organizations for their own benefit. Average American cannot afford an unexpected $400 expense [1], while 3 richest people own more wealth than the bottom 50% of the country [2]. Thinking that this isn't a zero sum game takes a lot of naivete. Under capitalism the government is nothing more than a management committee for the rich because the rich have millions of times more political influence than a regular citizen. Here's what a long term Cambridge study [3] found about the effects of capitalism in America: >What do our findings say about democracy in America? They certainly constitute troubling news for advocates of “populistic” democracy, who want governments to respond primarily or exclusively to the policy preferences of their citizens. In the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not rule—at least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S. political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it. This mythical true capitalism you speak of has never been observed in practice because it's at odds with basic human nature. Capitalism favors psychopathic behavior because those who are willing to be ruthless, to step over others, cheat, lie, and steal will out-compete those who do not. Likewise, the idea that poor people in capitalist countries are far richer than they would be without it is a complete and utter fantasy. [4] [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/20/heres-why-so-many-americans-cant-handle-a-400-unexpected-expense.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/20/heres-why-so-many-americans-... [2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/noahkirsch/2017/11/09/the-3-richest-americans-hold-more-wealth-than-bottom-50-of-country-study-finds/#1a9eb78a3cf8 https://www.forbes.com/sites/noahkirsch/2017/11/09/the-3-ric... [3] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B/core-reader https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-poli... [4] https://sci-hub.tw//https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.2190/AD12-7RYT-XVAR-3R2U https://sci-hub.tw//https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10....

oDot 7y ago
I have demonstrated precisely how it is not zero sum, using the iPhone example. > Under capitalism the government is nothing more than a management committee for the rich... You are mixing definitions here. Capitalism means private ownership, and what you've described there is government control. The US has Cronyism, not Capitalism. Your argument for it being mythic also mises the mark. Cheating, lying and stealing are illegal under Capitalism. The 4th citation is completely false, as it considers non-capitalist countries capitalist. In that list, half the countries are "Mostly Unfree" or "Repressed" according to the Index of Economic Freedom[0]. If you actually look at capitalist countries, that paper supports that so-called "fantasy", as the countries mentioned as "High-income" are "Free" or "Mostly free". Irony at its best. [0] https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking
- yogthos 7y ago
  >I have demonstrated precisely how it is not zero sum, using the iPhone example. My claim is that capitalism accumulates wealth with a small percentage of the population who then end up running the country as an oligarchy. Your iPhone example does not in any way contradict that. >You are mixing definitions here. Capitalism means private ownership, and what you've described there is government control. No, I've described how capitalists subvert the government to the interests of the rich oligarchy produced via the system of capitalism. >Your argument for it being mythic also mises the mark. Cheating, lying and stealing are illegal under Capitalism. That's the whole point, cheating, lying, and stealing are all effective means of being competitive under capitalism. Since making profit is the sole metric for success, these behaviors are inherently encouraged by the system. >The 4th citation is completely false, as it considers non-capitalist countries capitalist. False, the study clearly explains its methodology and the definition for capitalist countries. >In that list, half the countries are "Mostly Unfree" or "Repressed" according to the Index of Economic Freedom[0]. The discussion is whether capitalism improves quality of life, and the study clearly shows that it's false across the board. Meanwhile, I fundamentally disagree with your definition of freedom. A system that forces people to sell vast majority of their lives simply in order to survive is a form of slavery. It takes an incredibly dim mind to primarily conceive of freedom in terms of consumerism.