4 ms·

> 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 exam

by oDot 7y ago

> 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. Please do not change the subject, we were discussing zero sum game. > No, I've described how capitalism subverts the government to the interests of the rich oligarchy produced via the system of capitalism. Capitalism requires a separation of economy and state. What you're describing is Cronyism: > Cronyism is the practice of partiality in awarding jobs and other advantages to friends or trusted colleagues, especially in politics and between politicians and supportive organizations.[0] If capitalism is polluted with cronyism, you get Crony Capitalism: > Crony capitalism is an economic system in which businesses thrive not as a result of risk, but rather as a return on money amassed through a nexus between a business class and the political class.[1] > 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. Except for the part where you spend jail time for fraud or theft. > False, the study clearly explains its methodology and the definition for capitalist countries. > The discussion is whether capitalism improves quality of life, and the study clearly shows that it's false across the board. Look, the point here is not terminology. If you think Ghana is capitalist (as the paper claims), I can see why you won't like that system. Please consider, for the sake of this discussion, my definition of capitalism. > 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. That's the beauty of Capitalism. You're free. If you don't like the way of life, you go with people who think the same way, and you build yourselves a _voluntary_ communist heaven. No one will stop you, as in capitalism, all the state does is protect you from violence (which I guess is a role we agree on). [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cronyism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cronyism [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crony_capitalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crony_capitalism

yogthos 7y ago
>Please do not change the subject, we were discussing zero sum game. I'm not changing the subject. My claim is that it's a zero sum game of resource accumulation. We're now at the point where over half the resources in the world have been accumulated with a handful of individuals. Capitalism is the engine that allowed this to happen. >Capitalism requires a separation of economy and state. What you're describing is Cronyism: Cronyism is a necessary result of capitalism. People who have capital will always be able to influence the state, there is no way to separate the two. Capitalists are able to buy media, fund political campaigns, bribe politicians, and so on. This is why capitalist countries necessarily turn into oligarchies. >Except for the part where you spend jail time for fraud or theft. Rich people in Western countries practically never go to jail for fraud and theft. The most egregious example was the 2008 global economic collapse where millions of people lost all their savings and none of the people responsible were punished. What's more, the institutions and people responsible got massive bailouts at the expense of tax payers. >That's the beauty of Capitalism. You're free. Vast majority of people under capitalism have to spend large portions of their lives working just to live. This idea that you can just go and do whatever you like is a total fantasy because the only people who have the means to do that are those who were lucky enough to be born rich. The rest of the population has to spend their lives subsidizing the lifestyle of these birth lottery winners. Any regular person needs to work for at least 40 hours a week just to live, this is majority of their week taken away from them. It's utter absurdity to claim that they're free to build themselves anything in the little free time they have remaining. You appear to have an incredibly infantile understanding of the relationship between capitalism and society.
- oDot 7y ago
  > I'm not changing the subject. My claim is that it's a zero sum game of resource accumulation. We're now at the point where over half the resources in the world have been accumulated with a handful of individuals. Capitalism is the engine that allowed this to happen. And here you just changed the subject. You again talk about the wealth gap. The wealth gap and zero sum game are not the same subject. > Cronyism is a necessary result of capitalism. People who have capital will always be able to influence the state, there is no way to separate the two. Capitalists are able to buy media, fund political campaigns, bribe politicians, and so on. This is why capitalist countries necessarily turn into oligarchies. But buying the state has nothing to do with capitalism -- it has to do with the existence of a state, and the existence of rich people. Rich people exist in every system we ever had in history, so unless you suggest we do something other than a state, all that is left is to strengthen our protection of capitalism with a better constitution. > Rich people in Western countries practically never go to jail for fraud and theft. Source please. But if true, is probably the fault of cronyism. > The most egregious example was the 2008 global economic collapse where millions of people lost all their savings and none of the people responsible were punished. What's more, the institutions and people responsible got massive bailouts at the expense of tax payers. That is the fault of government going hand the hand with the private sector. Without the government, the crisis couldn't have been that big. In short, the government had (1) very very low interest rates and (2) encouraged risky home buying (3) practically insured bad mortgages. Do you think a bank would loan to someone who can't pay back? Only if the government is there to the rescue. There's a reason many Austrian economists predicted that crisis to amazingly fine detail. Now, you may reply "they did it because rich people bought them". Maybe, but that's Cronyism, not Capitalism. > Vast majority of people under capitalism have to spend large portions of their lives working just to live. This idea that you can just go and do whatever you like is a total fantasy because the only people who have the means to do that are those who were lucky enough to be born rich. The rest of the population has to spend their lives subsidizing the lifestyle of these birth lottery winners. Any regular person needs to work for at least 40 hours a week just to live, this is majority of their week taken away from them. It's utter absurdity to claim that they're free to build themselves anything in the little free time they have remaining. I get what you're saying, but if you think there's a better way, a truly capitalist system doesn't stop you from implementing it inside of capitalism. So if you want that communist heaven, capitalism saves you the need for revolution, or the need to go find a large-enough desert island. You just build the commie heaven inside the capitalist land. > You appear to have an incredibly infantile understanding of the relationship between capitalism and society. That's bold, coming from the guy claiming Ghana is capitalist. Either way, it seems like we are in agreement that Capitalism is not the problem, Cronyism is. The disagreement is if the end of all Capitalist systems is Cronyism. I think Cronyism is independent of Capitalism. All it needs is a state (=monopoly on force) and rich people. Just look at every country we had in history, capitalist or not, they all had a ruling class. The solution to that is to have the constitution limit the power of government even more. That way, when rich people will come to buy favors, there will be none for the politicians to sell.

by oDot 7y ago

yogthos 7y ago

>Please do not change the subject, we were discussing zero sum game. I'm not changing the subject. My claim is that it's a zero sum game of resource accumulation. We're now at the point where over half the resources in the world have been accumulated with a handful of individuals. Capitalism is the engine that allowed this to happen. >Capitalism requires a separation of economy and state. What you're describing is Cronyism: Cronyism is a necessary result of capitalism. People who have capital will always be able to influence the state, there is no way to separate the two. Capitalists are able to buy media, fund political campaigns, bribe politicians, and so on. This is why capitalist countries necessarily turn into oligarchies. >Except for the part where you spend jail time for fraud or theft. Rich people in Western countries practically never go to jail for fraud and theft. The most egregious example was the 2008 global economic collapse where millions of people lost all their savings and none of the people responsible were punished. What's more, the institutions and people responsible got massive bailouts at the expense of tax payers. >That's the beauty of Capitalism. You're free. Vast majority of people under capitalism have to spend large portions of their lives working just to live. This idea that you can just go and do whatever you like is a total fantasy because the only people who have the means to do that are those who were lucky enough to be born rich. The rest of the population has to spend their lives subsidizing the lifestyle of these birth lottery winners. Any regular person needs to work for at least 40 hours a week just to live, this is majority of their week taken away from them. It's utter absurdity to claim that they're free to build themselves anything in the little free time they have remaining. You appear to have an incredibly infantile understanding of the relationship between capitalism and society.

oDot 7y ago
> I'm not changing the subject. My claim is that it's a zero sum game of resource accumulation. We're now at the point where over half the resources in the world have been accumulated with a handful of individuals. Capitalism is the engine that allowed this to happen. And here you just changed the subject. You again talk about the wealth gap. The wealth gap and zero sum game are not the same subject. > Cronyism is a necessary result of capitalism. People who have capital will always be able to influence the state, there is no way to separate the two. Capitalists are able to buy media, fund political campaigns, bribe politicians, and so on. This is why capitalist countries necessarily turn into oligarchies. But buying the state has nothing to do with capitalism -- it has to do with the existence of a state, and the existence of rich people. Rich people exist in every system we ever had in history, so unless you suggest we do something other than a state, all that is left is to strengthen our protection of capitalism with a better constitution. > Rich people in Western countries practically never go to jail for fraud and theft. Source please. But if true, is probably the fault of cronyism. > The most egregious example was the 2008 global economic collapse where millions of people lost all their savings and none of the people responsible were punished. What's more, the institutions and people responsible got massive bailouts at the expense of tax payers. That is the fault of government going hand the hand with the private sector. Without the government, the crisis couldn't have been that big. In short, the government had (1) very very low interest rates and (2) encouraged risky home buying (3) practically insured bad mortgages. Do you think a bank would loan to someone who can't pay back? Only if the government is there to the rescue. There's a reason many Austrian economists predicted that crisis to amazingly fine detail. Now, you may reply "they did it because rich people bought them". Maybe, but that's Cronyism, not Capitalism. > Vast majority of people under capitalism have to spend large portions of their lives working just to live. This idea that you can just go and do whatever you like is a total fantasy because the only people who have the means to do that are those who were lucky enough to be born rich. The rest of the population has to spend their lives subsidizing the lifestyle of these birth lottery winners. Any regular person needs to work for at least 40 hours a week just to live, this is majority of their week taken away from them. It's utter absurdity to claim that they're free to build themselves anything in the little free time they have remaining. I get what you're saying, but if you think there's a better way, a truly capitalist system doesn't stop you from implementing it inside of capitalism. So if you want that communist heaven, capitalism saves you the need for revolution, or the need to go find a large-enough desert island. You just build the commie heaven inside the capitalist land. > You appear to have an incredibly infantile understanding of the relationship between capitalism and society. That's bold, coming from the guy claiming Ghana is capitalist. Either way, it seems like we are in agreement that Capitalism is not the problem, Cronyism is. The disagreement is if the end of all Capitalist systems is Cronyism. I think Cronyism is independent of Capitalism. All it needs is a state (=monopoly on force) and rich people. Just look at every country we had in history, capitalist or not, they all had a ruling class. The solution to that is to have the constitution limit the power of government even more. That way, when rich people will come to buy favors, there will be none for the politicians to sell.