3 ms·

You are kidding, right? Compare the standard of living of the average person when, as you say, everything was provided by the one and only ruler to BILLIONS of

You are kidding, right? Compare the standard of living of the average person when, as you say, everything was provided by the one and only ruler to BILLIONS of people being elevated by capitalism. As I said, not perfect by any means, but nothing anyone has come-up with has ever come close.

ModernMech 5y ago
Again, this same argument could have been made during feudal times. "Look at your standard of living and how great it is! Do not be envious of the king's standard of living, for you have only him to thank for your material comfort. Instead, be thankful you do not have to live like your ancestors, who were slaughtered and raped and starved to death. The king has protected you and your family from slaughter and rape and provides you food and shelter. This system is not perfect, but nothing anyone has come up with has ever come close to the greatness of our king and what he has done for you." It's not persuasive. > when, as you say, everything was provided by the one and only ruler I did not say that. In fact, during feudal times everything was still provided by workers. Workers farmed food, raised families, built houses, served in the armies, and did the work required to run society. Without workers society would collapse. Without kings (or billionaires, our modern kings), society would barely notice their absence. > As I said, not perfect by any means, but nothing anyone has come-up with has ever come close. I noticed in another reply you said Today the average worker in most economies has as much freedom as they want (they can quit and go get a different job and even make more money) and tons of protections (rightly so)." You know where those protections came from, right? They didn't come from capitalists of the time, that's for sure. They came from unionized laborers demanding and fighting, literally for those protections, with many paying the ultimate price [1], when capitalists responded with guns and bombs. Capitalists today still fight unions tooth and nail, because they know that when unions have power, workers get protections (rightly so). This idea capitalism is the best humanity has to offered is proven wrong by the improvements labor (not capitalists) have made to the system. Labor has more to say about how to improve the system. If they have improved it in the past, as you admit by calling their improvements "right", why are you not open to their ideas to improve it further? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_Wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_Wars
- soco 5y ago
  I would rephrase the OP's argument to "capitalism is the best humanity has offered so far". Or to paraphrase Churchill "capitalism is the worst form of economy except for all those forms that have been tried from time to time". Note: I only mean real-world, tried-and-true forms of economies. Not in books, not utopias, only real societies. Because not even this capitalism is "by the book", many countries and many epochs defined it differently, with unions, with subsidies, with with with... there's a lot to be improved, but I still argue we didn't have better (or less bad, if you want).

ModernMech 5y ago

Again, this same argument could have been made during feudal times. "Look at your standard of living and how great it is! Do not be envious of the king's standard of living, for you have only him to thank for your material comfort. Instead, be thankful you do not have to live like your ancestors, who were slaughtered and raped and starved to death. The king has protected you and your family from slaughter and rape and provides you food and shelter. This system is not perfect, but nothing anyone has come up with has ever come close to the greatness of our king and what he has done for you." It's not persuasive. > when, as you say, everything was provided by the one and only ruler I did not say that. In fact, during feudal times everything was still provided by workers. Workers farmed food, raised families, built houses, served in the armies, and did the work required to run society. Without workers society would collapse. Without kings (or billionaires, our modern kings), society would barely notice their absence. > As I said, not perfect by any means, but nothing anyone has come-up with has ever come close. I noticed in another reply you said Today the average worker in most economies has as much freedom as they want (they can quit and go get a different job and even make more money) and tons of protections (rightly so)." You know where those protections came from, right? They didn't come from capitalists of the time, that's for sure. They came from unionized laborers demanding and fighting, literally for those protections, with many paying the ultimate price [1], when capitalists responded with guns and bombs. Capitalists today still fight unions tooth and nail, because they know that when unions have power, workers get protections (rightly so). This idea capitalism is the best humanity has to offered is proven wrong by the improvements labor (not capitalists) have made to the system. Labor has more to say about how to improve the system. If they have improved it in the past, as you admit by calling their improvements "right", why are you not open to their ideas to improve it further? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_Wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_Wars

soco 5y ago
I would rephrase the OP's argument to "capitalism is the best humanity has offered so far". Or to paraphrase Churchill "capitalism is the worst form of economy except for all those forms that have been tried from time to time". Note: I only mean real-world, tried-and-true forms of economies. Not in books, not utopias, only real societies. Because not even this capitalism is "by the book", many countries and many epochs defined it differently, with unions, with subsidies, with with with... there's a lot to be improved, but I still argue we didn't have better (or less bad, if you want).