2 ms·
>I think you are confusing a market pricing mechanic which is a feature of capitalism with the core tenet of capitalism which is the existence of the private ow
by benj111 4y ago
>I think you are confusing a market pricing mechanic which is a feature of capitalism with the core tenet of capitalism which is the existence of the private ownership of the means of production.
Well you could argue that one means nothing without the other. But anyway, what bearing does private ownership have this context? I accept I used loose words but in this context the relevant part of capitalism is its pricing mechanism. So no I'm not confusing the 2.
If I buy a piece of a company, or land or whatever the government has no hand in deciding that value. Sure government policy could impact the value but if the government didn't have anything to do with it, it would have value, if the government is deciding the value it probably isn't capitalism (yes i know there are counter examples in 'capitalist' societies) .
What is the market value of not releasing a kg of co2? Yes people will pay to have trees planted, but who's going to pay Amazon to electrify its fleet to not emit co2? A kg of not co2 is worthless under capitalism, which isn't reflective of its value. That is a failure of capitalism. The fact that we are discussing having the govt step in to correct that failure doesn't negate the failure. A carbon tax (note taxes aren't inherent to capitalism) or carbon trading scheme will be synthetic govt constructs. Sure they harness capitalism and capitalistic mechanisms to work, but capitalism can't/hasn't got there on its own.
- ericmay 4y agoPart of the reason I mention the private ownership of the means of production here is because you wouldn't get very far suggesting that people shouldn't be able to start businesses or give money to startups or anything like that. That's what capitalism is. I don't recall how we got onto that tangent (sorry). But I think as I'm reading your comment again we get back to this core idea of "responsibility" or perhaps expectations. I do not have an expectation for a capitalist market to price something that nobody is buying or selling. To your point, I don't think capitalism has gotten there on its own. But the fault does not lie with corporations and this economic model, but in our failure to mitigate its flaws through regulation. Emissions are strictly a regulatory problem that needs to be addressed and if you continue to blame corporations and capitalism you'll just never make any progress on climate change. In my mind it's just a crutch people use to avoid changing their lifestyle or demanding that their government take action. It's much easier to just blame corporations for anything bad instead of reducing consumption. Certainly they bare responsibility and need to be contributors and all, but we need to change our government and our own habits too. A model where you buy Ford F-150 trucks, then protest outside of a Ford factory for selling you the truck is simply not a model that will address climate change.