4 ms·
Capitalist systems also don't have a great way of measuring value that doesn't include a monetary exchange. For example - if I fix my neighbor's computer, and h
by medvezhenok 3y ago
Capitalist systems also don't have a great way of measuring value that doesn't include a monetary exchange. For example - if I fix my neighbor's computer, and he gives me a dozen eggs from his chickens, we've exchanged tangible value (we've both benefitted from the exchange), but under a capitalist system, the value of that exchange was unmeasurable (since no money changed hands). You could convert it to a market rate analysis, but that mostly never happens.
Similarly, if a parent stays at home and takes care of the kids - that's economic value. But it will only show up in the statistics if the parent takes care of someone else's kids and hires someone to take care of their own (since that's economic exchange).
One trend of capitalism was taking a lot of this "implicit" or off-balance-sheet value creation and making it explicit.
- s1artibartfast 3y agoYou are mixing up having a monetary system and having a capitalist system, and I don't see how it relates to the topic. You also said that capitalism is bad at measuring off balance sheet value creation, and then say a fundamental trend of capitalism is to take off balance value and make it explicit. Which is it and why do you think it's a problem? Why does it matter if capitalism doesn't put a price on a mother raising her own child? You seem to imply that a better economic system should put a price on this activity. Why? Should someone be paying a parent or raising their own child, and who? One aspect of capitalism is that an individuals get to choose what they value and pay for it. Why should I pay mother to raise her child without choice? If for some reason I found value in her raising her child or mine, there is nothing in a capitalist system that stops me from setting up price and paying them to do it