4 ms·
It's not quite snarky, it's more reductionist. He's making two assertions: (1) Capitalism tends to shift power to those with capital, and (2) those with capital
by Buttons840 3y ago
It's not quite snarky, it's more reductionist. He's making two assertions: (1) Capitalism tends to shift power to those with capital, and (2) those with capital tend to benefit from cheap child labor. Will you argue against his central points, or will you dismiss them based on how they were delivered?
- colechristensen 3y agoUnless you define capitalism as “things I don’t like” then 1) broad individual freedoms have advanced the most in capitalist countries and those freedoms have not seen monitonic decrease since some founding date, rather have seem back and forth swings with a general trend towards more individual freedom in long time scales 2) child labor laws were enacted first in capitalist countries and continue to be stronger in capitalist countries I don’t see any rebuttal to these that don’t boil down to defining capitalism narrowly enough to exclude countries/economies that the commenter likes more and instead they would define as some brand of socialism. Capitalism I’m defining here broadly as an economy characterized primarily by individual ownership of resources and production.