6 ms·

Profit is exactly how we make sure individual and societal interests are aligned. Otherwise, how do we know what "benefits humanity"? Who decides? One says "let

• komali2 3y ago
  > Profit is exactly how we make sure individual and societal interests are aligned. That's interesting, I disagree, but I'm curious why you think so? Slavery is extremely profitable, the only reason it doesn't happen is because it is illegal - a distinctly unprofitable decision made and enforced by a government for the sole purpose of it's better for mankind. Arguably all regulation under capitalism fulfills this purpose, outside of those designed to form regulatory capture. If what you say is true, wouldn't we be able to just remove all law and let the divine will of profit determine our every action? Or, where do you see the line? > Otherwise, how do we know what "benefits humanity"? Who decides? One says "let's feed the poor". Another "let's explore space". Yet another "let's build an AI". Who decides the allocation? You genuinely feel that profit motive will allocate this better than the normal way of "who decides," that being debates and appeals to rationality and ethics? What profit is there to be gained from feeding the poor? The most profitable thing to do is to collude to ensure there is a class of people who are one paycheck from a missed meal or missed rent, therefore you can pay them as little as possible and they have to accept that because they can't afford to spend the time to look for a new job. I just don't see how profit could possibly align with actual human ethics. Sometimes, certainly, but rarely. > During Cold War, everything USSR did here in the Eastern Block was "for the benefit of all mankind". What do you mean? Where does that statement come from? I'm searching for uses by USSR fokls but the most definitive historical usage I can find is from a US navy officer saying of the nuclear weapons, "We are testing these bombs for the good of mankind." Hm, I agree, that is a crock, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the USSR or why you brought it up. The USSR was a state capitalist nation, it suffered similar issues with profit motive, though exacerbated by a centrally planned economy. Hence the holomdor: caused partially by the purging of wheat fields in Ukraine so as to plant cash crops instead to fund Stalin's feverish mega-projects. That's the heart of my argument: profit almost never puts the needs of humans first. Edit: IIRC "for all mankind" is also inscribed... yes, on the moon, by the USA lol. "We came in peace for all mankind."
  • nickpp 3y ago
    > why you think so? Because human nature is inherently selfish. The great majority of people generally tend to do stuff that benefits them and their close ones. Capitalism recognizes that and realizes that the great majority of value created by self-interested people is captured by the society in form of innovation, creation of products and services, jobs and taxes. Societies that reject this truth (communism) tend to starve since nobody does anything anymore and everybody tries to steal from the State. > Slavery is extremely profitable This is false at a society level. In the USA for example slavery was abolished when the industrialized North won the war thanks to its better industrial and economic performance. Turns out a society of self-interested free individuals is much more profitable and successful than reluctant slaves in chains. As soon as countries realized it - they abolished slavery. > where do you see the line? Some rules are essential for a rule-of-law society (like contract law, judiciary, police, externality taxation, etc), others are well intended but imply costs and time which adds up (see how housing is unaffordable due due to regulations making it impossible to build) and finally some are frivolous and should be avoided at all costs (EU's USBC charging ports come to mind). > You genuinely feel that profit motive will allocate this better Absolutely. Read up on how markets work and how they they are only mechanism we know for solving the pricing (valuation) and resource allocation problem. > rationality and ethics? The wallet always hits above. No starving person is ethical. During my life under communism I saw the worst human abuse imaginable all from people who in theory had no profit motive. Human nature is human nature. > What profit is there to be gained from feeding the poor? Are you kidding? Why do you think all those food companies exist if not for profit? In capitalism there is a glut of choice to the end that obesity is a big problem. In communism we kept looking hungry at empty shelves. > I just don't see how profit could possibly align with actual human ethics. This is getting too much to explain for me. I recommend reading up on free markets. Watch Milton Friedman's series, it's free on YouTube and it explains things extremely logical and much better than I ever could. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL10CF0016FC94D2ED https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL10CF0016FC94D2ED > Where does that statement come from? Who knows? They had to pretend some higher purpose to cover the fact that we were cold and staving. We knew how much better things were under capitalism so instead of denying it they went for heroics. No food but the state built ICBMs? It was "for world peace". No heating or A/C but with a space program? "For the betterment of all mankind". All kinds of pharaonic projects, monstruous brutalist monuments dedicated to our leaders were justified that way. We didn't believe them of course, but they just had to lie. Watch some Cold War era movies or documentaries if you want to understand how it really was. I am sure you can find a bunch on YouTube. I can't recommend any, the memories are too painful for me. > USSR was a state capitalist nation So "war is peace, freedom is slavery" then. Communists always had this funny habit of trying to rename things, to pretend they were somethin else, trying to muddle the waters. Orwell saw right through them. Us that lived their horrors too. But I am not interested in discussing dialectics. The end result of all communist experiments was starvation, no matter how you want to call them.