3 ms·

You chose a strange example from which to make your point. Universities are fairly special kinds of places and often have a lot of public or charitable funding.

You chose a strange example from which to make your point. Universities are fairly special kinds of places and often have a lot of public or charitable funding. They are hardly the epitome of capitalism.

crimsonalucard 11y ago
They organize themselves in a pyramid structure, which is a feature of capitalism. Even non-profit organizations are made this way which is more a phenomenon of society imitating society rather then what would happen naturally. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_of_Capitalist_System http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_of_Capitalist_System
- jeffdavis 11y ago
  You are essentially just relabeling every observation of something bad as a feature of capitalism, and ignoring bad things that happen in other systems. Pretty horrible things happened in the name of communism and socialism and early tribal societies. I don't see what's special about capitalism that causes pyramids (if anything, it seems more decentralized than a lot of other options). Pyramids seem more like a feature of large groups of people.
  - crimsonalucard 11y ago
    >You are essentially just relabeling every observation of something bad as a feature of capitalism, and ignoring bad things that happen in other systems. Pretty horrible things happened in the name of communism and socialism and early tribal societies. Just like how many horrible things have happened in capitalism. I'm not ignoring these things. Don't put words in my mouth. I'm presenting a reasonable explanation as to why there is wealth inequality in colleges: It's a feature of capitalism not exclusive to colleges. Let me make it more clear. I said the solution to this problem was either to switch to communism which only works in theory (and has been shown in most instances to be bad in practice) OR regress back to tribal like culture which is the only type of culture that has been show to have a relatively flat organizational structure in practice. Do either of these solutions sound appealing? No, They don't, and that's my point. There's no clear answer to this, capitalism is the best thing we've got right now but it is not perfect. >I don't see what's special about capitalism that causes pyramids (if anything, it seems more decentralized than a lot of other options). Pyramids seem more like a feature of large groups of people. This is not true. In nature when you look at early hunter-gatherers or tribes you see relatively flat structures with maybe one leader and everyone else being more or less equal. It is like this because one human can only hold so much power over another. You can think of this in terms of playground politics; can one child dictate the fate and actions of all the other children consistently? You can have leaders in playgrounds but these leaders can't tell all the children to start marching single file like the way leaders in north korea do it. It is only at the dawn of civilization (or capitalism) do you see pyramid structures start to form. People in this age begin gaining huge, almost obscene amounts of unnatural power as lords, kings, queens and emperors and can command hundreds and thousands of people to build insane projects like great walls and huge pyramids. How can one man hold so much power? Wealth. Once man gains the ability to save wealth you will get people who manage to store up obscene amounts of it and people who own a paltry amount. Now the rich man can pay the desperate poor man to do his bidding. In fact the rich man can employ thousands of poor people to do his bidding, but he'll probably need to employ managers to handle the load. What does that organizational structure look like to you? A pyramid. Wealth, money and capitalism leads directly to pyramids. I shouldn't say that pyramids are a feature of capitalism. Pyramids are a feature of wealth inequality. Wealth inequality, in turn, is a feature of capitalism. That's not to say I think capitalism is all bad. Excessive wealth leads to the ability to efficiently command human capital to build boeing 747s, the subway systems and other projects that benefit society as a whole. Being rich also leads to a huge amount of leisure time that allows people to stop foraging for food and develop hobbies like math, chemistry and science... therefore indirectly leading to the modern technological civilization as we know it today. Make no mistake, society as we know it is built on capitalism, but this does not justify wealth inequality. Life is unfair.
    - jeffdavis 11y ago
      Thank you for an interesting reply.

crimsonalucard 11y ago

They organize themselves in a pyramid structure, which is a feature of capitalism. Even non-profit organizations are made this way which is more a phenomenon of society imitating society rather then what would happen naturally. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_of_Capitalist_System http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_of_Capitalist_System

jeffdavis 11y ago
You are essentially just relabeling every observation of something bad as a feature of capitalism, and ignoring bad things that happen in other systems. Pretty horrible things happened in the name of communism and socialism and early tribal societies. I don't see what's special about capitalism that causes pyramids (if anything, it seems more decentralized than a lot of other options). Pyramids seem more like a feature of large groups of people.
- crimsonalucard 11y ago
  >You are essentially just relabeling every observation of something bad as a feature of capitalism, and ignoring bad things that happen in other systems. Pretty horrible things happened in the name of communism and socialism and early tribal societies. Just like how many horrible things have happened in capitalism. I'm not ignoring these things. Don't put words in my mouth. I'm presenting a reasonable explanation as to why there is wealth inequality in colleges: It's a feature of capitalism not exclusive to colleges. Let me make it more clear. I said the solution to this problem was either to switch to communism which only works in theory (and has been shown in most instances to be bad in practice) OR regress back to tribal like culture which is the only type of culture that has been show to have a relatively flat organizational structure in practice. Do either of these solutions sound appealing? No, They don't, and that's my point. There's no clear answer to this, capitalism is the best thing we've got right now but it is not perfect. >I don't see what's special about capitalism that causes pyramids (if anything, it seems more decentralized than a lot of other options). Pyramids seem more like a feature of large groups of people. This is not true. In nature when you look at early hunter-gatherers or tribes you see relatively flat structures with maybe one leader and everyone else being more or less equal. It is like this because one human can only hold so much power over another. You can think of this in terms of playground politics; can one child dictate the fate and actions of all the other children consistently? You can have leaders in playgrounds but these leaders can't tell all the children to start marching single file like the way leaders in north korea do it. It is only at the dawn of civilization (or capitalism) do you see pyramid structures start to form. People in this age begin gaining huge, almost obscene amounts of unnatural power as lords, kings, queens and emperors and can command hundreds and thousands of people to build insane projects like great walls and huge pyramids. How can one man hold so much power? Wealth. Once man gains the ability to save wealth you will get people who manage to store up obscene amounts of it and people who own a paltry amount. Now the rich man can pay the desperate poor man to do his bidding. In fact the rich man can employ thousands of poor people to do his bidding, but he'll probably need to employ managers to handle the load. What does that organizational structure look like to you? A pyramid. Wealth, money and capitalism leads directly to pyramids. I shouldn't say that pyramids are a feature of capitalism. Pyramids are a feature of wealth inequality. Wealth inequality, in turn, is a feature of capitalism. That's not to say I think capitalism is all bad. Excessive wealth leads to the ability to efficiently command human capital to build boeing 747s, the subway systems and other projects that benefit society as a whole. Being rich also leads to a huge amount of leisure time that allows people to stop foraging for food and develop hobbies like math, chemistry and science... therefore indirectly leading to the modern technological civilization as we know it today. Make no mistake, society as we know it is built on capitalism, but this does not justify wealth inequality. Life is unfair.
  - jeffdavis 11y ago
    Thank you for an interesting reply.