Sustaining Capitalism in a Finite World

Even salvation, while available to all, requires personal sacrifice, faith, endurance, patience, and excellence to realize. And then, only by Gods mercy. Many are denied by their own choices.

 

Ever read an economic report saying the economy was strong while markets didn't grow, sales were flat, profits didn't increase, share prices were flat, and GFP was stable? No. It's always a glowing report when everything has increased.

 

That has nothing to do with the lie that socialists always want what other people have. And apparently you can't defend that statement.

 

What does that have to do with the definition of capitalism?

 

As opposed to people who want someone else to provide them free gold teeth? Capitalism still wins the day.

 

Simply not possible. Unless you believe in infinite productivity. Consumption is necessarily limited by productivity. Capitalism will attempt to maximize productivity.

I just don't understand the problem with that in general. I would agree that maximizing productivity shouldn't always be the goal in all endeavors, but for those that should be as productive as possible, what is the problem?

 

You tell me. You were the one who said the foundation of capitalism isn't increasing accumulation.

 

It isn't.

Capitalism is an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market. Those characteristics are the foundation of capitalism.

 

But there are others, like a need for continuing growth. Ever read an economic report saying the economy was strong while markets didn't grow, sales were flat, profits didn't increase, share prices were flat, and GFP was stable? I didn't think so. It's always a glowing report when everything has increased.... "sales have increased" "share prices are up" "additional market share...." -all "good news".

Bad news? That would be markets didn't grow, sales were flat, profits didn't increase, share prices were flat, and GFP was "stable". "no growth" is very bad news. You know it. I know it. Economists know it. So stop pretending otherwise.

 

No. Capitalism can exist even in an environment of declining economic growth.

Capitalism doesn't require growth to be capitalism. It requires private or corporate ownership of capital goods, investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market. Whether the economy is growing or the economy is shrinking (unlikely under capitalism), if you have those things, you have capitalism.

 

No, it requires it to be healthy; to flourish; to continue to succeed. Setbacks and stagnation is survivable but must be temporary or a business will either fail or be bought out by another that is succeeding.

 

Are you talking about the system of capitalism, or are you talking about an individual business?

Of course, in a society with private or corporate ownership of capital goods, with investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market, there will certainly be businesses that fail. That doesn't mean the society still doesn't have the characteristics that make it capitalist.

 

What you're asking is whether I'm talking about theory or about reality. I'm talking about reality.

 

No, that's not what I'm asking. You mentioned a firm going out of business. What does a single firm have to do with capitalism in general?

Capitalism is a system with private or corporate ownership of capital goods, with investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market. As long as it has those characteristics it is a capitalist system, whether there is economic growth or not.

 

When the lack of growth I indicated is quite consistently experienced by most large businesses as a bad place to be and a condition to correct, it has everything to do with capitalism in general. There are small businesses that remain small but need increases in sales to cover increasing costs of input materials. But the larger corporations and even most of those of less size and capacity continue to seek growth out of perceived need. If they don't grow and struggle to be on the top of the heap, another corporation will probably buy them out to stay on top and dominate. It's survival. And survival incentivizes growth. Wanna call it a consequence of capitalism instead of a characteristic? It doesn't matter to me. It's there in any case.

And it's all related to competition, which all capitalists praise, but which all capitalists struggle to crush from day one. Crushing the competition dictates growth as a necessity.

 

And would a WSDE not need to grow?

 

Maybe yes, maybe no. Most today remain small, but the real issue is what to do with the profits: use them for growth, or use them for the benefit of the workers and society.

 

So just as a WSDE can choose to stay small, a capitalist company also could.

 

And many do. But small capitalist businesses cannot solve the problems we are facing that result from capitalism.

 

Can small WSDEs?

 

That's what it's all about.

 

Capitalism is simply a Property Theory stating that Capital -- the means of production -- is best utilized when left in the hands of private individuals.

It has nothing to do with "increasing accumulation."

Again, Capitalism is a Property Theory which you have confused with Economic Systems. As Supply decreases against constant or rising Demand, the prices of goods and services rise, and that is true in all three Economic Systems: Free Market, Command and Traditional.

Private ownership or control of Capital does not affect prices.

The majority of resources are renewable.

That is not the definition of Capitalism.

 

No, Inflation is a reality and Inflation serves to curtail Demand for goods and services. If you don't like the high prices induced by Inflation, then your choices are either stop consuming goods and services or increase the Supply of goods and services to match the Demand.

So? You're not entitled to a given Life-Style or specific Standard of Living.

Those are choices that people voluntarily made.

Wealth is not Income. Wealth is actively and voluntarily acquired. You can spend $190/month on cable/satellite TV, or you can use that money to buy Stocks, Bonds or Real Estate, acquiring Wealth.

Your choice....choose wisely.

They can afford to retire, they just can't afford to retire and maintain their current Life-Style and Standard of Living. That's a personal choice; not forced upon them.

 

"an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/capitalism

"Capitalism is an economic system and an ideology based on private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism

"The economic system in which the means of production is privately held."
financial-dictionary

 

Property Theories are Capitalist, Socialist and Communist. A Property Theory only answers the question: Who should control Capital?

Economic Systems are Market, Command and Traditional.

An Economic System answers three basic questions:

1] What shall we produce/provide?
2] How shall we produce goods or provide services?
3] For whom shall we produce goods or provide services?

The Economic System is the answer to each question:

1] What shall we produce/provide? The Free Market will decide.
2] How shall we produce goods or provide services? The Free Market will decide.
3] For whom shall we produce goods or provide services? The Free Market will decide.

In the Soviet Union and former East Bloc:

What shall we produce/provide? How shall we produce goods or provide services? For whom shall we produce goods or provide services? The Command Group will decide.

The Command Group is typically the government, or a government office or agency, but not necessarily. Command Groups may be quasi-governmental organizations, non-governmental organizations, unions, cartels or associations (like trade groups).

For the 2 Billion people in tribal/clan-based groups in Africa, the Middle East, Central Asia, and parts of Northeast, Southeast and Southwest Asia it is Tradition.