The hidden ugliness of Capitalism

MAny problems here.

AMerica went through many trials on our way to the modern capitalist society we have today much as indonesia and those other nations are in the midst of doing. The sweat shops which make our underwear is a VAST improvement in the lives of people who lived in even deeper poverty before those cheap labor shops were invented. In time they will develop farther as we did but how soon depends on how little the state and others interfere.

Our advancements came because of free trade and capitalism not because it it. SOcialism and state interference accomplished and accomplishes nothing. You need to learn more of history and understand our prosperity came because of capitalism and not because of unions and the state.

EVen the mobs and violence you describe was seldom seen and isolated although modern union members love to exaggerate it.

You are typing on a device that would not exist save for capitalism. Without free trade and capitalism you would still be scratching on a piece of mud with a stick

No one has the right to a living wage because any wage is a living wage.

 

Not my answer, I never said anything about what the answer is. I said that is what largely those that have power and money want. And they do use it. And will always use it. People will always try to game the system. If they don't use gov't they'll use a form of monopoly.

 

But it makes it easy to move towards crony capitalism.

 

Would that include $0 for a wage, or $0.01?

 

$0 is not a wage.

No one pays less than needed for one to live on

 

It's why I put $0.01. Can people live on that? What is the living wage then, you must have a number if $0.01 isn't it.

 

The living wage is what people will work for

 

Then do you complain when people won't work for $10/hr?
Do you complain when workers in fast food want $15/hr? Because those don't seem to work so well as living wages. Maybe $15/hr.

 

I never complain about people refusing to work as long as I am not required to support them even through government welfare.

Any wage is fine to live on once again it depends on HOW you choose to live

 

Gov't welfare exists. So then, I take it you complain when someone won't work for $0.01/hr or $10/hr, because they can't live on it.

 

They can.

Welfare queens simply demand a higher standard of living than they can make for themselves and expect others to provide it.

Does.not change the fact that they get a living wage

 

They can't.

 

My first post to you was deleted so Im trying again.

I cannot agree with you on abolishing capitalism would make the world safer etc, the reality is without the fruits of capitalism most nations would be stuck like Russia before the Bolshevik revolutions .

While sure its true that in the former Soviet Union they pay for your education and then provided jobs for those who were not capable of becoming a doctor, engineer etc, but life wasn't good for those who were factory workers either, you worked for the state, and if you weren't part of the inner circle of the Politburo your life wasn't that great.

If it was for certain companies technology Russia would be still a backwards company, where did you think your former comrades got the engine to build the MiG's fighter jets?

Where do you think the USSR got some of its technology from? they stole it from the west, the one thing the Soviets were masters at was "spying" and of course the land lease act signed by FDR give your comrades a boost during WW2.

Your issue with capitalism is the owner of production hires someone and pays them and they profit and you think that is bad? I personally think that you are wrong, because the bottom line of any enterprise is the bottom line as in profit, you cannot profit without consumer, if you make someone life a bit better and you profit from it that is good, the person buying the product is happy and in most cases the person making the product is happy because they are receiving wages.

Do you think that Henry Ford at his age could make all those cars by himself?
Do you think that Steve Jobs could create all those products by himself?
Do you think that Tori Burch could create all her products by herself?

When you hire a worker and he or she voluntarily agree to the wage how is that exploiting? now you should have a beef with price control set by the government because that is what distorts the market and distorts wage.
Its not the fault of capitalism, its more of government intervention into capitalism that is the problem

 

Except these advancements were made in the public sector. Ever hear of DARPA, CERN... universities?

 

For those not as well versed in marxist mumbo jumbo, what does that mean?

Is it, in your view, an impossibility that the workers could exploit the employers and the customers? If you believe that, it makes sense to take the side of the workers no matter what. I however, believe humans are humans, wheter workers, employer or customer, and that they all seek to take advantage of eachother, and thus all need some protection.

Ah yes, not true scotsmen are they? Let's pretend the biggest part of the socialist movement isn't socialist.

Indeed, and normally they would be, at decent prices, if the housing market was free. Sadly, it is not, as there are rent controls and building restrictions in place, as well as plenty of other regulations.

That's a very funny conclusions. No, the problem is not capitalism. The problem is the socialistic intervention which distorts the market.

The basic needs for everyone is also met in capitalistic countries. In addition, those countries aren't poor as (*)(*)(*)(*) as Cuba is.

Things are indeed not distributed because it's unprofitable. But that's not a problem of capitalism, it's due to the socialist interventions, as I've said. Please, give me some kind of cause and effect chain, where you tell me how capitalism is the problem of this.

Capitalism is a cooperative enterprise. That capitalism is about selfishness is the biggest myth. Under capitalism people voluntarily cooperate to further goals they have set themselves. Have you heard of friedman's pen example? The tin, the coal, the wood, and all the tools needed to extract those resources, the transportation of those goods around the world, and finally available to you at a very low cost in a shop near you. That required the cooperation of hundreds of people, of different religion and race, who might hate eachother if they ever met.

How would people know of a new product which is better than the old ones?

The system we have now has flaws, but if you learn history and get a perspective, you know that the poorest know live better than kings did in the past. They have a better life than most people who have ever lived have. We cannot take such prosperity for granted. And you want to adopt a system, when systems very similar to it have only lead to misery and death? That is not prudent at all. You do not gamble like that if you truly cared.

What does that even mean? Speak english, not marxism.

Woohoo, they had a film industry. So had everyone else also. It's not hard to have some culture. It's hard to not have any kind of culture. But go ahead, compare the USSR culture to western culture. The latter is superior in every way.

You might think it was wrong, but you have to accept the fact that all states with systems like the one you advocate eventually descends into such violence and oppression. That would get me to think, but it doesn't have the same effect on you I guess.

There's a fun soviet joke about this.. A man wants a car, so he goes to some government official to ask for one. The official says he can come back in ten years to get his car. The man ask wheter he should come in the morning or afternoon. The official wonders why it matters, since it's ten years from now. The man replies, because the plumber is comming in the morning.

The government had responsibility for the economy after all, and the economy went to (*)(*)(*)(*). But you know, there's something you must keep in mind. Being successful in one area doesn't tell us anything about wheter a system is good. If you focus all your resources into one area and neglect everything else, of course you are going to get some good results in that particular area. The USSR focused on some things, and neglected others. Comparing the best from the ussr to anything in the west is not a good comparison, because the west did not have the state command all resources of society like the ussr did. They didn't really choose where to focus and to neglect as the susr did, atleast not to the same extent. Compare the whole to the whole, and you see the superiority of the west is obvious.

But someone has to pay for them! Tools don't fall from the sky!

Methinks you're wrong.

The situations isn't at all the same. When the west industrialised, they were the first countries to do so. They had to invent all technologies by themselves, and try out to see what systems and such worked and which didn't, by trial and error. Of course that takes longer time than just copying! When the socialist world industrialised, the west was already industrialised. The technology was already there, and machines were already invented. it's not comparable.

what contradictions? Like saying you fight for the working poor, while mass murder them?

And the soviet economic system was better prior to that, is what you're saying? How?

Land ownership is not a defining trait of capitalism. We've been through this countless times. Yes, have some kind of land tax or whatever. I agree with you already.

 

Yes they can they simply wish to live beyond their means

 

I have a lot of employees, none of which make anywhere near minimum wage.

How can that be?

The labor market drives wages, not the employer.


[/QUOTE]

 

Just like you pay the least possible for gas, spaghetti sauce, or a new car.

Even if you wanted to buy a BMW for the cost of a ford, you cant.

Just like if I want an employee for minimum wage, I can't because nobody with the qualifications I want would take the job.

Again, the market drives labor rates, not the employer.

 

Funny that social programs are fairly recent systems installed in a country that has been prosperous for hundreds of years, yet these new "savior" systems appear to conniving l coincide with an increase in poverty.

Weird.

 

Sure we do.

The single most successful economic system the world has ever seen.

While socialist countries crumble and more and more countries turn to Capitalism (china) only a fool would believe capitalism is the problem.

We have been installing more and more socialist types systems into place, and we have seen the result. Now you want us to believe the problems are solved with even more centralized government socialist programs?

The definition of insanity.

 

What is "full value".

Let me guess, pay that is directly tired to profit, right?

 

Lol.

I made 15 bucks an hour a decade ago right out of college with a technical degree.

I pay my interns 18.

They have at least a bachelors degree and sometimes a masters.

Absolutely ridiculous expectations for somebody to turn off a timer and lift a basket of fries out of grease.

 

Neither "value" nor "labor" are material things in the physical world.

Value is subjective, which is to say that people value things. Things don't "have value". To say that there is such a things as "value" is to be imprecise and metaphorical.

Also, labor is simply an activity one does with one's body. Lifting, hammering, welding, etc. These are simply actions one performs. To say one "owns" his lifting is as nonsensical as saying one "owns" his jumping or laughing.

Lastly, the employer pays the worker based on how much the employer values the service (i.e. action) performed by the worker. If the worker is unhappy with this, he can always look for an employer who more highly values the service he provides. Or he can learn how to perform some other more highly valued service.

 

You are making stuff up. Food and shelter have minimum requirements. Depending on the area one lives.

- - - Updated - - -

Many don't buy the cheapest spaghetti sauce or new car. Maybe not gas either. They buy the best quality they can for the money.

- - - Updated - - -

China has been around for millenia's. The USA only a couple hundred. So the jury is still out.