Sustaining Capitalism in a Finite World

So what? Irrelevant to the discussion.

 

What was the point of my post? Did you pay any attention at all? GM isn't interested in making more cars if the demand is not there.

 

No, fascist rightie nutjobs who can't see the forest for the trees post ignorant posts.

 

I'm only talking U.S.

Wealth disparity and resulting loss of democracy
Raiding public support programs to divert tax dollars to capitalists
Inability to solve the healthcare crisis because they refuse to let go of huge profits.
Conversion of prisons to private prison systems in order to extract profits from it with increasing injustice resulting
Declining education
Inaccessibility of a college education due to cost
Refusal to address climate change to preserve sales and profitability of fossil fuels
Refusal to undertake an alternative energy program policy to preserve sales and profitability of fossil fuels
Allowing China to take the lead away from us in technology and innovation

Want more?

 

Nobody. It would happen automatically like water finding its own level.

 

sounds like capitalism!!

 

how is wealth disparity a problem under capitalism??

1) If people feel someone has too much wealth they are free not buy his stuff???
2) if Bill Gates earns a $1 billion he probably distributed $100 billion in product wealth so that is exactly what we want in wealth distribution. if only you could make the same contribution to wealth distribution
3). libcommie fake news press lies to you anyway: top 40 families have 50% of Americas wealth is a common one. they are worth only $2trillion while American consumers consume $20 trillion a year in wealth and have $13 trillion in homes.

 

why not tell us why you think its ignorant?

 

so??? every person on earth agrees with that. Why are you pointing it out like a kid pointing out 1+1=2

 

actually you said demand is inadequate not knowing that supply equals demand so demand cant be inadequate. Get it now??

 

which is why I said there are 75 million homes in America still without a 60" flat screen in every room. It's not up to you or a Nazi in govt to decide what production the market requires or what consumers are allowed to buy.

 

If you don't understand high school economics, it's time you gave up.

 

Demand inadequate? What did I say? -inadequate FOR WHAT?

You're having excessive trouble following conversations. Do you understand now?

 

gibberish lunacy!! corporations can always gear up to produce 2,3,10, 20 times what they produce now but this does not mean they don't do it because demand is inadequate but because supply is inadequate.

 

Since the conquering each other has gone out fashion in the world, as portrayed by the large international coalition in the Desert Storm war, the nations of the world have shifted their focus to their economies. Naturally each nation tries to maximize its potential based on the available skills and raw material. This requires massive international trade. Supported by the available fast transportation and communication facilities, globalization has assumed large roll in today's life.

Globalization tends to even out the labor cost all over the world, by migrating jobs. The rich, mature economies suffer in this environment. The capitalists, in their aim to maximize their profits export jobs. This lowers the standard of living of the masses in the rich countries. Thus, within our country, globalization compounds the problem, does not ease it.

The only way to preserve the comfort of the economically lower levels, is to make the distribution of wealth within the country more just. The upward siphoning of money can only be curtailed, if the economic decision-making is spread to many hands, by restricting the number of persons any one person can employ. This will lower the power of corporate greed. Unrestricted capitalism in rich countries produces high costs, cheap products, and lower wages. Taller the pyramids of corporations, less filters down to lower levels. In a trickle down economy, not much trickles down.

 

why so afraid to tell us exactly what I don't understand??

 

it is very very very just in America the more you please your customers the more you get paid. Capitalism is a lot like love, you succeed by pleasing people or in this case your customers. Any other system will remove the importance of caring for and pleasing others. Do you understand?

 

What I was asking is: How do you know the correct level of demand? You say it's too low. How do you know what it should be?

 

Free enterprise is the best economic system available. It encourages completion, thereby providing value and the appreciation of skills.

It is the unrestrained capitalism the breeds greed. Corporations keep growing by mergers and absorptions. This reduces completion. In absence of intense competition they become lethargic and inefficient. And when the economic decision making power is in a very few hands, silent monopolies come into existence.

 

I don't know "the correct level of demand". But my point is that it is obviously too low to justify higher capacity utilization or "economic production" as Ashwin put it. Keep in mind I was responding to his post and specifically to his point about "economic production" needing to be increased.

 

Do you realize that every business, beginning as soon as it first opens, looks constantly for ways to end competition?

 

Of course! That is in human nature; it is called greed. Just as we have laws to restrain violence of the citizens, we need laws to restrain the extreme greed. All flagrant interchanges in a society are detrimental to its well being. Laws are, taking away some individual freedom of its members for the good of the overall good. Too much law makes for repressive society, and too little brings anarchy. Unrestricted capitalism creates economic anarchy.

 

I don't hold Pukipedia to be an authority on anything.

Communist Property Theory may be employed with the Free Market Economic System. No one has ever attempted it, but it is doable.

Likewise Socialist Property Theory is often paired with the Free Market Economic System.

 

It is relevant, since you assume everyone should be equally poor.

They should not have purchased a home if they didn't understand how equity works. Some people are inherently better-off renting rather than owning.

The World was different in the past. It has changed and you cannot stop it, nor can you return it to the way it was. You have at least 2 Billion more people competing for the goods, services and resources that you once took for granted.

Poverty is a choice that people make through their actions or lack of actions. Like I said, no one is entitled to a given Life-Style or Standard of Living, rather it must be earned.

 

I don't think it's human nature. If it were, it would manifest in every case of a mature, sane, average-intelligence person. I know of people including myself who, upon attaining a comfortable income, begin donating to more charitable causes, who consider ways of working fewer hours, and who spend more time with family and friends. I agree that greed is a problem, and probably the main one in the U.S. today. But there is a type of person who is driven by greed. If such a person also possesses significant intelligence, sociopathic behavior is a greater risk. Such people are the type, I believe, who tend to "rise to the top" due to opportunity-seeking and strategizing. They are the ones who run the biggest corporations and end up in the top 0.1%.

But seeking ways of ending competition is intrinsic to capitalism because of the nature of the pursuit of privately-owned business in a competitive system like capitalism. By its nature, capitalism pits people against each other.