Capitalism (1 Viewer)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
    Huntn

    Huntn

    Misty Mountains Envoy
    Joined
    Mar 8, 2023
    Messages
    944
    Reaction score
    992
    Location
    Rivendell
    Offline
    Capitalism- good or bad?

    This is not my answer that it is bad per se, but the following is what triggered this thread. When I think of a country, I think of it’s citizens as being members of Team USA, Team Canada, or Team UK, etc, and with companies, corporations, I see issues where the emphasis is on profits, not my team. For corporations, the team is not my country, but my small group of capital collectors, and one thing that irritates me constantly is when I call a company, say a U.S. based insurance company and I end up talking to someone in India, or the Philippines. Hey profits up, but citizens (team members) are disenfranchised, the income levels of the home country is undermined, millions of jobs exported to cheap labor locations. I’ve witnessed this in manufacturing for at least the last 30-40 years. When it comes to profits there is no National loyalty. As I said, the team is the corporation, and sometimes, it’s not even the people working locally, some of those like assembly line workers are viewed as drains on the bottom line. Thoughts? 🤔
     
    i think you are missing a large factor- shareholders.

    If you are referring to "publicly traded companies" ( which most are in a large industry such as finance, insurance, manufacturing etc ) they are really beholden to their shareholders and maximizing profits to maximize returns for those shareholders.

    So its not "capitalism in a vacuum" per se- the shareholder factor is a major one that they MUST take into consideration when making decisions on how, what, where etc.


    per your example, if that Insurance Co is publicly traded, they made the decision to "out source" basic customer services because they found it to be much less expensive to do so, than to have someone state-side, collecting salary that has to commensurate with cost of living ( which is always rising ) and in the end, generates larger profit that can be distributed to shareholders in the form of dividends. Once that cycle starts showing returns, its never gonna stop.
     
    efil4 said:
    i think you are missing a large factor- shareholders.

    If you are referring to "publicly traded companies" ( which most are in a large industry such as finance, insurance, manufacturing etc ) they are really beholden to their shareholders and maximizing profits to maximize returns for those shareholders.

    So its not "capitalism in a vacuum" per se- the shareholder factor is a major one that they MUST take into consideration when making decisions on how, what, where etc.


    per your example, if that Insurance Co is publicly traded, they made the decision to "out source" basic customer services because they found it to be much less expensive to do so, than to have someone state-side, collecting salary that has to commensurate with cost of living ( which is always rising ) and in the end, generates larger profit that can be distributed to shareholders in the form of dividends. Once that cycle starts showing returns, it’s never gonna stop.
    Click to expand...
    You are right that I omitted that aspect of the equation from my discussion. So would you categorize Capitalism in its current state as a net positive or negative for any country/society currently in existence? How about when Capitalism power influencers infiltrate government? There are wealth generating entities in charge that focus primarily on profits, with little or no thought applied to the health of markets or society, there is an assumption that somehow the market will stay healthy, even when business practises are directly responsible for weakening markets.

    For example look at the USA, millions of manufacturing jobs exported, then look at the domestic market. My impression is that there are larger segments of society that are struggling than ever before along with evidence that being locked into our current economies prevents us as a species from doing what needs to be done to solve our environmental problems, eliminating carbon/fossil fuels as energy sources. The lament becomes “what about our profits”?

    Honestly, I think there is better than a 50/50 chance we are headed towards Earth based calamity. 🤔
     
    I think you are missing another perspective - at least in this age of information!

    Companies no longer only have to worry about the cost of production but also about their public image. Having a "good public image" increases sales and revenue.
    So although there maybe money saved by paying lower salaries, fewer benefits or outsourcing production to other and cheaper countries, those benefits would be lost if people wont buy your product or support your business.

    Capitalism also applies to consumers. They will take their business to the company that provides the most benefit in their oppinion
     
    Great topic for discussion.

    Capitalism isn't a form of government, it is simply a form of commerce.

    I will begin by stating here what I have said on here many times - I am somewhere left of Bernie. However, my socialistic ideals aren't popular, so I have to accept that I am not going to get what I want. Such is life in society.

    Capitalism, and its government counterpart Democracy, allow for free will and open opportunity. In my opinion, that is the best of the realistic options within a society of humans.

    Inherently flawed, and imperfect to its core, Capitalism stands alone as the only system intrinsically created to give opportunity.

    So Capitalism isn't good or bad. It is an idea. The fatality flawed humans that operate inside of the system are what determine the outcome, not the system.
     
    Dragon said:
    I think you are missing another perspective - at least in this age of information!

    Companies no longer only have to worry about the cost of production but also about their public image. Having a "good public image" increases sales and revenue.
    So although there maybe money saved by paying lower salaries, fewer benefits or outsourcing production to other and cheaper countries, those benefits would be lost if people wont buy your product or support your business.

    Capitalism also applies to consumers. They will take their business to the company that provides the most benefit in their oppinion
    Click to expand...
    That has not hindered the wholesale export of millions of manufacturing Jobs. Back in the 50’s the US was a treasure trove of jobs and a booming Middle Class developed because of it. That Middle Class has mostly evaporated. The other half of this is how does society respond to those disenfranchised- every person for themselves. Sorry to inject some politics, but many of the kids and grandkids of those disenfranchised 50s workers are likely Trump MAGA types longing for the good ole “white days”.

    One of my points is that Corporations mostly look to profits and often resist things that are deemed good for society because it hurts their profits. One good example would be Universal Health care paid for with taxes.
     
    CoolBrees said:
    Great topic for discussion.

    Capitalism isn't a form of government, it is simply a form of commerce.

    I will begin by stating here what I have said on here many times - I am somewhere left of Bernie. However, my socialistic ideals aren't popular, so I have to accept that I am not going to get what I want. Such is life in society.

    Capitalism, and its government counterpart Democracy, allow for free will and open opportunity. In my opinion, that is the best of the realistic options within a society of humans.

    Inherently flawed, and imperfect to its core, Capitalism stands alone as the only system intrinsically created to give opportunity.

    So Capitalism isn't good or bad. It is an idea. The fatality flawed humans that operate inside of the system are what determine the outcome, not the system.
    Click to expand...
    And Capitalism in the hands of humans we frequently see greed, excessive greed based on ME>WE. This is pervasive, not enough concern about US. And I mention it frequently, but we as a species will allow the planet to burn trying to hold onto our individual wealth.
     
    Capitalism isn't really good or bad, it just is.

    It does some things well, like produce things that we will want to buy, whether or not they are good for us is incidental.

    it is terrible at distribution of wealth. Without regulation it eventually leads to a few people having most of the capital.
     
    samiam5211 said:
    Capitalism isn't really good or bad, it just is.

    It does some things well, like produce things that we will want to buy, whether or not they are good for us is incidental.

    it is terrible at distribution of wealth. Without regulation it eventually leads to a few people having most of the capital.
    Click to expand...
    So Capitalism is only as good or bad as the people who implement it. I agree with this. I’ve always said that the only way Capitalism works is when it is subject to significant regulation by a government that is focused on social stability, who is concerned about the entire “team” of citizens who make up the country, and who expressly keeps the wealth distributed across society in an appropriate manner, which is subject to interpretation. :)
     
    Last edited:
    Picked up from Mastodon:

    IMG_0266.jpeg
     
    Believe this about Capitalism, first let’s not call it capitalism, how about big business, or say the term is interchangeable with the human psyche. It relies on slave labor in great measure. Its team of skilled labor is only safe for a while. Either your job is exported, or you’ll be replaced by technology, especially jobs like answering the phone or taking orders, even accounting and engineering. As the domestic marketplace is degraded and money gets tighter, though maybe still working, you’ll see less and less income along with fewer benefits.

    This is an established trend.
    Why? Capitalism only cares about accumulating $$$. The employees, wages, quality of life, medical coverage, etc., are an expense. Your desire for happiness is a pain in their arse. Much better to have a machine working 24/7 as a mechanical slave. Your job costs them big $$$.
    Even the cherished marketplace IS EXPENDABLE as wealth is scooped up. They don’t care about social stability or your happiness. It’s all about profits baby.

    Who might save you? Well, if we all get together and got on the same page. We might create a government populated with like minded people, that actually cares for us and the state of the nation as a whole like it was supposed to be, reigns in income disparity, $$$$$ gluttony and keeps the capitalists locked in their place, highly regulated with social safety nets, and justice for all. Pipe dream. Apparently, it’s not how we’re wired. When push comes to shove, more like dog eat dog.
     
    Huntn said:
    Believe this about Capitalism, first let’s not call it capitalism, how about big business, or say the term is interchangeable with the human psyche. It relies on slave labor in great measure. Its team of skilled labor is only safe for a while. Either your job is exported, or you’ll be replaced by technology, especially jobs like answering the phone or taking orders, even accounting and engineering. As the domestic marketplace is degraded and money gets tighter, though maybe still working, you’ll see less and less income along with fewer benefits.

    This is an established trend.
    Why? Capitalism only cares about accumulating $$$. The employees, wages, quality of life, medical coverage, etc., are an expense. Your desire for happiness is a pain in their arse. Much better to have a machine working 24/7 as a mechanical slave. Your job costs them big $$$.
    Even the cherished marketplace IS EXPENDABLE as wealth is scooped up. They don’t care about social stability or your happiness. It’s all about profits baby.
    Click to expand...
    Thing is, I don't think that's even sustainable within its own context. The bias towards the profit of the supply end is so strong it increasingly and systematically disregards the demand end; specifically, by squeezing (and even eliminating) incomes, it directly reduces people's ability to demand (and indirectly, consumption is driven by both the ability to buy and the time to consume; pressuring free time can also reduce demand). And that's just one of the reasons why it's a short-sighted self-harming approach.

    Can prop that up with credit, but not forever.

    Huntn said:
    Who might save you? Well, if we all get together and got on the same page. We might create a government populated with like minded people, that actually cares for us and the state of the nation as a whole like it was supposed to be, reigns in income disparity, $$$$$ gluttony and keeps the capitalists locked in their place, highly regulated with social safety nets, and justice for all. Pipe dream. Apparently, it’s not how we’re wired. When push comes to shove, more like dog eat dog.
    Click to expand...
    So I not only think that would be nice, I think it's actually necessary for the capitalists. They will collectively and repeatedly shoot themselves in the feet if they're not prevented from doing so.
     
    Capitalism, the stand alone version, creates a dog eat dog world, with a few hideously wealthy folks and the rest are basically peasants.....unfortunately we are trending more and more in that direction....

    The proper balance of capitalism and socialism (gasp!!!!!) is when this country is at it's best.....IMO
     
    Huntn said:
    Believe this about Capitalism, first let’s not call it capitalism, how about big business, or say the term is interchangeable with the human psyche. It relies on slave labor in great measure. Its team of skilled labor is only safe for a while. Either your job is exported, or you’ll be replaced by technology, especially jobs like answering the phone or taking orders, even accounting and engineering. As the domestic marketplace is degraded and money gets tighter, though maybe still working, you’ll see less and less income along with fewer benefits.

    This is an established trend.
    Why? Capitalism only cares about accumulating $$$. The employees, wages, quality of life, medical coverage, etc., are an expense. Your desire for happiness is a pain in their arse. Much better to have a machine working 24/7 as a mechanical slave. Your job costs them big $$$.
    Even the cherished marketplace IS EXPENDABLE as wealth is scooped up. They don’t care about social stability or your happiness. It’s all about profits baby.

    Who might save you? Well, if we all get together and got on the same page. We might create a government populated with like minded people, that actually cares for us and the state of the nation as a whole like it was supposed to be, reigns in income disparity, $$$$$ gluttony and keeps the capitalists locked in their place, highly regulated with social safety nets, and justice for all. Pipe dream. Apparently, it’s not how we’re wired. When push comes to shove, more like dog eat dog.
    Click to expand...

    You're absolutely right — pure capitalism collapses when people can no longer afford to participate in the economy. Capitalism depends on both production and a functioning market. If people are living at or below subsistence level, they can't buy goods, and the entire system starts to unravel.


    Denmark is a capitalist country too, but the model here differs significantly from what you typically see in the U.S. When Danish shipyards were outcompeted by Far Eastern shipbuilders, workers weren’t simply abandoned. Instead, they were offered retraining with full pay and a guaranteed transition into the growing wind energy sector.


    This is made possible by a system where both employees and employers contribute a small monthly amount to a fund. That fund ensures that when someone becomes redundant, they’re offered retraining for jobs that are actually in demand — and often better paid.


    Right now, many electricians, construction workers, and even IT programmers who’ve been laid off due to automation or AI are retraining for roles in the solar energy sector — everything from installation and maintenance to developing and managing the software behind it. In Denmark, you're not expected to stay unemployed for long. Within three months of being laid off, you're entitled to a concrete retraining offer — and you can begin exploring and applying for those options yourself from day one.
     
    RobF said:
    Thing is, I don't think that's even sustainable within its own context. The bias towards the profit of the supply end is so strong it increasingly and systematically disregards the demand end; specifically, by squeezing (and even eliminating) incomes, it directly reduces people's ability to demand (and indirectly, consumption is driven by both the ability to buy and the time to consume; pressuring free time can also reduce demand). And that's just one of the reasons why it's a short-sighted self-harming approach.

    Can prop that up with credit, but not forever.


    So I not only think that would be nice, I think it's actually necessary for the capitalists. They will collectively and repeatedly shoot themselves in the feet if they're not prevented from doing so.
    Click to expand...

    Yup, in general as a society we wouldn't want an Elon Musk, etc. It's a "waste" of capital. Forget about what he has done with his money, look at how much of that wealth just sits there. You would rather have more average americans involved in wealth creation to preferably spend it on something.

    It also gets down to what have you actually earned? Elon doesn't build rockets, or satelittes, etc. He has been for most of his career a capital investor. You have to ask as a society, does the capital that invest in idea deserve such an outpaced portion of the rewards? Should that not go to all the engineers that make these things work?

    This is what progressives mean btw when they say "Billionaires shouldn't exist."
     
    Whether capitalism is good or bad depends on what your values are regarding human interaction.

    The fundamental flaw in capitalism for me is that when goods are scarce prices and profits go up. I'm fine with that being true for diamonds and other luxury items.

    The problem is when the necessities to thrive are scarce like clean air, food & water, medication & healthcare, shelter, clothes, energy, transportation and education. Everyone should have equal access to those and there shouldn't be any price and profit gouging with those necessities. I find it immoral to do so.

    That's the fundamental flaw in capitalism for me. It's inherently at odds with community and being a good neighbor. It's inherently at odds with equal sharing and caring. That's why to me the best system is to have community/government controlled regulation over necessities on a non-profit basis and non-necessitates on a free market basis with community/government safeguards in place to minimize predatory and corrupt behavior. I also don't think corporations should be given the same legal standing and protections as flesh and blood people.

    There's a lot of complex market and campaign finance safeguards that have to be put in place to prevent the sociopathic wealth and influence hoarders from destroying liberty and freedom for all like they always do if left unchecked. There also has to be a cultural nurturing of the core belief that the better off we all are, then the better off we all are. The zero-sum game of capitalism is inherently dysfunctional and it destroys equality of liberty and freedom within community/government.

    Simple to in value, principles and goals, but difficult to implement and maintain. Anything worthwhile takes hard work and I think this is worth the hard work.
     
    LA 2 L.A. said:
    Whether capitalism is good or bad depends on what your values are regarding human interaction.

    The fundamental flaw in capitalism for me is that when goods are scarce prices and profits go up. I'm fine with that being true for diamonds and other luxury items.

    The problem is when the necessities to thrive are scarce like clean air, food & water, medication & healthcare, shelter, clothes, energy, transportation and education. Everyone should have equal access to those and there shouldn't be any price and profit gouging with those necessities. I find it immoral to do so.

    That's the fundamental flaw in capitalism for me. It's inherently at odds with community and being a good neighbor. It's inherently at odds with equal sharing and caring. That's why to me the best system is to have community/government controlled regulation over necessities on a non-profit basis and non-necessitates on a free market basis with community/government safeguards in place to minimize predatory and corrupt behavior. I also don't think corporations should be given the same legal standing and protections as flesh and blood people.

    There's a lot of complex market and campaign finance safeguards that have to be put in place to prevent the sociopathic wealth and influence hoarders from destroying liberty and freedom for all like they always do if left unchecked. There also has to be a cultural nurturing of the core belief that the better off we all are, then the better off we all are. The zero-sum game of capitalism is inherently dysfunctional and it destroys equality of liberty and freedom within community/government.

    Simple to in value, principles and goals, but difficult to implement and maintain. Anything worthwhile takes hard work and I think this is worth the hard work.
    Click to expand...
    The problem with what you propose is that our government isn’t designed to operate in that manner. We can’t agree on how to properly fund our current entitlement programs. Expanding it beyond what already exists will overwhelm the governments ability to manage and fund those programs. Not to mention the constitutional challenges along the way.

    Maybe that’s the fundamental flaw with socialism.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom