• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

capitalist ideals & "selling out"

Capitalism may suck but it is the most efficient economic system we have managed. I like my quality of life and am ok with "selling out".. I'd rather sell out than live in a third world backward country and die of some terrible disease or hunger..
 
Just because it is "the most efficient economic system we have managed" doesn't mean it isn't fucked.

And the alternative to it is not necessarily a "third world backward country" - there's a number of them which have a capitalist system also.

And there are differing styles of capitalism that focus energy and resource in different ways - not just the dog eat dog mentality that seems to be so popular lately.
 
Um, if you read my sentence, I said it does suck, but it is the most efficient system there is at the moment, so I'm willing to take it over socialism or anything else we have out there.

The thing about capitalism is that it minimizes deadweight loss. The second the government gets involved in the markets, there is inefficiency created that can cripple an economy. The degree to which the govt. is involved determines the level of inefficiency. At one end is total free-market capitalism with no govt. and at the other end is socialism where the govt. controls every aspect of production and pricing. Neither of those is a viable option so we have to find the happy medium. I don't think we have found it yet, I think the govt. of the US is too large and its hindering economic growth, but maybe not. Either way, the system we now have - capitalism with a bit of socialism is the best system we have discovered and will continue to be until all production neccessary for the continuation of human existence is automated and there is no need for labor.


I also think the comments made about lack of creativity due to the influence of money is somewhat misleading. The system we have allows for greater quality of living and increased leisure time which allows for more creativity. There are plenty of artists and musicians out there still that aren't about the dollar and are about making a statement or expressing themselves. Although there has been a surge in "pop culture" or bad art, I'm sure there is a great amount of creative art that is actually worthwhile out there.. shoot, there is a TON of great literature coming out of these capitalist times..
 
Capitalism isnt the most effective resource management we have ever created. Capitalism is a mentality, its a philosophy, it isnt an economic structure in and of itself but rather then rules that our modern economic structure runs by. You could still use our system of economic, and even aprove upon it, without upholding the capitalism ideas of class and the necessity of poverty in maintain price structure. Anyway, I doubt something that ruins the world for future generations can be called efficient. Furthermore, our system is outdated. The fact that we say there is over population means that the system isnt designed to deal with natural population growth that will occur.

Though I do not believe people are naturally lazy either. Its just that our society promotes it by limiting choice and freedom.
 
Capitalism might not be effective at resource management, but it is FAR better at increasing quality of life as well as stimulating education, research and development, etc etc. Capitalism most definately is an economic structure, one that depends on freedom from government intervention to work.

Furthermore, you make the statement that capitalism neccessitates class structure and poverty, which it most certainly does not. The markets and society are an evolving machine. The lower classes/poor have ALWAYS existed (for thousands of years - even all the various greek city states with their different social experiments all had a lower class).

Through capitalism they have gained a higher quality of life, education, insurance, etc etc. Socialist programs have helped with those improvements. Overall, since the introduction of free market capitalism, the plight of the working class has improved. During industrialization things were bad, but once we moved past that stage things improved remarkably.. its an evolving beast.

You also say that capitalism is going to ruin the world. I don't consider this to be true. Capitalism looks out for future profits and it is not profitable to kill off the population or source of goods - ie, the oceans and forests and atmosphere. I think all this environmental doom and gloom is overstated. A balance will be found and it will be achieved through a capitalist/socialist system..
 
Psychonaut777 said:
Capitalism might not be effective at resource management, but it is FAR better at increasing quality of life as well as stimulating education, research and development, etc etc.
FAR better than what?

And how do you define "quality of life" and "stimulating education"? My immediate question would be how can you be "FAR better" at stimulating education when only the well-to-do can really afford it?

Although technically there are some social aspects to the systems in place at the moment, they are minimal and often serve the purpose of keeping the poor down where they are.
 
Well, poverty has existed for centuries, but it isnt some background noise. Its a result of our resource management and ideology.

Furthermore, in these days 'national influence' reached far beyond a countries boarders. So I feel the poverty level has increased if anything. By breaking into a global economy and disrupting foreign social structures to super impose capitalistic structures on them you now have entire countries that are in deep poverty. Now I aint against capitalism or anything, just think its pretty obvious that it needs updating. The current logistics behind global resource management do need some serious work and are not necessary dependant upon any one political agenda.
 
Can we recreate society into communism (or socialism)?

There are far too many people to convert the whole nation into another economic form.

I think there should be a trial on this. A group of people go to an island with enough natural resources and try out socialism or communism. These people should also be reasonably intelligent and understanding.
 
You don't just switch a society from capitalism to communism (or socialism), at least not without a lot of violence and upheaval and, overall, the new society will be on weak footing and probably doomed to eventual failure (like in the former Soviet Union).

The key is being open to a gradual shift in attitude from selfishness to compassion for others. A society can shift gradually to be more socialistic, and the structural and legal changes coincide with the gradual shift in attitude of the people who make up the society.

Right now, capitalist societies teach selfishness, materialism and competition to young people with a resulting decline in morality taking place generation after generation. Improving society should start with education then the legal changes will take place with the will of the majority.

~psychoblast~
 
quiet roar there have been many different social experiments throughout time. Government structure and economic ideals are deaply intertwined. Our current system in the US is a constitutional republic based on capitalist ideals and a bit of socialist programs. I am saying that this sytem is far better than everything that has previously been attempted.

Monarchy and other despotic governments, Socialism (or attempted socialism), Facism, and true democracy (ancient Athens) have all been examples of "other" attempts. In the broadest sense, I believe that our current system is FAR better than those other attempts because they have provided the best distribution of wealth and standard of living ever experienced in the history of mankind.


To sexyanon - I believe we will move deeper into socialism the higher productivity becomes. We are seeing a trend in developed countries - less and less labor is required to supply the Goods (Agriculture and Industry) needed to sustain an economy and the rest of the labor is moving to services. Eventually the vast majority of our needs will be automated and we will spend most of our time educating ourselves and in leisure. Eventually we will cross from socialism into communism. It will be a peaceful evolution and it will only happen once the entire world is at this automated standard with a new emphasis on a common goal - space exploration or something similar is likely.. so many hundreds of years. This is my theory.


I agreewith you Void about capitalism negatively impacting the developing world. This is similar to how Industrialization negatively impacted the lower classes. I think we'll see a gradual increase in standard of living that will eventually affect the entire world. Notice how countries like South Korea are rapidly developing and catching up with Western Standards (they made the transition in under 50 years).. This fits in with my other thoughts on the evolution towards communism.
 
>>".. I'd rather sell out than live in a third world backward country and die of some terrible disease or hunger..>>

As was said, many of these countries are thoroughly integrated into the world-capitalist system and are the reason we are so fucking rich. :)

>>The thing about capitalism is that it minimizes deadweight loss. The second the government gets involved in the markets, there is inefficiency created that can cripple an economy. The degree to which the govt. is involved determines the level of inefficiency. >>

the neoclassical dogma has yet to be validated empirically.

>>the plight of the working class has improved. >>

Ask the malaysian who made my shoes.

ebola
 
Read my above statement. Things are bad right now for much of the world, but they are quickly improving. South Korea is a great example of the rapid industrialization and then modernization of a country that was war torn and far behind the developed world. In time the world will experience similar shifts but it doesn't happen over night. Unfortunately, it will take hundreds of years until the rest of the world fully modernizes and billions will have suffered, but there is no other way.. eventually our grandchildren's grandchildren might live in a world where capitalism has brought equality to the entire world and no nation or class suffers at the hands of another.. i hope.
 
Talent comes from the heart... some place deep inside.
It is squashed by ego and by any ego driven desires. Capitalism specifically works to uphold the ego... therefore in the western world true unspoiled talent is an extreme rarity..

And yes i also agree with punktuality in that i think a big part of the problem is our laziness...
 
"the neoclassical dogma has yet to be validated empirically."

very little in economics can be proved empirically. Everytime we try, it is disproven. This theory makes about as much sense as anything else I have ever studied, however.
 
I didnt mention changing governments merly tweeking economic structure which is the way the world is heading, though if we get into government change I'd say we have a need and the technology to become a democratic society not just one that uses the word democracy to print catchy bumper stickers. Though if we did became communist we'd still have a need for global resource management so as I said, the economic structure isn't dependant upon political flavoring.

Though the 1st world is rich simlpy because it plunders natural resources from everyone else just as Rome did and other empires before that. This is not sustainable. More so, every country that isn't 1st world will never be able to reach that level due to limited resources and class structure, and this is what foreign governments are coming to realise. Now with all the changes being forces upon the world with climate upheaval and ecological collapse we're pretty much heading into a sink or swim scenario.
 
Capitalism may enhance material productivity more than any other system.

However, material productivity does not necessarily equate to a happiness or safety in life, as the American experiment has proven. People in America presently work longer hours for less buying power than they did 50 years ago. The price of a house or car as a function of annual salary has risen. The average American now works 50 hours a week on average with less than 2 weeks vacation each year on average. Soon people will be taking out 40 year loans so they can buy houses. Then 50 year loans.

Physical slavery has been replaced by economic slavery, using chains made of credit.

America's amazing productivity has led to tons of product, but much of those products are unnecessary, if not counterproductive. Do you need a flat screen tv? A pentium 4 instead of a pentium 3 computer?

The theory behind capitalism getting the right amount of the right products made, is that demand will dictate supply. So the society votes with their pocket book on what will be produced. However, advertisers have thrown a wrench in the works because it is now apparent that skilled advertising is more important than product quality, and manufacturers can CONVINCE people to demand their products with good advertising.

Personally, I think capitalism would be a million times more efficient if we banned advertising. It would be a tricky ban to enforce. You'd have to let some advertising-like messages slip through to avoid banning other forms of speech that should remain free. However, in the absence of advertising, people will actually have to use their brains to judge the quality of competing products. Word of mouth and consumer satisfaction will become much more powerful in determining whether a product succeeds whereas now it can depend on just getting the right celebrity endorsement.

Advertising is like a psychedlic drug designed to distort a person's perception of reality in a way that makes the person think a particular product is necessary for a happy life, for sex appeal, etc. That distortion has screwed up the normal mechanism by which capitalism encourages survival of the fittest products.

Also, capitalism works best in an even playing field. However, rich people and corporations actually tilt the playing field in favor of the wealthy so that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. This is short-sighted on the part of the rich because it will eventually catch up to them. I guess at that point they will buy an island and run away from the poverty that has led to overwhelming violence and political unrest in their former country. Sort of like looting the store and then running away. For example, look at the medicare fiasco on prescription drugs, in which free market negotiations are PROHIBITED between the government and the drug manufacturers, with the result that the government pays sometimes twice what other parties (who do negotiate) pay for the same drug. Costing both medicare recipients and the taxpayers (who subsidize those recipients through medicare) millions or billions of dollars that are profit to the shareholders and high placed executives in the big drug companies.

Pure capitalism may lead to economic survival of the fittest, but once you make your fortune, then that system is actually working against you. Because you want to stay rich and get richer, but what if your streak of fortune is over? What if your kids are lazy idiots? Once you make your fortune, you now want to manipulate the politics of the nation to make it hard for rich people to lose their wealth. You create counter-capitalist laws and regulations. Some poor people still ascend to the ranks of the rich, but once there they do not blow the whistle because at that point those counter-capitalist laws are in their best interests. Some rich people are also stupid enough to lose their fortunes and descend to the ranks of the poor despite the favortism of the laws. Well, you can't save everyone. And, besides, it is good publicity to make people think that the playing field is still level.

Anyway, I'm not sure you can have a permanent level playing field with capitalism. A society based on the profit motive will engender selifshness and materialism in its people. They, in turn, will do what they can to gain and keep material wealth, which includes skewing the playing field to better protect their interests. Though "one person, one vote" should preclut this, the bottom line is that money talks and can sway public opinion. Once again, advertising undermines the proper working of a capitalistic society.

You know, we don't even need to abolish advertising. We should just hold advertisers to a MUCH higher standard. Any implied lie or exaggeration should be fraud and grounds to close a company down.

AM/PM has a commercial out right now where a girl talks about the evolution of humanity and how after becoming the dominant species over the course of evolution, she is now reaping the benefits...AM/PM hot dogs and hamburgers... Does anyone think that that kind of food is a reward for winning the battle of evolution? I mean, don't we all acknowledge that as some of the cheapest, crappiest food around? Shouldn't they really be talling us, "It's not very good, but it sure is cheap and convenient."

And I saw a commercial for cable or satellite tv that talked about living the good life. They showed kids riding their bikes, then swimming, then playing tennis, then a guy flying a kite on the beach... Not only were none of them watching tv, but they were actually doing the OPPOSTE of watching tv. They were engaging in physical recreational activity outside. WTF?? I'm sure some advertising study showed that they can sell tv to people by playing on their desire to NOT be couch potatoes. "Yes, this study shows that people will feel better about buying cable television if we link it with images of people outside playing, because most people deep down would rather be outside playing than watching tv. We confuse their subconscious by putting these images together until they don't know what they want to do, and so they will do the easest thing which is watch tv."

How can unhealthy, greasy, nutritionally bad food be packaged with a toy and sold to kids as "Happy Meals?" Are we trying to turn our children into fat slobs with clogged arteries?

What about a shampoo commercial? Shouldn't it be required that the actor or model in the commercial with the amazing shiny hair, really have USED that hair product -- and only that hair product -- to get that look? Should be. Yet, more than likely, that person has some super expensive hair treatment and they film it and then use it to advertise a totally different hair product. Much like restaurants taking pictures of FAKE food in their ads.

People like to think they are smart enough to see through the crap in advertising. That is dangerous because it is false. Advertising has become a study, based on the latest cutting edge research on mind control, brain washing and human psychology. You think most people can stand up to that? Not likely. We have an industry whose sole purpose is to figure out how best to lie to us. The industry needs to be dismantled or cut back to its roots and bound so that it cannot grow into a monster ever again.
Then we can see just how well capitalism works. Perhaps some other issues will arise and corrupt the system as it has been corrupted in America. Or perhaps capitalism can lead to a better lifestyle when it is done right. I'd be curious to see.

~psychoblast~
 
well, most of this is past my knowledge of the economic system

but i would argue from a buddhist standpoint as far as 'increasing quality of life' and 'stimulating education' or development or however you put it, the capitalist and indeed the materialist system we base our lives around is really unnecessary in creating a fulfilling, happy life and an educated, spiritual, open, tolerant mind, and a compassionate, kind and warm heart.

All you need to enjoy a happy and joyful life other than our basic needs for food, water, shelter is your mind - if you have the proper inner discipline and can accept reality for what it is (i.e. four noble truths if you're buddhist, but more generally, that all humans want to lead a better life and to become happy, which is fundamentally true) and can develop a compassionate soul, regardless of exterior conditions (whether you live in a capitalist, socialist, free market economy, etc.) you should be able to lead just as happy a life as you would with such facilities. i find certain taoist, shinto, tibetan beliefs to do with nature + the power of thought can definitely help in realizing this goal...

my two cents!

peace :)
 
Top