I dislike people saying ‘capitalism isn’t working’.

I dislike people saying ‘capitalism isn’t working’. I feel it’s a silly quote as capitalism is doing precisely what it is meant to do. It is working according to its own nature. ‘Capitalism isn’t working like the capitalists told us it would’ is a more accurate criticism. Capitalism doesn't work in any other way but 'boom & bust', wage-slavery and exploitation of others in the search for capital. These are just a few of the premises of capitalism.

I don't see where we've had capitalism to judge since 1913 and the Fed taking our Economy over by force of Emergency Declaration out of the White House. Let me know when we see actual capitalism again and not this hybrid nightmare of Oligarchy mixed with Free Market concepts mixed with Karl Marx.

Corporate welfare.
I thought the nature of capitalism was "If the business is dying, let it die" but i dont know.
Seems to be working for them.

Capitalism isn’t working like the capitalists told us it would. Why? Because they let it degrade into corporatism. Capitalism in America has been dead for years.

reply to post by Tea4One


Capitalism is working. It is a very solid foundation to build a free country upon.
Corporatism however, is not working. The way recent events across the world are unfolding are an excellent example of this.
Most people don't know the difference.
Don't fault them for that. Just educate them.

If I remember correctly, this is a video that does a good job at differentiating.
Disregard the terrible captions. Whomever transcribed this video was drunk or something.





Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama had a bit to say also. His opening statements in the video embedded below are very relevant to this conversation. As a recap: he basically stated when asked about his views on socialism, that socialist ideals have been poorly implemented and have changed much since their implementation. He went on to say that it is the same with capitalism, as in there is always a giant gap between the rich and the poor, and neither philosophy ever intended that to be the case.

reply to post by Tea4One


What we have isn't capitalism, it's corporatism.

When I took economics in college, it pushed my brain around and changed the shape of my forehead. It was all I could do to get a C!

One of the things I was taught, that didn't quite make sense to me, is the invisable hand and supply and demand. It makes sense in a simple cottage industry like economy, but when you add corporations like Coke, Pepsi, Disney, Britney Spears and Miley Cyrus, it isn't about supply and demand anymore. It's about corporate greed, manipulation, and control.

It's about putting people in little boxes, and telling them what happiness is, and to shut up, bend over and stop crying.

No, capitalism isn't working, but, corporatism is working just dandy!

The corporatocracy has been dismantling free market capitalism since before the American civil war. The biggest blow came in 1913, but it's been degrading ever since. You can't say "capitalism isn't working" because nothing resembling capitalism exists except at a very local level, and even that is disappearing rapidly.
Corporatism is working exactly as planned - a fusion of socialism and corrupted, debt based " managed capitalism", run by socialist technocrats, feeding the fortunes of a aristocratic oligarchy.
We should fight to bring actual capitalism back.
Then it might at least have a chance to work.

hate to burst your bubble but it is not

i'd like to think that our capitalism just mutated into something nasty, but it may be that capitalism will always follow this route.

OP I'm not sure that your criticism of capitalism has been completely understood even though you have been clear.
Perhaps I can put it another way (if you agree) - I dislike people claiming that 'capitalism isn't working because we have corporatism'. Or more precisely people believing, with no evidence at all, that a pure free market will deliver benefits to all of us and cure society of its ills.

Let me be clear, even though no country on the planet has ever adopted a pure free market system of the kind neo-liberal economists advocate and the theory has not been tested, we have many thousands of Americans believing that if only we had this system then things would be great. Its almost like a religious belief.

Yes we do have a coporatist system, but the idea that corporatism can be banished and we can have the milk and honey of unregulated, unrestrained wealth is a utopian fantasy.

Corporations will not vanish, just as acumulated wealth and interests will not go away. Take away regulations and corporations will control the people even more than they do today.

Originally posted by biggmoneyme
i'd like to think that our capitalism just mutated into something nasty, but it may be that capitalism will always follow this route.

indeed! it mutated many years ago, it´s the same in every other capitalism country, only that in each different country has other names...:S

Originally posted by freethinker123
OP I'm not sure that your criticism of capitalism has been completely understood even though you have been clear.
Perhaps I can put it another way (if you agree) - I dislike people claiming that 'capitalism isn't working because we have corporatism'. Or more precisely people believing, with no evidence at all, that a pure free market will deliver benefits to all of us and cure society of its ills.

Let me be clear, even though no country on the planet has ever adopted a pure free market system of the kind neo-liberal economists advocate and the theory has not been tested, we have many thousands of Americans believing that if only we had this system then things would be great. Its almost like a religious belief.

Yes we do have a coporatist system, but the idea that corporatism can be banished and we can have the milk and honey of unregulated, unrestrained wealth is a utopian fantasy.

Corporations will not vanish, just as acumulated wealth and interests will not go away. Take away regulations and corporations will control the people even more than they do today.

edit on 4-1-2012 by freethinker123 because: (no reason given)

If we were to do as Dr. Paul has suggested and reinstitute property rights as the deciding factor in how a corporate personhood and an individual person are to resolve disputes, then a truly free trade environment would work.
For example, if corporations are to be treated under the constitution as having the same rights as an individual person, they should be treated as such in a court of law when an individual has a dispute with them. Therefore, if Exxon Mobile or Monsanto poisons your property via waterways, or even rainfall, and you can prove this in a court of law, it would be treated the same way if your neighbor was dumping toxic waste on your corn fields; you would be able to sue them.
In a corporatist society, this doesn't happen because big corporations and government work in collusion. Big corporations tell big government how they are to proceed in their legislation. This is why the EPA does nothing to protect us from the poisons that we constantly are inundated with as a result of the corporate bottom line. In a true free market society however, our legal powers, as individuals, would be far more effective.

reply to post by Q:1984A:1776


I would prefer a society that ensured that water wasn't poisoned in the first place. If for example massive sanctions were put in place against companies that poisoned water, all of a sudden the economic 'incentive' to make such mistakes would cease.

And I don't see how putting private individuals and corporations as the same in front of the law will stop government and business colluding. It goes a hell of a lot deeper than that.

Besides, what chance have I on my own got, against a legal team that costs millions of dollars to hire? And don't tell me that it doesn't matter. If the most expensive legal team didn't get results, the corporations wouldn't hire them.

Originally posted by freethinker123
reply to post by Q:1984A:1776

 

I would prefer a society that ensured that water wasn't poisoned in the first place. If for example massive sanctions were put in place against companies that poisoned water, all of a sudden the economic 'incentive' to make such mistakes would cease.

And I don't see how putting private individuals and corporations as the same in front of the law will stop government and business colluding. It goes a hell of a lot deeper than that.

Besides, what chance have I on my own got, against a legal team that costs millions of dollars to hire? And don't tell me that it doesn't matter. If the most expensive legal team didn't get results, the corporations wouldn't hire them.

Large corporations would be crippled by Paul's brand of free markets. Why are they so dead set against him if a true free market would help corporations over individuals. You are still very much inside the box they want you to be in. Stick your head out. It's nice out here (no matter what they say)