<p>Why are so many people bitter about capitalism these days? Would you prefer socialism/communism, despite the numerous times it's failed?</p>
<p>What we have isn’t capitalism, and hasn’t been for a long time. It’s a false dichotomy.</p>
<p>That said, socialism doesn’t work and communism is just plain stupid.</p>
<p>Even, or maybe especially, pure capitalism can be very cruel.</p>
<p>As long as we don’t go to extremes, I like capitalism.</p>
<p>if you want pure capitalism go back to the 1920s under Harding and Coolidge where one man (J.P Morgan) had more money than the entire U.S gov. Capitalism mixed with a healthy amount of socialism is a fine system to run with.</p>
<p>The problem is that all of these are meta-narratives. For them to work with maximum efficiency, the entire world would have to adapt one economic system.</p>
<p>pandem is right, the US hasn’t been a capitalistic country for at least 80 years. </p>
<p>Also, I think that all these notions that under pure capitalism the rich would exploit the poor, and all those evil corporations would take over is utter nonsense. Any time something like that happens, it can be traced to government corruption or incompetence, and, naturally, the government shifts the blame to the industrialists.</p>
<p>^You seem to think a purely capitalist economy would work. That’s pretty funny.
</p>
<p>They would exploit the poor. That’s how you maximize profits. Is it evil? No, it’s capitalism.</p>
<p>The best solution is and always has been a mix of left and right ideas.</p>
<p>Profit has nothing to do with exploiting anyone. Companies can’t force anybody to work for them or buy their products. In a truly capitalistic society, it would be companies backing over backwards to attract consumers and the best and brightest employees.(Keep in mind that it’s faaaar from what we have right now.)</p>
<p>It’s no coincidence that the least regulated industry in the US is high tech, and also happens to be the most productive industry.</p>
<p>Vodka, go read up on early 20th century working conditions. That’s what a truly capitialistic society was. Controlled capitalism is great, but unrestricted it gives corporations way too much power and the worker none.</p>
<p>Being an American, I’ve never lived in a capitalist society. I am quite fond of the third way and don’t care for the pure model of capitalism. When thinking of it, I get an image of Chinese manufactures who knowingly put lead in dog food and suggest that if you don’t like it you can go buy somewhere else. Fake handbags on Canal Street are capitalism in action, so it heroin trafficking, price-gouging, exploitation, disposessed classes.</p>
<p>The free market externalizes all risk and privatizes reward, concentrating it with a tiny percentage of people. We like to pretend that we’ll be those people someday so we defend the system.</p>
<p>There is an interesting perspective about capitalism and Darwinism in the Times:
<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/12/business/economy/12view.html?ref=business[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/12/business/economy/12view.html?ref=business</a></p>
<p>"Relative performance affects many other rewards in contemporary life. For example, it determines which parents can send their children to good public schools. Because such schools are typically in more expensive neighborhoods, parents who want to send their children to them must outbid others for houses in those neighborhoods.</p>
<p>In cases like these, relative incentive structures undermine the invisible hand. To make their funds more attractive to investors, money managers create complex securities that impose serious, if often well-camouflaged, risks on society. But when all managers take such steps, they are mutually offsetting. No one benefits, yet the risk of financial crises rises sharply.</p>
<p>Similarly, to earn extra money for houses in better school districts, parents often work longer hours or accept jobs entailing greater safety risks. Such steps may seem compelling to an individual family, but when all families take them, they serve only to bid up housing prices. As before, only half of all children will attend top-half schools."</p>
<p>Capitalism, like Darwinism, is about winning of the fittest. But the fittest individual might not be the best thing for the group. A super animal that consumes everything and kills everything can destroy the biosphere and wipes out all the other animals and plants, eventually killing itself by destroying its own resources. In case you’re wondering, that supper animal is us.</p>
<p>I think a lot of people confuse capitalism with meritocracy. While there’s certainly an overlap, it’s not the same thing.</p>
<p>All historical examples of communism are not really socialism. There has never been a true socialist society in modern history.</p>
<p>Yes, I have faith in capitalism. People are designed to be selfish, with a competitive dog-eat-dog mentality, and capitalism is what allows the best dog to rise. Capitalism is compatible with human nature, whereas socialism is not. </p>
<p>Also, humans are pack animals. We follow the tribal leader, the many betas follow the alpha, etc etc. It is natural for different tiers to form, people on top with lots of power, and some in the middle, and more in the bottom. True capitalism isn’t exploitation, it’s about the fittest - in terms of ability and luck - rising to economic power, while the unfit do not. When you mix in bits of socialism, like we do now, that’s how you get diseases of unfits rising to economic power, and a few of the fittest who get screwed over. </p>
<p>But I acknowledge that we can never have true capitalism. The government would never want that to happen - it would mean a severe reduction in their overall power and controlling abilities.</p>
<p>^^ u’ve read Ayn Rand I assume? lol</p>
<p>Everyone on this site who supports unfettered capitalism is a highschool loner who has just read Atlas Shrugged, yes. And I’m not saying that sarcastically.</p>
<p>Again I direct you to late 19th-early20th century America.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, not if monopolies formed - which they of course would.</p>
<p>Pure capitalism does not result in pure and fair competition.</p>
<p>We have to differentiate between what capitalism should be and what capitalism turned out to be.</p>
<p>Theoretically, capitalism helps the public at large by introducing variety and competition. However, like pandem pointed out, it usually ends up favoring the few at the top.</p>