HackOtaku I posted the 500000th topic Reputation: 81
Joined: 31 May 2007 Posts: 228
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 4:15 pm Post subject: Is Capitalism for the greater good?
Capitalism has a great deal of problems, and there are many arguments for and against it, I'm just seeing what the general consensus here is.
People argue that capitalism fuels innovation and competition. Thanks to capitalism, everyone is looking to get rich somehow or another, so many spend their time starting businesses of some kind or another to offer solutions to problems. They argue that it's this ability to get rich that incentives people to innovate new, cheaper, better ways to do things, in order to themselves get richer.
America is the great capitalist nation, so we're a prime examples of the goods and the bads. We have hospitals gouging patients with insane bills so they can negotiate down with big insurance companies on the "real price" of things, and health care is one of the biggest costs in America. On the flip side, we also have some of the best hospitals in the world, thanks in large to the fact that people pour money into R&D for cures so they can get patents to make money.
Then we come into the issue of medical patents, a double edged sword. Ideally, cures should be sought out for the betterment of humanity (the cure for polio was not patented, for instance), however, it is currently done primarily for profit. Cure an ailment, then control the price of that cure for x amount of years and get rich, and most people are of the mindset that it is a fair practice.
Then there's the argument that capitalism brings down the prices of all goods, because if you attempt to charge too much for something, someone else can come along and offer a lower price. It's, theoretically, thanks to this that we have such cheap things in America.
Is this all for the best though? The downsides of capitalism are easily apparent. The first is that wealth becomes status, and this is something that is deeply ingrained in Americans. If you're poor, you're less of a person, if you're homeless, you're hardly even a person at all. Dehumanizing those without money comes naturally to Americans. We have a corrupted government due to the fact that companies need to buy off congress members in order to protect their interests. We have massive inequality across the nation while there are those at the top who make so much money they can't spend it all, but instead turn it back into more cash-generation businesses to hire more people for small amounts of money. It's all about having the biggest paycheck.
There is no concern anymore for the welfare of the people anymore. Everyone is only concerned about themselves. Many, many people are against social programs because they see them as "hand outs", and are against high taxes for the rich, because they think "I am going to be rich someday, and I don't want those taxes." Thanks to all the money the powers that be have, we have an entire party whose core principles are essentially that the common man should fight for corporate interests. Non-internet-diving Americans who just get their information from news channels and papers are so massively uninformed, because corporations are spinning non-issues (abortion, gay rights, etc.) that we already have answers to into the main focus of conversation to skirt people away from "real" issues, like the disappearing middle class, and the continuing gap of income inequality.
Someone once said America is a land of poor people who think they are temporarily embarrassed millionaires. That rings true for me time and time again, and I blame capitalism for it. Capitalism has preached this model that money is everything, and thank god for money and thank god for corporations that made this country so great, and by so great, I of course mean having a lot of money. People don't care enough about our education system, about our health system, about our infrastructure, people only really care about making money.
Look at how teachers are viewed in America. I am of the belief that teaching is one of the most noble professions, but in America, it is often a thing of ridicule. (Oh, teachers don't make any money, those who can do, those who can't teach etc) And it's because they don't make as much money that it is seen as a "lesser" job, even though educating the youth of the future is one of the most critical things a person can do for society.
But in a capitalistic world, society be damned, the only thing that matters is you and your wallet.
HackOtaku I posted the 500000th topic Reputation: 81
Joined: 31 May 2007 Posts: 228
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 4:21 pm Post subject:
Brolock wrote:
tldr
> Is Capitalism good? It might make prices lower, and encourage people to make innovations, but it makes money into an idol, and people start attributing wealth and status as a person.
Joined: 15 Apr 2011 Posts: 314 Location: P. Sherman 42, Wallaby Way, Sydney
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 5:20 pm Post subject:
Communism/ socialism dominated in my town 25 years ago and people then live very well, humman rights were at very high level for the time, even homosexuality had been removed from the list of mental illnesses long before US/UN did the same. Communist party even had some leader of homosexuals. In socialism humans have the highest market value (if there were no socialism human rights would still be at really low level (no health care, no limit on how much time you can work, if you get hurt you would simply get fired (even on the job))).
Both systems have their pros and cons. Socialism is left wing and capitalism is right wing. The best system is center
E.g Town in which I live 25 years ago (when Croatia was part of the socialist/communist Yugoslavy)
People had health care, all were well fed and having house was human right. Bank couldn't take your home. But thats it. They haven't built anything because they spent all the money on the people.
They have left town without maintenance which doesn't look like the rest of the country which was more right wing oriented.
Socialism is good for the generation that starts using, but after it nothing is left. One person has to get capital to create something that will last for generations
Communism/ socialism dominated in my town 25 years ago and people then live very well, humman rights were at very high level for the time, even homosexuality had been removed from the list of mental illnesses long before US/UN did the same. Communist party even had some leader of homosexuals. In socialism humans have the highest market value (if there were no socialism human rights would still be at really low level (no health care, no limit on how much time you can work, if you get hurt you would simply get fired (even on the job))).
Both systems have their pros and cons. Socialism is left wing and capitalism is right wing. The best system is center
E.g Town in which I live 25 years ago (when Croatia was part of the socialist/communist Yugoslavy)
People had health care, all were well fed and having house was human right. Bank couldn't take your home. But thats it. They haven't built anything because they spent all the money on the people.
They have left town without maintenance which doesn't look like the rest of the country which was more right wing oriented.
Socialism is good for the generation that starts using, but after it nothing is left. One person has to get capital to create something that will last for generations
good thing Americans aren't Croatian _________________
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:28 pm Post subject: Re: Is Capitalism for the greater good?
HackOtaku wrote:
The downsides of capitalism are easily apparent. The first is that wealth becomes status, and this is something that is deeply ingrained in Americans. If you're poor, you're less of a person, if you're homeless, you're hardly even a person at all. Dehumanizing those without money comes naturally to Americans.
With capitalism money becomes a simple expression of your power: a number.
IMO humans will always try to compare themselves to each other, who's got the biggest mace, who can run the fastest, who's got the fanciest clothes, who's got the highest k/d ratio at CS, whatever... If you remove capitalism, people will find another way to look down on to other people (What?! Your workplace is more than 5 miles away from home? Laaaaaaaame !) and the problem would still be there.
Thinking about it, the problem might actually be that we are trying to see everyone as an equal. People are not actually all equals but it is politically convenient to consider them so since you only have to make laws for one group instead of several, don't have to define categories, and more importantly: you avoid riots between groups. But on the other hand it brings other problems: consider someone who would literally be useless. A cold-hearthed society wouldn't feel bad about him being at the bottom of the social ladder, or even removed from existence and that would spare resources. However our current society empathizes and drags such individuals. The taxes taken from the riches to help the poor is just an example of the resources taken from one group to keep the less productive elements alive (reminder: "less productive" doesn't mean "useless").
So you could say that the problem with "dehumanizing those without money" is due to capitalism because it creates people without money, or you could say that it comes from your empathy, because it makes you think that dehumanizing ,or rather not-thinking-that-someone-is-as-good-as-you-are, is a problem.
tldr: if you admit that people are not equals, you don't feel bad about looking down on poor people and that makes one less downside for capitalism.
Note that wealth might not be the best way to differentiate people. I haven't given much thought on the question but inheriting a large sum of money from your parents doesn't mean you're actually useful. _________________
DO NOT PM me if you want help on making/fixing/using a hack.
Joined: 01 Oct 2007 Posts: 909 Location: Austin,TX with 72 virgins
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 8:05 pm Post subject:
... wrote:
Communism/ socialism dominated in my town 25 years ago and people then live very well, humman rights were at very high level for the time, even homosexuality had been removed from the list of mental illnesses long before US/UN did the same. Communist party even had some leader of homosexuals. In socialism humans have the highest market value (if there were no socialism human rights would still be at really low level (no health care, no limit on how much time you can work, if you get hurt you would simply get fired (even on the job))).
Both systems have their pros and cons. Socialism is left wing and capitalism is right wing. The best system is center
E.g Town in which I live 25 years ago (when Croatia was part of the socialist/communist Yugoslavy)
People had health care, all were well fed and having house was human right. Bank couldn't take your home. But thats it. They haven't built anything because they spent all the money on the people.
They have left town without maintenance which doesn't look like the rest of the country which was more right wing oriented.
Socialism is good for the generation that starts using, but after it nothing is left. One person has to get capital to create something that will last for generations
HackOtaku I posted the 500000th topic Reputation: 81
Joined: 31 May 2007 Posts: 228
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 10:48 pm Post subject: Re: Is Capitalism for the greater good?
Gniarf wrote:
HackOtaku wrote:
The downsides of capitalism are easily apparent. The first is that wealth becomes status, and this is something that is deeply ingrained in Americans. If you're poor, you're less of a person, if you're homeless, you're hardly even a person at all. Dehumanizing those without money comes naturally to Americans.
With capitalism money becomes a simple expression of your power: a number.
IMO humans will always try to compare themselves to each other, who's got the biggest mace, who can run the fastest, who's got the fanciest clothes, who's got the highest k/d ratio at CS, whatever... If you remove capitalism, people will find another way to look down on to other people (What?! Your workplace is more than 5 miles away from home? Laaaaaaaame !) and the problem would still be there.
Thinking about it, the problem might actually be that we are trying to see everyone as an equal. People are not actually all equals but it is politically convenient to consider them so since you only have to make laws for one group instead of several, don't have to define categories, and more importantly: you avoid riots between groups. But on the other hand it brings other problems: consider someone who would literally be useless. A cold-hearthed society wouldn't feel bad about him being at the bottom of the social ladder, or even removed from existence and that would spare resources. However our current society empathizes and drags such individuals. The taxes taken from the riches to help the poor is just an example of the resources taken from one group to keep the less productive elements alive (reminder: "less productive" doesn't mean "useless").
So you could say that the problem with "dehumanizing those without money" is due to capitalism because it creates people without money, or you could say that it comes from your empathy, because it makes you think that dehumanizing ,or rather not-thinking-that-someone-is-as-good-as-you-are, is a problem.
tldr: if you admit that people are not equals, you don't feel bad about looking down on poor people and that makes one less downside for capitalism.
Note that wealth might not be the best way to differentiate people. I haven't given much thought on the question but inheriting a large sum of money from your parents doesn't mean you're actually useful.
Yeah, most rich people are just part of a legacy, few are self-made. Easier to make money with money, but what are you to society. If there were a homeless man who spent his time talking about philosophy and understanding the world to anyone who will listen, is he of less value than someone who builds an office park? And if so, why? What qualities make him any better or worse than anyone else. I argue than any perception of inequality, of "i am better than him because of x" stems from a position of prejudice that you have created, but isn't necessarily the truth.
People are people, human is human, and I think we should all care for each other under the common idea that none of us asked to be here and it's mostly shit, so it's better if we don't make it any worse for each other. Creating ways of measuring yourself against another person is playing with fire, but like you said, it's human nature. I think it's a part of our primitive mindset that we are slowly leaving behind.
Joined: 01 Oct 2007 Posts: 909 Location: Austin,TX with 72 virgins
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 11:03 pm Post subject: Re: Is Capitalism for the greater good?
HackOtaku wrote:
Gniarf wrote:
HackOtaku wrote:
The downsides of capitalism are easily apparent. The first is that wealth becomes status, and this is something that is deeply ingrained in Americans. If you're poor, you're less of a person, if you're homeless, you're hardly even a person at all. Dehumanizing those without money comes naturally to Americans.
With capitalism money becomes a simple expression of your power: a number.
IMO humans will always try to compare themselves to each other, who's got the biggest mace, who can run the fastest, who's got the fanciest clothes, who's got the highest k/d ratio at CS, whatever... If you remove capitalism, people will find another way to look down on to other people (What?! Your workplace is more than 5 miles away from home? Laaaaaaaame !) and the problem would still be there.
Thinking about it, the problem might actually be that we are trying to see everyone as an equal. People are not actually all equals but it is politically convenient to consider them so since you only have to make laws for one group instead of several, don't have to define categories, and more importantly: you avoid riots between groups. But on the other hand it brings other problems: consider someone who would literally be useless. A cold-hearthed society wouldn't feel bad about him being at the bottom of the social ladder, or even removed from existence and that would spare resources. However our current society empathizes and drags such individuals. The taxes taken from the riches to help the poor is just an example of the resources taken from one group to keep the less productive elements alive (reminder: "less productive" doesn't mean "useless").
So you could say that the problem with "dehumanizing those without money" is due to capitalism because it creates people without money, or you could say that it comes from your empathy, because it makes you think that dehumanizing ,or rather not-thinking-that-someone-is-as-good-as-you-are, is a problem.
tldr: if you admit that people are not equals, you don't feel bad about looking down on poor people and that makes one less downside for capitalism.
Note that wealth might not be the best way to differentiate people. I haven't given much thought on the question but inheriting a large sum of money from your parents doesn't mean you're actually useful.
Yeah, most rich people are just part of a legacy, few are self-made. Easier to make money with money, but what are you to society. If there were a homeless man who spent his time talking about philosophy and understanding the world to anyone who will listen, is he of less value than someone who builds an office park? And if so, why? What qualities make him any better or worse than anyone else. I argue than any perception of inequality, of "i am better than him because of x" stems from a position of prejudice that you have created, but isn't necessarily the truth.
People are people, human is human, and I think we should all care for each other under the common idea that none of us asked to be here and it's mostly shit, so it's better if we don't make it any worse for each other. Creating ways of measuring yourself against another person is playing with fire, but like you said, it's human nature. I think it's a part of our primitive mindset that we are slowly leaving behind.
cool story bro but people dont care about other people and that is a fact _________________
idk why people argue about what it is to be human, and what humans should do in the present day when AI is going to take over in our life time. the only reason i can see discussing things like that is in actual relation to AI but otherwise its pointless
HackOtaku I posted the 500000th topic Reputation: 81
Joined: 31 May 2007 Posts: 228
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 11:49 pm Post subject: Re: Is Capitalism for the greater good?
AverageAzn247 wrote:
HackOtaku wrote:
Gniarf wrote:
HackOtaku wrote:
The downsides of capitalism are easily apparent. The first is that wealth becomes status, and this is something that is deeply ingrained in Americans. If you're poor, you're less of a person, if you're homeless, you're hardly even a person at all. Dehumanizing those without money comes naturally to Americans.
With capitalism money becomes a simple expression of your power: a number.
IMO humans will always try to compare themselves to each other, who's got the biggest mace, who can run the fastest, who's got the fanciest clothes, who's got the highest k/d ratio at CS, whatever... If you remove capitalism, people will find another way to look down on to other people (What?! Your workplace is more than 5 miles away from home? Laaaaaaaame !) and the problem would still be there.
Thinking about it, the problem might actually be that we are trying to see everyone as an equal. People are not actually all equals but it is politically convenient to consider them so since you only have to make laws for one group instead of several, don't have to define categories, and more importantly: you avoid riots between groups. But on the other hand it brings other problems: consider someone who would literally be useless. A cold-hearthed society wouldn't feel bad about him being at the bottom of the social ladder, or even removed from existence and that would spare resources. However our current society empathizes and drags such individuals. The taxes taken from the riches to help the poor is just an example of the resources taken from one group to keep the less productive elements alive (reminder: "less productive" doesn't mean "useless").
So you could say that the problem with "dehumanizing those without money" is due to capitalism because it creates people without money, or you could say that it comes from your empathy, because it makes you think that dehumanizing ,or rather not-thinking-that-someone-is-as-good-as-you-are, is a problem.
tldr: if you admit that people are not equals, you don't feel bad about looking down on poor people and that makes one less downside for capitalism.
Note that wealth might not be the best way to differentiate people. I haven't given much thought on the question but inheriting a large sum of money from your parents doesn't mean you're actually useful.
Yeah, most rich people are just part of a legacy, few are self-made. Easier to make money with money, but what are you to society. If there were a homeless man who spent his time talking about philosophy and understanding the world to anyone who will listen, is he of less value than someone who builds an office park? And if so, why? What qualities make him any better or worse than anyone else. I argue than any perception of inequality, of "i am better than him because of x" stems from a position of prejudice that you have created, but isn't necessarily the truth.
People are people, human is human, and I think we should all care for each other under the common idea that none of us asked to be here and it's mostly shit, so it's better if we don't make it any worse for each other. Creating ways of measuring yourself against another person is playing with fire, but like you said, it's human nature. I think it's a part of our primitive mindset that we are slowly leaving behind.
cool story bro but people dont care about other people and that is a fact
I argue than any perception of inequality, of "i am better than him because of x" stems from a position of prejudice that you have created, but isn't necessarily the truth.
The first thing I'd like to point out there is that (in)equality is the fact of having differences or not, while being better/worse is the grading of differences into a single joe.
I can say that Usain Bolt is not my equal because he runs faster, on the other hand I'm better at programming, which one is better? No idea. One problems is that we do not have an objective way to grade our differences, so until we get one any "i am better than him because of x" comparison is biased.
If we had that objective method I guess people would accept that better people get more rewards (think video games if you still have doubts) and the blame wouldn't be on capitalism.
In the meantime, even if we do not have this objective method to grade people, we can assume that it exists, thus that there exists people that are better than the others (even if we don't know who's who), and thus it is logical that we do not all get the same rewards, resulting in a difference of wealth. However I doubt that capitalism has this objective grading method, so the richs and poors created by capitalism may not be the right ones.
HackOtaku wrote:
I think we should all care for each other under the common idea that none of us asked to be here and it's mostly shit, so it's better if we don't make it any worse for each other.
Well, ya' know, one way not to make it any worse is to end the suffering - permanently. Caring is killing !
Punchlines aside, "care for each other" goes both ways; you seem to consider the "helping the homeless"-like side, but "care for each other" can also mean that one useless person is going to remove itself not to drag down the others. I'll spare you my initial prose on human race purge but basically there are people so stupid that they'd do us a favor by disappearing. Think parents suing a teacher for trying to discipline a troublemaker kid with more than verbal pleas. _________________
DO NOT PM me if you want help on making/fixing/using a hack.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Reputation: 81
Reputation: 130
Reputation: 34
