Iâm a left-winger, thereâs no hiding it. But at the same time, I canât deny that Capitalism has created a high quality of life in the Western world. Our life expectancy is through the roof, and ever increasing. We have enough food and water to feed the planet 3 times over. We are spoiled beyond belief with our electronics, leisure time, big houses, etc. But does this high quality of life justify Capitalismâs existence?
Capitalism is basically where the means of production are privately controlled, rather than owned by the state, commune, workers, etc. Most people credit Adam Smith with being the first Capitalist thinker. Compared to Feudalism, Capitalism was a liberal economic system. Let me say that again: Capitalism was liberal! It may sound odd, considering that itâs conservatives who champion this system. It was a great system compared to what people in the past had to suffer. Slavery, serfdom, feudalism were all terrible economic systems. The development of Capitalism allowed the poor to have a chance. The rise of Capitalism coincided with the rise of Parliamentary Democracy and a more powerful middle class.
But just like Karl Marxâs Communism, people misinterpret Adam Smithâs ideals. Adam Smith was the first to warn people against Corporations. He said, âThe directors of such companies (corporations) ... being the managers rather of other people's money rather than of their own, it cannot well be expected that they should watch over it with the same anxious vigilance with which [they would] watch over their own⦠Negligence and profusion, therefore, must always prevail, more or less, in the management of the affairs of such a company."1 In other words, Corporations are wasteful. He believed that Corporations were against free market principles. Smith even said that perfect liberty could only be achieved with perfect markets and with perfect competition. Obviously, Smith even knew that perfect Capitalism was a fairy tale.
Capitalism is a fairy tale because people are not perfect. Capitalism teaches people to be individualistic and self-centered. People in Capitalistic societies are breed to love money, and hate others. âFurthermore, Smith did not advocate a market system based on unrestrained greed. He was talking about small farmers and artisans trying to get the best price for their products to provide for themselves and their families. That is self-interestâ"but it is not greed. Greed is a high paid corporate executive firing 10,000 employees and then rewarding himself with a multimillion dollar bonus for having saved the company so much money. Greed is what the economic system being constructed by the corporate libertarians encourages and rewards.â2 A Capitalistic system causes people to think about themselves, rather than the overall good of society.
The âfree marketâ has turned into a corporate elite system. A very small percentage owns the vast majority of the means of production. Is this real Capitalism? Not at all. Orthodox Capitalism, in theory, rewards people for their work. But in this age of elite corporate oligarchs, people are not rewarded for the work they do. Hereâs a couple examples of what I mean. When we look at music artists, over 90% of the money earned on CD sales goes straight to the record company, not the music artist. Inventors rarely get the money they are due either. Their profits usually go to the corporation who they are employed by. Videogame developers get very little, because publishers like EA Games get most of the profit, despite the fact that the developer made the game.
Capitalism also employs the idea of profits before people. Now a Capitalist would argue that profits drive people to do better, thus, it helps the people in the end. But can a Capitalist explain why 50 million Americans do not have Health Insurance? Why did the world Health Organization rank the US 72nd/191st in the world for overall health, and 37th in the world overall in health care performance?3 Why are countries like Spain, Sweden, Norway, and Britain ranked higher? They have national health care, rather than privately owned health care. Countries in Europe (as well as some others) believe in people before profits. This has given them a much better, and more equal health care system. People cannot be turned away, or rejected a surgery because they are poor. People have thrown away their individualism and turned to equality and the betterment of society, even if it means they pay more taxes.
Letâs turn away from the Western world for a minute. Ask someone from Mexico if Corporate America has made their world better. Ask someone from Indonesia or Bangladesh who works in a Nike sweatshop if Corporate America has made their life better. Definitely not. Conservatives talk about how illegal immigration is at an all time high in America. Of course, they blame the âlazy Mexicans and Latinosâ who are just too lazy to get jobs in their native countries. They are just here to commit crime and take our jobs, Republicans and Democrats say. (I call Democrats âconservativesâ too. They support this Capitalist, elitist, imperialist, society just as much as Republicans do).
But has any mainstream American politician asked themselves âwhy do illegal immigrants come here?â They would never dare ask that question. Because the answer is that Corporate America has invaded their nation. Most Mexicans make less than a dollar a day because corporate America has invaded their nation, set up shop, and forced honest workers out of business. Deals like NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) allow Corporate America into poor nations to exploit the people. The only way for an average Mexican (or Latin American) to make a decent living is to move to the US and hope that they can land a job.
If you look at the disparity between rich and poor throughout the world, it has increased the most in Latin America.4 That is because American corporate elites, in the name of Capitalism and âfree trade,â are allowed to invade these nations and exploit the people.
Most Americans could care less about the exploitation throughout this world. But guess what!? That inequality is going to hit home very soon. It is pathetic that an issue has to hit home before Americans actually care, but that is the sad nature of our society. The United States is already extremely unequal in income equality. How much longer will it be before the average American cannot afford to eat? But most Americans will not care until it actually becomes an issue.
Now let me ask, where has Conservatism got us in this world? I donât just mean recent history. I mean all of world history. No one right now would justify slavery or feudalism. But back when these systems existed, conservative thinkers would justify these systems. It took liberal, left thinking minds to take down these systems. It took extreme liberals to tear down serfdom in Russia, slavery in the US, and Feudalism in Europe. These extreme liberals made the world a better place. They provided us with the Capitalist, democratic system we live in. But now we need more liberal minded people to change the world again. We can no longer survive in a corporate system where the gap between rich and poor is staggering. We cannot stand by while half of the people in the world make less than two dollars a day. It is time for a change.
Capitalists back during the Industrial Revolution were not afraid of change. They believed in a more equal society where everyone could make it. Now that Capitalism has failed the world, people need to be more open to a new system. Be like those Capitalists hundreds of years ago. They rejected the conservative banter to create a better society. Now it is time for Capitalists to reject the conservative mindset and to move to the left for a more equal society.
To use a familiar example, when slaves were freed after the American Civil War, they did not just accept the current system as it was. African Americans continued to fight for change. They didnât sit back and say âHEY! Weâre free! Our quality of life is better than it has ever been! Letâs keep it this way!â Despite having more freedom (according to law) they did not end their struggle there. They continued to fight for equality. I guess what Iâm trying to say is that we can always strive for a better life. We shouldnât stop here and keep things the way they are just because things are good. There is always room for improvement, even if that means dismantling the Capitalist system we live under.
1 Forbes.com (I forgot to get the exact link, but it was on the Forbes website) 2 http://deoxy.org/korten_betrayal.htm 3http://www.who.int/whr/2000/en/annex01_en.pdf 4http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/aa/Gini_Coefficient_World_Human_Development_Report_2007-2008.png (the higher the number, the higher the gap between rich and poor).
That way, folks can't say they are at the mercy of greedy coporations.
no but we are at the mercy of a governement. if this is better i do not know. the motives of a company i can predict. the motives of a governement are mor difficult to be predicted
and btw. how do you come to the conclusion that all companies are greedy?
I say we ditch capitalism for socialism! I say we put the economy under the control of the tax paying citizens! Not the direct government like Stalin and not the corporations like Bush allowed! Just the people sharing what the company makes amongst themselves according to how hard their coworkers work and how long. Think about it comrades, we would be spreading democracy to the economy rather than choking and excluding it from the economy and the work place!
You're trying to create a utopia there and it doesn't work. You're describing New Harmony, an attempt at utopia. Google it and check Wikipedia. Then read about it's downfall. You'll see you're idea of everybody bing equal and sharing the wealth isn't how the real world works.
My grandparents waited years in the US to get a cancer removed
Years! As in Plural. That is an exaggeration or a flat out lie and you know it. They would have been moved up on the list. If somehow you aren't lying you should sue the hospital for millions.
2) There's a theory known as 'Economic Man'. This makes the assumption that human beings are rational creatures, and therefore make rational economic decisions. However, many psychological studies contradict this assumption, showing humans, under many different conditions, to be completely irrational, misallocating their own economic resources.
Irrational? On what basis did this study categorize as rational?
On allocating resources to the best of their financial success? Are they misplacing humans with robots, who have no emotions? Does it consider people irrational for allocating their resources to something that provides them fun and excitement?
no but we are at the mercy of a governement. if this is better i do not know. the motives of a company i can predict. the motives of a governement are mor difficult to be predicted and btw. how do you come to the conclusion that all companies are greedy?
True socialism and even true communism has the tax payers making all of the choices. The federal government would only provide security, pass laws, and fund public buildings.
The Paris commune, the hippie commune, Buddhist communes which used to populate much of India and China, it's working in Sweden, they have nationalised companies in europe that are doing just fine.
What kind of question is that? We needed some socialism to survive 10,000 years ago when humans united and settled down with each other.
The Paris commune, the hippie commune, Buddhist communes which used to populate much of India and China,
this are small communes as you say, not countries. sweden may have some nationalised companies, but the majority is in private hands.
We needed some socialism to survive 10,000 years ago when humans united and settled down with each other.
we do not need socialism, which is a complete political system, what we need, or atleast some countries do, are social structures that secure individuals from poverty and misery
if the governement passes the laws, than the people are on their mercy. the laws are the foundation of the system.
That's not how it works here in the U.S. Under socialism the federal government wouldn't even change much. It would still have to pass bills through congress and everything would have to conform to the constitution. The government wouldn't have a lot of opressing power under socialism with the United States. There would still be a system of checks and balances just like there is today, the difference is that companies and the means of production are controlled by the tax payers.
Our quality of life until 5 years ago could justify capitalism, but now it's really hard to do, cause there is in even in the wealthy countries much poverty and the climate and the poorer countries have huge problems because of capitalism.
And Socialism doesn't have to nationalise 100%, if the country controls oil companies, electricity, and healthcare but things such as the media are held private, you could lable that as socialism.
Our quality of life until 5 years ago could justify capitalism, but now it's really hard to do, cause there is in even in the wealthy countries much poverty and the climate and the poorer countries have huge problems because of capitalism.
Our qaulity of life takes a dip every time there is a recession. And believe me, we've had over a dozen recessions under capitalism since the depression of the 1930s. There was a huge depression in the southern United States after the U.S civil war almost shredded the country!
Some companies should be controlled by the country. Also when there is a recession the country has to pay to save the economy. I don't agree with that when a private company makes mistakes, the country and the people of that country should not pay them.
