AGS Steam Games

Forums → WEPR → A price worth paying?

54 7303
FireflyIV
offline
FireflyIV
3,224 posts
Nomad

Capitalism is just one of many economic systems. The form we in the West live under today is a curious mix of Keynesianism and the Chicago School, although mostly the latter. This shift away from Keynesianism to Chicago School economics has had many implications, although now, let's just focus on the distribution of wealth. It was a system put in place and championed by the Thatcher and Reagan administrations in the mid 1980s, and has survived today with few challenges to monetarism, despite the fact that both the UK and the USA have experienced steady rises in levels of inequality since its implementation.

I'd like to veer the discussion away from the tired and tried debate of capitalism vs communism, and shift the focus to the deficiencies of capitalism in terms of wealth distribution. Capitalism was a system championed by liberals on the philosophical basis of equality of opportunity. However, as the role of government has been steadily eroded since the end of WW2 through the shift of focus from unemployment to inflation, coupled with mass deregulation and privatisation, the defeat of democratic socialism is abject, and the victory of the free market is absolute. However disturbing trends showing the failure of the free market to even gaurantee equality of participation, let alone equality of opportunity indicate that it is far from the allocatively efficient invisible hand Smith spoke of in the 18th century.

Thus, what I must ask to those who would defend such a system, do you really believe in the free market? And if so why. If you don't, and would like to change anything about it, what single aspect would you concentrate upon?

(I understand there are far lefties who'd like to get their views in here, but please try and keep it restricted to capitalism for the moment, as you'll have a chance to discuss fundamentally different systems in the second half of the thread)

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Facts and stats
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The wealthiest 1% of adults alone had 40% of all global assets in 2000, and the wealthiest 10% of adults owned 85% of the world total. Study

Simultaneously, nearly 1/3rd of the earth lives on less than 3$ per day. 2001 figures

As a silver lining, ''The proportion of the developing world's population living in extreme economic poverty - defined as living on less than $1.25 per day (at 2005 prices, adjusted to account for the most recent differences in purchasing power across countries) - has fallen from 52 percent in 1981 to 26 percent in 2005.''

Nevertheless, wealth disparities continue to increase:

http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/1999/0999collins.gif

http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/faculty/hodgson/Courses/so11/stratification/Wealth83_04.gif
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/wealth.jpg
http://www.uni-muenster.de/PeaCon/eliten/Robber%20Barons-Dateien/image21.gif

What (if anything) needs to be done about this? You should be able to deduce from the first half of the OP where my economic sympathies lie, but for those who have been unable to do so, I support immediate social justice.

(For all those far lefties, here's your chance to get involved.)

Oh. Also I realise that any jacka** can criticise, but rest assured I'll happily flesh out my proposals later, but I'd like to get some replies before I do.

  • 54 Replies
Drace
offline
Drace
3,880 posts
Nomad

More links to good info.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers%27_self-management
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_socialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy

You can't have democracy without worker control. How else do you praise democracy if a small group of individuals own the mass of the institutions that run society? Inequality and democracy cannot co-exist.

Capitalism as a hierarchical form of organization has shown its failure. Regardless, the alternative of a democracy is a much better one.

Though let me just ask you. What is your stance? How do you define capitalism and why do you advocate it? What do you believe is the problem?

chitown
offline
chitown
1,614 posts
Farmer

I will fix all of those links for you Drace:









FireflyIV
offline
FireflyIV
3,224 posts
Nomad

I don't know, the Capitalist nations seem to be doing pretty well. The third world countries are probably poor because of crooked leadership rather than capitalism.


Two words, dollar/euro imperialism. By adding interest to the 'aid' we giver to African countries, we tie them to a cycle which they cannot escape from. Instead of ever building any decent infrastructure, they have to pay us back the 5% on the $10bn they gave us. Combine this with the trade tarrifs we use in the Euro area and NAFTA - or look at the WTO's regulations, they are remarkably protectionist. Really the current system is engineered by the Western world, for the Western world, with the vast majority of the total population being screwed over. Within 1st world countires the majority still lose out to the elite classes who hold a massive proportion of the total wealth.

If the Capitalist nations stopped buying from third would nations and stopped all business with them, would you feel better?


This is exactly the attitude that creates such a system of exploitation in the first place. Even people like you who are willing to concede that capitalism is far from a perfect system seem to assume that without Chicago School capitalism the world would not be able to be prosperous. It's not a question of trading with third world countries, but the regulations and conditions of that trade, which are at the moment vastly in favour of the 1st world.

Let's also not forget that it was us in the first world who spent centuries raping third world countries for all they were worth, so for us to turn around and say,'well look after yourselves, not our problem' is very harsh indeed, seeing as we created the conditions for what is happening today.
NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,043 posts
Shepherd

Right, I see many contradictions between Firefly's socailism and Draces communism. You're don't care, as long as you blame everythign on capitalism. Peopel take advantage of the capitalism system. People will always take advantage of ANY given system. Before capitlaism, there were still underdeveloped countries that were being taken advantage of.

Why would I fight for a system where I have to share everythign I own, and third world nations still live in poverty? Communism won't help third world countries as much as Socialism won't help third world countries.

Either way, I'm done arguing about this.

FireflyIV
offline
FireflyIV
3,224 posts
Nomad

Right, I see many contradictions between Firefly's socailism and Draces communism.


Remember that socialism, like any ideology has various different branches with massive differences between them, as there are on the right wing. Drace is a Marxist. I am not, more akin to democratic socialism or social liberalism. Kind of like the difference between a social conservative and a Nazi.

You're don't care, as long as you blame everythign on capitalism.


It's because I care that I want to see changes made to the system. 'Because it is hard' is never an excuse not to try and do the right thing.

People will always take advantage of ANY given system.


Also true, however by making a system more inherently fair, you can minimise the damage caused by this.

Before capitlaism, there were still underdeveloped countries that were being taken advantage of.


I'm not saying that wasn't the case. What I'm saying is that it is still going on today and that we should do something about it. Again, saying things have always been pretty awful for people living in poverty is not a valid excuse for not wanting to change the system for the betterment of the majority. That's utilitarianism, a liberal belief, not a socialist one.

Why would I fight for a system where I have to share everythign I own, and third world nations still live in poverty?


If you are talking about my theory, then egalitarianism is not a part of it. Equality of opportunity is almost gauranteed. Equality of outcome certainly is not. There will still be wealth gaps, but that wealth will have been earnt, not inherited or won by luck, as so much of it is today.

Communism won't help third world countries as much as Socialism won't help third world countries.


Seeing as capitalism hasn't been helping either, I don't think it's foolish to suggest more socialistic reforms to address inequality of wealth.
Drace
offline
Drace
3,880 posts
Nomad

Interesting speech by Parenti on Third World poverty if your interested.

Myth of UnderDevelopment

Creating The Poor?

Drace
offline
Drace
3,880 posts
Nomad

Amazing documentary on the Argentinian movement for worker cooperatives.

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/the-take/

FireflyIV
offline
FireflyIV
3,224 posts
Nomad

An article you may be interested in.

Entitled, rethinking Marx.

Drace
offline
Drace
3,880 posts
Nomad

Well I am not crazy about Marx, but it was somewhat interesting, though it was just a bunch of different general topics, from Marx's birth, the French president, the current economic crisis, etc.

Showing 46-54 of 54