Capitalism: Failed System?

[God]

capitalism



cap·i·tal·ism

[kap-i-tl-iz-uhm]
nounan economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.


As seen in the world, the Wealthy are accumulating lots of money, while the poor keep on getting more poor. In the Usa the richest 400 people own the same amount as 185 Million of the lower part of the spectrum. Talk about Wealth Inequality.

Do you believe it's time for Capitalism to cease? There are many alternatives like Socialism and Cooperative businesses

Or

Do you believe that Capitalism needs to stay.

[lemons]

yes

Edited by e5 (Forum Super Moderator) - Please do not post pointlessly, thanks!

[Matt]

Capitalism: A love story by Michael Moore is a documentary about Capitalism that we just finished studying in English and it's pretty good at making Capitalism seem like a failed and corrupt system. It is a failed and unfair system in my opinion and it's what ruined Americas economy.

[Ardemax]

It might well be a partly failed system but what alternative is there?

[MKR&*42]

It might well be a partly failed system but what alternative is there?

This^

I would rather capitalism over communism any day.

[God]

Capitalism: A love story by Michael Moore is a documentary about Capitalism that we just finished studying in English and it's pretty good at making Capitalism seem like a failed and corrupt system. It is a failed and unfair system in my opinion and it's what ruined Americas economy.

I really need to watch that sometime soon, how long is it?

It might well be a partly failed system but what alternative is there?

Well Ardemax, that is an amazing question. A great alternative is Socialism. Also Cooperative Businesses which are owned by the workers.

This^

I would rather capitalism over communism any day.

c

Well our fears with Communism are all present with Capitalism.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Capitalism: A love story by Michael Moore is a documentary about Capitalism that we just finished studying in English and it's pretty good at making Capitalism seem like a failed and corrupt system. It is a failed and unfair system in my opinion and it's what ruined Americas economy.

Ahh, so according to Michael Moore it's capitalism that is the reason why America's economy is in a mess and not the fact that the Federal Government keeps spending what it doesn't have and now has over $17bn in terms of debt?

And what's unfair about it? Surely it's unfair to have wealth taken from people by the state and wasted by the government? If you invent something or some up with a great product to sell, why should you have the fruits of your labor stolen from you when it's rightfully yours?

Well Ardemax, that is an amazing question. A great alternative is Socialism. Also Cooperative Businesses which are owned by the workers.

Exactly! Let's not aim to be like the capitalist hell holes of Hong Kong, Singapore, parts of China, parts of India, Chile and the western world in general! No no no, let's aim to be more like the socialist paradises of Venezuela, Cuba, much of South America, Zimbabwe, South Africa, much of Africa, much of Arabia and Vietnam, Burma and North Korea. All such great third world alteratives to a first world system.

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Sir Winston Churchill

I suggest you both take an hour to watch the numerous Milton Friedman videos on YouTube where he debunks socialism. I would have thought that this argument had died back in the 1990's when the Soviet Union fell but evidently not. Pretty worrying really.

The basic difference between capitalism and socialism is the centralisation of power. In a capitalist economy, many people - if not most - have the ability to produce and create wealth and keep it thus spurring on competition. In a socialist system, that ability is restricted to a small few in the government - most of whom know nothing about producing anything other than ******** theories that usually cost billions in costs and sometimes millions of lives. Why do you want to keep repeating the mistakes of the past?

Capitalism hasn't failed. We should be pushing for more capitalism and less socialism.

[Ardemax]

Ahh, so according to Michael Moore it's capitalism that is the reason why America's economy is in a mess and not the fact that the Federal Government keeps spending what it doesn't have and now has over $17bn in terms of debt?

And what's unfair about it? Surely it's unfair to have wealth taken from people by the state and wasted by the government?



Exactly! Let's not aim to be like the capitalist hell holes of Hong Kong, Singapore, parts of China, parts of India, Chile and the western world in general! No no no, let's aim to be more like the socialist paradises of Venezuela, Cuba, much of South America, Zimbabwe, South Africa, much of Africa, much of Arabia and Vietnam, Burma and North Korea. All such great third world alteratives to a first world system.

I suggest you both take an hour to watch the numerous Milton Friedman videos on YouTube where he debunks socialism. I would have thought that this argument had died back in the 1990's when the Soviet Union fell but evidently not. Pretty worrying really.

I may be wrong, but isn't much of Scandinavian politics and society built upon Socialism?

[GommeInc]

Humans are selfish and only care about their own interests. Asking humans to distribute wealth is far too much to ask. Capitalism isn't necessarily a failed concept as it does work, but it is how it is being used by many humans which is the problem. It's like religion. Religion isn't bad, it's the people who use it for their owns gains or to manipulate others who are bad.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I may be wrong, but isn't much of Scandinavian politics and society built upon Socialism?

Nope, Scadinavia is a myth. In recent years, as the article explains, Scandinavia has been moving towards more capitalism.

http://www.cato.org/publications/com.../swedish-model

Do you think America would be better off with a Swedish-type welfare state? This question tends to evoke strong reactions from both the left and right, yet few understand Sweden’s economic history and the revisions it has been making to its welfare-state model in recent years. Sweden was a very poor country for most of the 19th century.

The poverty of those years caused many to emigrate from the country, mostly to the U.S. Upper Midwest. Beginning in the 1870s, Sweden created the conditions for developing a high-growth, free-market economy with a slowly growing government sector. As a result, Sweden for many years had the world’s fastest-growing economy, ultimately producing the third-highest per capita income, almost equaling that in the United States by the late 1960s. Sweden became a rich country before becoming a welfare state.

Sweden began its movement toward a welfare state in the 1960s, when its government sector was about equal to that in the United States. However, by the late 1980s, government spending grew from 30 percent of gross domestic product to more than 60 percent of GDP.

Most full-time employees faced marginal tax rates of 65 percent to 75 percent, as contrasted with 40 percent in 1960. Labor-market regulations were introduced to make it very difficult to fire workers. Business profits were taxed heavily, and financial markets were regulated heavily. By 1993, the government budget deficit was 13 percent of GDP and total government debt was about 71 percent of GDP, which led to a rapid fall in the value of the currency and a rise in inflation.

These policies and outcomes greatly diminished the incentives to work, save and invest. Economic growth slowed to a crawl. Other countries that avoided the excess spending, taxing and regulation of Sweden grew more rapidly, leaving Sweden in the dust. Sweden is still a prosperous country, but far from the top, and its per capita income has fallen to just about 80 percent of that in the United States.

In the late 1980s and 1990s, Sweden began an economic course correction that continues today. Marginal tax rates were reduced for most of the population, and this trend is expected to continue.

The wealth tax and inheritance tax were abolished. Financial markets, telecommunications, electricity, road transport, taxis and other activities were deregulated. Privatization of industry was begun, and the current government is continuing the process. The generosity of some welfare and other benefits has been reduced, with the goal of making work more economically rewarding relative to government benefits. Also, trade liberalization has been expanded greatly. The result has been a pickup in economic growth, and Sweden is no longer falling further behind other developed countries.

One notable success has been pension reform. Sweden was the first nation to implement a mandatory government retirement system for all its citizens. Sweden, like the United States and most other countries, was faced with an increasing, unfunded social security liability as a result of low birthrates and people living much longer. After studying the problem in the early 1990s, the Swedes approved, in 1998, moving toward a Chilean private pension system, first developed by former Chilean Labor Minister Jose Pinera. (Seventeen countries have adopted variations of the Pinerian system, which has been very successful in Chile.)

The new Swedish pension system has four key features, including partial privatization, individual accounts, a safety net to protect the poor and a transition to protect retirees and older workers. The benefits have been substantial budgetary savings, higher retirement income and faster economic growth.

Those who wish to chase the Swedish model need first to decide which model they seek: The high-growth, pre-1960 model; the low-growth model of the 1970s and 1980s; or the reformist, welfare-state model of recent years.

Article continues via the link....

In terms of the best case studies to look at, China v India in the 1970s to today is an interesting one.

As is Chile vs rest of South America in 1980s to today.

Or post-USSR Estonia vs the rest of Eastern Europe since 1990.

Or UAE/Oman/Kuwait/Qatar and Saudi Arabia vs Yemen/Iraq/Syria/Iran since the 1960s.

In all of these cases, they've all moved towards capitalism and have become wealthier - the one's which have moved towards capitalism the fastest and have become more free market have been the ones which have done better (Chile, China) than those who have been slower (India, South America).