What actually is wrong with Capitalism? I'm actually curious whther you guys have any statistics, data showing problems with Capitalism that can't be rectified by simply developing a welfare state and whatnot?
The falling rate of profit etc
Essentially crisis are baked into capitalism
>>2511079Scroll down to the very bottom of the thread linked at the end of this comment then follow the last link in that thread at
>>>/edu/16619 >>2511079Even capitalists know it, retard, they are ok with it having crisis baked in because they see as opportunities
>>2511047>simply developing a welfare state how are your welfare states doing bro? didnt they stop all advance in welfare since ussr fall? is the welfare increasing, stagnating, or does the accumulation of capital in a few hands lead to an accumulation of political power in these same hands that destroy the welfare state to increase their profit?
not even mentioning the ecological catastophe
s caused by a blind system that optimize for profit rather than human benefit and the fact we toil for a few privileged cunts wasting millions of humans work hours for their luxury, their thirst for power and their love for bloodshed and destruction to consolidate their power.
honestly I could write a wall of text on it but imo these things are easier to learn by experience
assuming you're a young person try to pay attention to the way these capitalists countries develop, capitalism not working is something that shows up in history over and over and that you can ergo see with the naked eye because its mechanisms never really change
>>2511047Everything is wrong with capitalism
>>2511079you don't want an actual proof like this
>>2511085 because that's boring, and let's face it, you're not gonna read that shit. Instead look at these MEMES
The things you own end up owning you.
>>2511047Welfare state cannot compensate for workers being unwilling to work. Propertyless workers, or rather, workers as property, don't have that communist worker spirit where they innovate their workplace freely and openly. Under capitalism, sticking out means you'll work more for the same wage, making it so workers can only ever work harder if they are threatened with sanctions, wage cuts, etc etc.
This is the main problem. Having to feed an entire parasite class is secondary to capitalism preventing innovation
To put it in more blunt terms, life is objectively getting worse for everyone in the world except for like a dozen or so people who now have more money than God and they have no clue what to do with it and are squandering it on AI science fiction LARP while everyone else is broke and miserable.
>>2511585*for like the top 50% of westerners
The western middle class owns more wealth than the western 1%
>>2511595Oh, give it time.
>>2511648
Division between the have and have nots is not an actual class division, and extreme disparty between wealth is always going to exist with capitalism, because even though a house is a house, it is different if it is a palace or dirt hut. Wealth is relative. Abolishing classes makes everyone the working class. You don't care about accumulating wealth and you are not just above survival. It's good. Chinese.
The PDRK initially started as a social democracy today it is a neoliberal shithole
Go figure
If you get your mind away from ideology and just consider an anthropological perspective of what markets are and why they exist and what they do, you can begin to see the problems with capitalism pretty quickly.
Markets began to emerge when humans started trading things with other humans in prehistoric times, tribal nomadic societies trading the few goods they carried with other tribes in rudimentary bartering rituals. This was the market, a few small trades between stone age tribal people happening here and there. Over time, as technology and civilization evolved, the market became bigger and more complex and involved more people and larger quantities and larger distribution networks, the scale of the market vastly increased but the purpose and principle of the market remains the same - to move wealth and resources from where they are least needed to where they are most needed for the mutual benefit of all participants.
Under capitalism, participants in the market have no incentive to cooperate and perform their role in the market by ensuring the flow of wealth/resources to where it needs to go. Instead of redistributing the capital they accrue back into the market, they are encouraged/allowed to hoard the capital and invest it into perpetual expansion and use capital to manipulate the market and dominate the market and ultimately destroy the market. Money is not something you are supposed to stockpile and sit on; it is a fluid resource like electricity or water or blood in a bloodstream. Capitalism is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of what money is, what markets are, and what they are for, it's a very individualist and childish ideology that makes the assumption that what is good for one really rich spoiled cunt is good for all of society.
>>2511668
Yes, you ensure that money and resources are going to where they need to go and you apply the basic laws of thermodynamics - wealth isn't really created or destroyed, it always has to come from somewhere else and every imbalance will constantly seek equilibrium someway or another.
At its core, capitalism is just eugenics. Noble families get to breed infinitely, the lower class can only rarely afford children, and those who are disabled and/or cannot work at all can't even provide for themselves, so they live a short and solitary life. These castes were set up intentionally along racial and historical lines, and self enforce with almost no exceptions, due to how high wealth grows exponentially without effort and the poor have to give away almost all their money to the wealthy every single paycheck or they die.
Any program that tries to balance this by simply putting a bit more money in the hands of the poor kinda misses the point, in terms of actually fixing anything, because it misses the obvious question - why are you using a political system that almost exclusively does bad things, on purpose, by design, and requires you to constantly offset all the bad things it does, when you could just not use the system and save all that time and energy?
>>2511674>At its core, capitalism is just eugenics.I've heard people say the same thing of meritocracy, calling it "social eugenics" and I think they have a good point. Like people say that meritocracy is a better system than * because if you structure society to favor the most able and skillful and clever people then society will produce and be led by great brilliant benevolent leaders, but the idea is fundamentally ableist and in practice just results in a society led by amoral antisocial psychopaths, just as eugenics would probably result in a society of pale grotesque retarded mutant monsters.
>>2511047Capitalism in its purest form is a street vendor running a food truck or a drug dealer making a transaction with a client. Capitalism as a religion is speculation where people are commodities. I'm sure the Marxist devotee makes it more complicated than that, but that's the gist of it.
>>2511713you're a moron with no idea what capitalism is
>>2511718Capital is money, no?
Idk the Marxist purist definition but I know that much.
>>2511722Dont listen to him you understanding of capitalism is correct
>>2511713>Capitalism in its purest form is a street vendor running a food truckNo, you're conflating capitalism with markets and the two are not the same thing. Capitalism is a rather recent phenomenon that began during the Age of Discovery when technology and imperialism and the opening of the Americas and the African slave trade allowed for unprecedented potential for investment and growth and wealthy imperial Western European society got a huge boner and got it in their heads that this period of limitless growth and new territories to conquer would last forever and capitalism was based on that very premise. And then, of course, it didn't last forever, we colonized everything there is to colonize and our imperialist goals has been largely stalemated by the development of nuclear weapons and now this shortsighted retarded perpetual motion machine economic model is falling apart.
>>2511724I don't have to be correct, but the simplest route is more efficient and direct. Then the world makes more sense. I think capitalism was first used as a pejorative by Marx in reference to Adam Smith's 'system of natural liberty's, but I could be wrong.
>>2511725The colonizers relied on a mercantile economy and the royal trading companies raped the world. My ancestors who weren't part of any "we" who took part in this did trade goods and services before the European model existed. I guess it's a matter of perspective.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zf_wzb8vCrY >>2511758
The market is speculation for profit, capital is just money. It's always been this way.
>>2511713The defining characteristic of capitalism is the perpetual growth factor, that is key. A guy running a hotdog stand selling hotdogs and using the money to feed his family is not a capitalist. But let's say the guy says "fuck my family, they can starve for a while" and instead of using his profits to feed his family he uses it to invest in a hotdog truck, then he uses the revenues from that to start a whole chain of hotdog restaurant franchises, then he gets investors to invest in his company and they go public and he starts a hotdog corporation, he runs all other hotdog sellers out of business and merges with other hotdog corporations to form an international hotdog conglomerate, he becomes the only source of hot dogs in the entire world, and then he takes a revolver out of his desk and kills himself and now there are no more hotdogs. That's a capitalist.
>>2511773
You are correct. For the ruling class, the people are commodities. Modernity only makes it worse.
>>2511722no, money existed long before capitalism, and capital include other things than money
>>2511724fucking read a book I beg you
>>2511047The liberal Thomas Piketty wrote a big book about how return on capital grows larger than the economy which means stark wealth inequality is baked into the system absent events that destroy a lot of capital (wars, plagues, the great depression) or a new global progressive tax system (which he thinks is politically unlikely). I'm not sure what he thinks should happen.
I've seen a few articles in pop science mags like Scientific American that reference studies about how markets always lead to a few winners and lot of losers. Here's one, too lazy to look for others:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-inequality-inevitable/None touch Marxist political economy (the SA article ends with a call for redistribution) but I think it's interesting when such critiques enter the mainstream.
>>2511047The welfare state became an impossibility after the 70s
>>2511047It suffers from recurrent crises that inherently lead to conflict. In the 30's, capitalists thought they had it all figured out with exactly what you propose, a welfare state backed by strong consumer spending. Then the 70's came and crises struck anyway.
There isn't any way to solve the problem that wouldn't end capitalism. Sure, you could have the state direct everything, but keep profits and dollars and welfare, but without private industry not capitalism.
>>2511674If Capitalism is Eugenic, why is it wrong? It purifies the world.
>>2511079Wdym proof it? Why do you think theres a push for AI and automation?
>>2511722>ancient summeria had capitalismle sigh
Unique IPs: 21