o_o

Nah that guy gives me bad vibes-- don't like him.

I like Milton Friedman, though.

First, no alternative is required for something to be unacceptable to continue

Yes there is! This system is at least feeding most people in most countries. I refuse to say that "because this system is not ideal, we must destroy the system which is feeding billions of people without an alternative in mind". Are you arguing that it should be okay for people to die?!?

Please explain-- what gymnastics?

Wikipedia definition of capitalism:

Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit.

If slaves don't have private ownership.... then they're not living under a capitalist system. Right? What am I missing?

So the outcome from a customer's perspective is that the price fixers have dropped their prices way lower? That's good, no?

And then once the 3rd party goes out of business and they resume their high price.... they're encouraging a new 3rd party to try again. So the prices lower again.

Meaning there's pressure on prices to be lower, which is what we want. Therefore, good system.

Of course, I'm not saying it's ideal. But is there a better system?

It’s not a side effect, it’s an effect. It’s a feature. If companies could, they would externalize everything they could. Including paying workers as little as they can (or not at all, see slavery), or externalizing the health problems with the work (see radium girls), etc, etc,

Right, but they can't! That's the whole point of capitalism! Slavery is the pinnacle of anti-capitalism, because slaves don't own their own capital! It's explicitly not capitalist.

That would be the last time I moved, so about a year ago.

Also, I happen to very much like my landlord. This is because they're heavily incentivized to address my concerns because otherwise I'd leave a bad review which they care about. Examples are: they fixed a couple of times the laundry facilities were broken, they fixed broken windows a couple of times, etc. etc.

EDIT: Actually, you're making a very good point which I didn't address properly! You're saying that voting gives society more power than prices do. This is a good point, but I disagree. I think prices control production more than any government can, because it allows a much more granular decision-making. For example, every single individual can "vote" that their apartment is too expensive by leaving and finding cheaper places, driving prices down.

Capitalism is defined as a set of rules/regulations that allows people to own the capital that they produce. Regulatory capture is when an organization gains control of the regulations to subvert other people's ability to own their capital. This is why I say that the more regulatory capture that happens, the less capitalist the system.

And yes! Capitalist systems heavily incentivize caring about money and nothing else. But the system also makes it so that when people act purely selfishly for money, that it results in good outcomes for everyone. That's why I think it's a good system.

For example, if organizations price-fix, it heavily encourages a third party to undercut them. If they try to prevent the third party by legal means, then that's not capitalism.

That's an interesting perspective! Care to share some data?

Personally, I think the fact that the median person in capitalist nations has enough food to eat is a pretty big plus! I don't think that's been the case throughout most of history.

Thanks for engaging with me so politely!

“Capitalism” is a huge umbrella term so means many different things to many different people. And as an extension of this, a lot of the things that are underneath that umbrella are inarguably … extremely bad. Environmental devastation, the oppression and wage slavery of the third world, the existence of multi-million-dollar worthless baubles when people still die from lack of affordable health care… Even if you’re very pro-capitalist it would be tough to argue that all aspects of capitalism are great for humans and humanity. Capitalism optimizes for economic performance, not human happiness.

You're right! But I don't see how the bad things are the fault of capitalism. Capitalism is a tool intended to fix these very problems!

Environmental devastation is an externality because the rules haven't been defined properly-- if the rules of capital ownership around environmental concerns were clarified (through some system of carbon emission limitations and carbon credits), then I'm sure capitalism could optimize for a good environmental outcome. A bad thing, to be sure, but not the fault of capitalism.

Oppression/wage-slavery in the third world happens mostly in nations that are the least capitalist. Also, the capitalist system works for the benefit of the country that establishes it. I believe this is how it should be. Other nations can simply block all trade if they want to remain unaffected, but shouldn't be surprised if the capitalist nation simply takes advantage of their non-optimal economic choices. Again, a huge problem, but not the fault of capitalism.

Mis-allocation of resources is the very problem that capitalism is best at solving. I'd argue that systems like public healthcare are hampering the ability of capitalism to solve these problems.

Also a lot of people’s only experience with oppression is through capitalism. Here, I am talking about the alienation of workers from their labor (or, put more plainly, “shitty jobs”). It’s pretty bad for the soul to work as a wage slave in Amazon Fulfillment Warehouse #143249 earning $14/hour while bosses so removed from you they may as well be on another planet earn roughly $14,000,000/minute for doing nothing more than sitting in an office for 2 hours a day and sexually harassing their hot secretaries. Obviously there’s more to it than this for those of us who are more pro-capitalism, but I think it’s easy to see how some people get very angry about these conditions very rapidly.

Agreed-- I've been in that situation, and understand that it doesn't seem fair. But were any other systems better? It was worse to be a farmer owned by your local feudal lord, no?

Personally, despite these problems, I am more pro-capitalist than not, but it is because I experience (and have experienced) a fair amount of non-capitalism-related-oppression.

Ah I see I may have been preaching to the choir here, I apologize. Your perspective is appreciated, regardless! Thanks for your input!

Quoting my reply to a similar sentiment: (link here: https://programming.dev/comment/1167202)

I’m really not trying to be a dick, but uhh… Look around? The world is literally on fire and efforts to put it out or even to stop pouring more gas on it are put down at every turn by capitalists in the never ending pursuit of more money for it’s own sake.

Well I mean it’s unclear to me that we’re much worse than previous points in history. I’d rather have the climate crisis over the nuclear one, or either of the world wars, or live under a feudal system where I’m owned by the local lord in his castle.

I sympathize (and agree) with the belief that the current system isn’t serving everyone, much less serving everyone equally. But the world is a complicated thing and we’ve got >7 billion people to feed! I think we should be very careful before deciding “yeah it’s time to tear down the existing systems and hope that there are better systems out there”. It’s easier to make things worse than to make things better.

I mean... it has, hasn't it? It's worked pretty well for the last ~200 years. Even in China, the successful parts are the capitalist parts.

Yes, it's costing us in terms of environmental sustainability. This is an externality which can be (but hasn't been) addressed. A failure of government, not a failure of capitalism.

Capitalism isn’t you buying a tool and using it. It’s buying the 3D printer, paying people to design and build widgets, paying people to sell the widgets, then taking most of the money for yourself.

Yes, I agree that this should be possible. Of course, if I'm taking too much money, the capitalist system will encourage my competitors to defeat me. Meaning that there a dis-incentive in place for doing bad/selfish things. Sounds like a pretty good system!

I hate that I can work (with others) to build a company from the ground up and have nothing to show for it, because the owner is using us to fund his lifestyle. I hate that landlords can buy up all the homes, driving up the cost to the point no one can afford one, then rent them out and sit on their ass while I pay their mortgage. That’s capitalism. People profiting off of ownership. It inevitably ends with some people owning almost everything, and the majority owning nothing.

Yes I agree! I hate these things too. But capitalism doesn't prohibit every bad thing. Bad things can still happen under capitalism. I'm just saying that such things are harder to do under capitalism than any other system. For example, you mention landlords have to buy up every home before they can take advantage of you through their monopoly. That's way harder than other systems, where the government already owns all the homes, and can simply drive up the cost whenever they want :/