Is capitalism good or bad?
holycrap

Powell, OH

#71 Mar 3, 2013
Brainiac2 wrote:
Capitalism is good for the tramplers but bad for the trampled.
That's not capitalism then.
holycrap

Powell, OH

#72 Mar 3, 2013
Cogito2 wrote:
Capitalism is the last man standing...so to speak. History has dealt the coup de grace to the skull of communism and socialism is in the ICU on life support.
Capitalism by definition and practice is parasitic, feeding upon the flesh of the masses, but what economic system would you guys implement in it's place to more equitably meet the economic needs of modern society?
And with the Keynesian (Government) interventions in the markets, how is the US model any different from that of China's hybrid of state control/free market economy?
The last man standing is the total opposite of capitalism. Capitalism needs people. People are the most valuable resource in capitalism.

Those who believe they are following capitalism using the last man standing model are the ones ruining capitalism.
Giggs

Gillingham, UK

#73 Mar 3, 2013
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, Churchill said that DEMOCRACY (not capitalism" is the worst system except for all the rest.
There's nothing democratic about capitalism, especially in its global and monopolistic stage.
Is england capitalist....or socialist?

What is the difference between American and England?

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Level 8

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#74 Mar 3, 2013
Sunobia wrote:
We're no longer producing. We're a nation of consumers. How long can this last?
Industrial and manufacturing capital has declined. It is now finance capital which is dominant.
Wheeling and dealing on Wall Street has priority over producing things.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Level 8

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#75 Mar 3, 2013
holycrap wrote:
<quoted text>
The last man standing is the total opposite of capitalism. Capitalism needs people. People are the most valuable resource in capitalism.
Those who believe they are following capitalism using the last man standing model are the ones ruining capitalism.
People have long had the status of commodities under capitalism. But before the electronic revolution within capitalism people were at least still needed for labor. Previously, technological revolutions within capitalism served to create labor saving devices which enhanced the productivity of labor while requiring less labor to create more and more wealth.
But somewhere along the way, with the electronic revolution, capitalist technological revolutions moved from creating labor saving devices to creating LABOR REPLACING devices. Now a robot can probabably produce more cars than could a thousant auto workers in the 1960s or 70s. They've even got robots that can do hip replacement surgery. That why you hear about "jobless" economic recoveries after a slump. In the 1960s a recovery meant greater employment. But as it has becoe increasingly possible to create wealth without labor, and by means of the very technology created by labor, the worker is becoming obsolete.
Now the market is not concerned about the inherent worth of the human being, or the "sacredness of the human personality," of which Dr. King and other Christian humanists spoke. Labor and the laborer is of value only if he can expand production and profit. Otherwise he (or she) is, from a capitalistic standpoint, without any value. Things take priority over person.
Why feed or pay the laborer when you can create wealth without him or her?
Our quest for the righ to be human, to live with dignity as human beings, increasingly puts us at odds with capitalism.
Civilized life can no longer be sustained on a capitalistic foundation. WE must create a new more cooperative society with democatic governance of technology and wealth centered in human communities.
Otherwise our future will be a nightmare. The struggle is now a fight between civilization an barbarism. Capitalism is the path toward barbarism,

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Level 8

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#76 Mar 3, 2013
Giggs wrote:
<quoted text>
Is england capitalist....or socialist?
What is the difference between American and England?
One (England) is an empire that has died, and the other (America) is an empire that is dying.
Both must undergo fundamental social transformation or sink into barbarism.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Level 8

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#77 Mar 3, 2013
Neo Szlachta wrote:
<quoted text>
The U.S is becoming more Corporatist this not Capitalism.
It is Corporatism.
Capitalism would be letting Corporations fail without Government bail outs.
It is really just Welfare for Corporations.
Contemporaryu capitalism IS corporate. It is certainly no longer (if indeed it ever was) some community of freeholders envisioned by Jefferson.

“Liberals hate America ”

Level 6

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#78 Mar 3, 2013
All human institutions have elements of good and bad. Capitalism is certainly no exception. But I view it as the least evil of all economic and political systems. At least with capitalism a person can work their way out of poverty. With communism and socialism the government gets to dictate what a person can or can't do. Government is never the solution to any problem, government IS the problem. The problem in this country is the current system is hostile to small business owners. The tax system needs to be changed (flat tax) to encourage and help small business owners.
holycrap

Memphis, TN

#79 Mar 4, 2013
Savant wrote:
<quoted text> People have long had the status of commodities under capitalism. But before the electronic revolution within capitalism people were at least still needed for labor. Previously, technological revolutions within capitalism served to create labor saving devices which enhanced the productivity of labor while requiring less labor to create more and more wealth.
But somewhere along the way, with the electronic revolution, capitalist technological revolutions moved from creating labor saving devices to creating LABOR REPLACING devices. Now a robot can probabably produce more cars than could a thousant auto workers in the 1960s or 70s. They've even got robots that can do hip replacement surgery. That why you hear about "jobless" economic recoveries after a slump. In the 1960s a recovery meant greater employment. But as it has becoe increasingly possible to create wealth without labor, and by means of the very technology created by labor, the worker is becoming obsolete.
Now the market is not concerned about the inherent worth of the human being, or the "sacredness of the human personality," of which Dr. King and other Christian humanists spoke. Labor and the laborer is of value only if he can expand production and profit. Otherwise he (or she) is, from a capitalistic standpoint, without any value. Things take priority over person.
Why feed or pay the laborer when you can create wealth without him or her?
Our quest for the righ to be human, to live with dignity as human beings, increasingly puts us at odds with capitalism.
Civilized life can no longer be sustained on a capitalistic foundation. WE must create a new more cooperative society with democatic governance of technology and wealth centered in human communities.
Otherwise our future will be a nightmare. The struggle is now a fight between civilization an barbarism. Capitalism is the path toward barbarism,
Disagree. Capitalism is what keeps us away from barbarism.

Robots don't just design themselves, so therefore labor will always be needed under capitalism. Will there always be a sruggle to balance how far to take technology and actual human intervention? Of course BUT these are good problems to have.

Everyone is not the same, everyone doesn't have the same capabilities nor abilities. Therefore, everyone can't be treated the same. So the *type* of labor needed changes as technology changes; however, the need for the labor itself never goes away.

You seem to believe the need for change should simply go away because it is not dignified to the human spirit? It is much more inhumane to put individuals in positions they aren't qualified to handle.
hmm

Atlanta, GA

#80 Mar 4, 2013
capitalism=any means necessary
Its all about that bottm line and profit.

I feel some owners of the big companies are worst then war generals. Having people and kids working in sweat shops in terrible working conditions. Denying benefits and paying below minimum wage to help the bottom line. Misappropriating funds and inside trading. Capitalism breeds the best crooks.

True it is harder for some to make it. Still anyone from any background can work hard and do well. If you work hard enough it do pay off. Most of the wealthy people had to do a lot wrong to get to the top.

I just like it how you can literally start with nothing and make somethingout yourself here. if you work hard enough, you can make it. So I'm wit it.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Level 8

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#81 Mar 4, 2013
holycrap wrote:
<quoted text>
Disagree. Capitalism is what keeps us away from barbarism.
Robots don't just design themselves, so therefore labor will always be needed under capitalism. Will there always be a sruggle to balance how far to take technology and actual human intervention? Of course BUT these are good problems to have.
Everyone is not the same, everyone doesn't have the same capabilities nor abilities. Therefore, everyone can't be treated the same. So the *type* of labor needed changes as technology changes; however, the need for the labor itself never goes away.
You seem to believe the need for change should simply go away because it is not dignified to the human spirit? It is much more inhumane to put individuals in positions they aren't qualified to handle.
You apparently didn't understand my analysis. Revolutionizations of the instruments of production has always been a part of capitalism, more so than in any previous social order. But previously the results were labor saving devices which revolutionized social and economic life. Human labor produced those earlier technologies as well. HUman labor under capitalism has craated the new LABOR REPLACING devices. This portends not simply the change in labor--as in earlier changes from agricultural production by peasant cultivators to industrial production by urban and industrial workers. It carries the prospects of the elimination of labor as such. We've already seen indications of that, and some people foresaw this development as far back as the 1950s &60s when they were talking about automation.
As the progress of this revolution under capitalism continues, it may well be the DISAPPEARANCE of labor that we face.
Initially, it was unskilled labor that was eliminated. And one of the reasons why Black or Latino laborers face such high unemployment, even before the reat of the nation, is due to the fact that the racial caste system kept them disproportionately locked into that level of the economy. But now the elimination fo labor is moving up the scale, destroying the livelihoods of middle class professional people as well.
Actually, the disappearance of labor has a potentially positive side. Under more democratic conditions it could mean greater leisure (the basis of freedom and culture) for ORDINARY people. Such leisure and freedom has historically only been available to the elites. But under capitalism, and elitist class system like all others, the disappaerrance of labor means economic ruin. Moreover, to defend its privileges while ruining the masses the 1% must erode our civil liberties as well. For eventually the people will resist--the global Occupy insurgencies and labor uprisings being perhaps mere a foreshadowing of things to come.
Without economic democracy we cannot sustain political democracy.(Civil liberties are increasingly under attack under BOTH Republican and Democratic administrations).
Economic ruin and political tyranny--both already under way--spells a future of barbarism.
KIP

San Francisco, CA

#82 Mar 4, 2013
Capitalism is good, because it breeds competition. Everybody wants to be on top. Capitalism inspires novelty. From the best singers and dancers to athletes, to the best scientists and engineers -- Capitalism gives them more to shoot for. Capitalism inspires design and form. It allows the freedom to create and become unlike any other system.
holycrap

Memphis, TN

#83 Mar 4, 2013
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
You apparently didn't understand my analysis.
The question you ask yourself is whether your analysis is even worthy of discussion. Only you can answer that.
Meaning do you even understand your analysis.(no offense).
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
Revolutionizations of the instruments of production has always been a part of capitalism, more so than in any previous social order. But previously the results were labor saving devices which revolutionized social and economic life.
Human labor produced those earlier technologies as well.
Human labor produces ALL technology. What you are arguing is the TYPE of labor used. Which is a false argument under capitalism
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
HUman labor under capitalism has craated the new LABOR REPLACING devices.
There is no such thing as labor replacing devices. The TYPE of labor needed does change as technology changes.
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
This portends not simply the change in labor--as in earlier changes from agricultural production by peasant cultivators to industrial production by urban and industrial workers. It carries the prospects of the elimination of labor as such.
ha! Labor can never be replaced. EVER.
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
We've already seen indications of that, and some people foresaw this development as far back as the 1950s &60s when they were talking about automation.
As the progress of this revolution under capitalism continues, it may well be the DISAPPEARANCE of labor that we face.
Again, labor can never be replaced under capitalism. One must either keep up with the changes in the TYPE of labor OR not.
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
Initially, it was unskilled labor that was eliminated. And one of the reasons why Black or Latino laborers face such high unemployment, even before the reat of the nation, is due to the fact that the racial caste system kept them disproportionately locked into that level of the economy.
So it was because of the racist system which kept them out of ways to keep up with the changes in capitalism. It wasn't the change in the TYPE of labor needed which caused the problem.
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
But now the elimination fo labor is moving up the scale, destroying the livelihoods of middle class professional people as well.
Labor changes effect everyone; not just the poor. Always been this way, always will be this way under capitalism.
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, the disappearance of labor has a potentially positive side.
There is no disappearance of labor.
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
Under more democratic conditions it could mean greater leisure (the basis of freedom and culture) for ORDINARY people. Such leisure and freedom has historically only been available to the elites.
Nonsense! All of us have leisure time because of the workforce laws which ensure this. How much time we have depends on our own abilities and capabilities under capitalism.
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
But under capitalism, and elitist class system like all others, the disappaerrance of labor means economic ruin. Moreover, to defend its privileges while ruining the masses the 1% must erode our civil liberties as well. For eventually the people will resist--the global Occupy insurgencies and labor uprisings being perhaps mere a foreshadowing of things to come.
We must have these things. We must have resistance in the never ending quest to balance capitalism. Again, these are good problems to have no matter how painful.
holycrap

Memphis, TN

#84 Mar 4, 2013
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>

Without economic democracy we cannot sustain political democracy.(Civil liberties are increasingly under attack under BOTH Republican and Democratic administrations).
--spells a future of barbarism.
Key word LIBERTY. Civil liberties MUST be open for fluctuation in order to protect the nation. The battle on the need and width for the time should ALWAYS be. This is what should happen sir.
holycrap

Memphis, TN

#85 Mar 4, 2013
KIP wrote:
Capitalism is good, because it breeds competition. Everybody wants to be on top. Capitalism inspires novelty. From the best singers and dancers to athletes, to the best scientists and engineers -- Capitalism gives them more to shoot for. Capitalism inspires design and form. It allows the freedom to create and become unlike any other system.
Pretty much agree. I don't however think everyone wants to be on top. Most people though just don't want to be on the bottom, hence the middle. So that in/of itself means capitalism is good. It gives people the best chance any form of government ever has of being at whatever level they want.
holycrap

Powell, OH

#86 Mar 4, 2013
Cogito where are you dear?

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Level 8

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#87 Mar 5, 2013
holycrap wrote:
<quoted text> The question you ask yourself is whether your analysis is even worthy of discussion. Only you can answer that.
Meaning do you even understand your analysis.(no offense).
<quoted text> Human labor produces ALL technology. What you are arguing is the TYPE of labor used. Which is a false argument under capitalism
<quoted text> There is no such thing as labor replacing devices. The TYPE of labor needed does change as technology changes.
<quoted text> ha! Labor can never be replaced. EVER.
<quoted text> Again, labor can never be replaced under capitalism. One must either keep up with the changes in the TYPE of labor OR not.
<quoted text> So it was because of the racist system which kept them out of ways to keep up with the changes in capitalism. It wasn't the change in the TYPE of labor needed which caused the problem.
<quoted text> Labor changes effect everyone; not just the poor. Always been this way, always will be this way under capitalism.
<quoted text> There is no disappearance of labor.
<quoted text> Nonsense! All of us have leisure time because of the workforce laws which ensure this. How much time we have depends on our own abilities and capabilities under capitalism.
<quoted text> We must have these things. We must have resistance in the never ending quest to balance capitalism. Again, these are good problems to have no matter how painful.
I'm not in the habit of posting nonsense. If it came from me it has substance. And there's quite a bit of scholarly study to support my analysis. Sorry you missed it. Labor is disappearing. That's not simply a matter of opinion. There have even been studies of this. No, it has disappeared completely. But it is vanishing because electronic capitalism has less and less need for workers. Again, numerous studies have shown that the eight hour day has been disappearing. People are commonly working 60 and 70 weeks. Studies show that Americans are working harder for less today than tney did forty or fifty years ago. We also worker harder than most peoople in other industrialized countries; and ther eis probably no place where unregulated capitalism holds more sway than in the USA. Also capitalism has been deskilling labor for decades. People with skills or "capacities" are no longer secure against economic ruin. In the 1960s, almost everyone with a high school diploma could get a job. Today not even an advanced academic degree offers any guarantees.
Capitalism is destroying civilization as the 1% and their political representatives undermine civil liberties in preparation for the corporate fascist state. They must be stopped--by insuurrection (preferably nonviolent) if need be.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Level 8

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#88 Mar 5, 2013
holycrap wrote:
<quoted text> Key word LIBERTY. Civil liberties MUST be open for fluctuation in order to protect the nation. The battle on the need and width for the time should ALWAYS be. This is what should happen sir.
The words are FREEDOM, SOCIAL JUSTICE, self-determination--politicall y, economically and culturally. but this can be created only in resistance to capitalism. A community of freedom.

Level 7

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#89 Mar 5, 2013
Brother Savant is correct in his analysis!

NEW TECHNOLOGY AND THE END OF JOBS
Jeremy Rifkin

A technology revolution is fast replacing human beings with machines in virtually every sector and industry in the global economy. Already, millions of workers have been permanently eliminated from the economic process, and whole work categories and job assignments have shrunk, been restructured, or disappeared. Global unemployment has now reached its highest level since the great depression of the 1930s. More than 800 million human beings are now unemployed or underemployed in the world. That figure is likely to rise sharply between now and the turn of the century as millions of new entrants into the workforce find themselves without jobs.

Corporate leaders and mainstream economists tell us that the rising unemployment figures represent short-term "adjustments" to powerful market-driven forces that are speeding the global economy in a new direction. They hold out the promise of an exciting new world of high-tech automated production, booming global commerce, and unprecedented material abundance. Millions of working people remain sceptical. In the United States, Fortune magazine found that corporations are eliminating more than 2 million jobs annually. While some new jobs are being created in the US economy, they are in the low-paying sectors and are usually temporary.

This pattern is occurring throughout the industrialised world. Even developing nations are facing increasing technological unemployment as transnational companies build state-of-the-art high-tech production facilities, letting go millions of cheap labourers who can no longer compete with the cost efficiency, quality control, and speed of delivery achieved by automated manufacturing.

With current surveys showing that less than five percent of companies around the world have even begun the transition to the new machine culture, massive unemployment of a kind never before experienced seems all but inevitable in the coming decades. Reflecting on the significance of the transition taking place, the distinguished Nobel laureate economist Wasilly Leontief warned that with the introduction of increasingly sophisticated computers, "The role of humans as the most important factor of production is bound to diminish in the same way that the role of horses in agricultural production was first diminished and then eliminated by the introduction of tractors."

In all three key employment sectors - agriculture, manufacturing, and services, machines are quickly replacing human labour and promise an economy of near automated production by the mid-decades of the twenty-first century.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Level 8

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#90 Mar 5, 2013
Cogito2 wrote:
Brother Savant is correct in his analysis!
NEW TECHNOLOGY AND THE END OF JOBS
Jeremy Rifkin
A technology revolution is fast replacing human beings with machines in virtually every sector and industry in the global economy. Already, millions of workers have been permanently eliminated from the economic process, and whole work categories and job assignments have shrunk, been restructured, or disappeared. Global unemployment has now reached its highest level since the great depression of the 1930s. More than 800 million human beings are now unemployed or underemployed in the world. That figure is likely to rise sharply between now and the turn of the century as millions of new entrants into the workforce find themselves without jobs.
Corporate leaders and mainstream economists tell us that the rising unemployment figures represent short-term "adjustments" to powerful market-driven forces that are speeding the global economy in a new direction. They hold out the promise of an exciting new world of high-tech automated production, booming global commerce, and unprecedented material abundance. Millions of working people remain sceptical. In the United States, Fortune magazine found that corporations are eliminating more than 2 million jobs annually. While some new jobs are being created in the US economy, they are in the low-paying sectors and are usually temporary.
This pattern is occurring throughout the industrialised world. Even developing nations are facing increasing technological unemployment as transnational companies build state-of-the-art high-tech production facilities, letting go millions of cheap labourers who can no longer compete with the cost efficiency, quality control, and speed of delivery achieved by automated manufacturing.
With current surveys showing that less than five percent of companies around the world have even begun the transition to the new machine culture, massive unemployment of a kind never before experienced seems all but inevitable in the coming decades. Reflecting on the significance of the transition taking place, the distinguished Nobel laureate economist Wasilly Leontief warned that with the introduction of increasingly sophisticated computers, "The role of humans as the most important factor of production is bound to diminish in the same way that the role of horses in agricultural production was first diminished and then eliminated by the introduction of tractors."
In all three key employment sectors - agriculture, manufacturing, and services, machines are quickly replacing human labour and promise an economy of near automated production by the mid-decades of the twenty-first century.
Jeremy Rifkin isn's the only one who has been writing about this.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

African-American Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
As I type this.... 3 min LMR 1
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min Reality Check 1,601,115
News On Twitter, Trump accuses blacks of racism thre... 9 min youll shoot your ... 130
Thank You Mr. Obama! 9 min THX Stands a Post 15
Let's play Guess Tamale's bra size! 11 min LMR 4
I wonder where THEY went?... 18 min The Grateful Axe 11
Young ape [email protected] 67 yo woman for 11 hours 21 min THX Stands a Post 2
Do You Believe Whites Are 65% Of The Population? 3 hr Paul 12
Do black men really have larger penises? (Sep '10) 5 hr Wolfman Jenkins 1,575
More from around the web