Capitalism MUST Die ... Eventually

[CaptainHaplo]

I take a few days off to get some sun, and I come back wondering where this board is going - and why we are all in this handbasket????

Seriously - capitalism isn't dead.

Know why? Because those in power rely on it to maintain power. Look at who is getting bailouts. Banks, corporations - the POWERS behind capitalism. Sure the government thinks they can "run" them better - aka healthcare - and you are already seeing the movement by many PRIVATE insurers to lower costs to the consumer to push against it. The fact is - those in power got there because of the 20% - and the 20% is the 20% BECAUSE of capitalism.

Sure this doesn't apply to em all - but lets look at an example. Know why Ford told the government "thanks but no thanks" on the bailout? They know that with the government running the show, their ability to capitalize on their market is hampered. Instead - by telling the government NO - sales of Ford products JUMPED - where GM continued to fall. Think thats coincidence? The smartest of the 20% know that they rely on capitalism to keep them where they are.

The biggest issue with socialism/communism is that its "fo-fairness" - its fake. Those in power always are above the masses they "lead". Corruption in socialist east germany was beyond rampant. Same with communist Russia. Sure its still there in some places - but the capitalist system (even as implimented) created a force that now is irreversable in many of the former Russian satellite states. Many times such things are cyclic, just as economies are - people want more for doing less - and initially they are given it - then they must be given less and less - for doing more and more. When that balance point tips - then the people again recognize the need for a system where their effort is rewarded.

This is why you see the liberal bent of many politicians - promise the masses all you can so they put you in power. But what happens when you must PAY for those promises? You must take from those who put you there. Many middle class people voted left this last election - and they are now slowly beginning to see what the cost of that is. This is the way of society. There is no "middle of the road" - its a pendulum one way or the other - swinging back and forth as the pitfalls of BOTH sides are exposed.

Capitalism won't die, because if it did, there would be no ability for the government to pay for its promises, and thus it would lose its power. To take a smaller picture as a example - smoking is unhealthy - drinking alcohol is unhealthy - does the government stop these things? No - it makes MONEY from them instead via taxation. If you think the government is out to look after your health with all its anti-smoking rhetoric (and make no mistake - that is what it is) - then ask yourself this - if it were not a cash cow for the government - would they even hesitate to ban it? You don't kill a golden goose - no matter how much you scare the public about avian flu....

[FIREWALL]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

I take a few days off to get some sun, and I come back wondering where this board is going - and why we are all in this handbasket????

Seriously - capitalism isn't dead.

Know why? Because those in power rely on it to maintain power. Look at who is getting bailouts. Banks, corporations - the POWERS behind capitalism. Sure the government thinks they can "run" them better - aka healthcare - and you are already seeing the movement by many PRIVATE insurers to lower costs to the consumer to push against it. The fact is - those in power got there because of the 20% - and the 20% is the 20% BECAUSE of capitalism.

Sure this doesn't apply to em all - but lets look at an example. Know why Ford told the government "thanks but no thanks" on the bailout? They know that with the government running the show, their ability to capitalize on their market is hampered. Instead - by telling the government NO - sales of Ford products JUMPED - where GM continued to fall. Think thats coincidence? The smartest of the 20% know that they rely on capitalism to keep them where they are.

The biggest issue with socialism/communism is that its "fo-fairness" - its fake. Those in power always are above the masses they "lead". Corruption in socialist east germany was beyond rampant. Same with communist Russia. Sure its still there in some places - but the capitalist system (even as implimented) created a force that now is irreversable in many of the former Russian satellite states. Many times such things are cyclic, just as economies are - people want more for doing less - and initially they are given it - then they must be given less and less - for doing more and more. When that balance point tips - then the people again recognize the need for a system where their effort is rewarded.

This is why you see the liberal bent of many politicians - promise the masses all you can so they put you in power. But what happens when you must PAY for those promises? You must take from those who put you there. Many middle class people voted left this last election - and they are now slowly beginning to see what the cost of that is. This is the way of society. There is no "middle of the road" - its a pendulum one way or the other - swinging back and forth as the pitfalls of BOTH sides are exposed.

Capitalism won't die, because if it did, there would be no ability for the government to pay for its promises, and thus it would lose its power. To take a smaller picture as a example - smoking is unhealthy - drinking alcohol is unhealthy - does the government stop these things? No - it makes MONEY from them instead via taxation. If you think the government is out to look after your health with all its anti-smoking rhetoric (and make no mistake - that is what it is) - then ask yourself this - if it were not a cash cow for the government - would they even hesitate to ban it? You don't kill a golden goose - no matter how much you scare the public about avian flu....

Excellent Post

[Max2147]

Originally Posted by Aramike

Yeah, this will piss a lot of you off, but here it is ...

... capitalism is doomed to failure, at least in its current sense. Ultimately, I believe that the only hope for economics is a gradual but imminent shift towards a balance between capitalism and socialism, and I have reasons to support this.

First, let's understand what makes capitalism works. That is the inherent neccessity of one individual relying on several others to produce things that he/she needs. That individual produces things that can be traded for a credit (such as a fiat currency) universally accepted for the things he/she requires. The surpluses of that system are known as luxaries, and whole industries are known to be built to accommodate those ideas.

The problem lies in the fact that people are beginning to overcome their own usefulness. Technology is progressing to the point where society is able to support itself with less and less participation of the populace. For instance, 70 years ago it took 10 times the people to cultivate the food needed for a community. Now we are able to create food for far more people with far less resources, creating great wealth for farmers while employing less of their customers ultimately meaning less money to be spent on the food.

Similar events are occurring throughout almost every industry. Technology is outstripping the useful nature of humans while at the same time there are more and more humans available to perform unneeded work.

So, what happens? Returning to the farmer, his riches are only stable while he's using less people to grow food for a higher demand. Now, if you simply let people who haven't found a marketable usefulness suffer, demand is lowered, creating a supply problem. Again, this applies to any industry.

Society needs to understand that, at some point, technology is going to make supply far outweigh demand. The more people who are born (remember, thriving populations expand exponentially) and the greater the technology, the lower percentage of people will be required to be employed in order to support the burgeoning population. At some point, we will achieve a critical mass, as it were, and have to being heavily transistioning society to a more "free socialist" standpoint, like it or not.

Any thoughts?

I think I get what you're saying, but I'm not sure it will lead to socialism.

We've already seen a lot of what you're describing in the US. Manufacturing jobs have dropped off in a huge way, replaced either by technology or by outsourcing. The result hasn't been socialism, it's been a service-based economy.

It used to be that American companies had their blue collar and white collar jobs in the US. Today a lot of the blue collar jobs have gone overseas or been replaced by technology, but the white collar jobs are still in the US, and there are more white collar jobs than before. In the future the blue collar jobs will continue to disappear - that's inevitable. Our hope will be to replace those jobs with more white collar jobs. The key will be education, which will give people the qualifications needed for the white collar jobs.

It's a major oversimplification, but I think that's where the future is going. Most people in advanced nations will have cushy white collar jobs, while robots at home and workers abroad replace the blue collar jobs.

I'm not saying this is all a good thing, but I think it's the way things are going.

[August]

Originally Posted by Max2147

It used to be that American companies had their blue collar and white collar jobs in the US. Today a lot of the blue collar jobs have gone overseas or been replaced by technology, but the white collar jobs are still in the US, and there are more white collar jobs than before. In the future the blue collar jobs will continue to disappear - that's inevitable. Our hope will be to replace those jobs with more white collar jobs. The key will be education, which will give people the qualifications needed for the white collar jobs.

It's a major oversimplification, but I think that's where the future is going. Most people in advanced nations will have cushy white collar jobs, while robots at home and workers abroad replace the blue collar jobs.

I'm not saying this is all a good thing, but I think it's the way things are going.

The whole problem with it is that while there are indeed more white collar jobs than there were before there still aren't nearly enough of them to replace the lost blue collar jobs,... and the population continues to grow,... and now we're starting to see white collar jobs being replaced by technology too. At what point does it become unsustainable?

[FIREWALL]

UFO's will land for a visit in D.C. before capitilism ends in USA.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by Max2147

I think I get what you're saying, but I'm not sure it will lead to socialism.

We've already seen a lot of what you're describing in the US. Manufacturing jobs have dropped off in a huge way, replaced either by technology or by outsourcing. The result hasn't been socialism, it's been a service-based economy.

It used to be that American companies had their blue collar and white collar jobs in the US. Today a lot of the blue collar jobs have gone overseas or been replaced by technology, but the white collar jobs are still in the US, and there are more white collar jobs than before. In the future the blue collar jobs will continue to disappear - that's inevitable. Our hope will be to replace those jobs with more white collar jobs. The key will be education, which will give people the qualifications needed for the white collar jobs.

It's a major oversimplification, but I think that's where the future is going. Most people in advanced nations will have cushy white collar jobs, while robots at home and workers abroad replace the blue collar jobs.

I'm not saying this is all a good thing, but I think it's the way things are going.

August got it exactly right, yet again. Essentially, the point is that the service-based capitalist economy will only go so far as the services are needed. As a result of non-tangible production, you're going to see what is needed provided in greater and greater quantities by technology.

What happens when technology can feed 500 million people, but only 300 million people can afford the food, due to that same technology reducing the need for individuals to be gainfully employed? Are we going to abandon those people, or will social programs step in?

@ Haplo:

Seriously - capitalism isn't dead.

You must've skimmed my original post because that is not at all what I'm saying. I'm talking about the long-term sustainability of capitalism. In fact, I agree that capitalism is a superior system to any other, but I do not believe that it can continue in its current form indefinitely, due to technological advancement.

Certain politically-inclined individuals should make a point to understand that this isn't a thread about ideology. It is meant to be analytical in nature.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by FIREWALL

UFO's will land for a visit in D.C. before capitilism ends in USA.

Heh, have you read the papers recently? (Tongue-in-cheek comment, but still...)