Current Events > Capitalism sounds good on paper, the problem is human nature

(+) Yeah! (+)

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

You do realize that capitalists don't actually produce anything, right?

You do realize it doesn't matter because capitalists are the ones who invested in the company, right? You do realize that without investors a company has no source of capital, and therefore the workers wouldn't be able to produce anything, right? You do realize the only reason the workers produced what they produced is because they were instructed to do so by their supervisor, right? Most importantly, you do realize that even workers can also be prone selfishness and greed, right? That last point is key, because if workers can also be selfish then workers can also be incentivized to make their products worse in order to relieve themselves of the additional labor required to make a better product.

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Not an inherent component of socialism and again, you show that you really don't know what socialism is.

It actually is an inherent component of socialism that you, like many socialists are naive to. Socialism ultimately requires State ownership of the means of production for two main reasons. One is because in order for socialism to implemented on a large scale, you would have to make capitalism is illegal. Who enforces laws? Oh yeah, the State. Enforcing the laws banning the evil practice of capitalism alone would require a lot of State oversight to make sure every businesses complies with those laws. The other reason is that without profit, there's no incentive for individuals to invest, and therefore the State has to invest in all of the businesses. It's the same reason why we typically depend on the State to invest in things like public infrastructure; because there's no clear return on investment with things like roads and highways, etc.

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Those are not the options I'm talking about. I'm talking about the the inherent coercion involved when someone is forced to take a shitty job or is forced to give most of their income to their landlord because the only other option is dying homeless on the street. Because under capitalism, there is no incentive to provide for the people who need it most and capitalists realized a long time ago that there's easier and far more unethical ways of making money outside of making good products.

I don't think it's inherently coercive that people have to choose between taking a job or dying. People and all other species have always had to choose between working or dying. If a wild animal doesn't hunt its prey, it doesn't eat and it dies. Ever since humans were in hunter-gatherer societies people have needed to work in the form of hunting and/or scavenging for food in order to survive. It's just the natural way of things that you work or die. For that reason, blaming capitalism for the fact that we have to choose between working or dying makes as much sense as blaming capitalism for the fact that water is wet.

Why is it that with capitalism, worker productivity only ever increases but wages stagnate? Where is the invisible hand to adjust this anomaly?

Capitalism sees companies as people so those profits are more important than human wages.

ModernPost posted...

Why is it that with capitalism, worker productivity only ever increases but wages stagnate? Where is the invisible hand to adjust this anomaly?

It's because Reagan was full of shit, and "Trickle down" nonsense doesn't work. Unless we count the contempt the executive class likes to piss all over their workers.

ModernPost posted...

Why is it that with capitalism, worker productivity only ever increases but wages stagnate? Where is the invisible hand to adjust this anomaly?

First, what solution do YOU propose?

Mike_Stanton posted...

First, what solution do YOU propose?

First? Why do we have to start there?

Mike_Stanton posted...

First, what solution do YOU propose?

I suggest collective ownership of the means of production. And oppression of the capitalist class until such a class no longer exists.

ModernPost posted...

First? Why do we have to start there?

Because it's one thing to identify a problem, but it's another thing to propose a workable solution.

IShall_Run_Amok posted...

I suggest collective ownership of the means of production. And oppression of the capitalist class until such a class no longer exists.

pretty awful idea tbqh

Humans nature being greedy is what capitalism works on.