/biz/ - Business & Finance

It isn't

it is not, but it does require regulation

>>616470

Capitalism transcends the good/bad dichotomy, it's too massively complex. To simplify it is to misunderstand it. It has bad aspects, but it's meaningless to say it's simply or inherently "bad".

It's shitty, but better than all other options.

>>616470

Overall the system is fine. But it does need regulation and there are limitations to its merit. Capitalism breaks down when:

Nepotism dominates
There are large entities that can transcend the power of local consumer bases
Similar to above, Monopolies
Lobbyists and companies have more sway over the government and democratic process then the citizens

There are more but those are the major issues that breaks down the capitalist system and slowly transform it into something else.

We have a dominate altruistic moral code in every culture around the world, capitalism is based on selfishness, therefore, even though capitalism works time and time again we go back to systems that don't work because or morality is fucked up.

>>616470
The core concept of capitalism is taking the value of labor that someone else deserves. Successful capitalists are able to do this to an increasingly larger number of people. In a society where people have no choice but to plug themselves into a corporation for their livelihood, that is where freedom ends. Capitalism encourages taking advantage of vulnerable people to the maximum extent. The industrial revolution is the smoking gun about the true nature of capitalism. It's not about selling shit for a profit, it's about leeching off the mass people in the working class.

It is virtually impossible for everyone to escape the corporate system, so a lack of ingenuity/drive/creativity in any individual is not necessarily the problem. It's a larger societal issue.

An American businessman was standing at the pier of a small coastal Mexican village when a small boat with just one fisherman docked. Inside the small boat were several large yellowfin tuna. The American complimented the Mexican on the quality of his fish.

“How long it took you to catch them?” The American asked.

“Only a little while.” The Mexican replied.

“Why don’t you stay out longer and catch more fish?” The American then asked.

“I have enough to support my family’s immediate needs.” The Mexican said.

“But,” The American then asked, “What do you do with the rest of your time?”

The Mexican fisherman said, “I sleep late, fish a little, play with my children, take a siesta with my wife, Maria, stroll into the village each evening where I sip wine and play guitar with my amigos, I have a full and busy life, senor.”


The American scoffed, “I am a Harvard MBA and could help you. You should spend more time fishing and with the proceeds you buy a bigger boat, and with the proceeds from the bigger boat you could buy several boats, eventually you would have a fleet of fishing boats.”

“Instead of selling your catch to a middleman you would sell directly to the consumers, eventually opening your own can factory. You would control the product, processing and distribution. You would need to leave this small coastal fishing village and move to Mexico City, then LA and eventually NYC where you will run your expanding enterprise.”

The Mexican fisherman asked, “But senor, how long will this all take?”

To which the American replied, “15-20 years.”

>>616592
“But what then, senor?”

The American laughed and said, “That’s the best part. When the time is right you would announce an IPO (Initial Public Offering) and sell your company stock to the public and become very rich, you would make millions.”

“Millions, senor? Then what?”

The American said slowly, “Then you would retire. Move to a small coastal fishing village where you would sleep late, fish a little, play with your kids, take a siesta with your wife, stroll to the village in the evenings where you could sip wine and play your guitar with your amigos…”

>>616591
>the value of labor that someone else deserves
>implying
Risk/reward
>>616592
Explains Mexico.

>>616470
The system is great. People are bad

>>616595
What the american should've said is:
Move to a luxurious costal Vila where you could sleep better and harder, play with your kids harder, let them enjoy the life you sacrificed for them, siesta harder with your wife, give back to your community trough charity, sip better wine, play guitar with your amigos all the time not just off work.
A good man is greater with money

>>616598
>>616598
You say that now because we have minimum wage laws. However, in the early 20th century people were paid only enough to continue living, and thus virtually became slaves to the corporation. It is wrong that people make millions and billions of dollars at the expense of the well being of their employees. The increasing pay gap is due to the sheer volume of people forced to work under these corporations. We have anti-trust laws to combat such network effects.

Also, it's not about risk/reward because
1. people in positions of power have an advantage for maintaining power and obtaining more power, so it is less and less a matter of risk for them.
2. See the last point in my post about how it does not apply to working class people, either. Most people are shafted out of what they deserve and a small number of people receive exponentially more than they need directly at the expense of those people.

>>616595

>The American said slowly, “Then you would retire. Move to a small coastal fishing village where you would sleep late, fish a little, play with your kids, take a siesta with your wife, stroll to the village in the evenings where you could sip wine and play your guitar with your amigos…”

and you'd also be a millionaire

also, mexicans are subhumans and deserve to be exploited for the greater good

>>616470
It allows weakling to hoard property with the protection of the state.

In other words, property rights ruin competition: let the strong man own the property he can defend.

>>616470
It forces out value for useless shit.

Things we need:
>more science

Things we don't need:
>more useless consumer shit

>>616470
The biggest flaw with capitalism is the mismatch of information (you can cheat the not all knowing consumer) and by that increase P, if you have a mismatch in information by both consumers and producers, you cannot get an pareto efficient society => das bad nigg.

but the biggest flaw might be that perfect competition is impossible, therefore markets tend to grow towards monopolies which drives down Q and increase P.

Im not saying that capitalism is a bad system, its the best we got, but it is still flawed

>>616474
Capitalism with regulation is actually socialism.

>>616979
Greed = innovation.

>>616988
that depends on the degree of regulation

>>616616
Your entire argument hinges on the fact that you know what's 'wrong' and what's 'right'

>>616552

Capitalism breaks down when:

You have the existence of the "regulations" that you claim are the cure.

Without the regulations nepotism is a disadvantage, large entities can only exist where they have an advantage in providing better services and lobbyists can't lobby for SHIT.

>>617002

lolbertarian pls fuck off

>muh free market
>muh deification of laissez faire

Do free market fags just stick their heads in the sand when they're confronted with actual history of companies fucking the populous over when given free reign?

Do you not fucking remember Teddy Roosevelt's square deal?

Shit, we don't even need to go back in time. Look at what Comcast and Time Warner are doing RIGHT NOW. They've formed perfect monopolies in their respective market and do not compete with each other anywhere in the country due to the nature of internet infrastructure (and due to blatant collusion). Then they dont upgrade their infrastructure with the rest of the western world (why would they? no competition) and charge high rates to practically the entire nation. Then they throttle streaming video services like youtube and netflix (illegally) so that you stay locked in to their cable TV service. Then they lobby congress for anti net neutrality bills so that they'll be able to legally extort the people even more and ruin the internet as we know it forever in the name of profits.

Power companies do the same shit once they get a 100 year city contract, because cities can't multiple companies putting up power lines. Shitty infrastructure, high rates.

Stop living in a fucking dream world. You need some regulation. It definitely does get out of hand and the government mostly incompetent. But you gave to try. A perfectly free market is a fucking joke. The people will get squashed.

>>616470

But it's actually pretty good. A well regulated capitalism is the best economic system for economies where people don't know each other intimately (i.e. family, kibbutzim...).

One caveat is that it rewards people not as much for their contribute to system's efficiency but rather for ability to convince others of their importance and indispensability.
Another problem is that the system only has foresight limited to that of its individual decisionmaking agents, which means that a silly fad can gear entire economy towards bullshit, or that it can be excessively wasteful. But again, there's really no better alternative available - system with more centralised decisionmaking could have more of a strategic vision, but it loses many feedback loops and reacts and changes much more slowly.

>>617002

kek