• neptune@dmv.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Downvotes and yet no comments with criticisms of the link’s arguments.

    • Copernican@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s a book review not an article with an argument to make. The concluding paragraph makes no claims:

      “This book isn’t a book of answers; it is a book of questions and discussion resulting from those questions. The only certainty one might derive when they have finished reading it is that the only chance we have in defeating the ongoing march towards greater catastrophe wrought by human subjugation to capital is to be found in the struggle against capitalism and in organizing that struggle.”

    • quindraco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This relationship between employers and workers (the bourgeoisie and the working class when writ large) is one of the essential elements of capitalism. – article

      Capitalism requires the bourgeosie to exist, since it requires private ownership. But the relationship between them and workers is absolutely fundamentally irrelevant to capitalism, which I suspect the author knows.

  • flossdaily@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m so sick of this nonsense.

    Capitalism is the greatest generator of wealth ever created. The problem isn’t the system generating the wealth. The problem is how we DISTRIBUTE the wealth that has been generated.

    Any solution that doesn’t recognize that is just ignoring the very clear history of economic systems.

    Capitalism sucks, but it’s better than every other economic system ever attempted.

    Let’s fix it with Democratic socialism, not burn it down and become the next USSR.

    • guangming@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Capitalism is the greatest generator of wealth ever created

      I feel like when making that “calculation”, you’ve forgotten to figure in the complete and utter destruction of the biosphere, the impending losses due to climate change, the cost in human lives and well-being and dignity of enslavement, exploitation, and so on.

      • flossdaily@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not, though.

        Your conflating an economic system with a lack of regulation. There’s no reason capitalism can’t be regulated properly. The New Deal showed us that it has been in the past.

    • nutsack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Capitalism sucks, but it’s better than every other economic system ever attempted.

      this is my favorite argument against thinking about alternatives because it’s so common and is complete nonsense. there’s plenty of room for improvement, and it isn’t as though “the ussr” is the only alternative.

    • TokenBoomer@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You do realize Democratic Socialism would eliminate capitalism? Or do you mean market socialism? Or Social Democracy?

      • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Social democracies actually do have capitalism. Sweden for instance has many corporations that exist and are highly successful, while the rest of the economic system has some socialist attributes.

            • TokenBoomer@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              America is a mixed economy. We have social security, Medicare, etc. it’s already a social democracy. So you just want more of it. The problem is capitalism always corrupts it because the for profit model makes greed the priority. That’s why some want to get rid of that impetus. They want a planned economy that doesn’t operate on scarcity.

          • flossdaily@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s absolutely what I’m advocating for.

            Keep capitalism. Allow people to become rich. Use the promise of money to fuel innovation and labor.

            … but, after the wealth is generated, we use an extremely aggressive, progressive tax system to functionally call wealth at some level that fuels ambition, but recognized that the majority of that vast wealth was generated by the workers.

            For example, Bill Gates at one point was with 80 BILLION dollars. Can anyone say with a straight face that back when he was working out of a garage, he would have been any less motivated if he knew he could get (only?!) 50 million dollars?

            Of course not. That’s a fortune… That’s all your material needs met for your whole life, and a great inheritance to leave for your family. So why not ramp up all taxes, exponentially, forn income and wealth beyond $50m?

            The innovations would be the same, the companies would be the same, but either by taxes or by salaries or stock options, the WORKERS would have shared in that 80 BILLION that Gates hoarded.

            • Stinkywinks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Does wealth really fuel ambition? Id feel like eventually it would just become a growing number in an account. I think a lot of people on top want power but I believe the innovators are fueled by creativity and curiosity. Maybe some jobs are useless. Do we need 10000 fast food choices? Do we need 10000 different stupid apps? Do we need to constantly grow like a virus, destroying the planet and anything that stops our growth? Enslaving people in meaningless jobs to keep the machine growing.

              • flossdaily@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                The ability to get acquire wealth ABSOLUTELY fuels ambition. The concept that working harder and smarter will yield financial rewards? It’s driven more innovation than anything else in history.

                Creativity, discovery, and problem solving are fun… but taking an new idea and turning into something useful… That’s MOSTLY drudgery, and very expensive in both time and money. The financial rewards at the end of the journey are what fuel people and institutions.

                • Stinkywinks@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Sure not starving to death and living a comfortable life, but I’d say there’s a limit to most. What is it for you? The number in the account, all the useless materialism, or the power of being in charge of everything and everyone you own? I don’t think any of the reasons is a good way to live, and I doubt most even want to live that way. We don’t need to be mindless hoarders.

    • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yep. Social democracy for the win.

      Capitalism should be allowed to exist within the narrow confines of a sandbox. Its products should be equally distributed and it should be heavily regulated to prevent the creation of the Uber wealthy and extreme income inequity.

      That’s just my opinion for whatever the fuck that’s worth.

    • TheMage@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Well - who decides how wealth is “distributed”? How much does the person that generated the wealth get to keep? Who decides what gets spent on what? I agree with you in principle here and I am sick of anti-capitalists whiners. But, when I hear “distribute”…I get nervous because who is in charge of that? Like politicians? eeeeewwww.

      • flossdaily@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago
        1. The people decide. Through there elective representatives.

        2. This whole post is about an awareness that the “person” generating the wealth is actually hundreds of thousands of people generating the wealth.

        Bill Gates didn’t generate 80 billion dollars. He just positioned himself in manner to that allowed him to hoard 80 billion dollars in wealth generated by countless software engineers and other workers.

        1. I don’t understand being squeamish about ANYONE trying to redistribute wealth. Right now there’s like 3 people who have as much wealth as the bottom HALF of Americans (~150,000,000 people). The situation is beyond ridiculous.
        • TheMage@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          So - the elected representatives means the “usual” politicians? See, the problem is that means we are right where we are now with zillions of dollars being pissed away on “stuff” that a lot of us disagree with. I dont disagree that wealth is too accumulated up top, but I disagree that someone like gets to decide. And, if they are elected, that means those that fund their campaigns get more “say” than anyone else does.

          So, instead of taxes and wealth confiscation, we encourage businesses to pay more through tax relief that has to go directly to payroll? Maybe make it so a certain % of profits must be used for raises and bonuses? Stuff like that sounds better to me than some Washington boob deciding that money Ive earned out to be spent on xxxxx pet project.

            • TheMage@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Love to get money out of politics but politics sort of is money. It will always be driven by money. Sucks.

              • Stinkywinks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                It doesn’t have to be. We can have fair elections where every candidate gets the same exposure via a public fund specifically for elections. Outlaw lobbying and pacs and have every candidate just debate/speak on stream

      • wahming@monyet.cc
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re perfectly fitting the stereotype of the ‘temporarily embarrassed billionaire’.