Capitalism is Opposed to Human Happiness Debate
Date: 07-17-2010, 11:01 AM
I agree that Capitalism seems to be the system that is best suited to accommodate human greed, but this doesn't mean that greed can't drag down the economy in a Capitalist system.
The economic problems that we are currently dealing with are essentially a consequence of greed.
Date: 07-17-2010, 11:23 AM
True, caused by the greed of government and the influence of the greedy on the government. Take the healthcare bill - supported by big insurance. Why because it increases customers and cuts competition. Increased customers from the mandatory insurance part. Cut competition because of the preexisting condidions clause. With that requirement no new companies can come. So the greedy insurance companies used govt to damage the system and increase profit.
Date: 07-17-2010, 12:16 PM
I would add that most of the goods we produce today aren't things we need, so most of that increased production isn't as productive as it would seem.
I don't think that either system would result in people being more or less happy than the other. The only difference, IMO, would be the factors people use to measure their happiness.
Here is the winning comment as far as I am concerned......
Date: 07-17-2010, 12:20 PM
The problem is that capitalism uses government issued privilege to monopolize natural resources and other natural opportunities. This results in diminished opportunity for those of the working class by making them dependant on the owners of privilege. An example:
"If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's ideas were invented and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today…The solution is patenting as much as we can. A future startup with no patents of its own will be forced to pay whatever price the giants choose to impose. That price might be high. Established companies have an interest in excluding future competitors." -- Bill Gates
So, the capitalist Bill Gates uses government issued regulation and privilege to force would be inventors to work for him, either directly or via payment for access to his privilege. It is this privatization of natural opportunities which make capitalism so oppressive; though socialism is even worse. The answer is free markets and the abolishment or taxation of capitalist privilege. This government issued privilege is the source of the capital/labor conflict.
Date: 07-17-2010, 04:14 PM
Sorry for the delay, anyhow...
There are as many forms of Socialism as there are Capitalism. Just like someone saying that Fascism is the only form of Capitalism, it's not necessarily true that Statism or Party Politics are the only form of Socialism. For instance, consider the Levellers from the 1600's of Great Britain, which were in name "good Christians," but in practice, little more than Anarchists and Communists.
Either way, yes, I agree with you that the great vast majority of Socialist governments are failures. I would even go so far to say all of them, but that would ignore that they are preferable according to the amount of personal liberty given to the individual. Of course, that's not much, nor is there a great difference in that from Socialist nation to Socialist nation.
I have only titled my idea Socialism -- I am only arguing that we should reorganize social organization to equalize everyone's bargaining position. So that none would be able to live off of others without contributing, and so that each could enjoy as much as they produced. This can be done through a variety of avenues, but I'm mostly concerned here with proving that human happiness is opposed to systems of economic domination.