Is capitalism ruining society or lifting it up? Vote now and let your voice be heard!
✍️ Share your thoughts in the comments, but remember to keep it civil, no matter how heated the debate gets! Let's hear your opinions!
Yes, capitalism is the engine of progress that has created wealth and improved lives around the globe.
No, capitalism exploits the masses, concentrates wealth in the hands of a few, and causes social and environmental destruction.
What concerns me at the moment is how experts in the field of AI are aware that they ought to proceed with caution, but capitalism could very well prevent any attempt at being cautious.
What if the opposite is true though? The smartest people in the world dont have the answers yet they seem to want to give control to governments who are made up of the dumbest and most corrupt people. Polititians definitely do not have the answers nor will they be able to stop the "bad guys" from progressing with the technology.
You are basically describing fracking.
Fracking as opposed to what? Deep sea drilling?
@OBEY YOUR MASTERS: We need to limit both types to need as opposed to profit. The supply demand equation is backwards now.
Fracking is def too great a risk. The aquifers it impacts on are too precious to risk on something that the NT govt wants to place a gazillion conditions on, policing hardly any of them,and what is the penalty? How is $$$ going to repair or replace an ancient geologically unique aquifer? What's the fine a few hundred grand and bottled water for the locals?
On that front the CM of NT said trad owners can veto any project they want? Yeah , and I drive better when I'm pissed. The usual plan is divide TOs ,hone in on one and usurp their connection with bribery.
If TOs can veto fracking, why is it even going ahead in beetaloo when none of them want it and have said so for years?
Both sides of govt have sold out to big resources and US gas raiders. Labor 'because' CFMEU and LNP because
mates'. (What brown paper bag ?)
Governments are controlled by corporations
Yes thats a big problem.
These type of questions are hard to answer in forums because almost every individual has a different and objectively under defined a lot of terms from all camps and everytime someone attempts to answer such questions they are riddled with contradictions due to the scale at which they operate that opens up the issue to a lot of subjectivity.
How about the word fair with a definition of not being a (profanity)! Haha
Such a great noob. You don't have kids do you 😛. Sometimes when you're being fair kids conser you a (profanity). So another subjective definition.
Not a full capitalism. A capitalism with elements of socialism is fine, but when you go full blown capitalism, it becomes like America where retail workers get paid based on tips instead of hours they worj and guns running rampant despite all the public shooting that happened.
Australian capitalists - “but only as long as I get to keep my roads, police, fire engines, hospitals, schools, pension, doctors, medicine and tax offsets … Just cancel jobseeker for everyone else”
You’re a socialist pal. Just a selfish one.
I mean - the majority of what you listed are what is referred to as a public good. Things provided to the benefit of society through taxation…
I don't think you proved the point you intended.
"Is capitalism ruining society or lifting it up?"
It's quite literally doing both. Capitalism has been the greatest driver of living standards and prosperity in history BUT, and this is a monumental but, it's come at severe ecological and sociological costs.
Ecological - economies can't grow forever. There are finite resources that this planet can give us and we're vastly exceeding some of them already. When they're gone their gone.
Sociological - capitalism's has almost nothing to say on what makes a good society or a society worth living. Lots of things that make life awesome, like weekends, 40 hour work weeks, holidays, work directly against capitalism.
TL;DR - Capitalism is good, but it needs to be work within the ecological boundaries of this planet,and within the bounds of a 'good society'.
TL;DR - Capitalism is good, but it needs to be work within the ecological boundaries of this planet,and within the bounds of a 'good society
Capitalism demands growth, though. Nature only has so much to give. We can adjust capitalism. Nature can't adjust complete depletion of resources.
We make, we waste, we breed , we want more, all,now.We already can't even keep up with the proper re-use or recycling of shit.
Why does it need to work they way? Wha metric or metrics are you using?
Capitalism + a dash of social safety nets.
Basically how Aus does it. Could be improved with a little tweaking both ways in different areas.
Why is it whenever someone is a hyper socialist they're almost always a lazy unemployed loser?
Why is it whenever someone is a hyper socialist they're almost always a lazy unemployed loser?
If you aren't the one arguing for free handouts, would you bother to be a socialist?
They aren't lazy.
Their idea of work is waking up at 9:45am, having a morning coffee, working from a Starbucks for 2 hours in the field of "content creation" and then talking about how life is crazy busy.
They also want to live in the city, in a very nice apartment, and don't want any inconvenience in life.
Why can't you just lay off and realise this is what is necessary for humans to thrive?
Why are people so concerned about welfare handouts lol. I always find there are larger fish to fry such as the aged pension, super ANALation, childcare subsidies, BIG-ASS construction projects that blow out, etc
Not really directed to you but to everyone if you think your tax pays for welfare only, it actually pays for everything I've mentioned plus sh0t loads of other local and state government infrastructure that some of you actually use regularly!
Soo true. I know 2 online capitalist bashing people who do fu*k all and b!tch all day about how capitalism is trash. Then they start saying socialism is good but they are literally living in their mum's basement doing nothing
Smart capitalism can be successful! There just isn't much of it.
Innovation works in the current capitalism climate albeit shitty because governments provide incentives and tax manipulations (breaks, funds, loopholes, etc). Society would see far more progress if we changed the way governments and taxes ran. We wouldn't be stuck with the 1 tech to fit all solutions. For eg. Lithium type batteries are everywhere only because they're funded the (profanity) out of! Theres virtually no alternative = Thats a side effect of capitalism and minimal innovation.
There's way too many historical references to mention. Innovation that has occurred has through private funding, personal passion and research, and collaboration - none of which has capitalism helped only stifled really
What is Smart capitalism?
Thoughtful, Humane, Innovative, Greed-less and sharing business operations.
That sounds a bit like socalism
Sounds like a hippie commune or co-operative.
@Protractor: Well it ain't. Workers are still workers they just get better pay, wanna be at their job, and actually give a sh0t. People at the top still get more money. But shareholders can go and get f0cked for their 15% dividend every qtr!
@CoreArchitect: You still get something just not this overly inflated amount, and then when the stock price is down your all having a cry and whinge. Shareholders weren't always the first priority for companies and now they are which is 1 reason why capitalism is failing. The best capitalism model is, IMHO, in order of most important to least (basic eg) - tweak all your want
So many businesses fail now cause of greed, miss-management, staff underpayment or abuse, no wonder u get shit service and/or shit product!
Shareholders weren't always the first priority for companies
WTF? Do you have any idea how a business structure operates? 'Shareholders' is just another name for the shared owners, and business owners always cared primarily about profit. It's the exact same reason you go to work (do you actually have a job?), to get paid.
Do you spend money without thinking about value you get in return? Would you buy my iPhone for $15000? Why not unless you also care about value?
You are on a bargain website which would imply that you do care, and that is all a business owner (or shareholder) is doing. Operating a business to gain value. Why is this ok for you to do but not for them?
which is 1 reason why capitalism is failing
By failing you mean wildly successful?
But don't take my word for it, here's the data: https://shortfall.blog/the-deep-optimism-manifesto-262f273c9…
most people would agree here
By 'most people' you mean just you.
Kids today who think things are bad have never been exposed to anything actually bad. This generation was brought up in the most peaceful and prosperous era of human history thanks to capitalism while at the time time claiming to be oppressed. It truly is a comedy.
no wonder u get shit service and/or shit product
I just bought a new 65" MiniLED for $1100 which is one of the most amazing deals I've ever seen. Maybe you need to shop elsewhere
WTF? Do you have any idea how a business structure operates?
Yes I do!
'Shareholders' is just another name for the shared owners, and business owners always cared primarily about profit.
Many business owners care about staying afloat or generating an income - not necessarily about ever-increasing profits. In the last 30-40 years there has been a growing shift towards the top brass getting paid more and shareholders being treated as top priority within the company payout structure no matter the costs! - whether to employees, or the products/services offered.
It's the exact same reason you go to work (do you actually have a job?), to get paid.
Thats a narrow-minded view!
Do you spend money without thinking about value you get in return? Would you buy my iPhone for $15000? Why not unless you also care about value?
Its relative to my income - which is none of your business! Product prices are relative to manufacturing quantity (supply and demand), etc
You are on a bargain website which would imply that you do care, and that is all a business owner (or shareholder) is doing.
I'm on a bargin website to pick up on rare occasions a product on the cheap but really for peoples information and insight on products I may be interested in purchasing. I value peoples' knowledge where I might lack it, since I can't be on top of everything.
But don't take my word for it, here's the data: https://shortfall.blog/the-deep-optimism-manifesto-262f273c9…
Read some of that stuff. People in the data business call this selective statistics! Bit of conspiracy theorists crap going on too. Manifestos are usually pump and dumps to me.
Kids today who think things are bad have never been exposed to anything actually bad. This generation was brought up in the most peaceful and prosperous era of human history thanks to capitalism while at the time time claiming to be oppressed. It truly is a comedy.
I wouldn't know anything about that. I do think kids today have many more opportunities than I did, but each until their own how they grow up would determine that. I'm not here to judge that. Did you go through a war? Or perhaps you inherited your mummy and daddy's monies!? I sense resentment..
I just bought a new 65" MiniLED for $1100 which is one of the most amazing deals I've ever seen. Maybe you need to shop elsewhere
Thats relative to you at this point in time. Do you understand economics and how supply and demand work. How is that a deal - lol its a tv - People back in the 90s would have been saying the same thing about cheap 60cm flat screen CRTs. New products costs more and then they become cheaper the more people purchase it - there are limits though.
Yes I do!
Well you say that and then you say…
Many business owners care about
Please post your survey results that show this. I've worked in a few businesses, I've never ever heard any business ever reflect this view.
staying afloat or generating an income - not necessarily about ever-increasing profits.
Profits are income. No profit = no income. Everyone goes to work to get an income ie profit.
This is the part you seem to be stuck on. When you do work you expect income. A 'business' is exactly the same as you just with more people involved.
In the last 30-40 years there has been a growing shift
I suggest you read a book or two. I'll give you some starters: Vanderbilt, Rockefeller, Carnegie, Ford… None of this is new. No shift, everyone always does anything for personal gain. Always has, always will. Once you grasp this, the world will make a lot more sense.
The only thing that has shifted recently is that now with social media, more and more ignorant people get a louder voice. So they ignorantly shout they they have it worse off, when they actually have it better off. And people who lack basic critical thinking skills confuse these loud ignorant voices with reality.
The best way to separate these ignorant opinions is with data
Thats a narrow-minded view!
Whatever you call it, the fact remains that many, many more people, multiple billions) are better off now than at any time in history due to free markets
I value peoples' knowledge where I might lack it,
And here I am to give you some…
People in the data business call this selective statistics
Do they? I'm in the data business, I've never heard that phrase. Maybe you are confusing 'data business' with 'my head'?
Statistics can have bias, but that has to be demonstrated, not just brushed aside with sweeping phrases like this. Which specific datasets provided did you feel were not accurate and why. Please give detail.
Manifestos are usually pump and dumps to me.
I think we're learning that what you think has no correlation to reality…
Did you go through a war?
I actually have, have you? My father, grandfather and great grandfather were all in majors wars, and I was raised on a military base in Asia during Vietnam so got to see the horrors of it first hand. Thousands and thousands of Vietnamese refugees escaping by any means they could with only the shirts on their back, some not even with that. Do you think whatever hurdles you face today are worse than all that?
I suggest you read The Killing Fields and then tell me how bad you have it.
Or perhaps you inherited your mummy and daddy's monies!?
Yet again your opinion has no correlation to reality…
I sense resentment..
Pro tip: Maybe rely less on what you feel and more on the facts…
Do you understand economics and how supply and demand work.
Yes, do you? I did a couple of economics papers as part of my degree. Which specific bits would you like help with?
How is that a deal
Because the item has far more value than what I paid for it, the literal definition of a good deal.
People back in the 90s would have been saying the same thing about cheap 60cm flat screen CRTs.
That's right, now see if you can join the dot as to how that happens… I'll give you a hint, it starts with a C and ends in apitalism…
New products costs more and then they become cheaper
Thanks to free markets, now do you understand why capitalism is so good. Genuine profit driven competition operating in free markets continue to innovate and drive down prices making things cheaper over time, meaning more people benefit. If business owners did not seek profit they would have no need to innovate, and we'd all be stuck with tiny CRT TV's that cost $3000.
Thank you capitalism for giving us all the opportunity at a better life!
@cobknob: I'm uncertain if that makes any sense. You come across a little confused.
You can't dictate priorities in the free market. Competition does that.
You're wrong in your reasons why businesses fail. Sure, some fail because of those reasons - but some thrive - it depends on multiple variables.
It would be easy that Apple is a greedy company - charging multiple thousands of dollars for a phone that slave labour in China manufactures and the materials for which are mined by African-kid-slaves. But it's doubtful that Apple is going to "fail" any time soon.
So, that's my point - your whole rhetoric seems to be built on a shaky foundation.
@CoreArchitect: Define smart. It certainly doesn't equal (! =) fail. That would be closer to dumb or stupid. Smart capitalism would be extracting maximum value and not at the extent of stability, or negatively impacting business products or services, employees, etc
Some maybe my opinion. But common sense has never crossed paths with capitalism today.
This is about what I expected from OzB. Keep in mind that the demographic on these forums are predominately late 20s/early 30s men and anecdotally with higher than average incomes.
Statistically speaking,this community isn't likely to have a dog in the race,so to speak,in supporting socialism,are effectively shielded from many of the cultural/social harms of capitalism and isn't young enough to be overtly progressive.
As someone who's Gen Z (along with being a woman and a few letters of the alphabet soup),I've seen much more radical support for mass socialism reform from my peers.
This support of socialism from your peers stems from never having lived in a socialist country and the fact its been over 80 years since the west fought a war against socialism. Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Its just sad that rather than learning from the mistakes of History they seem to want to make them over and over again.
Its very easy to be a socialist in a free country however you will never have freedom in a socialist country.
With Socialism .. you eventually run out of spending other people's money.
I wouldn't so casually establish causation like that. There could be a million other things that explains their support :)
It's also interesting that you equate capitalism with being "free" and socialism with not (?)
I also do question the validity of "spending other people's money" depending on what exactly we're talking about. Is this about redistributive policies like welfare,taxation and public services? If so I hardly think it's fair to equate this to being in a "socialist country" .
Because the only people that support Socialism are the ones that never lived in or through it.
Lack of freedom in Socialism is also why you see large numbers of people fleeing socialist countries for capitalist countries yet never anyone moving to a socialist country.
Give me an example of one Socialist country where its people are free to buy their own home and start their own business and have the choice of what they can buy?
Were do you think welfare comes from? It is all from taxation of other people's/ corporation / businesses money.
Were do you think welfare comes from? It is all from taxation of other people's/ corporation / businesses money.
Well technically speaking it doesn't have to be anyone's money. QE exists (with it's own issues) and has been rather popular during covid if you didn't notice. Just pointing out the issue with this concept
Lack of freedom in Socialism is also why you see large numbers of people fleeing socialist countries for capitalist countries yet never anyone moving to a socialist country.
Also arguably lots of reasons for this too lol.
Give me an example of one Socialist country where its people are free to buy their own home and start their own business and have the choice of what they can buy?
Pretty narrow definition of freedom. In a sense you're not free to do lots of things as well
Anyways I just wanted to point out how welfare doesn't equate to a "socialist country" in the sense that you're using the phrase so it's not very helpful,or concise,to lump them in. I hope you have a good rest of the night,I wont be replying anymore :)
@Talsek: lol borrowing money for social welfare programs is even worse ..
a) you will cause inflation by increasing the money supply with no actual productivity improvement
b) the debt cause by borrowing for social welfare will have repayment consequences costing you future repayments that can't go to anything productive.
@jazinger23: https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/nobel-laureate-lauds…
THE Nobel Prize-winning US economist, Joseph Stiglitz, has described the Rudd government's stimulus package as ''one of the most impressive economic policies I've seen, ever''.
…
The cash payments were focussed at people on modest incomes – families, veterans, pensioners and carers – as they were most likely to spend quickly and the economy growing. According to Deutsche Bank, the stimulus payments boosted retail sales by $7.5 billion and helped save about 115,000 jobs in early 2009, including 40,000 jobs in retail. Retail trade in groceries, restaurants, household goods and clothing all trended up every month in 2009.
https://www.finity.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/An-Econ…
Excuse me if I take the advice of someone who got a Nobel Prize in economics over you.
@deme: I clearly remember the rush to spend the bonus. (Wayne Swan was treasurer?). Funnily enough even the ALP haters took the stash too. Despite all their complaining about the waste.(Note for self , price to forgo principles = $900) That was the epoch of Strayas first big TV acquistion wave.
@deme: We are still paying the interest on those policies and ideas since 2009. Short term gain .. long term pain
Government debt has ballooned since that time and so has private debt.
The low interest rates we had from 2009 till 2022 has fuelled cheap money being pumped into housing and the stock market.
Now with global interest rates going up .. the cost of all of that debt is also ballooning .. Government debt is costing tax payers18 Billion in interest repayments this financial year, $20 billion estimated next year. Debt is the second largest cost to the budget behind the NDIS.
Our kids and grandthings will surely thank us for this.
We are still paying the interest on those policies and ideas since 2009. Short term gain .. long term pain
There’s no plan to pay it off (like most developed countries countries) and to keep servicing the debt,we rely on economic growth. Last I checked we were in an average debt ratio of ~99% GDP amongst all countries (?).
You can see why this is unsustainable and really the idea of ‘paying it off’ is unrealistic. Maybe your kids and grandkids might thank you for economic reform instead ;)
Also there’s a reason the stimulus package in 2008-9 was positively regarded. Iirc just the growth in the economy alone ( when most other developed economies were contracting) offset the package several times over. Not to mention a lot of it was in infrastructure,so not just a one off boost to productivity
Government debt has ballooned since that time and so has private debt.
Liberals doubled the debt
@deme: Did Professor Stiglitz mention how and when we would pay back all of the money borrowed for 2009 stimulus and all other deficits since then? Sounds like modern monetary policy is all about spending money you don't have and kicking the repayment can down the road?
Sounds like modern monetary policy is all about spending money you don't have and kicking the repayment can down the road?
That’s called fiscal policy lol
It’s become very apparent you’re just arguing on rhetoric (:
@Talsek: That same fiscal policy of continually borrowing to spend money you dont have will come back to bite future generations in a big way. Look at portugal, greece, ireland and spain how their economies are handling more and more crippling debt levels.
@jazinger23: I notice that you never acknowledge it when someone actually makes a point you can't refute
It was a mistake coming back to this thread. Wont be replying again lol (:
@Talsek: I upvote people's posts i agree with ..Why would i just type "i agree" to other people's posts? Thats just wasting a post for no reason
Excuse me if I take the advice of someone who got a Nobel Prize in economics over you.
Stiglitz is a Keynesian economist, Friedman was from the Chicago school, both Nobel prize winners, both with conflicting economic views.
How do you decided which is correct?
Wait until a certain percentage of them are broke and in the gutters, and got no where to go and are crying for help lol. I know wat I'd be saying - had your chance and burnt it!
That's a problem.
This is literally a consoom forum on a consoom website lol
Both statements are true.
I don't support Capitalism as it currently is, and even though I contribute to and perpetuate its ideological goals daily simply by going to work to keep a roof over my family's head, I do believe that you should be able to freely critique the current systems in the spirit of improving lives.
Outside of some extremely lucky entrepreneurial outliers, It's not hard to see why and how the current Capitalist system benefits only a privileged few. And I think the world has no positive future without Socialism, or at the very least; a form of human-centered Capitalism.
This of course requires drastic social ideological change: Humans can be greedy, inconsiderate, mean-spirited, overly competitive, and ultimately fear vulnerability and change: These values are fundamentally incompatible sustainability and stability.
Human wellbeing should be the central goal of any economy, rather than maximizing profits or GDP growth; and it starts by implementing policies that prioritize that wellbeing, including measures like a UBI, healthcare reform, progressive taxation, and investment in education and infrastructure.
Companies need to be held accountable for their impact on society and the environment. This can be achieved through regulations, incentives for ethical behavior, and greater transparency in business practices.
Innovation and entrepreneurship should continue to be encouraged, even more so than it is now; but not at the expense of social welfare or environmental sustainability… Policies that support startups and small businesses, while promoting sustainable and ethical practices are fundamental.
We need to change social norms, and guide people towards greater empathy, collaboration, and social responsibility: Education, media campaigns and community-building incentives and initiatives help guide people to join together.
Empower workers and the surrounding communities by educating them on collective bargaining, democratic workplaces and community organization. Economic benefits are to be distributed more equitably than they are now, and workers should have a say in the operation and macroeconomics in the companies they contribute labour to.
Negged for preaching the truth. Pretty typical.
Negged for preaching the truth. Pretty typical.
I didn't neg you but your opinion and 'the truth' are not the same thing.
It's not hard to see why and how the current Capitalist system benefits only a privileged few
This statement contradicts all he data:
https://shortfall.blog/the-deep-optimism-manifesto-262f273c9…
We all live in the most peaceful and prosperous times in human history thanks to free trade, but socialists are happy to burn this progress to the ground because they can't afford to buy a house straight out of school in a capital city? Entitlement much?
You are on a website that celebrates the benefits of capitalism everyday, this opinion seems to be severely detached from reality.
Human wellbeing should be the central goal of any economy
The problem is that every time this has been tried it ended in mass death. So rather than fight nature (ie instinctive competition) we need a system that works with it, ie freer markets and trading.
including measures like…
All require someone else to pay for them. And in order to pay for them you need money, and the best system for producing wealth is free markets.
If you would like a real word comparison, go visit any of socialist economies and see how you like that instead. Ive been to a few and it's not pretty.
I entirely agree with you. You demolished all those points really well. Especially "human wellbeing should be" blah blah. What a crock of trash. What @monky and similar call empathy for human well-being is so convoluted. They will always find some injustice somewhere. Always!
HAHAH PLAY THE SIGMA YOUTUBE MUSIC LE EPIC REDDIT GOLD TAKE MY BEN SHAPIRO TOKENS SER
(I am commenting on your post derisively)
I am commenting on your post derisively
Jokes are always funnier when you explain them.
Could you explain another so that we my laugh some more?
Textbook cope.
socialists are happy to burn this progress to the ground
Strawman: I don't advocate for the destruction of any modern infrastructure, technology or cultural achievement; after all, these are achievements built with the blood and sweat of slave labor: A great disrespect to those who weren't allowed reap the benefits of the capitalist society they were forced to build.
Simply put, I advocate for democracy: Capitalism was great for many lucky enough to benefit from it, nobody can deny that. But now capitalism isn't needed, especially since continual growth isn't possible.
Since you don't have a solution to this other than 'Just trust capitalists!', and your whole, emotionally-charged argument is built on social normativity, you honestly just end up coming off as having a weirdly gross and distorted outlook on what should be basic humanity and empathy.
You are on a website that celebrates the benefits of capitalism everyday
"And yet your participate in society. Curious! I am very intelligent."
The problem is that every time this has been tried it ended in mass death.
Woah did Sky News finally report on the gulags and mass graves in Norway, Finland and Sweden?
All of those poor socialist children in their free schools, suffering without vending machines to dispense $5 sugarwater to them during the hours there isn't an active shooter patrolling the hallways… How miserable! Truly they are the real slaves…
All require someone else to pay for them. And in order to pay for them you need money, and the best system for producing wealth is free markets.
"Welcome to 1st-Amendment's TED talk on le epic Reddit trickle-down economics: It works for me!"
If you ride it any harder they'll surely raise your wages, or at least leave the cage door open while you work!
So yeah anyway I win, you lose, and I'm also taller than you. 🍌
Strawman: I don't advocate for the destruction of any…
It's not a strawman you just missed the point. Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro etc also didn't advocate for that either, but it was the end result. Once you start trying to control people to achieve some sort of socialist utopian 'equal outcome', the only way to maintain that is via stricter and stricter control until people are being locked up and murdered for trivial reasons. We don't have to guess at this, it's been tried multiple times and ended the same way every time.
We got to see this first hand with Covid. First it was recommendations, then it was instruction, then it by force of law, then regular people minding their own business were being arrested and pepper sprayed and half the population were encouraging more of it. This is exactly how it played out in the Soviet Union, Communist China, Nazi Germany, Cuba, Cambodia etc etc.
There is a formula for tyranny and it always starts with good intentions…
Learn from history's mistakes or be doomed to repeat them.
these are achievements built with the blood and sweat of slave labor
I own a business, I don't own any slaves. Does the place you work own slaves? Pretty sure that is illegal… and ironically it was made illegal by free marketeers… Another capitalist win!
Simply put, I advocate for democracy
You're confusing different concepts here. But a freer market is more democratic since each individual has more freedom to choose how they spend their own money.
Capitalism was great for many lucky enough to benefit from it, nobody can deny that. But now capitalism isn't needed, especially since continual growth isn't possible.
Freedom to spend your own money isn't needed becasue… reasons? Extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof.
Since you don't have a solution to this other than 'Just trust capitalists!'
Show me where I said that. Since you used the word strawman you should know what it means…
and your whole, emotionally-charged argument is built on social normativity
No, it's built on data like this: https://shortfall.blog/the-deep-optimism-manifesto-262f273c9…
If you have a better suggestion supported by data then by all means post it. But don't give us your crazy already-tried-and-failed ideas and suggest we replace our working system with that.
you honestly just end up coming off as having a weirdly gross and distorted outlook on what should be basic humanity and empathy
Sounds like an emotionally-charged argument. Your projection skills are amazing…
Capitalism is responsible for lifting more people out of poverty and oppression than anything else while socialism is responsible for more death and destruction. Who has the most empathy here?
Woah did Sky News finally report on the gulags and mass graves in Norway, Finland and Sweden? All of those poor socialist children
Those are all capitalists economies, here is the data that supports this: https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking
If you scroll to the bottom you will see most of the socialist economies down at the bottom. Laos 147, China is 154, Burma 162, Cuba is 174, Venezuela 175, North Korea 176. And don't just take my word for it, maybe you should go visit some of these places to see how they compare.
trickle-down economics
Your use of the word 'trickle down economics' shows that you have no idea about economics. This is not a thing. The phrase was an attempted slur by left wing morons who don't understand Friedman's Nobel prize winning theory on supply-side economics, then repeated by all the left wing sheep who also have no idea about the basics of economics.
If you want to compare supply-side vs demand-side economics I'll talk, but don't use kindergarten terminology if you want to talk to the adults.
Haha, you contradict yourself far too much to take seriously!
Sorry dude: At the end of the day I'm just too tall and handsome to deal with your obvious cope posting, so obviously I win again 🐒💤
Great job being a job-maker though; I'm sure your employees all really like you!
At the end of the day…
At the end of the day your poorly thought-out ideas couldn't cope with scrutiny and when exposed you ran, like they always do.
le epic Reddit trickle-down economics
It's a bold call assuming he has a job.
@monky: Wow, amazing comeback, insinuating someone is gay on the internet, as well as assuming genders, all in the current year.
@monky: I'm allowed to. Put as much effort into your work as you do in trying to get other peoples money, and maybe you won't have to do so much of the latter.
Better yet, start your own business, and split all the profits equally with your employees.
Norway, Finland and Sweden?
Not socialist countries.
le epic Reddit trickle-down economics
Have you not looked at r/Australia? It's a bunch of people like yourself, wanting other people to give them money.
Lots of closet Commies here.
I wonder if that balances out the not so in the closet neo nazis in victoria?
I mean isn't the term interchangeable with young liberals these days>?
Anything that's not far left is far right neo nazi, haven't you been on social media lately?
Way to call it out
I mean isn't the term interchangeable with young liberals these days?
You are a walking meme:
https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/021/818/hit…
That;s OK.Troll away. Your moniker epitomises your misguided superiority complex.
Exemplifies it, in fact
*Hint, it's overrated /overstated/overinflated.
Is there like a total of 15 of them? :)
LOL, yeah, that is why the security authorities have labelled right wing extremism the number one homegrown threat to our national security. 2 years ago they were not even concerned , almost in *denial ( *it's an Aussie thing) Let me guess the Victorian Libs are making stuff up?
@Protractor: I'm not sure anyone labelling anything, especially the security authorities makes my prior assertion wrong.
I don't think it's a problem at the level of what is indicated.
@CoreArchitect: There are at least 30 cells on the govts RADAR, listed and growing. Actual numbers ? I have no idea. Most would be underground.
A problem is a problem
@Protractor: I don't think I fully understand, mate. What are the specifics of this problem? That they occasionally run and protest against immigration? Or wave their arms around doing silly solutes?
Lets give fascism a whirl, who;s with me?
Bring back Kennett? Onion Muncher?
Canavan,Joyce and Taylor would all make great dick-tators
Even crony capitalism is better than communism. But I see western countries becoming more Marxist by the day with their woke agendas.
Capitalism has worked well for humanity but that doesn't mean it will continue to.
What concerns me at the moment is how experts in the field of AI are aware that they ought to proceed with caution, but capitalism could very well prevent any attempt at being cautious.