Current Events > Capitalism in a nutshell

(+) Yeah! (+)

don’t hurt people and don’t take their stuff.
---

MakoReizei posted...

don’t hurt people

Since when?
---

...unless you can exploit their labour for profit. then do that.
---

...what
---

Maybe in an ancap fantasy land where everyone gets along. Realistically though, you hurt others to get ahead yourself.

3rd_Best_Master posted...

MakoReizei posted...

don’t hurt people

Since when?

since ever?
---

Ampelas posted...

Maybe in an ancap fantasy land where everyone gets along. Realistically though, you hurt others to get ahead yourself.

Just as stupid as the original post
---

Fuck bitches, make money
---

Capitalism in a nutshell

---

ASithLord7 posted...

Ampelas posted...

Maybe in an ancap fantasy land where everyone gets along. Realistically though, you hurt others to get ahead yourself.

Just as stupid as the original post

How's that stupid? It's the way that capitalism currently functions.

Capitalism is not a system. Capitalism is the lack of a system to keep people from trading their resources freely. The lack of ability to control other people’s actions is why progressives hate it.

Capitalism is a word made up to hide the fact that what it describes is not a system like other economic isms. Even the simplest and most noble utopianisms of the golden age of utopian idealism required people to set it up and make rules for it. Capitalism is not a system in the sense of something put into place, like socialism. It is just what people naturally do when they get together peacefully.

“You do this for me, and I’ll do this for you.”

That’s capitalism.

It’s don’t hurt people and don’t take their stuff.

Even Marx seems to agree that capitalism is not really an ism:

Free competition brings out the inherent laws of capitalist production, in the shape of external coercive laws having power over every individual capitalist.1

That is, while democratic countries do have “external coercive laws” about capitalism, these laws are not the result of experts controlling individuals, but rather are inherent in the nature of individuals, whenever people are allowed to trade what they have for what they want and are encouraged to do so peacefully.

Capitalism is not about forcing people to trade, it’s about letting them safely trade.

What Marx and other ismists don’t seem to have done is take the logic a step further. If the “laws of capitalism“ are imposed on men by their nature, then attempting to replace capitalism with man-made isms will result in natural catastrophes: black markets, corruption, and violence as nature attempts to move around those artificial boundaries.

http://www.hoboes.com/Mimsy/Editorial/bureaucracy-event-horizon/capitalism-not-ism/
---

capitalism and exploitation are the same things.

Ampelas posted...

ASithLord7 posted...

Ampelas posted...

Maybe in an ancap fantasy land where everyone gets along. Realistically though, you hurt others to get ahead yourself.

Just as stupid as the original post

How's that stupid? It's the way that capitalism currently functions.

Who is the business owner down the street hurting by selling their goods?
---

ASithLord7 posted...

Ampelas posted...

ASithLord7 posted...

Ampelas posted...

Maybe in an ancap fantasy land where everyone gets along. Realistically though, you hurt others to get ahead yourself.

Just as stupid as the original post

How's that stupid? It's the way that capitalism currently functions.

Who is the business owner down the street hurting by selling their goods?

Technically they could be said to be contributing to the malpractice done by the manufacturer of the product they're selling, no?
---

ASithLord7 posted...

Ampelas posted...

ASithLord7 posted...

Ampelas posted...

Maybe in an ancap fantasy land where everyone gets along. Realistically though, you hurt others to get ahead yourself.

Just as stupid as the original post

How's that stupid? It's the way that capitalism currently functions.

Who is the business owner down the street hurting by selling their goods?

Probably no one, but to expand beyond a small business, he has to step on some toes for sure. Or he could be crushed by that new Walmart/department store moving in across the lot. That's just capitalism at work.

Ampelas posted...

but to expand beyond a small business, he has to step on some toes for sure

No they don't. As a megacorporation, maybe.
---

Capitalism is a system of humanist economics, where:
the Individual determines what he values,
the worth of an Individual is the sum of his productivity,
"growth" is doctrine.

Capitalism assumes two necessary conditions:
1. perfect information
2. perfect competition

These two conditions are not ubiquitous, natural equilibria. Humans are not perfect data processors, external costs and finite resources can threaten to topple the entire system (i.e. climate change), and government must push back against the asymptotic forces of natural monopolies and economies of scale.

As for the religion of the "Individual" ...it feels right, for now. A sense of self is implicit in every thought we have. But it will eventually be challenged once computer algorithms become more intelligent than our own biochemical algorithms-- once intelligence decouples from consciousness.
---

Or if the store owner happens to be paying someone less than a livable wage?
---

scar the 1 posted...

Or if the store owner happens to be paying someone less than a livable wage?

Seems like a lot of assumptions for a blanket statement about an entire economic system.
---

ASithLord7 posted...

scar the 1 posted...

Or if the store owner happens to be paying someone less than a livable wage?

Seems like a lot of assumptions for a blanket statement about an entire economic system.

Well, I wouldn't be so quick to assume that such a blanket statement is meant to be correct in exactly 100% of all cases.
---

MakoReizei posted...

don’t hurt people and don’t take their stuff.

Guess we don't need police or laws if that's natural to capitalism.

Edit: The sad thing is laissez faire ancaps really believe this crap.
---

ASithLord7 posted...

Ampelas posted...

but to expand beyond a small business, he has to step on some toes for sure

No they don't. As a megacorporation, maybe.

So he gets stepped on and pushed out of the market by the megacorporations that are willing to do the stepping. Growing up, my friends dad was put out of business by Walmart moving in. Customer loyalty doesn't mean much when your prices are 10% undercut by the Walmart down the street.

So...TC meant the topic title literally? As in that's the only attempt at a definition that could literally fit inside a nutshell?
---

This topic was really dumb.
---

Godnorgosh posted...

MakoReizei posted...

don’t hurt people and don’t take their stuff.

So no war, imperialism or wage theft? That's interesting.

what do those have to do with capitalism

it's literally just trading without government supervision
---

Capitalism is the reason we are all on computers and smartphones.
---

MakoReizei posted...

Godnorgosh posted...

MakoReizei posted...

don’t hurt people and don’t take their stuff.

So no war, imperialism or wage theft? That's interesting.

what do those have to do with capitalism

it's literally just trading without government supervision

Statists don't understand how you can get out of bed in the morning without government intervention.

The statists in this thread literally believe that nobody is capable of determining what their efforts are worth, and need the government to determine that for them. I'm surprised they don't need a government agency coaching them on their breathing.
---

The thing is, most Americans are likely to associate 'capitalism' with the prevailing system that they live under in the United States of the 21st century -- as if capitalism was always and everywhere the same. The quality of life for many people struggling under capitalist systems in other eras or other countries, on the other hand, isn't something that a lot of modern Americans are likely to take into account when weighing up a judgment.

Capitalism isn't a guarantor of democracy, civil liberties or human rights. Colonial economies based on regimes of forced labour and expropriation (where 'free trade' meant free trade only for Europeans or Americans, not indigenous peoples) made huge profits for planters, traders and investors; how were they not capitalist?

It's hard to get people to understand that 'capitalism' isn't just about the Starbucks or Apple that they know and love or loathe. It has a whole other history behind it, a whole other face that most Americans aren’t familiar with and fail to recognize.
---

What capitalism is supposed to be:

- Make a product
- Your product is better and cheaper than your competitors
- Profit
- Consumers profit too because they get the best and cheapest

What capitalism is actually like

- Make a bad product
- Use your huge amount of money and political connections to take your competitors off the market and use patent law excessively to further curb any attempt at competition and make insurmountably expensive barriers to entry
- Profit
- Consumers get screwed over because they get a bad and overpriced product but they got no choice because there's no competition
---

frozenshock posted...

What capitalism is supposed to be:

- Make a product
- Your product is better and cheaper than your competitors
- Profit
- Consumers profit too because they get the best and cheapest

What capitalism is actually like

- Make a bad product
- Use your huge amount of money and political connections to take your competitors off the market and use patent law excessively to further curb any attempt at competition and make insurmountably expensive barriers to entry
- Profit
- Consumers get screwed over because they get a bad and overpriced product but they got no choice because there's no competition

also, you know, wage slavery
---

averagejoel posted...

...unless you can exploit their labour for profit. then do that.

What is the difference between exploiting someone and offering to buy their labor from them at a higher price than what they are currently getting for it?
---

frozenshock posted...

What capitalism is supposed to be:

- Make a product
- Your product is better and cheaper than your competitors
- Profit
- Consumers profit too because they get the best and cheapest

What capitalism is actually like

- Make a bad product
- Use your huge amount of money and political connections to take your competitors off the market and use patent law excessively to further curb any attempt at competition and make insurmountably expensive barriers to entry
- Profit
- Consumers get screwed over because they get a bad and overpriced product but they got no choice because there's no competition

One of these describes Capitalism. The other describes Corporatism. A lot of people conflate the two. Some people, like Michael Moore, are intellectually dishonest and mislead people deliberately. Other people are legitimately confused because the US falsely brands itself as a Capitalist country, when it is in fact Corporatist. If you fall into the latter category, I'd encourage you to question what people have been selling you.
---

there
can
be
no
ethical
consumption
under
capitalism

Ampelas posted...

Maybe in an ancap fantasy land where everyone gets along. Realistically though, you hurt others to get ahead yourself.

---

- Workers build thing, sell it to consumers
- Business owner pays workers less than their labor produced, pockets the difference as profit
---

Antifar posted...

- Workers build thing, sell it to consumers
- Business owner pays workers less than their labor produced, pockets the difference as profit

Businesses shouldn't pay the bills. They should just split the all of the income equally among employees until it gets driven underground and no one can work anymore. Liberal utopia.

Annihilated posted...

Antifar posted...

- Workers build thing, sell it to consumers
- Business owner pays workers less than their labor produced, pockets the difference as profit

Businesses shouldn't pay the bills. They should just split the all of the income equally among employees until it gets driven underground and no one can work anymore. Liberal utopia.

Profit is usually talked about as money after all expenses have been paid. Plus if the workers built the things themselves and sold it without a business they would still have to pay bills first before they can divide up the money between everyone.
---

Polycosm posted...

frozenshock posted...

What capitalism is supposed to be:

- Make a product
- Your product is better and cheaper than your competitors
- Profit
- Consumers profit too because they get the best and cheapest

What capitalism is actually like

- Make a bad product
- Use your huge amount of money and political connections to take your competitors off the market and use patent law excessively to further curb any attempt at competition and make insurmountably expensive barriers to entry
- Profit
- Consumers get screwed over because they get a bad and overpriced product but they got no choice because there's no competition

One of these describes Capitalism. The other describes Corporatism. A lot of people conflate the two. Some people, like Michael Moore, are intellectually dishonest and mislead people deliberately. Other people are legitimately confused because the US falsely brands itself as a Capitalist country, when it is in fact Corporatist. If you fall into the latter category, I'd encourage you to question what people have been selling you.

That's not what corporatism is. Corporatism is the division of society into interest groups like unions or the clergy. Crony capitalism is the term you're looking for.
---

Annihilated posted...

Antifar posted...

- Workers build thing, sell it to consumers
- Business owner pays workers less than their labor produced, pockets the difference as profit

Businesses shouldn't pay the bills. They should just split the all of the income equally among employees until it gets driven underground and no one can work anymore. Liberal utopia.

That has nothing to do with liberalism.
---

The sense I get ITT is that capitalism has never existed in the real world.
---

Annihilated posted...

Antifar posted...

- Workers build thing, sell it to consumers
- Business owner pays workers less than their labor produced, pockets the difference as profit

Businesses shouldn't pay the bills. They should just split the all of the income equally among employees until it gets driven underground and no one can work anymore. Liberal utopia.

funny you say that given the amount of money funnelled off and never used by the super rich

Funkdamental posted...

The thing is, most Americans are likely to associate 'capitalism' with the prevailing system that they live under in the United States of the 21st century -- as if capitalism was always and everywhere the same. The quality of life for many people struggling under capitalist systems in other eras or other countries, on the other hand, isn't something that a lot of modern Americans are likely to take into account when weighing up a judgment.

Capitalism isn't a guarantor of democracy, civil liberties or human rights. Colonial economies based on regimes of forced labour and expropriation (where 'free trade' meant free trade only for Europeans or Americans, not indigenous peoples) made huge profits for planters, traders and investors; how were they not capitalist?

It's hard to get people to understand that 'capitalism' isn't just about the Starbucks or Apple that they know and love or loathe. It has a whole other history behind it, a whole other face that most Americans aren’t familiar with and fail to recognize.

The lack of true free trade precludes the possibility of Capitalism.

Again, what you rail against is Crony Capitalism, where certain entities were given explicit advantages.
---

UnholyMudcrab posted...

Polycosm posted...

frozenshock posted...

What capitalism is supposed to be:

- Make a product
- Your product is better and cheaper than your competitors
- Profit
- Consumers profit too because they get the best and cheapest

What capitalism is actually like

- Make a bad product
- Use your huge amount of money and political connections to take your competitors off the market and use patent law excessively to further curb any attempt at competition and make insurmountably expensive barriers to entry
- Profit
- Consumers get screwed over because they get a bad and overpriced product but they got no choice because there's no competition

One of these describes Capitalism. The other describes Corporatism. A lot of people conflate the two. Some people, like Michael Moore, are intellectually dishonest and mislead people deliberately. Other people are legitimately confused because the US falsely brands itself as a Capitalist country, when it is in fact Corporatist. If you fall into the latter category, I'd encourage you to question what people have been selling you.

That's not what corporatism is. Corporatism is the division of society into interest groups like unions or the clergy. Crony capitalism is the term you're looking for.

I'm going to have to put my foot in my mouth, on this one. The word I was looking for is actually "Corporatocracy" (though I concede that "Crony Capitalism" is also more accurate than the word I used). I'm frankly embarrassed to admit that I've been conflating Corporatism and Corporatocracy for several years at least (especially considering how I just accused others of conflation).

Thank you for the correction.
---

Sativa_Rose posted...

averagejoel posted...

...unless you can exploit their labour for profit. then do that.

What is the difference between exploiting someone and offering to buy their labor from them at a higher price than what they are currently getting for it?

if the worker is not getting what their labour is worth, they are being exploited.

as long as there's a surplus going to investors or CEOs, workers are being exploited.
---

averagejoel posted...

as long as there's a surplus going to investors or CEOs, workers are being exploited.

lol, as if entrepreneurs and investors would ever take any risk at all if there were no returns in exchange for those risks.
---

Polycosm posted...

UnholyMudcrab posted...

Polycosm posted...

frozenshock posted...

What capitalism is supposed to be:

- Make a product
- Your product is better and cheaper than your competitors
- Profit
- Consumers profit too because they get the best and cheapest

What capitalism is actually like

- Make a bad product
- Use your huge amount of money and political connections to take your competitors off the market and use patent law excessively to further curb any attempt at competition and make insurmountably expensive barriers to entry
- Profit
- Consumers get screwed over because they get a bad and overpriced product but they got no choice because there's no competition

One of these describes Capitalism. The other describes Corporatism. A lot of people conflate the two. Some people, like Michael Moore, are intellectually dishonest and mislead people deliberately. Other people are legitimately confused because the US falsely brands itself as a Capitalist country, when it is in fact Corporatist. If you fall into the latter category, I'd encourage you to question what people have been selling you.

That's not what corporatism is. Corporatism is the division of society into interest groups like unions or the clergy. Crony capitalism is the term you're looking for.

I'm going to have to put my foot in my mouth, on this one. The word I was looking for is actually "Corporatocracy" (though I concede that "Crony Capitalism" is also more accurate than the word I used). I'm frankly embarrassed to admit that I've been conflating Corporatism and Corporatocracy for several years at least (especially considering how I just accused others of conflation).

Thank you for the correction.

You're good. Corporatism isn't really all that relevant to American economics, so it's a pretty common mistake to make.
---

Sativa_Rose posted...

averagejoel posted...

as long as there's a surplus going to investors or CEOs, workers are being exploited.

lol, as if entrepreneurs and investors would ever take any risk at all if there were no returns in exchange for those risks.

the model I'm talking about is called a Worker's Cooperative. it's objectively better
---