I Don't Hate Capitalism....

I guess we'll just agree to disagree on what the definition of capitalism is. Marx had the same problem with mainstream thinkers. I guess you just pick whichever one fits your world view. Here's a definition by a PhD linguist, philosopher, cognitive scientist, political activist, professor emeritus at MIT:

Capitalism is a system in which the central institutions of society are in principle under autocratic control. Thus, a corporation or an industry is, if we were to think of it in political terms, fascist; that is, it has tight control at the top and strict obedience has to be established at every level -- there's a little bargaining, a little give and take, but the line of authority is perfectly straightforward.

We could use the least restrictive form...
Capitalism = an economic system

And this is basically what you'll find in the dictionary with an added mention that ownership is private to distinguish it from other forms of economic systems, but does that really tell you what capitalism is? Is that enough info to tell you that it is OK for millions of people?

Anyway, if you use that definition, then you see Red Lila has just showed you what big pile of poo capitalism is. And maybe Socialism too. Can you think of any other economic systems? Are you free to choose your economic system or are you forced to use one of the worst ones?

I'd like to echo the sentiments of many of those who have already posted on this thread. I don't hate capitalism, but I am certainly very wary of those that use it as a means to exploit others.

Change must happen, but it wont if we all sit idly by and accept our fate.

As referenced by my last point, a combination of human nature and the very idea of profit motive prevent capitalism from ever changing. Regardless of popular sentiment, its going to take the people changing the way we think about property and resources entirely to do that. Hence my proposition of a hybrid system. It doesn't require capitalism to change its nature but keeps its inequalities a safe distance from those things which are required to insure high quality of life and longevity.

So, and forgive me if I am wrong, capitalism cannot change due to human nature, but you have proposed a system which can facilitate such a change with a low impact on the way we would have to live our lives? - I'm not mocking, just trying to understand your position on this issue.

Your system proposes a means whereby we can retain the desirable outcomes that we currently enjoy by taking part in that economic system, i.e. high quality of life and longevity. There's an issue here, however, that I think is worth exploring. What do we mean by 'high quality of life'? Is this concept culturally relative or is it an idea that is universally accepted? Also, is longevity a good thing? Capitalism helps us to live a long life, but longevity, in and of itself, is putting a severe strain on the limited resources that we are able to obtain on this little blue and green rock that we call home - as we are currently witnessing in the UK, capitalism provides the older generation with a means of supporting themselves when they retire, but those economic resources have run out and are currently unsustainable, in other words, longevity is one of many issues that is crippling the system.

Just some thoughts. I am not seeking an argument, rather an exploration of these concepts.

I won't claim to be the original author of this plan, its actually the goal of the Green Party in the US to setup just such a system. We're focusing quality of life in this case on guaranteed access to Food, Housing, Electricity, Clean Water, Internet, Education, Employment, and Healthcare. As new technologies arise and become so prevalent they are necessary for modern life they may be added to that list as well.

As far as longevity, this is perhaps where my transhumanism shows. Technology is at the point where we are decades from being able to regrow limbs, reverse aging, etc. We're also nearly to the point of true computer intelligence. Between the ability to produce foods through bacterial process and the foundations for space expansion being established today. That said, large portions of our difficulty in caring for the elderly is the post WWII boom in birth rate, as birth rates have declined these strains on care for the elderly will as well. Additionally there's a correlation between how well educated someone is and how many and how late in life someone has children, tending toward fewer and later. These factors alone should mitigate the population issue.

Also, Capitalism only promote longevity from those on the beneficial end of the deal. Just like a car dealer trying to sell you a car for far more than its worth, the deal is great for him but not for you. Capitalism has this same imbalance.

Whyte Horse wrote:

Rickie The Grey wrote: What's the name of that company & city and where are they?

Mondragon Cooperative Corporation in Mondragon, Spain.

That is very very interesting. Good luck to them. I'm not sure current business culture is ready for this.

I'm not sure how far it will go since it seems to limit the wealth of the highly compensated. Thus the motivated achiever may not be attracted to this system. The motivated achiever would gravitate toward higher compensation/reward.

There've been several studies to the contrary. Most workers self-report they would take less pay for a job they felt empowered in. There are those that will take incentive over all else but those are Business majors ^_~

Red Lila wrote: There've been several studies to the contrary. Most workers self-report they would take less pay for a job they felt empowered in. There are those that will take incentive over all else but those are Business majors ^_~

Exactly my point. There are organizations that will pay a premium for performace and there are people motivated by gaining above average compensation.

No offence to the studies but unfettered greed still rules. I'm not saying it's right or good, it's the way it is right now.

....and for the record, unfettered greed is not Capitalism. It it does occure as it does in any economic system. Greed is a human fault.

I never said it was, I was simply stating that Moral Hazard is a reality in all economic calculations and capitalism has a very high rate of moral hazard, that is to say it provides more opportunities for greed to win out over fair compensation. The entire premise of a business deal is to get more out of it than the other party. Taking advantage of situations where your complete understanding allows you to profit from someone else's ignorance is one of the foundational premises of capitalism.

Red Lila wrote: I never said it was, I was simply stating that Moral Hazard is a reality in all economic calculations and capitalism has a very high rate of moral hazard, that is to say it provides more opportunities for greed to win out over fair compensation. The entire premise of a business deal is to get more out of it than the other party. Taking advantage of situations where your complete understanding allows you to profit from someone else's ignorance is one of the foundational premises of capitalism.

I'm agreeing with you.