The Intractable Flaw That Dooms All Capitalist Societies

[Guest X-QUORK]

It's a big, real issue though isn't it?

Yes, I totally agree. The only glimmer of hope we have is right now, we have a small window of opportunity in which to take stock and decide where it is we want to go in future.

Alas, I'm sceptical about the chances of our illustrious leaders grasping the nettles and going for it. The banks will be told to behave and off we go again...ad infinitum, until eventually we run out of resources.

[Game_Over]

Can any system 'work'? The problem is not the system but the agents within it. In other words ... humans.

Our very nature means that at heart we are greedy and competitve. It's why we evolved in the first place. If we weren't then we wouldn't be here discussing what type of system works for greedy and competitive agents.

OK so we also have altruistic traits, but this has been evolved for use in our respective packs. Ultimately it still benefits you if you are altruistic. Nor is it a trait you can rely on. There will always be people who are not altruistic at all and who will try to exploit whatever system you impose upon them.

So the way I see if, you either have an efficient system, or a fair system. You cannot have both.

I think what we should be aiming for is equality of opportunity NOT equality of outcome.

Some people are always going to be wealthier, happier and healthier than others because many humans are not very intelligent, lazy and seem hell bent on self destruction.

And any society that actually encourgaes the least intelligent, laziest people to breed fastest is ultimately doomed IMO.

[Guest X-QUORK]

My point is that water is in effect an infinite resource, as is energy and with infinite amounts of water and energy, we could easily grow more food than we could ever consume.

I'm sure you didn't mean infinite literally? Unless we master usable fusion energy, our useful energy resources will indeed run out in the medium term, unless we see a massive world population decline.

[nixy]

And any society that actually encourages the least intelligent, laziest people to breed fastest is ultimately doomed IMO.

agreed, but without the 'IMO'

[Vested Disinterest]

Sorry to butt in a day late with my own (probably naive) pet theory without reading the whole thread...

Company A plans ahead for lean times. This means putting something away when times are good. This cuts into their profit.

Company B does not plan ahead. They make more profit and/or can lower prices and out-compete Company A. Investors see this and pile in. Company B takes over Company A and makes even more profit.

When the excrement eventually hits the fan, Company B also happens to be mates with government and gets a huge bailout from the taxpayer.

I don't know if you can regulate to enforce rainy day savings? It didn't seem to work with the banks...

[Game_Over]

I'm sure you didn't mean infinite literally? Unless we master usable fusion energy, our useful energy resources will indeed run out in the medium term, unless we see a massive world population decline.

I think within 50-100 years we will have mastered nuclear fusion.

And energy from the Sun is infinite to all intents and purposes.

Oil was not considered useful until approx 100 years ago and I think, like coal, it will be superceded before it is used up.

How much energy is there in a teaspoon of water?

And how much water is there on the planet?

[anon]

with peak oil here, or on the horizon, i believe the current debt based monetary system has got to change. the future simply can not be larger than the past ad infinitum without an ever expanding soruce of cheap energy. (the decent after peak oil cant arrive fast enough for me). we can all argue capitalism vs socialism vs whateverism, but until we sort out the economic expenential growth paradigm it really is pointless.

i think it helps to consider the state interms of energy expenditure. as with all systems forcing one specific way of life onto an idealistically diverse population is highly energy intensive, think herding cats. on the other end of the scale total (madmax or otherwise) anarchy is also energetically expensive, think constantly rebuilding burnt down houses or crops after a fall out with the people from the other side of the mountain. id suggest in a future thats less energetically rich well need to find a political system that uses energy in the most effiecent way. i expect this will eventually be a much reduced state, probably only responsible for maintaining the law, maintaining a small military and probably a small postal system.

[Ted D. Bear]

Socialism is not cooperation, it is stealing from the productive to give to the unproductive.

The free market is by its nature cooperation only.

It's only stealing if the 'productive' deem themselves to have been stolen from.

Of course, this whole meme that any kind of taxation or redistribution being theft presupposes that private property rights are valid in the first place.

[Injin]

It's only stealing if the 'productive' deem themselves to have been stolen from.

Theft is theft, even if you sleep through it.

Of course, this whole meme that any kind of taxation or redistribution being theft presupposes that private property rights are valid in the first place.

They are.

[anon]

on the matter of nuclear fusion, i really hope we get it to a stage where its energetically viable. there was a documentary on the beeb a month or so ago. they indicated that should significant resources be put into it we could probably have it up and running by 2030 at the earliest. the problem is that the research we need to do is very energetically intense. the main question is will that energy be availible over the next 2 decades to carry it out, or will it be sucked up by the whole 'ever expanding economy'. who knows. but nothing im hearing from those with the perse strings gives me any hope currently.

[Vested Disinterest]

Capitalism will ensure that this doesn't happen, as it has done in the past.

Ultimately the Sun is going to explode and the Earth will become just a barren ball of rock.

So unless humans develop the technology to leave the Earth and travel to other Solar systems, ALL life on Earth is ultimately doomed.

And the environment is a big non-issue as far as I can see.

Take water as an example.

If 1 human or a billion humans drink water and then excrete it, what difference does it make to the environment?

If a plant grows and then dies and rots away, what difference does it make if a human eats it?

Nothing we appear to consume is either really created or destroyed and that applies to water, food and energy.

You're missing some major fundamental truths about the world we live in. For example entropy. Also known as disorder, and it's 100% guaranteed to increase. Take iron or steel production. We extract the ore from known, relatively localised locations underground, process it and make products from it. These get distributed all around the world and gradually decompose (e.g. rust). When it runs out you will say that we "just use it again" but it takes a lot of energy to find all these bits of metal all over the place, and even more to find all the rust particles in the sea/soil/air.

And food currently requires fossil fuel-derived fertilisers to grow in enough quantity.

It's the same with water too. You're right that it doesn't go away, but it costs more (energy) to locate it and make it usable again.

And last time I looked energy isn't something that is in endless supply...

[Stars]

It's only stealing if the 'productive' deem themselves to have been stolen from.

If you take the results of my actions from me, then i can legittimately consider it stealing if I consider that I own myself.

Try to argue reasonably that I don't own myself.

BUT - not all property is the result of the efforts of the owner (or someone he paid)..consider the land itself. Nobody added the land - the land is not the result of anyone's actions.

Redistributing the benefits of land, steals nothing.

Edited April 16, 2009 by Stars

[Guest X-QUORK]

with peak oil here, or on the horizon, i believe the current debt based monetary system has got to change. the future simply can not be larger than the past ad infinitum without an ever expanding soruce of cheap energy. (the decent after peak oil cant arrive fast enough for me). we can all argue capitalism vs socialism vs whateverism, but until we sort out the economic expenential growth paradigm it really is pointless.

Exactly, this is the crux of the problem for capitalism, without growth it dies. Consistent growth is not possible...therefore neither is capitalism for anything like the long term. QED.

[anon]

having a socially agreed apon contract that everyone accepts, that gives you the right to work the land the the exclusion of others, and to benefit from the results of your labour ie ownership, prevents the need to kill your neighbour who takes a fancy your land or the produce grown there on.

[Ted D. Bear]

Theft is theft, even if you sleep through it.

Unrefutably true, but nothing to do with my point. Donations are not stolen goods.

They are.

Their validity holds in certain contexts.

[Game_Over]

Exactly, this is the crux of the problem for capitalism, without growth it dies. Consistent growth is not possible...therefore neither is capitalism for anything like the long term. QED.

Please define 'the long term'

because if it works in the 'short term' it is always going to be the system that is adopted

because in the 'long term' we are all dead anyway. QED

Edited April 16, 2009 by Game_Over

[Injin]

Unrefutably true, but nothing to do with my point. Donations are not stolen goods.

No one donates that I know of. if they did, there wouldn't need to be punishments for not paying.

Their validity holds in certain contexts.

like being on earth,, in this universe etc

[anon]

Exactly, this is the crux of the problem for capitalism, without growth it dies. Consistent growth is not possible...therefore neither is capitalism for anything like the long term. QED.

i agree its a very tough problem for capitalism, but its an equally tough problem for just about any system we have today socalism/communism included. all sytems the have today subscribe to this expanding growth model. central planning or free market, which everside of the coin you look growth is the aim. and thats the problem.

[Guest X-QUORK]

Please define 'the long term'

52 years, 121 days and 9 hours.

[Ted D. Bear]

If you take the results of my actions from me, then i can legittimately consider it stealing if I consider that I own myself.

Try to argue reasonably that I don't own myself.

Of course you own yourself. But theft is not the only means by which 'your' property may be transferred to another. You may give it of your own volition: redistibution can, in principle, come about without coercion.

[Guest X-QUORK]

i agree its a very tough problem for capitalism, but its an equally tough problem for just about any system we have today socalism/communism included. all sytems the have today subscribe to this expanding growth model. central planning or free market, which everside of the coin you look growth is the aim. and thats the problem.

Subsistance?

[roadtoruin]

So NuLabour then.

That's just been tried, didn't work either.

Controlling a free market DOES NOT WORK.

It hasn't just been tried.

You're not suggesting new labour was strictly controlling capitalism surely?

No reason why controlling a free market cannot work. Most people want some check on unfettered capitalism because all around us they see the outcomes when we leave it to just let rip.

[lowrentyieldmakessense(honest!)]

worth a read

Financial-Panics-Political-Change

[domo]

It's only stealing if the 'productive' deem themselves to have been stolen from.

Of course, this whole meme that any kind of taxation or redistribution being theft presupposes that private property rights are valid in the first place.

Can I have your address please?

[Ted D. Bear]

No one donates that I know of. if they did, there wouldn't need to be punishments for not paying.

There are, to my knowledge, no punishments for not donating blood, but people still do it.

And I suppose these people are wasting their time?