Topic: Capitalism, why does it ignore the farmer? - page 3. (Read 3077 times)

It has demonstrated it superiority in terms of, as you said, being able to destroy other systems, but for me the success of a system is to create happiness and opportunity and self development for people, not just for some people. Just ask someone poor in the USA how good is capitalism for them.

Unfettered capitalism is always a double edge sword (see Dirty Money in Netflix). It encourages scrupulous business practices just for profits. I think there should be a balance between capitalism and socialism to better the community instead of just a select few. The still widening wealth gap is creating more tension between the haves and have nots. Spreading the wealth will ensure sustainability of harmony in the community.

Balance the socio-economic hierarchy couldn't be in countrie with dictators like Russia, China and others. When I hear these words from my friends then I recall that video and speach - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VXA1ZUWh4Q

capitalism is the major reason why many third-world countries are poor and cannot make head way in development and come out of poverty. Local content is the best way for any government to come out of poverty and suffering. Local products develop a country why capitalism enslave them. 

Socialism and communism are utopian ideologies, they can not exist in the conditions of the modern world. Countries that tried to build communism were doomed to failure. Capitalism is the natural state of human society. And this is the only system that lasted for many years and showed results. Yes, capitalism does not satisfy everyone, but it works, albeit with interruptions, whereas socialism and communism have not realized their potential.

While I agree with most of your post, this cite is a bit over-simplified. There are decision-making techniques that are not based neither on force nor on commerce - for example, voting, discussing, etc. Commerce can also include force, e.g. if one party is structurally weaker and the other one abuses that. There's not only black and white.

Yep. Incentiving real innovation is a largely unsolved problem in socialist theories based on democratic control of production. In state socialism ("real existing socialism") there may be incentives to work hard (so you step up in the "socialist pyramid"), but you always work inside the "planning schemes" rolled out by the ruling class. There may be some limited innovation incentives like prizes for scientists. But innovation always needs the "approval" of your work by somebody who is in a superior part of the pyramid, or - in the "anarcho-socialist" variants - of a majority of the group with those who work with you. So lots of innovation potential gets lost, and these systems will tend to have less innovation - and thus, a less effective productive system.

Everybody that wants to talk about an alternative to capitalism must solve that problem: There must be an incentive to innovate that is equal or higher than in capitalism. I don't think it's impossible - capitalism is also an "invention" so a better system surely can be invented - but it's a really hard challenge and the traditional socialist theories are far away from solving this issue.

I think that you are confusing what capitalism is about. You can buy local and promote local progress and still be capitalist. I think you mean globalisation.

So you want to stop capitalism with capitalism? Selling products or services and obtaining a profit with it is just what capitalism is about but it seems you want just local capitalism but that is not the way capitalism works if a business owner is more efficient than another in other country then it is natural that the more successful businessman will try to get a share of the market in other countries or localities.

May I know, is your quote according to bitcoin project or not? Basically, I agree about your quote. But I don't want to compare a capitalism to communism or another economic theory. Because in a fact, capitalism dominates all economic in the world right now. So, how to against a capitalism domination if communism is not a best answer for it??

Since capitalism has taken root in many countries, it means that it is the most convenient form of governance and resource allocation for mankind. In the present economic system a lot of errors, but it at least works.

The state economy cannot be confined to the domestic consumer. Any businessman knows that the limited market of sale of production quickly becomes saturated. This will inevitably lead to a drop in demand. Many countries tried to lobby the interests of domestic producers. Organized the whole company on the campaign to buy the products of domestic producers. Give me one successful example. Anyone wants to buy a product of the best quality. He is not interested in the country of manufacture.

 Humanity is can't see to a better system than capitalism .many economics system have been tried for many hours and opportunity. But none of them have been lasted as a capitalism.a is the one of them have been lasted as a capitalism
A capitalism is the one and normally different from one to other and characteristic is a capitalism in order which
People with equal right and feedom to discover and earn people with earn value in thing that fact and that we find in bitcoin value in purely capitalism for a nature because you have no cover coin .

yes. it is to help your compatriot also that produce the product. and aside from that, commercializing local products would also be advertising it and has possibility of being exported and be sold on other countries as well.  from that the economy of the country will increase a bit.

True capitalism and not quasi type is economically viable in places where you
have strong competition.Without capitalism, quality may be compromised as
there are no competitors of a product, commodity or service rendered since
couldn't have controlled by entrepreneurs.Hence,from the trend of developments
experienced over the years.Capitalism is relatively better than other economic
theories known to man due to its economic dividends. 

This is an argument on how capitalism is able to destroy everything that is not capitalism. However, it is also clear that it has made the social gap wider and that more people are living in poverty thanks to it. In my book that is not success.

People should do what they want, not what you want, or any party or "glorious" leader. Trade created our world. As a certain P. N Whitehead said, men have resolved their differences through two means: force or commerce. What he forgot to add is that those who sucked at commerce wanted to control those who didn't by means of force, as the OP suggests.
 

Capitalism boils down with the right to private property and the right to use your property as you see fit. If you don't believe in it, go start your little socialist utopia wherever you want from my part. Just do it on your own dime.

In any way, it always amuses me to see people who grew up reaping all the benefits of capitalism condemn it in favor of socialism. Socialism used to say 150 years ago that the problem of production has been solved and all that remained was the problem of distribution. Tell me, how many advancements in production have happened since then? Socialism has concepts which are sheer nonsense but which for some reason are very catchy at first glance. Like democratic control of the means of production. Let's say I start a firm and devote my time and money in developing a product which becomes a success and can't keep up with contracts. I need to hire two more people to help in production. According to socialist principles they now have a say in production, "democratically" they can vote to produce whatever, even if they have no f clue about what they are doing and are mere;y doing physical labor, even if it was not their ideas, time, will and money which developed the business (had I lost my money or went bankrupt as MOST business endeavors do, would potential workers compensate my loss ? -- the workers want freerolls). If I invented the iPhone and the workers wanted to build 3310 because it has been successful in the past, I should just accept their decision as they are more. And don't get me started on dialectic materialism et al.

And even if you assume the problem of production can be solved, let's say robots, the problem of distribution is unsolvable top down or through voting or whatever. The solution for distribution is simple: money and its free circulation.

PS. All the people commenting are most likely capitalists. The problem is they don't know what socialism and capitalism are exactly and are muddleheaded.

Capitalism is an economic system and an ideology base on private ownership the means of production and their operation for profit. It requires free market economy to succeed. the market sets the prices of the components of supply . It also distributer them according to the laws of supply and demand.

For me, capitalism is the best economic model since in reality, government did not care for it's citizen. If it will become communism, all people are deprived to be successful and nowadays, competition is the best way to improve, enhance and innovate everything. People are greed and for me, there is no such thing as the best economic model because the mentality of the people are self-centered and manipulator.

Powerful companies are being broken up by governments under the garb of preventing monopolies and maintaining stability of the markets ("too big to fail"). But that doesn't mean that there is no capitalism. The powers of the largest capitalists are just restricted.

Capitalism is good only for a few people in this world. And believe it or not, it's not you and me. Capitalism create so much damage in our world for the benefits of only some people. It's a cancer as a model economic. The only slogan the do know is "profits profts profits"