Capitalism is the greatest invention in the history of humanity.
Nothing else comes even close in its positive impact to the well being, quality of life, and freedom of the ordinary person.
The fact that some people, in the year 2017, even attempt to deny this fact is the utmost display of ignorance an stupidity.
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Good post.
It's not just capitalism senpai
It's all the trimmings like a functional government which makes the dream work
Wealth isn't well being
it isn't, and capitalism has given us massive increases in *both* is a relatively very short time.
Yes, a functional government is necessary for capitalism to thrive.
But a well functioning government without capitalism is tyranny. Always was and always will be.
The function of government is to provide the necessary security for market actors to exchange goods comfortably.
Sadly, the American government has been perverted far beyond any semblance of a limited state. How is the Japanese government?
>How is the Japanese government?
a bit overbearing, but the populous here also has a healthy disgust of Communism. I'm more worried about the US and the millennial crowd.
Question for you, based Japbro, as you seem smart:
What exactly is Capitalism?
How is it any different from a free market?
If they are the same... what is the point of the label?
capitalism refers to the private ownership of the means of production, as well as the methods of exchange.
the term "free markets" alone says nothing about ownership.
>capitalism refers to the private ownership of the means of production, as well as the methods of exchange
This makes sense, but if that is the case, is there any example anywhere of a free market where private ownership isn't allowed?
I can't see how that would work and so I always thought they were basically the same.
There once was a quite anti-Capitalistic radical who was in favor of state intervention into the economy when it benefits the working man and who warned against what he called the vile maxim of the masters of mankind: "All for ourselves and nothing for other people".
His name was Adam Smith.
While capitalism is pretty great, I submit this as the better invention: Patriarchy and marriage.
>The key insight of Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations is misleadingly simple: if an exchange between two parties is voluntary, it will not take place unless both believe they will benefit from it. Most economic fallacies derive from the neglect of this simple insight, from the tendency to assume that there is a fixed pie, that one party can gain only at the expense of another.
Stop reading Noam Chomsky, maybe, and pick up a book about actual economics.
>invention
Capitalism wasn't "invented" or discovered it was a natural outcome of ancient methods of trade, private ownership of property, and the coinage of currencies. Aristotle talks about these things as ancient qualities essential to any civilization in his Politics. Is this bait? I don't know, but it seems like you seem to think that Adam Smith invented the ownership and protection of private property by government or law which is insane, I'm sorry if you truly believe that.
cute, but ridiculous.
]
Explaining the need for regulatory oversight doesn't make you an anti-Capitalist radical.
Only asking for the means of production to lie somewhere other than the private citizen would, Wwhich of course is exactly the opposite of what Adam Smith proposed.
Yeah yeah just because you read "wealth of nations" don't mean you understand everything about capitalism
Read more book kids
I didn't say Adam Smith invented anything, and your comment is irrelevant.
I'd say if you read the wealth of nations, you understand *everything* about capitalism. It ain't that complicated.
What economy does Thailand have?
Guns & ships are cooler
>Capitalism is the greatest invention in the history of humanity.
That is what you said, I refuted your position that capitalism was invented, because an invention is by definition the creation of an individual and thereby distinguished from a discovery or a historical process. Either you don't know what the word invention is or you're too stupid to understand what is going on here, or pretending to be stupid, whatever the issue, you are wrong.
do you have anything to contribute here besides pedantic bullshit?
LOL I think i must be wrong but nope
you just read those books like I think !!!
yep i read wealth of nations but I don't think I understand " EVERYTHING" because THE NEW THINGS always come when the time pass
Many Economist read wealth of nations but are there anyone can predict the next economic crisis ? NO
people who born after WW2 don't know any shit about what really happen with inequality of incomes and capital Because they think they are " Genius" like you !!! without collect the real numbers and data
If mankind didn't invent capitalism and the idea of free exchange, where can it be found in nature?
Thailand is the 75th least free country in the world, in terms of economic freedom
Capitalism isn't an invention, it's a social contract upheld by international governments.
>X=Y
Me: no X is not equivalent to Y, your argument is invalid
You: disproving my central claim has no relevance or contribution except that it makes my entire argument moot and redundant and just plain incorrect
And yet it beats every other Communist country on the planet by a mile according to that list.
I'm no fan of heavy regulation that stifles an economy, but it's something to think about.
Capitalism is based on exploitation and as such is morally wrong.
I read it a long time ago, and yes it does really explain everything there is to know about capitalism.
The field of economics is not about re-explaining the basics.
Any attack on it, either after WWII or before, is based on ignorance and/or stupidity as I already said.
And btw, non-capitalist countries have been by far the most unequal in terms of income.
Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea are literally the bottom three.
If it presents itself with valuing consent in transactions then how does it exploit the social contract?
you are an idiot, read the list again
>Capitalism is based on exploitation
see, this shit is why people really need to go read a 200 year old book
Fine Mr. Einstein sama
up to you . I am out
Dammit this place full with intellect virgin man
and the world of wisdom is world of man because woman can't use reasons
this place will turn everybody to Homosexual just like all greek philosopher
It was a bretty gud system, but we didn't always have it, did we? What if there is another system that is even better that hasn't been extensively tested? What if it's national socialism?
I think you fucked up your chances on that on the first test, sry about that
Austrian capitalism is, as far as I know, a great system.
Keynesian capitalism not so much, its long-term goal is to swindle money from the goyim by inflating the relative wealth of the rich who coincidentally happen to be jews. The goys stay happy because the growing paycheck creates an illusion of getting more money in return for the work they put in to the system but in reality inflation keeps their wealth in check.
>maybe the government deciding my meaning in life is better than freedom to manifest my own destiny.
List of socialist states:
China
Cuba
Loas
Vietnam
North Korea
Venezuela (?)
>en.wikipedia.org
You tell me, hotshot: is Thailand above or below all of these according to that list you linked?
Not sure why you're attacking me for being absolutely fucking right.
Source?
>everything I don't like is Noam Chomsky
yes Thailand has more free markets than fucking Communist countries.
Why exactly is this worth stating?
>Keynesian capitalism
That's an oxymoron if I EVER heard one.
You seem to be an expert on capitalism, did you know that there are at lest two different forms of capitalism: liberal market economies (or LME) (e.g. US, UK, Canada, New Zealand, Ireland) and coordinated market economies (CME) (e.g. Germany, Japan, Sweden, Austria). Did you know there is no such thing as a purely capitalistic country on earth run on free markets because they are all mixed economies, i.e. socialist or other economic forms are mixed into the capitalist framework. In most cases, "mixed economy" refers to market economies with strong regulatory oversight and governmental provision of public goods, although some mixed economies also feature a number of state-run enterprises. Is China truly communist, is the US purely capitalist even with extensive welfare and protectionist policies?
He wasn't anti-capitalist, but today he'd be called anti-neoliberal, which to neoliberals and their ilk is just the sAmerica as being Stalin.
I don't agree with those terms.
Kensyian policies are not a kind of a capitalism, its the partial negation of it.
Ok, you're just an edgy asshole, then, or you didn't read my posts in full. Point I was trying to make is, even though Thailand is not the best in terms of economic freedom it STILL beats the hell out of any socialist shit hole on the planet, thus further proving your original point that capitalism is clearly the best.
Reign it in, buddy, for fucks sake.
Adam smith is setting of my jewdar
He was Scottish.
again, debate about levels of regulatory oversight is completely different than calling for the means of production to to be moved somewhere else other than the individual (ie. actual rejection of capitalism).
I am really not trying to just be mean, but what the fuck are you on about? Why thailand? How is this relevant to the discussion?
>the only way to advance human wellbeing is to allow the rich to get richer forever until we're living in feudal slavery again
Most of the social progress of the 20th century was during the post-war years where the rich were heavily taxed and massive amounts of wealth were dedicated to social investments and rebuilding
>The state should subsidise the rich by taking care of all the necessary unprofitable activities for society to be stable, the rich get to scoop up all the profitable activities and hoard the wealth bounty for themselves
No, my first point earlier was that you don't know what the word "invention" means in use or definition in English. Secondly I questioned your understanding of the historical development of capitalism and the current theoretical models of its related theory. You don't know what "capitalism" is sir. Get a dictionary for the word invention and then go to wikipedia for the word capitalism and start there before you make anymore completely stupid, thoughtless comments that might actually infect others with your retardation.
who the fuck made this picture? it's the other way around
Cause that was the country that asshole above was from, as he was subtly undermining your argument for capitalism. I was pointing out his ABJECT HYPOCRISY and making fun of him at the same time, as he clearly benefits from such a system himself.
You missed the point, apparently.
i dont want to fuck with the economy at all in america, its working pretty well considering our standard of living rises steadily with the progression of technology (including stuff like cryptocurrency)
And this guy is still a pedantic asshole. Subtle undermining, see? I don't like that kind of shit.
Certainly better than it's modern ideological counterparts. However as an ideology it's nothing but growth for growth's sake and that's the ideology of a cancer cell. The reign of quantity so to speak. Capitalism, as well as other and modern ideologies, tends to tear down all other necessary institutions (family/folk, religion, nation etc) for civilization in a mad dash for mere material gains as can be seen today.
Without a strict social hierarchy, inspired by the worship of a monolithic divinity, any civilization is doomed.
i would however change welfare to some kind of job program working on infrastructure or something, if they were able to work
Actually the greatest invention is the violin
Even as a fascist i agree
Stop conflating shit.
capitalism doesn't imply no taxation or no social programs. The important thing is private ownership and people benefiting directly from their fruits of their labor.
Is it an invention? People have traded for thousands of years.
It was the removal of serfdom/slavery and the institution of protected private property rights. Once slave/serf labor is eliminated more minds are directed at innovation and wealth goes into physical capital and innovation instead of land/slave expansion.
you can't teach economic 101 with this troll board
it's useless
let's abandon thread
Agreed
Good post Nippon user
it obviously must have been an invention at some point.
And here we see yet another attempt to undermine and dissuade. Pathetic.
Pointing out that something is false equates to being pedantic or subtle undermining? No, what is untrue, incorrect, false is simply false. I refuted his central claim and that is not subtle undermining, undermining implies that his claim was not disproven but weakened. All I wanted to say was that he was wrong, and I said it, I'm sorry if that offends you.
Not even going to read your post at this point. Nothing relevant.
I suppose this is how you typically win your arguments by running away like a child?
You have no argument.
reminder that credit money was the greatest invention of the twentieth century and has led to unprecedented stability
I believe boiling it down to private property rights is most important. If pne looks at the international private property rights index it will look a little different than the heritage economic freedom index.
What utter bullshit. Keynesian Capitalism ended in 1970s with Oil Shock prices.
Which was replaced with neo-liberalism. You only had anything resembling "austrian school" capitalism in pre-World War I
National Socialism worked well until it got jewed.
>reminder that credit money was the greatest invention of the twentieth century and has led to unprecedented stability
>Keynesian economics
Is that why we're almost 20 trillion in debt? Is that "stability" according to you?
>user proceeds to cover eyes with the presumption that if he can't see something it isn't there
>TFW living in a capitalist utopia with every amenity at my fingertips
>Still suicidal and depressed because vapid consumer culture and alienation from society at large
T-thanks capitalism. You truly are my greatest ally.
All idiology is garbage, and OP is a witless faggot shill.
Geography has always been the best predictor of a nation's success. Not race or idology. Just where you are in relationships to resources and shipping lanes.
Historically speaking, Capitalism is a mix of a State that both promotes entrepeneurship and a society where Private property and both private and public ownership of means of production exist.
You had things such as Silk Road and Indian trade routes, but given main lifestyle was stricly feudalistic in many places you can't really call it Capitalistic
Modern Capitalism also requires a background of Scottish Iluminism, Social contratualism and principle of separation of powers to flourish and prevent Corporativism (as opposed to Capitalism) to be the norm
Pedantic "arguments" about whether or not capitalism was INVENTED has literally nothing to do with whether or not it is the best system. Fuck off. You have no actual argument. Just take the loss at this point.
This is of course nonsense.
Any society can work as hard as it wants and grow as fast or slow as it wants, regardless of the economic system that underlies it.
More conflating bullshit.
Yes it's called mutualism and it is far superior to capitalism
Its basically capitalism but prevents peoplr from siphoning wealth off others simply do to private ownership such as landlords and shareholders.
>Geography
Muh "land based resources" argument. Is every country going to be equal in terms of wealth? Is that even the point? Do some reading.
>Geography has always been the predictor of a nation's success
Oh look! Babby's first Guns Germs and Steel! Everyone try to be nice to this user, he is like a child so innocent in his ignorance of the world and the things within it.
It's true. black people are quite successful when they are located here because we offer them welfare
>and it is far superior to capitalism
evidence needed.
Yeah, just look at how prosperous the Middle East or Africa is with all the resources they have. Also, Russia, the biggest and richest country in the world have been a shithole for most of its lifespan
so obvious now.
Never even heard of "mutualism". Is this actually in practice anywhere? Or just another useless theory?
>Geography has always been the best predictor of a nation's success.
China was once the wealthiest nation on earth, then European powers took over, then the US, and likely it will soon be China again in the lead.
Singapore was a crab-invested swamp for centuries, then suddenly in just 20 years, it transformed and now has a higher GDP per capita than both the US and Europe.
Your theory is shit.
well if all money is created through debt then debt = total money supply. an increasing gdp increases demand for debt and thereby the money supply.
the nineteenth century had currency panics every 7 years because gold could not keep up with modern economies. currency panics are now largely a thing of the past and even 2008 did not cripple the dollar
>well if all money is created through debt
And that sounds like a good fucking idea to you? Are you literally retarded?
>ad homm
>no refutation
Typical for a brainlet. All money must be created somehow. Either dug out of the ground where it benefits miners first, by government printing where it benefits cronies first, or by banks where it is allocated based on risk(debt money).
Banks are much more efficient at allocating new money than any historical alternative.
This has nothing to do with OP's thread or original argument, as you are attempting to talk about "what is money", essentially. Go to Youtube and search "Milton Friedman money". Watch the first video. You have been misled as has much of the country.
>This is of course nonsense.
>More conflating bullshit.
Nice baseless assertions.
>Any society can work as hard as it wants and grow as fast or slow as it wants, regardless of the economic system that underlies it.
Wtf mang, did you answer to the wrong post or something? I said that capitalism, along with other modern ideologies, tend to disregard key factors of civilization due to being philosophically materialistic, ie they're sadly insufficient to account for the complexity of society.
A country can't run on an economic doctrine alone. Free-ish markets are a good thing but must be constrained by more important institutions, such as those I outlined earlier.
I don't think it's that shit, it just doesn't work anymore. Sure, hundreds of years ago fertile lands, water access etc. would greatly affect the growth of a nation. But now you don't generally have famines (unless, you're a socialist of course), you have plenty of resources via international trade and geographical position of a country matters way less because of stuff like the UN
a capitalist by definition is one who lends capital. if lending is the basis of capitalism and lending is money then it is essentially the same discussion
Have you ever transitioned to capitalism???
Hope you and your generation never does.
The cruelest and soulless process/system in the history of mankind, leading to meek , uneducated , shells of people , similar to robots but not yet efficient enough.
If it is so perfect how come all of your birth rates are in sharp decline for decades now. All over capitalist world. West and East alike.
You are not breeding enough Takeshi , and that is a problem, because in few generations your IQ rates will stop climbing.
I think it is first detectable in your part of the world, because you have hyper-capitalist systems and are quite advanced technologically, however quite poor in spirit and not even a shade of
the Empire of the Rising Sun
the world once respected and honored.
People now think of you as tiny cameras clicking at tourist venues, rather than Bushido, Kendo and Samurai/Ninja legends you once were.
I think your ancestors would all collectively do sepuku if they could see what you have become, sad American vassal... In 100 years you will all be generic one nation and it makes me sad.
So sad.