- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Thats your opinion of reality, fine

Posted by: The oinker (Capitalist Pig) ( Freedom from socialist delusions, USA ) on July 02, 1999 at 14:18:48:

In Reply to: A Reply To The Oinker posted by Asarualim on June 30, 1999 at 10:24:58:

: I know this isn't my thread but the arguements being made by the little piggy just drove me to make some comments.

I appreciate your indulgence comrade.

: : The market doesnt fail to provide for the poor. it doesnt provide for anyone

: THAT is what's wrong with it.
Thats your opinion of reality, fine

: : People have to provide for themselves. the market only efficiently allocates resources. If you produce $20.00 worth of goods or services you are paid that amount so that you can purchase $20.00 worth of goods or services that you wish to consume.

: That is not true. Where does the profit come from hmmm?

Yes it is true. example 1. If you produce the entire product from start to finish own or rent the bulding used for production, perform all the labor, own all the equipment with which to produce, purchased the raw materials to do so, and retail it yourself ie. absorb all marketing costs. You will receive the market price for the product ie. what the consumers are willing to pay.
If you do not have all of the above you will not receive the full market price because technically you have not contributed everything needed to bring the product to the consumer. Labor is just one part of the equation.

The theory of surplus value is flawed because it does not consider risk. That is where profit comes from. If I own the bldg. and all the means of production and employ you. You make the product I pay you regardless of selling the product. That is my risk. If my process or my product inferior and the consumer does not purchase it I risk loss. you the employee does not. If someone is harmed by my product I am liable you are not. You as the employee have received what you have produced, one portion of the process of production.

Also, your conception of capitalism fails to account for economic

My conception of capitlism cannot be captured in a singe sentence I assure you.
Economic growth, true economic growth comes through productivity gains.
This is also the only true way to increase the standard of living. This is why unions are inherently self destructive. (More on that another time) If it costs less to produce a product that contributes to growth. For example computers have become faster and cheaper. This allows more businesses to afford them. These businesses become more productive. Lets say one person can do the job of two. To the shallow thinking socialist this is bad, but it is good. Milton Friedman calls it creative destruction. This person is now freed to be more productive somewhere else. the economy grows, costs of goods and services decline, consumers enjoy more purchaing power.
Feel free to ask questions.

how do business cycles develop?

A good question comrade. All natural things are cyclical. The seasons , the weather and especially humans. a free market economy is simply the daily commerce of a free society. If those people go through cycles ie. demogaphics, education, invention, all these effect the market. If it had no cycles it would have to be unnatural.

: :The market is fair in this sense however it may not square with our sense of social justice.

: Well poverty, social dislocation, decadent materialism,
Did free market economics create this? or have they always been around? Are they part of the human condition?

Democracy and a free people go hand and hand with a free market and self determination.

: :This why there are progressive taxes and other forms of wealth redistribution. Politicians have decided they will correct the so called social inequalities of the market by extracting income from those that have produced it and giving it to those who have not.
: This causes most of the crises in the market not the market itself.

: You are oh so wrong here. Recessions are the result of too much saving and not enough consuming. Over allocation of saving only occurs when there is an uneven distribution of wealth, hence the more even the disrtribution of wealth, the more anticyclical the economy becomes. Furthermore, the progressive tax system is even better at being countercyclical because it automatically removes more money from the economy in prosperopus times, reducing inflation, and places more money in the economy during recessions, stimulating the economy. This is why progressive tax systems are considered by economists to be automatic stabilizers i.e it prevents teh economy from going into wasteful, excessive booms and busts.

Keynesian economics is losing many followers, I suggest you read Milton friedman.

: : Deathy I understand where you are coming from with your concern for the poor but I think you'll agree the poor are better off in a strong economy rather than a weak one. When resources are misallocated through gov't programs they are used inefficently thereby acting as a drag on the economy as a whole.

Our economy is rigged by large corporations, rich bond holders, and money centered banks to promote profits.

More conpiratorial left wing delusions. Corporations are beholden to consumers. Do you remember betamax? Wang labs? Coleco? eight track tape players, record players, the horse and buggy? Corporations rise and fall continually along with their products which come and go as the consumers decides.

Moreover, there is no intrinsic reason why the free market, if it actually was free, would actual provide for the needs of the people.

the needs of the people are met by delivering goods and services efficiently to those who wish to purchase them. That is it. It does not discriminate it does not "think" it does not "decide" that one person deserves more than another. You get out of it what you put into it. Just like life, just like anything else.

: : : :Usually those who have failed blame the system instead of themselves. It easier to blame a faceless system for ones personal lack of success.

. Property, capital, rent, interest, etc. are mere creations of our brains, clever words concocted by econiomist, to rationalize the current social relations of production.

Yes at some point humans came out of the caves and said, I am good at making this, and you are good at making that why dont we trade. Everything was built from that. It has gotten much more complicated, so much that we pay people to explain and forcast it for us.

: : Don't start using children to peddle your socialist dogma. Use ideas not propaganda. Having children is a choice. Lay the blame where it belongs.

: Non sequitor.

: : Its an interesting coincindence that the countries with the most generous unemployment benefits have the highest rate of unemployment.
: : The stronger the saftey net the more it becomes a bed. Why have BMW and Mercedes opened factories in the U.S. ? Productivity.
: : Your welfare state has destroyed you economy not the market. your blaming the wrong thing.

: This is the problem with globalization, it erodes the welfare state, hence leaving capital opne to destroy itself.

You have it reversed comrade. If globalization and free trade is allowed to continue free markets will triumph over the bloated welfare state. the way to destroy free markets is through regulation and taxation it won't destroy itself. only socialism does that.

: : As for falling wages in the U.S. when you consider healthcare benefits and other non wage compensation wages have not declined unless of course you factor in the highest taxes as a percentage of GDP in history. Again you are blaming the wrong thing.

: Wrong again. Real wages, along with productivity, have stagnated the last thirty years. It is only until recently that things have begune to pick up, eight years into an economic expansion!!!

Your are restating the others proposition and being duped into following left wing statistics.
See my reply above and if you still dont believe me why has the average home size increased in the U.S. over the last thirty years? That is not symptomatic of falling wages.

: : P.S. what does Buh mean?

: That's a good question.

I thought so

Follow Ups:


The Debating Room Post a Followup