2 edits
Originally posted by spruce112358Is it? Is it really?
Freedom of choice is what capitalism is all about.
Out here in the part of the world I live in, capitalism is "all about" paying workers the mathematical minimum, charging as much as you can, even if you could provide goods/services to more people by charging less, and placing the interests of shareholders over all other factors and all other stakeholders - including the environment, local laws, human suffering, human decency in general, and above all, placing the interests of shareholders over "freedom of choice" for millions of people working in the sweat shops that make "capitalism" possible.
And yet you say freedom of choice is what capitalism is all about?
Perhaps what you meant was "freedom of choice is what capitalism is all about" as far as reasonably prosperous people in developed countries are concerned?
N.B: 🙂
Originally posted by FMFJust thought I'd blow the Wajoma Horn.
Out here in the part of the world I live in, capitalism is "all about" paying workers the mathematical minimum, charging as much as you can, even if you could provide goods/services to more people by charging less, and placing the interests of shareholders over all other factors and all other stakeholders - including the environment, local laws, human suffer ...[text shortened]... choice" for millions of people working in the sweat shops that make "capitalism" possible.
Originally posted by FMFI would say people are reasonably prosperous in developed countries because of a couple hundred years of capitalism and, yes, we went through the phase your part of the world is going through, too.
Is it? Is it really?
Out here in the part of the world I live in, capitalism is "all about" paying workers the mathematical minimum, charging as much as you can, even if you could provide goods/services to more people by charging less, and placing the interests of shareholders over all other factors and all other stakeholders - including the environment, loca ...[text shortened]... as far as reasonably prosperous people in developed countries are concerned?
N.B: 🙂
I wish there were a shortcut -- one can imagine there must be one. I wonder.
Let me know if you find it.
1 edit
Originally posted by spruce112358Do you seriously think it is in the nature of capitalism to "allow" all countries to become developed countries in the same sense as the reasonably prosperous people in developed countries would define "developed countries"?
I would say people are reasonably prosperous in developed countries because of a couple hundred years of capitalism and, yes, we went through the phase your part of the world is going through, too.
Capitalism thrives on paying infrahuman wages. When the whole world has "[gone] through the phase [my] part of the world is going through", in what countries will capitalism find enough people who "choose" to work for infrahuman wages?
The "200 years" thing sounds like "and you'll not live to see if my test tube theory works!'
I would say that people are reasonably prosperous in developed countries like Britain because for a couple of hundred years gradually blossoming democracy and elements of socialism reined in and moderated the predatory nature of capitalism. And now we see "capitalism" aggressively disallowing developing countries from using the self same recipe that made developed countries "propserous" during those 200 years.
Originally posted by spruce112358If you own nothing, are you allowed to do nothing? Conversely, if you own much, are you allowed to do much? Does your freedom of action depend on your level of wealth? The more wealth you have, the greater freedom you have access to?
More about what you are allowed to do with things you own.
Originally posted by spruce112358What markets? WHO would access them? Who has the money to access these markets?
What do you think would help Gaza more right now:
A) Socialism
B) Free access to markets (i.e. Capitalism)
The only way people in Gaza can get access to international markets is through foreigners giving these guys money.
In otherwords, modern socialism.
Unless you are a proponent of the IMF model of indebting countries up the ying-yang through "subsidies" and we've all seen how "successful" that has been for most 2nd and 3rd world countries.
