Criticism of Capitalism / Right Wing Economics pt2

I wrote an earlier post essentially making quite clear I do NOT agree with right-wing economics in ANY capacity, that means the illusion of ‘free markets’ ‘capitalism’ etc, label me a terrorist if you want, that’s what foxnews would do…oh wait the ‘left’ subscribes to the same ideas.

Here is a list I put on the last one, I will explain why these tenets are fallacious, I am adding ‘0’ as it was not there originally:

0: Growth is good (and sustainable)

Think about this for a moment, we base our economy of how much it GREW. If it grows huge, great, if it only grows a little, pain for all. Let me state this as bluntly as possible: the ONLY thing that grows forever in biology is cancer/bacteria/viruses. Hmm, maybe that is our current system?

In case you don’t get this, we CANNOT grow forever. It is physically impossible. Unless we leave this planet (less and less likely) we are constrained by space, by oil, by everything.  The fact we are based on a biologic impossibility, should make you severely question all future assumptions that ‘capitalism’ makes you believe.

1: The rich are the ‘job creators’

I like this one, because it is an excuse that if we believe it, suddenly the gods among us have to be given anything so that we MIGHT be gifted with a job by them. That any government regulation might scare these skittish gods away and make them decide they would rather just not give us jobs any more. It’s a very perverse hero-worship.

2: The rich are there because they are smarter/more capable/ had a better idea than the rest of us

This is tied to #2, where the rich are rich, because they ‘earned’ it, the lie we hear is that they must have invented something. Bill gates gets launched around everywhere as some boot strap example, ok he did, I admit that. But can you name 10 ‘rags to riches’ people? If this system was so real, shouldn’t we have some pretty easy examples of that? I am not denying it happens, but its an excuse for nepotism reality.

3: If you aren’t rich, its because you weren’t smart/capable/inventive enough

This is a variation of learned helplessness, that you shouldn’t envy the rich, just because YOU were not smart enough. Just because you don’t have an idea, you can’t hate those poor rich people. It’s a very strange psychology trick, where the rich become victims (they don’t deserve your scorn!) but the blame is completely on you, you dumb idiot.

4: If you work hard, you too will eventually be a millionaire

#3 might put the whole populace in depression (which a sizable fraction is already) so we have this convenient lie. It is vague, but ever-present. That if you work hard, YOU TOO are going to make it. To go on a bit of a short tirade it, it blows my fucking mind when I see some of my old ‘friends’ from highschool who are never-questioning republicans that grind shitty fucking jobs, and BELIEVE IN THE HEART they are going to be millionaires eventually. They are on good idea away, one year away from ‘really making it’. So…if they are going to be millionaires they don’t want them goddamn liberals taxing their shit either, so naturally, they don’t want to be hypocrites, it just wouldn’t be right, they have to be consistent after all!

It does not register to them, that they have a bacherlors degree and are making 10$/hr or, that they are working 60 hrs a week, and getting NO WHERE, that this is not going to change, that the slave class we are part of it humming along quite well.

5: The government is evil, and does nothing good except perhaps defense

You see this one more out of the libertarian/tea party movement, and quite frankly its deceptive, and delusional. Does the government waste money, is it over-extended, etc, fuck yes it is. But to think that because it is sometimes bad, it must be extinguished only serves to fulfill the fantasy mad max fantasy wet dream of every man for himself (which ironically a lot of libertarians would get their ass smoked in such a situation)

Never are things like space exploration, road building, national forest etc EVER mentioned. I have actually had libertarians argue to me that roads should be PRIVATELY BUILT. If you legitimately think the pure-reliance our economy has on the roadway system could be privately sustained you need to seriously think about things. Roads, like the grid is NOT profitable for individuals to subsidize, that is why it takes a collective effort to pay these things.

6: The ‘Private Sector’ can do anything the government can do, better, cheaper, and more ‘free’

Like #5, the gov has a LOT of problems, I admit that. But the right/libertarians think that because a part of it is broke, lets kill the whole thing. That instead of the government propping up national parks, lets sell it off, whoever buys it will have a REASON to keep it clean – goes the logic. However, what if a company buys up a national park and…lets strip mine that bitch. Hey, its ‘private’ property, go cry your liberal tears somewhere else commy!

Of course the major problem with this, is that ‘externalities’ are NOT included. I strip mine ‘my’ forest and it doesn’t matter if it floods someone down stream, that’s an externality – a huge huge problem with ‘free markets’.

7: Capitalism is the only ‘free’ system, where the best rise to the top

This is just a typical talking point, designed to short-circuit thinking processes. Everyone wants to be free, so by extension, you should subscribe to capitalism, after all, if you work hard, YOU TOO will be a millionaire. See how all of these play back into themselves?

8:There is nothing wrong with capitalism, and anyone criticizing it is likely a Liberal/Commy

I have made a few facetious jokes already about this, but this is very true. How come we cannot have a realistic debate about a growth-based economy being unsustainable without getting cognitive dissonance, that this person must be a commy if they are criticizing ‘what made America great’.

9: (Unspoken but critical) Money/Wealth is real

Our money is FIAT, that means it has value because we are told it has value. We got off the gold standard in the 70s, meaning that your dollar is now completely meaningless other than what others believe. Now, I understand that ‘money’ is a social lubricant that allows me to buy a cow while you use it to buy a car or whatever the typical stupid examples economists use to think they are real smart. I get it, and for that it has purpose. But…when you say it is supposed to do that, but then proceed to continue printing more money, it makes the other money worthless. When we over-leverage (meaning banks have approx. 1 dollar for every 100 in accounts – this trend holds nationwide) there is more ‘money’ then there is real shit in the whole world! That is a very serious problem for a system we are supposed to take serious.

10: Efficiency and new substitution of goods

The major counter to my point that growth isn’t endless is that ‘smart’ people will come up with new efficiencies, or new goods.   It is a kind of ‘the lights have always turned on before, why would this be different’ mentality of not grasping that things could ever change. Oh, who cares if we are burning up all the oil/coal, once we run out there will be a ‘market impetus’ to invent a new energy system.

This is extremely short-sighted and…what if there ISN’T a new energy? I personally think there ARE energies out there like practical fusion etc, but what if we run out of oil and we do not have the technology or research done? What if we need to get to space to find the next energy, but we ran out of oil?

You can only make things so efficient, you actually hit limits. We can makes cars frictionless, we can’t make houses 100% thermal units, so these efficiencies help us ‘grow’ for a bit, but its accounting tricks that are not sustainable.

*

The major problem I have with capitalism is that it is a competitive system that pits man vs man (how great the pseudo-badasses pretend!) so instead of combining our resources to do something, we spent them out doing the other. I mentioned space, I heard somewhere that to mind asteroids it will take trillions of dollars to invest in the industry to do it, but that the boon will be unprecedented in human history. In short, free markets can not ever mine asteroids, the ‘start up’ costs are far far too high for any corporation. It can not sustain set backs, losses, or even getting out of whatever market it got its original money.   This is assuming we were to start now before we run out of oil. Instead of us spending resources to out compete each other for limited, depleting resources, we can put our resources together (which is taxes, and it gets us things like roads, parks, a military etc) and perhaps get off this planet.

Because otherwise our ‘growth’ is going to kill the host (earth) before killing ourselves, like all good cancers.

ek26

 

Advertisements

34 thoughts on “Criticism of Capitalism / Right Wing Economics pt2

  1. if you want to read some crazy shit, visit Advocaus Diaboli…

    http://dissention.wordpress.com/2011/11/10/modern-contraception-destroyed-internal-slavery/

    He still contributes to the transfer of wealth from men to women because he visits prostitutes–my opinion it should be legal but to do it more than rarely is worse than letting yourself get addicted to drugs or alcohol and isn’t really a MGTOW path…

    yeah, stop listening to the man-0-sphere 30k millionaires–or is that 30k in debt…

  2. Lots of good points worth considering, but what is happening in point 3? Are you saying it’s ok to hate rich people just because they are rich and nothing else? To me, the quote you criticise is the opposite of learned helplessness – it doesn’t say you’re dumb, it says you haven’t come up with the right ideas yet, and haven’t done the right things. If anything, it’s optimistic. Of course, getting rich requires a degree of luck too, and sometimes “the right things” you need to do are dishonest. If anything, the quote is too optimistic (I guess to give the person more motivation and drive)

  3. People didn’t always live under the “growth is always good” paradigm.

    Looking back at the origins of the usury ban, societies back in the day had few to no income producing capital assets. But it wasn’t a “misunderstanding of capital markets” like some today would deem it. It served a function. Bans on usury were stabilizing.

    In the past, a debtor frequently became a slave. A person without a stake in society isn’t as liable to defend it. States were weakening by dispossessed freeholders and and insolvent debtors. Then came the age of smoke-stack industries and those who maintained the usury ban weren’t able to compete as well. Large-scale industry is hampered without credit markets. With the outsourcing of our industry (Bill Gates may have created American jobs back in the day but he is creating far more Chinese jobs now) we’re now experiencing the consequences of too easy credit combined with few jobs, no savings, no opportunities and the “American dream” taking its last gasp as millions of people lose their stake in society.

    • There have been entire years when I didn’t have access to media. No news is good news and when you’re surrounded by people you care for and have no idea that something bad is happening every nanosecond in the world, it feels safe.
      Those were my happiest times. Think I need to unplug for a couple of weeks at least, and do some yoga. Good writeup EK.

  4. Good post – I should have noticed it sooner.

    As for Bill Gates – he did NOT lift himself up. He was born into a rich, well-connected family and his mother made a lot of business contacts for him.

  5. I’ve tried to say some of those things and not put it nearly as clearly as you have. Nice work. I’m bookmarking this one.

    P.S. Your name reminds me of a very, very bad Australian merchant bank…

  6. Pingback: Capitalists are Hoes! I mean, Capitalism, Ho! | gaikokumaniakku

  7. But, shouldn’t the economy grow? After all, new people enter the labor market every year. It would seem that if the economy did not grow, these people would not have jobs. I suppose if as many people left as entered the labor market, the economy would not need to grow.

    Capitalism has its flaws, but no other type of economy produces wealth so well. As G. K. Chesterton said, the greatest problem occurs in a capitalist system only when there are too few capitalists. After all, communism made Russia impoverished. Socialist systems are ruining several European countries, especially Greece and Spain. What better system is there?

    • Nothing can grow forever, what we are essentially subscrbing too is a pyramid scheme. It is really that simple, take it to an extreme. What if our economy grows 1000% for 1 year, ten years, etc, is there ANY LAND LEFT?

      • I see what you mean. We don’t have an infinity of resources. Even so, some are renewable and we won’t see the end of even non-renewable resources for a very, very long time. After all, the amount of resources we need are determined by the amount of people on earth, and these people either produce goods themselves or allow others to profit off of their needs, e.g. patients make being a doctor profitable and children aid teachers similarly.

        People are great at adapting to changes. If there were no land left for settlement, we should build more cities. But, with countries like Russia, Canada, and America, where tons of land is still available, we won’t have to worry about it for a great while. Either a new Dark Age will hit us and cause rapid population decline or people will find a new way to survive under those conditions.

        • We are going to enter a new dark age…precisely for the reason I am espousing, running out of resources: namely oil, which then effects things like energy, plastics, water, fertilizer…

    • When examining the flaws in Capitalism, I think it’s important to consider the free market is a utopian dream. It doesn’t exist, and won’t, and can’t.
      The larger-scale the enterprise the more direct and indirect problems introduced into the system.
      The example of the owner of a local pie or sandwich shop, for instance, might be fine for illustrative theoretical purposes but it has little bearing on the way things work in practical reality. In theory market choices will be determined based on self interest…in the real world, especially the global economy, everyone is so removed from the direct consequences of their market choices there is little, often no basis whatsoever on which such determinations can be made.

      • The interesting thing about the market is that it tends to function well with little oversight. The other two options besides the free market are markets with either limited or complete government interference. At very least, the government needs to have a body of laws which encourage fair play.

        But, potential problems start to arise when the government interferes in the market more than this. One must find the balance between the extremes of laissez-faire capitalism and Fascism or Communism. I think it better to err more on the side of laissez-faire capitalism than the side of governments with central planning bodies. After all, once the government can influence the market by passing laws beyond those required for fair play, political corruption starts to breed in government as businesses try to influence government representatives to pass laws favorable to them or vote against laws unfavorable to them. Conversely, politicians begin to threaten businesses with laws harmful to their businesses if they do not receive the right amount of bribe money. Thus, America has a system of crony capitalism, which is the worst form of capitalism possible!

        So, I think that it’s better to allow people to have the freedom to pursue bad ideas and to let their failure or success determine whether or not their enterprise is a good one. Otherwise, we’ll have the universe of Psycho-Pass, where people are told they cannot pursue their dreams because their aptitude tests suggest a better place for them in society.

          • Psycho-Pass was my favorite anime of 2013. It’s a very dark show–very different from your run of the mill shonen. But it’s not entirely original since the scenario reminds one of Minority Report. It shows a utopian society where everyone is given a job based on their aptitude tests and people with violent psyches are removed from society before they can commit a crime. Everything seems very logical and well-ordered until we delve deeper into the way their system works.

            It ran simultaneously with another dystopian show: Shin Sekai Yori. And I think that Psycho-Pass was the better of the two.

      • Exactly, good point Liz, the major thing too is capitilism/free market is based on the idea that you have choices (not always true, esp. in monopoly) AND that you have ‘rationale’ buyers, those who research products etc, needless to say, a very bad assumption.

  8. Interesting fact I just found out: Many of the businesses in Venezuela only accept US dollars. Not their own currency. Although the government has pegged the US dollar to Venezualan currency, in practical reality it doesn’t work that way and they have a thriving black market underground where currency is traded for dollars. Often, when a credit card is accepted the actual transaction point is somewhere in the states (a go-between third party)…so that the transaction is made in US dollars. Thought that was pretty fascinating.

    Very often, blackmarket activities are ignored in the overall equation but they can make up a huge part of the economy. The Italian economy would have collapsed long ago without it. But those transactions aren’t legal and therefore hidden. Think last I heard (best estimate) the blackmarket economy (transactions made “under the table”) made up over a third of economic transactions. From what I’ve seen, I’m betting it’s more.

    • The above one third of transactions was for Italy, intended to say. A lot of people think of stolen kidneys when they hear “black market economy” but it’s not that at all. It’s more like retiring with a pension and then continuing to do business with one’s former employer for cash under the table, or working extra hours for cash under the table, or doing work/selling under the table…and so forth.

      • They have a name for it. The economia sommersa (submerged economy). There are essentially two sides to the underground economy…one the “highly” illegal (like trading in stolen goods, drugs, ect). The other is tax avoidance business measures. If the business pays you in a way to avoid taxes, it’s part of the underground economy. (Italy has some really crippling taxes and labor laws, essentially all businesses do this, from the mom and pop shops to large scale enterprise).

  9. Wahey for bashing capitalism and free markets while enjoying all the massive benefits they have granted to the people in your country. Try being born in a socialist/statist shithole of a country like I was – where ‘you have it, therefore I take it’ is the law and there’s virtually no entrepreneurship, companies refuse to hire thanks to excess regulation, everything is 3x more expensive than in the US (with inferior quality) and the only real ambition one could have is to run for public office, despite all the land and natural resources available – and I want to see you saying the same stuff. Capitalism isn’t perfect, no, and I acknowledge that it has its flaws (although some of the points you made are logical fallacies or straight-up lies, e.g. I’ve never heard one single libertarian say you will necessarily become rich if you work hard enough), but the current alternatives are way worse. Besides, you do realize that feminism is nothing more than a cog in the leftist machinery, right? Feminists want to divide society by creating ‘privileged’ vs ‘oppressed’ categories, thus giving more power to the state, and are NO different from the leftists who defend racial quotas and rampant taxation for the sake of promoting ‘social justice’. Feminism and socialism walk hand in hand. Go to any anti-capitalist conference and guess what you will find there: Feminists, by the score, along with other statists. Being a socialist and an anti-feminist is tantamount to claiming to be a secular Jew and an Islamic jihadist at the same time and I hope you eventually come to realize that.

    • ‘I’ve never heard one single libertarian say you will necessarily become rich if you work hard enough’
      What do you think drives the ENTIRE libertarian dogma? Its this thought they are the best and repressed by ‘evil’ government and without them they’d be millionaires.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s