• HubertManne@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Capitalism is great for handling things that are relatively unimportant. So you don’t want it for medical, education, infrastructure (including utilities), etc. Its fine for things like fashion or the various things might have around the house. Even then it must be highly regulated.

    • Badass_panda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Agreed, although I’d reframe it; capitalism is a solid default, and does a good job of innovating … but it tends to operate like gravity, the more capital you have the more you get.

      So, you need a mechanism to redistribute that capital, and you need to make sure that the things everyone is supposed to have enough of, don’t get distributed that way in the first place.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah the way I look at it, capitalism is like oxygen – completely pure, it will react almost anything and destroy it. But dilute/regulate it down, and it’s remarkably useful. Even then though, you need safeguards/antioxidants to help keep it in check.

        So the problem isn’t that we breathe oxygen – it’s that we’re breathing 100% pure oxygen instead of normal air (which is like 22% oxygen).

        • Badass_panda@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I disagree… an entirely free market ends up looking a lot like feudalism. I’m not saying propping up companies that are too big to fail isn’t a problem, I’m saying failing to do so is hardly a panacea.

        • metaStatic@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          people mistake cronyism for capitalism all the time. the free market can’t be said to have failed if it was never free in the first place. it’s like saying a tree has failed after it’s been cut down and turned into an unstable table.

          • MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Let me clear this up, speaking as a capitalist. I make oodles of money and then I pay off people and help my cronies, my cronies help me make more money. That is how a free market and capitalism works and it is working great for me. Frankly I’m offended and aghast at the idea that you don’t want it to be that way, what are you suggesting? Some sort of regulations to stop me from paying whoever I want to do whatever I want? You sound like a fucking communist!

          • Badass_panda@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Cronyism and capitalism are hardly mutually exclusive… the idea of an entirely free market is a non sequitur, as without limitations on the market, individuals within it can take control over it, rendering it non free.

          • Deceptichum@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            There is no such thing as “cronyism” it’s literally just capitalism.

            You’ve realised it’s flaws and try to pass off that problem as something different, it’s not.

            • metaStatic@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Cronyism can happen under any system. you just see what it’s done to capitalism and say “See? this is capitalism”

              Anyone who thinks communism has never been tried is making the exact same argument.

              • Deceptichum@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                You’re really not making the same argument, because even China and the USSR didn’t call themselves communist.

    • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Taxing rich people to pay for good paying jobs in healthcare, education, and utility/infrastructure maintenance would help everyone.

      Economies need to be a cycle. If the rich just hoard and don’t spend then we can’t spend either.

      So if they won’t pay a liveable wage, tax them heavily and start paying liveable wages with the money.

      • HubertManne@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Definately. One problem with money is it has no inherent value. It only has value when it is utilized. So hoarding essentially removes money from the economy. Its like potential and kinetic energy.

    • seitanic@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think worker cooperatives could handle those things better. It sounds like you’re just looking at the outcomes for consumers, not workers.