Originally posted by Claw
'classical economic' - nice words, little meaning. Say, we always knew the best way to deal with things eh? Nah. It's just the simplest approach.
And we got where we are with our hands and brains, and our social abilities... like, we don't just try to survive on our own, but help each other, and we don't keep our knowledge sectret, but teach it to everyone so following generations can build on it... we aren't intelligent to reinvent everything if we lost all knowledge right now... we accumulated all our knowledge over millions of years, and our first steps into using tools were more vital than the computer I am using now... we seem to advance faster now, but it's not capitalism that allows us to do it, but technology. Scientists are rarely capitalists, and seldom rich, even the famous ones. They gave us airplanes and CD players and TV, not the capitalists that put a region code on DVDs so we can't play a film released for the US market on a European DVD player... THAT is capitalism. IBM keeping RISC processor technology hidden (or trying to) so they could sell their older machines is practiced capitalism, too. Pursuing economic self-interest.
Our world is not entirely capitalistic - better be thankful for that.
Maybe I should correct myself. Capitalists don't have to be bad I guess. Propably spirit can be a capitalist and still be a good person. EDIT: Just had a look at a pro-cap website. Now I see spirit really isn't a capitalist if he thinks rich people should be charitable. That idea contradicts the capitalistic idea.
I believe in forcing people to do right. You disagree? Then do, but don't tell me people may do what they want... they may not. There are rules, and that a rule doesn't exist yet is no argument against it. (Whoops - that one was directed against spirit's "there is no law" argument)
And hey, when did I say 25%? I recall mentioning 1% once. Stop laying words into my mouth that aren't mine.
Maybe we became what we are in spite of capitalism d00d...
"The essential nature of capitalism is social harmony through the pursuit of self-interest. Under capitalism, the individual's pursuit of his own economic self-interest simultaneously benefits the economic self-interests of all others." - http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~shadab/capit-2.html#2
Spirit said rich people should give money to help, which doesn't help their economic self-interest, so he isn't a "true" capitalist.
Blah. Sorry. Industry made my shoes, not capitalism. Sorry to say, but like Spirit you seem to think I deny having money, making money, enjoying luxury.. did you read my posts at all?
Capitalism isn't trade. Capitalism is an ideology saying that everyone should stife for his own interest only. No welfare needed... "All do their share, all get their share" is the ideal. But not all jobless are just lazy, and should you believe that you were an idiot.
It's not that I want to deny rich people to lean back and enjoy their wealth. I just want 'em to be a bit less like Uncle Scrooge.
Nah. Capitalism is a socio-economic ideaology. It doesn't influence, it is the basis of a society.
I do not know keynesian and I do not like terms; it's especially difficult to understand English terms in a matter I am not too familiar with. If you want to tell me something express it so I can understand it without looking up the meaning of words I never heard of. 
I do see where you're coming from, but we're all in this together now
Where am I coming from? My father is a hedonist yaknow. I am a believing in social democracy. Not the corrupt political party but the ideology.
And I don't see what you mean by 'together' - [capitalist] I am a free individual and care only about myself [/capitalist]
Capitalism doesn't give you all this. It doesn't prevent you from having it, but capitalism isn't responsible for you having it.
Our wealth is a result of our improved technology.
Our living standards have been improving constantly since we started using tools.
Capitalism is a non-abstract and simple to understand ideology kinda "everyone does his share, everyone gets his share"
People in China have computers too. And it's not communism that oppresses the people, it's powerful people. And those exist in our "free" world too. [/B][/QUOTE]
If you don't know what I'm talking about when I mention classical economics and keynesian economics then you probably shouldn't go around saying "capitalism is this" "capitalism is not this it's that"
Classical economics is what america was running on in the sixties, deregulated, streamlined free market, little governmet intervention... a powerhouse of wealth in the right scenario.
Keynesian economics is a theory of regulated economics, using constant checks and govt intervention to try and stop the growth/burst scenario of classical economics....it's also a basis for many of worlds welfare states....... That's a very generalised overview. Inform yourself if you wish to know more.
I agree that capitalism has primarily been about increasing the material wealth of the individual, but its not all doom and gloom in the sense that we only care for ourselves when we try to be 'good capitalists'
The welfare state is an exampe of this. A collective of people working with the aim of creating a net.. of sorts. To try and prevent extreme poverty for those at the bottom of the socio-economic pile..... as well as other specific benefits like accident compensation and free healthcare. Using capital to create more capital also creates revenue for the system of welfare. Yes there are leeches in this system, but it also works to help alot of ppl who would otherwise be homeless individuals with no hope at all.
Capitalism could be anything we want it to be when we realise that it's a means to an end, and nothing more.
When I say that capitalism influences ideologies.... I mean that it's just a tool of social organisation that can be used to do so... it doesn't inherently do it by itself. In this way we can see that labelling people as true capitalists is only a byproduct of how they have used the tools at their disposal. Defining and confining the tool because of how it is being used is probably not a great thing.
Regarding technology and information, I whole heartidly agree. Information and knowledge is not something to be horded(sp?) like gold, it's necessary for the positive development of society, and should be shared freely...... this reminds of that old series The Thunder Birds.. and how much better off that world would have been if they had shared their tech with the outside world instead of hiding on their crappy little island. But then the story would have been pretty ghey
I can't really say I've ever met or heard of someone who would never give any money or specific knowledge away becasue it was ....un-captitalisitc....It suppose it's been rationalised in some round about way , talking about excess and the trickle down effect of wealth, yadda ya.... but in the end it's just greed that seems to be a major motivator.
btw I never thought that you denied money and it's associated benefits, I would be a fool to think that seeing as you seem to be the owner of a computer and you use the internet
