Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,292,000 Posts!
Poker ForumFTR Community

Anti-Capitalist Sentiment (with some morality)

Results 1 to 75 of 1312

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    capitalism stifles human technological evolution;

    So oil companies aren't buying out energy patents?

    capitalism encourages, rather than punishes, immoral practises;

    So a corporation that dumps hazardous toxins in the Ecuadorian rainforest is not saving more money than one that disposes of it responsibly?

    capitalism rewards scarcity and thus discourages abundant resources from being used in favour of scarce resources;

    http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.co...ood-thing.html

    capitalism promotes an every man for himself mentality, and thus destroys community;

    Explain how this is false please.

    captialism causes envy between peers, and thus breeds crime.

    This is perhaps arguable, but human nature is not genetic, it's nurtured.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    capitalism stifles human technological evolution;

    So oil companies aren't buying out energy patents?
    They may be. I'm not sure what the relevance is. Whole lots of different people buy up whole lots of different patents

    There has been tremendous innovation in the energy industry over the years. Like super crazy mega lots of technological evolution. It isn't that other non-fossil sources of energy sources aren't big because of the oil and coal industry stifling them. They're weak because the populace is afraid of the word "nuclear" and virtually everything else is still too expensive. Regardless, there is still a shitload of tech evolution in energy in just about every form. Even though we don't use nuclear even though the most powerful companies want to, it still has evolved tremendously. Both fossil and renewable forms are constantly, rapidly improving

    capitalism encourages, rather than punishes, immoral practises;

    So a corporation that dumps hazardous toxins in the Ecuadorian rainforest is not saving more money than one that disposes of it responsibly?
    A company that does this is likely saving money, but the cause and effect relationship isn't about capitalism. All forms of governments do this, and when they do it, it's usually much worse. Banana republics are great examples of this, and they did not operate on capitalist principles as much as they did mercantile and feudal ones (mainly feudal). The ecological destruction caused by BP is noooooooothing compared to regular non-capitalists in, say, Somalia. Even if capitalism did encourage immoral behavior, how do you know it's more than the other options? Regardless, how can it be said capitalism doesn't punish immoral practices when your right to property (possessions, land, your body) are protected by capitalist principles? This one could get really drawn out so I'll just end it there

    capitalism rewards scarcity and thus discourages abundant resources from being used in favour of scarce resources;

    http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.co...ood-thing.html
    It just straight up doesn't. Look around. Virtually everything is about growth upon growth upon growth of resource use, and not just use, but creation of new resources. Even in those companies that people dont like, like oil, they're pulling out as much of it as possible. They're evolving tech so much that they can pull out even more. Within the system, there are a handful of outliers, like diamonds or farm subsidies, but they're not the capitalist model. They're caused by unique outlying factors, and should probably be dealt with.

    But even then, diamonds remain the monopoly it is because nobody actually needs them. People are willing to shell out 4k for something that costs just a couple hundred bucks and is not necessary for anything. This isn't really a problem. I mean, it's sort of a problem in that it shows how malleable and myopic humans are, but De Beers isn't fucking you over with the price gouging. They're letting you fuck yourself over. Now, in the examples where this sort of gouging is for things that people actually need, it always gets dealt with. You can guarantee that if our cars were fueled by diamonds, De Beers' monopoly would get crushed, and the cost of diamonds would plummet to a more natural level

    capitalism promotes an every man for himself mentality, and thus destroys community;

    Explain how this is false please.
    Maybe if you said every company for itself or every class of companies, it could look true on the surface. I don't really know how to respond to this statement because it's so demonstrably false. The workforce and enterprise are dynamic. People have to use their capital to get things, but this isn't what "every man for himself" looks like

    captialism causes envy between peers, and thus breeds crime.

    This is perhaps arguable, but human nature is not genetic, it's nurtured.
    History didn't start with Adam Smith. This stuff was far worse before, and crime reduction correlates with capitalism very well. The ability to labor and stuff requires a secure environment, after all.

    People who resort to crime don't do it because of capitalism, they do it for other reasons. Capitalism has made it easier not to resort to crime, because it has created more resources and is the only known way for you to create more resources.

    renton, do you think that community spirit is strong in our current economic system?
    This sort of thing is more about how populations interact than capitalism. We don't have a "community spirit" because we're not horticulturalists or pastoralists or foragers whose main power structure is through lineages

    But even then, we do have a lot of strong community oriented stuff. I hear tales of otherwise agnostic folk who convert to Mormonism just because they see how strong and charitable the community. Everybody loves their football team. Family ties are still strong, but obviously not nearly as strong as they used to be, but this change, like with all the changes on this issue, are about population size, economic dynamism, and transportation growth

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •