|
|
 Originally Posted by OngBonga
What, like love? Friendship? Community? Art? Chess?
Yeah, actually. Pre-capitalist societies had to struggle so hard to even stay alive that there wasn't really much time for chess or art or love. Those things are actually secondary needs which take a back seat to food/shelter/security, and increasing the wealth of a society allows people to have easier lives and more free time to spend on artistic endeavors, or freedom to have relationships outside of pure utility ("I have to stay with this poor of the world).
Now i'm sure your rebuttal will be that socialist policies or the resource-based economy idea would alleviate the problems of the poor, but that's just not practically possible. Capitalism as I said recognizes that scarcity exists, and attempts to deal with it in the best way, resources are distributed based on their greatest need. Socialism attempts to mask scarcity and often outright denies its existence, with devastating consequences that leave the poor even poorer than they started.
|
Reply With Quote