{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by Bistromathics:
4/13/2014 5:42:07 PM
19
"Capitalism simply isn't working"
[url=http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/12/capitalism-isnt-working-thomas-piketty]Guardian article on a new and slightly controversial book from French economist Thomas Piketty.[/url]
[quote]...Piketty is in no doubt, as he indicates in an interview in today's Observer New Review, that the current level of rising wealth inequality, set to grow still further, now imperils the very future of capitalism. He has proved it.
It is a startling thesis and one extraordinarily unwelcome to those who think capitalism and inequality need each other. Capitalism requires inequality of wealth, runs this right-of-centre argument, to stimulate risk-taking and effort; governments trying to stem it with taxes on wealth, capital, inheritance and property kill the goose that lays the golden egg. Thus Messrs Cameron and Osborne faithfully champion lower inheritance taxes, refuse to reshape the council tax and boast about the business-friendly low capital gains and corporation tax regime.
Piketty deploys 200 years of data to prove them wrong. Capital, he argues, is blind. Once its returns – investing in anything from buy-to-let property to a new car factory – exceed the real growth of wages and output, as historically they always have done (excepting a few periods such as 1910 to 1950), then inevitably the stock of capital will rise disproportionately faster within the overall pattern of output. Wealth inequality rises exponentially.[/quote]
[url=http://www.amazon.com/Capital-Twenty-First-Century-Thomas-Piketty/dp/067443000X]Capital in the Twenty-First Century[/url] is pretty much on fire right now and has brought its author into the limelight. Thomas Piketty, from the Paris School of Economics, has analyzed hundreds of years of data and come to the conclusion that massive wealth inequality is very detrimental and very inevitable in our current, capitalist structures.
[url=http://www.vox.com/2014/4/8/5592198/the-short-guide-to-capital-in-the-21st-century]Here is a quick guide to the book and Piketty's arguments.[/url]
[url=http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/may/08/thomas-piketty-new-gilded-age/]Unsurprisingly, the most thorough review of the book comes from a certain left-leaning economist.[/url]
-
1 ReplyThe Soviet Union couldn't even last 80 years, capitalism has been going strong for nearly 400.
-
Obviously a commie.
-
Edited by M37h3w3: 4/27/2014 3:58:42 AMGood thing we don't have Capitalism in America. Just good ol' fashioned Crony-Capitalism. Wait. -blam!-!
-
2 RepliesI started writing a massive post to counter the topic of this thread, but I was beginning to start an entire book, lol! Simply put, Capitalism is supposed to be about working hard, giving your best in anything you do and moving up in the workforce so you can become a success. Not everyone is guaranteed this and there will be losers in a capitalist economy. It doesn't mean that they have to stay losers. It's their freedom to choose whether they stay losers or find a new avenue to success. That's the nature of capitalism. The economy you are seeing now is [i]not[/i] capitalism. It's a hybrid monstrosity that's slowly being morphed into more of a socialistic economy, by the government, where the government dictates who wins and who loses instead of letting the free market decide. Yes, the rich are getting richer and poor are getting poorer, but [i]not[/i] because of capitalism. If you understand basic economics and pay attention to what the crooks in Washington D.C. are doing (both D's and R's), you'll realize this is all a power grab that will result in most everyone losing in the end. As a side note- not all rich people are evil, fat cats screwing the little, hard-working guy. There are plenty of rich people that actual donate tons of money to charity and build their businesses to promote job growth and opportunity for more Americans to one day become wealthy themselves. That's capitalism at it's best. The major news outlets will rob you of this reality and only focus on the small bunch of rich jerks that take their money and horde it while paying off politicians to help game the system so they can get richer and prevent others from becoming wealthy on their own. Dang, that was still pretty long. My bad.
-
Inb4thisturnsintoapoliticalshitstorm. Again. Go ahead B.net, surprise me. It's not working and if you point that out then you are some kind of national socialist goy communist shrekless heathen obama worshipping newfriend.
-
1 ReplyWhoever wrote this is a communist anus wiper.
-
Saved for later, thanks for the post! My thoughts on this are, of course it doesn't work, it's a system that breeds greed and will always create a hierarchy.
-
America hasn't been capitalist for 100 years.
-
[quote]The ratio of wealth to income is rising in all developed countries. Absent extraordinary interventions, we should expect that trend to continue. If it continues, the future will look like the 19th century, where economic elites have predominantly inherited their wealth rather than working for it. The best solution would be a globally coordinated effort to tax wealth.[/quote] What the -blam!-? His solution isn't even anti-capitalistic.
-
4 RepliesEdited by Ricochet 049: 4/21/2014 10:45:42 AMWe are not in a capitalist economy. We are in a semi socialist monopoly. Try and make a new car brand. You will have to pay billions just to get passed the initial "I think I'll start this" stage, because they have implemented laws to prevent future competition. When I say free trade, I mean an open market that allows people to actually engage in it. Rather than be force fed the same crap so only a few can live "the good life".
-
And Communism does?
-
1 ReplyEdited by Gaara444: 4/21/2014 12:26:35 AM>Implying monopolies capture true capitalism There wouldn't be such a huge wealth inequality if people created competition before the beasts got too big. Also, what does he suggest? Socialism? Wealth is not the same as income, you can tax a man for having a factory but you can't redistribute that factory, all Socialism would do is put the factory in the hands of the government. Now people would think that would destroy the "Rich Vs. Poor" because they would be under this delusion that the government is going to do things right. Because governments have had amazing track records of always being right, right?
-
7 RepliesCapitalism is doing the same thing it always does: demand competition. It's just people don't utilize their ability to compete properly, and sit on the wayside. A few "big fish" can then bully "little fish" around, and the "little fish" don't always do everything they can to stop the bullying. Right now, a good amount of people think that making everyone "little fish" will help, but they want a "bigger fish" to do it. [spoiler]And what happens when this biggest fish is alone with the little fish, and the little fish don't know how to fight for themselves? I'll give you a hint, these fish like to wear crowns. [/spoiler]
-
Edited by Van Darkholme: 4/13/2014 6:14:45 PM[quote]Capital, he argues, is blind. Once its returns – investing in anything from buy-to-let property to a new car factory – exceed the real growth of wages and output, as historically they always have done (excepting a few periods such as 1910 to 1950), then inevitably the stock of capital will rise disproportionately faster within the overall pattern of output. Wealth inequality rises exponentially.[/quote] *thinks for a moment* yeah that's true But this economist might be forgetting that contemporary capitalism serves to further enrich the big fishes at the expense of the little fishy's. My point is that capitalism as it is isn't designed to be sustainable/beneficial in regards to a society; it's simply raw competition with some regulations placed by a government. Big fishy's don't give a f*ck
-
All of my kek. The most competitive economies on the planet - the Scandinavian ones - have fantastic wealth distribution. Why is this? Capitalism allows wealth to be as liquid as possible. The problem isn't capitalism, the problem is government. Also, wealth inequality is literally irrelevant if the lowest quintile's absolute state is not one of utter destitution.
-
It's not the system it's the people. I know a lot of people who don't want to keep a job. They just go from job to job then complain about that one job each time. If you can't handle it then get a lower paying job, but don't whine about its payment. At that point it's your fault for not doing 110%! Ya capitalism seems like everyone can work with the system, but not a lot can. Some even put themselves in debt and make their children struggle to hold a job. That's one big problem, some people struggle to get a money for some transportation or a job,due to many aspects. Overall if we all have patience and work ethic Capitalism will bring us out of debt. Don't count on any president just count on the people..
-
1 Reply*grabs umbrella* *awaits shitstorm*
-
6 Replies[quote]massive wealth inequality is very detrimental and very inevitable in our current, capitalist structures[/quote]Wait, is that supposed to be controversial?
-
Better than socialism
