Phrazemaster said:
Point taken. I did say any system can be gamed or corrupted.
And this is what I believe is a basic assumption that does not stand up to scrutiny. We are not driven by "profit" - we are not born wanting money.
We are born wanting food and shelter, in modern culture money is the medium of exchange to secure that. Most (not all people) do not accumulate money just for the sake of having it. As the old joke says, "I give all my money away for stuff that I want more".
We have a human spirit that has an insatiable lust for life and expansion. A mere economic system is not what spurs civilizations. It is intrinsic to our nature to DO things. Figure things out. BUILD things. (And unfortunately, destroy things too).
Philosophy has inquired about this for thousands of years and there are many opinions but few objective facts, while Maslow's hierarchy of needs seems pretty well respected (well repeated).
Think about yourself. You are always sharing stories of all the things you like to do, build, figure out - even sometimes at great cost to yourself. Why?
Because I can... I can because I worked hard, saved and invested wisely (enough, but could have invested better), and live frugally (in nowhere MS). This affords me the luxury to pursue projects, but cost-benefit always matters.
I abandoned my novel outlet tester after it looked like it would cost me a few tens of thousands more to get agency approval, to then have an uphill battle convincing consumers it was OK to touch a metal contact on an outlet tester, only to compete with established product costing single digit dollars. I don't have that much money to waste.
It isn't because there's a money system. it's because you love to DO things. Money does nothing here but hinder life and regulate it. You'd still get up early one morning to build a bridge if you needed one, because you WANT TO. We expand our lives because we WANT TO - not because there's a money system that "motivates us" to do things.
A principal strength here is rule of law and right to own property. In government systems where citizens are not allowed to own property (like keeping profits from work effort), there is little motivation to work harder and excel.
In fact the motivation that comes from profit is, itself, the problem. When the motivation is to store up these imaginary "credits" so you can have power over others, which let's face it IS the core of capitalism, then the goal of the game is tyranny. To say otherwise is to miss the heart of the game.
It seem we have divergent views about capitalism.... It is a terrible system, except for all the rest, that are even worse..
I am not saying socialism or marxism is better - I am saying there IS a better way. One stab in this direction is Ubuntu Contributionism. There's a book on Amazon by that name if you're interested; it's about the "gift economy" wherein everyone does what they do because they want to.
Back in the 60s there were hippies living in communes, Israel has had kibbutz (agricultural based communes) for over a century. Not exactly new concepts but often limited.
There's an old saying: it's hard to convince a man of something, if his paycheck is tied to him not being convinced. We don't have a better system in this world because those in power are happy with the system, not because "there's nothing better. We tried everything else." We don't have a better system because the current system works quite well thank-you for those in charge. It's the Golden Rule." He who has the gold, makes the rules.
And historically he who has the power takes the gold. It ultimately comes down to power.
Yes and at this point it's an extremely well-crafted document that serves the interest of those at the top to ignore. How many violations of the Constitution can we find presidents making? How many conflicts of interest get around the grand three branches? If they wanted to make the Constitution work, they should have put in a proviso that congressmen/women must abide under the same rules as those they govern.
indeed... I can think of several new rules to put into an amendment or two. How about citizens going to jail for lying to congress, while politicians routinely lie to the public? In fact they would probably never get elected if they told us only truth. :
We want them to lie to use, making promises they know they can't keep.
As it is, there is one set of laws for the lawmakers, and another for the masses. What's good for the goose is apparently not good enough for the gander. There should also be a clause that prevents lobbying -
Actually lobbying is protected speech and comes from the provision that we are allowed to lobby our government to argue our self interest. This gets perverted by all the money thrown at lobbying by big business (crony capitalism). They have tried to regulate lobbying but politicians don't want to cut off the mothers milk for their re-election campaigns. The only long term solution is to reduce the scale of government spending and regulation, that will reduce the attraction for big business to lobby in their self interest.
the most corrupt under the table method for the rich to be stroked and the poor harmed - and another that no person shall be able to serve more than 2 terms ever. None of this "career politician" crap which invites even more corruption.
+1 term limits make sense... Government service should be sacrifice, not a high paying career. It makes sense for a millionaire or billionaire to enter government service after already rich, but how do all these congress people become millionaires from jobs that barely pay enough to keep them under a roof in DC?? They often trade on inside information that would get normal citizens arrested.
And another still that prevents conflicts of interest - no industry ties to politicians. No congressmen making rules for big Pharma, and then becoming a highly paid executive of big Pharma.
there are already rules about that. But it is a double edged sword at least for entering government service you want people who understand the industry they are regulating.
Ah that last one - that's the rub. The monied interests always find a way to get in there and wreak havoc. Because that's what greed and corruption does.
Even the best "rules" or systems, implemented by the corrupt, themselves become corrupt. You cannot legislate fairness.
Legislate "fairness",,, we can't even define it...
one mans fair is the others unfairness.
But you can try. And there are better ways. Another way to state all this is, if capitalism is so great then why does it intrinsically serve the interests of those in power?
have you ever been hired by a poor person?
Sure, "anyone" can be president :
, and "anyone" can be rich." But really? Is it that cut and dried in this system? Can "anyone" buy a house these days, with down payments exceeding $100K? How long would it take for a young couple to earn that kind of money - that is, AFTER they have paid off their "student loans." (remember when college was free?).
I do not remember college being free... I dropped out at least partly because I felt bad about wasting my mother's money (I was not a good student). She put my two brothers and one sister through college... they were more disciplined than I was (am).
Thanks for sharing.
Mike
So my choice is socialism as previously implemented, or capitalism? There are other, better ways. We sent men to the moon. We can come up with a fair system of governance and economy. But not as long as those in power have a vested interest in preventing that, and in maintaining the stat quo.
This sounds like the classic class warfare promulgated by Karl Marx (workers of the world unite). It is politically easy to target the rich because there are fewer of them so they lack power in simple democratic votes.
I don't think we need to throw out the baby with the bathwater, we have a good system that could be improved with a few minor tweaks,,, while it is very difficult to improve a republic using democratic methods. Several amendment proposals are already trying to move us toward simple democracy, that has issues. Lynch mobs and some scary science fiction is based on simple democracy, or tyranny of the majority. Our government is founded on the principle of protecting individual rights.
JR
