Capitalism: What hard changes do you propose, if any to improve it?

Question

I'm fascinated with the recent question asked about whether or not capitalism is still viable. The author of the question (not I) was barraged with accusations of communism when he or she was a capitalist him/herself. Funny, the presumptions made. This author is a hard-core libertarian, so make no mistakes, this is about the ECONOMIC system of capitalism and how YOU would make changes to improve it. This is not about the overthrow of capitalism, nor (directly) about systems of state and government. So, have at it and make the future of capitalism greater!

Ok, Ok, Ok.... yes, we can all acknowledge that we have a corporate welfare state operating as a coporate consumer market with mercantile overtones...yada, yada... but WHAT actual changes in structure, short term AND long term do you think we should focus on in order to improve the nominally "capitalistic"-like system. Pie in the sky only goes so far in addressing the inequities, and snapping a magic finger just don't wark twoo goood, Earl (if you know what I mean, and I know that you do).

To Bohemian Cowboy and Garretts_Twin: excellent points you both make. In the spirit of the dialogue, you both are doing an excellent job spreading educational messages about capitalism in this forum. :)

Dor_a: your answer is convoluted and poorly constructed. Basic errors in grammar and spelling fail to lend credit to your hackneyed statements. The author of this question is the farthest thing from being a communist as a consumate capitalist and entrepeneur. You also evidently cannot distinguish economic systems from systems of government and state. Perhaps some basic schooling in civics could help you to overcome your socialist leanings.

iconoclas...: points for effort, but the Communist Party is a political party and Communism is a system of governance, that relies upon economic control, but is NOT an economic system. So, the premise of your arguement is on a shaky foundation. Your specious statements calling the current system fascist is aburdist, yet you strike a cord in me by appealing the the Natural Rights and principles of Natural Law. The later work in your response bears far more merit than your exaggerated and extremist positions early on and is thereby appreciated.

to nigelbestpiece: I always like to give people the benefit of the doubt by hoping that they are simply so super-educated and intelligent beyond my level or ability to comprehend or understands, that they are right and I am wrong. However, in your case sir, your inane ramblings, while starting out on a promising note, devolve into a morass of sound-bite propaganda, that, while highly opinionated, is effectively meaningless and rambling. OK super-genius, restart that one with more cogent statements and I'll take you seriously.

Answer 1

Capitilism is EVIL! Socialism is the only way.

Answer 2

Capitalism in essence is a system that seek to make humans work for it. All government would and do follow policies that are good gfor the system and not for the people that voted them, in the hope that a better system will give more to the people, so and therfore in essence it is a slavery system that in a couple of senturies will evolve in a totalitarian and some evil and disempowering thing that will make people work for it and not question it.
See the one qho asked the question himselfe was afraid to speak and or seek its overthroughing. Afraaid of being branded a comunist.
There lots of ways of improving it and or keeping it at bay.
But in essence, such slow downs would only bore society to death and their removval would be immediately required.
Inthis slavery sytem (that the future will bring, not to far away future), the slaves are tooken care of to some point to make them beter living for then free man.
See Brave new World or 1983.
I just dont belive in it.
Anyone who would try to regulate it or fight it will be somehow removed from the social prestige. To me its an evil that its comming and we will not be able to stop it. Untill its to late and then we d have less power then we have upon it as we do have now.
The stronger it becomes the weaker and more pampered we ll become.
One day we will have a deaper understanding on this one.
We ll know that money is not evrything. That money is not what makes us happy. And the same for governments will apply.
Only governments need to be competitive.
And money will buy the guns and keep them at and in float.
Therefore competition between govs and capitalisms are the evils of our world that keep on keeping us back.
We got to get rid of them

Answer 3

I would like to think that the big problem with capitalism is when it alone is implemented. There are times when the system will fail, and that is when the government should be able to step in and help. The ability of the government to control the money supply is critical and should be saved. The government regulations are required for some things and not for others. For instance, I am not in favor of price controls except in contolled monopolies, such as private utilities. The key is a objective balance, and an ability to admit wrongs and to change. I think the BEST thing to do is open information up to everyone, because the informed customer is the crux of the capitalist system.

Answer 4

"Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are mostly privately owned, and capital is invested in the production, distribution and other trade of goods and services, for profit in a competitive free market."

Therefore to say that Capitalism no longer exists due to Government intervention in the market place is inaccurate. Government intervention in the market only prevents an entirely free market. Government intervention does not prevent Capitalism itself, defined by the majority of the means of production being privately owned.

I would say the Capitalism needs improving by being morally informed. Two key areas where amoral capitalism performs badly are the environment and poverty.

First, the environment. Amoral capitalism has no concern for the effects of production on the environment. In reality, the destruction of the environment is a massive human cost which people in the Third World are already paying for as world temperatures rise. Furture generations in the West will also be adversely affected in the extreme.

Second, poverty. Whilst it is agreed that capitalism creates wealth, it also increases inequality between the rich and the poor. Whilst some measure of economic inequality must be accepted under the system of capitalism, the current level of those starving to death whilst Americans eat themselves to death is completely unacceptable.


Possible changes to Capitalism that could help include taxes on businesses that reflect their level of enviromental destruction, and allowing poorer countries to protect their own economies. We few in the West are only grossly rich at the expense of billions in absolute poverty.

As to what system of morality should inform capitalism, I really don't know. Maybe that's another question...

Answer 5

Strictly speaking you don't see any strict and rigid isms are followed any time.of these capitalism may be improved with some cocerns like birth and death may be a government affair.mere efficiency and role of market may be good in the long run but some concern to poor may be better to improve happiness

Answer 6

We no longer have Capitalism in this country.

Social Security
Medicare
Medicaid
Department of Education
Government controlled education
Progressive Income Tax
Inheritance Tax
Imminent Domain Abuse
$2,700,000,000,000 Federal Budget
Minimum Wage Laws
FDA
Trade Tariffs and Restrictions
The list goes on and on and on...

I am always amused by people who hate capitalism because they hate something that no longer exist. You can't improve something that no longer exist. Return capitalism to what it is suppose to be - individual liberty without coercion from the government.
Everything listed above IS the overthrow of capitalism. At some point we all simply becomes slaves to our government.
-----
“Few men desire liberty. The majority are satisfied with a just master.”
-Gaius Sallustius Crispus
-----

Answer 7

Media and music being relationship love and drama obsessed, people over identify their problems with this sort of music, is someone really moving on when their listening to music about their issues? In the 80's and 90's music was about enjoying life and living the moment, now majority of it is the opposite and music has a big impact on people and cultures.

Answer 8

I don't think it needs any improvement - the problems with the system are caused by human failings.

Answer 9

the way to improve capitalism is to add pay justice to it

capitalism + justice = peace and plenty

there is enough income for every family working average hard to have US$75,000 a year - ie, every family working average hard creates US$75,000 of wealth [world annual income divided by number of families = US$75,000]

instead we have 1% getting 90% of world income - ie, 10% away from 1% getting 100% of world income

99% of people are paid less than the world average hourly pay - 75% of americans are paid less than the world average hourly pay - 99% of people earn more than they get, ie, they put in more than they get out - 1% get more than they earn, ie they take out of society more than they put in

injustice is theft produces violence is misery and escalates to extinction soon

it is perfectly possible to calculate the most an individual can really contribute to society by their work - and it is much less than US$50 billion

any cap on overpay will reduce underpay and thereby reduce violence [war and crime], with all its waste, expense and suffering

and limit overpay, hence tyranny

obviously money is power - overpay is overpower is tyranny is corruption, sadism, slavery

it is what the founding fathers wanted and tried to get

you cant have endless increase of overpay and underpay and happiness - present overpay and underpay are super super extreme - madness

we have pay from 1000th to 1,000,000 times the world average hourly pay - the range of work [personal productivity] in an hour is clearly nowhere near as wideranging as this

we have pay from $1 to $1 billion a fortnight - way beyond madness

a billion times as much, a billionth as much, for the same number of hours work!

and violence to match

you have to address the injustice

the state built on injustice cannot stand

every state in history so far has fallen due to injustice in pay [overpay and underpay, tyranny and slavery, a few getting higher and higher pay per unit of work, most getting less and less pay per unit of work]

america was supposed to be different

to hope to maintain a state, while it is s-haki-ng t-o p-iec-e-s with extreme violence due to ignoring extremely wide hourly pay range, is vain

limitation of fortunes is only limitation of freedom to steal others' earnings

obviously there is a limit to the amount an individual can contribute to society by their work

i dont think anyone is going to try to claim that the 225 people who have as much money as 2,500,000,000 people have been collectively as productive as 2,500,000,000 people

ie, injustice exists - and injustice is theft and theft produces violence - and violence destroys quality of life in many ways - and overpay is overpower is tyranny, destroys quality of life in many ways - and underpay and underpower destroys quality of life in many ways

reduce overpay, underpay and violence - reap peace and plenty - and many fewer problems - maybe our problems will be solvable manageable with reduced overpay underpay

grasp the nettle of injustice or become extinct in the next 100 years - that is the stonefaced reality

we cant go on accelerating overpay underpay and violence without reaching ww3 and nuclear winter

we have to abandon our long love affair with limitless fortunes - we have to accept the wisdom we have refused for 1000s of years

work is limited - pay must also be limited

50 hours x 50 weeks x 50 years x world average hourly pay, minus a lifetime's minimum spending is only US$1 million [2006 dollars] - it is inconceivable that there can be any justification for fortunes over US$10 million

how much does work [personal ie, nonmachine productivity] among fulltime workers range? - less than a factor of 2 - and fulltime pay ranges by a factor of 1,000,000,000 -

the pool of wealth is not fixed, but it is finite - very few things are infinite - individual contribution is limited, not unlimited - the fact that some companies gush huge profits does not mean that wealth is infinite - even if someone invented an infinite energy source, their contribution [personal sacrifice by their work] would not be infinite - compensation should be for sacrifice, losses, not for the social value of the product - and no one has invented an infinite energy source - and can humanity afford to pay an infinite reward for the invention of an infinite energy source? - no

see my other answers to economic questions for more details and reasoning on this

our only hope!

Answer 10

The first thing one should do in answering this question is too define the terms, Communism is an economic system in which the means of production are controlled entirely by the state, all private property is abolished the state is supreme over all. Fascism is an economic system, where the means of production are under the operational control of private individuals, while the state remains supreme over all, the government readily intervenes in the economy via taxation, quotas, subsidies, tariffs duties, and control of the money suppy. Capitalism is an economic system in which the government does not intervene in the economy, the means of production are owned by the private individual, property rights are a central tenet, and trade is voluntary. So if you are asking, "how can one improve capitalism", you cannot, for it is the sole system which allows for freedom, that is the absence of coercion by another human. However if you are askig, "how can we improve our present system?" which is fascism, and has many euphemisms: socialism, mixed market, keynesian... etc. Then the answer becomes far more elaborate, but for the purposes of brevity i will cover some key points. Government has been created by mankind in order to defend itself against force being used against them, millenia ago realizing that as a group we are far better at protecting ourselves. We live in a system where the very people who administer the groups aggregate protection, are the greatest violator of that. In our day to day lives we exist with one another in relative peace, we are not robbing and murdering but when acting under the abstraction of a group we suddenly believe it to be ok. I have no right to come to you and demand the money you have earned, hence i cannot delegate to a government representative that "right" which I myself never had. Taxation is theft, resistence to it is met with kidnapping and imprisonment, resistence to that kidnapping and imprisonment will result in death. It is the use of initiatory force which must first be eliminated from government, taxation would need to be abolished, government assets sold and the money returned, this is not to say that the government would be entirely abolished for most people would see its benefits, but it must be a voluntary association, not a coerced association based on a concept of tacit consent. At present money is taken from people by the government and "redirected" where it would not have otherwise gone, where we the producers would have voluntarily chosen, else it need not be stolen. That right, the right to own ones produce, and remember mans mind is his basic tool of survival we must produce to survive or live off the produce of another, that is an inescapable reality. And a correct morality should recognize that, when one has spent his time and effort learning, doing and entering a voluntary agreement of trade, that which he has earned is properly his (or hers ofcourse), I have no right to go and take it from him by force, that does not matter if it is just me or 10 people, or 100 or 300 million. theft is wrong. if we allow people to spend THEIR money as they see fit we will have a true example of what society should be, and yes we make mistakes, we lose our money, we invest unwisely, can choose a life of greater minimalism and leisure, while others choose a life of effort and reap great reward, but the one who chose leisure has no claim on the reward of another. Only through voluntary charity is that sort of wealth transfer moral. The only use of force which is exceptable is retaliatory force to protect ones life or property. If we model our system based on these principals, that we ought to be free, and have a right to our property, the we will have not only a better system but the best there can be. For it is one which we are free. And don't be fooled that the government is necessary to prevent poverty or help the poor they create them, for this money being stolen affects them worse, due to their fixed incomes, and the fact that when private individuals are left to control their money they tend to produce with it, ie. make more goods, the governmnet does not, it is taking this production, and diverting it to their whims. And they're taking alot, most have no idea because they never tell you all at once and in fact much is taken at the manufacturing levels, so you don't even see it, but think about it: income tax, property tax, sales tax, state taxes, municipal taxes, estate tax, capital gains tax, various manufacturing and resource taxes, luxury tax, inflation (just a future tax), quotas, subsidies, duties, tariffs... etc. We are paying an enormous percentage of our income to the government, certainly upwards 75-80% or more, if that money were being spent by those who had earned it, some of whom are extraordinarily productive, the money would have been used to create more not destroy, not to perpetuate lies among others that it is ok that we steal. Billions are spent by the government just to convince us that they are good for us, that we are to foolish to spend our money wisely, and we need them to decide for us. I would also like to mention, that democracy is simply a method of choosing ones ruler not a method of choosing the rules, often democracy is spoken as a polar to either communism or fascism, it is not, there can be democratic communist and fascist nations, look around the globe in earnsest and you will see that fascism suffuses it, and spends much time giving lip service to freedom, while it incrementally enslaves the populouses of the globe. If you want to improve this system then we must come to realize that the founding fathers of america were on to something freedom should be the goal, obviously they have strayed dramatically, and that has happened because of socialisms appeal to short sighted but well meaning people, and incrementally, we have destroyed any right to our own property which we once had, we are now permitted to do things, the government has come to see itself as the bestower of rights and not the defender of them. So to answer your question with specific alterations, would be pointless and eternal, for as you can see i believe it pretty well all has to go for its very nature as a coercive entity, is flawed. We need to form the government anew, and ensure its limited function, for once it gained the right to expand itself, to limit itself, it became limitless. We are now very quickly descending into an authoritarian state, the globe is suffused with them, and people for the most part don't care to see it, for its ramafications are incalculable and its grip on mankind is incredible, it is simply considered an inevitability, "death and taxes" I believe they say. And with each passing day their grip grows tighter, it is now being advocated by various branches of government the value of "chipping" people, violent inmates, sexual predators, children, military personnel, police officers, persons dealing with items of national security... comprehend that, think a generation into the future or 2 or 5, where will society be, will it be improved? A sense of urgency about your question needs to be developed for if more people asked it, sought an honest answer and researched it we would likely be far better off.