[Soft_Landing]

Off topic idea (rant). Please comment.

The measure of any project in any society in the capitalist system is whether or not it is profitable.

A good health care system, for example, can be seen as a good 'investment' so long as it improves the productivity of your workforce, allowing your society to be more profitable.

In democracies, the populace desire an increase in the standard of living, whether it is profitable or not.

More broadly, however, an increase in the standard of living, in a capitalist society, is a worthwhile project only so long as it allows that workforce to be more profitable. Any increase in standard of living may increase a workers potential productivity, but returns are likely to be diminishing.

The shift in the IT industry toward outsourcing to second world countries could be understood as employing workers who can be equally productive as others, but can be so at a lower standard of living.

The point is, that even under ideal circumstances (unlimited resources), capitalism might only be expected to increase human living standards to the point where marginal profitability is maximised... i.e., wouldn't go on forever.

This is just a comment on the nature of capitalism, but the rant arrived while I was reading peak oil news, so I thought I'd share it here.

Thanks for reading.

[roccman]

Thought this was an interesting piece: "Whether Leonard Lewin's book, "Report from Iron Mountain on the Accessibility and Desirability of Peace" (available online here, and well worth the read) was a hoax or not, the book made the absolutely fascinating assertion that at its core, a capitalist economy (like the one ruling the world today) needs to waste resources because there simply is not enough demand otherwise to keep all bottom lines rising. If I remember right, it was held that waste (excess production) of something like 35-37% had to be wasted in order to keep things in balance."
--Snip--

"Nevertheless, consider for a moment what might have happened without 9/11: The market would likely have collapsed to a Dow which by today would likely be under 3,000 and perhaps as low as 700, while the life savings of most Americans (and everyone else trying to scrape together enough for retirement) would have disappeared. Jobs violence would be endemic. The homelands of America's competitors, Russia and China would likely have fallen into disarray, which in turn would lead to increased pressures in those countries for military action (thinking mushrooms) as a bait & switch to keep the powers that be in control of those countries would have become necessary.

Moreover, there would likely be massive starvation, disease, and unemployment to the point where, as in the 1930's, there would be calls for massive change - a New Deal - and that would turn the everyday order of everything in Washington, London, Paris, and wherever else you can think of in terms of capitalism, upside down. Even the Third World would sink back into deeper despair, lawlessness, disease, and isolation. " link

[steam_cannon]

Summary: The Capitalist Economy only survives as long as it can keep growing/wasting (including war as a means to waste) and when it hits the limits of growth, it falls apart. Similar to how a body wastes and dies from cancer. It's an interesting article, many of the discussions on banking and fragility of the US economy essentially suggest the same thing, that we're going down!

[Micki]

I strongly disagree that a capitalist economy must keep growing.

First of all it must be recognised that we currently do not have a true capitalistic (market liberal) systems.

A completely free market will expand and contract according to what the market allows for.

The only reason we need to have growth now is because of greed and the fact that we have propped up and bubbled the economy through intervention, inflation and manipulation, to such an extent that allowing for the necessary contraction would casue serious discomfort.

However without intervention (ala PPT and currency policies etc), interest rates set by the markets rather than the CBs and with a gold backed currencies we would have much less inflationary/deflationary swings and frequent adjustment of misallocations.
Growth would therefore be based on savings, improvements and efficiencies rather than inflation.

This would result in slower growth and less unnecessary spending like on wars and government subsidies, which does not suit either the politicians or the greedy upper echelons.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Micki', 'I') strongly disagree that a capitalist economy must keep growing.

[Micki]

The issue is that the current Capitalistit/Fascist/Socialist fusion system isn't based on free market economy.
So to say that today's system requires growth and therefore capitalism requires parpetual growth is comparing apples with oranges.

[Heineken]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Micki', 'T')he only reason we need to have growth now is because of greed . . .

[Micki]

Market set interest rates rather than artificially supressed rates limits borrowing => limits asset inflation =>limits speculation.

I am not saying greed as a human characteristic goes away, just that the free market system has a way of dealing with it, not like today letting it run rampant.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Micki', 'T')he issue is that the current Capitalistit/Fascist/Socialist fusion system isn't based on free market economy. So to say that today's system requires growth and therefore capitalism requires parpetual growth is comparing apples with oranges.

[Micki]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')ow do you propose to pay the interest on loans without growth in a debt-based fiat monetary system?

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Micki', 'I') can payoff loans and pay interest even if my income is stagnant, so i don't understand the questions.

[Micki]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'Y')es, our economy is debt-ridden, but our monetary system is based upon debt.

[I_Like_Plants]

I buy stuff I hunt up cheap, then sell it less cheap. It's how I make my living. I thought this makes me a capitalist, but that's not what modern monster-capitalism is about. I actually do a fair amount of work and research work for my money - real capitalists don't work for their money, they just "invest", buy stocks etc.

I'm on about the level, truly, of an Amish farmer who takes cheap wood and builds toy wagons and sells 'em, a modern capitalist does not do labor at all.

A Capitalist economy is like a cancer tumor, grow or die. Me I don't give a flying fuck if I make less this year than last, of course I'd like to make more each year, but it's not going to kill me if I don't.

Never forget that when Capitalism is talked about, we're talking Warren Buffett and Bill Gates and Halliburton and so on, not the way you or I might work or do a little part time thing.

[Micki]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'r')eal capitalists don't work for their money, they just "invest", buy stocks etc.

[MrBill]

roccman posted:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '"')Nevertheless, consider for a moment what might have happened without 9/11: The market would likely have collapsed to a Dow which by today would likely be under 3,000 and perhaps as low as 700, while the life savings of most Americans (and everyone else trying to scrape together enough for retirement) would have disappeared. Jobs violence would be endemic. The homelands of America's competitors, Russia and China would likely have fallen into disarray, which in turn would lead to increased pressures in those countries for military action (thinking mushrooms) as a bait & switch to keep the powers that be in control of those countries would have become necessary.

[untothislast]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', 'H')istory has proved time and again that economies grow under conditions of peace and certainty. Wars and all the economic activity surrounding wars usually bankrupt their sponsors, and end up destroying wealth. Sure, it takes economic activity to wage a war and then clean-up afterwards, but it leaves behind less wealth.

[MrBill]

untothislast wrote:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hether this cosy arrangement has been reciprocated for assistance rendered throughout the invasion and occupation of Iraq, I don't know.

But, you can sponsor a war and make a profit on it. Why, you can even become a global superpower afterwards!

Sorry to nitpick - keep up the excellent work.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', ' ')I am surprised MonteQuest is taking part in this discussion as it has zero to do with depletion economics?

[cube]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '.')..
How do you propose to pay the interest on loans without growth in a debt-based fiat monetary system?

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '.')..
How do you propose to pay the interest on loans without growth in a debt-based fiat monetary system?