Scurt: văd asta la Beranger. E din "The Economist": un sondaj de opinie despre cât de tare susţine populaţia piaţa liberă, de fapt un eufemism pentru "capitalism". Treaba voastră cum interpretaţi datele. Eu m-am amuzat să citesc reacţiile cititorilor, şi am selectat câteva. Selecţia este cât se poate de subiectivă, dar asta nu schimbă cu nimic concluzia: capitalismul nu mai are susţinători necondiţionaţi nici măcar printre cititorii "The Economist". Asta spune multe despre ce se întâmplă în lume. Numai noi, românii, n-am aflat asta, ocupaţi fiind cu amantul lui Pepe(sau al Elodiei?) care se masturbează în faţa lui Urinel, făcând senzaţie într-un tabloid. Aşadar:
Motto:The best system for the world's future: "I get all the money."
- I am a capitalist and believe in the free market, my problem is that the unfettered free market of the USofA where I reside is only friendly to those who have no social conscious and to me that is the missing part of the free market system. Labor is only considered as a cost and has no value to the system. The time and monies spent to educate one to have salable skills is simply considered as a personal risk and of no value as compared with capital invested. The years where I worked in the system it became evident that there were rules for some of us, but those working in the stock market and financial markets had no rules. It is not a level playing field and it should be.
- Horse manure. Rule Number 1 of Free Market Capitalism: There's no such thing as a free market. We all like the idea of capitalism and free markets but more and more we are finding we live in a plutocracy of haves and have-nots. Americans like the idea of cheap labor until they are the ones without a job and having to face the fact they are only capable of living in a slum, like their Chinese counterpart, thanks entirely to Free Market Capitalism. Any economic system is designed and manipulated to serve a need. If you want it to serve the needs of the many, then you most likely cannot have it "Free" but structured and managed with laws, tariffs, and wage controls and social support systems paid by taxation. If you want a system that only serves the top 5% of the population then by all means, open the market up and let "it" be free while the 95% become imprisoned with lousy lifestyles, low wages, and slum-lord living conditions.
- There is a better system than capitalism and communism: a technocracy. If you abolish money and replace it with a yearly-expiring set of energy credits divided evenly over the population and based on the number of joules generated by the system, you could avoid bartering and create a system immune to greed, materialism, and societal self-destruction.
Alongside the technocratic economy, society would be restructured to emphasize the importances of standardization, sustainability, abolishment of personal property, increased automation of production (beyond the 95% manufacturing by machine done today), and the elimination of most non-manufacturing non-medical non-educational occupations. Free time and personal discovery along the lines of Bertrand Russell's "In praise of Idleness" would be encouraged and mankind's creativity and happiness would flourish unlike any other era in human history.
- Well, Capitalism versus Socialism is not worth debating on today due Socialism does not exist any longer (except in Cuba and North Korea). I mean there is no system that could compete Capitalism in reality for that is only system remained on our planet Earth. Greek origin of Democracy = People ruling. Frankly, I do not see ordinary people ruling in any existing country. They just vote people presented to them by brain-washing media machines, they have choice of many parties, politicians, institutions with similar or almost same concept. There were no so many mental sick persons as today, although Yugoslavia was governed by Communist party and Josip Broz dictatorship.
That is more simulation of democracy than real democracy.People cannot suspend their vote at the point when not satisfied with politicians, they must wait for next elections. In the meantime media machines will turn angels to devils or vice versa depending on assignment. Once upon a time I live in communist state called Yugoslavia, now in capitalist Serbia. Ordinary people in former Yugoslavia have lived much better than today - standard of living was much higher, criminal rate lower, almost all were covered by good public education and health care system. Nobody was afraid of job loss, today people fear of job loss more than death, according to some reports. That is really bizarre. Life of average people was longer in communist Yugoslavia than in democratic Serbia today, heart attack and stroke were not so frequent as today. Finally, The bottom line is that "state terrorism of same thinking" was replaced by "corporate terrorism of ordinary low ranked employees by managers". What is better, who knows. "Freedom of thinking" is not so essential as "Freedom of Survival", that is each single day hard issue for most citizens of Serbia. Wikileaks shows that issue of Freedom of Thinking is still, in Democracy, unsolved. Well, the question is what is better for an economy and corporation, absolute power of Free Market, State controlled Market or something else... What is better for growth of state or/and corporation - limited range of salaries to, for example, 1 to 10, or let managers and CEOs take as much as they wish so salaries with bonuses can rich proportion 1 to 1,000 or even more. One state can have high rate of economic growth even with slavery system. I am not sure that is what we want, at least, what ordinary people want.
- What to compare capitalism to-how about feudalism. In my view we don't live in a capitalist society anymore(on either side of the pond), but in something that approaches feudalism. How dare the Dukes of GE and Google pay taxes, that's for the serfs. If you steal the Baron Goldman-Sachs' software the FBI will come within 48 hours and you will be turning big rocks into little rocks for eight years. If you are a knight of the portfolio or sir hedge fund manager you have de-facto free reign to run people over in the streets or have an underage sex slave. The Marquis of RBS is having a bad run, why all the people in the land have it extracted from their hides. I am not uncomfortable with the idea that money comes with priviledges, but the present reality is a distortion of capitalism. I feel if this is not rectified there will be people with pitchforks on the nobilities doorstep and I will cheer them on.
- Free Market economy? What is that, how long is a piece of string? Were respondants thinking of their conceived version of what a free market is, ie Capitalism vs Socialism or the business communities version ie Government's only role is to enforce contract law and bomb open the gates of foreign markets, no rules winner takes all?
I think the snow job done by Milton Friedman et al has been the most profitable propaganda campaign in history and is finally being seen by some for what it really is: a massive redistribution of wealth to those who need it least.
- The US is a bankocracy. The bankers are in favor of capitalism as long as there is no risk of them losing money, ever. Then the tax paying serfs must pay.
- It's "casino capitalism" I have a problem with (and consumerism even more so). Financial speculators, like casino gamblers, stand to make or lose millions of dollars in short periods of time, but the danger is that investor speculation makes financial systems unstable. Money floods markets in times of optimism, creating 'bubbles' that drive markets up - finally bursting when investors realize the market is overpriced relative to the value of real assets. Then you get a panicked outflow of capital and - anyone? - economic recession.
That's quite aside from the fact that the current model of capitalism (ie. consumerism) is essentially top-down globalization, leading inevitably to democratic deficit, the race to the bottom for wages and all that entails...essentially a system of economic slavery that benefits the rich at the expense of the poor. World Bank, IMF, WTO...I'm looking in your direction...
- don't think it's a good idea to assume that just because so many are disenchanted with free market capitalism they are automatically in favor of socialism.
It seems a sports analogy is better here. Free markets with no regulation are much like a football game with no referees or referees that do not manage violations properly. In short order the game becomes a brutal free for all and the only participants enjoying the game are the biggest, most unscrupulous bullies on the field. 90% of the players feel they can no longer play or contribute meaningfully and what you get are folks that either pack up their gear and go home, or they gang up on the couple of bullies, keep the ball and start their own game.
With so many people in the world fighting over such a small portion of the overall pie, many are beginning to wonder where the referees went.
I do not support free market capitalism. I do not support outright socialism. I do support capitalism with a strong referee to ensure the little players have a change to engage in the game--historically things work better when everybody gets to play.
- The main problem with capitalism is its monetary and banking system that creates booms and slumps because of its inherent instability. This is because it is based on debt.
If a government doesn't raise enough in taxes, it has to borrow, with interest. The money in circulation for use of the general public, that is, our national currency, only exists (apart from cash created by the state) if someone has borrowed it from a private bank, plus interest.
This system needs more than regulation, it need radical reform. That reform should have two remedies. Abolish fractional reserve banking so that banks can only lend what money they have, not create it out of thin air. Return the sole right to create money (digital as well as cash) to the state.
Then, if capitalism is truly competitive, and is regulated correctly,it will be greatly improved.
- Capitalism is the best form of an economic when the government plays their part as a referee. The markets must stay competitive, and the word "competition" implies that there will be a winner or a loser. Whence there is a winner, a monopoly is an inevitable result. Now capitalism isn't a free market. The referee's job is to keep the game going forever. I see our country much like it was in the end of the 1800's with giant corps having defeated the competition, keeping the government in their pocket with their immense wealth gained as a result of a noncompetitive market, paying off the referee in the meantime. I hope a modern day Roosevelt comes through and puts the power of the government back into the people's hands, instead of the hands of a small aristocratic group of businesspeople.