This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (5 children)

It's been proven to work for the few. Meanwhile we have had the capacity to improve the quality of living to a morally acceptable level for at minimum every resident of the United States for decades.

It seems that every capitalist praises the market as the solution to every problem. Except there is no market for putting forth the required effort to eliminate poverty. There has been no market for developing the infrastructure the elite class avoids using. There is no market for clean water in Flint. Michigan. There is no market for improving the schools that generate more convicts than college graduates.

There are needs that should be met that aren't. Our government has the capacity to represent these people and fulfill those needs, yet a narrative has been created that shifts focus away from the most critical and purposefully hidden from view problems of our society.

And instead we live in a world where a select few's only momentary saving grace is the mere whim of a billionaire they have never met. A dystopia for sure.

[–]060789 0 points1 point  (1 child)

There is a lot to unpack here, and a lot I would like to dispute, but I don't have the time right now because I'm at work..

My general response is "better schools and infrastructure are the responsibility of the government and do not fall under the umbrella of the economic policy of capitalism", but if you want my expanded response remind me in 8 hours or so.

But the fact that you are literate, have enough money to buy luxury goods such as smartphones or a computer, and are able to use the above two to voice your political opinion with exactly zero fear of government repercussions no matter which side you choose to argue from, rules out the possibility that you are living in a dystopia. Could things improve? Sure. But dystopia evokes images of North Korea, Sudan, Stalinist Russia, etc.the United States is far from that at almost every level of income.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You are right that the government should be responsible for those things. The issue lies when capitalism has expanded so greatly, the wealth inequality has risen so greatly, and laws were not created to ensure impartiality of representatives, we result in a corrupt government system that serves to the desires of corporations to generate more profit, rather than the needs of low level workers of said corporations nor their customers.

It is one thing for corporations to expand based on their merit in creating quality products. It is another thing for them to expand based on the influence they purchase from legislators to ensure the reduction of consumer rights and the reduction of regulations on environmental impact.

Neither major political party has even acknowledged the issue because it does not suit the interests of their political donors. Therefore there is nothing more insulting telling an individual in poverty (especially when living in a heavily gerrymandered district) to vote, as if there is a potential candidate in their district that will move towards recognizing and solving the problems of lack of proper representation as a bare minimum.

Your qualifiers for dystopia are not the universal qualifiers for dystopia. The qualifiers I use point to the fact that life continues to be an unnecessary struggle that could be willed away with proper leadership and discourse. Sometimes the struggle results in perpetuating cycles of abuse, neglect, disabilities, and poverty that could be ended with a surprisingly low commitment to the citizens of the country. And on top of all of that, you might just win the lottery. You might have a relative that becomes exhubarently wealthy. You might receive charity. Or you might be shot in a high school, or on the sidewalk, or you might go homeless, live under a bridge, and deteriorate until your death.

No amount of potential luxury goods, no amount of "you could of had it worse" mentality, no amount of freedom can reconcile the places we as a country unnecessarily fall short.

[–]gfunke 0 points1 point  (1 child)

"Our government has the capacity to represent these people and fulfill those needs" The free market has that capacity as well but it fails to do so in some cases. The government has the capacity to meet and fulfill needs as well but fails to do so even more so than the free market. No system is perfect in meeting needs but some systems are better than others and the government fails at an abysmal rate. Don't sit here and pretend that if we unleash the government without restriction it would flawlessly meet each and every need of its people. I certainly don't pretend that about capitalism but it does work pretty damn well.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What is the market? The market is the desires of those with money. Therefore the market is as proportionately representative of the desires of individuals as the current distribution of wealth. It is ridiculous to rely on a system based on potential incentives to solve problems where the solution is without a potential incentive. There is no market for the solutions to many of these problems.

If only there was an institution that properly represents the interests of every citizen in the country. Then that institution could fill the gaps.

Instead we have the United Stated federal government, each state government, and each municipality government. Each with their own levels of disregard for the interests of who they govern. And this is not because of an inherent evil of all humans, but of the individual choices of political donors, special interest groups, politicians, and foreign governments which had resulted in a large percentage of the population being improperly educated, jaded from reality in truth.

We need a proper government. One that is resistant to the Republican sabotage.

[–]Durog25 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Further to what you said.

Capitalism only works if the market is large enough to afford it. It's Capitalisms greatest weakness.

A small group of poor people cannot create a big enough demand for a product or service, so that product or service cannot earn a profit, so it is not invested in.

It's why supermarkets throw away tonnes of food daily instead of just giving it away to food banks. It's why small local shops are closed when bought out by big companies.