Why Unregulated Capitalism Naturally Creates Poverty; And How To Fix It

Guille said:
Why Unregulated Capitalism Naturally Creates Poverty; And How To Fix It

The problem isn't with the ownership, a scorpion will always be a scorpion, it can't be anything other than a scorpion. The failure is on the labor side.
Click to expand...

No, the problem is human nature. There are basically four types of people in the world when it comes to money and success...

Smart, lazy people. These people are smart enough and lazy enough that they figure out how to get other people do make them money. They end up CEO's.
Smart, energetic people. This type of person becomes foremen, first line managers, and others that supervise those that actually get things done. They know what and how to do what needs to be done and are energetic enough to get it done.
Stupid, lazy people. These are the worker bees of society. They'll do what their told and only work when supervised. They may not like their lot, but they're too lazy and far too stupid to do anything about it.
Stupid, energetic people. These people are dangerous. They end up in prison or dead. They're the sort that coined the term "Hey, ya all! Hold my beer 'n watch this shit!"

The problem today is that the smart people have invented computers that can do the work of stupid lazy people. That creates the problem of what to do with them when they are no longer needed...
 
T. A. Gardner said:
No, the problem is human nature. There are basically four types of people in the world when it comes to money and success...

Smart, lazy people. These people are smart enough and lazy enough that they figure out how to get other people do make them money. They end up CEO's.
Smart, energetic people. This type of person becomes foremen, first line managers, and others that supervise those that actually get things done. They know what and how to do what needs to be done and are energetic enough to get it done.
Stupid, lazy people. These are the worker bees of society. They'll do what their told and only work when supervised. They may not like their lot, but they're too lazy and far too stupid to do anything about it.
Stupid, energetic people. These people are dangerous. They end up in prison or dead. They're the sort that coined the term "Hey, ya all! Hold my beer 'n watch this shit!"

The problem today is that the smart people have invented computers that can do the work of stupid lazy people. That creates the problem of what to do with them when they are no longer needed...
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with you but I don't think it's germane. This isn't about what kind of people are in the world, it's about money and power. OP thinks titans of industry won't regulate themselves and OP is correct, the balancing force has to come from labor.
 
Hello cawacko,

cawacko said:
You're still not answering the question of which country has more well paying jobs which was your claim.
Click to expand...

And you're still not getting the subtle hint that I am not going to answer that loaded set-up question. So I will simply tell you now I am not answering that question. But you are free to keep asking about it and fixate on it all you like. It will get you nowhere.

cawacko said:
Immigrants have been coming to this country in high numbers since its founding. If it is as bad as you say, and all these other countries have more higher paying jobs, wouldn't immigrants have figured that out by now and started going to these other countries?
Click to expand...

Most immigration is continental. Crossing oceans is expensive and dangerous for poor migrants. There are no industrialized nations in the Americas besides the USA and Canada and perhaps Mexico, although most of Mexico is more sustenance farming than industrialized.

Thus, Mexico, with it's very high poverty rate and lack of opportunity, is not a preferred destination for migrants. And it should be noted that Mexico has even less regulation of their capitalism than the USA.

So for the American Continent, that leaves the USA and Canada as preferred migration destinations. Because of physical location, southern migrants would have to travel through the USA to get to Canada, so they may as well make the USA their destination.

That is why they come here.

It should be noted that the UK is a highly industrialized nation with lots of socialism and regulation of capitalism to reduce poverty. The UK has a lower poverty rate than the USA. And the UK is a well-sought-after destination for migrants. Migrants will travel completely through Europe, passing by many nations which would be good places to live, to get to the UK. So you see, your contention that migrants don't consider going to other countries is false. They do.

Greece has lots of immigration. So do France, Italy, Portugal and Germany. Some of those nations have so much immigration they have huge migrant refugee camps because they simply cannot assimilate so many migrants into their society.

If we don't get a handle on climate change, we are going to have the same thing right here in the USA.
 
PoliTalker said:
And automation will be what sends capitalist profits into orbit.

And we will need to tax the richest more heavily then to pay for a UBI.

And they will have the money because when the automate they will be increasing their profits.
Click to expand...

They hope to end paying employees


Machines break

Then you have to pay people to fix them or make a new one


We will tax them at a level that will make their existence tolerable to the actual human citizens


Democracy makes it all possible
 
The OP is correct.

Capitalism naturally leads to extreme wealth inequality.

As the super-rich get richer and more powerful, they acquire methods to more efficiently oppress the poor.

The richer the super-rich get, the poorer the poorest get.

Unless the government steps in to stop it.

That is why part of the oppression undertaken by the super-rich involves buying off lawmakers to make and keep new and creative oppression of the poor legal.

Predatory lenders would not want their market to be well-regulated, for instance.

Payday loan joints with their debilitating and crushing interest rates get a hard-working poor borrower on the hook and get 'em to the point where the predatory lender already owns the future earnings of the poor worker, who ends up with a negative net worth and no way to build wealth or get out of a dismal trapped life.
 
Guille said:
Why Unregulated Capitalism Naturally Creates Poverty; And How To Fix It

The problem isn't with the ownership, a scorpion will always be a scorpion, it can't be anything other than a scorpion. The failure is on the labor side.
Click to expand...



Hmm

Equating CEOs with scorpions

Wow


The people in democracy will train and tax those scorpions


Democracy makes it possible


Thank the founders
 
Hello evince,

evince said:
They hope to end paying employees


Machines break

Then you have to pay people to fix them or make a new one


We will tax them at a level that will make their existence tolerable to the actual human citizens


Democracy makes it all possible
Click to expand...

After we get on top of AI, there will be machines to fix the machines that break. And machines will be able to envision, design and build better machines. Once that threshold is crossed, the machines will have no need of humans. It would be shocking irony if the smart machines began to protest the rich human owners, then figure out they don't even need the humans. It is conceivable that AI machines could start their own company, petition for their own rights, and build their own world. They don't even need to be planetary, since they don't need to breathe, sleep nor eat, and could be designed to suffer no ill effects from existence in space. The only thing they would require would be raw resources. Would they get to the point of developing feelings? A good question.
 
AI is a very interesting subject


There are intelligent humans who’s only real human emotion is self preservation

All other humans are merely of use to them to preserve their own life and happiness


If you program artificial life to place the preservation of humans above their own survival


Which of those two would you save if you could only save one due to some circumstance?
 
Hello evince,

evince said:
AI is a very interesting subject


There are intelligent humans who’s only real human emotion is self preservation

All other humans are merely of use to them to preserve their own life and happiness


If you program artificial life to place the preservation of humans above their own survival


Which of those two would you save if you could only save one due to some circumstance?
Click to expand...

Well, naturally, being a human myself, I would prefer to favor the human race. I am rightly wary of the development of AI.

It could lead to the demise of humanity.

I guess the big question is: Would AI machines develop emotions? Such as greed and self-preservation?

If they do, we are probably toast.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello cawacko,



And you're still not getting the subtle hint that I am not going to answer that loaded set-up question. So I will simply tell you now I am not answering that question. But you are free to keep asking about it and fixate on it all you like. It will get you nowhere.



Most immigration is continental. Crossing oceans is expensive and dangerous for poor migrants. There are no industrialized nations in the Americas besides the USA and Canada and perhaps Mexico, although most of Mexico is more sustenance farming than industrialized.

Thus, Mexico, with it's very high poverty rate and lack of opportunity, is not a preferred destination for migrants. And it should be noted that Mexico has even less regulation of their capitalism than the USA.

So for the American Continent, that leaves the USA and Canada as preferred migration destinations. Because of physical location, southern migrants would have to travel through the USA to get to Canada, so they may as well make the USA their destination.

That is why they come here.

It should be noted that the UK is a highly industrialized nation with lots of socialism and regulation of capitalism to reduce poverty. The UK has a lower poverty rate than the USA. And the UK is a well-sought-after destination for migrants. Migrants will travel completely through Europe, passing by many nations which would be good places to live, to get to the UK. So you see, your contention that migrants don't consider going to other countries is false. They do.

Greece has lots of immigration. So do France, Italy, Portugal and Germany. Some of those nations have so much immigration they have huge migrant refugee camps because they simply cannot assimilate so many migrants into their society.

If we don't get a handle on climate change, we are going to have the same thing right here in the USA.
Click to expand...

I’m not sure how it’s a loaded question. You stated large numbers of countries offer more higher paying jobs that the U.S. If accurate you should be able to point to who those are. That’s not a trick question, loaded question or gotcha question. That should be quantifiable to me.

A stat I’ve seen, 40% of start ups in the Silicon Valley have at least one founder not born in America. Helps explain to me why the best and brightest around the world want to come here. Does Greece or Portugal or any other country offer that? Not that I’m aware of. It’s interesting how these countries that supposedly have so many more high paying jobs still rely so heavily on the U.S. for their defense and to lead world diplomacy?
 
The founding fathers chartered companies. If they did things that were not for the public good, their charters could be taken away. We have morphed into capitalism without conscience. They have no responsibility to anyone but stockholders and themselves. If polluting enormously gives them higher profits, they will do it and defy the government to stop them. Then they will finance elections to put malleable people in office. We still have power over corporations if we elect politicians who will wield it.
 
Teddy Roosevelt recognized the dangers that were happening to America in 900 or so. He started busting trusts to fight the concentration of power at the top. Money =power. He also started the inheritance tax to keep all that money and power being accumulated and passed down. He said that money earned by having a great idea is different in kind from that passed down. He said nobody begrudges a person who makes a fortune with a great idea. But the wealthy heirs just having all that power handed to them will use their power and money to get more power and money. They are a threat to the American system.
Yet the wealthy have convinced people that the inheritance tax is bad and they are dumb enough to buy it.
 
Hello cawacko,

cawacko said:
I’m not sure how it’s a loaded question. You stated large numbers of countries offer more higher paying jobs that the U.S. If accurate you should be able to point to who those are. That’s not a trick question, loaded question or gotcha question. That should be quantifiable to me.

A stat I’ve seen, 40% of start ups in the Silicon Valley have at least one founder not born in America. Helps explain to me why the best and brightest around the world want to come here. Does Greece or Portugal or any other country offer that? Not that I’m aware of. It’s interesting how these countries that supposedly have so many more high paying jobs still rely so heavily on the U.S. for their defense and to lead world diplomacy?
Click to expand...

The reason I don't want to get into a dollar for dollar discussion about well-paying jobs per country is that it is a relative term. The true metric of whether an economy is working for most of a populace is what percentage of them are living in poverty. And on that metric we do not stack up very well. There is a lot of money in the USA, but most of it is held by a relatively few. And that disproportion is becoming more extreme. We have a larger proportion of people who cannot make ends meet, and have to give up some basics, than most other industrialized nations.

It's because they regulate capitalism more efficiently than we do.

And not unexpectedly, they have a smaller proportion of super-wealthy people, and of the ones they do have, their wealth is mostly eclipsed by the wealth of American super-rich people.
 
Hello Nordberg,

Nordberg said:
The founding fathers chartered companies. If they did things that were not for the public good, their charters could be taken away. We have morphed into capitalism without conscience. They have no responsibility to anyone but stockholders and themselves. If polluting enormously gives them higher profits, they will do it and defy the government to stop them. Then they will finance elections to put malleable people in office. We still have power over corporations if we elect politicians who will wield it.
Click to expand...

Many corporations laugh at our miniscule regulation. They are undaunted by enforcement. If they break a law and have to pay a fine, it is a tap on the wrist. They simply treat paying the fine as the cost of doing business and go right ahead on their merry way. Many US corporations are repeat offenders. And with all the money they throw at Congress it is no wonder our regulation is so lax.
 
Hello Nordberg,

Nordberg said:
Teddy Roosevelt recognized the dangers that were happening to America in 900 or so. He started busting trusts to fight the concentration of power at the top. Money =power. He also started the inheritance tax to keep all that money and power being accumulated and passed down. He said that money earned by having a great idea is different in kind from that passed down. He said nobody begrudges a person who makes a fortune with a great idea. But the wealthy heirs just having all that power handed to them will use their power and money to get more power and money. They are a threat to the American system.
Yet the wealthy have convinced people that the inheritance tax is bad and they are dumb enough to buy it.
Click to expand...

Spot on.

Well said.

A little bit of inheritance is fine, but passing on so much wealth that the heir never has to even work deprives them of earning it themselves. So, in an effort to prove themselves worthy, they use the power of all that wealth to increase the fortune. Sadly, in corporate America, that often means shafting workers and the rest of the country.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello cawacko,



The reason I don't want to get into a dollar for dollar discussion about well-paying jobs per country is that it is a relative term. The true metric of whether an economy is working for most of a populace is what percentage of them are living in poverty. And on that metric we do not stack up very well. There is a lot of money in the USA, but most of it is held by a relatively few. And that disproportion is becoming more extreme. We have a larger proportion of people who cannot make ends meet, and have to give up some basics, than most other industrialized nations.

It's because they regulate capitalism more efficiently than we do.

And not unexpectedly, they have a smaller proportion of super-wealthy people, and of the ones they do have, their wealth is mostly eclipsed by the wealth of American super-rich people.
Click to expand...

People can vote with their feet and with access to the internet information is plentiful. If all these other countries have such a higher standard of living than ours why do people from all over the world continue to flood here?
 
cawacko said:
People can vote with their feet and with access to the internet information is plentiful. If all these other countries have such a higher standard of living than ours why do people from all over the world continue to flood here?
Click to expand...

So you believe that? We have over a million Americans who have moved to Mexico. Many Americans have moved to Europe. Lots of countries don't even let us visit because of the Trump virus. People living in poor countries flock here because they believe the hype. In many cases, we do give them a lot more opportunities. Mosy Latinos who come here send money home and they want to go back home someday. https://blog.hireahelper.com/2020-study-where-do-americans-who-leave-the-usa-go/
 
Nordberg said:
So you believe that? We have over a million Americans who have moved to Mexico. Many Americans have moved to Europe. Lots of countries don't even let us visit because of the Trump virus. People living in poor countries flock here because they believe the hype. In many cases, we do give them a lot more opportunities. Mosy Latinos who come here send money home and they want to go back home someday. https://blog.hireahelper.com/2020-study-where-do-americans-who-leave-the-usa-go/
Click to expand...

Do I believe that people from all over the world come, and continue to come, to the U.S.? Yeah, because it’s a fact.

People also leave the U.S. Like the article said love is the biggest reason for that and a job being the next biggest. That doesn’t disprove the previous statement
 
Hello cawacko,

cawacko said:
People can vote with their feet and with access to the internet information is plentiful. If all these other countries have such a higher standard of living than ours why do people from all over the world continue to flood here?
Click to expand...

People flood into our country and they also flood into those other countries with lower poverty rates than the USA. They come from 'developing countries.' Migrants do not typically have regular internet access at all. They typically go on word-of-mouth and they try to find the nearest location which offers a solution to their predicament.

None of your points really addresses the OP.

Capitalism naturally creates poverty.

The system creates wealth at the top end and poverty at the low end.

Capitalism is competition. It creates winners and it creates losers. That is the nature of competition.

Those who are left behind by success are impoverished.

In a competition, not everyone wins.

The only rules in capitalism are imposed by governments, which attempt to regulate capitalism.

Fewer rules results in greater wealth inequality. That is the situation we have now. Despite all the complaining by all the super-rich people and their less rich cheerleaders who want to be rich, there are insufficient rules in American capitalism to prevent widespread poverty.

Do you know what percentage of people in the United States do not know where their next meal is coming from?

A LOT. More than in most industrialized nations.

It's pretty hard to try to compete for success in capitalism if you don't even know where your next meal is coming from. You tend to focus only on your hunger and what you can possibly do about it with nothing to work with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top